Bergoglio abortion promotion

Novus Ordo is to Catholicism what the West is to Christendom - Sunday 27th of May to Saturday 2nd of June

This was a very eventful week; in fact, far too eventful for me to do it any justice, especially having fallen so far behind my weekly reviews that I am forced to be brief. I shall therefore only pick out 2-3 stories which I found to be of paramount importance, and anything beyond that will get a simple passing mention.

For honourable mentions alone, I must begin with Cardinal Sarah who in his homily at Chartres told us that "The West Has Nothing to Offer but Emptiness", at least as headlined by Gloria.tv. I must admit to not yet having read the whole transcript but these are sobering words, for several reasons.

The most important reason is that his words are the bitter truth. When Cardinal Sarah said that “the Western society, chosing to organize itself without God, has fallen into lies and selfishness”, he was only saying what any open-eyed Catholic can tell from reading the news, or looking around, or reading various statistics. He then went on to state that Western society “has embraced the craziest ideologies and has become the target of an ethical terroism more destructive than the terror of the Islamists.” That is a point I have made too many times to recall, and often ended up in heated conversations about it.

The fact of the matter is that the suicidal policies of the West - and I don't simply mean the governments alone here - are what has brought the Western world to the edge of destruction. It's not Islamists who got the West to kill off a vast number of their children. It is not Islamists who got the West to squander the investments of their forefathers and get itself into a debt it is unlikely to ever climb out of peacefully. It is not Islamists who turned men against women, women against men, women against children, people against their very nature. It is not Islamists who destroyed the great heritage of Christianity in Europe, and even the Americas. All these things have been done by Westerners. Granted, they have been driven by the rulers of Western states, but with every missed Mass, with every modern interpretation of ancient wisdom, with every vote cast for a morally dubious candidate, with every bomb dropped unjustly, the West has turned itself into the enemy of the very Christendom which built it, and I feel, has brought itself beyond the point of salvation.

Virtually all of the most dangerous ideas of the 20th century all originated from the West , be it all-out homosexualism, transgenderism, feminism, communism, nazism, freemasonry, warmongering, ethnic cleansing, eugenics, the killing of the unborn, the killing of infants (although China gets a dishounourable mention here), the killing of the elderly and I am sure the list could go on and on.

It has become common among many so-called Alt-Right or generally 'conservative'-leaning people to proclaim the West is best without specifying what is good in the first place. If an alien landed on Earth today and used Christian metrics to measure a society's standing, I can assure all that the West would not indeed be best. If another alien was to use metcis of sustainability - and I don't even mean eco-stuff, but simple demographics - the West would not be best. If yet another alien was to use metrics of economic sustainability, even there the West would not be best. If yet another alien was to use more natural law metrics, such as quality of family life, value of human life, number of friends, or what not, the West would trail even here. The warmongering NATO would also drag the West down on any metrics measuring peaceability.

In fact, the only area in which the West is clearly best is that which has to do with self-indulgence, but it is precisely due to winning this particular 'award' that the West trails on so many other fronts.

Christendom was the best culture. The West is the monster that chewed up Christendom and is trying to dump what remains of it in the deepest sewer it can find. The sooner we realise that, the better.  We must never conflate 'the West' with Christendom for the former is a morally decrepit empty shell of a society with very bad future prospects, whereas the latter is what built up virtually all the good that we enjoy today. Europe without Christianity is likely to be no different than the Soviet Union - a cold, sterile, ugly, violent, hateful place.

The sooner we work to restore Christendom, the sooner Europe can in any honest sense attempt to reclaim moral or even existential superiority.

It has escaped nobody's attention that the Irish voted to remove legal protections for the unborn. This means that before long the sodomitical prime minister of theirs will be able to introduce legislation to kill all the unborn, if he so desires. No doubt he will play it safe by introducing an age limit on those who can be killed, but we can expect this to be the top of the slippery slope. I am not going to waste much time on this, except to state that this is yet another win for the Novus Ordo. Everything the Novus Ordo touches, it kills, and Ireland is the best example of that.

As the author of the piece May 25th was the burial, not the death, of “Catholic Ireland” notes and as I have mentioned many times before, the Catholic Church runs most of the schools in Ireland. According to the piece, 93% of primary schools are run by the Catholic Church. This means that virtually each and every one of those people who voted to kill the unborn will have been touched by NOChurch in no meaningless way.

Ireland is not the Novus Ordo done badly, but the Novus Ordo done well, almost to perfection. This is what the Novus Ordo does: It kills the faith, then poisons society, then destroys the...

