Some will say: “It’s just metaphor. It’s just a nun with a poetic flair.” Prevost Inc. is, like Bergoglio Inc., diabolical. With Prevost silence is a weapon and strategy - appoint liars and murders (of souls) and sit silent after the carnage as the fake-pope-explainers do the devil's rounds.
What we see here is the elevation of the poetic over the metaphysical. This certainly predates Pope Provost (Leo XIV). One of the main reasons I think "Our Lady of Akita" is bogus is because the statue is based on a false revelation to Ida Peederman in 1945 where "Our Lady of All Nations" proclaims that "She was ONCE The Virgin Mary". The "Prayer" even says: "Our Lady of All Nations, who was ONCE the Virgin Mary..."
Pius X was a little off when he called Modernism the "synthesis of all heresies". A more apt description is that Modernism is the disjoining of the Spiritual from the Natural and the subversion of metaphysics, where our feelings and unanimity transcend the ontological and self evident. Instead of the old army motto: "Be all that you can be" we now have "Be anything you want to be".
God indeed transcends logic. We don't know how God can make a stone so big He cannot move it even when God can do all things. God is mystery. But God does not CONTRADICT logic. God cannot be and not be, for example, just as a Wolf cannot be a Cat. God became man, without ceasing to be God, an ineffable mystery we adore.
Pope Provost, by his silence, of course, is approving of error. ("Not to condemn error is to approve of it; not to speak the Truth is to suppress it.") And Trad Inc is doing us no favor by continuing to apologize for this Monster.
Pope Provost is even more sinister and more diabolical than Pope Frantic. Pope Frantic was a Clown, and wore it on his bombastic face and occult sleeve. He would occasionally say Catholic things, but his actions were blatantly heretical. The scandal of Pope Frantic's regime is that two hundred or so cowardly birdbrains wearing red hats sat around and did nothing, for fear they would lose their meal tickets at the Vatican refectory. Every one of them, including Cardinal Burke, is a traitor, a sellout, and a scoundrel, and they all have my utter contempt.
Meanwhile, Pope Provost is the perfect Janus, pulling the "pontificate" of Pope Frantic Forward and legitimizing it, while looking even further back before Vatican II and pulling it forward into the Agiornamento and the Hermaneutic of Continuity. Pope Frantic was too pedestrian to be the False Prophet forerunner of the Antichrist. He turned the Holy Seat into amateur hour. But Pope Provost is much slicker- wearing Fiddleback Vestments, chanting in Latin, and being obscured by Incense. The Satanists know it is all about image, even as they gut the innards, and attack the substance of the Faith, which is exactly what Sister Sue Vatican Two was doing.
St Pius X stated that the fundamental doctrine of Modernism is Evolution or Evolutionism, since the pernicious theory of Evolution implies no fixed essences, & when applied to doctrine means no fixed or definitive doctrine. The same can be applied to liturgy, morals & everything else.
"To the laws of evolution everything is subject - dogma, Church, worship, the Books we revere as sacred, even faith itself...there is to be nothing stable, nothing immutable in the Church."
You are correct. It is tragic that Pius X never condemned Darwinism outright, and completely banned its teaching in schools, and excommunicated those who promoted it. It is tragic he never had the Pontifical Institute expose and condemn the lies of Darwin and the poppycock of Lyell. It was the Protestants that would take the lead there.
I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss Akita or the Lady of all Nations revelations because of the "once was Mary" line. This is not so shocking a phrase if we consider it in the possibly proper context of a 'regnal' name, which is simply a title taken on by monarchs during their reign, for whatever reason. God doesn't become more divine but Mary as a human can certainly continue to progress into higher degrees of roles, in any particular way God chooses to bestow. And clearly, when many refer to the current and previous popes as "Bergoglio" and as you yourself do "Pope Provost", it's done for a particular effect. So a regnal name does bear some significance, not just in our reception of the monarch's authority but in what they are seeing their role to be.
Also we have the precedent in many other ways. There was at one point a common usage of the phrase "the former Miss ____; to refer to a married woman. Using a woman's married name doesn't mean "Miss ____" no longer exists, it simply means she has a more current, relevant title that applies to her current role. Also, if you bump into Rand Paul in the Capitol rotunda, you would likely address him as Senator Paul, wouldn't you? But that doesn't mean he's no longer a doctor of medicine and can no longer be addressed as such in the proper context.
"Our Lady of All Nations" had a whole myriad of problems associated with it and was condemned by the local bishop. And considering that this was the Netherlands in 1945, that is saying something.
When we see ontology being attacked, red flags- and our dander- should be going up.
