Adventures in Popesplaining

I guess it was only a matter of time.  As I’ve said on more than one occasion, I’m not into Catholic-bashing and I’m not about to start here.  However, that doesn’t mean I can’t take the Pope to task.  Or the Jesuits, liberals, and their institutions.  I can and I will.

I wonder what he’s thinking right about now.

You know what I’m talking about:  Pope Francis finally gave his blessing to homosexual unions.  Or more accurately, the blessing of such unions should two people of the same sex just happen to show up before a priest.  It’s not marriage mind you, nor is it to be confused with marriage but if they both show up in tuxedos, there’s a photographer there, perhaps some flowers and a reception afterwards, well, that’s just a coincidence.

Anyways, don’t pay any attention to all those pesky details.  It’s not a blessing of the union, it’s just a blessing of the persons within that union.  There.  Is that as clear as mud?

Now, I could go on and on about what the Pope just did.  Let’s just say at this point that he engaged in what Taylor Marshall calls “weaponized ambiguity.”  It’s what the Jesuits have been doing for generations now.  And let’s not forget that Francis is the first Jesuit to be elected Pope.  As for those apologists (I’m looking at you Michael Lofton) who still believe in the “indefectibility” of the Papacy, I’ll keep on listening to you keep on popesplaining things until the cows come home.  I need the yuks.   

I realize we’re Orthodox.  However, here’s the thing:  there’s an old saying about America, “when we catch a cold, the rest of the world gets pneumonia.”  You could say the same thing about Rome in comparison to the other Christian confessions.  

In other words, we’re not necessarily out of the woods ourselves.  Perhaps I should be more specific:  there are certain eparchies within the Ecumenical Patriarchate which are not immune from this Jesuitical nonsense.  You know which ones I’m talking about. 

I could go on and on; we could let this thing play itself out (and it will, one way or the other).  The repercussions will be “interesting” to say the least.  As for those of us who are Orthodox, we need to be aware of these repercussions and be on guard that this virus doesn’t replicate itself in our Churches.  


  1. Second paragraph, hilarious!!
    Thanks for squeezing a laugh into this pathetic situation

  2. MomofToddler says

    This is very sad. I am in a Roman Catholic Homeschool Co-op right now. I know there is a variety of beliefs among Roman Catholics, but many of the women I have had a chance to get to know, are faithful, pious, kind and are becoming friends, but some do seem to think salvation comes from being in communion with the Pope and legalistically fulfilling requirements, such as “Holy Days of Obligation” which we call Feast Days. Some believe if they separate from the Pope, even if he is doing great evil, they are in danger of hell. As my Godmother mentioned to me, St. Gabriel Fool for Christ is a good Saint for us to look to now as he was excommunicated for 5 years for not tearing down an Orthodox chapel at the request of his Patriarch during communism. May St. Gabriel intercede for all these Catholics that need to follow the Holy Spirit in these difficult times and flee to the True Church.

    • Mom, I too feel great sadness for my Catholic friends. Having said that, this is what happens when one bishop is made supreme over the entire Church. I suppose a possible silver lining is that this will shake up the rest of Orthodoxy as to the machinations of Bartholomew.

  3. “Weaponized Ambiguity” – The Jesuit Vice…?

  4. Anyways, don’t pay any attention to all those pesky details. It’s not a blessing of the union, it’s just a blessing of the persons within that union. There. Is that as clear as mud?

    “weaponized ambiguity.”

    Roman Catholicism has perfected the art of weaponized ambiguity and sophistry. I’ve seen in the twittersphere where others have made the corrleation between “blessing” same sex unions and the use of female altar servers, Eucharistic ministers, etc., which were allowed “for special occasions” but are now almost totally ubiquitous with Roman Catholicism.

    This is 100% what is going to happen within Roman Catholicism with these same sex “blessings.” How could it not? You give an inch and a mile is taken. What is suppose to be a “for special occasions” only, is getting ready to become commonplace. All under the guise of fake mercy. This doesn’t help people in these situations, it emboldens them in THAT situation, and indeed in their eyes legitimizes it.

    Taylor Marshall, Michael Lofton, and the rest of that lot would rather go down with the Roman ship than dare admit defeat and convert to Orthodoxy.

    I wonder what he’s thinking right about now.

    “Why couldn’t you have waited till 2026 after our false union”
    ~ Patriarch Bartholomew, probably

    As for us in the Orthodox Church, I think we’re getting ready to see a big influx of Roman Catholics into the Church. There’s been a steady flow the last couple of years, now I expect it to become a river. But, sadly I’m sure many RC’s will go to irreligion, SSPX, sede. Sometimes the mental grasp of “Rome” is too strong.

    All of what is going on in Rome quite clearly points to Orthodoxy being the Truth and Rome being the deviation.

    Bartholomew is still very much welcome to go to Rome, but, it will be Bartholomew alone, and maybe some of his sycophants. The Church of Greece is currently battling gay marriage in Greece and the rest of the Churches seem wholly unwilling to go to Rome, even before this.

    Pascha 2025 is still well over a year away and given how things are going it’s extremely hard to see anyone following Bart to Rome.

    As for GOARCH, I dare (maybe hope is too strong of a word?) that Elpi allows for gay blessings in his Metropolis. Why? Because that will be an extraordinarily clear demarcation line for American Orthodoxy and for a clear line in the sand to be drawn between him/GOA and the other Orthodox jurisdictions.

    Interesting times in which we live.

    • Antiochene Son says

      “Why couldn’t you have waited till 2026 after our false union”
      ~ Patriarch Bartholomew, probably

      From all accounts it seems like Francis may not be long for this world and he’s accelerating everything. I’m not sure what a new pope before 2025 would mean for a false union, if it makes it more likely or less.

  5. Does anyone commenting here actually live in Greece? I do. I live on the island of Tinos, a holy island for Greek Orthodox, but one that has a sizeable Catholic population. A lot of Greeks on Tinos and in Athens, where I spend a lot of time, with friends and work acquaintances, believe that gay “marriage” should be legalized in Greece. I’m not talking about devout Orthodox but your average man on the street – the plumber, the electrician, the restaurant owner, the cab driver, the architect, the lawyer – all the people who got baptized and married in the Orthodox church and who, from time to time, go to church on Sundays and have their children baptized. Prime minister Mitsotakis, a “conservative “, kisses up to the EU so he wants to legalize gay unions. He knows there will be no political fallout. The Left are all in with this plan. Who is opposing this? The priests in the Greek Orthodox Church and a few devout Orthodox.

    I am Roman Catholic and I am a sedevacantist. I see too much self-congratulation among the Orthodox. They’re coming for you. Do you have a plan for when they do come for you? Elpi is only the beginning. What will your priests and bishops do? Will they really resist? What does it mean to resist? Are you so sure your bishops will have more spine than your average Catholic bishop? Especially in Greece where many of the laity already subscribe to the philosophy of the modern world.

    • The Greek Church is but one of 14 autocephalous Churches and 5 ancient patriarchates. We’re talking 5% to 10% (I’m guessing) are Greek. It’s also important to note that the Greeks are decidedly different than the rest of the Church. They’re as cultural as they are Orthodox. They’ll admit it. It’s not a criticism. It’s an observation.

      Where you spend your time will not give you insight into the Church unless you’re in it. It would not surprise me to learn the Catholics spend as much time out of church as the Greeks.

      A sedevacantist is one who doesn’t like the fact that they have a crazy pope and think it’s the pope that is the problem. They think if they had the “right” pope, everything would be different. In reality, the problem has nothing to do with Francis (the wrong pope) and everything to do with a faulty premise. A human being, even a great one, cannot be the vicar of Christ. No one is going to “come for us” because we are free from the expectation that anyone has that kind of power. By way of example, the Greeks have been “coming for Russia, for decades. 75-90% of the Church have pretty much divorced (ignore) them at this point.

      The premise of the Orthodox Church is not to give authority to a person. Some we like. Some we don’t. But at no point do we worry that the Church won’t stand because the wrong person is in the wrong role. This is not a core belief of ours. The Orthodox Church can just move around it.

      It’s is the RC who created a different version of the Church in 1054 which included a pope who was to be “Christ on earth with authority over everything and everyone.” That was the RC’s first mistake. From that mistake came others, like the filioque, dispensations, purgatory, and now Synods of Synodality, etc. And it is in this specific way (inventiveness), the RC is vulnerable in ways we’re not.

      Rather than accept this reality, you feel it makes more sense to wag your finger at a blog. Orthodoxy, as understood by Greek cab drivers, plumbers and electricians probably doesn’t qualify you as an expert in the Orthodox Church. Just saying.

      What you’re seeing is the opposite of self-congratulation. None of us have anything to do with the fact that our Church stands, and will continue to stand, in spite of the people in it. Our Church isn’t based on what people do or don’t do. We have no head other than Christ and His teachings. He’s our sole authority.