The man who might be pope, and actually seems Catholic - Sunday 7th to Saturday 13th of January, 2018

This was, for NOChurch Bergoglian times, a relatively scandal-free week, although this did not spare us notions which would have horrified any even slightly-decent Catholic some 60 years ago or so.

In an interview, Bishop Athanasius Schneider was keen to point out what everyone already knows: Bergoglio has by his intransigence, demagoguery, promotions/demotions and affirmations already answered the dubia questions which were presented to him. In other words, we are in completely uncharted waters and it will no longer do to pretend that Bergoglio is leading the Barque of St. Peter into safe waters, but rather we must face the realisation that he is trying to scuttle the ship. The good bishop did not say that, but  a little creative reading between the lines will tell us that.

A group of converts from Islam has also come to the same realisation and they posted an open letter urging Bergoglio to change his attitudes toward Islam. They point out that conversion to Christianity from Islam comes at great personal cost, so Bergoglio should not be going around minimising the sacrifice that converts make, or confusing the faithful by promoting the notion that Islam, or any other religion for that matter, is the way to God, or even worthy of praise.

The big Bergoglian scandal of the week came with the news that Bergoglio had awarded a pontifical award to a homosexualist abortion promoter from the Netherlands. The award is titled "The Pontifical Equestrian Order of St. Gregory the Great" and is supposed to be given to those who through their actions have shown great devotion to the teachings of Holy Mother Church, so we are all longing to know just which of these miscreant's multiple acts of violence against the Catholic faith Bergoglio thinks should be incorporated into the Catechism. The Vatican's defence was that she was awarded the medal for being a visiting diplomat, which as far as excuses go, seems to have been plucked from the equivalent of meat which isn't fit enough to go into  sausages for dogs (if there even is such low-grade meat that is).

The curious thing is that nobody was particularly surprised: We have all got used to the fact that Bergoglio is a death merchant. "Does Pope Francis Have No Shame?", we were asked. The answer, of course, is "no, he is utterly shameless!"

Sticking to the topic of Bergoglio and his death merchant and perverts, a member of the 'Academy for Life' appointed by Bergoglio informed us that couples (by which I, not wanting to waste too much time reading his filth, suppose he means married coupes) are in certain circumstances obliged to use contraception.

Fr. John Hunwicke picked up on an article written in the Catholic Herald titled "How to save the English Church" and was supportive of the ideas proposed. These ideas are that there are places in England which have shown that it is possible to revitalise parishes, if only they are handed over to people who have a sense of purpose. Those parishes entrusted to the Institute of Christ the King in particular have borne great fruit. The author wondered why some of these parishes should not be also handed over to the Ordinariate.  We would all like to know.

Over in Iran, they have now banned English in primary schools in an effort to end/combat "Western cultural invasion". Maybe when they are done trying it over there they can export the idea abroad. I am actually in 100% agreement with them that without English the moral corruption of the youth through popular culture is likely to be much more difficult. Let them learn Chinese or Russian, or Latin!

We were also informed that Bergoglio might have plans in the making to force every priest to swear allegiance to him, as opposed to the Church. We shall keep a watchful eye on this story. It certainly seems to fit the personality of the man, but I doubt it will happen. He doesn't need to anyway, since he has much, if not most, of the NOChurch establishment doing his bidding.

Okay, having written this much, I now realise that the week was actually yet another horrible NOChurch week, but I am done with the bad news...

We did have good news the best of which came with the installation of Archbishop Michel Aupetit in the Archdiocese of Paris. I am not quite sure how this man has managed to slip the Bergoglian drag net because he actually seems more than decent. We are, after all, talking about an appointment by a man who seems to seek out the darkest corners of the Church for the most devious perverts before he makes an appointment, and who seems to reject decent choices in favour of indecent ones, so this appointment is a schock, frankly speaking. Even The Remnant lauded the man, and praise from The Remnant does not come cheap; nor should it. I have previously written that I see this man as papabilia, and I have yet to come across bad news regarding him. He is anti-abortion and anti-euthanasia, seems actually Catholic, and has a hollistic view of medical ethics which he has presented in a well-reviewed book, so he is likely to dive arm-deep into the ethical issues plaguing France at the moment. Having been a doctor, he is more than capable of holding his own against those who use trade jargon to promote inaccuracies and outright falsehoods.

I look forward to learning more about the man and if he is even half as good as he seems then it seems promosing.

Our sometimes-friend-sometimes-foe always opinionated Fr. Allan J. McDonald had a piece on how to "popularise ad orientem without disorienting the laity", in response to a piece written by Msgr. Charles Pope. I am in agreement with one of the commenters to the piece who wrote:...

