Russia

Some thoughts on the 100-year anniversary of the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima

This is a huge day in the life of the Church. The Miracle of the Sun at Fatima is the greatest and most widely witnessed divine intervention since the Resurrection of Christ.

It is such a big day in fact that I feel somewhat forced to have some sort of commentary on the day itself, untrue to form. There are many much-better informed followers of Fatima, so I'll try and keep my statements brief.

The eminent historian Roberto di Mattei wrote a splendid piece which was published on Rorate Caeli. In it he writes a bit of what happened on that day, but much of his text has to do with how the 9 popes since the apparition have failed to honour the Virgin's request to have Russia consecrated to her Immaculate Heart.

There are some who feel that the consecration of Russia has been carried out and that the positive changes we see in Russia have occured as a result of that consecration. There were positive developments when Pope Pius XII consecrated the whole world to the Blessed Virgin, a fact Sister Lucia was keen to point out, but she was keen to point out that the consecration had not heeded our Blessed Mother's wishes. The Second World War did indeed end and we did indeed have a period of peace, but the world was soon plunged into the chaos of the Cold War, and the errors of Russia continued to spread. Indeed, Roberto di Mattei catalogues this.

Now some will say that Russia has changed and this and that.; facts hardly open to dispute. Anybody who argues that Russia is still communist is as ignorant as he is stupid, I would argue. Well, either that or you are accusing the Russian leadership of complete ignorance of what communism is. After all, communists specialise in destroying churches, not in building and re-building them. If you don't believe me, just as the Chinese and the Soviets!

One would think that people as wise as those in charge of Russia - people, it has to be admitted, who manage to outmanoeuvre the combined intellect of the entire Western world combined seemingly without even trying - would be in the know as to the basic tenets of communism, if that was the ideology that they secrectly espoused. The charge of the Russian leadership being crypto-communists really does not stand up even to the slightest bit of scrutiny.

Since the fall of the Soviet Union, Russia has built over 10,000 churches, many if not most with government money, I would assume, since there is simply no way that the Orthodox Church in Russia, persecuted and infiltrated by communists for so long, with barely any Mass attendees, would be able to afford such an undertaking. Some reports I have seen have claimed as much as 28,000 churches have been built in Russia since the fall of communism, a figure that seems rather fanciful to me, but which I would happily accept if it were proved to be true.

The president, Vladimir Putin, routinely attends church services, as does prime minister  Medvedev and defence minister Shoigu. These, I would argue, are the 3 most important public figures in Russia and they are doing everything they can do to prop up the Russian Orthodox Church. Although there is much to go before Russia can be called a Christian nation - the abolition of abortion being the foremost - there is not much more that the current leadership of Russia could have done to help Christianity regain its place at the centre of Russian life.

That it is the Russian Orthodox Church being propped up and not the Catholic Church will offend some, but it does not offend me. To any impartial observer, the Russian Orthodox Church certainly appears more Christian than the Catholic Church. Only the learned will bother to find out that the claims of the Russian Orthodox Church are bogus, but few ever go that far. Externals matter and the fact of the matter is that the primate of Russia behaves in a much more Christian way than does our pope, or whatever Bergoglio is.

Furthermore, it has always been the role of the Russian leadership to support Russian Orthodoxy and I am at a loss to understand how these people think that the Russian leadership can impose the Catholic faith on people who have been hostile to the Catholic Church for centuries. These rifts have nothing to do with Vladimir Putin or even the communists, and they cannot be healed by political figures, although I grant that political figures can do much to push the re-unification. The fact of the matter is that the Blessed Virgin Mary provided us with a roadmap of how to convert Russia back to Catholicism, and that is through the consecration of Russia.

Rumour has it that Putin even asked the pope to consecrate Russia; so much for the politicians being communists. That the popes have failed to do this is to their eternal condemnation. It would be one thing if they did not believe in the Fatima message, but pope after pope has paid homage to the apparitions at Fatima so it beggars belief that they will not do what they were asked to do.

Back to the topic of the consecration and the accompanying warnings...