      When we have a question or a problem, that’s where we look.

      No matter how much you believe otherwise, a human being is fallible. Magical thinking doesn’t change that. There was but ONE infallible person who walked this earth and He was fully God. – Not a proxy.

      Christ, as head of the Church, can’t be hijacked by a sinister group of mobsters as Francis was. If we see a patriarch (our highest bishop), do something stupid, we tell him. If he continues being stupid (thinking of Bartholomew), we solicit the help of our bishops. If we get their help, it’s a victory. If they ignore us, THE CHURCH STILL STANDS.

      It’s true that those of us who are Orthodox practice it imperfectly and to varying degrees. However, I’m sure there are just as many Catholics who only go to Church for baptisms, weddings, funerals, Christmas and Pascha.

      If pointing out the obvious is “self-congratulation,” then you misunderstand the term.

      • I have two quibble about your statement, “The Greek Church is but one of 14 autocephalous Churches and 5 ancient patriarchates. We’re talking 5% to 10% (I’m guessing) are Greek. ” These comments do not address the substance of your main point.

        The 14 autocephalous Churches include the 5 ancient patriarchates, so the total is 14 (or 15 if you count the Monastery of St Katherine on Sinai.

        And as to how many of the Orthodox Churches are “Greek” depends on what you mean by “Greek”. The Churches of Constantinople, Greece, and Cyprus are Greek. So that’s 3 out of 14, or about 20%. However, if you include the Patriarchates of Jerusalem and Alexandria, which have a majority of ethnic Greek hierarchs, albeit a largely non-Greek laity and lower clerty, then there are 5 out of 14, or close to 33%.

        In terms of population, of course, the numbers or percentages are quite different.

        • I appreciate you clearing that up and I should be given extra credit for leaving all that out. 😉

          • Err… I think you will find that Rome
            adopted the filioque before 1054.

          • I should clarify what I wrote: I meant that my comment does not address the main substance of what you wrote. It’s just a footnote, you might say.

            • And it’s a GREAT one. I thought of putting it all down and then I realized someone who has only talked to a handful of people about the Church may not understand anything I’d be saying. On paper, it looks pretty convoluted. – I would love for these people to find the Church one day and I don’t want to scare them off.

              What was new to me is Mt. Saint Catherine’s Monastery. Is it part of the Greek Church or the Ecumenical Patriarchate?

              • From:


                ‘ … The Holy Monastery of Sinai along with all of the South Sinai area which is connected with the Archdiocese of Sinai, Pharan, and Raitho, in its operation is regulated by the holy canons of the Ecumenical Councils and spiritually it ranks among the complex of Orthodox Churches. According to various decisions taken in different occasions by the local synods and the Orthodox Patriarchs with regard to the Holy Monastery of the God-trodden Mount Sinai, it is characterized by the unique privilege in Orthodox Christianity of being governed administratively by its abbot who is the same person as the Archbishop of Sinai and of being “unsubdued, immune, untrampled by anyone, and totally free from all and everyone. Furthermore, it is Autocephalous,” as it is not subject to any Patriarch or Synod. His Eminence the Archbishop of Sinai enjoys a broader spiritual relationship with the Patriarch of Jerusalem as it is by the latter that the former is consecrated, and whenever the archbishop celebrates within his episcopal jurisdiction he commemorates the name of the Patriarch of Jerusalem. The general operation of the Sinaitic brotherhood is regulated by “The Basic Canons,” and it is democratically governed by its Abbot and Archbishop of Sinai, Pharan, and Raitho, the Holy Council of the Fathers, as well as by the assembly of the entire brotherhood which is convened from time to time. … “

        • Whiskey Six says

          You left out the Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch. That’s it’s real name.

          • True, but technically they’re one of the 5 ancient patriarchates and they’re not the Greek one.

        • Looks like Antioch has set them straight. Has Bartholomew weighed in on the matter?

          • Has Bartholomew weighed in on the matter?

            As far as I know he has not, nor do I expect him to. This is putting him between a rock and a hard place. Why?

            1) The Church of Greece & Athos have already spoken out regarding the pushing of same sex marriage/adoption by Mitsotakis (remember there are many conservatives in New Democracy who are opposed). If he doesn’t side with Athos and the Church of Greece in their fight against this, that will not go unnoticed.

            2) Now that Rome has signaled it is blessing same sex couples (and don’t fool yourself that it is anything but that), Bartholomew needs to be seen as “hip with the times” if he is still planning on uniting with Rome. Which means he can’t speak out. (*I have yet to see what the Eastern Catholics say about this, but that would be interesting*).

            As I mentioned to Foni (Φωνή) below, you cannot serve two masters, and who knows how many Bartholomew is serving. He has lost credibility with the wider Orthodox world concerning Ukraine, this will only further and hasten his demise.

            • Oh, yes. I meant to write about tonight, but I didn’t. I will tomorrow with pictures! (Unless they’ve taken them all down.)

      • Michael Bauman says

        A Blessed celebration of the Incarnation of the Lord our God!

        What keeps the Orthodox Church from going down the road of modernity? Repentance. The recognition by each person, including Bishops that we are sinners in the hands of a merciful and loving Incarnate Savior, Jesus Christ. My own inclination to embrace any of the false beliefs and practices of modernity from pornography to the various political ideologies from authoritarianism to libertarianism to political violence can only be overcome if I repent daily at least.

        The Jesus Prayer: “Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God: have mercy on me, a sinner”

        It is the foundation of all Orthodox piety and strength. If I do not repent, then no matter what theology I say I hold to, then all the triumphalism in my heart means not a whit.

        This is the day the Lord has made, let us rejoice and be glad in it for He is with us.

        Forgive me, a sinner

    • The Orthodox Church is the original Church, headed by Jesus Christ Himself. Some might fall into novel ideas like this but the Church as a whole will never be allowed by God to fall. Come back to the original Church of the Bible.

  6. Φωνή βοώντος εν τη ερήμω says

    Unfortunately that’s what happens when you are a schismatic and a heretic like the Pope is… And by the way the Pope and his Church is NOT Catholic… it’s not even Roman. Everyone has a right to leave the Church like the Pope has or like Elpidoforos is aspiring to do… Those that don’t respect the Holy Scriptures, the Holy Tradition and the Holy Canons are welcome to leave and form their own Church… They won’t be able to keep usurping the name of the ONE, HOLY, APOSTOLIC and CATHOLIC Church for long… Legally they are exposed. I don’t care about the Pope because the Vatican has left the ONE, HOLY, APOSTOLIC and CATHOLIC Church for some 1000 years now… but I care about those that are usurping the name of our Church and violate its Holy Tradition and Holy Canons… Maybe that’s why Elpidoforos wants the Greek language to vanish so as for noone to be able to hold him accountable on his canonical trasngressions. But his comeupance will come in due time…

  7. My father was one to call a spade a spade Sometimes he called it a f…ing shovel. The apple didn’t fall too far from the tree in my case. This declaration of permission for Catholic priests to bless homosexual partnerships is an utter abomination that flies on the face of the doctrine of our and their 2000 year Tradition, the key element of which is the Holy Scriptures. Francis knows that this new policy is meant to legitimize an interpersonal relationship that is what the Catechism of the Catholic Church itself terms “intrinsically disordered. “ How dare he override that code written under the direction of the great John Paul II?! Apparently Francis is of the opinion that he himself is Tradition, as Pope Paul VI declared himself to be when he rode roughshod over the Church. Francis is an apostate, judging from the Roman Church’s own rules. He is leading his worldwide flock down the broad road to perdition. Anathema!

  8. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it’s a duck. If Father down at the local parish blesses a gay couple, he extends the approbation of the Church to the gay couple. This isn’t rocket science. The pope’s equivocating sophistry is hardly persuasive that he is not legitimizing homosexual couplings. He has just turned 87. If he lives long enough he will make gay marriage official. That’s where this is going.

  9. Not sure why we care about papal wackiness – it’s not like this is surprising or anything….

    For a long time now it’s been as clear as day that serious Orthodox Christianity is being maintained by the Russian Orthodox Church and any who are in communion with her…. that includes American Orthodox Christians of any jurisdiction who see the Orthodox Christianity as expressed in the Russian Orthodox Church as their faith also.

    The Latin Pope, possibly Patriarch Bartholomew, the C’ple/GOA “stallion” bishops…. well, they’re outside of that window it seems, pretty much of their own choosing. We each get to choose who we make our lunch with… and we each gotta live with the implications of that.

    I grew up in an area of PA with a good number of Irish and Italian Catholics – many of whom also espoused that false belief that “salvation is only under Rome.” Thankfully, few Roman Catholics believe that anymore, though the indoctrination seems like it is hard to shake. And it’s doubly weird since the Roman Catholic Church doesn’t even teach anymore that salvation is only under Rome. Old habits die hard.

