Novus Ordo protestanisation

The grinch who stole Holy Week, or more honestly put, the attention whore who tried to upstage it - Sunday 25th to Saturday 31st of March - Holy Week

As we all should be aware, but most are not, the Holy Week reforms of the 1950s were quite sweeping. Berfore Holy Week, Rorate Caeli once again re-posted an article on " The Reform of Holy Week in the Years 1951-1956". It is well-worth reading, especially in connection with the news recently that some traditional orders had been allowed to celebrate the pre-1950s Holy Week on a 3-year experimental basis starting this year.

Traditionalists are nothing if not resourceful and it didn't take long before there was a resource for the pre-1950 Holy Week with English translations, aptly called Pre-1955 Holy Week (although I grant that it may well have been present before the announcement). Rorate Caeli also provided us with a clarification on who exactly may chant the Passion. These two interventions by Rorate Caeli were quite helpful to me personally, as I finally came to realise taht the Passion is not actually the Gospel reading for Good Friday, but that we actually have a Passion reading followed by a Gospel reading, at least in the traditinal liturgy, pre-1950s edition in any case. Rorate Caeli was also kind enough to provide us with pictures of Palm Sunday from the pre-1955 Holy Week celebration.

Anybody who knows anything about Christianity knows that Easter is the biggest event of the Church year (yet it seems that professional journalists writing for major state-sponsored publications don't have a clue about what Easter is all about, to nobody's surprise, and they are probably even proud about it). We shall also know that Holy Week is the most august week of the year. It is for this reason that the secular anti-Catholic world generally steps up its attacks on the Catholic faith and the Catholic Church. It is also the week that the world's most popular attention-whore gets up to his usual attention-seeking antics in order to seemingly steal attention away from the Church's commemorations and celebrations.

This year was no exception, but having noticed that his Maundy Thursday foot fetish doesn't get the attention it used to , Bergoglio decided to get a little help from his now 93-year old atheist friend Euginio Scalfari. Every time he speaks to that an he can be guaranteed a few scandalous headlines and this time was no different. Just in time for the Holy Week Celebrations, in which Christ instituted the Holy Eucharist and died to save us from the fires of hell and allow us too spend eternity with God, Bergoglio told his friend that there is no hell, and that those who die in sin simply vanish, while those who repent before end up spending eternity in the presence of God. This interview was timed to coincide with Maundy Thursday, and naturally overshadowed his feet-washing ceremony, which was once more carried out in prison and against the rubrics of the Novus Ordo, rubrics which he himself amended, it has to be mentioned.

The reactions were not long in coming, and predictably, much of the Catholic press tied itself up in knots, blaming the poor atheist fool Scalfari, instead of pointing to Bergoglio as the culprit. The Vatican issued a non-denial denial, informing us, as we all know, that Scalfari does not record his interviews so it cannot be ascertained whether what was reported was the exact phrasing that Bergoglio used. In other words, they were saying loudly and clearly that Bergoglio is a heretic, as we all know, but we can use the he-doesn't-record-interviews card to get us out of a very serious doctrinal situation. They could really have done little else, for had they said that Bergoglio had actually admitted that he doesn't believe in hell, then they would efffectively have been confirming what we all know, that the man is not Catholic. Had they come out and denied that Bergoglio said that, then they would have had to explain how it is that a man who, as far as I know, hasn't faced many accusations of total misrepresenation in his work before - save for when he speaks to Bergoglio - could get such a fundamental thing so wrong.

Bergoglio himself did not come out and deny it, so we can rest safely in the knowledge that Bergoglio told his atheist friend that. It must be noted that this is not the first time that Bergoglio has denied that souls end up in hell, as Scalfari has reported on this before, and even in Church documents Bergoglio has written something to the tune of everything been on its way to Heaven. His defenders have pointed out that Bergoglio mentions the devil quite a lot, and so he must be misquoted if he has said that the devil does not exist. That is a logical fallacy if ever there was one, as it is entirely possible to believe that the devil exists and yet believe that nobody ends up in hell; that the devil would spend eternity in hell with his demons. In any case it was dishonest of them as they could easily have found multiple instances of Bergoglio telling us that those who die in mortal sin never end up in hell, assuming that anybody can even die in mortal sin, which Bergoglio does not seem to believe - save for traditional Catholics who use doctrine as stones to throw at people while sitting in the judgment seat of Moses. That's his phrasing, not mine, of course.

On the topic of attacking the Church's doctrines, Bergoglio could not resist taking a barb at the notion of truth, insisting that priests ought not to make "idols of certain abstract truths". This was in a separate speech, mind you, proving beyond doubt, if anyone is still not convinced, that the man is in constant heresy mode, and not just when speaking to his atheist anti-Catholic friends who, if you are to believe his enablers, have nothing better to do than...

