From Dr. K’s fourth and final (maybe) review of the Socci book (emphasis mine):

ADDENDUM 5/30/19: Some are claiming that in my revisions to this review, I am “backtracking” and “sanitizing” my original position. This is not so.

REALLY?
Well, I have all the screencaps. The point of this post is not to discredit the overall reputation of the good doctor. If you read to the end, I think you will agree that I give him a pretty wide berth. But bad behavior needs to be called out, even when it’s someone on “your side” who is engaged in it.
Original review, emphasis mine:

I read this book expecting to be a little skeptical of an author who would argue that Benedict XVI did not validly resign the papacy. After all, it sure looked as if he intended to do that in his famous speech of abdication, and the world seems to have accepted it as such. Socci, however, persuaded me otherwise with his careful analysis of Benedict’s XVI’s various utterances on the subject (and there are a surprising number of them!), Archbishop Gaenswein’s speeches, and, above all, the interpretations of canon lawyers — none of them traditionalists, by the way — who have proved in detail that the resignation lacks several conditions for validity.

Revised review, emphasis mine:

I read this book expecting to be skeptical of an author who would argue that Benedict XVI did not validly or fully resign the papacy. After all, it sure looked as if he intended to do that in his famous speech of abdication, and the world seems to have accepted it as such. Socci, however, gave me much to think about with his careful analysis of Benedict’s XVI’s utterances on the subject (and there are a surprising number of them!), Archbishop Gaenswein’s speeches, and, above all, the interpretations of canon lawyers — none of them traditionalists, by the way — who argue that the resignation lacks several conditions for validity.

No backtracking in sight, am I right? Later in the revised review, he made everything perfectly muddy clear:

I still consider and acknowledge Pope Francis to be the Roman Pontiff

Note well that the wrongdoing is not primarily in changing the review, provided that he really messed up and didn’t mean what he wrote the first time. I’m not sure how that can be, given the clear words he used, but it’s possible. I suspect he was probably struck at some point with the logical inconsistency of signing the Open Letter addressed to a man who isn’t pope. But I digress. The real wrongdoing in the revisions is claiming that it was merely a clarification, and that both reviews are of the same essence.
Either words have meaning, or you’re a Modernist; you can’t have it both ways. There is no harm in saying, “I used to think X, but now I think Y, I changed my mind.”  But there is enormous harm in saying, ‘I used to think X, now I think Y, but it’s the same thing; X=Y.” Honest people don’t do that. Also note, the fact that my own position on the matter is aligned with his original review and I’m mad that he changed it has zero bearing on the rational argument I just laid out.
Let me tell you what I think is really going on here. I didn’t figure this out my own, rather it was suggested to me by two contributors in the combox, and then developed into a bit of a theory. It may come off as sounding condescending, but my intent is to give the good doctor the benefit of the doubt, because everything I read and am told about him is that he’s an honorable man, to a fault. So what immediately follows here is the most charitable explanation for what has transpired in the past two days.
The theory goes like this: The situation in the Church today, where we have two living bishops in white, is itself such a dramatic tear in the fabric of reality that it’s very hard for any serious Catholic to accept as “the new normal.” When presented with fresh information that further disrupts the already chaotic backdrop, the unguarded mind tends naturally toward something between confusion and panic. There are powerful psychological forces at play in situations like this, which I will explain in a moment.
We have to remember that the vast majority of people do not have the kind of situational awareness and tactical information processing skills that many readers of this blog might take for granted. This bearing, let’s call it “Frosty,” comes about through a combination of nature and nurture. However, this trait is lacking in probably 90% of the population, and it has little or no correlation to IQ. For those who lack Frosty, the discovery of a truth that is shocking puts their brain into a short circuit. Instead of switching over to frosty mode and ice cold if-then protocol, they just can’t handle it. It’s a tidal wave of cognitive dissonance (which you can read about HERE) that gets processed into confirmation bias (which you can read about HERE) and eventually ends up as Belief Perseverance, where the person maintains or reverts to a position that has been firmly shown to be false (HERE).
The most spectacular examples can be found in cases of pilot error, battlespace miscalculations, and most recently, 2016 election night video montages (you could say that the entire Resist/NotMyPresident movement is an example of it in the broader culture). But it also sounds to me like a perfect description of what’s going on here with the good doctor, if we are going with the charitable explanation. If it’s true, he bears little or no culpability for his actions, because his actions were the result of subconscious psychology.
Or else he just got scared or threatened, and changed his review out of self-preservation.
Look, it’s easy for me to sit here and criticize someone who has way more skin in the game than I do. I’m certainly thankful that I don’t have any kind of dependence on the institutional Church that would be threatened by what I write here (which I’m now attaching my real name to, if you check the byline). I do have sympathy for those who are caught up in all this with job, friends, family on the line. However, it always comes back to the fact that the salvation of souls is the supreme law of the Church. Souls are being lost. Act, and God will act.
I’m afraid I must end this post by calling out the final paragraph added to his final revision, because it contains a really dangerous message:

