Angela Merkel

A terrible force of destruction meets an immovable object - Early reactions to Correctio Filialis - Sunday 24th to Saturday 30th of September

It turns out that the Correctio Filialis de haeresibus propagatis was released at exactly midnight of September 24th, and not on September 23rd as I had previously written. What confused me was the fact that I went to Rorate Caeli shortly after midnight and found it there, and naturally assumed that it had been posted somewhat earlier. If we check their timestamp though it seemed to have been set for publication at exactly midnight. I had caught wind of something being released from reading Fr. John Hunwicke's post from the day before, in which he claimed that something big was expected on the Sunday. For that reason I was surprised to learn that it had been released before, or so I thought, and it didn't help that so many blogs I read put the 23rd on it.

Time zones help explain that confusion, because many of the blogs I follow are from the Western hemisphere, where it was still the 23rd on the day of publication. I would much rather use the Rome time since the document was meant for Rome, and since it was released on the 24th my time as well, so I'll henceforth refer to the 24th as the release date, but I digress, although...Distinctions Matter!

The phrase "an irresistible force meets an immovable object" is I believe quite common in weather-speak and I believe it is used when a weather front meets a mountain area or some such thing. In my particulary context, it obviously refers to Bergoglio and while he has been immovable in his obstinacy against Catholic doctrine and practice, in this particular analogy he predictably plays the part of "a terrible force of destruction" with the signatoris of Correction Filialis acting as representatives of the immovable object that is the deposit of faith.

For my part I acquired it from "The Dark Knight" - one of the best movies ever made, by the way, and unquestionably one of the most well-made, if not the ouright winner of that particular category. In the final confrontation with the Joker, Batman saves him from an untimely death out of moral principle, despite spending most of the movie actually trying to stop him, at great danger to his own life and that of others. In that particular scene, the Joker says "this is what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object".

My memory tweaked it a bit to read "terrible force of destruction" but I'll stick to that terminology since Bergoglio is unstoppable only on account of the timidity of the hierarchy of the Church, along with the complicity of many modernists in the Catholic establishment at large. He is by no means unstoppable, but that he is a terribe force of destruction I deem indisputable.

The more I think about it, the more I realise just how numerous are the similarities between Bergoglio and the Joker as portrayed in that film. Some time, I might get around to writing about that.

In any case, the correction was an attempt to stop Bergoglio's seemingly unstoppable march towards the destruction of what remains of the Catholic edifice. For what it's worth I don't think he will succeed with or without the correction, but the correction is a huge stumbling block. This has been proved very clearly as Bergoglio's enablers and attack hounds have had no other course but to attack the signatories in defence of Amoris Laetitia, and not the content of the correction itself.

Some have pointed out that there is nothing in the correction which shows that Amoris Laetitia actually teaches heresy, completely bypassing, it seems, the main charge of the signatories, which is that in his words and his deeds since the publication of Amoris Laeitia, Bergoglio has encouraged heretical readings of it (an already dubious text at best), in turn propagating heresies. If you're going to critique a document, the least you can do is read it and attack what the document actually asserts.

Others have pointed out that the number of signatories is small, the hypocrisy of which one writer, I believe on Rorate Caeli, took exception. He notes that the Bergoglio party has spent the better part of 5 years (and 5 long long years, I hasten to add) intimidating those who disagree with the dangerous direction this horrendous pontificate has taken us, only to point to the number of his opponents being small as proof that the majority is not with the opposition. We remember, by the way, that Bergoglio speaks constantly of dialogue and parrhesia, all the while either threatening or ignoring those who actually attempt to dialogue with him. It seeems hypocrisy is his only mode.

The most ingenious and at the same time non-sensical defence of Amoris Laetitia is that it is all due to a mistranslation! They claim that the whole furore was due to a mistranlation of the Latin. You couldn't make this stuff up!

Christopher Ferrara took dissected this ridiculous claim  at the Remnant. I suppose their implicit claim is that Bergoglio is somehow a Latinist who wrote the whole thing up in Latin, no doubt in their mind consulting the great treasure of Latin writings that the Church possesses. This is a staggering claim, in defending a man whose grasp of Italian evidently is as incompetent as his grasp of Spanish. No matter which language he speaks hardly anybody can figure out what he actually said. I suppose Latin being his primary language might explain why nobody understands him when he speaks any other language, but we are left with the small issue that the official Latin version of Amoris Laetitia was only published in July of this year, well more than a year after the original publication of Amoris Laetitia, and that the document itself was probably written in Spanish, given the large input of Tucho 'art of kissing' Fernandez, the ghostwrite and brains -...

