Wednesday, November 19, 2014

The Weirdest Post and Comments Ever

This is a good example of a dumb post that shouldn't have been written, but managed to generate some excellent comments, even though the Bear and his readers don't seem to agree on what they're arguing about. The Bear sincerely hopes everyone is able to get a chuckle out of things (as well as appreciate some good comments) without taking offense. We are blessed with some passionate woodland creatures who exhibit youthful high spirits! -- The Bear

But for the excellent, well-reasoned comments, the Bear would just yank the article below about "dead" Catholics.

It isn't that the Bear thinks he got it wrong, or that it was mean-spirited, or the Pope is suddenly off-limits. (Although he is, after all, the Pope.)

The problem with the article is that we could do a "Pope Says Weird Stuff" piece twice a week. It's what he does. Nobody knows why.

The particular article in question didn't really advance the science of Francisology. Sure, he may have been talking about traditionalists, but that's not clear. He may have been making a point by saying "married in the Church," but while we're sensitized to these issues after the synod, there's no way of knowing.

As for the rest, in the best light, it is a salutary lesson about living your faith more fervently, mixed with some typical Franciscan oddities. And that's the way it is, as Walter Cronkite used to say.

In a word, the Bear's article wasn't edifying.

This does not reflect on anybody else's comments. They didn't write the piece the Bear is talking about. Mine was not much more than a "yay, we gotcha again" piece. The Bear is not apologizing, and it remains to be seen if it is confession-worthy. (You won't know.) His piece was below even the relaxed standards of a blog written by a Bear.

From now on, the Bear will report on Pope Francis' weird stuff only if it is clear and significant.


  1. The internal discussion in my head on most days in print form.

    Minus bears.

    1. It begins without the Bears, like every circus performance.

  2. I think you're being a little hard on yourself. (See? Catholic Guilt!)

    Several times in my life I've encountered people who I just can't figure out. They're not necessarily interesting or remarkable people, but they just do things (or cause harm) in a way that is a Vexing. And coming away from dealing with them, I'm left wondering, Just what the heck is going on in their head? How do they see the world? Why do I feel like this person lives in a different universe from me? And I just keep going round and round in this fashion.

    Well, you know where I'm going with this. And since in this case its the pope, we have the added difficulty of other people frantically assuring us that everything's fine, nothing's wrong, great teacher, man of the Gospel, fine vestments on that emperor, eh?, problem's all with you. And for me, the distinctive "tells"of cognitive dissonance are like blood in the water to a shark: Now I have to know what's going on here. (I am aware, mind you, that this isn't necessarily a spiritually fruitful activity. Catholic Guilt again!)

  3. You are fine, Bear. The real problem, as I think others here and there have noted is that we have to interpret what we think the Holy Father means when he opens his mouth. We are at this point rather conditioned to think he's picking on traditionalists owing to his track record thus far.

    But, this homily could be speaking to any Catholic who thinks he is just fine going to mass on Sunday, putting their kids in Catholic school. Believe me, there are many a family at our parish school about whose depth of faith I wonder. I have relatives who had Catholic weddings, put children in Catholic schools, got their sacrament tickets punched, never darkening a church door but Christmas and Easter, if even then. He could be speaking of liturgical progressives who eschew traditional pieties think their time at the soup kitchen or helping women exercise their "right to choose" is fine. Their pieties ARE the guitar mass, soup kitchen and feminism.

    The Holy Father should have just asked what the Bee-Gees asked: "How deep is your love?"

  4. Oh for God's sake (literally!)

    squish squish squish....

    Wake up and grow a isn't really a matter of 'interpreting' the crap coming out of the b of r's mouth 90% of the time; they are blindingly self-evident. And the really vile actions (the synod and its direction was his baby...Kasper is his theologian...the year and a half of contradiction to the Deposit of Faith and Magisterial teachings) are likewise patently evident. To deny it, to wring one's hands in a misguided loyalty to a judas over Christ,or to go all squishy in not fighting against it will be mighty hard to justify at Judgment.

    Tell ya what, here's one of the latest...tie yourself up in knots trying to justify this....

    This is E.V.I.L. It is NOT Catholic. It is directly in opposition to Christ's teaching. He is leading souls to hell. Period.

    Call me a troll if you want, I don't give a rip. St. John the Baptist was called a lot worse by squishes, and I'm tired (mighty tired) of treading lightly, trying to be 'nice', while the only thing accomplished to that end is the selling-out and betrayal of Our Lord.

