Their god is their belly, and their glory is in their shame

Saint Paul brandishes the sword of the word of God, clothed in the attire of a Jew of the First Century.

The blessed and glorious Apostle Saint Paul wrote to the Church of Philippi, these inspired and eternally valid words, nearly two thousand years ago:

Citizenship in Heaven

17 Be ye followers of me, brethren: and observe them who walk so as you have our model. 18 For many walk, of whom I have told you often (and now tell you weeping) that they are enemies of the cross of Christ: 19 Whose end is destruction: whose God is their belly: and whose glory is in their shame: who mind earthly things. 20 But our conversation is in heaven: from whence also we look for the Saviour, our Lord Jesus Christ, 21 Who will reform the body of our lowness, made like to the body of his glory, according to the operation whereby also he is able to subdue all things unto himself.

(Douay Rheims Translation)

The Apostle, who as such, enjoyed the personal charism of infallibility, was modest in his speech. Many have interpreted this passage as referring to gluttony but it refers principally to lust, and that of men.

Some men, losing all sense of reason or faith (if they ever had it), however, are so stupid and foolish and so ignorant of their own corporal endowments, that they hold that as soon as blood enters some part of their body, that they are inspired.  For fools of this kind, the contemporary mass-media lie of gender theory is for them a divine revelation, directly from their god.

To that end they want all things to bend to this new revelation from below: laws, religion, and above all morals.

This is what is behind the outrageous modernism and sacrilege of scripture which was recently published by the Pontifical Biblical Commission, entitled, “Che cosa è l’uomo? Un itinerario di antropologia biblica,” (“What is man? A journey into biblical anthropology”), which in its Fourth Chapter concludes thus (source):

L’esame esegetico condotto sui testi dell’Antico e del Nuovo Testamento ha fatto apparire elementi che vanno considerati per una valutazione dell’omosessualità, nei suoi risvolti etici. Certe formulazioni degli autori biblici, come le direttive disciplinari del Levitico, richiedono un’intelligente interpretazione che salvaguardi i valori che il testo sacro intende promuovere evitando, dunque, di ripetere alla lettera ciò che porta con sé anche tratti culturali di quel tempo. Sarà richiesta un’attenzione pastorale, in particolare nei confronti delle singole persone, per attuare quel servizio di bene che la Chiesa ha da assumere nella sua missione per gli uomini

From Rome translation:

The exegetical study conducted on the texts of the Old and New Testament has made evident elements which are to be considered for an evaluation of homosexuality, in its ethical implications.  Certain formulations of the biblical authors, like the disciplinary directives of Leviticus, require an intelligent interpretation to safeguard the values which the sacred text intends to promote by avoiding, therefore, to repeat according to the letter, what it also carries along with it as the cultural traits (i.e. baggage)* of that age.  Pastoral attention will be required, in particular in respect of individual persons, to activate that service of the good which the Church has to assume in Her mission for men.

Admittedly this is complex double speak. So I will translate it into common English:

In other words, WE ARE INSTRUCTING YOU TO WHITEWASH GOD’S WORD AND HIDE THE SAVING TRUTH OF THE IMMORALITY OF SODOMY FROM those addicted to this sin, lest they repent and no longer serve as agents of the Globalist Marxist revolution for the destruction of all humanity. With Papa Francis’s Blessing. Wink. Wink. Hint. Hint.

That admittedly that is not a literal translation, but rather one in the style of Vatican II, that is of dynamic equivalence! (satirical comment)

Oh, and to those who say, “But this isn’t magisterial!”:  “We say: well we agree, since Bergoglio was never the pope (see ppbxvi.org for the Catholic reason), but you really need to get a new line, because people can see through that kind of gaslighting.”

As a matter of fact, Bergoglio has announced that from now on, all Dicasteries of the Roman Curia are equal (see report here). That means, whatever the Pontifical Biblical Commission puts out, is just as authoritative as the Congregation for Divine Worship. — So get set for the next Liturgical Aggiornamento, folks!, on the lines of dumping the “cultural baggage” of the past.

_________

* This parenthesis and its content are a translator’s note, added by the From Rome Blog.

 

4 thoughts on “Their god is their belly, and their glory is in their shame”

  1. The corrupt Bergoglian anti church must come up with their stupid lies in order to get away with their evil heresies and pastoral malpractice.

    Like

  2. Oh dear! I expect that this comment will get me banned from yet another Catholic ‘site.

    The heresy and apostasy of Modernism, Naturalism, Pantheism did not originate in T’Googlio Monster. It had been alive and well for, at least, 150 years before B’googlio took over the “ministry”. Some valiant popes had tried to stem the rise of Gnostic Naturalism (most notably Pius X who had the gift of miracles in his own lifetime (a sure sign to his contemporaries) and is preserved incorrupt (a sure sign for the future)). Many of his predecessors and successors said much the same things concerning the nature of the sly contemporary apostasy from the Apostolic Faith.

    Leaving his immediate predecessors aside, Joe Card Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI) was/is an out and out Modernist admitting that he “didn’t like” Thomism because it is “too rigid” and openly approbating the apostate, pantheistic fantasies of de Chardin. I don’t claim any authority whatsoever to make claims about who is, or is not, pope but history indicates that the Petrine Succession has passed through some very shady characters before. However, I’m not aware of any instance where the Petrine office has passed through an antipope or pretender.

    In my opinion, Benedict XVI was regarded as a “conservative” by the “avant guard” only because his version of the dialectic of competition between “old” and “new” was too slow and he handed over the “ministry” to one who thinks that the “new” needs to be imposed on the “profane” to speed up Evolution toward the inevitable and relentless “progress” to the “new”.

    I also contend that the V I definition of papal infallibility says much more about when a pope is not infallible than when he is. My opinion on the matter could be summarised as: “A pope is always fallible unless these conditions are met.”

    Like

  3. Very good translation Vatican II’s latest license to sin in the name of “dynamic equivalence.” Dynamic equivalence is a George Orwell concept for sure, the transformation of the forbidden into the approved. This is what Vatican II is all about–permitting us to bask in the glow of God while we do whatever we damn well please until our moral consciousness is completely destroyed. After this comes the deluge of the New World Order which with its permissiveness we will be too weak to fight. Hell will then come to earth.

    Like

Leave a Comment

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.