26 September 2023

Before the Synod Starts: Liquidating the Faith

I'm glad to see other people realising what I did when the Synod was first announced. Its aim is the destruction of the Faith and the Church.

From Rorate Cæli

By Michael Charlier

On the Eve of the Synod: Liquidating the Faith

Michael Charlier
September 25, 2023

On Wednesday of next week, the Synod (it is no longer a Synod of Bishops because of Pope Francis' expanded circle of participants) on Synodality will begin in Rome. Its purpose is to set in stone, so to speak, the Pope's legacy: to make of the one apostolic and hierarchical Church founded by Christ a synodal institution that -- as the new administrator of the faith, Fernández, has repeatedly affirmed -- should adhere to and follow in everything the teaching of The Pope.

This already points to the double basic contradiction of the event: whatever is discussed and approved in this and the coming year: In the end, Francis and he alone decides what will be published in a more or less solemn form as a final document. And the second level of this contradiction. Whatever Francis will then publish and declare binding: Each of his successors will be able to change it or revoke it again with another stroke of the pen. In the liquefied Church, there are no longer any rules or truths that last longer than the current pontificate - and sometimes only as long as the momentary whim of the currently reigning Spontifex.

This does not mean, however, that the synod is meaningless and that its discussions and documents need not be studied more closely. Its "ecclesiastical-political" importance, to use this expression which is not quite appropriate here, cannot be overestimated. What is said at the synod in the presence of the pope or under the approving nod of his appointees describes the space of what can be said, doubted, demanded or even practiced "just so" in the church in the future. The synodal synod forms - this fits very well with the "liquefaction" mentioned above - a space or an apparatus of dissolution of boundaries, which in the future is to make it impossible to state clearly what is Church teaching and what is not, what is still to be Catholic. Anything goes.

To narrow down this space again and to fortify the boundaries will require more than the good will of a future pope who wants to find his way back to apostolic teaching. It will require an enormous effort on the part of the whole people of God, who must find the strength to fully re-appropriate this faith. Even and especially where faithless false shepherds have long since lost it or are actively working to destroy it.

A look at the episcopates (and not only of the German-speaking countries) shows how far this corruption has progressed. And the present disputes in the USA about the faith-loyal bishop Strickland make clear that the battle is fought there with hard sticks, as one can see on the hyperpapalist website "Where Peter Is" or the Jesuit magazine "America". And not only there: Also in this country upright chief shepherds like Bishop Voderholzer of Regensburg or Bishop Meier of Augsburg are attacked under the most ridiculous pretexts - not to mention the continuous attacks against Cardinal Woelki of Cologne, who is considered not progressive enough.

Therefore it is urgently appropriate to take careful note of what the bishops of the German-speaking countries will present in Rome. Some of them have already publicly spread out their wish lists - for example, the Swiss Bishop Gmür with the standard demands for women's ordination, homosexual blessings, and the abolition of celibacy, or the Essen Bishop Overbeck with the demand for a church constitution that is to be largely oriented to the principle of democracy and the (worthless) order of secular society. The resolutions of the German Synodal Way give further information about what can be expected from this side for the Roman Synod.

It is not yet clear whether serious discussions of this and similar directions will take place in Rome, nor to what extent they will be reflected in a final document. But already today it can be considered certain that these proposals, simply by being presented at the Roman Synod, will determine the discussions in the dioceses and the national churches (unregulated under canon law) for many years to come. They will be the stuff from which the future schism will emerge - for in the long run, even no Jesuit sleight of hand can maintain the illusion of unity between those who want to remain with the apostolic faith and those who want to conform it to the world.e

Globalists’ Contempt for Slovakia’s Voters

The elites have never cared about votes. Just ask the people of Ireland. They twice voted 'NO' on EU treaties only to be told to vote again until the elites got the result they wanted.

From The European Conservative

By Péter Szitás & Michael O’Shea

The circumstances in Slovakia demand steady leadership, ideally with support from the populace.

It’s always a useful gut-check to hear the quiet part out loud. During a recent panel discussion on the upcoming Slovak elections, organized by a globalist Polish think tank and attended by numerous European journalists and economists, panelists expressed contempt for Slovak voters’ apparent frustration with support for the war in Ukraine and economic privations at home.

“It will be difficult, but they can be led there,” said one panelist. “They need to see why their views are incorrect.”  

In an earlier session, when pushed on the panel’s evasion of economic issues in favor of hot-button talking points of Russia, Hungary, and democratic decline, another panelist opined, “The economic issues won’t actually affect the way people vote.” (This is patently false.)  “And, besides, the inflation is even worse in Poland and Hungary.”  

It was a fitting setting for such sentiments. Slovakia offers perhaps the ideal vantage point for the issue of how the West defines democracy in the 21st century. For the better part of a year, the country has featured unelected ‘technocratic’ governments. Furthermore, it sits between Poland and Hungary, which Western media frequently brand with labels of ‘autocracy’ and ‘democratic backsliding,’ despite their governments’ free elections and reelections.

When Slovaks go to the polls on September 30, they will assert their will over the country’s governance for the first time since former Prime Minister Eduard Heger resigned after a vote of no-confidence in December of last year. In May, President Zuzana Čaputová appointed a caretaker cabinet of technocrats, rather than call early elections. She hoped the passage of time would benefit sympathetic forces in the parliament.