    For the love of Christ, stop second guessing legitimate reporting and criticism (much of which needs to be harsh in light of the grave offense and scandal given, and the souls lost FOREVER as a result), of the indefensible behavior of a modernist in (barely) papal attire.

  5. aaaaand how great is God's timing?!....

    ...left this site and went immediately to one of the few others I check every day, and this is the first thing I see. What a coincidence (if I believed in coincidences)....sorry, but he's dead-on, balls-accurate.


      Just for you.

    2. And I wear it as a badge of honor.

  6. I don't recall defending anything, but I think I was right on the mark that the homily seemed wrong, was wrong, and why.

    Badger, you are an appreciated contributor. But when I started this blog I never intended it to be an "righteously angry" blog or be dominated by the Argentine Bombshell. The real problem I had with the article was it was lazy and didn't move the needle. We know Francis says weird stuff. All the time. I have decided not to let his anger, or dementia, or Jesuitical plots dictate what I put in my blog.

    And if I have to call the Pope a "heretic" to please you, I can save you the time waiting around, because I am not going to, barring the apocalypse. I don't know whether he is or not, I don't think that's my call to make, and I think it makes our genuine grievances easy to write off as the work of the fringe. I think he is an awful pope. That datum is not going to dominate my life as a Catholic. We'll have a new one soon enough.

    1. Bear, I'm not waiting around for you to call him a heretic...he does a good enough job of identifying himself as such. I guess I'm just frustrated in a few respects; to see a REALLY good writer with a really attuned sensus Catholicus (as you are) so often bemoaning the fact that he wrote a really fine piece of truth that educates the ignorant, and gives fraternal solace of to those in great need of not feeling alone in this horror of this papacy, tends to tie me a bit in knots. You're a damn fine, intuitive synthesist, and your analytical pieces on the pope are works of educational merit, and touchstones of sanity (laced often with a biting, brilliant humor), when much of the rest of the world would have us think that orthodoxy is insane, cruel, and only for the gullible rubes.

      I know it much sucks right now, but seriously, the woods are on fire...remember?...and the fire is getting more infernal, not less. There is no bigger story today; no more pressing issue; nothing more important for the life of the Church, and the salvation of souls, than the fact that a pope is trying to form a one-world religion (did you read the post above?), change Church doctrine (and make NO mistake, that's what the Sin-nod was all about...the 'god' of "surprises" if!), have muslims onto Vatican ground praying for the overthrow of Christians and Christianity, and generally as a matter of course make a mockery of all things Traditionally Catholic. I'm sorry, but that needs to be pointed out OFTEN and without reservation or scruples, and very strongly, else they get-away with it. The light is a great disinfectant, and it wasn't shone on the dissenters who drove the change after VII...that's one of the biggest reasons we're in the current mess.

      Look, it's your blog, you can do what you want, but I come here because I often see flashes of great brilliance at a time when the encroaching darkness is suffocating. Worrying about making "our genuine grievances easy to write off as the work of the fringe" as a reason for not speaking the Truth that needs to be spoken, is (and this is as charitably as I can put it) weak.

      The "datum" of his Obama-esque ecclesial wreckovation should have some high level of place in the life of every Catholic right now, else he gets away with the unthinkable...we came out of the Synod on the right side by the barest skin of our teeth, and that by the grace of God. But His favor, and His grace is being withdrawn. Bergoglio and his henchman are a grave punishment, and by God if you want your children and grandchildren to have any sort of authentic Catholic teaching in a recognizable Catholic Church, quit wringing your hands when you write good (and necessary, however uncomfortable) pieces!

      You're a great be a great warrior. It's not the time for crumpets and scones over tea in the woodland; perhaps God will one day grant that again....but right now it's the time for spiritual arms to be taken up and wielded boldly and deftly for those given the 'talents'.

      Anyway, it's just MHO....take it or chuck will. Pax.

    2. ....aaaaaand once again my next click yields a pearl....

      It just hit me as stunningly relevant. I'm going to bed.

  7. Bear, it was an edifying post, and a peaceful defense of the value of the sacraments, and what I would call "clean living" which expresses love for others, both in and out of the family.

    The Pope seems to minimize how much work it is for families to be good to each other, first. Before the divorce/remarriage.

