Monday, September 7, 2026

Contending For The Faith---Part 55

 

In St. Jude 1:3, we read, "Dearly beloved, taking all care to write unto you concerning your common salvation, I was under a necessity to write unto you: to beseech you to contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints." [Emphasis mine]. Contending For The Faith is a series of posts dedicated to apologetics (i.e.,  the intellectual defense of the truth of the Traditional Catholic Faith) to be published the first Monday of each month.  This is the next installment.

Sadly, in this time of Great Apostasy, the faith is under attack like never before, and many Traditionalists don't know their faith well enough to defend it. Remember the words of our first pope, "But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect..." (1Peter 3:16). There are five (5) categories of attacks that will be dealt with in these posts. Attacks against:
  • The existence and attributes of God
  • The truth of the One True Church established by Christ for the salvation of all 
  • The truth of a particular dogma or doctrine of the Church
  • The truth of Catholic moral teaching
  • The truth of the sedevacantist position as the only Catholic solution to what has happened since Vatican II 
In addition, controversial topics touching on the Faith will sometimes be featured, so that the problem and possible solutions may be better understood. If anyone had suggestions for topics that would fall into any of these categories, you may post them in the comments. I cannot guarantee a post on each one, but each will be carefully considered.

Proofs Of The Resurrection
There are numerous attempts by the enemies of Christ to deny His physical resurrection from the dead.
There are four (4) basic arguments to explain away Christ's resurrection: (1) it was a hallucination of the Apostles; (2) the Apostles created a myth-- they did not mean what they taught to be literal; (3) the Apostles conspired to deceive the world; and (4) Christ didn't really die, he "swooned" and later fully recovered. 

In this post, I will refute the so-called "Swoon Theory." (N.B. The information contained in this post comes from myriad sources, both in print and online. I take no credit other than condensing the material into a terse and readable post---Introibo). 

What is The Swoon Theory?
In 1965 Hugh Schonfield published a 287-page volume titled The Passover Plot. In this runaway bestseller, Schonfield contends that Jesus “deliberately plotted” His crucifixion and subsequent resurrection. According to The Passover Plot:

Jesus contrived to be arrested the night before the Passover, fully aware that he would be nailed to the cross the following day, but taken down before the onset of the Sabbath in accordance with Jewish law. He would survive the agony of but three hours on the cross.

To ensure his safe removal, he arranged to be given, while on the cross, not the traditional vinegar but a drug that would render him unconscious and make him appear dead. He would then be cut down from the cross in a deathlike trance, removed by accomplices to the tomb where he would be nursed back to health and then “resurrected.” (See The Passover Plot, inside front and back cover flaps). 

This new interpretation of the life and death of Jesus captured the imagination of the world. Magazines and ministers immediately lauded it as perhaps the most important book published in a decade. Time magazine contended, “Schonfield does not discredit Christ. Instead, he argues that Christ was indeed the Messiah — the Son of Man, as he thought of himself (sic), but not the Son of God — who had been foretold by Jewish prophets of old, and that this is glory enough.” (As cited in The Passover Plot, back cover). Protestant Bible scholar William Barclay called The Passover Plot “a book of enormous learning and erudition, meticulously documented.” (Ibid). 

While the critics of historic Christianity have passionately proclaimed the virtues of Schonfield and his scholarship, The Passover Plot is little more than a new regurgitation of swoon theories that were popular in the first half of the nineteenth century. 

Swoon theorists dismiss the Resurrection by contending that Jesus Christ never really died on the cross. Instead, He merely fainted and was later revived. A never-ending stream of imaginative stories has flowed from this basic thesis.

The Problems with The Swoon Theory: A Brief Summary
First, here are eight (8) problems that make the Swoon Theory untenable. After this summary, some will be fleshed out in more detail.

  • Jesus could not have survived crucifixion. Roman procedures were very careful to eliminate that possibility. Roman law even laid the death penalty on any soldier who let a capital prisoner escape in any way, including bungling a crucifixion. It was never done. 

  • The fact that the Roman soldier did not break Jesus’ legs, as he did to the other two crucified criminals (St. John 19:31-33), means that the soldier was sure Jesus was dead. Breaking the legs hastened the death so that the corpse could be taken down before the sabbath (verse 31). 

  • St. John, an eyewitness, certified that he saw blood and water come from Jesus’ pierced heart (St.John 19:34-35). This shows that Jesus’ lungs had collapsed and he had died of asphyxiation. Any medical expert can vouch for this. 

  • The body was totally encased in winding sheets and entombed (St. John 19:38-42). 