This particular apparition, like many other now approved apparitions, has a history of "crooked lines", where approval initially conferred on title and prayer, then pulled back on apparition itself, then back and forth a bit, between both local authorities and Rome.
Currently the apparition is not approved of supernatural origin but yet, the prayer and image remain approved. Interesting. Sure, potential "red flags" indeed, but of what exactly. If the prayer genuinely included "ontology being attacked", as you suggest, the prayer itself would be suspect. Instead of just altering the one line, which was only specifically changed to drop the "who once was Mary" to avoid 'any pastoral misunderstanding'. Not because it 'attacked ontology'.
At this point I believe the safest course of action, given that the Church Authorities are obviously proverbially out to lunch, is to stick with the obvious and approved apparitions, such as St Margaret Mary ALocoque, St Catherine Labore, Lourdes, and Fatima. (Even with La Salette there are many false secrets, so people must be careful here.) These, in the light of the Church Fathers, Sacred Tradition, and Scripture, have much to tell us. The others lead to confusion and despair. That is my experience in my 40 years of studying and discussing eschatology.
We can't even trust the enemy-colonized Vatican's version & interpretation of the Fatima Message, most importantly the suppressed Third Secret of Fatima.
Few know that the Third Secret was read by Pius XII in 1957 in the company of various prelates (unpublicized), one of them being the American Card. Samuel Stritch, who indirectly revealed 2 parts of it to 2 priest associates:
And that can only happen under a false pope, "the top," as Cardinal Mario Ciappi revealed. The Great Apostasy in the Church, which Cardinal Ciappi, who read the Secret, said "would begin at the top," i.e. with John XXIII & his successors, allowed the counterfeit, Masonic-inspired Vatican II church to be created, with new doctrines, laws & disciplines, new supernaturally gutted Mass, invalid sacramental rites, leading to the exodus of many millions of Catholics & tens of thousands of priests & religious. It was & still is an unprecedented revolution in the Church, or rather, newly created counter-church. How such a thing could happen is explained at whitesmoke1958.com
All this is very hard to accept by those adhering to the V2 church, but the convergence of evidence: historical, theological (on that see novusordowatch.org) & approved prophecy is substantial, even overwhelming.
If Pius XII actually read the Third Secret, that is a complete game changer, because it would finally obliterate the myth that he was the "Pope of Fatima". As everybody should know, it was Pius XII who appointed Anibale Bugnini to head a Liturgical Committee in 1947 that went on to "reform Holy Week". And that "reform" has the footprints of the Bogus Ordo all over it. Pius XII was just as bad as John XXIII and Paul VI. And I am betting he had the real St Sr Lucia murdered in the convent in Coimbra shortly after the interview with Fr Fuentes on Dec 26th 1957, to make sure nobody would reveal anything in 1960 or thereafter. It was for the same reason, obviously, that all of St Sr Lucia's works were transferred to the Vatican shortly after her elimination- so that no loose canons in the Portuguese Episcopate would leak classified information.
If that is true, everything now makes perfect sense. Pius XII and Cardinal Ottoviani are going to have one heck of a Judgement Day.
As for the White Smoke/Cardinal Siri thing, I am more inclined to believe that is a Deep Church Operation. The Deep Church wants us all debating peripheral things, such as Sedevacantism, Baptism of Desire, and Americanism, and factionalizing into radicalized groups. This was the whole purpose of the SSPX, in retrospect. While these are all important issues and we all have our theories, for the moment, as Fr Paul Wickens used to say, we should agree to disagree and unite under the Mantle of Our Lady of Fatima.
Nice try. Keep away from unapproved "revelations," even approved ones by the Vatican II church. In fact every one of them after Fatima should be ignored, even the enemy-colonized Vatican's interpretation of the Fatima Message. See the REAL Sr Lucia's last public words in 1957 to Fr Augutin Fuentes before being "disappeared" (almost certainly murdered) & replaced by a proven impostor and Fr Fuentes rebuked and slandered by them in 1958 when Pius XII was approaching death (by poisoning). Fr Fuentes was then unjustly removed as Postulator for the canonization process for her cousins Jacinta and Francisco.
Oh no, I don't seek to receive private revelations (I hope praying for spiritual guidance doesn't fall under that category!) That's a good reminder from the likes of St. John and St.Teresa, who as 'mystical' as they were, knew such matters weren't to be trifled with. Nor am I overly interested in the content of apparitions in general. But there's also Benedict XVI I think who said better that private revelations be 'scrutinized than scorned.'