  8. Thank you for the kind comments. I seem to have given the impression that I thought I did something wrong. Not really. I think it was blogging on "easy mode," and at the end nobody knew anything they didn't know going in. I'm so sick of all of it. I want to go back to the woodland and tell campfire stories to the beloved woodland creatures. Well, sometimes, anyway. This is turning into a bigger deal than I intended. It is more about me feeling locked in or obligated to blathering on about somebody I don't find that interesting. Apparently some of my readers do. Maybe I should limit myself to the REAL newsworthy stories: POPE PREACHES SOUND CATHOLIC DOCTRINE! (If he ever did.)

    1. If beloved woodland creatures get to eat toasted marshmallows, I'm in.

  9. Those who are awake for the coming second visitation of Our Lord Jesus know why Francis says "weird stuff" - he is the False Prophet, the second beast in Revelation chapter 13. Everyone else who doesn't know is either a part of his cohort (modernists) or in some degree of slumber (Matthew 24:43, Luke 12:39). Just like the old Israel for the most part rejected the Messiah, the New Israel - Catholics - reject the second coming. And just as those of old Israel who accepted the Messiah were rejected and persecuted, so it is today for those few Catholics who are not letting their house get broken into.

    What will it take for you all to wake up? Will you even recognize the abomination of desolation - the invalidation of the Mass - when it happens as a whole (there are many invalid Masses already where modernists tread more openly)?

  10. Really great comments, and they make me think. Thank you all. I think where the only disagreement lies is that I don't know what I accomplish when I run breathlessly into the forest clearing saying, "The Pope is saying some really weird stuff" every day. We all know what we're dealing with here. The response, it seems to me, will eventually be "yawn, and so what else is new?" Or, at worst, it might discourage a reader or two.

    I am not swearing off writing about the Pope. So perhaps you'll be able to enjoy the on-target and acid musings of the Bear and can skip any subsequent fades. Strike and fade, that is the Bear's history.

    Writing a blog is hard. You want to please everybody, naturally, but the (speaking in relative terms) bigger you get, the more diverse an audience you are trying to please. In the end, I have to write what I want to write about (I'm not getting paid here) and hope that my interest is contagious.

    As for the Mass being invalid and Francis being the False Prophet of Revelation... not going to sign off on that. He seems more like a goofy standard issue Vatican2nista from a country nobody would ever have heard of except for a musical and that they got their butts kicked by the Brits when they unwisely annexed the Falklands. I certainly hope the False Prophet is more subtle and competent or I'll feel very cheated. What is the good of living through Revelation times if it's just a replay of Vatican 2. And need I remind everyone that WE WON in the Synod, and Francis' -- False Prophet or not -- prospects for next year are much weaker now that the whole rotten scheme has been exposed.

    1. Dear Bear,

      The Mass as a whole is not invalidated yet, only in certain modernist quarters. And to be clear, yes the Novus Ordo is perfectly valid when said properly, although certainly deficient catechectically to the Tridentine Mass (Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi). What I failed to communicate is will you notice in the future the invalid Mass?

      So be prepared to feel very cheated. You write with an error of judgment, meaning that you see things too well, that is through the eyes of a true faith, obviously well understood and lived as shown by your bloggery. Most of the world, and Catholics too, are in love with Francis. Why? He confirms the worldly and large apostate Catholic crowd in their sins, primarily by omissions and clever inference management.

      He could not be so successful until their was a great enough apostasy who will be fooled. But it certainly is unpopular to be viewed as "against the pope." Of course he isn't a pope but the final anti-pope of history. Recall what St. Paul says in the Bible, the man of sin (Antichrist) cannot come until the great apostasy. Haven't you noticed said apostasy?

    2. Your comments are very well written and to the point. There was one apostasy at the so-called Reformation. Vatican II was followed by, I would term it, a "soft apostasy" causing a fine network of fractures through the Church, but not the decisive kind of Lutherian apostasy. Take Vatican II -- a pastoral, not dogmatic council. I would be happy to agree to any propositions the Vatican II docs clearly teach. (Safe to say, because there aren't any.) And nonetheless, after this showboat council that failed to leave so much as a fingerprint on the deposit of faith, the Church went astray, primarily through changing the liturgy and architecture of the Church. It hit us where we live. Yet we still do our best.