The concept is not without precedent in the region. Czechia has employed caretaker governments on multiple occasions. Hungarian Prime Minister Ferenc Gyurcsány resigned in Spring 2009, after years of scandal and economic hardship, and Gordon Bajnai led a similar technocratic government until the country’s elections a year later. Bajnai’s government at least secured the backing of parliament—something the current Slovak government couldn’t manage.  

Western media have not objected to the long period of unelected governance. Technocracy, after all, signifies adherence to the will of the administrative elite.  

Some Slovaks, citing the country’s fractious political environment, initially celebrated a caretaker government of nonpartisan intellectuals. But in practice, the government has been mostly inept.

Recently, the parliament has failed even to vote on the government’s proposals. MPs are primarily interested in the election campaign—thus, securing the support of the citizenry—and not the priorities of a lame-duck cabinet. Even acute topics, like reforms to the nation’s network of children’s hospitals and procedures for handling migrants on their way to Germany, have failed to garner action. President Čaputová and caretaker Prime Minister Ľudovít Ódor have expressed public frustration. 

“This summer we received a valuable lesson in the basics of the functioning of parliamentary democracy in practice,” writes Eva Čobejová in Denník Postoj. “We can see why those despised political parties are important when important things need to be pushed through.”

She adds, “We can clearly see what are the possibilities of an official government appointed by the head of state. It doesn’t really matter if its ministers are smart, intelligent, or technocratically skilled.”

Slovakia is burdened on economic, social, and foreign-policy fronts. Inflation and energy pressures coincide with a renewed European migration crisis and a war in neighboring Ukraine. The circumstances demand steady leadership, ideally with support from the populace.

President Čaputová declared that “the ambition of the new cabinet should not be to solve cultural and ethical issues.” But even on pressing economic matters (Prime Minister Ódor is a celebrated economist), Slovaks have sensed little relief.  

Slovakia’s inflation is more than twice the euro zone average, and 2023 is set to represent a second straight year in double-digits. Slovaks are sensitive to GDP, adjusted for purchasing power parity, falling behind those of their V4 neighbors and even EU newcomer Romania.  

Polls suggest that a plurality of Slovaks will support controversial three-time Prime Minister Robert Fico, a development that has awakened Western journalists and EU bureaucrats from their slumber. Foreign Policy warns that Fico is “anti-Europe, pro-Russia.” The Guardian proclaims, “Slovakia could soon become Russia’s newest ally,” and laments “faith in liberal democracy has been eroded … in the heart of Europe.” 

Even if Fico fails to build a governing coalition—a legitimate possibility—Brussels is unlikely to approve entirely of the new government in Bratislava.

“[T]his is how parliamentary democracy works,” reminds Čobejová. “It upholds the will of the people, not the enlightened ideas of a few intelligent people.”

In the coming days, the political establishment will likely beat the now-familiar drum of ‘democratic backsliding.’ The only element truly at risk of backsliding is the administrative elite’s control over Slovak government policy. 

Alamo Day

MM  is definitely a Texan! Only a Texas monarchist would commemorate the defeat of one republic by another. Travis signed his letters from the Alamo 'For God and the Mexican Constitution', which was republican. In fact, the '1824' on the Alamo flag is the date of the establishment of the First Mexican Republic after their treason was successful

From The Mad Monarchist (6 March 2012)

Bishop Challoner's Meditations - September 27th



Consider first, that this commandment does not only forbid all wilful murder, unjust shedding of blood, beating, or doing anything else that may hasten one's own or any other person's death, but also all thoughts that have any tendency that way, all wishes or desires of the death of any one, whether through malice or envy, or for some temporal convenience or interest; as also all manner of hatred and rancour of heart to any one living. For it is written, 1 John iii. 15, 'whoseoever hateth his brother is a murderer; and you know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.' Christians, look well to yourselves, and carefully examine into the true state of your interior in this respect. You have perhaps hitherto flattened yourselves that you have nothing to reproach your conscience with on the score of the horrible sin of murder; but have you never wilfully entertained any hatred, envy, or malice to your neighbours? If you have, know that all this is like murder in the eyes of God. O take heed of living in any such malicious dispositions to any one person upon earth, lest you should be excluded thereby from any share in eternal life, to which murderers have no title.

Consider 2ndly, how the Son of God himself has explained to us the extent of the obligations of this commandment, Matt. v. 21. & c., 'You have heard,' saith he, 'that it was said to them of old, Thou shalt not kill, and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment. But I say to you, that whosoever is angry with his brother shall be in danger of the judgment. And whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, (a word expressing indignation and contempt,) shall be in danger of the council, (a higher and more severe tribunal,) and whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell-fire.' By which our Lord would have all Christians to understand that this divine law was not only designed to restrain the hand from killing, but also the heart from wilfully entertaining the passion of anger or the desire of revenge; and much more from suffering out wrath to break out into words on indignation or contempt, much less into downright affronts or injuries, which might either rob our neighbour of his honour or of the peace of his mind, or, as it too commonly happens, of the grace of God, by provoking him also to passion and sin.

Consider 3rdly, how the Holy Ghost also declares himself in like manner against the murdering crime of passion and revenge, Ecclus. xxviii. 'He that seeketh to revenge himself,' saith he, 'shall find vengeance from the Lord, and he will surely keep his sins in remembrance. One man keepeth anger against another, and doth he seek to be healed by God? He hath no mercy on a man like himself, and doth he entreat for his own sins? He that is but flesh nourished anger, and with what face doth he ask forgiveness of God? Who shall obtain pardon of his sins? Forgive thy neighbour if he have hurt thee, and then shall thy sins be forgiven to thee when thou prayest. Remember thy last things and let enmity cease. Remember the fear of God, and be not angry with thy neighbour. Remember the covenant of the most high, and overlook the ignorance of thy neighbour. Refrain from strife, and thou shalt diminish thy sins,' & c. O let us imprint these divine lessons deep in our souls, and we shall fulfil this great commandment.