Whereas Russia can be said in many ways to have rejected the errors of Russia, these errors are all-pervasive in the West. Whether it is the attack on the Christian faith, the destruction of the family, the promotion of sodomy, fornication homosexuality and feminism, the attack on human nature through transgenderism and materialism, the attack on the sacredness of human life through euthanasia and abortion, the promotion of Islam, witchcraft, scientism and atheism, the errors of Russia have spread into the West like wild-fire and there seems to be no stopping them.

I repeat that I am no expert of Fatima but it is my understanding that...

A terrible force of destruction meets an immovable object - Early reactions to Correctio Filialis - Sunday 24th to Saturday 30th of September

It turns out that the Correctio Filialis de haeresibus propagatis was released at exactly midnight of September 24th, and not on September 23rd as I had previously written. What confused me was the fact that I went to Rorate Caeli shortly after midnight and found it there, and naturally assumed that it had been posted somewhat earlier. If we check their timestamp though it seemed to have been set for publication at exactly midnight. I had caught wind of something being released from reading Fr. John Hunwicke's post from the day before, in which he claimed that something big was expected on the Sunday. For that reason I was surprised to learn that it had been released before, or so I thought, and it didn't help that so many blogs I read put the 23rd on it.

Time zones help explain that confusion, because many of the blogs I follow are from the Western hemisphere, where it was still the 23rd on the day of publication. I would much rather use the Rome time since the document was meant for Rome, and since it was released on the 24th my time as well, so I'll henceforth refer to the 24th as the release date, but I digress, although...Distinctions Matter!

The phrase "an irresistible force meets an immovable object" is I believe quite common in weather-speak and I believe it is used when a weather front meets a mountain area or some such thing. In my particulary context, it obviously refers to Bergoglio and while he has been immovable in his obstinacy against Catholic doctrine and practice, in this particular analogy he predictably plays the part of "a terrible force of destruction" with the signatoris of Correction Filialis acting as representatives of the immovable object that is the deposit of faith.

For my part I acquired it from "The Dark Knight" - one of the best movies ever made, by the way, and unquestionably one of the most well-made, if not the ouright winner of that particular category. In the final confrontation with the Joker, Batman saves him from an untimely death out of moral principle, despite spending most of the movie actually trying to stop him, at great danger to his own life and that of others. In that particular scene, the Joker says "this is what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object".

My memory tweaked it a bit to read "terrible force of destruction" but I'll stick to that terminology since Bergoglio is unstoppable only on account of the timidity of the hierarchy of the Church, along with the complicity of many modernists in the Catholic establishment at large. He is by no means unstoppable, but that he is a terribe force of destruction I deem indisputable.

The more I think about it, the more I realise just how numerous are the similarities between Bergoglio and the Joker as portrayed in that film. Some time, I might get around to writing about that.

In any case, the correction was an attempt to stop Bergoglio's seemingly unstoppable march towards the destruction of what remains of the Catholic edifice. For what it's worth I don't think he will succeed with or without the correction, but the correction is a huge stumbling block. This has been proved very clearly as Bergoglio's enablers and attack hounds have had no other course but to attack the signatories in defence of Amoris Laetitia, and not the content of the correction itself.

Some have pointed out that there is nothing in the correction which shows that Amoris Laetitia actually teaches heresy, completely bypassing, it seems, the main charge of the signatories, which is that in his words and his deeds since the publication of Amoris Laeitia, Bergoglio has encouraged heretical readings of it (an already dubious text at best), in turn propagating heresies. If you're going to critique a document, the least you can do is read it and attack what the document actually asserts.

Others have pointed out that the number of signatories is small, the hypocrisy of which one writer, I believe on Rorate Caeli, took exception. He notes that the Bergoglio party has spent the better part of 5 years (and 5 long long years, I hasten to add) intimidating those who disagree with the dangerous direction this horrendous pontificate has taken us, only to point to the number of his opponents being small as proof that the majority is not with the opposition. We remember, by the way, that Bergoglio speaks constantly of dialogue and parrhesia, all the while either threatening or ignoring those who actually attempt to dialogue with him. It seeems hypocrisy is his only mode.

The most ingenious and at the same time non-sensical defence of Amoris Laetitia is that it is all due to a mistranslation! They claim that the whole furore was due to a mistranlation of the Latin. You couldn't make this stuff up!

