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,...
