Wednesday, April 26, 2017

Bears to Church: "We Got This"

Planet of the Heretics

"You bloody fools. Ah, damn you!"

That's it. Bears are taking over. Resistance is... yummy. For a preview, check out the Bear's favorite website.

Why does the Bear feel like Charleton Heston on the beach at the end of Planet of the Apes?

Ann Barnhardt's inaugural podcast was pretty gosh-darn good, and not just because she cites the Bear. She gets the high stakes we are playing for.

The Terrible Truth Everyone is Afraid to Acknowledge

IF we can have a pope who spouts the bull... erm... crap that Francis does; who is elected and reigns unchallenged; diminishing, no changing, the Faith in fact by exceptions and distractions; who one day dies; and 95% of the Catholic Church declares he was a saint among us, who was humble, and truly cared for those on "the peripheries;" whose abominable encyclicals remain on the shelf next to those of great, faithful popes of the past, THEN


There is a PROBLEM with the papacy itself.

And if a problem with the papacy, then a PROBLEM with the Church itself.

And if a problem with the Church itself, there is no logical reason to believe anything the Church has ever declared to be the truth. The Bear means, if you catch your spouse cheating, why should you believe him or her the next time there is reason to suspect adultery? A promise has turned out to be a broken thing. There are things you can do after breaking a promise, but un-breaking it is not one of them.

But God made this promise, right? So it is impossible that Pope Francis is Damien in his old age, right?

Anyway, Bear forgot. Adultery's no big deal anymore. The Bear would think of a better example if he did not run such a slipshod ephemeris.


Now, are you awake? Are  you shocked? Is there a flaw in the Bear's logic? A divinely guided institution is less like a machine than a diamond. A machine can have worn out parts and still function, although perhaps not as well.

A diamond is whole or not. Period. You can't admit a flaw to its integrity or it is essentially changed.

"But we've had bad popes before."

You know, the Bear does not believe that is even worth the electrons it would take to argue, but here goes. Those popes may have been immoral, and they may have been mistaken, but they did not start tearing down the Faith starting at Genesis 2:24. Also, a Medieval pope did not have the ability to wage unceasing warfare against the Faith on a one-to-on basis.

Worst argument ever. It would be fine if Jorge Bergoglio was just a "bad pope." He is far, far worse than that. He is an enemy of the Church. Possibly a major cosmic player, but let's not get carried away. It's like having a Bear rampage through your house and saying, "Oh, we've had pests before."

We really need a new theology of the papacy to logically cover the facts that (a) Francis is Pope, and (b) he is actively destroying the Catholic Church and the ancient Faith. Good luck with that one. You know, though, if you're going to make all these claims about your pope and your Church, you had better be able to explain Jorge Bergoglio. Submitting a dubia did not accomplish anything. And that is charitable.

The solution is... Yeah, Bear's got it here in his pocket...
Oh, wait, Bear doesn't wear pants. He doesn't have a pocket. Uh...

So what is the solution? The Bear's earlier shocking example cannot be simply dismissed unless we are to fall into fideism. Logically, it remains a viable option that can be forensically presented with a reasonable degree of confidence, if one were not Catholic. Right now the Bear would hate to have to enter into a debate with a Protestant about the Glorious Shining Truths of the Unchanging Catholic Church.

"Divorce? We Catholics don't believe all that crap anymore. Can we talk about something relevant, like migrants?"

But do not fear. The Bear is not going to adopt that logical and defendable position today.

But he's got to tell you, we are being so abused by our churchmen, by our theologians, by our thinkers, and by 99% of the Catholic media, and especially by the ultramontanist faction. Why does some STUPID BEAR who can't even shop at a normal menswear store have to sit here with comfort-honey smeared all over his muzzle trying to figure out this crap with his 450 gm. brain?

The Bear isn't going to adopt that logical and defendable position he outlined before, you know, the one that we've been duped all along. That exercise is not the take-away.