Conclude, if thou desirest to keep thyself far from the guilt of murder, to banish far from thy soul every thought that has any tendency to malice or revenge. O learn from the doctrine and practice of thy Saviour rather to suffer in thy person, in thy honour, or in thy worldly goods, than, by seeking revenge, to endanger the loss of thy soul by losing thy God and his grace.

27 September, Antonio, Cardinal Bacci: Meditations For Each Day

Prudence and Simplicity

1. Prudence is one of the cardinal virtues frequently recommended in the Sacred Scriptures. “If you receive my words and treasure my commands,” the Holy Spirit tells us in the Book of Proverbs, “turning your ear to wisdom, inclining your heart to understanding… if you seek her like silver, and like hidden treasures search her out: then you will understand the fear of the Lord: the knowledge of God you will find.” (Prov. 2:2-6) Then, He promises, God will counsel and protect you, “for wisdom will enter your heart, knowledge will please your soul, discretion will watch over you, understanding will guard you; saving you from the way of evil men.” (Cf. Prov. 2:2-12)

The word ‘prudence,’ as St. Thomas explains, is derived from the word ‘providence,’ and it consists in ordering everything correctly towards its proper end. (Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 49, a. 6) From that we can see how necessary this virtue is. A man who can order everything correctly towards its own end, does everything as it ought to be done. He will have achieved true wisdom, which is the foundation of sanctity.

To speak when we should speak; to be silent when we should be silent; never to leave unsaid what ought to be said, but to know when we should speak, and how much; to pay attention mainly to necessary things, that is, to God and to the supernatural; to avoid every thought which would separate us from God and endanger our salvation; to love God more than anything else and more than ourselves, because He is the supreme good and our supreme happiness; to love other things only in God and for Him solely; to direct all our actions proportionately towards God, towards our neighbour, and towards ourselves, and to avoid every act which would alienate us from God, which would be contrary to His precepts, or which would endanger our eternal salvation.

And this is true prudence, which is founded on divine wisdom and must be continually nourished by the grace of God and inspired by charity. Since this virtue pervades and embraces all the others, a man who achieves perfection in it has reached the peak of holiness.

But perhaps we are too preoccupied with worldly interests, and so stray from the straight path which leads to God and to sanctity.

2. Apart from the Christian virtue of prudence, there is also the prudence of the world and of the flesh. This, however, as St. Francis de Sales explains, is really duplicity and craft; it does not avoid dissimulation and falsehood; it seeks its own profit only and is prepared to obtain its end by any means. “I know nothing at all about the art of falsehood, dissimulation, and pretence,” St. Francis wrote to the Bishop of Belley, “which is the centre of political activity and the mainspring of human prudence. That which I have on my lips I have in my heart. I hate duplicity like death.” (Letters of St. Francis de Sales (Spirito), Bk. II, c. 24. Letter 178) Our prudence should likewise be united with rectitude, sincerity, and simplicity. We must speak the truth with charity and never lie or deceive. “For we can do nothing against the truth,” says St. Paul, “but only for the truth.” (2 Cor. 13:8) He advises the Ephesians “to practice the truth in love.” (Eph. 4:15) To the Romans he writes: “I would have you wise as to what is good, and guileless as to what is evil.” (Rom. 16:19) The virtue of Christian prudence, then, consists in complete exactitude in all that is good combined with a holy simplicity free from any taint of duplicity or evil.

3. “Be therefore wise as serpents,” Jesus directs us in the Gospel, “and guileless as doves.” (Mt. 10:16) We must be prudent, but also simple and straightforward.

St. Francis de Sales comments on these words of the Gospel: “A white dove is more pleasing than a serpent. Should we try to combine their gifts, we could not transfer the simplicity of the dove to the serpent, because he would still be a serpent; but it would be easier to bestow the prudence of the serpent on the dove, because in doing so the dove would not cease to be beautiful. Let us therefore embrace this holy simplicity, which is the sister of innocence and the daughter of charity.” (Letter 119)

Christian prudence must always be united with holy simplicity, which is an ornament of the soul.

Eastern Rite - Feasts of 27 September AM 7532

Today is the Feasts of The Holy Martyr Callistratus and His Wife and of Our Venerable Father Nilus, Founder and Hegumen of the Grottaferrata Monastery.


Saint Callistratus was a native of Carthage. An ancestor of Saint Callistratus, Neochorus, had served under the emperor Tiberius in Palestine, under the command of Pontius Pilate, the procurator of Judea, and was a witness to the suffering on the Cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, His voluntary death and glorious Resurrection.

The saint’s father was a Christian, and he raised his son in faith and piety. Also like his father, Saint Callistratus became a soldier and excelled among his pagan military comrades by his good conduct and gentle disposition.

At night when everyone slept, he usually stayed up at prayer. Once, a soldier sleeping nearby heard Saint Callistratus invoking the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and he reported this to the military commander, who in turn summoned Callistratus, interrogated him and wanted to make him offer sacrifice to idols. The saint resolutely refused to do this, so the military commander ordered that the saint be beaten. Then, covered with wounds, the saint was dragged over sharp stones. The beating and the torments did not sway the firm will and brave endurance of the sufferer.