Boast not for to morrow, for thou knowest not what the day to come may bring forth

That is from Proverbs 21:1

Boast not for to morrow, for thou knowest not what the day to come may bring forth

Tomorrow indeed is the inauguration day for Donald J. Trump, the president-elect of the United States of America. He won against all the odds, given how many people were against him. The good thing is that virtually all the people that a just man would want aginst him were actually against Trump, so those who did not trust the man certainly had the witness of his enemiest.

Given that I came out so strongly in favour of Trump, and the fact that I have described him as the best presidential candidate in the U.S. in 60 years, since Dwight Eisenhower that is, one might be surprised at my choice of title verse. There is good reason for that though.

The most worrying tendency with regards to Trump, a trait he exhibited even during the campaign, is his inexplicably harsh rhetoric against Iran. That is simply uncalled for as Iran is more or less the most peaceful state in the Middle East, barring Lebanon. It is a state which is rather predictable, and whose major enemies are also the major enemies of the Christians in the region. I do take Trump at face value when he says that the days of military intervention are over, and I hope that his rhetoric is in major part done to placate the zionists. That, however, brings me to the second part of what is worrying about him.

His support for Israel and the zionist agenda is very troublesome. While I have little doubt that Trump is smart enough to realise that a war against Iran would have very dire consequences, I am not so sure the zionists and the warmongers in his cabinet realise that. A Christian has no business taking the side of Israel over that of any other country in the region, a fact which would become obvious to evangelicals if they only took some time to study authentic Christianity, in particular the works of St. Paul. Whereas his Christianity can be questioned, I do not question the bloodthirst of the zionists and the neo-cons who hitch on to the zionist cause (although frankly it is difficult to know which is the tail and which is the dog on that particular beast) and I am afraid that if nothing else, Trump's excessively harsh rhetoric on Iran might embolden the zionists into a military confrontation with Iran, one which would make the misadventures of the past 20 years seem like child's play.

With those 2 misgivings out of the way, I must admit that for the first time in very long there is an authentic hope for peace. We have become used to the U.S. being on the wrong side of virtually every conflict over the last 20 years or so. In fact, if one knew nothing of the sides in any conflict, one only needed to ask which side the U.S. was supporting and more often than not, one would rightly conclude that they were the bad guys. With Trump there is hope that the U.S. might actually stop killing people abroad. I doubt it will stop entirely, but there is a good chance that it will be scaled back.

I am not particularly worried about Trump's tough rhetoric against China. He will know as well as anybody that China is not a military threat towards the U.S., so any conflict between the two will be in the form of a trade war. He will also know that the U.S. is no match for China in the only area which could see the two countries in conflict -South East Asia - and if he doesn't then surely the sensible cabinet and advisors that he has put together will be only too happy to let him know that. I am sure that his plan for "Make America Great Again" does not involve getting a very bloody nose in an area of the world of little value to his country in terms of nationaly security, so we can count on the U.S. and China to de-escalate any tensions long before any threat of military confrontation.

There is much that can be said about Trump's amicable attitude towards Russia, with the most obvious comment being that it is simple common sense. There is no good reason why the U.S. and Russia should ever have been enemies since the fall of the U.S.S.R., save for keeping the congressional-military-industrial complex well funded. On this point one must believe that Donald Trump is genuine because there were no political points whatsoever to gain from this move, given the anti-Russian rhetoric in his country.

It is probably the case that Trump realised the folly of this attitude, and decided that it is smarter to make Russia an ally instead of an enemy, especially given the fact that the only real threat to the U.S. is China, and the U.S. faces only destruction if it attempts to confront both those countries. Russia and China, of course, are allies, and Russia also has a lot of untapped potential so for a businessman developing trade relations with Russia only makes sense.

As for domestic policies, surely the war against the Catholic Church from the political front is over, for now. That only leaves the war against the Church from the Church's own hierarchy!

Given that the abortionists took such a hard line against Trump, and the fact that Trump is not one to back down from a fight, we can suspect that he will take the fight to them, which is good for all concerned. The media also seems set to continue its assault against him, and we can be happy for that as the media is likely to lose most of any credibility that it has left, especially given that the man has decided to side-step the media where possible and attack the media when necessary.



Subscribe to Angela Merkel