    But as for “Popesplaining,” why bother? Just become Orthodox Christian in the OCA or in ROCOR or the Antiochians or in the American Serbs or some GOA parish that’s not nuts, and you’ll probably be in a good place. We each need to stay in a good, safe vessel to weather the cultural storm that’s engulfing the West. It ain’t pretty.

    • George, I told you not to print this story without the rest of it! 🙂

      We’ll finish the whys and what fors tomorrow.

      • “George, I told you not to…”

        One word from you…
        and he does what he likes…” 🙂

        • George is an ordinary man,
          Who desires nothing more
          Than just an ordinary chance to live exactly as he likes
          And do precisely what he wants

          An average man is he, with no eccentric whim
          Who likes to live his life, free of strife
          Doing whatever he thinks is best, for him
          Just an ordinary man.

          — But let a woman in your life

          And your serenity is through
          She’ll redecorate your home, from the cellar to the dome
          Then go on to the enthralling fun of overhauling you

          … Let a woman in your life
          And you’re up against a wall
          Make a plan and you will find
          She has something else in mind
          And so rather than do either
          You do something else that neither likes at all

          … You want to talk of Keats or Milton
          She only wants to talk of love
          You go to see a play or ballet
          And spend it searching for her glove

          … Let a woman in your life
          And you invite eternal strife
          Let them buy their wedding bands
          For those anxious little hands

          … He’d be equally as willing for a dentist to be drilling
          Than to ever let a woman in his life

          … He’s a very gentle man
          Even tempered and good natured
          Whom you never hear complain
          Who has the milk of human kindness
          By the quart in every vein
          A patient man is he, down to his fingertips
          The sort who never could, never would
          Let an insulting remark escape his lips
          A very gentle man

          … But, let a woman in your life
          And patience hasn’t got a chance
          She will beg you for advice, your reply will be concise
          And she’ll will listen very nicely
          Then go out and do precisely what she wants

          … A man of grace and polish
          Who never spoke above a hush (He’s Greek, so that’s not true.)
          Now all at once he’s using language
          That would make a sailor blush

          … Let a woman in your life
          And you’re plunging in a knife

          Let the others of my sex
          Tie the knot around their necks

          … He’d prefer a new edition of the Spanish Inquisition
          Than to ever let a woman in his life

          … George is a quiet living man
          Who prefers to spend the evenings
          In the silence of his room
          Who likes an atmosphere as restful
          As an undiscovered tomb
          A pensive man is he, of philosophic joys
          Who likes to meditate, contemplate
          Free from humanity’s mad inhuman noise
          Quiet living man

          … But, let a woman in your life
          And your sabbatical is through
          In a line that never ends come an army of her friends
          Come to jabber and to chatter
          And to tell her what the matter is with you!

          … She’ll have a booming boisterous family
          Who will descend on you en mass
          She’ll have a large Wagnerian mother
          With a voice that shatters glass

          … Let a woman in your life
          Let a woman in your life

          … I shall never let a woman in my life. (And yet he did.)

          Source: Musixmatch
          Songwriters: Alan Jay Lerner / Frederick Loewe
          I’m An Ordinary Man lyrics © Chappell & Co., Inc.

      • George Michalopulos says

        Gail, FTS, Evie, Joseph, et al:

        The reason I wrote this piece is because it hit the day before like a thunderclap, at least among the Tradcats, who were justly horrified. And it was more than a little amusing to watch the Popesplainers twist themselves in knots trying to just what is clearly an abomination.

        As to why I used the EPs picture is because (and this is only my opinion), I believe he now regrets his entire Jesuitical educational formation. Not only has he been bamboozled by the globalists in the Ukraine but he is probably wondering why the Pope didn’t wait until he signed the official papers in 2025.

        Anyway, that’s my take. Gail and I will be writing more about this in the days to come.

        • Like tonight! It’s going to be labor intensive because Google has been wiped clean. All of history is gone. In its place are woke fantasies. The powers-that-be were serious about erasing the past.

    • Only trouble is that God puts us on the front lines. Beware. Believers are dispensable.

  10. Joseph Lipper says

    What does Patriarch Bartholomew have to do with this?

    Absolutely nothing. So why his picture at the heading?

    Yet the Russian Church backs the Vatican on same-sex blessings:

    Why not put Patriarch Kyrill’s picture at the heading?

    • You did read where it says, “sacred signs that resemble the sacraments”, could not be conducted on homosexual unions since they could “approve and encourage a choice and way of life that cannot be recognised as objectively ordered to the revealed plans of God”.

      “God Himself never ceases to bless each of His pilgrim children in this world, because for Him ‘we are more important to God than all the sins we can commit’. But he does not and cannot bless sin.”

      This isn’t blessing same sex marriages. It’s blessing people who commit sin.

      • Gail, Mr. Lipper can’t be blamed for not reading the fine print, he’s simply CCing the tactics of his friends in the mainstream euroatlanticist media who get away with saying whatever they want in the assurance that the audience never checks the actual facts.

        Oh and the fact that unlike Patriarch Kirill, Patriarch Bartholomew is supposedly the spiritual leader of the Orthodox Church and claims to speak for Her.

        Either way, if a homosexual couple asked a priest for a blessing in Russia, I can imagine what sort of response they’d get.

      • It doesn’t look like he read beyond the headline – or noticed that this occurred a long time ago before Francis went completely off the deep end.

        “Russia’s Orthodox church has backed the mid-March declaration by the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, barring the blessing of same-sex unions.

        “We cannot in any way or under any form accept same-sex cohabitation as a marriage union. Accordingly, no wedding or blessing can be performed”, said Metropolitan Hilarion Alfeyev, the Russian church’s foreign relations director. “People of homosexual orientation also come to our Orthodox churches, and if they go to the priest to receive a blessing, the priest cannot deny this. But if such a person says, ‘Father, bless me for my same-sex cohabitation,’ then of course the priest will refuse.”

      • Joseph Lipper says

        Gail, yes, the reference to the Moscow Patriarchate’s agreement with the Vatican on “same-sex blessing” from 2021 refers to blessing individual people who suffer from same-sex attraction and who ask for a blessing. It does not refer to couples, and Metropolitan Hilarion makes that point clear in the article I provided. So, naturally, I would expect some “Popesplaining” from Patriarch Kyrill (and/or the MP’s DECR) on the Vatican’s most recent statement.

        The only time that couples are jointly blessed by an Orthodox priest, that I can think of, would be liturgically, such as with the service of betrothal and marriage. There is no “spontaneous” blessing of even married couples that I can think of in the Orthodox tradition. Please anyone correct me if I am wrong.

        Traditionally speaking, in Orthodox churches even married couples separate themselves in church, with the men standing on the right side of the nave before the icon of Christ, and women standing on the left side before the icon of the Theotokos.

        It is therefore not surprising that even the Eastern Rite Catholics are rejecting the most recent statement on “spontaneous” blessing of couples:

    • From the article cited by Joseph:

      ‘ “We cannot in any way or under any form accept same-sex cohabitation as a marriage union. Accordingly, no wedding or blessing can be performed”, said Metropolitan Hilarion Alfeyev, the Russian church’s foreign relations director. “People of homosexual orientation also come to our Orthodox churches, and if they go to the priest to receive a blessing, the priest cannot deny this. But if such a person says, ‘Father, bless me for my same-sex cohabitation,’ then of course the priest will refuse.” ‘

      Is it that you cannot read, Joseph?
      Or do you hope that others will take
      your word as true without checking?

    • Joseph, I’m sorry, but you’re blatantly lying in order to push the narrative that you want.

      In the UK online Tablet article that you link (which is dated Apr 2021), Met. Hilarion (Alfeyev) of the Russian Orthodox Church states:

      “We cannot in any way or under any form accept same-sex cohabitation as a marriage union. Accordingly, no wedding or blessing can be performed”, said Metropolitan Hilarion Alfeyev, the Russian church’s foreign relations director. “People of homosexual orientation also come to our Orthodox churches, and if they go to the priest to receive a blessing, the priest cannot deny this. But if such a person says, ‘Father, bless me for my same-sex cohabitation,’ then of course the priest will refuse.”

      You’ve been pushing the narrative that you prefer on these pages for years – that somehow the Patriarchate of C’ple as embodied by its current hierarch (Patr Bartholomew) is the paragon of Orthodox Christian virtue – and that the Russian Orthodox Church is evil incarnate with devil’s horns and all the accoutrements.

      I have no idea why George and Gail put up with your nonsense. They are evidently far more patient and kind Christians than I would be in this regard.

      Your “ends justify the means” approach to push your desired narrative – similar to what a White House Press Secretary would do – is clear nonsense, and – in my opinion – it should not be tolerated.