I think too many people in this debate are expecting (and in some cases, believe they have attained) clear answers where there are none and may never be until we quit this life or until the inexorable progress of events shows, beyond gainsaying, where the truth lies.

“Expecting clear answers where there are none and may never be…” ???
Well yeah, we do expect clear answers, because God is not a jerk. He doesn’t leave us in the dark wondering where to find the Church. This line of thinking veers dangerously close to denying the Visibility of the Church, one of the principle errors of the Protestant Revolt. You can read about it HERE. I’m sure that’s not what the doctor meant to say, yet that is the plain meaning of the words he wrote. Words matter!
The Lord our God is about order, clarity, and truth. Seek these, and you seek Him.
When you find chaos, ambiguity, and deceit, flee. Especially when these are the primary character traits of an antipope.
 

We take a short break from the madness, as it’s a special day! It’s a day where an unapologetic mixed-rite Catholic such as myself gets to both enjoy two feasts for the price of one (and yes, going to two Masses in one day is an honor, not a burden), as well as… birthday cake!
Two quick reminders. First, the Ascension is also the Second Glorious Mystery, the Fruit of which is the Theological Virtue of HOPE. Take good care not to sin against hope in these trying times, my brethren.
Second, never forget what our Lord and Savior did right before He Ascended… literally the very last thing he did while He stood on this earth. Do you remember? Mark 16:14
HE UPBRAIDED THEM.

“At length he appeared to the eleven as they were at table: and he upbraided them with their incredulity and hardness of heart”

These men all died saints, and our Lord thought it best to take their leave by tearing them a new one as a parting gift. How would you say your own lukewarmness compares to that of the Apostles? What message do you think the Lord might have for you today?
Before you go complete that reflection, we need to re-post some highlights from you know who:

The two detestable behaviors noted in the headline were directly called out by Dr. Peter Kwasniewski in his review of Antonio Socci’s book, wherein the doctor declared that the evidence in the book PROVED that Benedict’s resignation was invalid. He lamented said behaviors in those who would lazily dismiss the evidence or shout down/calumniate those who have helped bring it to light.
After a few hours of his review going viral, the good doctor altered his review, and completely flip flopped on his assessment of the evidence. Suddenly, he is unconvinced, and he pledges his loyalty to “Pope Francis,” who is totally the Pope, obvi.
You can read the latest version of his review at Amazon, of course. But to answer those of you accusing me of slandering the doctor by willfully changing what he really wrote, I offer the original screen grab below, with the money phrase highlighted.

Dr. Peter A. Kwasniewski

May 28, 2019

Look around and think about that headline the next time you are anywhere near a college campus.
There are thousands of warriors in Purgatory with no one to pray for them. Please remember them today.

So true, Laurence, so true.
Link at the bottom of this post; here is a small taste:

Let us not mince our words. God’s ways are indeed inscrutable, but, (forgive me, Lord, if I speak in presumption) He seems, from what I can see, to be using the evil man we know as Pope Francis to gather all those who will be condemned, together, along with him, into one Hellish tent. We must ask: Would Almighty God use a genuine Successor of Saint Peter to do that, when He has promised the precise opposite, or would that not indeed renege entirely our faithful Lord Jesus Christ’s own promises to Peter, to his Successors and to His Holy Catholic Church? Would that not make Almighty God a liar?