He will adopt some other logical and defendable position.

Except he does not know what the Hell it is, and it is apparent none of our gelded darlings who manage what we believe are going to tell him. Freaking do-it-yourself Catholicism by blog. The Bear is sick and tired of it.

Pope Corbinian

Tell you what. If everything's up for grabs anyway, the Bear declares himself Pope Corbinian. Is that any more ridiculous than Pope Francis turned out to be? Would the Bear be a worse pope? Could he? Heck, the world would love him more than Francis. "A Bear! That is so adorable!"

So, great. First act: everything Jorge Bergoglio ever wrote is collected and burned. Second act: every act of Jorge Bergoglio's papacy is abrogated. Third act: Jorge Bergoglio is excommunicated with bell, book and candle and he is banished to the Vatican dungeons in chains.

The absence of microphones will prove fatal within days.

Pope Corbinian. Governing the Church from this ephemeris since April 26, 2017. Because, in all seriousness, the universe is not big enough for the contradictions inherent in there being a Catholic Church and Jorge Bergoglio being its pope.

Happy days are here again.


  1. Good stuff Bear that needed saying, insightful, well written,fun to read. You do good work.

    My thought on Pope Francis: The premiere virtue signaler of our time and perhaps all time is Pope Francis who eats massive amounts of humble pie in front of the whole world, distorts the teaching of Christ, celebrates failing liberal regimes, Kowtows to Islam while criticizing Catholics who seriously practice their faith. It is most ironic that the Catholic we should try most not to emulate is our dear Pope.

  2. I'm trying to keep in mind that Jesus chose 12 disciples, and one of them was a traitor. A very successful traitor - Jesus was betrayed, his disciples scattered, and Jesus was crucified.

    So I'm still hoping for the resurrection, but am increasingly convinced that it will not come through men but directly from God.

    Two of my frequent prayers are "Let God arise, let his enemies be scattered." (Psalm 68:1) and "Lord, do you not care that we are perishing?" (Mark 4:38, remembering that His response was "Why are you afraid? Do you still not have faith?")

  3. Pope Corbinian. It has a nice ring. What would you have in store for the Jesuits, or for that matter, the Fighting Irish of Notre Dame? Not only is their Catholicism suspect; but, they haven't won a NCAA National Title in football since 1987.

  4. POPE FRANCIS IS AN ILLUMINIST [since he was before becoming pope, Pope Francis is an apostate Bishop] -

  5. Well, naturally, Bear.

    That is why the "current" Church is essentially protestant. heck maybe moving to Episcopalian from what I can tell.

    No Real Presence, no sacraments, no need for priests. Only the supremacy of our own judgement.

    Who wants or needs a Pope? When the Islamists come to drag him from the Vatican, who will stop them? Heck, mayhap he'll just join them willingly?

    I've been watching this stuff from the sidelines since before the last Lent.

    As one man once said to another... man, "What is Truth?" Who knew that Roman man was right after all? At one time, I thought that was the defining moment of the Gospel. Truth is right there and was willfully ignored and betrayed. Not much has changed, huh? Where can this man find Truth when those who should be their utmost defender WANTS Truth to be mutable?

  6. Owl drags a soap box over.

    The idea that the Pope is the gold standard for what is and what is not Catholic is the problem. It is sort of a modern pious notion that was especially handy when JPII and BXVI were around and could be used as an argument for ignoring problematic priests and bishops (as well as pant-suited Jesuits).

    The theology of the papacy is fine -- the problem is various models of the papacy as well as certain thorny unanswered questions (Is a heretical Pope automatically excommunicated/is the Chair of Peter automatically vacated?) as well as various wrong-headed pious notions and misunderstandings of what the Papacy is.

    Subsists in, is perhaps the most perfect term that only one person in the entire world truly understands and he abdicated the papacy, is a term that does not describe how the Catholic Church relates to the Papacy, even though too many people think you can reduce what is Catholic, and thus what is not, to that which is and comes from the Papacy.

