and fantasies about the Third Secret.
I came across the following comment while reading a post at Catholic Herald.co.uk by Mary O'Reagan: If our Catholic blogosphere is going to survive then our bloggers have to become more Catholic. A reader asks, why not blog about this?
Windswept House - Fr. Malachi Martin"Suddenly it became unarguable that now during this papacy (of JPII), the Roman Catholic Church carried a permanent presence of clerics who worshipped Satan and liked it; of bishops and priests who sodomized boys and each other; of nuns who performed the “Black Rites” of Wicca, and who lived in lesbian relationships . . . every day, including Sundays and Holy Days, acts of heresy and blasphemy and outrage and indifference were committed and permitted at holy Altars by men who had been called to be priests. Sacrilegious actions and rites were not only performed on Christ’s Altars, but had the connivance or at least the tacit permission of certain Cardinals, archbishops, and bishops. . . In total number they were a minority—anything from one to ten percent of Church personnel. But of that minority, many occupied astoundingly high positions or rank.... The facts that brought the Pope to a new level of suffering were mainly two: The systematic organizational links—the network, in other words that had been established between certain clerical homosexual groups and Satanist covens. And the inordinate power and influence of that network." (pp. 492-3)
I've not read Malachi Martin's faction, but apparently most Catholics online have. Especially those who think the Third Secret of Fatima has not been fully revealed, and Benedict XVI was forced to abdicate.
This explains so much.
Say no more poodle...
Another incredulous and muddied outrageous story! Wow! Keep them coming, Terry as today is a slow day. ^^
ReplyDeleteLove the picture of Cardinal Bertone too...it speaks volumes! Maybe he's the one peddling all the lies...O-o
I think the Third Secret is about the loss of Faith in the Church. It doesn't surprise me that people who laugh it off are also those who claim everything's cool despite the mounds of evidence to the contrary. Those who laugh now will mourn, I believe.
ReplyDeleteThe loss of faith in the Church is evident everyone one goes. Both the right and left are a mixed bag and the few who are on solid ground are few...period.
DeleteThose who judge will be judged. Those who presume to know what others think or believe are in the dark.
My prayers are for all who try to grow in the faith and who hope to remain at the foot of the Cross until the last day.
"Those who presume to know what others think or believe are in the dark."
DeleteIs that a judgment?
"Both the right and left are a mixed bag and the few who are on solid ground are few...period."
DeleteHow about this? A judgment? Sounds definitive and conclusive.
Hmm,no wonder its lonely by you..if you try to pick a fight with Yaya who has only talked about doctrinal Catholic teaching but has done so with love and compassion and honesty about her own human failings, you would fight with anyone! What she said in her post was nothing that we have not heard from our Catholic teaching for years, and nothing that is offensive.
Delete"Those who laugh now will mourn, I believe." Sounds like you are awaiting that day with morbid excitement.
Mack, forgive me if I'm mistaken, but are you not someone who dissents from Church teaching on the evil of homosexual acts?
DeleteYou are not mistaken. And????What has that got to do with what I posted? Yaya doesn't. And you seemingly delight in the projected future suffering of others. We are all fallen. Some of us are honest about it.
DeleteThen you are in grave danger. The message of Fatima is really a particular articulation of the Gospel: repent. Stop sinning. If one is separated from the Church, and persists in that error, Hell awaits. That is doctrinal Catholic teaching. I don't delight in that any more than I delight in the Truth. Those who mock the Truth now or put themselves above the Church will be lost, and it won't be funny or "OK" then.
DeleteBeyond that, there are several things wrong with your comments here, which I'll address simply because I'm weary of how this blog has become a cesspool of petty banality and grandstanding by the cultist followers.
Yaya implicitly accused me of "judging", without distinction, and so I pointed out the fact that that action itself appears to be a judgment. You then launch an ad hominem attack, claiming that I picked a fight. Truth is so disregarded today that even basic logical integrity is railroaded by constant irrelevant distractions, such as invoking whatever approach Yaya takes on this blog (as if I had ever made any reference to that).