The saint was sewn up in a leather sack and drowned in the sea. By God’s mercy, however, the sack struck a sharp rock and was torn open. Saint Callistratus came to dry land unharmed, carried by dolphins. Viewing such a miracle, forty-nine soldiers came to believe in Christ. Then the military commander threw Saint Callistratus and the believing soldiers into prison. Before this, all of them were subjected to innumerable floggings.

In jail Saint Callistatus continued to preach the Word of God to the soldiers and he bolstered their spirits for martyrdom. Summoned again before the military commander, the sufferers firmly confessed their faith in Christ, after which they were bound hand and foot and thrown into the depths of a great lake behind a dam. But there their bonds broke, and with bright faces the holy martyrs stood in the water, rejoicing in their Baptism, which coincided with the act of martyrdom.

Beautiful bright crowns appeared over their heads, and all heard a voice: “Be brave, Callistratus, with your company, and come rest in the eternal habitations.” At the same time, the earth shuddered and an idol standing nearby fell down and smashed. Seeing this, another 135 soldiers also believed in the Lord Jesus Christ. The military commander, fearing a mutiny in the army, did not put them on trial, but again imprisoned Saint Callistratus with his 49 companions, where they fervently prayed and gave thanks to the Creator for giving them power to endure such sufferings.

At night the martyrs were cut to pieces with swords by order of the military commander. Their holy relics were buried by the 135 soldiers who remained alive. Later, a church was built on the spot of their sufferings, as Saint Callistatus had foretold.

Troparion — Tone 3

In contest you were strengthened by the Holy Spirit, Martyr Callistratus, / and were glorious in casting down the Enemy. / You offered a noble army of athletes / as sweet-smelling incense to Christ. / With them pray for us who praise you with hymns.

Kontakion — Tone 4

(Podoben: “Today You have shown forth...”)
Like stars you have shone upon the world / shedding the light of your contests and miracles upon all who cry to you: / “Rejoice, Martyr Callistratus and fellow company of martyrs.”

Born to an Italian family of Byzantine rite ("Greek rite") of Rossano, in the Byzantine theme of Calabria, for a time he was married and had a daughter. Sickness brought about his conversion, however, and from that time he became a monk and a propagator of the rule of Saint Basil in Italy.

He was known for his ascetic life, his virtues, and his theological learning. For a time he lived as a hermit, but his reputation drew followers to Rossano, whom he began to instruct. However, after a while, he realized that he was viewed as a local authority, and hearing that there was talk of making him bishop, Nilus fled to Capua, where he stayed for fifteen years. Later he spent certain periods of his life at various monasteries which he either founded or restored. Although Nilus instructed his monks according to the Rule of St. Basil, he maintained cordial relations with the Benedictines at Monte Cassino, where he spent some time, as well as at the Alexius monastery in Rome. The Rule of St. Basil was one of the resources Benedict had recourse to when drafting his own rule.

When Pope Gregory V (996–999) was driven out of Rome, Nilus opposed the usurpation of Philogatos of Piacenza as antipope. According to his disciple and biographer, Bartholomew, in 998 Nilus hastened to Rome to intercede on behalf of a fellow native of Rossano, John Philogathos, who had, against the advice of Nilus, cooperated in an ill-advised scheme of the Roman noble Crescentius to depose the Emperor Otto III's kinsman, Pope Gregory V. Later when Philogathos was tortured and mutilated, Nilus reproached Gregory and the Emperor for this crime, prophesying that "the curse of heaven sooner or later would affect their cruel hearts".

Nilus main works were the foundation in 1004 of the famous Greek monastery of Grottaferrata, near Frascati, on lands granted him by Gregory, count of Tusculum; he is counted the first abbot. At the time Calabria was under Byzantine rule and was Koine Greek in language, culture, and spiritual and liturgical tradition. The abbey continues in the Byzantine rite. He spent the end of his life partly in the Sant'Agata monastery in Tusculum and partly in a hermitage at Valleluce near Gaeta. He died in the Sant'Agata monastery in 1005.

Saint Nilus is revered as the patron saint of scribes and calligraphers.


IN LUMINE FIDEI: 27 SEPTEMBER – SAINTS COSMAS AND DAMIAN (Martyrs): The brothers Cosmas and Damian were Arabians of noble extraction, born in the town of Aegae. They were physicians, and during the reign...

27 September, The Chesterton Calendar


Individually, men may present a more or less rational appearance, eating, sleeping, and scheming. But humanity as a whole is changeful, mystical, fickle, delightful. Men are men, but Man is a woman.

'The Napoleon of Notting Hill.'

27 September, The Holy Rule of St Benedict, Patriarch of Western Monasticism

CHAPTER VII. Of Humility

27 Jan. 28 May. 27 Sept.

Let him consider that he is always beheld from heaven by God, and that his actions are everywhere seen by the eye of the Divine Majesty, and are every hour reported to Him by His angels. This the prophet telleth us, when he sheweth how God is ever present in our thoughts, saying: “God searcheth the heart and the reins.” And again “The Lord knoweth the thoughts of men.” And he also saith: “Thou hast understood my thoughts afar off”; and “The thought of man shall confess to Thee.” In order, therefore, that he may be on his guard against evil thoughts, let the humble brother say ever in his heart: “Then shall I be unspotted before Him, if I shall have kept me from mine iniquity.”