      These are not political powerplay games that we are talking about. The goal is not to “win the argument” at any cost. This is Christ’s Holy Church that we are talking about.

  11. Mt. Athos Council Officially Opposes Gay Marriage!
    By Helleniscope -December 19, 2023

  12. Whiskey Six says

    Did anyone read the Catholic proclamation or just what the reporters wrote about it?

    Here is a link to the original text:

    I would encourage people to read it for themselves the whole thing and then come to a conclusion.

    Unfortunately, this document will be used by both sides for political gain. The sodomites to push the boundaries and the Conservatives to attack a church.

    • No, I haven’t read it. Thanks!

    • If one is to accept the logic of the text of this document, which manages at times to make sense while simultaneously making highly dubious assumptions about the inclinations of those who would be likely to seek such ‘blessings,’ one can only conclude that there was no need for it in the first place.

      It offers no real clarification at all other than in the formal liturgical realm which, in typical Roman fashion, it artificially separates from “normal life.” The document boils down to an apology for Francis’s studied ambiguity; and thus its outcome is almost certain to lead precisely to where the Roman Catholic faithful fear it will lead.

      Much like Vatican II, it leaves the door wide open to grave abuse while providing Papal cover for those inclined to such abuse.

      It’s full of high minded drivel about the supposed openess to ‘transcendence’ of these blessing seekers and calls us to assume, without even a hint of evidence, that they are seeking to ‘live better.’ The word repentance – or even desire for repentance is nowhere to be found.

  13. Jay Dyer has an excellent video from yesterday on the recent Roman developments:

  14. Nicholas Sandoukas says

    I am going to make a bold prediction. A few actually. Gay blessings are coming to a Greek Orthodox Church in America soon. If Pope Francis is still alive and Patriarch Bartholomew, by 2025, they will come into communion with each other. But that’s not the bold prediction. The Bold prediction, is that not a single canonical Orthodox Church will do anything for or against it. They might say that they are not in communion with Rome, but they will also stay in communion with Constantinople. And although I think one or two monasteries on Mt. Athos might go the old calendarist route in response, most will do nothing.

    • That’s an interesting prophecy. For me, that would really sour me on the Church and I still haven’t gotten over the COVID thing. If I wanted the lowest common denominator, I could have been anything but Orthodox. Being Orthodox, is not the easiest path. Why take it seriously if the bishops don’t?

      I don’t think Russia will be silent. I’d like to think none of us will be.

      • “Why take it seriously if the bishops don’t?”

        Because you’re responsible for your own salvation and your relationship with God within the Church. The bishops have an important role to play in that of course, but Orthodoxy is the Way the Truth and the Life regardless of what others around you are or are not doing.

      • Michael Bauman says

        Gail, “Why take it seriously…” For the benefit of your soul and the Truth.

    • Nicholas, I’m going to add some caveats to your prediction:

      Gay blessings are coming to a Greek Orthodox Church in America soon.

      -> This is a possibility (though I’m still not convinced, especially considering what is going on in the Church of Greece and on Athos). But, if it does I can almost guarantee that it will occur in the Direct Archdiocesan District which is under Elpidophoros directly. There is no way I see Met. Alexios, Met. Isaiah, or even Met. Gerasimos (who is very close with the monasteries) allowing this. Nor will any of the monasteries stand for it.

      The Bold prediction, is that not a single canonical Orthodox Church will do anything for or against it. They might say that they are not in communion with Rome, but they will also stay in communion with Constantinople. And although I think one or two monasteries on Mt. Athos might go the old calendarist route in response, most will do nothing.

      -> I don’t agree with any of this. The Churches of Russia, Serbia, Poland, Georgia, etc., i.e. most of canonical Orthodoxy are not going to go along or stay in communion. As of now all of the above are in communion with Bartholomew in spite of the OCU situation. But, there are many cases all through Church history where some Churches are out of communion, while other Churches are in communion. ROCOR is a perfect recent example. But, communing with Rome is a very clear-cut break with the rest of the Orthodox world. It didn’t go over well for Constantinople after Ferrera-Florence, and it won’t go over well for them this time either.
      I also don’t agree that Athos will do nothing either. Remember that other than a few monasteries, no other monastery is on board with the OCU, most of the monasteries have been critical of Bartholomew, Athos has spoken out against the pope and just the other day spoke out against Mitsotakis’s push for gay marriage. I could see one or two monasteries going along, but, if a Roman Catholic prelate were to commune on Athos there would be a firestorm erupt from the other monasteries.

    • George Michalopulos says

      Nicholas, I’m afraid you may be right. All Christians in America of whatever denominations have been marinated for too long in the sauces of tolerance, diversity and goshdarn it! good ole’ Midwestern American decency. This goes for us Orthodox as well.

      In other words, when the next plandemic hits or the Dept of Justice demands that we bless the civil unions of gays, we’ll find some Jillions-like figure to offer the sophistry needed to give your average parish priest the wiggle room to do so.

      Then again, we may be surprised.

  15. David Hawthorne says

    And now same-sex marriage activists will make a point of showing up to insist on these “blessings” and when conservative RC clergy refuse there will be a firestorm. And the Pope won’t have his clergy’s back.

    • Yep.

    • This is exactly what’s going to happen and Francis knows it.

      You cannot bless two people in a same sex relationship without the optics, or the overt view, that the couple is being blessed rather than two separate individuals.

      What is current common practice in the Novus Ordo, female alter servers, eucharistic ministers, etc., are all things that should be the exception yet have become the rule. Why? Vatican 2 produced vague documents that were a break from previous RC tradition (at least in their system).

      For us Orthodox you cannot bless a same sex couple and just say “We’re blessing the individuals in that couple not them couple themselves and not the sin.” That makes zero sense.

      This will just turn into even more mental gymnastics for Roman Catholics to cope over and try to explain. You have to hand it to them, it takes a lot of mental work to make that happen.

      • Michael Bauman says

        Grammer police: both George and Petros.
        The proper is’we’ Orthodox– not “us” Orthodox.
        We Orthodox even sounds better.

        • When I would write letters to my mother, a first grade teacher, over the summer, she routinely got out her red pencil and corrected them. She then moved on to my penmanship which she would compare (unfavorably) to my friend’s. After a while, she wondered why I didn’t write her any more letters.

        • “Grammer police” ?

          Not: “Grammar Police’ ?

        • Grammar, not grammer.

        • Mary Gardner says

          Another grammar police here:
          “For us Orthodox” is correct. In those two sentences, “us Orthodox” is the object of the preposition “for.”
          “We Orthodox” indicates a subject or a predicate nominative.

        • Just for fun…

          Although I don’t comment on the grammar of others, I try, in honor of my unusually exceptional English teachers, to observe correct grammar myself. To this day, while it has become acceptable even in graduate level work to split infinitive phrases, I cannot bring myself to do so.

          Actually, Michael, Petros has it correct because of the way he phrased it. His “us” is correct because it follows the preposition “For.” Had he written, “Us Orthodox cannot bless…,” it would have been incorrect, but he didn’t.

          To you, Petros, and all here, I wish you all a blessed Nativity feast.

          Christ is born!

  16. Father Wilson says

    I have said this before, but I think it bears repeating: while there is only one person who is Pope at any one time, in another sense there are two hundred sixty-six popes. The predecessors of the current Pope do not cease to exist. Their magisterium continues in operation. They are part of the living Tradition. The current Pope is no more free to teach what he pleases than I am. We both stand under the authority of Christ, under His revelation as embodied in Scripture and Tradition.

    That means that the teachings of John Paul II and Benedict XVI still stand. Anything Pope Francis does or teaches is seen in the context of the Tradition.

    This latest document poses serious concerns. For one, Pope Francis has the habit of governing as a maverick. He bypasses his own public relations people at will in dealing with the media, and he bypasses his Curia and the Diplomatic Corps as he chooses. From what I am hearing, this latest document was published straight from Francis and his friend Cardinal Fernandez of the doctrinal office. It contradicts what the Secretary of State, Cardinal Parolin, told the German bishops two years ago (that the blessing of same-sex couples was off the table of discussion). It contradicts several statements of the Roman Curia on this question, issued in the past few years – and the theologians who worked on those documents are still alive and active in the Curia. It seems to me that it also puts us in the rather stupid position of repeating the disastrous mistakes made by the Anglican Communion over the last twenty five years: the wealthy but steeply declining western Anglican churches such as England, Canada, United States, Australia, New Zealand were aggressively pushing the revamping of sexual mores while the African and Asian bishops revolted. I see signs of the exact same thing happening with us: the African bishops are appalled by this document.

    For an illuminating exposition of the style of governance of Jorge Bergoglio, see the article by historian Henry Sires on the blog OnePeterFive.

