Norway

More dubious canonisations: Heads decency loses, tails perversion wins - Sunday 7th to Saturday 27th of October

We had yet another dubious NOChurch canonisation, as Pope Paul VI was canonised by Bergoglio, the man who seems to want to attack Humanae Vitae - pretty much the only thing Pope Paul VI did somewhat right, just about. The miracles attributed to Paul VI are as dubious as his character, but that didn't stop NOChurch from counting them as genuine, and using them as proof for his sanctity; these people are nothing if not relentless in their quest to destory all things Catholic.

Needless to say, real Catholics did not take this lightly. The SSPX issued a statement issued questioning it. Peter Kwasnieski went even further, and explained Why We Need Not (and Should Not) Call Paul VI ‘Saint’. Louie Verrechio, in his own particular way, had his take on this queer man being raised to the altars. I have no idea what NOChurch media wrote about this, but I am quite certain it was entirely uncritical.

With so many canonisations, and so many dubious, people have begun to wonder: What exactly are we to think of canonisations? Does it mean the same thing? Are we bound to accept these things? How come there are so many of them nowadays and every pope seems to get a halo as his retirement present. Well, Canonization: Old vs. New Comparison in Unam Sanctam Catholicam attempted to show us what has changed and it shows clearly that whereas the old process was concerned with the integrit of the process, the integrity of the faith, the new one seems to be more interested in expediting the process, and not so concerned with anything which might slow or halt a canonistaion.

Part of the problem with the McCanonisations, is that we often do not get to evaluate objectively what was done, as much of the information is still hidden. The McCarrick scandal, for instance, has done much to cloud John Paul II's legacy, since it has come to light that there were warnings about McCarrick long before he got made cardinal, and that he was promoted in spite of these warnings. We were informed by ChurchMilitant.tv that the Vatican is gigging the McCarrick Investigation so as to place the blame on Pope John Paul II, now sainted by NOChurch's saint factory, and deflect attention away from Bergoglio - soon-to-be-sainted by said factory. Mundabor saw in this proof that Bergoglio is clearly an atheist, arguing that no true Catholic would canonise someone and then question the man's virtues after he had been canonised. I shall not waste your time in pointing out that Bergoglio is not Catholic at all, since that much should be obvious from what I have written many times on this blog, but I agree with Mundabor that this can count as proof.

My take on that is the following: This is a classic case of Bergoglian intrigue. It's a case of "heads, I win; tails, you lose". By this I mean that Bergoglio wins his greater plan to destroy the Catholic faith no matter how it turns out if he implicates Pope John Paul II in the McCarrick scandal, and the stronger the implication, the stronger his victory, and there is a connection to Pope Paul VI here as well. Let me explain...

It is no secret that Bergoglio is partial to sodomy. There are strong reports that Pope Paul VI at least before he became pope was involved in sodomitical relationships of the homosexual nature. If it turns out that Pope Paul VI is definitely proved to have done this, then now that he is a 'saint', what Bergoglio will have done is to create the space for him to claim that homosexuality is no big deal, since even some saints were homosexual. If, however, it turns out that the blowback is so large, then he can tar all canonisations by saying that canonisations are not infallible, are not trustworthy, and therefore the Catholic faiith has no certainties. It is the same with McCarrick: If you pin the blame on Pope John Paul II, then you  say thatt McCarrick's perversions either were not that grave, or failinng that, that Pope John Paul II was a flawed pope, who still managed to become a saint, and therefore we can be as flawed as we like and still manage to become saints. One can expect him too caption it "canonisation is  medicine for a fall world, not a prize for the perfect", just as he does with Holy Communion.

So what are we to do, given all these canonisations, a large chunck of tthem highly dubious? Well, a piece on either Rorate Caeli or Novus Motus Liturgicus tackled this issue head on. The conclusion was that perhaps we do not need to take an all-or-nothing approach. Although the Church does not define canonisations as infallible, certainly not within the scope of the dogma of infallibility, we can still maintain that pre-Vatican II canonisations are infallible, while those after the process was changed are not infallible. If the intention and the matter of canonisation has changed, then surely this cannot be without consequence for how we approach them.

The zionists in occupied Palestine continued their aggression. It was in many ways inevitable, as not having Syria as a playground for their airforce, they were bound to find other victims for Etheir murderous appetites . Donald Trump withdrew from yet another treaty, this time the INF Treaty, yet again proving that he will stop at nothing to placate the war party, contrary to his many statements on the campaign trail speaking of a responsible foreign policy. There were reports that the U.S. helped coordinate the drone attack on Russia's aribase in Syria earlier this year , really to the surprise of nobody since the U.S. has admitted to helping the Islamists ever since the start of the Syrian war, which they themselves helped to...