28 September, The Roman Martyrology

Quarto Kaléndas Octóbris Luna tértia décima Anno Dómini 2023

September 28th 2023, the 13th day of the Moon, was born into the better life:

In Bohemia, the holy martyr Wenceslaus, Duke of that country, glorious for his holiness and his miracles, who was murdered in the house of his brother, and thus gained the palm of victory.
At Rome, the holy martyr Privatus. He had been full of sores, whereof he had been healed by the blessed Pope Callistus. Under the Emperor Alexander, for Christ's faith's sake, he was flogged to death with scourges loaded with lead.
Likewise at Rome, the holy martyr Stacteus.
In Africa, the holy martyrs Martial, Lawrence, and twenty others.
At Antioch, in Pisidia, (in the persecution under the Emperor Diocletian,) the holy martyrs Mark, who was a shepherd, Alphius, Alexander, and Zosimus who were his brethren, Nicon, Neon, Heliodorus, and thirty soldiers who were brought to believe in Christ by beholding the wonders wrought by the blessed Mark, and were crowned with martyrdom in diverse manners and places.
Upon the same day, under the Emperor Decius, the holy martyr Maximus.
At Toulouse, (at the beginning of the fifth century,) the holy Confessor Exuperius, Bishop (of that see,) concerning whom holy Jerome hath told how sparing he was to himself and how open-handed to others.
At Genoa, (likewise in the fifth century,) the holy Confessor Salomon, Bishop (of that see.)
At Brescia, (also in the fifth century,) holy Silvinus, Bishop (of that see.)
On the same day, the holy Virgin Eustochion, the daughter of blessed Paula, (and disciple of holy Jerome,) who was brought up with other virgins at the Lord's birthplace, and passed away, glorious for. eminent good works, to be for ever with this same Lord.
In Germany, (in the eighth century,) the holy Virgin Lioba, eminent for the gift of miracles.
℣. And elsewhere many other holy martyrs, confessors, and holy virgins.
℟. Thanks be to God.

Meme of the Moment

S. Eusebius, Pope: Butler's Lives of the Saints


From St Thomas Aquinas Seminary. You may follow the Office at Divinum Officium.

The North American Martyrs: Butler's Lives of the Saints

Ss. Cyprian & Justina: Butler's Lives of the Saints

Pope Francis in Marseille: A Guilty Blindness

Francis lives a comfortable life in Rome. He doesn't care about the 'painful day-to-day reality of European citizens who have to absorb the migratory flow.'

By Hélène De Lauzun

There is a yawning gap between the irenic aspirations defended by the Pope and the painful day-to-day reality of European citizens who have to absorb the migratory flow.

At a time when the influx of migrants into the Mediterranean has never been so massive, as illustrated by the situation on the Italian island of Lampedusa, which in recent weeks has seen an unprecedented arrival on its soil of several thousand immigrants from Africa, the Pope has openly taken a stance by saying that we cannot speak of a migratory crisis. Migrants “do not invade,” he insisted in his speeches, calling on France and Europe to face up to their “responsibilities.” For many European citizens—whether Catholic or not, French or Italian—such comments are not acceptable. 

Several leading figures from France’s right-wing political class have spoken out to criticise the pontiff’s speech and distance themselves from the Holy Father’s diagnosis. Marion Maréchal, head of the list for Zemmour’s Reconquête party for the European elections, reaffirmed her attachment to the Catholic faith on television, while condemning the pope’s view of the migration issue, accusing him of “doing too much.” “Pope Francis has no business playing politics,” she declared on BFM TV before the pontiff’s arrival on French soil.

Jordan Bardella, President of the Rassemblement National and head of his party’s list for the forthcoming elections, echoed the same sentiments. Claiming to be a non-believer, he denounced an “Argentinian pope” who is totally unaware of the realities of European migration. What’s more, he accused him of playing a harmful role in encouraging migrants to make the long journey from Africa to Europe. On Sunday, September 24th, he said, also on BFM TV:

When he says that Marseille is a haven of peace, allow me, like all French people, to take offence and say that he doesn’t know Marseille. He has chosen to use a political discourse, but my role is to remind him that when we call for mass immigration, when we call for the unconditional and unlimited opening up of all our borders, then we bear a responsibility for the belief and the El Dorado that these people from the continent have created for themselves.

Jordan Bardella then added that he preferred “the wisdom of Benedict XVI, who said that states have the right to regulate migratory flows.”

Both Maréchal’s and Bardella’s reactions rightly highlight the yawning gap between the irenic aspirations defended by the Pope and the painful day-to-day reality of European citizens who have to absorb the migratory flow. Clearly, the Pope lives in a world that does not exist and speaks of a reality that he does not know. The Pope’s argument about the indifference of Western societies seems hard to sustain when you consider the colossal resources deployed by countries like France and Italy to rescue migrants at sea, welcome them, care for them—and, more often than not, keep them on their soil, because very few of the thousands who land end up being refused asylum. To give a few figures, France devotes almost €2 billion a year from its budget to asylum, with appropriations constantly increasing over the last few years. 