I'm just trying to point out that even with all the brouhaha and controversy over that particular line of the Lady of all Nations prayer, it wasn't really the obstacle that stood in the way of this apparition's approval. I think it was last year that the Vatican explained that the apparition's content requesting fifth Dogma acknowledgement was the major issue. Which is very "eyebrow-raising" and worth noting, because the idea of Mary as Co-Redemptrix, Advocate, and Mediatrix of all graces is most definitely doctrinally sound.
St Sr Lucia was murdered by Pius XII. That was why she was placed in a monastery- to isolate her and make the crime possible. Bishop Da Silva was in on it too. He spread the false notion that Heaven accepted the "consecration" Pius XII did in 1942 which was claimed changed the course of the war.
What it was was a curse. The world would have been far better off if the Axis had won the war. (Not that that would have been a picnic.) At least Bolshevism would have been contained for a generation or so, before the inevitable infestation of Germany and France. And Marshal Petain was the best thing that had happened to France since 1789. Catholicism was flourishing in Vichy France and its overseas colonies, which were unmolested. (Until the British decided to invade Madagascar, and the French Mediterrainian Fleet was destroyed by the British in a surprise attack that was even more devastating than Pearl Harbor... but I digress.)
Pius XII was not a good man. The Truth is starting to come out.
I'm sure I'll get hate for this, but there's a long medieval tradition of Christ giving birth to the Church through His pierced side, and of that pierced side being depicted yonically in sacred art.
Yes. A piece like this, if it is to have a traditional perspective, should at least have some reference to Julian of Norwich’s meditation on Christ as Mother
Thanks for mentioning her. My theology professor had us read that meditation by Julian of Norwich in her Theology of Gender class she taught. It was life changing!
Medieval symbolism V post-Christian lgbt blasphemy. Show me the Medieval texts that talk of Christ's 'womb'? The image you are talking about in relation to wound in his side is in a text from Luxembourg and was seen as, first of all, an accurate depiction of the size of the wound, and further contemplation bringing one to perceive the font of grace, 'whereout pours water to our baptism and blood to our redemption'. The twisted business of daring to 'trans' Truth is evidence of a warped modern mind.
I think the problem with this innovative way of speaking has less to do with understanding Christ as spiritually having a womb from which the Church is born and more to do with conflating the Church born from Him with the Blessed Sacrament.
There are a lot of things worth arguing for if one is trying to be a faithful Catholic. Pretending to 'Queer' the Son of God should never be one of them. Christ took on human nature in the actual real form of a male. Christ surely 'begets' His Church. The High Priest has no womb, literal or metaphorical. It is trans creepy. Don't understand why it doesn't creep folks out. As for Julian of Norwich and her extended journal fantasizing about meeting divinity, her notion of the Trinity is heretical and her celebrity is, correctly, found amongst Anglicans and feminists.
I'm not trying to 'Queer' the Son of God. I think that there are probably big problems with this address as presented here (as well as with the weird Salvador Dali thing). I'm just pointing out that some feminine imagery is traditionally used with reference to Christ, because He births the Church. That's not queering Him or transing Him. That is part of the tradition of sacred Catholic art.
Are you ok with Timber Wolf linking to your articles alongside claims that Pius XII ordered the murder of Sister Lucy?
He seems to have a habit of posting links to your articles alongside unrelated and unsubstantiated claims about many things as though he is trying to link your work to such claims or conversely use any credibility you might have to promote his own writings.
Thanks for bringing that to my attention. I commented that I do not believe Pius the 12th had anyone murdered which is insane. Unfortunately I cannot hide or delete what you linked to because it is a restack.
The real problem with Christ having a womb is that the Eucharist in Christ’s womb is a denial of the Eucharist. According to Catholic faith, that is, revelation, that is, Christ’s own words, the Eucharist is the real body and blood of Christ, and the Catholic Church is the mystical body of Christ, according to the words of St. Paul. The two cannot be confused. One of the most important distinctions of our faith is: the Eucharist is the real body of Christ, the Church is the mystical body of Christ.
If, according to the nun, the Eucharist is in Jesus’ womb, then the Eucharist is something that Christ instituted, but something different from him, and therefore not the real body of Christ. No one can carry themselves in their womb. This is therefore a denial of the Eucharist as the real body of Christ. In fact, the Eucharist was in the womb of the Virgin Mary, because the Eucharist is the real body of Christ.
Our faith was fundamentally changed by Vatican II and mystery theology: now, according to them, the Eucharist is the mystical body of Christ, present in the church (this is why you have to say amen during communion in the new mass to create it with your faith), while the Church is not the mystical body of Christ, but the people of God, the real body of Christ.