      What I don't think people get is the demographic time bomb is going off right now. It comes from contraception, a rejection of Church teaching. So no priests, churches full of gray heads. No doubt times are bad.

      The Great Apostasy? I'll stay tuned, but I'm looking for something sharper.

    3. Dear Bear,

      I see the boil the frog slowly in the pot flies under your radar. Big changes quickly are too easy to notice. *Eventually* you will get Francis declaring various mortal sins as acceptable, and in fact eliminating all sin, with "dogmatic" pronouncements. But by then, will you be too far gone to notice? This blindness courtesy the coming global Mass changes - the abomination of desolation – which will invalidate the Eucharist.

      There are two slow boilings going on. At the macro level is the “spirit of Vatican II,” which was the trigger for this, but aided by the Church relaxing discipline too much as well (N.B. I am not a trad who rejects some or all of the real Vatican II). How much have you heard penance and confession preached over the last few decades? The second is Francis, who you observe says weird stuff. His utterings cannot be too far off or that would be too obvious. Pay attention to omissions, which are harder to spot, and notice the vagueries which are never corrected. How often does Francis preach confession or repentance? Instead we get accompaniment. Walk with the sinner but don't ask him to stop sinning or good heavens, actually convert to Catholicism for those of other faiths. However, his personally appointed cronies produced the infamous interim Synod document (have you read it?) which is the “saddest document” according to Cardinal Burke and a “neo-pagan ideology” according to Bishop Athanasius Schneider. BTW, Francis as Archbishop did give Holy Communion to adulterers, and fornicators and anyone else in the slums, so he has already proven his desire for such sacrilege. Look it up.

      What you call the soft apostasy after Vatican II is really the great apostasy as shown by real data. Look at vocations, down 60-70% since then, and that on top of a large increase in population, so the vocation count per Catholic is even worse. Look at Mass attendance, down to 12% (NY) and maybe 20% in some places in the US. Only about 5-8% in Europe, with Holland at 2%. Recall that apostasy is loss of faith, so what do those numbers say? Not only that, look at the quality of the catechesis of the average Catholic today. It's a sad joke. Many of the Church goers are dissenters and actually heretics, clergy included. St. John Paul II said it well – practical atheists. You are a rare bear who actually knows his faith.

      So please pray to the Holy Spirit for guidance and keep your eyes on what Rome says, since that will get weirder and weirder, and what happens to the Mass.

    4. MOST AWESOME dialogue going on here....educational in the extreme!

      And I'm on board with much of what you say RC, particularly in terms of this being most probably the time of the Great Apostasy, ushered in in increments so as to "lead astray, if possible, even the elect."

      Sadly, I think this is just the 'birth pangs''s gonna get a whooooole lot worse. And as to your point,
      "What you call the soft apostasy after Vatican II is really the great apostasy as shown by real data. Look at vocations, down 60-70% since then, and that on top of a large increase in population, so the vocation count per Catholic is even worse"
      ...I think it's even worse than you state when one considers the quality of most (though thanks be to God not all) the modern clergy. A reading of "Goodbye Good Men", "the Rite of Sodomy", and "The Faithful Departed" gives a very good understanding of the quality rejected and the vice sought out in the seminaries of the 60's-80's. We've seen some small improvements since then, but with this current cabal of apostates in the highest level of the Hierarchy appointing bishops and elector-cardinals, I think we're heading back into the heart of the pit, but in a way that wasn’t even imagined here-to-fore.

      At this point, only God can right the unspeakably egregious wrongs; it is truly beyond man's capability in scope and momentum. He may yet surprise us in that respect, but I think the 'smart money' is laid on this being the time of the Great Apostasy, which means we ain't seen nothin' yet. It is truly a time to be on watch (as RC says, and our Lord admonishes just before He enters into His Passion).

      And if this is indeed the case, it is a call to trumpeting the Truth with loud voices, exposing the lies from the rooftops, and witnessing to our own martyrdom (whether white or red) if necessary. Just look at the decimation of Church in the East and in Northern Africa...the demons have been unleashed, and they are literally tearing the hides off of the saints again, but in a seemingly much more brutal way and without even the glimmer of humanity apparent.

      I think your last paragraph was chilling RC and most prescient....the Mass and the Eucharist are (and always have been) the keys. Keep an eye out for the attempt to desecrate both; particularly with adulterous Holy Communion reception serving as the tip of the phalanx, and sodomitical couplings and 'gay marriage' as it's unholy heart....all in the bastardized name of mercy.