The Pope’s description of Marseille as a “creative mosaic,” for example, is appealing, but it’s just as hard to accept when you realise that France’s second-largest metropolitan area has suffered for years from an appalling reputation for insecurity, crime and filth—the result of uncontrolled immigration that has totally transformed its once-attractive face. Journalist Gabrielle Cluzel of Boulevard Voltaire reminded us on Twitter that, while Marseille can pride itself on its memorial to migrants, it is also known for a plaque in Saint-Charles station commemorating the deaths of two young girls, Laure and Mauranne, brutally murdered in 2017 by a Tunisian migrant who should never have been on French territory—the other side of immigration, which Pope Francis deliberately denies. 

It is also curious to note that those who are usually the first to denigrate the Christian roots of France and Europe or to castigate the retrograde nature of the Catholic Church, namely the representatives of the far-left parties, have been the first to sing praises since Pope Francis’ trip to Marseille. Sandrine Rousseau, an ecologist MP, Clémentine Autain, a communist MP, and Antoine Léaument, a member of the France Insoumise party accustomed to Robespierrist declarations, are lauding the Pope in the media and calling on Emmanuel Macron to listen more closely to the pontiff in his policies. There’s a reversal of fortunes here that we might find comical—or distressing. 

The Pope’s statements are “making a mess.” After all, isn’t that Pope Francis’ signature? But as we know only too well, the mess they create has more negative than positive effects. On the thorny issue of migration, Francis’ out-of-touch discourse is helping to alienate many people from the Catholic Church, who do not expect him to speak in a way that is far removed from reality and overly political. 

In the light of the events in Lampedusa and Marseille, it is impossible in France not to think of the prophetic novel written by the writer Jean Raspail fifty years ago, Le Camp des Saints, in which he described the apocalyptic arrival of migrants on the beaches of Provence, causing a fragile and moribund European society to teeter on the brink of collapse. Ironically, Raspail at the time portrayed a globalist pope exhorting from his plane the unconditional integration of these unfortunate people. But at the same moment, deaf to these aerial gesticulations, on the beaches where these cohorts of poor wretches had come to be stranded, the author described a handful of monks bending over them to confer baptism on them, against everything and everyone. This is the urgency we would have liked the pope to talk to us about in Marseille.

Meloni Slams Germany for Funding Pro-Migrant NGOs

A follow-up to the story I shared earlier. It seems the Reds in Germany are funding the NGOs that are supporting the jihad against Europe.

From The European Conservative

By Tamás Orbán

Italian PM suggests Germany instead move reception centers to their own soil

Italian Prime Minister Georgia Meloni has sent a letter to German ChanceItalian PM suggests Germany instead move reception centers to their own soilllor Olaf Scholz stating that she was “astonished” by Berlin’s recently announced initiative to finance pro-migration NGOs operating in the Mediterranean and in southern Italy, accusing him of deepening the crisis instead of cooperating to solve it, Il Giornale reported on Monday, September 25th.

Meloni’s complaint was sent to Berlin after Germany’s social-democratic government announced last Friday that it would finance two NGOs—including the rescue charity SOS Humanity—with up to €790,000 each to continue and expand their work. 

Meloni’s letter, dated September 23rd, was made public after Italian Defense Minister Guido Crosetto took a stab at Berlin in an interview published by La Stampa on Sunday, saying that Germany is no longer “a friendly country,” and that its “ideological approach puts us in trouble.” 

The PM’s letter to Scholz also makes it clear that Rome considers Berlin’s actions utterly disrespectful:

I have learned with astonishment that your government—in an uncoordinated manner with the Italian government—has reportedly decided to support with substantial funds non-governmental organizations engaged in the reception of irregular migrants on Italian territory and in rescues in the Mediterranean Sea.

Both activities “raise questions,” Meloni added, citing the EU’s border protection agency, Frontex, which has been stressing for some time now that the presence of rescue NGOs on the Mediterranean constitutes a serious “pull factor” to illegal migration. “It’s widely known,” Meloni wrote, that these NGOs are “multiplying the departures of precarious boats that result not only in additional burden on Italy, but at the same time increases the risk of new tragedies at sea.”

Although these NGOs consistently deny that their operations would encourage illegal migration, there’s compelling evidence to support Frontex’s assessment. In the past years, the German Gefira Foundation observed at least nine of these NGOs—mostly financed by the Soros’ Open Society Foundations, among others—frequently picking up migrants right after they leave the Libyan coast and ferrying them straight to Europe. 

Furthermore, Meloni added that German funds for NGOs that help at the reception centers on land—and are often accused of instructing migrants how to deceive authorities and take advantage of the European asylum laws—are not welcome either. If this work is so expensive, the prime minister suggested to Scholz, “it is legitimate to ask whether it does not deserve to be facilitated on German territory rather than in Italy.”

The German decision to finance such groups is not the first disappointment Rome had to suffer in relation to the current crisis, as Italian officials, including Defense Minister Crosetto, have been criticizing neighboring countries (such as France, Austria, and Switzerland) for closing their borders instead of sending help. 

Germany doesn’t have a direct border with Italy, but it also managed to draw contempt from Rome early on after it suspended voluntary migrant relocations from the country due to the high amount of irregular arrivals it faces. Berlin’s reasoning that it registered some 15,000 illegal entries just in August hardly changed Rome’s perceptions, as over 133,000 migrants landed in Italy this year, twice as many as in the same period in 2022.

“Faced with our request for help, this is their response?” Crosetto snapped in the interview. “We did not behave in the same way when Angela Merkel convinced the EU to invest billions of euros in Turkey to stop migrants coming to Germany from the Middle East.”