Call me Captain Obvious, but of course Sister Tiziana Merletti, Pope Leo’s new Secretary for the Dicastery for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, is vehemently opposed to the Traditional Liturgy.... because there is no place within it for her or her New Age gender bending argle bargle. Her shallow indefensible diatribe isn't theology, it's self serving gender identity politics. In essence, job security. Not even a green haired, white sneakered, pant suited, Novus Ordo Teilhard de Chardin loving lector could discern the Jesus Christ, Son of the Living Father, True God and True Man from the rhetoric of that papally blessed puddle of tepid dog vomit being sold as a "lesson."
At the end of the day, what it comes down to is people do not want to be perceived as “mean”.
It’s the total feminization of society. Pope Leo is in a lose lose here. If he corrects her, he becomes “mean”. Journalists will pounce on the Pope “dunking” on a “poor FEMALE”. If he doesn’t correct her, well the Overton window ratchets one more click to the left.
Until men decide to stand up and declare what is right and true, forgoing any name calling of “being mean”, “he’s a bully”, etc. this will continue to happen. Society and culture will continue to devolve.
Yes, & another way to say that is if we aren't willing to suffer persecution for the sake of the unpopular truth, we are not true followers of a crucified Christ.
We can pray for vocations to the traditional, pre-Vatican II Church which is the "remnant" true Church. See this very informative website: traditionalmass.org/issues/#a
My other replies have more cognitive dissonance-inducing, little known information.
OK, Chris, I surrender. I know this is Catholic Comedy Channel, but you have now surpassed even your recent ten episodes of Looney Esotericists'R'Us. In fact, this sexually ambiguous Jesus is just a slightly more barking mad example of the gender chaos in esoteric thinking.
We already have had a new version of the Trinity for years - the Luminous Holy Trinity of Mother, Daughter and Holy Soul, which could somehow be merged into the traditional Trinity. You will be less than surprised to see that Valentin Tomberg strikes again......
No wonder the former Robert Prevost proves himself to be merely a nicer version of Pope Francis. He and a horde of the hierarchy of the Church sat in silence as this Sister produced this abomination. Do any of them believe anything Catholic?l
I hope this nun doesn't get ahold of this Fr. Chris Alar clip. If she does, she will surely reach a different conclusion than he did: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/deFKzoF2ukk
First let me say your commentary is next level. Thank you for addressing this. Im going to state the obvious, Leo is Francis 2.0 because he believes it or that was just part of the deal. Same outcome. The honeymoon is over, Im calling it. We still have a church to fight for, shes injured but not dead. But we need to be ready to engage. First however, we need to be armed with truth. Example, on Fr Zs blog the other day he gave a fine rationale for ad orientem vs populum. When my bishop starts his salute to Leo by making changes, I need something to counter it. Its tempting to give up, frankly this whole thing is frustrating and Im sick of these destroyers, who push madness and their innovations as youve explained here. But its Christ's church, and our church, and like a porcupine being swallowed by a python, we have a right to stick out our quills on the way down and not make it easy for the bastard. We will need information for that, canon law, etc.
Please keep your commentary coming. God bless you.
I have been keeping my personal scorecard on the former Robert Prevost since 8th May. Is he Francis II or Leo XIV? To date, I make it 27 to 4 in favour of Francis II. If a hermaphrodite Jesus is now within the acceptable range of Catholic teaching, what is left of the Church except a nice respectable NGO which looks after all the peerless buildings, libraries, works of art, etc around the world?
As I noted in another comment above, I have tried to be objective by keeping a scorecard on Pope Leo. Which is a very odd and even disrespectful thing to do. But are we going to blindly accept every reassurance from a visibly desperate Catholic commentariat who are almost begging for Leo to be a significantly different Pope from Francis? So far, it is Francis II 27, Leo XIV 4.
Some will say: “It’s just metaphor. It’s just a nun with a poetic flair.” Prevost Inc. is, like Bergoglio Inc., diabolical. With Prevost silence is a weapon and strategy - appoint liars and murders (of souls) and sit silent after the carnage as the fake-pope-explainers do the devil's rounds.
What we see here is the elevation of the poetic over the metaphysical. This certainly predates Pope Provost (Leo XIV). One of the main reasons I think "Our Lady of Akita" is bogus is because the statue is based on a false revelation to Ida Peederman in 1945 where "Our Lady of All Nations" proclaims that "She was ONCE The Virgin Mary". The "Prayer" even says: "Our Lady of All Nations, who was ONCE the Virgin Mary..."
Pius X was a little off when he called Modernism the "synthesis of all heresies". A more apt description is that Modernism is the disjoining of the Spiritual from the Natural and the subversion of metaphysics, where our feelings and unanimity transcend the ontological and self evident. Instead of the old army motto: "Be all that you can be" we now have "Be anything you want to be".