  11. I started out liking and defending Pope Francis. I am where I am, here, today, because, perhaps because I am a trial lawyer, I have to size people up and assess credibility. I'm pretty good at that, if I say so for myself.

    I can assure you that if Pope Francis imposes the duty upon me to assent to something I know is not true, then I will deal with that situation when it is put upon me. Right now -- and I say this with complete regard for the office of the Papacy -- we seem to have an ill-formed, well-meaning ass of a Vatican2nista for a Pope.

    God has permitted the Church to be decimated. I don't know why. Yet I see that, when it comes to actually changing doctrine, somehow the Holy Spirit always protects the heart of the Church. Perhaps the real story of they synod is that we have more and better bishops than we thought we did.

    There is a lot above my pay-grade. Calling out the Pope for heresy and declaring the Church apostate is more than prudence will allow as things are now. This is a different in degree, not kind, of what we have seen for fifty years now. I believe the Church "brand" still means something, and that the Pope, whatever his personal shortcomings may be, is a symbol of unity and the best way of knowing you're in the right camp. I don't expect everyone to agree with me on that.

    Bears watch. Bears wait. Bears are capable of doing what is necessary at the right time.

  12. "ill-informed"....absolutely. "well-meaning"? what evidence? In fact, I think the vast preponderance of evidence points in another direction. He had a decent PR machine to make him look like a jolly old favorite uncle, but I think even that's starting to crumble under his feet. I can't begin to tell you the number of times in my own little sphere of influence I've had to expound authentic Church teaching to a loved one, in direct opposition to what the pope has said, and what they quote to me. And it usually ends with them saying something along the lines of, "well he IS the pope, and I agree with the changes he's making". I could talk till I'm blue in the face, but it won't matter a whit with 99% of them. I have a dear friend who've I've been talking with for 4 years, and she's planning on entering the Church; we had lunch the other day and she was one of the few who is utterly appalled at what she sees and hears from this pope, questioning her decision to enter....I talked her down from the ledge, and she left buoyed in the understanding of the Church's indestructibility; but truth be told, I had to talk myself off the ledge after she left. This is "lio", and it is utterly demonic. I know you are terribly well-versed and well-read, but I would ask you to take a walk thru Pascendi again at some point this weekend....take a highlighter, and anytime you see anything that describes Bergoglio (his words, his actions, his MO), mark it. You'll be amazed at the color you see on the paper when you're done.

    A heretic is as a heretic does...I have neither the time nor constitution to again go thru the VAST list of flatly heretical statements, inferences, and actions that Bergoglio and his 'right-hands' have spewed over the many years that they've presided over wrack and ruin in their respective dioceses (let alone the past year and a half). You don't personally need to call them such, but their behavior has defined them. And I don't know that anyone has said the Church is apostate....if I gave that impression, mea culpa. The Church is the spotless Bride of Christ, but she is filled with (and headed by) apostates who are bloodying, beating, and raping her.

    And Bear, frankly, I think your optimism about the bishops is a little mis-placed. The fact that a majority voted IN FAVOR of the proposed errors sent shivers down my spine...they simply missed the 2/3 needed for procedure; and that by a very small margin. What do you think's gonna happen next year when the 'court is stacked', and the few who did speak out have been exiled, some in a trumped-up disgrace?

    Yes, the Holy Spirit will protect the Deposit of Faith, but how that will be done, and what will the end product look like... we don't know. An apostate pope can do (has already done) a lot of damage. I saw this the other day and thought he hit it square on; worth the read....

    Don't get me wrong...I'm still in the pew of my NO parish, but we are seeing and hearing 'marvels' unprecedented within the Church, with a most unholy fire set ablaze. And the arsonist appears to be wearing a cheap, see-through, white cassock.

    And I don't say all of this to argue with's not argument so much as venting. I think all of us with eyes opened to the horror are really all on the same page, at least within the same chapter.

  13. Ill-formed, not ill-INformed. Meaning, it doesn't seem like "is the Pope Catholic?" has quite the same right as it used to be. "Well-meaning," by his own lights, which is really darkness.

    Badger, do you understand the difference between what the Bear thinks and what he is willing to declare, especially when he has a lawyer's instincts of caution and thinking through every implication? Also, anything I write, especially of a polemical nature, is liable to be broadcast by Pewsitter to reach potentially dozens of people! (Speaking of which, I thought the one on Word on Fire's blog was Pewsitter bait, but, oh well...)

