episcopal effeminacy

The world's 'humblest' attention whore certainly got his money's worth this week, because he was all over the headlines.

We were informed that Bergoglio has named 14 new cardinals, from 11 countries. I don't know much about any of them, apart from Ladaria, the CDF prefect, who will now be made cardinal. I do get suspicious of anybody who Bergoglio thinks worthy of being a cardinal, knowing the sort of types with whom he surrounds himself. With this set of appointments, I am quite certain that more than half of all cardinals eligible to vote for a new pope will have been appointed by Bergoglio.

This is obviously cause for concern, and I am not alone in worrying about this. In The Silence Of The Cowardinals Creates More FrancisCardinals , Mundabor makes the valid  point that the dubia cardinals have helped facilitate this, bu vacillating on their correction. With every new cardinal, Bergoglio gets closer to making his mark on the church more long-lasting, and the cardinals lose any numbers they might have been able to marshall.

At least those 4 cardinals tried, is all I can say about that. It was always going to be a tough call to expect manhood from a bunch who for at least 60 years has been selected and promoted on effiminacy.

As if that wasn't enough, the world's most well-known sodomy pusher had the galls to tell a victim of clerical sexual abuse that God had made him a sodomite, and that he was happy for him to remain that way; Bergoglio, as one would expect, taking the time to add spiritual abuse to the sexual abuse that the man had received. Of course, he didn't use the word sodomite, but 'gay', as is par for the course for the perverted. I'll not waste your time dissecting that, as common sense should suffice to realise just how absurd and evil this notion is. It gets even more absurd in the context of something else which the most hypocritical pope in history said. You see, he came out and said later that homosexuals cannot enter seminary. Gloria.tv reported it thus:

If bishops’ have “the slightest doubt” that a young man is homosexual, it’s “better” not to let him enter the seminary, Pope Francis said in a closed door meeting with the Italian bishops.

This was enough for one of the commenter's to respond:

It seems, they only let them enter if their homosexuality is certain

Indeed, given the amount of statements and actions that Bergoglio has made in favour of homosexuality, one cannot draw any other conclusion.

There is something else troubling about this episode, on top of the obvious one of having a pope pushing the sin of sodomy when it is obvious to many that he is more than likely himself a sodomite. The problem I have is that this episode rather perfectly demonstrates the kind of nonsense which we have come to expect from NOChurch.

If homosexuality is a gift from God, then it can only be good. If this gift is good, and God wills it that way, then it is difficult to see why sodomites should be excluded from the seminary. I accept that we can find a way around it, but I would much rather have Bergoglio explaining how something can simultaneously be a gift from God, yet be something that ought to be denied service to the wider Church. Instead, those who defend this kind of waffle are left trying to reconcile two evidently irreconcilable statements, and yet claiming that the errors are on the part of those who cannot make sense of it.

Possibly in response to this, Cardinal Müller took the time to inform us that homophobia does not exist, and is a totalitarian invention. I naturally agree with this sentiment, but if it is at something Bergoglio has said, it would be only fair to drag Bergoglio's name into it. Another example of avoiding the widest elephant in the room could be seen with Arhbishop Chaput accusing Cardinal Marx of inserting “a lie” into the intercommunion debate. Again, this is just picking at low-lying fruit, when there is a very clear target in sight.

It is utterly sickening watching grown-up men playing the part of teenage girls talking on social media behind their friends, behind inuendos and smileys. It is obvious that all the confusion we have right now is because of Bergoglio, yet even the few who address these problems seem hell-bent on pretending that they do not originate from the pervert-in-chief. They really ought to man up or shut up because they are hardly doing anyone any good. In 20 years, nobody will remember a speech they held in a place probably torn down by them to in reference to a cardinal who will probably long have been brought down by scandal. If they were to speak directly against the most dangerous man against the faith today, in clear unambiguous terms , chances are they would at the very least get a not-too-dishonourable mention.

The zionists continue to kill Palestinians in Palestine. As I mentioned last week, the U.S. moved its embassy to Jerusalem, and protests which had begun even before then have only got more heated. The victims among the Palestinians have piled up as the Israelis continue to shoot practically anything that moves, in full knowledge of the fact that the U.S. will cover up for any crimes they commit. In Gaza Massacre Exposes Western Hypocrisy on Russia’s ‘Annexation’ of Crimea, the Ron Paul Institute re-printed an article on precisely this point.

Not to get left behind by the anti-Russian propaganda train, the Swedish something in charge of civil readiness something (blah blah blah) printed a pamphlet on  disaster preparation or some such thing. In something which would be a strong contestant for the fakest news of the year award, the pamphlet told us that...

It was a relatively slow news week so I hope my summation of the week's events shall be quite brief.