God indeed transcends logic. We don't know how God can make a stone so big He cannot move it even when God can do all things. God is mystery. But God does not CONTRADICT logic. God cannot be and not be, for example, just as a Wolf cannot be a Cat. God became man, without ceasing to be God, an ineffable mystery we adore.
Pope Provost, by his silence, of course, is approving of error. ("Not to condemn error is to approve of it; not to speak the Truth is to suppress it.") And Trad Inc is doing us no favor by continuing to apologize for this Monster.
Pope Provost is even more sinister and more diabolical than Pope Frantic. Pope Frantic was a Clown, and wore it on his bombastic face and occult sleeve. He would occasionally say Catholic things, but his actions were blatantly heretical. The scandal of Pope Frantic's regime is that two hundred or so cowardly birdbrains wearing red hats sat around and did nothing, for fear they would lose their meal tickets at the Vatican refectory. Every one of them, including Cardinal Burke, is a traitor, a sellout, and a scoundrel, and they all have my utter contempt.
Meanwhile, Pope Provost is the perfect Janus, pulling the "pontificate" of Pope Frantic Forward and legitimizing it, while looking even further back before Vatican II and pulling it forward into the Agiornamento and the Hermaneutic of Continuity. Pope Frantic was too pedestrian to be the False Prophet forerunner of the Antichrist. He turned the Holy Seat into amateur hour. But Pope Provost is much slicker- wearing Fiddleback Vestments, chanting in Latin, and being obscured by Incense. The Satanists know it is all about image, even as they gut the innards, and attack the substance of the Faith, which is exactly what Sister Sue Vatican Two was doing.
In the Holy Hearts of Jesus and Mary.
The Akita statue, a copy of the one of "Our Lady of All Nations" -- thank you. That is one of several reasons why I discount Akita.
St Pius X stated that the fundamental doctrine of Modernism is Evolution or Evolutionism, since the pernicious theory of Evolution implies no fixed essences, & when applied to doctrine means no fixed or definitive doctrine. The same can be applied to liturgy, morals & everything else.
"To the laws of evolution everything is subject - dogma, Church, worship, the Books we revere as sacred, even faith itself...there is to be nothing stable, nothing immutable in the Church."
-St Pius X, On the Doctrines of the Modernists
You are correct. It is tragic that Pius X never condemned Darwinism outright, and completely banned its teaching in schools, and excommunicated those who promoted it. It is tragic he never had the Pontifical Institute expose and condemn the lies of Darwin and the poppycock of Lyell. It was the Protestants that would take the lead there.
I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss Akita or the Lady of all Nations revelations because of the "once was Mary" line. This is not so shocking a phrase if we consider it in the possibly proper context of a 'regnal' name, which is simply a title taken on by monarchs during their reign, for whatever reason. God doesn't become more divine but Mary as a human can certainly continue to progress into higher degrees of roles, in any particular way God chooses to bestow. And clearly, when many refer to the current and previous popes as "Bergoglio" and as you yourself do "Pope Provost", it's done for a particular effect. So a regnal name does bear some significance, not just in our reception of the monarch's authority but in what they are seeing their role to be.
Also we have the precedent in many other ways. There was at one point a common usage of the phrase "the former Miss ____; to refer to a married woman. Using a woman's married name doesn't mean "Miss ____" no longer exists, it simply means she has a more current, relevant title that applies to her current role. Also, if you bump into Rand Paul in the Capitol rotunda, you would likely address him as Senator Paul, wouldn't you? But that doesn't mean he's no longer a doctor of medicine and can no longer be addressed as such in the proper context.
"Our Lady of All Nations" had a whole myriad of problems associated with it and was condemned by the local bishop. And considering that this was the Netherlands in 1945, that is saying something.
When we see ontology being attacked, red flags- and our dander- should be going up.
This particular apparition, like many other now approved apparitions, has a history of "crooked lines", where approval initially conferred on title and prayer, then pulled back on apparition itself, then back and forth a bit, between both local authorities and Rome.
Currently the apparition is not approved of supernatural origin but yet, the prayer and image remain approved. Interesting. Sure, potential "red flags" indeed, but of what exactly. If the prayer genuinely included "ontology being attacked", as you suggest, the prayer itself would be suspect. Instead of just altering the one line, which was only specifically changed to drop the "who once was Mary" to avoid 'any pastoral misunderstanding'. Not because it 'attacked ontology'.
At this point I believe the safest course of action, given that the Church Authorities are obviously proverbially out to lunch, is to stick with the obvious and approved apparitions, such as St Margaret Mary ALocoque, St Catherine Labore, Lourdes, and Fatima. (Even with La Salette there are many false secrets, so people must be careful here.) These, in the light of the Church Fathers, Sacred Tradition, and Scripture, have much to tell us. The others lead to confusion and despair. That is my experience in my 40 years of studying and discussing eschatology.
