Bergoglio popularity

Beware of NOChurch cardinals, especially when they come saying the Tridentine Mass - Sunday 10th to Saturday 16th of June

In a week which contained a lot of major news from the secular world, it might seem odd that my highlights are to do with an event that didn't even take this week - the Chartres pilgrimage. My primary concern is for the Church, for only the Church can save the world, and with that in mind I shall go on to address some of the events on the Chartes pilgrimage.

It is rather significant that the Chartres pilgrimage has become so famous. I had not even heard of it until som 4 years ago or so, but I shall have to agree with Michael Matt that it is one of the most significant events taking place in the Church today, although in his case he plainly states that it is the most significant, with which I do not quite agree. Along with its increasing profile, the mass has attracted higher profiles of celebrants. Last year it was Cardinal Raymond Burke, who is probably the closest thing we have right now to a champion of the faith. When Cardinal Burke celebrated though, it was without a position in the Curia, having been unceremoniously kicked out of his position as the head of the Apostolic Signatura (the Church's highest court) so that Bergoglio could railroad his full-throttled assault on marriage through easy annulments and sacreligious Communion.

This year's celebrant, therefore, would have to count as the most high-profile yet. In Cardinal Sarah, we had the head of the Congregation of Divine Worship, the man in charge of not only the Mass but the administration of all sacraments. Yes, there are bureaucratically speaking other higher-profiled cardinals - the secreatary of state comes to mind - and even with regards to Catholicity the prefect for the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith ranks higher. However, in his capacity as head of worship, he ranks second only to the pope, so one is entitled to say that they don't come much higher than Cardinal Sarah. Also in terms of standing up for the faith, Cardinal Sarah is one of only 2 cardinals under the age of 80 - the other being Cardinal Burke - who have consistently stood up against efforts to water down the faith, or to outright corrupt the faith (however tepidly).

It was therefore with great sadness that I read a piece written by Peter Kwasniewski titled Traditional Clergy: Please Stop Making “Pastoral Adaptations”. It quickly became clear that the piece was about the final High Mass at the Chartres pilgrimage, of which Cardinal Sarah had been the main celebrant. Among the 'pastoral adaptations' on show was reading both the Epistle and the Gospel in French, instead of Latin, and not bothering with having the proper orientations when reading Sacred Scripture, instead turning towards the people, and not even bothering to chant but rather speaking it out instead. These were grave liturgical abuses. It is unclear who was in charge of these abuses - the master of ceremony, the local bishop, or the cardinal are all potential agents. What cannot be denied, however, was that in perhaps the most prominent Tridentine Mass in the world today, we were being confronted with a very well-orchestrated Novusordoisation, and that ought to trouble us all.

If there is anything that the Novus Ordo has taught us, it is that slippery slopes are real, and once embarked upon one will quickly find oneself close to the bottom. It is therefore inexcusable that at the most prominent Tridentine Mass the celebrants would embark upon the same slippery slope which led us to where we are in NOChurch today, i.e., little if any reverence at Mass, with priests who treat the Mass as if it is their plaything, and laity who froth in anger at hearing that there are authentic Catholic alternatives. Another point that Dr. Kwasniewski made which is worth repeating is that Latin is the language of the Church, and the Chartres pilgrimage is the most international pilgrimage that we have today. It therefore makes little sense to have the readings in French when many of the attendees will be non-French. They could, if they so wished, read out in Latin according to the rubrics and then afterwards read in French (which is allowed by Ecclesia Dei, it turns out, although even that is a slippery slope) but that's not what they did. In other words, I am quite certain that whoever made the decision did it knowing full well that it was against the liturgical laws and against the spirit of the Tridentine Mass, yet did it anyway, perhaps to force the point that the Tridentine Mass has to get along with the Novus Ordo mass.

This being NOChurch times, of course, not everyone was upset. As I have previously mentioned, Catholics as a whole have lost the ability to get angry at anything directed against the faith. In "WHEREIN ROBERT CARDINAL SARAH GETS IT RIGHT AND FATHER Z DOESN'T " (I've no idea why he insists on capital letters for his headlines), a response to Fr. John Zuhlsdorf's Why we Say The Black and Do The Red, which was in turn a commentary on what Dr. Kwasniewski had wrriten , Fr. Allan McDonald chimed in that Cardinal Sarah was right to make adaptations in order to get people to feel at home, once again showing that the Novus Ordo has poisoned the minds of even many of those who say the Tridentine Mass occasionally. We don't adapt the Mass to ourselves; rather we adapt ourselves to the Mass, and the arguments he was making were well-adressed in Dr. Kwasniewski's original piece, which it seems blew completely over his head.