Christopher Ferrara took dissected this ridiculous claim  at the Remnant. I suppose their implicit claim is that Bergoglio is somehow a Latinist who wrote the whole thing up in Latin, no doubt in their mind consulting the great treasure of Latin writings that the Church possesses. This is a staggering claim, in defending a man whose grasp of Italian evidently is as incompetent as his grasp of Spanish. No matter which language he speaks hardly anybody can figure out what he actually said. I suppose Latin being his primary language might explain why nobody understands him when he speaks any other language, but we are left with the small issue that the official Latin version of Amoris Laetitia was only published in July of this year, well more than a year after the original publication of Amoris Laetitia, and that the document itself was probably written in Spanish, given the large input of Tucho 'art of kissing' Fernandez, the ghostwrite and brains -...

Another dubia cardinal's death leaves us close to full suspicion mode - Sunday 3rd September to Saturday 9th of September

The major news this week was of course the death of Cardinal Caffara.

I must admit that my first reaction at the death of Cardinal Meisner was "Was it suspicious"? I did not even know the circumstances at the time but I found it strange that someone without any apparent illness could simply drop dead.

Fast forward 2 months later and we have the death of yet another cardinal, also in a surprising death and without any apparent illness.

I am already in semi-suspicion mode over this because I am convinced of the absolute malice of Bergoglio and those surrounding him. If any of the other 2 cardinals was to pass away I would go into full suspicion mode. Like they say in the Godfather, this would be the case even if he got struck by lightning!

We have been informed that Bergoglio had/has the dubia cardinals monitored, and this coming from Cardinal Caffara will have to be counted as the trustworthy given it was essentially the last testament of a dying man. If anything happens to either Cardinal Brandmüller or Cardinal Burke, then the whole Catholic world should rise up and demand an autopsy because we would be derelict in our duty to protect our brethren if we did not.

Not content with not answering the dubia, Bergoglio found time to issue new legislation regarding the translation of the Novus Ordo Missae. The message was loudly received and unambigious: Do what thou wilt! Now it is up to the local episcopal conferences to produce translations and for the Vatican to approve them, instead of the Vatican's liturgy commissions being in charge of the process.

It would seem he has given up on his plan of doctrinal devolution, so the next best thing is liturgical devolution. We need not wonder whether the motives were sinister or benign, as with Bergoglio they are always against the faith. It was nonetheless another demonstration that the only thing this oaf of a man does not have time is putting down 5 little words on a piece of paper in answer to the dubia.

Over at the Fatima Center, we had yet more traditionalist infighting. It is most unbecoming and I sure wish it would stop. It is rather tragic that there is so much infighting among those who agree on the basic premise: Fighting Vatican II and its spirits. At the very least we ought to ask those involved not to air their dirty linen in public.

One thing I shall say though is this: Among traditionalists, truth reigns supreme, and this is what gives this counter-revolution so much vigour. In that sense I can find it more irritating than off-putting, because the search of truth definitely involves troubling revelations, and that involves a certain amount of friction.

We also had news of North Korea testing the hydrogen bomb. My stand on the North Korean situation is  very clear: They have both the legal and moral right to pursue any means to defend their national sovereignty. North Korea is not a signatory to the non-proliferation nuclear treaty (NPT), nor is any country prohibited from testing missiles, and its security concerns are not unfounded given the U.S. world bombing tour seems to have put North Korea on its perfomance list. The leader of a country has a natural right and a natural obligation to protect the civilisation within his jurisdiction. Even awful morally decrepit countries have natural rights, and that applies just as much to the U.S. as it does to North Korea.

The U.N., of course, responded with a set of yet more illegal sanctions. It is unbecoming of Russia and China to allow the imposition of these sanctions, especially since the U.S. keeps imposing sanctions on even them at the same time. It is unfathomable to me just why the go along with this bullying given that they are both individually, and certainly combined, great enough powers to resist it.

On the other hand, of course both Russia and China have an interest in preventing more countries from joining the nuclear club, so maybe they secretly get what they want but end up looking good by not being the driving power behind what is clearly illegal actions on the part of the U.N. Security Council. Either way, it is unsightly to behold.