We can't even trust the enemy-colonized Vatican's version & interpretation of the Fatima Message, most importantly the suppressed Third Secret of Fatima.
Few know that the Third Secret was read by Pius XII in 1957 in the company of various prelates (unpublicized), one of them being the American Card. Samuel Stritch, who indirectly revealed 2 parts of it to 2 priest associates:
youtube.com/watch?v=nO-8UhGOagg&t=4s (3 min, 40 sec; the YT channel has more)
Even Benedict XVI when cardinal credibly revealed to Fr Dollinger, a close friend of his, that the Third Secret included the foretelling of "a bad council and a bad mass": onepeterfive.com/cardinal-ratzinger-not-published-whole-third-secret-fatima
And that can only happen under a false pope, "the top," as Cardinal Mario Ciappi revealed. The Great Apostasy in the Church, which Cardinal Ciappi, who read the Secret, said "would begin at the top," i.e. with John XXIII & his successors, allowed the counterfeit, Masonic-inspired Vatican II church to be created, with new doctrines, laws & disciplines, new supernaturally gutted Mass, invalid sacramental rites, leading to the exodus of many millions of Catholics & tens of thousands of priests & religious. It was & still is an unprecedented revolution in the Church, or rather, newly created counter-church. How such a thing could happen is explained at whitesmoke1958.com
All this is very hard to accept by those adhering to the V2 church, but the convergence of evidence: historical, theological (on that see novusordowatch.org) & approved prophecy is substantial, even overwhelming.
And see my other reply.
If Pius XII actually read the Third Secret, that is a complete game changer, because it would finally obliterate the myth that he was the "Pope of Fatima". As everybody should know, it was Pius XII who appointed Anibale Bugnini to head a Liturgical Committee in 1947 that went on to "reform Holy Week". And that "reform" has the footprints of the Bogus Ordo all over it. Pius XII was just as bad as John XXIII and Paul VI. And I am betting he had the real St Sr Lucia murdered in the convent in Coimbra shortly after the interview with Fr Fuentes on Dec 26th 1957, to make sure nobody would reveal anything in 1960 or thereafter. It was for the same reason, obviously, that all of St Sr Lucia's works were transferred to the Vatican shortly after her elimination- so that no loose canons in the Portuguese Episcopate would leak classified information.
If that is true, everything now makes perfect sense. Pius XII and Cardinal Ottoviani are going to have one heck of a Judgement Day.
As for the White Smoke/Cardinal Siri thing, I am more inclined to believe that is a Deep Church Operation. The Deep Church wants us all debating peripheral things, such as Sedevacantism, Baptism of Desire, and Americanism, and factionalizing into radicalized groups. This was the whole purpose of the SSPX, in retrospect. While these are all important issues and we all have our theories, for the moment, as Fr Paul Wickens used to say, we should agree to disagree and unite under the Mantle of Our Lady of Fatima.
In the Holy Hearts of Jesus and Mary.
Totally over the target.
Nice try. Keep away from unapproved "revelations," even approved ones by the Vatican II church. In fact every one of them after Fatima should be ignored, even the enemy-colonized Vatican's interpretation of the Fatima Message. See the REAL Sr Lucia's last public words in 1957 to Fr Augutin Fuentes before being "disappeared" (almost certainly murdered) & replaced by a proven impostor and Fr Fuentes rebuked and slandered by them in 1958 when Pius XII was approaching death (by poisoning). Fr Fuentes was then unjustly removed as Postulator for the canonization process for her cousins Jacinta and Francisco.
radtradthomist.chojnowski.me/2019/03/is-this-interview-that-caused-her.html sisterlucytruth.org
"The devil rejoices when people seek private revelations." - St John of the Cross
Oh no, I don't seek to receive private revelations (I hope praying for spiritual guidance doesn't fall under that category!) That's a good reminder from the likes of St. John and St.Teresa, who as 'mystical' as they were, knew such matters weren't to be trifled with. Nor am I overly interested in the content of apparitions in general. But there's also Benedict XVI I think who said better that private revelations be 'scrutinized than scorned.'
I'm just trying to point out that even with all the brouhaha and controversy over that particular line of the Lady of all Nations prayer, it wasn't really the obstacle that stood in the way of this apparition's approval. I think it was last year that the Vatican explained that the apparition's content requesting fifth Dogma acknowledgement was the major issue. Which is very "eyebrow-raising" and worth noting, because the idea of Mary as Co-Redemptrix, Advocate, and Mediatrix of all graces is most definitely doctrinally sound.
