RSS

The American Conservative’s recent disappeared article ‘Theology of the Lady Parts’

24 Dec

As with the Federalist piece, the American Conservative has disappeared their short post on the same subject, referencing the Federalist piece; the Google cache here is displayed below (copy and share while you can):

Theology of the Lady Parts

 

 

[Note: supposedly the Patristic Institute has denied the event is taking place there. But the Daily Mail story has not been changed or retracted, as of the time of this writing; compare the link given with the screencap:

 
]

Advertisements
 

12 responses to “The American Conservative’s recent disappeared article ‘Theology of the Lady Parts’

  1. infowarrior1

    December 24, 2015 at 8:27 am

    Streisand effect?

     
  2. feeriker

    December 24, 2015 at 10:22 am

    The delegates will also be greeted to an audience with Pope Francis and a walk with in the Vatican gardens, the Times reported.

    Ah, to be a fly on the wall as Pope Fucktard I gives his blessing to this group of hedonist heretics. Shades of Alexander VI indeed (if I were a pagan, I might even assert that Fucktard is in fact a reincarnation of ol’ Rodrigo, sent back to expedite the rot he fostered in his previous existence but failed to survive to see through completely the first time).

     
  3. Will S.

    December 24, 2015 at 11:37 am

    @ infowarrior1: Let’s hope! 🙂

    Seriously, why has the Daily Mail article not been changed, if in error? Why did two less-well-known internet publications pull their pieces on the info. of the Patristic Institute, but the Daily Mail either wasn’t asked to pull it or for some reason hasn’t?

    Hmmm…

    I’m just doing my part. Idiots must learn, never pull something without a really good explanation; better to update, and leave it up.

    @ feeriker: Indeed, it would be interesting.

     
  4. feeriker

    December 24, 2015 at 11:57 am

    Oh, and does anyone else cringe at the thought of what Comrade Frankie’s Christmas message tonight might contain?

     
  5. Will S.

    December 24, 2015 at 12:05 pm

    If I were Catholic, feeriker, I certainly would.

     
  6. Eric

    December 25, 2015 at 5:54 am

    As a Catholic, I think that since Benedict is still legally a Pope, they should let him do all the talking; and hood Francis, like a falcon, and only take the hood off for official photo-ops and things.

     
  7. feeriker

    December 26, 2015 at 5:22 pm

    As a Catholic, I think that since Benedict is still legally a Pope, they should let him do all the talking

    Although I’m not Catholic I hope that some courageous reporter(s) uncover(s) the truth someday soon concerning Benedict’s “abdication” (which I have a hard time believing was in any way his own free will). This is probably an even more explosive scandal than the emerging “Hitlerygate.”

     
  8. Will S.

    December 26, 2015 at 6:53 pm

    @ Eric: If only…

    @ feeriker: I’ve long wondered the same: who pushed Benedict out? How? Why? Why did he cooperate?

    Popes rarely abdicate. Like, never. To an outsider, it’s too suspicious.

    I liked Benedict. I do not like Francis.

    Francis wants to be liked by the world; Benedict didn’t care.

    Friendship with the world is enmity with Christ.

     
  9. Eric

    December 28, 2015 at 8:36 pm

    There’s a lot of controversy over Benedict’s abdication. I can’t believe that he would do it unless he believed it was for the benefit of the Church—could he have been tricked? Who knows?

    The last time I read of a Pope abdicating, we wound up with Boniface VIII, and look what a disaster that was. Popes are not made to resign, I don’t believe the official story that it was for Benedict’s health—he’s lived for two years since and his predecessor remained Pope while in a coma before he died.

    There are some Catholics who hold that Francis is an Antipope and only recognize Benedict as legitimate. Despite Francis’ problems, he hasn’t done anything that would disqualify him as Pope. He’s sort of like Jimmy Carter was as president; nothing worthy of impeachment but you still can’t wait for a Ronald Reagan to take his place.

     
  10. Will S.

    December 29, 2015 at 12:27 am

    It is mysterious, and it hasn’t been good, for sure.

     

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s