We also had a chance to witness the priorities of NOChurch when the bishops of the U.S. ligned up almost in unison to condemn Donald Trump on simply removing a provision which prevented, or at least downplayed, the enforcement of law, a law not exactly unjust since a country has a right to decide who gets to enter and under what conditions. Bergoglio, rather predictably, also got in on the grandstanding, and yet again showed his hypocrisy.

It was also interesting to see Bergoglio called an "attention whore", since I have previously expressed similar sentiment, and I even have a tag for it called "Bergoglio attention-whoring" . The article was by Mundabor, which comes as no big surprise but I don't recall him doing it earlier. Christopher Ferrara, in the piece linked to in that particular article, expounds on Bergoglio's fake magisterium and showcases more of his rap sheet in the interview book just recently released.

On a final note, the list of Bergoglio victims grows longer, with Professor Josef Seifert now added to the list. I suppose in these mad times, not being on the Bergolio hit-list is a sign that you are not doing your job in one sense or another and being on the hit-list is more often than not a mark of  honour. It is nonetheless remarkable how distinguished are those who have found themselves as victims of Bergoglio's dreadful pontificate. The non-arguments of those who percecute them are also interesting.

If I were high-profile or distinguished enough I might have ended up on that list, a point Roberto de...

Time for everything but the dubia and more U.S. rogue state madness - Sunday 28th of August to Saturday 2nd of September

So, Bergoglio has a new book out. It comes from a series of interviews he gave to a French sociologist.

In it he reveals a lot of things, and finally puts paid to the idea that psychoananlysis has any value by revealing that he saw one for 6 months in his middle-age. The woman was Jewish and close to death, and true to form, Bergoglio obviously made no attempt to efffect a conversion.

The book itself is classic Bergoglio - scandal interwoven with heresy at every turn. I have not reat it,  but the excerpts are quite revealing. Given how long the interviews must have taken, it is further proof that Bergoglio is willing to take time to do everything apart from answering the dubia which were presented to him.

The week also revealed that not all Argentinian bishops are perverts, with Bishop Pedro Daniel Martínez Perea issuing directives which are completely in contradition to Amoris Laetitia in both letter and spirit. We all wonder what will happen to him. His priorities are very clear for all to see, and first among them is destroying the faith, or so it seems at least.

We also had more proof that the U.S. has become a rogue state, with its closure and raid of a Russian consulate in San Francisco. It is easy to get up in armss about the U.S. not following international laws, but truth be told this is a country that doesn't even follow it's own laws, so we should not surprised when it goes all rogue on other powerful nations.  The Russians, were as usual, composed in their reaction.

In the U.S., we also had Steve Bannon leaving the Donald Trump administration.  Some have taken this as a sign that he will enable to help Trump more from the outside by attacking his enemies than from the inside. We do wonder though, with virtually all the reasonable people in the original Trump administration gone, who is going to advise Trump  properly? He seems to be a hostage of the generals with whom he has surrounded himself, and for that he can blame nobody else but himself. The U.S. has this juvenile fascinattion with army-men, and so it seems with Trump, but this might just prove his undoing.

Then we have Hurricane Harvey hitting Texas. It's actually rather heart-warming seeing that Christian brotherhood has not been completely extinguished, given the lengths to which Americans went to help their countrymen.

Continuing on the theme of Bergoglio having time for everything but the dubia, he and the patriarch of Constantinople issued a joint statement - on the environment, of course.

True to form, Bergoglio also had time to appoint more anti-Catholic and anti-life people to the Pontifical Academy for Life.

Finally, we had news of a 'Catholic' school removing statues from its compound so as not to "intimidate" non-Catholics. Some see it as a logical end of Vatican II, and I do not disagree. The only real question is how come it took so long. In any case, they decided to piggyback on the general iconoclasm and monumental stupidity going on in the U.S., and get in on the act by showing their disdain for the Christian heritage.

All in all, another bad week for NOChurch, and another display of just how far the U.S. decay has come - charity in the face of adversity not withstanding.

In Bergoglian times, fake papal news is indistinguishable from real papal news, and a novel idea - Sunday 6th of August to Saturday 12th of August

There was a statement alleged to have come from Vladimir Putin regarding Bergoglio. I cannot for the life of me figure out if the news is fake or whether it is real.