St Sr Lucia was murdered by Pius XII. That was why she was placed in a monastery- to isolate her and make the crime possible. Bishop Da Silva was in on it too. He spread the false notion that Heaven accepted the "consecration" Pius XII did in 1942 which was claimed changed the course of the war.
What it was was a curse. The world would have been far better off if the Axis had won the war. (Not that that would have been a picnic.) At least Bolshevism would have been contained for a generation or so, before the inevitable infestation of Germany and France. And Marshal Petain was the best thing that had happened to France since 1789. Catholicism was flourishing in Vichy France and its overseas colonies, which were unmolested. (Until the British decided to invade Madagascar, and the French Mediterrainian Fleet was destroyed by the British in a surprise attack that was even more devastating than Pearl Harbor... but I digress.)
Pius XII was not a good man. The Truth is starting to come out.
Great comment.
I'm sure I'll get hate for this, but there's a long medieval tradition of Christ giving birth to the Church through His pierced side, and of that pierced side being depicted yonically in sacred art.
Amen! Saints have used this kind of imagery for centuries.
Yes. A piece like this, if it is to have a traditional perspective, should at least have some reference to Julian of Norwich’s meditation on Christ as Mother
Thanks for mentioning her. My theology professor had us read that meditation by Julian of Norwich in her Theology of Gender class she taught. It was life changing!
Medieval symbolism V post-Christian lgbt blasphemy. Show me the Medieval texts that talk of Christ's 'womb'? The image you are talking about in relation to wound in his side is in a text from Luxembourg and was seen as, first of all, an accurate depiction of the size of the wound, and further contemplation bringing one to perceive the font of grace, 'whereout pours water to our baptism and blood to our redemption'. The twisted business of daring to 'trans' Truth is evidence of a warped modern mind.
I think the problem with this innovative way of speaking has less to do with understanding Christ as spiritually having a womb from which the Church is born and more to do with conflating the Church born from Him with the Blessed Sacrament.
There are a lot of things worth arguing for if one is trying to be a faithful Catholic. Pretending to 'Queer' the Son of God should never be one of them. Christ took on human nature in the actual real form of a male. Christ surely 'begets' His Church. The High Priest has no womb, literal or metaphorical. It is trans creepy. Don't understand why it doesn't creep folks out. As for Julian of Norwich and her extended journal fantasizing about meeting divinity, her notion of the Trinity is heretical and her celebrity is, correctly, found amongst Anglicans and feminists.
I'm not trying to 'Queer' the Son of God. I think that there are probably big problems with this address as presented here (as well as with the weird Salvador Dali thing). I'm just pointing out that some feminine imagery is traditionally used with reference to Christ, because He births the Church. That's not queering Him or transing Him. That is part of the tradition of sacred Catholic art.
That kind of comment is properly called adding to a discussion. I try not to converse with people who cant converse.
Yes! Thank you for mentioning this.
Are you ok with Timber Wolf linking to your articles alongside claims that Pius XII ordered the murder of Sister Lucy?
He seems to have a habit of posting links to your articles alongside unrelated and unsubstantiated claims about many things as though he is trying to link your work to such claims or conversely use any credibility you might have to promote his own writings.
For example: https://substack.com/@timberwolf2/note/c-126745104
Thanks for bringing that to my attention. I commented that I do not believe Pius the 12th had anyone murdered which is insane. Unfortunately I cannot hide or delete what you linked to because it is a restack.
It seems you can prevent re-stacking of your articles by blocking the user.
https://support.substack.com/hc/en-us/articles/14739169102740-How-do-I-block-someone-on-Substack
They have tried to normalise the apostasy, trying to make it look as though this is Catholicism. No, we will always oppose the evil for what it is !
The real problem with Christ having a womb is that the Eucharist in Christ’s womb is a denial of the Eucharist. According to Catholic faith, that is, revelation, that is, Christ’s own words, the Eucharist is the real body and blood of Christ, and the Catholic Church is the mystical body of Christ, according to the words of St. Paul. The two cannot be confused. One of the most important distinctions of our faith is: the Eucharist is the real body of Christ, the Church is the mystical body of Christ.
If, according to the nun, the Eucharist is in Jesus’ womb, then the Eucharist is something that Christ instituted, but something different from him, and therefore not the real body of Christ. No one can carry themselves in their womb. This is therefore a denial of the Eucharist as the real body of Christ. In fact, the Eucharist was in the womb of the Virgin Mary, because the Eucharist is the real body of Christ.