    There can be no doubt now that the Bear thinks Pope Francis is terrible, and for reasons we would both agree upon. I don't think he's misled by bad advisers, or misinterpreted by the media or any other excuse, unless he is suffering from a mental disease or defect. For whatever reason, we find ourselves with a bad pope. Bad, and confusing, and deceptive. He is constantly revealing an unhealthy inner landscape in his assumptions and gnomic utterances.

    What I am not prepared to do is go sedevacantist. Because that seems to be the rational conclusion from some of your comments. We're either stuck with a bad pope, or we don't have a pope. I don't see a third alternative. I don't like the former, but I don't see the latter at all. The synod was a big reveal. Not only to us. Those opposed to Francis and Kasper will be better prepared and enjoy more solidarity. IF Francis manages to turn things around in Turkish Seal Show Part II, then I will deal with that then. Courts have a wise policy of not deciding hypothetical questions.

    Once again, Pope Francis is not going to be the focus of this blog. There are other fine places to go for that. Even under a bad pope, we have to live our daily lives as Catholics. One thing the Bear has learned about the President: his own life doesn't really change much, no matter who is in power. The Bear's life has not changed since Francis became Pope, except he gets annoyed when he permits himself, and he has more to write about when he allows himself. I worry that there is something unhealthy about franciscophobia. And I've probably really over-explained myself by now.

    1. Dear Bear,

      No need for sedevacantism, which is wrong at this time. Look up the definition of anti-pope. You cannot have an anti-pope without a real pope - the real pope being Benedict XVI. Although there have been resignations, never for old age and NEVER in tradition is there such thing as a "Pope Emeritus". That novelty is truly a sign. Also, the purported resignation letter has an error in it (in Latin) which makes it invalid. Look it up. We have a real pope in chains - Benedict XVI.

      Francis is not a bad pope, but a bad anti-pope. The apparent pope is not Catholic in this case. BTW, you will also notice the officially announced joy by Freemasons upon Bergoglio's "election." That has never happened in history either.

    2. I completely agree with your assessment of the pope, Bear. I think Susan is right that you may agonize a little too much over your criticisms, but I understand why you don't want your blog to become another anti-Francis blog. The Great Catholic Blog Forest has plenty of those already.

      Speaking of those blogs, I read them for information, but rarely comment because I worry that too many commenters are allowing themselves to become quite unhinged about Pope Francis, to the point of name-calling and abusive language. I fully understand their distress, but I worry that they're putting themselves in grave spiritual danger by giving vent to their anger in such an uncontrolled fashion.

      Some time ago, I resolved to confine myself to analysis of the pope's words and actions alone, and to avoid public speculation about his inner disposition. That resolve has been slipping since the synod, but ultimately, the questions of heresy and legitimacy will forever remain beyond my pay grade.

      We are all allies here. This is a relatively peacable part of the forest--guarded as it is by a bear--and even those of us who occasionally like to venture out into the more savage regions like to know there is an oasis we can retreat to.

  14. " be broadcast by Pewsitter to reach potentially dozens of people! "
    ...funny! :)

    Bear, I don't know how many time now that I've said I don't need/expect you to say he's X,Y, or Z; his actions and words themselves reveal him to be X, Y, and Z. My main point in this tortured discourse (which has gone a bit far afield) is that when you do write a good piece exposing the truth that needs to be exposed as regards the BofR, don't wring your hands and second guess yourself. Other than that, write whatever you want to write about...Calgon bath-oil beads vs. Jergans bubble bath, or horse-meat vs. seal-meat...have a nut! (or a salmon as the case might be for a bear).

    And how on earth did you get the whole sedevacantist push out of what I wrote? He's the pope...he's a nightmare, but he's the pope. Until and unless some future pope or council states that he was invalid, He. Is. The. Pope. No argument on that from me or from the SSPX (who may, just may, be being used by God in some way that will form the whole tapestry when all is said and done).

    As I stated above, I'm really not trying to argue....I was more-than-anything venting some pretty substantial frustration over a situation (this current pope) that I quite frankly can't quite get myself to believe is really happening. Anyway, please don't be so defensive about my words...I see that they apparently ruffle your fur in a way I didn't/don't intend, and for that reason I'll lay low in the leaves on the periphery (maybe the pope will like me better then :))

    Anyway, God bless you...keep up the good fight, however you choose to do it. May peace be upon you and your family, and may the words and love of Christ be always in your heart.