    Let me suggest something -- an ongoing in-depth study of the Theology of the Papacy. Let us work together, come with known truths, and develop a model that we can all use. Catholicism by blog, or Catholicism done individually isn't what the Faith is about. The Faith is about believing that which has been given to us, not some nonsense that is being whispered to us individually by the "Spirit of VII". We believe and seek understanding, not we seek understanding so that we might believe.

    We are Catholic because we participate in the life of the Church -- our individual relationship with God comes from our cooperate participation in the unity of the Church. et pluribus unum is not a Catholic model of the Church.

    1. You make a lot of sense, as always. But no approach can overlook the cultural sea change of instant personal media. Look how it has permitted the ridiculous degree of polarization in the U.S. we had differences (Just look at All in the Family) but now we not only watch TV, we talk back to it and make it. As everybody probably knows my analysis is always based on natural facts. On that basis I think we are not noticing that the most familiar institutions simply are not what they used to be. They seem to be the same, but the information revolution has fundamentally changed them. The Church never prepared to explain Jorge Bergoglio because it was literally impossible to foresee him in the context that makes him what he is. Now, it can hardly step back and do so without throwing everything into chaos. No, everyone must put on a brave face and pretend Francis is one more pope in a historical line.

      As I said in the article, somebody needs to explain Francis in a logical and truthful way. He represents the greatest existential crisis the Church has ever seen. A dictatorship of eccentricities and heresy poured without mediation directly into the minds of Catholics on a one-to-one basis.

      The only possible solution I see (besides Bears) is for the pope to be vastly reduced in importance without eliminating his unique role as the successor of Peter. Until that happens, things will get worse and deform the Church to the point where truth is whatever public image the latest ubiquitous pope wishes to portray. This is, I assure you, inevitable, in this new Information Age.

      What might a solution look like? There is none. I mean none except might be discovered by gutsy churchmen of good will. The Papacy has been rocketed to a super-institution. Pope Francis is not the cause. There were worrying signs long ago, but we were all rah rah about being significant to the world at large.

      In the end, nature will correct, but many might not like the solution. It will all become so confusing and silly it will be every man for himself. We will still be Catholic, but everyone will be forced to choose what he's going to accept from an out-of-control papacy. In other words, we are living in the new normal. So what does that imply for how useful the Petrine office really is? There are some things we just can't afford to think about without being forced by cold logic to look at the Church differently than we have been taught.

    2. --->somebody needs to explain Francis in a logical and truthful way.

      Rhetorical question, but who constitutes "somebody" and what is to be the standard by which we determine that the explanation is logical and truthful? We have fallen quite a bit that I feel the need that we even have to address those questions.

      There is something fruitful for the theologial to ponder that the Church is not Pope Francis' Church, it is not your local priest's Church, and it is not even thine or mine. It is Christ's and we have an obligation to be a part of it. We seek to understand that which the Church is and to be changed by her not to tell her what she is or to change her. Together we are sons and daughters of the Church, not her master, even if we happen to be dressed in white.

      I have the seeds of a solution, and it doesn't rely on gutsy churchmen of good will, but rather badgers, and bears, and voles, and sheep, and a few rabbits (if I might). Blogs are great things, they are beacons of light in a dark age, but they are often solitary outposts or loosely connected.

      The embers of the fire of the Faith is tended in the family, the biological and that of our "tribe". That is where we need to look for the solution...for the devil wishes to destroy the family, and has done a wonderful job at it. The more we function as a family, the less the outsider can interfere, the less the false shepherd can lead us astray.

      The first thing that needs to be done when stranded in the wilderness is to take see what we have and what we don't have. We live in a new normal, as you said, but we can take stock and start building what is needed to survive. We won't outlast this, and our children probably won't, but perhaps theirs might see the end to this. But probably not if you know anything about history and the ebb and flow of philosophies and world views.