The best commentary on Fr. McDonald's piece came from Henry , who wrote:

A single instance of vernacular abuse, as at Chartres, is not a big deal. No doubt God will survive the desacralization of a couple of moments in this one Mass, and the

...

Proof, if anyone needed it, that NOChurch is the devil's creation, from the mouths of Novus Ordites themselves - Sunday 4th to Saturday 10th of March

They say that polls can be used to tell us just about anything, and it's true that the way questions are posed does make a big difference. If the questions are posed in the same way year after year, however, then the polls must tells us something of value, if it is the case that there are variations year on year, of even if there are no variations, to the very same questions asked in much the same way.

This, I assume, is the way that the Pew Research Center has been conducting its various surveys aimed at Catholics on various issues. The latest survey is quite telling in may ways and some will indeed choose to focus on the fact that Bergoglio has lost a lot of trust among most Catholics. Mind you, by 'Catholics' the researchers mean people who self-identify as Catholics. Had the term 'Catholic' been defined to mean people who actually believe in everything that the Catholic Church teaches there is little doubt that the figures would have looked much worse for Bergoglio, but then again, there might not have been a big enough sample to go by, given that believing Catholics are virtually an endangered species after almost 60 years of NovusOrdoism.

I could go on and ask this and that question, such as "how can an overwhelming majority of Catholics still maintain  positive opinion about this man?", or "how can a majority think he is a force for good?". That really wouldn't get us anywhere because the point that traditionalists have been making for a long time is that 'Catholics' for the most part nowadays are practitioners of a religion that would have been deemed abominable by virtually any practising Catholic before 1950.  I'll not dwell much on Bergoglio except to point out that Bergoglio has only accelerated  a loss of identity and virtue that began even before the Second Vatican Council, probably since they re-made the Holy Week liturgy in 1950, and it is not hard to see why because the psychological effect of these changes must have led to the conclusion that Christianity is a man-made religion.

If you don't believe me then simply ponder what I wrote on the day I read the survey:

In other NOChurch apostasy news, we have a poll measuring attitudes of Catholics in the U.S. to various topics, althouth most of the piece focuses on Bergoglio. A lot of people will focus on Bergoglio but I thought the most telling point was the following:

The share of U.S. Catholics who favor allowing gays and lesbians to legally marry has grown from 54% in 2012 to 67% in 2017.

In other words, the mass apostasy within NOChurch began long before Bergoglio began homosexualising and anti-evangelising through his voluminous seemingly-never-ending rantings.

In a discussion that I had some while back, it was mentioned that Vladimir Putin does not give full freedom to the Catholic Church in Russia. I am unsure what that means, as the Catholic Church in Russia seems to be under less oppression than in say, the U.K.. In any case,  my response was simple:

If I was in charge of Russia I wouldn't allow the Catholic Church to operate either. This is a country coming out of 80 years of communist propaganda, with a president trying to rebuild the moral fabric of the nation. On the other side we have the Catholic Church, which in its NOChurch guise seems to do nothing other than promote homosexuality and feminism.

The survey of American Catholics confirms pretty much what I said then. Whatever NOChurch touches is worse off for it.

Many will say that one needs to make a distinction between people who self-identify as Catholics and those who actually go to Mass every single Sunday. I agree that the distinction is not irrelevant, but I have always argued that the greatest argument against the Novus Ordo is not the vast number of Catholics who never bother going to Church on Sundays, but rather a good conversation with a large number of those who do. I have had many of these discussions, and I can disabuse anybody of the notion that the statistics for Sunday Mass-going Catholics would be anything other than horrifying.

I really do not want to spend too much time on other news of the week, because nothing out to detract from the frightening news contained in that survey, which I urge everyone to read.

In other weeks, I might have spent more time on a new homosexual priest scandal, this time in Italy, on account of the news that a homosexual prostitute made a list of 40 sodomitical clerics with whom he has been involved and this list has now been presented to the Vatican. As I wrote last week, we seem to have sodomy news from clerics almost every week and it is utterly depressing, yet it explains so much of what is going on in the Church today.

I could mention that an African cardinal, a certain Cardinal John Onaiyekan, is bemused at why the Catholic Church in Europe is attempting to tackle the 'isolation' of homosexuals, instead of tackling its empty Churches.

In another week, I might have written extensively about the Italian elections, in which anti-immigration and anti-EU forces won the majority of the votes, very much in oppsition to Bergoglio's and the Italian bishops' conference's prodding.

We might have been able to tackle comments by Cardinal Brandmüller taking issue at the German bishops' conference promoting and authorising protestants to receive 'Holy Communion' on Sundays if they are married to Catholics, a move based on "utterly dishonest" premises. After all, these would be protestants who long so much to receive the Eucharist that they couldn't be bothered to enter the Catholic Church in order tod o it.