    Pax et bonum...see you in the heavenly elysium.

    1. Okay. I'll never second guess myself again.

      That was easy.

      Leopard Seal vs. Polar Bear. Who wins? Leopard Seal. Horrible. I saw it on a TV show. But anyway, you're right. Never had seal meat. Well, that anyone knows. There was "Benny" that "ran away" from Pablo Fasques' circus. Nobody's the wiser, eh?

    2. I have not been ruffled by Badger. Goodness no! We all share the sacred bond of the woodland. "The just shall correct me in mercy, and shall reprove me." Psalm 140.

    3. Srsly. The woodland would not be the same without Badger. I apologize if I've come across as growly. That's not the way I felt. I feel that, oddly, we agree 99.9% and have managed to generate a tiff that is manufactured out of nothing. The confusion is my fault, because I should never have posted the "retraction." I don't need to say everything I think. That was simply an unnecessary post that caused senseless bickering.

      So, do Badgers like salmon? Berries? Fresh, warm, pies? (Don't ask.) Maybe even a bit of pony? I mean, should I just happen to see one die of natural causes between now and Sunday. (Fright is a natural cause, isn't it?)

    4. You are a very kind and good Bear. And I also am sorry if I caused you to get your grump on....that's kinda what badgers do (it's where we got our name :)) And on that thought, would you, in your kindness, say a quick prayer for Mr. isn't so easy for him you know :):):)

      And answering your question....pony! Definitely pony....and maybe a little rabbit....and a nice plump squirrel...and perhaps a chipmunk or four...and....foxes!....and.....
      ....well, that should make just about all the other woodland creatures a little uneasy, eh?

      And yes, fright is a perfectly natural cause of are 5 bullets to the least according to the Clinton administration....but hey, that's a whole 'nother post.

  15. Speaking of Mundabor, I thought this article of his was hilariously on point:

    Titius or Caius have been told by grandma that Catholicism is a monolith, a huge block of granite. Even when they lapsed, more or less openly, they still knew the monolith was there. Now Francis is declaring the monolith outmoded, and he offers excrements instead, saying that in the Age of Mercy the monolith is brown, and smells of sheep. Titius and Caius start browsing the Internet, and … there is it, the good old monolith! A huge block of granite, to which all the Traditionalist bloggers point and say: “look at it! An idiot is trying to scratch it with a fork! How do you think it is going to end?”

    Now that's a memorable image, and the perfect answer to all the normalists who fret and scold over the notion that criticism of the Holy Father well cause people to lose the Faith. Rather, it is they who put people in danger by encouraging people to take such an elevated and quasi-heroic view of the current occupant of the Petrine Office that they can't cope with a bad one.

  16. I think you're on point, Murray. The thought is not original to me, and I would give credit if I could recall where I read it, but due to the never-ending media circus, both official and otherwise, we are getting a skewed view of the Pope's importance, or at least influence. If he robs anyone, it will be those that have little or nothing to begin with. We who have the true faith are strengthened and united.

    As far as I'm concerned he can stand naked in St. Peter's Square and proclaim himself to be an Arian. That in itself does no lasting damage to the Church or my faith. Like the hymn says, "Time, like an ever flowing river, bears all it sons away," thus solving our problem for us without anyone working themselves into a lather. Actuarially, perhaps him before me, but in any case, the Franciscan Detour will be brief. I'll do my part to amuse, educate and oppose without going horse-crazy about it. (That's an old Bear expression.)

  17. This morning, at The Catholic Thing: Wanted: A More Reserved Papal Style

    Imagine (if you still can) a papacy that is not all noise and clamor and confusion and opinionating; imagine a pope who performs his public duties with quiet reverence and without drawing attention to himself, and whose main communication with the world is through official teaching documents. Bliss!

    1. That goes without saying. If Justice Scalia constantly discussed legal controversies, people could lose the distinction between his private opinions and his decisions, which actually mean something. And if ever there were an example of "familiarity breeds contempt," this is it. We're dealing not just with a Pope but a celebrity who lends his glitter to questionable causes. As the Bear wrote awhile back, ah for a popely pope.


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...