    3. --->But no approach can overlook the cultural sea change of instant personal media.

      Approaches that correctly forecast what follows the current state of media can.

      If you have to put artillery on a moving target down range, you don't fire where the target is, but where it will be.

    4. Interesting artillery analogy. I would suggest a box barrage.

    5. Yes. If one is only reacting to where one's opponent is, one will always have the losing position.

      It is not hard to get out in front of heresy. Heresy is never novel nor interesting. We know what it is up to and where it is going. So we get there first

  7. Well written Bear!
    I hate to say I told you so, and I'm not sure at all I said this here, but I said it many places. This matters to no one but me. It's edifying that I said it. Small miserable comforts.
    A crisis of faith is bound to happen, all because of this man, and all because of exactly what you said. If this and that are not true, than what is true. And even though the pope is horrible, if he does all the rotten things we all know he's done and is doing and will do, the crisis has come because the Cardinals don't care. If they cared, it would make a great deal of difference.
    They don't care.
    I no longer want to read slightly negative commentary about the man. It's all been said. I know, I've read it all for the last three plus years. And when a priest or bishop quotes him, we can hardly bear it, no pun intended. It is darn near intolerable.
    But they don't care. And that leaves us with...well...divine intervention. I admit, what worries me is 2017 ending, maybe 2018, and...nothing.
    What a choice. A chastisement that means we don't know what, or a destroyer in the Chair of Peter, plus a world gone mad.
    Jesus, help us. Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us.

    1. They don't care in the way that you want them to care. Bell, book, and candle, isn't remotely a part of their thought process or nature -- which is part of what got them to be Cardinals. There are good ones and they do care in accordance to their temperaments and how they have been tempered.

      God isn't the deus ex machina to Pope Franics.

      Owl also assumes that if Owl prayed for God to solve Owl's problems with sinners in this world, and God intervened divinely, that Owl would be a part of the "problems" that God solved.

      I digress, and do not mean to be harsh at all, but Owl firmly believes that the problem of Pope Francis is solved not by a quick God fixing everything, but by the long slow turn of years and the hard work of woodland creatures sowing seeds that they will not see the fruit of. If we wait around for someone else to "do something" even God, then we are not changing our own lives, the lives of our neighbors, the lives of our parish, and the lives of our Church.

      Anyway, Pope Francis makes me really upset, in part because if we had a fantastic Pope that was all fire and brimstone and truly interested in mercy, Owl could have a nice cushy life and not have to work so hard. Now Owl has to worry about things and if Owl is actually living according to what is true and right and dealing with sin that is unmasked instead of masquerading as an angel of light and being ignored.

      Hrumph, Hrumph, Grumble, Grumble. Pope Francis has made Owl permanently old and cranky.

  8. If a true pope can behave as Francis has, then we have been wrong about the prerogatives of the papacy. And we have thus learned from Francis that true popes can mislead the Church and the entire world as to what the Church teaches. Did our Lord establish the papacy just for this?

    The above is a sedevacantist argument, and I do not know how to contradict it.

    1. Purpose of the papacy cf. Jesus and Peter - Jn 21:15-17 (RSVCE) - and strengthening his brethren cf. Lk 22:32 (RSVCE) -

      Cf. How Pope St. John Paul II concludes Ordinatio Sacerdotalis (May 22, 1994): "Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church's divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32) ..."

      That's why Our LORD established the papacy but it is not a guarantee that each Pope will faithfully perform his duty as Pope as Church history attests. This is also clear from Our LORD's own teaching that Peter/the popes can be unfaithful and not feed the sheep. Cf. Jesus the True Vine [Jn 15:1-17 (RSVCE) -] and The Faithful or the Unfaithful Slave [Lk 12:41-48 (RSVCE) -]

    2. Remember that St. Peter, acting as Pope, was misleading the flock for a time. St. Peter was a humble man, and took his correction from St. Paul and from thereon lead the Church properly.