No, in fact, you are now, by your own definition, "picking a fight" with me.
It is disingenuous at best to tout "our Catholic teaching" while also dissenting from it. It is scandalous to go about as a "Catholic" while in open defiance of what a Catholic must believe. So if you wish to talk about being "honest," examine yourself.
Finally, the suggestion that an acknowledgement of our being fallen precludes any right to defend Church teaching without reservation and/or to allow some license to paper over the Truth is a deadly trap. To be compassionate is not to condone error or sin, explicitly or implicitly, no matter how many friends it costs one or how many popes or bishops or lay bloggers suggest or act as such.
to somehow imply that we are all fallen means that those who do not dissent
Ah...I think I know who you are now! Its been a while.
DeleteLonely, or whatever your going by these days..I bet your a real blast at parties!
"A cesspool." And yet you keep coming back to feed.
DeleteI do enjoy your comments though. :)
I try not to focus on popularity as if being a "blast' in life is somehow important. Your disregard for what is true in the apparent interest of popularity or 'fun' is alarming to me. I fear for your soul.
DeleteSt. Thomas teaches that an affect of lust is the dulling of reason, and when reason is damaged, we are prone to error, to be moved by false teachings, and so to be separated from Christ and His Mystical Body.
"Lonely," I don't think you ever had to deal with the scourge of being "popular." You do sound like one of the nuns I had in school. Sr. Theresa is that you..no...even nuns can't live that long.
DeleteHowever, what you do have in common with my beloved Sisters was a complete lack of humor...which I somehow find humorous, so I agree with Terry I enjoy your comments also. Except don't be starting anything with Yaya.
Thank you for the blessing.
DeleteAs far as I can tell, the cesspool consists of old queens, ex-cons and current or former trad matrons. Oh, and LarryD.
DeleteWho'd you call "old"???
DeleteScott - wait...what?
DeleteI'm sorry Larry. I apologize for Scott.
DeleteI've been over there commenting today. At least I know I'm crazy - I feel sorry for the others :)
ReplyDeleteHaha - me too!
Delete"Windswept House"? Is that anything like "Wuthering Heights"?
ReplyDeleteI wrote an Amazon review on "Windswept House" back in 2000.
ReplyDelete"I have to say that I found "Windswept House" to be an exciting novel of suspense that attempts to understand the battle between the Church and Evil. I really enjoyed reading it. Having said that, let me say that I have real problems with the book. It is libelous and slanderous. While pedophilia is a grotesque problem within the church, Martin goes too far by suggesting that the late Cardinal Bernadin was the head of a satanic, pedophiliac ring. It was clear to me that Martin based his creepy cardinal of "Century City" on Bernadin. I later read an interview with him where he said that this was indeed the case. This is not only a lack of Christian charity but is pure, sinful slander. What possible good can Martin's book do on balance when he engages in this sort of character defamation? Read Michael O'Brien's "Plague Journal" to see a true Christian response to Evil. As a suspense novel, I'd give "Windswept House" 5 stars; as a Christian novel, I give it one."
Well, the Vox populi hasn't agreed with me over the years -- only a third of the people thought my review was helpful. But if anything, I would be more harsh in my criticism of it today. I do not recommend this book even as a thriller. Try the hilarious "Mandelbaum Gate" by Muriel Spark or the "Unbroken Heart" by Robert Speaight or "A Postcard from the Volcano" by Lucy Beckett for good Catholic novels.
I gave Malachi Martin the benefit of the doubt despite credible evidence of serial infidelity until I heard his 1991 talk to Human Life International https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmGDlU0dQEA
ReplyDeleteHe begins the talk by saying that women should have 98% of the input when it comes to discussion about marriage, divorce, contraception and abortion. I instantly knew he was the fraud and serial liar that many claimed (even though he was laicized and lived with a woman he claimed that he celebrated mass in the old rite ever day). An old trad would never say that, but an Irish playboy who pandered to women his whole life would say that. I speak harshly because he has probably led more people into Sede-vacantism than any one else. It is appalling to see the number of hits his talks have gotten on Youtube.