Even converts show us yet again why nobody likes NOChurch, and for good measure, Bergoglian scandals abound as well - Sunday 18th to Saturday 24th of February

It is quite often to hear people saying that the Church needed to change because it was not effective in evangelisation, or was losing members, or whatever other tripe the ill-informed or ill-intentioned will give us about the pre-Vatican II Church. They say this to rationalise or justify the rapture which took place at Vatican II, whose negative effects are growing by the day.

In this context, and given that we are approaching the 'canonisation' of Paul VI, it is timely to have a look at how the Church actually was, statistically, at the death of Pope Pius XII. Indeed, Rorate Caeli never gets tired of reminding us of how booming the Church was, and even though the figures are for the U.S., I am quite certain that the trend holds world-wide. In a piece titled "The Canonization of Vatican II: The case for Pacelli, revisited", they did just that.

Long story short, if the Church today was to have even 1/4 of the numbers that the Church was pulling in 1958, it would be seen as almost miraculous, given how bad things are today.

These are only the positive numbers. For a complete picture we would have to also find out the number of apostates every year, how many priests became laicised, how many monks and nuns left religious life and the number of divorces and annulments. With regards to annulments, I know for a fact that there were less than 1,000 in the whole world in the reign of Pope Pius XII, compared to more than 60,000 in the U.S. alone just some 10 years later and today probably. I suspect the other negative numbers from the reign of Pope Pius XII would put NOChurch to shame.

'Shame' and NOChurch are never far apart, and this week was no different. From Rome we had a high-ranking member of the Apostolic Signatura sentenced to 18 months probation for child pornography possession. This particular pervert was revealed as he groped a man at a market and was then run down by the young man, only for the police to intervene. Upon looking him up they noticed he had prior convictions for indecent exposure and this led to a search on his apartment wherein the perverted material was found.

In the U.S., we had one of Bergoglio's most popular sodomy-pushers, Cardinal Tobin - a Bergoglio appointment - tweeting out "goodnight baby" before promptly erasing the tweet. He claimed that it was to his sister, but I am not sure how many people believe that, as I certainly don't. The best we can hope for is that he was writing to his mistress, although it doesn't take much of an imagination to suspect that he was sending to someone with not quite so squishy parts...

In Germany, they have gone full-blown apostaste, with news that protestants will be allowed to receive Holy Communion, if they are married to Catholics. I'll not spend much time on this, but it is amusing to note that Catholics who do not pay the Church tax are barred from all sacraments, whereas protestants who share the same bed with Catholics are welcome, even though they do not believe any of the Chuch's imporntant doctrines. That's NOChurch logic if ever we had it. Gloria.tv wondered when Muslims will be up for some Sunday bread.

The Remnant wrote a piece on sacrilegious Communion by protestants and traced the rot all the way back to the documents of Vatican II, in 1965. It is very fashionable by many who dislike Bergoglio to pin all the blame on him, but the fact of the matter is that Bergoglio is only a very virulent strain of the Novus Ordo virus. The rot began a long time ago and there are very many people to blame, and no Novus Ordo pope gets off lightly, with the exception of Pope John Paul I whose reign was too short and not excluding even Pope Benedict XVI, however much good he did. These are the same popes, by the way, who are automatically canonised at death, with Bergoglio even blasphemously joking that Benedict and he are on the waiting list.

We are supposed to believe that the greatest crisis and apostasy in the Church's history has been overseen by a series of holy popes not seen since the early centuries, when many of them died to save the faith.

One of these supposed 'heroically holy' popes, Bergoglio the terrible, has this past week been implicated in a financial corruption scandal. It involved the transfer of money to a scandal-ridden hospital on Bergoglio's behest, to the tune of $25 million from an organisation which normally limits itself to donations of $100,000 and in exceptional cases to $200,000. The cardinals in the U.S. voted for the money to go to the hospital because Bergoglio urged them to do so. We would all like to know how much of that money has gone to its proper use and how much went off to pay off people for their silence.

In " Peronism and Corruption" , Fr. Ray Blake attempted to explain why Bergoglio surrounds himself with so many perverts. He puts it down to Peronism, in which people are promoted not due to competence or virtue, but out of loyalty to the head honcho. Hilary White picked up on this and pointed out that part of the reason why Bergoglio wants perverts around him is because they are easier to control since he has more dirt on them. That he is one of them did not get a mention, but perverts of a feather perve together.

The now rather famous Jordan Peterson revealed in an interview to former Catholic Answers host Patrick Coffin that he needs 3 more years before he can give his position on the "historical Jesus". I remember getting into a discussion regarding whether the man was a Christian or...