    The regime of Francis is not the way this is supposed to work. I see it becoming clearer and clearer to the cardinals and bishops that he is completely untrammeled by doctrinal, moral and traditional restraints. There are very serious situations of concern in the Church today; Francis thinks his biggest problems are climate change and traditional Catholics. Continually he mocks devout traditional Catholics as those who can only look backwards — completely oblivious to the fact that he himself seems to believe that we are living in the springtime of 1968!! Young priests and seminarians look back to Benedict XVI as their Pope, not to Francis. He has done nothing about the situation of Catholics in China, whom he has abandoned to the wolves. He has a seriously appalling history of horrible personnel appointments. He has coddled and protected clerical sexual abusers. He turns a blind eye to homosexuality in the Roman Curia.

    His legacy will collapse like a deck of cards in the wind.

    • With all do respect, I’m going to go through some of your comments:

      – The Pope’s predecessors continue to influence through their teachings and form part of the living Tradition.
      A) What is going on with the same sex blessings, Pachamama, the Novus ordo, etc., is a perfect example of this “living tradition” in Roman Catholicism. Living things grow and so far it has morphed into something unrecognizable from Apostolic Christianity.

      – The current Pope’s authority is under the guidance of Christ, Scripture, and Tradition.
      A) According to Roman Catholic ecclesiology, sure. According to Orthodoxy and Church history and the apostolic Faith, it is indeed not. If that were truly the case there wouldn’t be aberration after aberration in Roman Catholic ecclesiology, dogma, liturgy, over the past 1,000 years. Either the Holy Spirit is getting it wrong, or Rome is.

      – Teachings of previous Popes like John Paul II and Benedict XVI remain relevant within the context of Tradition.
      A) Not really. Because within the Roman Catholic framework the pope is the ultimate authority and is above a council, he can undo what a previous pope has done. Look at Vatican 1, Vatican 2 and everything since then. That’s a clear break from what was previous Roman Catholic belief.

      – Concerns arise from Pope Francis’ unconventional governing style, bypassing advisors and contradicting previous statements.
      A) Again, within the Roman Catholic framework, the pope is the ultimate authority and is above every other bishop, he doesn’t have to do any of the above.

      – The recent document on blessing same-sex couples contradicts prior statements by senior church officials and creates division among bishops, notably from Africa.
      Criticisms include Francis’ unconventional governance, prioritization of issues (climate change over internal Church concerns), and neglect of situations like Catholics in China.
      A) The history of Roman Catholicism of the past 1,000 years is rife with contradictions. This isn’t any different. Again, Vatican 2 itself is nothing but contradictions of previous Roman catholic liturgy, belief and practice.

      – Francis is seen as dismissive of devout traditional Catholics and out of touch with the current Church climate, drawing more support from those who align with Benedict XVI.
      A) This I will agree with. But, traditional Catholics also live in a world that doesn’t exist anymore. Roman Catholicism is not going to return to the TLM nor is it going to return to the Middle Ages, what you see now is what Roman Catholicism is going to be like from now on.

      – Accusations of mishandling clerical abuse cases, overlooking homosexuality in the Roman Curia, and poor personnel appointments are mentioned.
      A) And nothing is going to fix any of that. There is no “fail-safe” in the Roman Catholic framework. If the pope is the ultimate authority and “is to be judge by no one,” how does one get out of this quagmire? They don’t. Roman Catholicism is trapped in a jail cell of it’s own design

      – Prediction of Francis’ legacy crumbling due to these issues, likening it to a collapsing deck of cards in the wind.
      A) Francis’ legacy is not going to crumble as this has been the trajectory of Roman Catholicism for the last 60+ years. Francis did not come out of a vacuum, he is a product of Vatican 2. Francis has stacked the deck of cardinals with bishops who were also formed in the new religion/ecclesiology of Vatican 2. TradCats thinking a “bazed pope” is going to come along are not living in reality.

      Whoever replaces Francis will just be a Francis 2.0, if not worse. The cardinalate and indeed a majority of the bishoprics (at least outside of Africa), have been stacked in favor of a Francis 2.0, you can also think JPII & Benedict for this as they did nothing to clean house.

      As mentioned a number of times above, because of Roman Catholic ecclesiology there is no way for a council to meet to oust a pope as a pope is above a council.

    • OnePeterFive, the blog run by an apostate from Orthodoxy?

    • George Michalopulos says

      Fr, thank you for this thoughtful critique.

      If I may be so bold: is there a mechanism by which the Curia (or some other body) can remove him from the Papacy?

      • Father Wilson says

        Like his previous two predecessors, Francis has written an instrument of abdication, to be effected if he is incapacitated. I know nothing more of this, but assume he has designated a cardinal(s) who would certify this incapacity.

        There is no clear path to depose a Pope. Theologians are not even in agreement about whether a Pope who espouses heresy automatically loses his office.

        What to do? My Irish nuns used to say. “Grin and offer it up.” But I think that this nonsense has already crossed the line and Francis will find it increasingly difficult to govern. He is a lame duck who is rapidly losing support.

        • He is a lame duck who is rapidly losing support.

          While I don’t dispute this, I suspect this perception very much depends upon one’s circle of like minded coreligionists, be they the faithful or the modernists. If I had a dime for every time I’ve heard that various leaders who constantly offend faithful Christian and/or conservative sensibilities are in their last gasp I would be a rich man indeed.


          How much of this nonsense do you suppose is bound up with what’s going on in Germany (primarily) and gaining traction elsewhere?

  17. Father Wilson says

    The article I reference is by the historian Henry Sires (pron. SEERS), “Pope Francis: How Much Lower Can We Sink?”

    Dr. Sires was a professed member of the Knights of Malta, which is a Religious Order whose headquarters in Rome is an independent state. He authored (under the nom de plume Marcantonio Antonio) the book, “The Dictator Pope,” about Francis. It caused quite a sensation, and when his authorship was discovered he was expelled from the Order.

    The article updates the book, and is a fascinating read. The world fell heavily for the Francis Myth in the years following his election. Dr Sires sets the record straight, and puts Francis solidly in his Argentine, Peronist context.

    • Antiochene Son says

      The papacy is literally a dictatorship though, by design. I understand that Francis is far afield from the traditional mind of the Roman church, but not on this point.

      I guess I have a hard time feeling sorry for traditional Catholics when all I’ve heard in polemical circles for years has been “the (Vatican I style dictatorial) papacy is necessary to safeguard the Catholic faith” when Francis has used those powers to do the exact opposite. The powers used for good can also be used for evil. There is the special pleading that “the Holy Spirit wouldn’t let a pope use them for evil”, but here we have Francis, who is manifestly not being led by the Holy Spirit. In Orthodoxy no bishop has that power, so it’s not a concern.

      And this all goes back to the development of doctrine principle, which Rome emphatically believes in and Orthodoxy rejects.

    • This is an excoriating analysis, which fails
      to answer the question of whether or not
      Bergoglio actually believes in God,
      never mind Catholic Tradition.

  18. Michael Bauman says

    Matthew 4:17 “Repent, for the Kingdom of God is at hand” Comes to my mind.

    Forgive me, a sinner.

  19. Michael Bauman says
    • The introductory video to the book is fascinating
      [Video – 12:57]

      …but it seems to suggest that St James the Just,
      Brother of the Lord, was one of the chief Apostles;
      which, as far as I am aware, he wasn’t.

      Not having read the book, I cannot say
      whether or not the text really does this.

      Perhaps you can enlighten us, Michael?

  20. In my lifetime, it is the worst ecclesiastical gaslighting I have ever seen. For the first time in Church history, the image we behold is not what is given in reality. What is a non-liturgical priestly blessing now called a pastoral priestly blessing? This document reeks of the sin of casuistry. It manifests the worst of Roman Catholic legalism. I don’t even understand how Lofton and others can defend this. Now to the bright side, Roman Catholics have been calling my parish office. I may be going to meet with groups in their homes for coffee after the New Year.

  21. George Peras says
    • And this is meant to imply what, exactly, Mr. Peras?

      • Maybe that Francis and Bartholomew have exchanged crosses, so to speak. Which is the answer to the question: Why should the Orthodox care about what’s happening in the Catholic Church.

  22. Its seems as if Francis wants a schism within the RCC. Many of the African bishop conferences have come out with statements that they aren’t going to allow blessings of sodomite couples under any circumstances. The same with the bishops of Kazakhstan and the bishops of both rites in Ukraine.

  23. Archbishop Viganò: Bergoglio’s ‘blessings’ for
    homosexual couples show he is a ‘servant of Satan’

    Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò says the Vatican’s newly approved blessings
    for homosexual ‘couples’ show that the ‘Bergoglian hierarchy’
    are ‘servants of Satan and his most zealous allies.’