Please do go over to the The Crushed Bones and read the whole thing. It is very well done. Very clear and unambiguous. There is a flow to it that is distinctive of a rational thought process, which lends a certain beauty to the piece.

1. We know that A is true
2. We also know that B is true
3. We also know the law of non-contradiction is true
4. Therefore, C must also be true

The truth is so beautiful! He is almost unconcerned with the proof set. He knows his conclusion is correct because he has removed the logical fallacy that has befallen the vast majority: He has removed the false base premise. Once you fix that, the rest of it falls into place seamlessly, not a chemtrail in sight. That is, unless your intellectual dishonesty or fear of declining revenue gets the better of you.
READ IT ALL HERE
Hang in there, Bones. Haters gonna hate.

“When a supranational common good is clearly identified, there is need for a special legally constituted authority capable of facilitating its implementation.”
“Think of the great contemporary challenges of climate change, new slavery and peace,” he told members of the Pontifical Academy, who are meeting this week at the Vatican.

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pope-francis-calls-for-new-supranational-authorities-to-enforce-UN-goals
I’m sure the “special legal authorities” will look kindly upon you and your Christian family when they visit you on the occasion of “facilitating its implementation” of the worst Marxism you can imagine.
Maybe it starts with jail time for not recycling or for running your a/c too much. Watch some Antifa videos to find out where it goes from there.
Let me know how that works out.

“And therefore we also having so great a cloud of witnesses over our head, laying aside every weight and sin which surrounds us, let us run by patience to the fight proposed to us: Looking on Jesus, the author and finisher of faith, who having joy set before him, endured the cross, despising the shame, and now sitteth on the right hand of the throne of God. For think diligently upon him that endured such opposition from sinners against himself; that you be not wearied, fainting in your minds.” Hebrews 12:1-3

Truly He is risen. Alleluia!
Happy Easter everyone.
 

The Agony of Jesus Christ at Gethsemane is noteworthy for its intensity. I’ve always believed that the intensity of the terror was not driven primarily by thoughts of His impending Passion and death, for He certainly was no coward, but rather by the knowledge that His sacrifice would be wasted by a multitude through hatred and indifference. His desire for reciprocation of the deep personal love He has for each of us was/is so intense, that the sense of loss over His beloved but damned sons and daughters caused his earthly physical body to sweat blood (Luke 22:44). His spoken desire of “let this chalice pass” in Matt 26:39,42 could be referring to the Crucifixion, as tradition holds, but it seems to me there is something more. God willed for the world to be reconciled to himself through this very sacrifice, and Jesus IS God. The will of Jesus, in both His divine nature and His human nature, united in the Hypostatic Union, were never at odds with God the Father: For He and God are of the same Essence.
Just prior to this, upon entering the garden, He said, “My soul is sorrowful even unto death.” (Matt 26:38) Is He sorrowful because He is about to ransom humanity through His Cross and Resurrection? Or is He sorrowful because so many would choose to ignore it? His terror and pain, it seems to me, is out of His love for those who would be lost; lost loves, so to speak, in spite of His own unyielding love and sacrifice. I’m not a scripture scholar, but it seems worth meditating on, for the sake of our own soul.
Miss Barnhardt has her usual reflection posted today, and I highly recommend it, even if you’ve read it before HERE.
A great exercise on Good Friday is to pick a Gospel and read it all the way through. It really doesn’t take that long. I am going to leave you with the seventh chapter of Matthew, the third part of the Sermon on the Mount.
Remember that the Sermon on the Mount takes place at the very beginning of Jesus’ public ministry. After the infancy narrative ends with chapter two, the introduction of John the Baptist and the baptism of the Lord in chapter three, and the temptation in the desert at the beginning of chapter four, He gets right down to business. Upon hearing of John’s death, Jesus immediately withdrew to Capernaum to begin the Galilean Ministry, as foretold in Isaiah. Preaching His message of repentance (4:17), He chose his first disciples (4:18-22), and then began drawing large crowds (4:23-25), primarily through working miracles.
Now that He had everyone’s attention, it was time for the big reveal. The Sermon on the Mount begins with chapters five and six forming a sort of catechism, and the central theme is something like, “You all think you know what’s what? Well, I’m here to take it up a notch.” He goes on to explain a litany of sinful behavior, and how we’re so much more wretched then we even knew. But then we get to chapter seven, where He offers hope, through repentance, prayer, obedience, and love. He wants to be loved.
Enter ye in at the narrow gate, my friends. Blessed Pascal Triduum to all.