Our faith was fundamentally changed by Vatican II and mystery theology: now, according to them, the Eucharist is the mystical body of Christ, present in the church (this is why you have to say amen during communion in the new mass to create it with your faith), while the Church is not the mystical body of Christ, but the people of God, the real body of Christ.
Call me Captain Obvious, but of course Sister Tiziana Merletti, Pope Leo’s new Secretary for the Dicastery for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, is vehemently opposed to the Traditional Liturgy.... because there is no place within it for her or her New Age gender bending argle bargle. Her shallow indefensible diatribe isn't theology, it's self serving gender identity politics. In essence, job security. Not even a green haired, white sneakered, pant suited, Novus Ordo Teilhard de Chardin loving lector could discern the Jesus Christ, Son of the Living Father, True God and True Man from the rhetoric of that papally blessed puddle of tepid dog vomit being sold as a "lesson."
It wouldn't surprize me if she's a lesbian too.
It's a form of DEI.
At the end of the day, what it comes down to is people do not want to be perceived as “mean”.
It’s the total feminization of society. Pope Leo is in a lose lose here. If he corrects her, he becomes “mean”. Journalists will pounce on the Pope “dunking” on a “poor FEMALE”. If he doesn’t correct her, well the Overton window ratchets one more click to the left.
Until men decide to stand up and declare what is right and true, forgoing any name calling of “being mean”, “he’s a bully”, etc. this will continue to happen. Society and culture will continue to devolve.
Yes, & another way to say that is if we aren't willing to suffer persecution for the sake of the unpopular truth, we are not true followers of a crucified Christ.
There are papal ways to correct - apostolic exhortations, or within encyclicals.
It’s papal table-talk.
Then she has to be corrected unforgivingly too.
"They will hollow out your religion and wear it as a skin suit."
The past still exists for God Sister.
How do I pray for vocations in this quagmire church?
We can pray for vocations to the traditional, pre-Vatican II Church which is the "remnant" true Church. See this very informative website: traditionalmass.org/issues/#a
My other replies have more cognitive dissonance-inducing, little known information.
OK, Chris, I surrender. I know this is Catholic Comedy Channel, but you have now surpassed even your recent ten episodes of Looney Esotericists'R'Us. In fact, this sexually ambiguous Jesus is just a slightly more barking mad example of the gender chaos in esoteric thinking.
We already have had a new version of the Trinity for years - the Luminous Holy Trinity of Mother, Daughter and Holy Soul, which could somehow be merged into the traditional Trinity. You will be less than surprised to see that Valentin Tomberg strikes again......
https://www.thecenterforsophiologicalstudies.com/post/in-the-name-of-the-mother-and-of-the-daughter-and-of-the-holy-soul
No wonder the former Robert Prevost proves himself to be merely a nicer version of Pope Francis. He and a horde of the hierarchy of the Church sat in silence as this Sister produced this abomination. Do any of them believe anything Catholic?l
I hope this nun doesn't get ahold of this Fr. Chris Alar clip. If she does, she will surely reach a different conclusion than he did: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/deFKzoF2ukk
I’m stunned. Speechless.
First let me say your commentary is next level. Thank you for addressing this. Im going to state the obvious, Leo is Francis 2.0 because he believes it or that was just part of the deal. Same outcome. The honeymoon is over, Im calling it. We still have a church to fight for, shes injured but not dead. But we need to be ready to engage. First however, we need to be armed with truth. Example, on Fr Zs blog the other day he gave a fine rationale for ad orientem vs populum. When my bishop starts his salute to Leo by making changes, I need something to counter it. Its tempting to give up, frankly this whole thing is frustrating and Im sick of these destroyers, who push madness and their innovations as youve explained here. But its Christ's church, and our church, and like a porcupine being swallowed by a python, we have a right to stick out our quills on the way down and not make it easy for the bastard. We will need information for that, canon law, etc.
Please keep your commentary coming. God bless you.
I have been keeping my personal scorecard on the former Robert Prevost since 8th May. Is he Francis II or Leo XIV? To date, I make it 27 to 4 in favour of Francis II. If a hermaphrodite Jesus is now within the acceptable range of Catholic teaching, what is left of the Church except a nice respectable NGO which looks after all the peerless buildings, libraries, works of art, etc around the world?
There’s something about Leo. Which I don’t like. Can’t put my finger on it, but it’s there.
As I noted in another comment above, I have tried to be objective by keeping a scorecard on Pope Leo. Which is a very odd and even disrespectful thing to do. But are we going to blindly accept every reassurance from a visibly desperate Catholic commentariat who are almost begging for Leo to be a significantly different Pope from Francis? So far, it is Francis II 27, Leo XIV 4.
I choked on my vomit...