Also of mention is the fact the truth regarding the...

You don't need God; You have me! Sunday 14th to Saturday 20th of January

There is a lot of ground to cover this week so I shall try to be brief on each topic.

We begin with some good news in the form of a series of articles by the always-unpredictable Fr. Allan J. McDonald. I refer to him as unpredictable because one never knows what he is going to write. One day he could be attacking the latest destructive Novus Ordo novelty and the next day he could be attacking not only an analogous novelty, but the very Novus Ordo mentality that brought the novelty into being in the first place.

This time he published 3 posts on Vatican II, the sum total of which was geared towards defending the Catholic Church pre-dating before Vatican II. He linked to a series on interviews from people who lived before Vatican II, and only one of 6 was negative, and that 6th one turned out to be a bitter feminist who was a toddler at the opening of the Second Vatican Council, so her opinion can be dismissed out of hand. What we have is a snapshot into the life of a Church which was caring, loved and vibrant; a Church which was the centre of the lives of many of her sons and daughters. It was a loving Church which inspired those under her care to aspire to be the best they could be.

In a follow-up post, he responded to a comment from the original piece, in which the notion that the pre-Vatican II Church could not have been that good given that it collapsed virtually overnight once NOChurch went into high gear was advanced. He finished off with citing a study which shows that only 24% of Catholic women in the U.S. go to Church nowadays. This number was naturally much higher before the Novus Ordo. In other words, in spite of - or perhaps, due to - the mass effeminisation programme undertaken by NOChurch authorities, even women find NOChurch unappealing.

On Rorate Caeli, Peter Kwasniewski outlined the Church's traditional wisdom in having post-Christmas and pre-Lented periods, to slow us down from the highs of Christmas before we enter the gloom of Lent. It was a piece well-worth reading.

We were also informed that at least 20% of non-religious people pray, often in times of trouble. I would have thought the figure was higher. So perhaps the old adage that there are no atheists in foxholes should be updated, but I would think that even 80% of the rest have some kind of notion of God, only they let their anger get in the way of their humility. You find it commonly expressed in the "God doesn't exist, because if he did then so-and-so would not have died" and so on.

In the U.K., we had Bishop Egan visiting a foreign diocece and to his dismay and horror most Catholic churches were locked. He did not appreciate that, and neither do I since I have also attempted to go to many churches which I found locked. That this diocese seemed to be in England precludes the possibility that he could have paid a visit during siesta hours. Churches being locked is yet another fruit of Vatican II, and a bitter one at that.

We then get to the bad news, and not entirely unpredictably, these are headed by our very own Bergoglio.

The world's favourite attention-whore was up to his old tricks again, although this time he outdid even himself. On another of his scandalous trips - this time to Chile and Peru to do nobody-knows-what-good, he 'wedded' a couple on the plane, after joking that it is witchcraft which gives him all his wrecking-ball energy. The couple both worked as air stewards, and the story they gave was that Bergoglio by chance inquired as to their marriage status, and finding out that they were not sacramentally married - only civilly -, volunteered to wed them on the plane. I must admit that I never bought the story for a second, because more or less everything Bergoglio does is a stunt. Furthermore, we are talking about a man who says that most couples who are married are not married and many couples who are not married are actually married. It is an unlikely candidate for an inquisition into whether the steward serving him is in a sacramental marriage.

It reminded me of a scene from an X-Men movie, in which the grandfather mutant tells Charles that he doesn't need Cerebro (the machine he uses to reach into far-away minds) in order to reach out to all the world, because he can do with his powers instead, saying "You don't need a machine to amplify your powers. You have me!". Bergoglio was simply stating "You don't need to call on God for marital blessings; You have me!". The mutant seems to have been correct, as he had the power; Bergoglio, not quite so, as he doesn't.

Now, at a wedding Mass, we call down God's blessings on the new couple and pray that they will have a fruitful marriage. Bergoglio obviously seem that a wave of his hand can replace the blessings that are brought down from Heaven upon a newly-wed validly and sacramentally married in the House of God.

It never seemed likely that Bergoglio would warmly speak to flight attendants anyway, as insider portrayals of Bergoglio paint him out as a rather unfriendly man. It seemed even less fanciful that a man who has launched a fully-fledged assaunt on the institution of marriage would care whether a couple was canonically and sacramentally married.

To nobody's surprise, therefore, the whole stunt turned out to have been pre-planned but that didn't stop Bergoglio continuing to lie about the whole event and sticking to the original story.  What id did, however, was show just how irreverent and narcissistic all involved were. No longer could...

Pages

Subscribe to Bergoglio popularity