Meloni also brought up the migration deal with Turkey, but as a positive example for Germany to follow instead of facilitating illegal entries. According to the Italian PM, European countries should focus on “finding structural solutions to the migrations phenomenon” primarily by cooperating with transit countries in North Africa and striking similar agreements that would cost even less than the one with Ankara.

As for more immediate solutions, the Meloni government signed off on a series of new measures last week in an attempt to deter migrants, including lengthening the detention period, increasing the number of detention centers, and making migrants pay if they want to leave these facilities before their asylum claims have been processed.

In turn, a German government spokesman promised on Monday that “the letter will be answered.” The spokesman refused to elaborate on what Scholz’s answer might be, and only repeated the foreign ministry’s position on rescue operations at sea, which are a “legal, humanitarian, and moral duty” of Europe. 

Pope Saint Pius X Shows You Might Be a MODERNIST and Not Know It

*** Note. I mentioned the wrong Encyclical when talking about the Pontifical Biblical Commission, I meant to say PROVIDENTISSIMUS DEUS. The PBC was not 'infallible' but the teachings were promulgated as norms to be believed and taught, and could be disputed in the proper fashion, but believed until proven otherwise.

The Synod of Francis Has Learned Nothing From the Synods of the Eastern Churches. The Objections of a Greek Catholic Bishop

Synodality does not work. Only the restraining hand of Rome has prevented the Eastern Churches from descending into the chaos that afflicts the Orthodox. If Rome goes 'synodal' may God have mercy!

From Settimo Cielo

By Sandro Magister

In almost identical words, first while conversing with the Jesuits of Portugal and then on the flight back from Mongolia, Pope Francis has said that “the Synod is not an invention of mine. It was Paul VI, at the end of the Council, who realized that the Western Church had lost synodality, while the Eastern one has got it.”

And on September 11, receiving Baselios Marthoma Mathews III, catholicos of the Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church, he reiterated that “there is much we can learn from the age-old synodal experience of your Church.”

But is it really so? Judging by the failure, in 2016, of the convocation of a Council of all the Orthodox Churches, after sixty years of preparation, simply due to the lack of unanimity in the approval of one of the preliminary documents, the Eastern model of synodality would not seem at all to be the most fit to accelerate, in the West, that “process” of change in the Church so much to the liking of the pope and his set:

“If the West, in fact, understands synodality as a place or a moment in which all, lay and clergy, act together to arrive at some ecclesiastical, doctrinal, canonical, disciplinary decision, whatever it may be, it is clear that such synodality does not exist in the East.”

Calling attention to the colossal misconception, in these exact words, is a bishop who knows the East well.

His name is Manuel Nin. Catalan, 67 years old, a Benedictine monk at the Abbey of Montserrat, a professor of theology and specialist on the Fathers of the Church, then rector of the Pontifical Greek College in Rome, he has been since 2016 the titular bishop of Carcabia and apostolic exarch for Catholics of the Byzantine rite in Greece, based in Athens.

He will take part, in October, in the next session of the Synod on synodality, and is among those whom the pope has personally added to the list of participants. But he makes no secret of thoroughly criticizing the “misunderstanding” on which Francis so insists:

“When it is stated that: ‘You in the East have always had synodality,’ synodality is simply confused with the episcopal college.”

Nin has condensed his objections in a commentary published in August on the website of his exarchate.

In the East, he writes, it is true that the title of “Synod” is given to the college of bishops governed by a patriarch, an archbishop, or a metropolitan when it meets to exercise authority over the respective Church (as for example that of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church held in Rome from September 3 to 13).

But this synodality has nothing to do with the model of “a modern parliamentary republic, where all can say anything and talk about everything. The life of the Christian Churches has never been a form of democracy in which all decide everything based on the rules of the majority.”

Of course, Pope Francis has also insisted repeatedly in saying that “the Synod is not a parliament,” much less “a television program in which everything is talked about.”

At the same time, however, he has extended participation in the Synod not only to those with episcopal authority, but to priests, religious, and lay people, men and women, in obedience to a predominantly horizontal interpretation of the Greek word “Synod,” understood as “walking together.”

Together with whom? With others, with everyone. Albeit with the caution that the role of protagonist be left to the Holy Spirit.

When instead – Nin writes, and this is his main objection – the true meaning of the word “Synod” is not “walking together with all,” but “walking all together with Christ.”

Nin quotes the father of monasticism: “Those footprints in the sand of the desert that Anthony believed to be his own, at a certain point he discovers, he and we with him, that they do not belong to him but to the One who walks beside Anthony and supports him in moments of weakness. To Him who is always at our side, to the risen and living Lord who is in our midst. The monastic vocation can help us understand a fundamental reality in Christian life.”

It is interesting to note how this objection of Nin’s accords with the one published in July on Settimo Cielo by the New York theologian Robert P. Imbelli, who also observed in the “Instrumentum laboris” of the upcoming Synod a role as immense as it is vague and muddled assigned to the Holy Spirit, and instead a very weak reference to Christ, to the cross, to the paschal mystery, that is, to the only reliable guide in order to be truly able to “converse in the Spirit.”

“I therefore propose looking at synodality,” Nin continues, “as the journey of all of us who have been baptized in Christ, listening to his Gospel, celebrating our faith, receiving his grace in the sacraments. A journey certainly to be undertaken together, guided and accompanied by the hands or even carried on the shoulders of our shepherds, but following in the footsteps of Him who is the way, the truth, and the life.”