    (LifeSiteNews) — When the devil tries to persuade us to sin, he emphasizes the supposed good of the evil action he wants us to do, while overshadowing the aspects that are necessarily contrary to God’s commandments. He does not say to us: Sin and offend the Lord who died for you on the Cross, because he knows that a normal person does not want evil in itself, but that he usually does evil under the appearance of good.

    This strategy of deception invariably recurs. To induce a mother to have an abortion, Satan does not ask her to be pleased with the killing of the child she is carrying, but to think about the consequences of pregnancy, the fact that she will lose her job, or that she is too young and inexperienced to raise and educate a child; and it almost seems that that mother, by making herself a murderer through infanticide, shows a sense of responsibility in wanting to spare the innocent creature a life without love. In order to convince a man into adultery, the tempting spirit shows him the supposed advantages of finding an outlet in an extramarital affair, all to the benefit of peace in the family. To urge a priest to accept the heretical deviations of his superiors, he emphasizes obedience to authority and the preservation of ecclesial communion.

    These deceptions obviously serve to drag souls away from God, to erase grace in them, to stain them with sin, to obscure their conscience in such a way that the next fall is all the more casual the more serious it is. In a way, the action of the devil is expressed as the “Overton window,” making the offense against God less horrible, making us believe that the punishment that awaits us is less terrible, and the consequences of our guilt more acceptable.

    The Lord is good: He forgives everyone, He whispers to us, taking care to keep us away from the thought of Christ’s Passion, from the fact that every blow of the scourge, every slap, every thorn stuck in His head, every nail driven into His flesh is the fruit of our sins. And then, if you give in to temptation, it’s not your fault, it’s your frailty. And once sunk, sin after sin, in the habit of evil and vice, the soul allows itself to be dragged lower and lower, until the devil’s request presents itself in all its horror: Rebel against God, reject Him, blaspheme Him, hate Him because He has deprived you of your right to happiness with oppressive precepts.

    This, on closer inspection, is the recurring element in temptation, ever since Adam’s sin: to show evil under false appearances of good, and good as an annoying obstacle to the fulfillment of one’s rebellious will.

    The Church, who is our Mother, knows well how dangerous it is for a Christian soul to ignore this infernal strategy. Confessors, spiritual directors, and preachers considered it essential to explain to the faithful how the devil acts, so that they might understand with their intellect the fraud of the evil one, so as to be able to oppose it with their will, aided in this by assiduity in prayer and frequent use of the sacraments. On the other hand, how could we imagine a mother who encourages her child not to progress in God’s love, and who reassures him that the Lord will grant him salvation unconditionally? What mother would witness the ruin of her child, without trying to warn him and even punish him, so that he understands the gravity of his actions and does not harm himself for eternity?

    The delirious Declaration Fiducia Supplicans, recently published by the parody of the former Holy Office renamed the Dicastery, definitively pierces the veil of hypocrisy and deception of the Bergoglian hierarchy, showing these false shepherds for what they really are: servants of Satan and his most zealous allies, beginning with the usurper who sits – an abomination of desolation – on the Throne of Peter. The very incipit of the document sounds, like all those issued by Bergoglio, mocking and deceptive: because trust in God’s forgiveness without repentance is called the presumption of salvation without merit and is a sin against the Holy Spirit.

    The false pastoral solicitude of Bergoglio and his courtiers with regard to adulterers, concubinaries, and sodomites should be denounced first of all by the presumed beneficiaries of the Vatican document, who are the first victims of sulphureous conciliar and synodal pharisaism. It is their immortal soul that is sacrificed to the woke idol, because on the day of the Particular Judgment they will discover that they have been deceived and betrayed by those who on Earth hold the authority of Christ. The fault that the Lord will accuse these unfortunate people of will not only concern the sins committed, but also and above all in having wanted to believe in a diabolical lie, in a fraud of false pastors – starting with Bergoglio and Tucho – that conscience had shown them as such. A lie that many members of the hierarchy want to believe, who hope sooner or later to be able to receive the same blessing together with their accomplices in vice, ratifying that sacrilegious and sinful lifestyle that they already practice, and with the ostentatious consent of Bergoglio.

    The fact that Tucho Fernández’s declaration approved by Bergoglio reiterates that blessing an irregular couple ought not to seem like a form of wedding rite, and that marriage is only between a man and a woman, is part of the strategy of deception. For what is at issue here is not whether marriage can be contracted by two men or two women, but whether persons living in a gravely sinful state can merit, as an irregular couple, a blessing imparted by a deacon or a priest, with the sole precaution that it is not to give the impression of being a liturgical celebration.

    The attention of the Vatican Sanhedrin is entirely directed to reassuring the Christian people that they have no intention of formalizing new forms of marriage, while the state of mortal sin and grave scandal of those who would receive such a blessing, and the danger of eternal damnation that weighs on those poor souls, is totally overlooked. Not to mention the social impact that this declaration will have on those who are not Catholic, and who thanks to it will consider themselves entitled to much worse excesses. One wonders whether, in this race to legitimize sodomy – obtained without going so far as to celebrate marriages between sodomites – there is a conflict of interest in those who propose it so insistently: it is as if rulers protected themselves with a legal shield against liability before imposing on the population an experimental gene serum about whose adverse effects they are not unaware.

    There is no doubt about it: it is a rude awakening for the so-called conservatives, who find themselves blatantly mocked by Prefect Tucho, who worries that the blessing of a couple should not look like a marriage but has nothing to say about the intrinsic sinfulness of public concubinage and sodomy. The important thing is that the moderates – defenders of Vatican II – can consider themselves satisfied with that Jesuitical apostille (in this case that these spontaneous and non-ritual blessings are not a marriage) that is supposed to save the doctrine on the papacy while pushing souls to damn themselves.

    For priests who do not agree to bless these unfortunate people, two paths are being prepared: the first, to be expelled from the parish or from the diocese ad nutum Pontificis; the second, to resign themselves to bartering their right to dissent in exchange for the recognition of the right of other confreres to approve; something already seen in the liturgical field with Summorum Pontificum. In short, Bergoglio’s operation is an outlet of the Faith, where you can find everything from the rites of pre-1955 Holy Week to LGBT “Eucharists,” as long as nothing is called into question about his “pontificate.”

    Added to this is the scandal for Catholics, who, in the face of the horrors of the sect of Santa Marta, are tempted to embrace schism, or to abandon the Church. And again: with what bitterness and sense of disillusionment will those people regard Rome who, aware of their situation of objective irregularity, have sought and still seek with all their strength and with the grace of God not to sin and to live in conformity with the Commandments? How can those people feel who ask for a paternal voice that exhorts them to continue on the path of holiness, and not the ideological recognition of their vices that they know to be incompatible with natural morality?

    Let us ask ourselves: what does Bergoglio want to achieve? Nothing good, nothing true, nothing holy. He does not want souls to be saved; he does not proclaim the Gospel opportunely, importunately to call souls to Christ; he does not show them the scourged and bloodied Savior to spur them on to change their lives. No. Bergoglio wants their damnation, as an infernal tribute to Satan and a brazen challenge to God.

    But there is a more immediate and simple purpose to be achieved: to provoke Catholics to turn away from his church and leave him free to turn it into the concubine of the New World Order. Women priests, gay blessings, sexual and financial scandals, the immigration business, forced vaccination campaigns, gender ideology, neo-Malthusian environmentalism, the tyrannical management of power are the tools with which to scandalize the faithful, to disgust those who do not believe, to discredit the Church and the papacy. Whatever happens, Bergoglio has already achieved his goal, which is the premise for securing the consent of heretics and fornicators who recognize him as Pope, ousting any critical voice.

    If this document, together with other more or less official pronouncements, really had as its purpose the good of adulterers, concubinaries, and sodomites, it should have pointed out to them the heroism of Christian witness, reminded them of the self-sacrifice that Our Lord asks of each one of us, and taught them to put their trust in God’s grace in order to overcome trials and live in conformity with His Will. On the contrary, he encourages them, blesses them as irregular, as if they were not; but at the same time he deprives them of marriage, and in this way admits that they are irregular. Bergoglio does not ask them to change their lives, but authorizes a grotesque farce in which two men or two women will be able to appear before a minister of God to be blessed, together with their relatives and friends, and then celebrate this sinful union with a banquet, the cutting of the cake, and gifts. But it’s not a wedding, let’s be clear…

    I wonder what’s going to prevent this blessing from being imparted not to a couple, but to several people, in the name of polyamory; or to minors, in the name of the sexual freedom that the globalist elite is introducing through the U.N. and other subversive international organizations. Will it suffice to point out that the Church does not approve of polygamous unions and pedophilia to allow polygamists and pedophiles to be blessed? And why not extend this gimmick to those who practice bestiality? It would always be in the name of welcoming, integration, inclusiveness.