Some sede-vacantists are simple gentle souls who can't stomach the scandals in the Church. I've done 40 Days for Life with two different sede-vacantists, and they were naive souls who had profound conversions and were living as Christ Crucified. One took care of an abandoned young man who was confined to a wheelchair due to a rare muscle disorder. He couldn't talk, he had the mind of a six year old, the disorder would make his muscles flex for hours on end--including his penis--but he was a joy to be around. The current intellectual leaders of sede-vacantism (Drs. Kelly Bowring, Gerry Matatics, Fr. Cekada--not to mention the less savory characters) will have to answer for the little ones they've led astray. Lord have mercy.
Malachi Martin and his landlady share a grave plot. It is rather strange.
DeleteI'd like to see Ron Howard do the film. I loved Angels and Demons.
ReplyDeleteI do hate to sound like these creepy conspiracy people but the third "secret," was always kind of a let down. It was like this BIG thing when we were kids...there is a third secret and of course, we knew it was the end of the world (cool) of the dead rising from their graves and feasting on the living( cool) or we were all going to be stuck in Catholic Grade School for eternity (not so cool) but then it was....just kind of a let down.
ReplyDeleteHowever, its also my understanding that Catholics are not required to believe in Fatima or any of the apparations and their messages, correct?
Correct, it's not mandatory to believe it.
DeleteYou are correct, MM. I was surprised by that too when a priest friend told me. I love our Lady of Fatima and Our Lady of Guadalupe...in fact, all of the approved apparitions the Church has seen to approve. They help me along the royal road as I do stumble and fall often but the gentle hand of Mary is always there and St. Joseph's too! <3
ReplyDeleteAnd MM...thanks for the atta'boy! But we all know, we can agree to disagree! I would rather watch anime or wash dishes than squabble online...not worth my time. Smoochies though! <3
Wash dishes??? You must REALLY hate to argue online!
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteDoes anyone remember when King Louis XVI did not obey the call to consecrate France to the Sacred Heart? It seems we've been through this before.
ReplyDeleteYou were the only one of us around at that time! Just kidding..
DeleteBut there were many, many reasons for the French Revolution, and the French Catholic Church had more then a little hand in that. I know its taken as fact from some Traddies that the revolution was caused by the philosophes, they actually appreciated religion and faith in keeping social order. The close ties the Church had to the royal family was a huge problem as was the fact that the Church owned about 10 percent I think of the property and while exempt from taxes was able to collect tithe from one tenth of agriculture...all of those things worked against the Church, just like the royal family when people were starving. Other little things like the Church not allowing any other religious practice (Jewish and Protestants were denied full membership or citizenship in the state) some women being sent to covents against their will (most likely not as many as reported but still ) and of course as Mercier said....the Church was ...‘full of priests and tonsured clerics who serve neither the church nor the state’ and who were occupied with nothing but ‘useless and trifling’ matters"...a problem that continues today but is at least kept mostly at the Vatican where at that time their particular world was rife with them.
Now perhaps if they consecrated as requested the royalty, the aristocracy, the elite etc would have their eyes opened to the seeds they planted, and maybe the Revolution would have followed the same path of ours instead of becoming a blood bath and destroying rich and poor, the mob may not do the things that mobs tend to do (see Ferguson..we still havent learned) But the Church had a hand in its own destruction at that time (as it did in England, etc.) Notice I seperate the Church from the Faith...the Faith goes on despite the humans in charge of the administration of the Church.
Sorry the French Revolution is endlessly interesting and full of twists and turns (and blood and gore) that are not as coming book simple as some people would like to portray it.
Not to mention that up until the Revolution, large parts of the French Church seemed to treat the Council of Trent as toilet paper.
Delete