Fr. Allan J. McDonald

We dare to question, and we dare to join the dots - Sunday 11th to Saturday 17th of February

If one was to write extensively about all the public evils going on in the Church right now one would hardly have time for anything else. For that reason I'll save those for last and attempt to be brief in my coverage of them. It's same old really - Bergoglio's sodomites and apostates are pushing apostasy and sodomy, in different guises and with a different cast of characters every week.

We start with a very curious story regarding Syria, one which confirms what anybody with half a brain already knew but which is nonetheless intriguing. We had the French defence minister admitting that they have never had any reliable evidence of chlorine use in Syria by the government. If I am not mistaken, this came not long after the U.S. defence minister also stated that they have no evidence that the government of Syria has used chemical or biological agents against anti-government Islamists. The question of whether it is any of their business what the Syrian government does in its own country's fight for survival against Jihadis - armed and trained by the West and its allies - is one which I shall not address now. We must assume that none of them have ever had any evidence of the Syrian government ever committing atrocities of the likes against its citizens, or even the non-citizens killing its people in an effort to turn it into an Islamic state.

This should have made news, but predictably did not.

Le Creep did not waste any time stating that if they do find evidence they will strike against Syria - in contravention of international law, of course, but which of these globalists cares about that?

The important thing to take home is that for some reason, the narrative from the NATO aggressors has started to shift. I cannot help but wonder why this is, given that the U.S. has dug its heels in Syria by attacking the Syrian government forces and its allies multiple times. It's almost as though Syria is the battleground for different factions of the Western establishment, the major cost being Syrian blood.

A similar theme, this time limited not to general NATO roguery but only to U.S. roguery, is "If America Wasn’t America, the United States Would Be Bombing It", which I read on the website of the Ron Paul Institute.  The piece was specifically about the multiple war crimes the U.S. has perpetrated since the end of the Second World War, with a special emphasis on crimes only over this past decade. It is difficult to disagree with the claim of the piece, and truth be told, if the U.S. had an embassy in Washington, then they would have found a way of taking out Donald Trump militarily by now. I would much rather think that the U.S. would not be bombing America, had America been a different country, but rather supplying it with weapons and propaganda aid.

The only group of people who largely get the U.S. straight are traditionalists, and even here I would argue that at least within the U.S. it is not a majority which is opposed to U.S. aggression. A lot of American traditionalists, however, are honest enough to recognise the U.S. as the threat to world peace and morals that it really is, and are ashamed of the U.S. for that reason.

If you think I am exaggerating ask yourself this: Since the end of the Cold War, what is the body count of non-U.S. aligned Islamists compared to that of the U.S.?  This is a particularly good mental exercise for those who do nothing but fret about the threat of Islamist violence. I don't have the numbers, but I would be extremely surprised if the numbers were not in the region of 100:1, with the U.S. having the larger number. It is also worth pointing out that the only country in which the U.S. and al Qaeda have been on opposite ends of the battle ground has been Afghanistan, and to a lesser extent Iraq (although that's questionable). In Libya, Syria and Yemen, the U.S. and al Qaeda have not only fought side-by-side, but the U.S. has provided air support for al-Qaeda, the very organisation over which the U.S. claims to have started the Afghan war.

For the longest time I resisted the notion that al-Qaeda was a CIA-front, but now I have grudgingly come to accept that it must be the case, given that in most conflicts they fight on the same side, and in the only conflict in which they had direct combat, the U.S. had been responsible for their creation in the first place, having supported Islamists in Afghanistan in their fight against the Soviet Union.

That war has destroyed a country and destabilised a region. Instead of showing contrition, Americans are now led into welcoming the tune of war drums against North Korea, Venezuela and Iran - and those are only the countries that make it to the news. I am sure there are many other threats made against smaller states but which are not found newsworthy or propaganda-worthy enough for the U.S. to make a big show about.

If we count the dead unborn, and the rising number of dead elderly, killed for no other reason other than for being inconvenient, then the body count of the West versus the Islamic world is in the region of 1,000:1 at least. As Michael Matt from the Remnant asks , why should any American think they have the moral high ground over Islam, or Islamists, or even communists? Well, at this rate the U.S. will be communist before long and large chunks of Europe will be Islamist, so we shall soon be able to see if the body count will increase or decrease.

On the topic of body counts, we were informed that there was a school shooting in the U.S., with 17 people being killed as a formerly-expelled student shot up at his...

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...

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:...


Subscribe to Fr. Allan J. McDonald