    The same diabolical falsification is taking place for women priests. If, on the one hand, the Synod on Synodality did not address the ordination of women, on the other hand, a form of “non-ordained ministry” is already being planned that would allow them to preside over spurious celebrations under the pretext that there are no more priests and deacons. Also in this case, the faithful see on the altar a woman in an alb reading the Gospel, preaching, distributing Communion, just as a priest would do, but without being one. It is done with the Vatican footnote that it is a ministry that does not call into question the Catholic priesthood.

    The hallmark of the conciliar and synodal church, of this sect of rebels and perverts, is falsehood and hypocrisy. Its purpose is intrinsically evil, because it takes away God’s honor, exposes souls to the danger of damnation, prevents them from doing good, and encourages them to do evil. Those in the Bergoglian church who continue to follow the doctrine and precepts of the Catholic Church are out of place and sooner or later will end up separating themselves from it or giving in.

    The Catholic Church is the only ark through which the Lord has ordained the salvation and sanctification of mankind. Wherever what appears to be the church acts and works for mankind’s damnation, it is not the Church, but rather her blasphemous counterfeit. The same is true of the papacy, which providence willed as a bond of charity in truth, and not as an instrument to divide, scandalize, and damn souls.

    I exhort all those who have been awarded the dignity of cardinal, my brothers in the episcopate, priests, clerics, and faithful to oppose most firmly this mad race towards the abyss to which a sect of renegade apostates would like to force us. I implore the bishops and ministers of God – by the Most Holy Wounds of Our Lord Jesus Christ – not only to raise their voices to defend the immutable teaching of the Church and to condemn deviations and heresies, under whatever appearance they may appear; but also to warn the faithful and prevent these sacrilegious blessings in their dioceses. The Lord will judge us on the basis of His holy law, and not on the pharisaic seductions of those who serve the enemy.

    + Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop

    December 20, 2023
    Feria IV Quattuor Temporum Adventus

    Looks like Viganò has raised his colours.
    If he gets no support, will he leave?
    Will he become Orthodox?

    • Every time I read something he’s written, the phrase, “good and faithful servant,” crosses my mind.

    • Archbishop Vigano is today’s RC John the Baptist. The second to last paragraph of this prophecy bears rereading.

    • When the devil tries to persuade us to sin, he emphasizes the supposed good of the evil action he wants us to do, while overshadowing the aspects that are necessarily contrary to God’s commandments.

      This is not only a good ‘introduction,’ it is the singular criterion by which these
      false teachers, whether of the Papal, Fordhamite, or any other orgin, can be identified and put to shame by the faithful (if they had any shame).

      Unlike today, in earlier Christian times the long period of catechesis was spent not on learning ‘theology’ (so called) as we understand it today. Rather, it was spent on learning and learning to keep the commandments of God. For apart from this experiential knowledge neither love nor mercy can be properly grasped or exercised. Nor can true theology be known.

      “Illumine our hearts, O Master Who lovest mankind, with the pure light of Thy divine knowledge. Open the eyes of our mind to the understanding of Thy gospel teachings. Implant also in us the fear of Thy blessed commandments, that trampling down all carnal desires, we may enter upon a spiritual manner of living, both thinking and doing such things as are well-pleasing unto Thee. For Thou art the illumination of our souls and bodies, O Christ our God, and unto Thee we ascribe glory, together with Thy Father, Who is from everlasting, and Thine all-holy, good, and life-creating Spirit, now and ever and unto ages of ages. Amen.”

    • Looks like Viganò has raised his colours.
      If he gets no support, will he leave?
      Will he become Orthodox?

      That would require him going against centuries of Papist propaganda that the Roman Catholic Church is the True Church and the Eastern Orthodox erred. It can be done, I’d like to see it with him because I do believe he’s honest, but he has to accept this fact first that he’s been lied to and got it backwards.

      • George Michalopulos says

        His Eminence is a devout, pious man who sees things clearly. He is also (justly) scandalized.

        That being said, it was almost two years ago when he called Moscow “the Third Rome.”
        If is (and I believe it to be the case), the the Orthodox Church is the true Church.

      • We may have hope.

    • It seems unlikely that Vigano would become Orthodox, given the following sentence taken from his statement: “The Catholic Church is the only ark through which the Lord has ordained the salvation and sanctification of mankind.”

      • It depends on what is meant by: Catholic.
        Isn’t it true for we [us…?] Orthodox that
        we believe:
        In one Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church ?

        • Yes, now that you put it like that, it is true for us who are Orthodox that we believe “in one Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.”

    • Though I appreciate Vigano’s fight against error within the Roman Catholic framework, it’s a bit akin to fighting fire with gasoline. He’s fighting error within an error itself. Even if he were to miraculously reverse the situation the fact remains that Rome is still in error on pretty much every possible level. The phrase “lipstick on a pig” comes to mind.

      Vigano quite clearly believes that Rome is still the truth, we should pray for his conversion to Orthodoxy.

      Here’s an excellent video from Jay Dyer from the other day:

  24. Michael Bauman says

    Just a book I am thinking of reading

  25. Let’s just pray and hope that Patriarch Bartholomew will not follow Mr Bergoglio’s new ways.

  26. The kindest thing someone can do for someone else is to acknowledge and share their pain. You did that for me. Thank you, to all of you.

  27. Archbishop Of Cyprus Opposes Gay Marriage
    and Adoption – Pat. Bartholomew Silent…

    EDITOR’S NOTE: It will not be easy for any of you to find this piece of news that the Archbishop of Cyprus, one of the most important Orthodox Churches, has opposed loudly gay marriage and adoption. If you search Google, the algorithm sends it to page …30. If you look for the news on major websites of Cyprus, it will not be anywhere. If you turn to the Greek-American websites and news, one of which is published by a Cypriot, you will not find it… And so you are left with some – not all – Orthodox religious websites and Helleniscope. Church after Orthodox Church, following Mout Athos, have re-affirmed the Faith and opposed gay marriage and adoption. But Pat. Bartholomew has declined to take a position and projects a guilty silence…

    • Looks like the bishops are realizing they have to get in the game. We need their protection. We need them to stand between us and them.

    • Joseph Lipper says

      “When the Church accepts that there are two sexes, male and female created by God, she cannot accept any legislative regulation that the state will make. She will not fight anyone, she accepts them all, but she will state her principles, her positions and invite those who want to follow Her,” Archbishop George said.

      This is not directly related to the Vatican’s recent pronouncement on the spontaneous blessing of irregular couples. However, it is exactly the kind of response I would expect from an Orthodox bishop when the government is proposing legislation that contradicts the tradition and ethos of the Church.

      Indeed, the Archbishop is responding here to a proposal being made to change the law in Cyprus, allowing couples in civil unions to adopt children:

    • I have been pleasantly surprised by the Greeks in Cyprus & Greece on this one. Athos was of course no surprise.

      Funny how the “pope of the Greeks and all immaculate mother church of all Orthodoxy and infallible grand puba” Bartholomew is eerily silent on all of this. You think he would come out swinging defending the Greeks, but alas, you needs to save face for his union with Francis.

      • Petro, my take is a little different: I think the backlash against this latest thing from Francis has been so severe, so furious, and so widespread that it’s blindsided the Pope and his leftist minions completely. This would include Bartholomew as well.

        It’s been my estimation of the EP that whenever he (or one of his underlings) does something foolhardy, he does one of two things: 1) if it’s something he did, he starts popesplaining about what a martyr he is, and 2) if it’s something one of his eparchs does, he goes to ground and lets the minion hang out to dry.

        We saw an example of #2 when during the multiple-spoon debacle when he let Elpi twist in the wind.

        Frank’s “blessing but not a blessing” is also an example of #2. Mind you, I don’t disagree with you about what his silence means, i.e. that it is because he agrees with what the Pope did (he and his eparchs most certainly do). It’s just that they don’t want to receive the same backlash that Francis has. In typical Byzantine gayme-playing fashion, they would rather see how this plays itself out and then gently, subtly see the same thing happen in their respective C’politan eparchies (e.g. GOA, Great Britain, Australia, etc.)

        Anyway, that’s my take.

        • That’s a great observation George

          I think you may be right because Bartholomew over the past month or two hasn’t even opened his mouth at any point without at least once talking about the “muh mother church” rhetoric. I don’t think I’ve read one article about him where he hasn’t mentioned it at least once.

          I’m now convinced he knows that the entire Church is calling his bluff and don’t buy what he is selling.

          This also confirms to me IMHO that no one, even among the Greeks and Cypriots, are going to follow him to Rome, considering the battle those two are facing, and how both respective Archbishops have come out against skittles marriage. I personally think Bartholomew knows the jig is up and that’s why him and his sycophants are on full blast recently.

          The Church now knows that the proverbial emperor has no clothes

          • Petro, you’ve hit the nail on the head. I especially like your phrase that the rest of Orthodoxy “has called his bluff.”