Some good news out of Europe for a change - Sunday 26th of November to Saturday 2nd of December

Given the general somewhat-negative emphasis of this blog, I feel duty-bound to begin with some rare good news - Catholic or secular - coming out of Europe. These news come from Poland, perhaps not entirely surprisingly.

I have my misgivings about the apparent re-Catholicisation of Poland, being generally wary of the nationalistic bend it seems to have. Anyone who knows me will know that I support nationalists in all their stripes, so long as they don't bring with them baggage of ethnic or racial ideologies. I can't claim that I have seen much of that in Poland, but I am still suspicious that the modest but noteworthy increase in Catholic social life in Poland has more to do with the Poles trying to craft out a national identity. In this  context, turning to Catholicism works very well since it unites a large chunk of Poles - presumably even German Poles - given that it is not on purely ethnic lines, and they can be unified in Catholic grandeur, which built all that is good about Europe. It also manages to differentiate Poland from its secularist/atheist enemies to the West and North - primarily Germany and the Nordic countries -  and it's long-time Orthodox adversaries - in the form of Russia - to the East. It also allows them to keep out Muslims on the culture card, without getting into issues of Islam itself.

Credit where credit is due though, and the news that Poland was going to phase out Sunday trade by the year 2020 was some of the best news that I have heard or read in a very long time. It is something which wreaks of a true religious revival - which whatever the intentions from the political class - might actually end up being long-lasting, regardless of who comes to or stays in power in the country. Naturally the leftists, or so I have been informed, were opposed to it, but it would seem as though the cultural marxist's general treachery to the Polish people will not be soon forgotten and it would seem as though the Law and Justice party or some similar nationalistic entity in Poland will be there for a while.

Furthermore, it is politically difficult to get rid of Sunday as a day of rest given that I am pretty sure that the Sunday rest was abolished by the communists, and one does not make many friends in Poland by making oneself a defender of Soviet policies. It's a very shrewd political move, and I applaud it unhesitatingly.

Sticking to Europe, we have more proof of its downfall in a handful of stories. In Germany and other places they have started decorating their 'diversity barriers', wrapping them up as Christmas presents. That's the most appropriate term for the barriers that they have put up on pedestrian walkways and roads leading to Christmas markets. Since we all know why they have to be put up in the first place, it would be much more honest to just paint a picture of Mohammed on them rather than pretend that they are part of the Christmas attire. I should point out that the town centre close to where I live has also put up diversity barriers - presumably to protect its Christmas market -, but alas has not gone to the trouble of wrapping up.

We were also informed that the Muslim population in Europe is set to grow, up to 25% of the population in some places, by the year 2050, and that is with zero immigration.

The Muslims do the right thing in having children, and that is to be applauded. It is the West which is to be chided for deriding the miracle of procreation. That snobbery may well prove to be its downfall, and it will be just reward for its open-armed embrace of the culture of death.

In the U.K. there was a feminist march, and feminists did what they do best which is to display their stupidity and entitlement. One of them even took the trouble to inform people that the Bible is more violent than the Koran. She should know, she told us, being a former Catholic herself. It has featured as one of my day's comments, but I'll reproduce 2 very poignant parts of the analysis from Tantumblogo. The first one clearly lays the blame for the woman's ignorance for the Novus Ordo, and I naturally agree:

“I’ve read passages [of the Koran] and the Bible is a lot more violent.  I should know, I’m a former Catholic.”  Another triumph for the post-conciliar Church!

The second one was his take on feminism itself, and feminists in general:

Which brings me to my final point – I will probably offend some in saying this, or how I say this, but I have long had a sense that many feminists are really little more than out of control teenage daughters who keep acting more and more outrageously in the increasingly forlorn hope that “dad” – society, males at large, whatever – will rein them in.  And the longer they are allowed to continue acting out, the more hurt and upset and, subsequently radicalized, they become.  It’s like they are a toddler constantly trying to find some boundary that daddy will set for them.  In their rage in finding none in the collectively weak Western men of the past 60 years, they will even turn to the cruel, draconian authoritarianism of islam to find some entity that seems to care about them enough to tell them no, to set firm limits, and make them turn over the dang car keys.

It is difficult to disagree with that either. As I wrote in my comment to the bizarreness of the whole spectacle:

I am also at a loss to understand what these women are marching for, given that the laws in most formerly Christian countries can hardly favour women more. The

...

Pages

Subscribe to Norway