In Syria, American bungling is reaching titanic levels - in the modern conception of the word "titanic".

The U.S. said that it would back a Kurdish border force, upon which Turkey promptly initiated a military campaign against Kurdish regions in northern Syria. Now the U.S. is telling Turkey that it should be careful about what it is doing there, and Turkey is responding by asking the Americans what gives them the right to be in Syria in the first place. A major political confrontation between NATO allies is at hand, and if we are lucky it could escalate to a military confrontation and help bring about the end of this out-dated organisation.

I am at times left wondering whether the American leadership - and this is no different under Trump - is simply incompetent or malicious, and I always fall back on malicious because I have a hard time believing that anybody could be as ignorant as the Americans would have to be to think that they would be able to arm a 30,000-strong Kurdish militia while expecting Turkey to sit on the sidelines watching by. My take on this is that the Americans want Turkey in Syria and in order to do this they had to provoke them into a military confrontation. The resentment from the Turks over this certainly seems genuine, so I dismiss the notion that both sides are acting.

That theory at least leaves the Americans in control of their senses, and is about as charitable as I can be towards American imperialist aggression. We cannot dismiss the notion that they are totally intellectually inept, however, and the number of flip-flops that TIllerson makes would be able to give an ordinary man whiplash.

The Syrians threatened to shoot down Turkish jets if they cross into Syria, but I doubt they will follow through on that threat, given the NATO-menace. This is why we must all hope for the quick disintegration of NATO.

The Bergoglio Vatican continues to lie to us, this time telling us that the award it gave to a pro-abortion, pro-homosexuality, pro-euthanasia Dutch politician was not done in order to honour her, but in order to insult her. No comments needed on that one.

Sticking to the most perverse pseudo-pontificate in history, we were told that Bergoglio's Vatican is asking faithful bishops in China to resign so that the Vatican can reach a deal with China to have communist-appointed bishops. The strange thing about this whole scenario is that Cardinal Zen seems to have been under the impression that Bergoglio was unaware of the Chinese Catholics being sold out. Alas, the Vatican has been quick to issue a correction to his narrative and assured us that the shenanigans of the Vatican diplomatic corps are in lock-step with the thoughts of the most openly communist pope in history.

I have pointed out before that if you do not feel betrayed by Bergoglio, then you have to question your Catholic credentials. Alas, we now know that the Chinese underground Catholics are true Catholics, because they have joined the large group of faithful Catholics which Bergoglio has sold out at one time or another.

The actor Jim Caviezel, who played Jesus Christ in the movie "The Passion of the Christ" by Mel Gibson, recently gave a speech to Catholic university students. It is well-worth watching and listening to if you can stand the annoying introduction which lasts less than 80 seconds, or simply skip the firssty 80 seconds - it's somewhat NovusOrdoist ending not withstanding. In brief, it is more Catholic than what virtually any Novus Ordo bishop in the Church has said since Vatican II. It really put our effeminate episcopacy to shame.

VoxCantoris is angry that Catholics in Canada put the most anti-Catholic ruler they have ever had in that country in power. He referenced an earlier post in which Canada's supreme court came down softly on a bestiality case. I sympathise with him, but must point out that under Anglo-Saxon custom, one can only be charged under crimes which are in the statutes. If the wording of the statutes produces undesirable or immoral outcomes, then the statute has to be changed. This is partially why we have had such broad statutes of late that virtually anybody can be found guilty of some kind of law in the Anglo-Saxon countries. That is not a suitable alternative.

A more suitable alternative would be an Old Testament kind of system in which the judges are presumed to be wise and therefore have much greater leeway in issuing their judgements. That however, reminds me of the old Soviet joke, that "if we had ham, we could make eggs and ham, if we had the eggs". One would need wise judges - who are in short supply in the West nowadays - and a moral code which is virtually universal in society, another thing which doesn't exist in 'modern' Western societies.

Finally, we were treated to a very good quote from Joseph Sobran by Laura Wood, regarding Western aggression in the Middle East:

 “Let’s face it: Christianity and Islam are eternal enemies. Each makes uncompromising claims of exclusive truth. But this doesn’t mean that the secularist-Zionist war on the Islamic world serves any Christian interest or deserves Christian support.”

I naturally agree with that completely, and it more or less sums up my view on zionist and Western secular aggression directed against non-Jews in the Middle East - many of these victims being Christians even. It would seem the zionists have co-opted the secularists and the Christian zionists (ignorant as they are of both history and theology) in a battle-of-civilisation which rests on completely false grounds - namely, that Christians and Jews stand on the same side religiously, or even morally.

We were also informed that a traditionalism-leaning monastic community in Germany was closed, and that it didn't...