            As I’ve said on more than one occasion, the schism if it comes, will not be between the Grecophone churches and the rest but within the Grecophone churches. The vast majority of the Hellenes have long “had the number” of the Phanariotes. They put up with them just because.

            • will not be between the Grecophone churches and the rest but within the Grecophone churches.

              Agreed. In a few weeks it will be the 5 year anniversary of the granting of “autocephaly” to the OCU.

              In 5 years, how many Churches have recognized the OCU: 4, including the EP

              Even within those Church, minus the EP, the OCU is major point of contention. Russia has set up a growing Exarchate in Africa.

              In 5 years we have seen Bartholomew go from a decently respected Orthodox hierarch (I once had great admiration for him), to being something of a “nothing burger” in the Orthodox world.

              In 5 years we have seen no other Church recognize the OCU, and indeed we have seen many, if not most Churches, call for a council to find a canonical solution to the OCU.

              In the past 5 years we have seen the definitive downfall of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, of that I am certain. For a long time the Orthodox world went along with the “martyred Church of Constantinople,” and indeed we did because it was just that, Bartholomew for his faults, was Orthodox. 5 years on and that is no longer the case. By his own actions he has become a pariah in Orthodoxy.

              Again, George, what you pointed out about Bartholomew going on the defense when he’s done something wrong is spot on. The whole Church is tired of his antics and actions, so what has he done? Apologize? Nope. He’s gone into hyper drive reminding everyone that he’s above everyone and that the EP is the “Mother of Orthodoxy.” The problem is: No one is listening anymore, and no one is buying it anymore.

              I left a quote over at Helleniscope saying that Bartholomew has done more to damage modern Hellenism than the Turks could have ever hoped for. What we are seeing now with his refusal to speak out against skittles marriage in Greece is a perfect example.

              My take: We are witnessing the fracturing of the EP. Like all Greek tragedies all the “good stuff” is playing out behind the scenes. But, my take is that there is an internal power struggle going on with who will be Bartholomew’s successor. Makarios, Elpidophoros, Emmanuel, and who knows who else are all vying for the spot.

  28. Ukrainian patriarch says Pope Francis’ Fiducia Supplicans
    has ‘no legal status’ in eastern church

    ‘ LifeSiteNews) — His Beatitude Sviatoslav Shevchuk, the Patriarch of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church (UGCC), issued a strong statement in response to Pope Francis’ document Fiducia Supplicans that gave approval to priests to “bless” homosexual so-called couples, saying it has “no legal status” in the UGCC and thus will not be implemented. ‘

    More Catholic than the Pope…?

    • And so the schism begins.

    • More Catholic than the Pope…?

      Yes. With a lower case “c.”
      But his entire argument only served to emphasize that “Eastern Catholicism” (orthodox in practice but loyal to Rome) is something of a sham, even as he failed to address the issue at hand.

      No “legal status” – not because it’s simply wrong and is contrary to the catholic faith, but because “we have our own traditions”? That’s quite a self-indictment of the entire premise of Eastern Catholicism.

      • I stopped for a while in Eastern Catholicism on my journey from Rome to Orthodoxy.

        If you think you have to jump through mental hoops to make papal infallibility/supremacy work, just wait until you try and make Eastern Catholicism mentally work.

        – You have some EC’s like the Melkites who aesthetically look like Orthodoxy.

        – You have some that have been heavily Latinized and look like Rome, like the Maronites.

        – You have some that honor Nestorius as a saint and who don’t have a proper anaphora

        – Then there is the UGCC who venerate Josaphat Kuntsevych as a “saint.” A “saint” who heavily persecuted and murdered Orthodox Christians.

        Eastern Catholicism is rife with contradictions, and indeed the slogan they always use “Orthodox in union with Rome” is itself a massive contradiction as there can be no such thing.

  29. Not sure if anyone has seen and read this. I heard about it on YouTube and looked it up. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, God will not be mocked. Lord have mercy on us all!
    Article title: Andrea Cionci- “Buenos Aires: lightning on the halo and keys of St. Peter. Bergoglio at the end of the road?”

    Article Content:

    Well, from a faith perspective, how should we interpret the lightning bolt that struck the statue of St. Peter on December 17th?

    On Sunday December 17, 2023, lightning literally pulverized the key and halo of the statue of Saint Peter, located on the facade of the Sanctuary of Our Lady of the Rosary of San Nicolas , north of Buenos Aires, Argentina.

    The news was reported by the Telegram channel “The Pope’s Pearls” : it seemed to be fake, given that no news could be found on the web, but the event has just been confirmed by the Reverend Father Justo Lofeudo, a priest who is certainly a Bergoglian.

    A typical “Ratzinger effect”, evidently, that particular phenomenon whereby the Bergoglians or the una cum, (Bergoglio’s legitimist conservatives) unconsciously offer information, documents and testimonies that are very useful for the reconstruction of the Magna Quaestio. In this case it would obviously only be a “sign from Heaven” which, however, has been interpreted by many Catholics without too much difficulty.

    Father Lofeudo certainly did not realize the effect that the disclosure of the photo would have.

    The priests of the Sanctuary have issued a statement that rejects the symbolic interpretation of the fact, but not the fact itself: “The Sanctuary does not agree with the interpretation that has been given with respect for the damage produced in the image of the apostle Saint Peter.”

    What is striking, in fact, is that the event occurred on Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s birthday, the day before the publication of the “Fiducia supplicans” declaration which opens up blessings for gay couples.

    This measure marked a sort of point of no return: the faithful are starting to understand that something isn’t working.

    Even the place where the accident occurred is rich in meaning: first of all, the Sanctuary of San Nicolas is in Argentina, homeland of the anti-pope, a few kilometers from Buenos Aires, the city of which Bergoglio was bishop for a long time.

    The channel “The Pope’s Pearls” reports: “Above all, it is a place of worship and veneration because inside there is the beautiful statue of the Madonna of the Rosary, which appeared for years to the visionary Gladys Quiroga de Motta, starting from early 1980s, giving her more than 1800 messages.

    In them, the Holy Virgin says she has returned to continue the Apparitions of Fatima, and many of these clearly speak of the terrible struggle between the devil and the Church.”

    Since February 11, 2013, various “suggestive” events have dotted the story of the usurpation of the Chair of Peter reconstructed in three documentaries in The “Ratzinger Code” investigation.

    We can remember the lightning that struck the Dome the same night as Pope Benedict’s “resignation”; the inexplicable blocking of the bells of Castel Gandolfo following the invalid election of Francis; the killing of the doves released by Bergoglio by crows and seagulls; the fire of the Bethlehem chapel a few hours after Francis’ visit; the fire in the Consistory Hall of Castel Gandolfo a few months ago, in the same days in which we published this appreciated reportand many other events that Catholics of just a century ago would have interpreted as unequivocal “press releases” from the Eternal Father.

    Well, from a faith perspective, how to interpret the lightning that struck the statue of St. Peter on December 17th?

    It seems that the time for antipope Francis is coming to an end: heaven would have symbolically destroyed his halo of sanctity and disintegrated the key, which represents the pope’s authority. Strange that the statue only held one key, it seems. Symbolically, the golden key alludes to power in the kingdom of heaven and the silver key indicates the spiritual authority of the papacy on earth. The rope connecting the key eyelets alludes to the link between the two powers.

  30. How the Pope rewrote Saint Paul:

    Monica Miller | From Satan to the Sanction:
    What’s Wrong with Fiducia Supplicans

    The idea that blessings may be given without requiring anything from those upon whom the blessings are bestowed is the epitome of what Dietrich Bonhoeffer characterized as “cheap grace.”

    ‘ St. Paul was wrong! His first Letter to the Corinthians, the apostle not hiding his anger and frustration, is loaded with corrections to the neophyte Christian community. And here is Paul’s first complaint against them:

    “It actually is reported that there is lewd conduct among you of a kind not even found among the pagans—a man living with his father’s wife. Still you continue to be satisfied, instead of grieving and getting rid of the offender! As for me, though absent in body I am present in spirit and have already passed sentence in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ on the man who did this deed. …I hand him over to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, so that his spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord. …Expel the wicked man from your midst.”

    Two thousand years later, according to a peculiar “development of doctrine,” the man expelled by Paul, and his mistress/stepmother, far from being excommunicated, may actually receive a priestly blessing as a couple in an “irregular union” according to the arguments and logic of Fiducia Supplicans (FS)—the formal declaration issued from the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith by Cardinal Victor Fernández with the approval of Pope Francis. If you think the reference to St. Paul’s discipline is hyperbolic—let us closely examine how the new declaration makes it possible, for the first time in the history of the Church, for priests to bless couples in objectively sinful relationships—including same-sex unions. … ‘