The Holy Gospel of St. Mathew, Chapter 7: The third part of the Sermon on the Mount:

[1] Judge not, that you may not be judged, [2] For with what judgment you judge, you shall be judged: and with what measure you mete, it shall be measured to you again. [3] And why seest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye; and seest not the beam that is in thy own eye? [4] Or how sayest thou to thy brother: Let me cast the mote out of thy eye; and behold a beam is in thy own eye? [5] Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam in thy own eye, and then shalt thou see to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.
[6] Give not that which is holy to dogs; neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest perhaps they trample them under their feet, and turning upon you, they tear you. [7] Ask, and it shall be given you: seek, and you shall find: knock, and it shall be opened to you. [8] For every one that asketh, receiveth: and he that seeketh, findeth: and to him that knocketh, it shall be opened. [9]Or what man is there among you, of whom if his son shall ask bread, will he reach him a stone? [10] Or if he shall ask him a fish, will he reach him a serpent?
[11] If you then being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children: how much more will your Father who is in heaven, give good things to them that ask him? [12] All things therefore whatsoever you would that men should do to you, do you also to them. For this is the law and the prophets. [13] Enter ye in at the narrow gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there are who go in thereat. [14] How narrow is the gate, and strait is the way that leadeth to life: and few there are that find it! [15] Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
[16] By their fruits you shall know them. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? [17] Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit, and the evil tree bringeth forth evil fruit. [18] A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can an evil tree bring forth good fruit. [19] Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit, shall be cut down, and shall be cast into the fire. [20] Wherefore by their fruits you shall know them.
[21] Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: but he that doth the will of my Father who is in heaven, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven. [22] Many will say to me in that day: Lord, Lord, have not we prophesied in thy name, and cast out devils in thy name, and done many miracles in thy name? [23] And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, you that work iniquity. [24] Every one therefore that heareth these my words, and doth them, shall be likened to a wise man that built his house upon a rock, [25] And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and they beat upon that house, and it fell not, for it was founded on a rock.
[26] And every one that heareth these my words, and doth them not, shall be like a foolish man that built his house upon the sand, [27] And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and they beat upon that house, and it fell, and great was the fall thereof. [28] And it came to pass when Jesus had fully ended these words, the people were in admiration at his doctrine.[29] For he was teaching them as one having power, and not as the scribes and Pharisees.

The following course of action was suggested from reader, “Aqua”, emphasis mine.

His Humbleness strikes again, cameras at close range a couple of “feet” away

Posted onAPRIL 11, 2019

Not just a PR stunt, but a giant middle finger to our Lord, who is “unable” to genuflect at the Consecration nor kneel during Exposition.

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3W1mG38IX4?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent]

Repost below from just a few months ago.

---

Practicing what you preach: “Better to be an atheist” than a “hater”

Posted onJANUARY 4, 2019

Courtesy HERE.  This was at Vespers and Te Deum, 31 December 2018. Of course he’s done this many times before, with ample photographic evidence, and the winningest caption I’ve seen so far is, “Antipope Bergoglio stares down his opponent.”
He helpfully followed it up two days later with a homily about how daily Mass-goers are a bunch of hypocritical haters who would be better off staying home and living as atheists HERE.
Have you ever wondered why they keep putting out the prie dieu when they know he’s never going to use it? Do you ever wonder why he’s not embarrassed standing there in front of it, when it’s such a jarring sight? Do you ever wonder why, in six years, he’s never told them to stop bringing it out?
Because he wants it there, that’s why. It’s there for effect, you see. It’s an enhancement, an accessory. “I should be kneeling, but I won’t bow to you. Non Serviam. And (just to reinforce the point) look at this stupid kneeler they put here for me. How pathetic.”
Remember, the biggest rush he gets is not in the power play itself, but in the getting away with it.
Are you aiding and abetting him? Do you follow this man?