The Real Benedict option in these desperate NOChurch times

The term "Benedict option" is normarlly used to refer to a course of action which leads people away from the midst of a messy society and into seclusion, from where they can regroup and re-introduce sanity into the society. It refers to St. Benedict, the founder of Western monasticism, who did just that and whose monastic communities would go on to save the cultural inheritance of Europe after the fall of the Roman Empire.

There was a book published not too long ago titled "The Benedict Option" in which an apostate - to Orthodoxy and who is said to be a self-promoter so I'll not mention his name or link to his articles- argues for much the same thing. The fact that St. Benedict strove to secure and promote the Catholic faith does not seem to faze the author, and some reviewers of the book have noted that without the authority of the Church, we would still end up with the same situation since a secluded society, even of moralists, would soon run into disputes about what was moral and what was not. Some would counter that by pointing to the fact that the Catholic Church - at least its earthly hierarchy - has been largely responsible for the destruction of morality in much of the world, a charge I do not dispute. Of course, NOChurch does by no means share the soul of the Catholic Church, but that's a topic for another day.

The biggest fallacy of the author seems to be the presupposition that a secluded society which insists on moral grounds would be left alone by the decadent world around it. There seems to be little grounds for that presupposition given that the modern state does not recognise any sphere in human affairs in which it is not entitled to not only interfere but actually dictate. In the future though, after this particularly self-destructive phase of Western civilisation (or what's left of it anyway) has crumbled, out of the ashes we might well end up having a Benedict option similar to the origial one, which rebuilds what's left of former Christendom.

However, I would like to argue that there does exist in these dark times of the Bergoglian papacy a real Benedict option which we cannot simply dismiss. It requires a re-definition of what is commonly known as the "Benedict option" and it refers rather to a pope, and not a monk, not withstanding the fact that this particular pope told us he would like the life of a monk, though he only manages to make a half-decent impression of one.

The pope in question, of course, is Pope Benedict XVI, and the real "Benedict option" is the notion that Bergoglio is not really the pope, but that Pope Benedict XVI is still the rightful pope.

This notion was popularised by Ann Barnhardt, who pursued it with the "tenacity of of a psychopath", to quote a very good moving which uses the those words to describe  a detective who pursues a very far-fetched theory in attempting to solve a murder of one of his colleagues, and manages to find the murderer in doing so,

As Bergoglio's manners have deteriorated towards total open depravity, more and more have bought into the notion that he is not pope. After all, isn't a Pope supposed to be Catholic? How can a Catholic poke fun at the Holy Trinity? How can a Catholic  insult the mother of God  - multiple times? How can a Catholic insult those who attempt to convert others to the one true faith, while praising some of the most immoral apostates in history in the process? How can a decent priest surround himself with sodomites and paedophile-enablers? How can a pope attack the sacred institution of marriage? How can a pope promote sodomy? How can an even half-decent Catholic shower praise at mass murderers and mass abortionists? How can an even moderately sub-intelligent human being advance the notion that youth unemployment is root cause of evil in the world today? How can a pope state that communists are the real Christians? I could go on and on and on, and on...

The simple answer to that is that Bergoglio is not Catholic, and more or less the only people who believe that Bergoglio is Catholic are the neo-Catholics of the see-no-evil-hear-no-evil-or-pretend-it-is-good-if-the-pope-does-it Novus Ordite variety. Most traditionalists, I would argue, have realised that Bergoglio is not pope, and most non-Catholics who follow the man realise that he also is not Catholic, which is why it is popular among modernists and leftists to openly state that Bergoglio is attempting to completely revamp the Church but is being held back by conservatives and resisters (i.e., that he is not Catholic). In fact, Bergoglio has used much the same words, as have a few of his closest collaborators.

In claiming that Bergoglio is not Catholic, I am naturally counting as Catholic someone who actually believes in the Catholic faith, in Holy Mother Church as the Church divinely instituted by Christ, and one who desires to further her divinely-commissioned purpose: the salvation of souls. Strictly speaking, of course, a Catholic is anybody baptised into the Catholic Church by either baptism or blood. That allows us to use a more theological than cultural definition, while also allowing us to rule out as Catholics such as Martin Luther, Adolf Hitler, Arius and the like, who in a strict application of the term are simply bad Catholics and not non-Catholics.

The basic premise is this: The Church is a communion of faith, and those who deviate or reject even a portion of the faith find themselves outside this communion. Our heretic-in-chief has rejected a large chunk of the faith. Truth be told, it would be difficult to point to any aspect of the Catholic faith that he actually accepts. The only thing he seems to embrace papal authority, albeit with a totally faulty conception of it and its duties, because he really only seems to...

Pages

Subscribe to Bergoglio abortion promotion