I came to the piece through Fr. Zuhlsdorf's site. In the piece we found the following (emphases from his site):

President Putin has slammed Pope Francis for “pushing a political ideology instead of running a church”, and warned that the leader of the Catholic Church “is not a man of God.”

“Pope Francis is using his platform to push a dangerous far-left political ideology on vulnerable people around the world, people who trust him because of his position,” Putin said. 

“If you look at what he (the Pope) says it’s clear that he is not a man of God. At least not the Christian God. Not the God of the Bible,” Putin said at the Naval Cathedral of St. Nicholas in Kronstadt.  

“He dreams of a world government and a global communist system of repression.

“As we have seen before in communist states, this system is not compatible with Christianity.”

The charges made against Bergoglio are certainly true, but the tone is certainly not that of Vladimir Putin, who is the most diplomatic statesman around. He is very cautious in his statements and I fail to even see why he would bother taking time from his busy efforts rebuilding Russia to criticise a man who is busy destroying the Catholic Church, of which he is not a member (the 'which' refers to Putin here but since heretics cannot be members of the Church...). I just don't see Putin making these statements, and at a cathedral no less.

Mind you, I would certainly not respect him less if he said it!

The truth is that Bergoglio's attack hounds have  been critical of Putin so it would be only fair of Putin to point out that Bergoglio is not a man of God and that he is deceiving people. I just don't think that Vladimir Putin said it, because I have not seen any confirmation of this piece from trustworthy newspapers or blogs, and even Fr. Zuhlsdorf seems to think it is fake news.

There were many comments on this piece at the website, but one in particular was noteworthy:

Fake news or not (I think it is largely invented), Pope Francis is to blame for having said things that make people wonder if articles like this are true. What this article says would not be remotely plausible if it pertained to either of our previous two popes. Not so with Pope Francis. Even if Putin never said what the article says he says, it is plausible that he did say those things and it is also plausible that there is some element of truth to at least some of them.

The truth is the more absurd a story coming from the Vatican nowadays the more likely that it is true, and the more anti-Catholic it is the less we can dismiss it. Even Bergoglio's defenders cannot pretend that the man is not a disaster for the Catholic Church.

The same priest writes about the 'North Korean' situatoin and suggests some solutions. There was only one contributor who wrote anything worthy of a Catholic response, while the rest showed off their americanism. As it turns out, he is British, and seemed generally to be the most informed. One of his responses captures his general attitude towards the 'problem', and he had many.

Simples. Don’t threaten North Korea. Don’t put THAAD missiles in South Korea. Don’t carry out massive battle manoeuvres in the south. In fact go back home and look after your own people.

I have a novel idea: Just leave North Korea alone!

My idea runs roughly along the same sentiments in other words. The fact is that most other countries have come to terms with the fact that North Korea is a nuclear power, including all of its neighbours, which are well within the range of North Korean weapons. It is only the U.S. which thinks it is so special that it has a right to prevent another country from defending itself.

North Korean concerns are not exactly unjustified, as the U.S. has been on a global campaign to take down anyone who opposes its policies and not strong enough for self-defence. We have seen Iraq, Libya and Syria attacked militarily by the U.S. and on top of that you can add other countries the U.S. has bombed int the recent past on multiple continents. As a sovereign country, North Korea have every right to defend themselves or at the very least to assure the destruction of anybody who attacks them, adn contrary to popular opinion, it is the U.S. which is the aggressor as it keeps holding military drills - some with such ominous names as "Operation Decapitation" - and imposing sanctions on what is already one of the most impoverished countries in the world. Truth is, sanctions are considered an act of war.

It is time for the U.S. to stop acting as if it is special - and being allowed to get away with it - and live with the rest of the international community as part of the community, and not as an overlord. It is the U.S. which is the real rogue state!

There is simply no good reason why anybody should accept the ridiculous notion that the U.S. has a right not to be under threat from other countries, given that it threatens virtually all countries on the planet. Furthermore, there is nothing irrational about the behaviour of North Korea: They simply seek the survival of their nation, as do most right-thinking people (which obviously excludes most of the Western politicians and electorate at this point in time). I would hope that at least Catholics can agree that it is unjust to threaten a country with annihilation simply for seeking the means to preserve itself,...

Pages

Subscribe to Russia