A week of commemorations, some good, some Bergogliian - Sunday 29th of October to Saturday 4th of November

This week included the Feast of All Saints, as well as the Feast of All Souls, as all well-informed Catholics will know.

One is an authentic celebration of those who have made it to Eternal Glory spend eternity with God in Heaven. The other is a commemoration of the souls who have not quite made it, inviting us to pray for them and help them along the way. These are the positive commemorations.

It will have escaped the attention of few that this week also marked the 500th anniversary of the protestant revolt. There were many good articles written about this event and the myths that have grown up about it. It's interesting to note that even the  posting of theses to the church door is generally agreed not to have taken place, but is one more myth about that arch-heresiarch. Many of the good articles I found have been linked below, and it would be nice to have a glance at them if you want to know about the real Martin Luther, the one who was condemned by the Church, a rabidly depraved human being who seems to have had little or  no love in him, except of various immoral acts.

One good article was a reprint of an article written 50 years ago in The Wanderer by Bishop William Adrian. It shows that the attempt at rehabilitating Luther has been going on since at least the Second Vatican Council, and what is interesting is that even then the attempt was going against readily available historical data which showed just what a horrble man he was.

We shall not waste much time on him, as we have bigger problems in the Church today than an arch-heresiarch who was excommunicated; in the form of an arch-heresiarch who seems intent on tearing everything Catholic down, and who seems to have very little resistance from the Church's other bishops in his attempts to do so. This same man decided to honour Luther with a blaspemous stamp in which Luther and his associate the the places traditionally associated with the Virgin Mary and St. John. The pose of these people kneeling is unusual as, from what I have read of the man's writings, he is unlikely to have ever got on his knee in front of the Cross or Crucifix after he had apostasised. Even their distortions of history are distorted in other words.

We also had news that Bergoglio has supposedly set up a commission geared towards looking into creating a new ecumenical mass. This time they even bothered to come up with a denial, so at least they know the venture is evil.

It's interesting to note that not even the Novus Ordo Missae is un-Catholic enough for Bergoglio, despite having carried tens and hundreds of millions away from the faith. He wants a novus Novus Ordo, and the blasphemies contained in it we can only imagine. Many disbelieve this story, and I am not sure I am too keen to believe it either, given the Novus Ordo Missae is working just dandily in tearing Catholics away from their faith en masse. However, it is important to remember that the worse a rumour is under this pontificate, the more likely it is to be true, if history is anything to go by. Virtually every bad warning regarding Bergoglio has come to fruition, with the reality being often worse than the rumours.

In an article entitled "Why Catholics should defend indulgences", the Catholic Herald did a good job in explaining the issue of indulgences. It is a very easy read ad a good explanation. That particular newspaper used to be my go-to-site for news, but Bergoglio has left his mark on it. Besides being largely Bergoglio apologists, the newspaper seems often to be little more than neo-cons in Catholic drag, as their very clear support for the Western aggression Libya demonstrated, and it's heavy anti-Russian propaganda. Credit where credit is due though.

This week's Bergoglio-victim-of-the-week was Fr. Thomas Weinandy, who in a rather forthright manner put into writing what he has felt about Bergoglio for a long time. He wrote that Bergoglio has caused "chronic confusion", among other stuff. He also wrote of Bergoglio's hypocrisy in speaking of parrhesia while punishing those who speak up openly in favour of Catholic teaching and against Bergoglian novelties, all the while as Bergoglio rewards those who show nothing but disrespect to the Church's moral authority.

Keen to prove that the terms of its massive grants from the U.S. government does not oblige the USCCB to invest in irony, Fr. Weinandy was promptly dismissed from his position as the USCCB's top doctrinal advisor, swiftly proving that he was right to point out the hypocrisy of FrancisChurch.

I would remiss if I did not take this opportunity to compliment Mundabor on his keen sense of picking out NovusOrdoist tendencies even from people who do good acts. The details of how Fr. Weinandy came to issue his letter to Bergoglio are worth reading about on their own,  but in short, he asked for a sign from God, and a very specific one at that. Once he had received that sign, he felt he should go ahead with airing his grievances. Mundabor notes the fact that it is not a good idea to test God, in the way the priest did. We have a case in which a priest seems to have been forced by God into doing what he should have been doing all along. Given that this particular priest was the head of the doctrinal office, we cannot claim that he does not know right from wrong, so we ought to be afraid that he has led others into thinking that they can test God in similar ways.

It would not be entirely fanciful, for instance, to think that a man with a weakness for a workmate will use the same trick and put a set of conditions which, if met,...

Pages

Subscribe to Novus Ordo protestanisation