      The roll of the Papacy is not to tell people how high to jump, even of Pope Francis thinks it is. The Pope is the primary steward...a guardian of the Lord's treasury. If a Pope is a bad guardian or refuses to dispense of the Lord's treasury to His subjects, that says nothing about the Church, the office of the steward, nor the Lord. Rather it only condemns the bad steward even more so.

      The problem is that the laity have come to believe that the Pope is the Faith...that what is and what is not Catholic is the prerogative of the Pope to decide. No...the Pope's prerogative is to hand on the Faith whole and intact.

    3. Lurker, thanks for your answer. I can spot the errors of Francis, but not every Catholic will. Certainly not every bishop does. Won't sincere people be led completely astray by the Vicar of Christ? And they will have Francis to turn to, and I will have a previous pope to turn to. The Church will at least have to condemn this man in the future.

      Further, if Francis teaches error as pope, why should I trust what a previous pope has taught? After Francis, the faithful will not be able to rely on the teaching of any pope, it seems. The answer to this dilemma must be, that we have to look to the consistent teaching of the Church throughout the ages. But then I am back to rejecting the teaching of a pope. And what good is the papacy if it can teach error to the faithful?

      I don't lose sleep over any of this; I pray I don't lose my faith over it.

    4. The answer is that Catholics are not Gnostics. You have a good question about epistemology and the way out of it is to reject Gnosticism and anything that smacks of it. I will write more later, perhaps tomorrow, but how do we know that Arius and Luther and all archheretics are wrong? The answer is not "because ecumenical council or because pope or even because bible"

  9. Wow, another great post by the most insightful 400 lb. bear alive today, and the comments were great too. Ive got nothing to add really. Although if anyone can tell me what you're supposed to do if a bear is chasing you while you're on fire, it would be appreciated.

  10. If you are on fire and a Bear is chasing you, run as fast as you can in a circle around the Bear. He may become mesmerized and not attack until your crisply burnt body falls to the ground allowing the Bear to melt marshmallows and chocolate over you. This will make the Bear happy, guaranteeing your admission into Bear Heaven That is for Viruous Humans, Too.

    1. I should've known better than to ask a bear for advice on this one. Completely funny, though.

  11. I don't expect this issue to ever be addressed, let alone solved. Until the Bear detonates his massive EMP device, destroying all modern communication, the unnatural cult of the Pope will grow. The Bear has this right, all other opinions are wrong. Barring the election of nothing but REALLY humble REAL saints who do not think the sun rises out of the rear waistband of their BVDs, the Faith will continue it's one-way ratchet to whatever eccentricities popes teach as truth. There is NO competing institution of sufficient weight to check this. There is no way to keep things from become more ad hoc and confused. The Pope controls the Holy Microphone. That's all that matters.

    In retrospect - and the Bear does not know exactly when this happened - the papacy was oversold. Maybe the Old Catholics were right. Infallibility is not by necessity connected to this problem, but is practically. Get ready to exercise your eye-rolling muscles, Catholics. There is already (1) what the clergy really believes and (2) what faithful Catholics believe. The good news is that (1) ultramonanists will fade into a bad joke, and (2) real Catholics don't seem to have much trouble knowing what to believe. There will be the Official Faith, then the True Faith.

    The center of gravity of the truth will shift to the faithful, and away from the institution. Unlike the Reformers, however, the faithful want only to hold to the Faith as handed down. There could be worse outcomes. In the long term, the new Papal Church will become just another worldly organization sailing further and further away from the truth to an eventual union with all other religions, perhaps as first among equals.

    Welcome to the Remnant. If it comes down to choosing between the Truth and the Papacy, it will not be hard for the Bear. He doesn't really expect any of you humans to explain this, much less fix it. Now, all of you get up on your hind legs and bleat "We have no god but the Pope! Baaaa!"