Toward the conclusion of his commentary, Nin makes an unexpected reference to a protagonist of the Church from a few decades ago, with whom he allies himself:

“I recall the beautiful reflection of Cardinal Giacomo Biffi, archbishop of Bologna from 1984 to 2003, published in the years of the great Jubilee of 2000 with the title: ‘Identikit of the Guest of Honor.’ Already back then the great Italian cardinal warned against the danger of sidelining or even forgetting the One who was the only reason for the Jubilee, the main cause, the sole honoree, the One Celebrated.”

Yesterday the Jubilee, today the Synod. With the same forgetfulness?


Edward Pentin, in the “National Catholic Register,” has also highlighted the critical observations of Bishop Manuel Nin:

> Greek Catholic Bishop: Synod on Synodality Is Not Like Eastern Synods

The Deadly Rise Of The Science Enforcers

The weaponising of science by the woke Left is one of the most dangerous trends today. Science is no longer science. It is a religion and an anti-theistic, anti-Western religion at that.

From William M. Briggs

The woke must needs have enemies. If they do not have them, they will create them. Their identities—and the woke are all about identities which create for them “lived experiences”, which always means “fantasized experiences”—have an absolute need to see themselves battling against powerful forces that are ever on the brink of destroying them.

This gives them the excuse to crush those enemies. Without mercy. This lack of pity follows from their premise that their enemies are holding back Utopia, which is the bliss-filled land where the greatest good for the greatest number shall be perpetual. Because science.

Enter woke scientist Peter Hotez. He is a little fella, the shape of a Butterball turkey with a constant corn-kernel grin. He is the famous author of, and I promise this is true, “Crafting your scientist brand“, a 2018 peer-reviewed paper in PLOS: Biology.

Crafting your scientist brand? If that sounds more about making science about propaganda and personality than about truth, well, that’s because it is.

Hotez said making science about people and not science is necessary because there has been an “abrupt rise in well-funded and organized antiscience movements”.

If he means by this the rise of the Woke Regime, with its vast resources, and its capture of all professional organizations and universities, and its endless ability to print money to fund its “science” fancies, why, he is exactly right. The Regime’s machinations in and manipulations of science are well known and greatly to be regretted.

Example besides the usual, you ask? It appears the Australian Experts who rule their medical institutions will recommend putting men who enjoy sodomy on antibiotics. Permanently. Perpetually. To “avoid sexually transmitted diseases.” Why would that be necessary, one wonders? One cannot say. Not without getting in trouble.

Dear reader, does your sexual partner have a uterus?

Hotez was also allowed recently another outlet for his propaganda, this time in an organ known for it, the LA Times: “Scientists have become sitting ducks. We need leaders to step up and defend us.

He isn’t happy some refused his beloved covid vax, claiming they died because not taking it:

The dead were victims of what we too often label as “misinformation,” as though these victims succumbed to random junk on the internet. This was not always the case. The unvaccinated were targeted by a well-financed and newly politicized anti-vaccine movement.

Does he include in that “misinformation” the continuous stream of lies told by Experts and rulers that if you got the vax you couldn’t get covid, couldn’t pass it on, and wouldn’t have any adverse events?

No. But he does repeat his case that his enemies are out there, and growing in power. Which is, of course, false.

Just before CPAC, another prominent Freedom Caucus member had disparaged vaccinators as “medical brown shirts,” meaning Nazis, and she later attacked me and other scientists by name on Steve Bannon’s podcast. Other caucus members regularly made unsupported and spectacular claims about the benefits of hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin as COVID treatments, while disparaging COVID-19 vaccinations.

Funny that Hotez forgets the vaccine passports, and the many, many people who were fired for not taking the vax, people forced out by a brutal, panicked Regime. And he forgets when HCQ and ivermectin (“horse paste”!) were outlawed in some locales, and people cancelled for recommending them.

Yet now, the Mayo Clinic advises HCQ for covid.

Is there any truth to the “conspiracy theory” that rulers had to ban all these alternate treatments, because if there were existing treatments they couldn’t have got emergency authorization for the forced vaccinations? Hotez doesn’t say.

Hotez next tells his good joke:

During the 1930s, Joseph Stalin’s rise to authoritarian control relied on exiling or imprisoning prominent scientists. This had catastrophic consequences for Soviet productivity, especially in agricultural science.

He did, too. The Soviet State, a full-bore Expertocracy, decided all The Science. Those who opposed it were executed, sent into exile, or fired. Which, except for the executions, so far, might sound familiar.

He claims “A 2021 survey found that 15% of scientists who engage with the news media about COVID-19 have received death threats.” Sure, some of them might have got threats from cranks, and some are probably lying about it. Anybody in the public eye our of vibrant democracy routinely has to deal with idiots venting their spleens. Ahem. But his claim that “almost 40% of COVID-19 scientists report experiencing at least one confrontation either online or in person” is more revealing.

Confrontation. Experts do not like to be questioned. Which is what is meant by online “confrontations”. It is enough, to them, that they have spoken. When they speak, you are meant to listen passively and follow orders. You, dear reader, are not an Expert and thus uncredentialed and unworthy of having an opinion. When you express one, directly to an Expert, they feel threatened. They really do.

What Expert was fired for their lies during the panic? Which were fired for being wrong? Which were fired for expressing over-certainty? As far as I know, the answer is exactly none to all these questions. Yet the “body count” of Regime critics to The Science is high, high.

If Hotez is really worried about “anti-science rhetoric”, he’d fire himself.