    Forget artillery. Bear knows exactly what the future will be. It is a stationary target. Back when the Bear was harping about obscure books like Treason of the Clerks and Amused to Death and When Prophecy Fails, he was right all along. Either enjoy your cognitive dissonance or be willing to admit that Francis is wrong, wrong, wrong in the wrongest way he could be, and there is no way to explain him within the current theology of the papacy. We were wrong to tie so much of the Faith up in believing our own advertising. The fact is, the pope is not protected from IN FACT teaching error, and error by the salmon freighter load. If some procedural fig leaf gets you to the night, that's fine with the Bear. But the pope is either right or wrong on what he is REALLY, TRULY AND IN FACT teaching on adultery, as on being put into official practice even as you read this. Do you really imagine if anyone cares today if it bears the halal stamp of infallibility?

    Dubia. Switch the letters and it spells Dubai. And is just as relevant.

    1. I'd take up the challenge of explaining Pope Francis from within current theology of the Papacy. The problem is not the theology but rather false notions that Pope Francis is exploiting.

  12. I am afraid that the populist Church of Pope has a bigger microphone than Owl or even Bear. Along with everything else, we are in the Post Theology age. All that matters is making as many people happy as possible, except those, of course who hold to the Faith.

    The reason the Bear believes all of his dubious tactics are licit is because it is all a shouting match from here on. The Bear believes it is incoherent to show deference to someone who is not containing his authority within his office. He is a ridiculous figure precisely because he has traded the Papacy for the Cult of Jorge. Can "The Pope" step out of the protections of his office? Of course, unless an exception to free will is made for him. Can he decide to permanently operate outside those protections because he (as a human being with such-and-such experience and opinions) knows better? Sure. And that is what he has done. This is why he operates through the Peronist Big Microphone while assuring everyone he is "one of us." If he were not his own own Eva Peron, he would have to find her.

    1. Hey don't give the Argentinian Jesuit any ideas, he probably reads this blog. I agree 100% with what you're saying here, Bear. I listened to the Barnhardt podcast, and it was pretty good but I cringe when she calls PBXVI the worse pope ever. Sure, the old man made a huge blunder by abdicating, and he did have modernists tendencies at one time. But I think he saw the error of his ways, and was trying to rectify things by issuing Summoris Pontificum. Anyway, she makes an excellent point that the only way this situation can be rectified is either Jorge is declared a heretic, or that his election be declared invalid and he is an antipope. In a way, you could say we live in pretty interesting times. Frankly, I've just tuned the man out for the last couple of months and been happy about it. Yes, we should resist him at all costs bec. of the damage that's being done, been it's really in the Lord's hands at this point. Btw, nice reference to an EMP attack. But even that may not knock out the holy microphone.

    2. History has a bigger microphone. History is a giant mill that grinds everything to dust. A great man might be reduced to a book, a lesser to a footnote. In time, history will sweep us woodland creatures away.

      Pope Francis has a few sentences that will be about him, not much more. What we do is to turn that mill stone, to grind this epoch and ourselves away. Only if we diminish, can Christ increase. If we turn the stone on our own time, Pope Francis, who is of our own time, will also be ground away with us; he to his few sentences and us to our nothingness.

  13. The Bear has not finished overturning this rock. However, he maintains that history isn't what it used to be, and if anyone tries to make predictions on the basis of history he will be sorely misled.

    The second is that Francis is a tragic figure, but no less destructive for that. No doubt, we could hear salutary messages about mercy, and judgmentalism. However, Francis is not a teacher. He is a flim-flam man. Not only may he misinform us today, he may quench necessary messages in the future.

  14. I don't think there is any logical option besides sedevacantism. If we maintain Francis is Pope, the Papacy itself is rendered absurd. Sedevacantism leaves us with many questions and mystery, but it does not leave us with contradiction.


Moderation is On.

Featured Post

Judging Angels Chapter 1 Read by Author

Quick commercial for free, no-strings-attached gift of a professionally produced audio book of Judging Angels, Chapter 1: Last Things, read...