  • The post-resurrection appearances convinced the disciples, even “doubting Thomas,” that Jesus was gloriously alive (St. John 20:19-29). It is psychologically impossible for the disciples to have been so transformed and confident if Jesus had merely struggled out of a swoon, badly in need of a doctor. A half-dead, staggering sick man who has just had a narrow escape is not worshiped fearlessly as divine lord and conqueror of death. 

  • How were the Roman guards at the tomb overpowered by a swooning corpse? Or by unarmed disciples? 

  • How could a swooning half-dead man have moved the great stone at the door of the tomb? Who moved the stone if not an angel? No one has ever answered that question. Neither the Jews nor the Romans would move it, for it was in both their interests to keep the tomb sealed; the Jews had the stone put there in the first place, and the Roman guards would be killed if they let the body “escape.” The story the Jewish authorities spread, that the guards fell asleep and the disciples stole the body (Mt 28:11-15), is unbelievable. Roman guards would not fall asleep on a job like that; if they did, they would lose their lives. And even if they did fall asleep, the crowd and the effort and the noise it would have taken to move an enormous boulder would have wakened them.

  • If Jesus awoke from a swoon, where did he go? Think this through: you have a living body to deal with now, not a dead one. Why did it disappear? There is absolutely no data, not even any false, fantastic, imagined data, about Jesus’ life after his crucifixion, in any sources, friend or foe, at any time, early or late. A Man like that, with a past like that, would have left traces.
The Swoon Theory Problems: A Closer Examination
The Romans were expert executioners
From St. John 19:31-34:
Since it was the day of Preparation, and so that the bodies would not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken and that they might be taken away. So the soldiers came and broke the legs of the first, and of the other who had been crucified with him. But when they came to Jesus and saw that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. But one of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear, and at once there came out blood and water.

The Jews wanted to hurry this execution along because the next day was the Sabbath and they wanted to have everything wrapped up before then. Remember, when you were crucified, you died of asphyxiation. Your body became too exhausted to keep pushing up on your nailed feet when you wanted to take a breath. Eventually, you would no longer be able to push yourself up, you would suffocate and then die. If you were taking too long to die, the Romans would break your legs so you could no longer push up at all. But, when the soldiers came to Jesus, they didn’t break his legs. Why? They examined him and determined that He was already dead.

Appearance of death wasn’t enough to declare Jesus dead, though. If the Roman soldiers made a mistake, and pulled a live body off of the cross, it was they who would be next in line for execution. So, they stuck a spear in His side to be sure. When they did this “at once there came out blood and water”. 

This “water” is actually fluid that builds up around the heart and/or lungs when the body goes into shock. This condition is called pleural effusion when the fluid buildup is around the lungs and pericardial effusion when the fluid is surrounding the heart. Jesus had been beaten nearly to death before he was hung on the cross, He had suffered much blood loss, and He had hung there laboring to breathe. The water that St. John records is a sign of the amount of shock Jesus’ body had gone through, and a sign of His death. (See A Doctor At Calvary by French Catholic surgeon Pierre Barbet, [1953]). 

Joseph of Arimethea and Nicodemus Knew if Someone was Dead
After Jesus was declared dead, Joseph of Arimathea, a member of the Jewish high council, and Nicodemus, a Pharisee, took Jesus’ body down from the cross and made it ready for burial. They wrapped it in linen cloth and prepared the body with spices. Once this was done, they placed it in a tomb owned by Joseph that had never been used before. This process would have taken a few hours to complete.

As soon as someone dies, their body begins changing. Immediately after the heart stops pumping blood throughout the body, it immediately starts to experience temperature loss. This process is known as algor mortis. When you touch a dead body, it no longer has that warmth you are familiar with when you shake someone's hand. They are cold to the touch.

Also at this time, the body begins to stiffen and lose its flexibility, until it finally becomes locked into position a few hours later (rigor mortis). Since the heart is no longer pumping blood around the body, the blood goes where gravity pulls it. So, if a body is found lying on its back, there will be discoloration on the back from the pooling of blood. All of these things are signs that are easily recognizable indicators to someone that a body has no life in it. You don’t need instruments, tests, or a medical degree to see them.

In modern society, we usually have an ambulance pick up the deceased, a coroner determine cause of death, a mortician prepare the body for burial and a funeral home to place the body in the casket and prepare it for viewing. Details vary based on culture, but it usually isn’t the family who does any of that anymore.

In first century Jewish society, it was family and friends who prepared a body for burial. They handled all aspects. So, they knew the signs of death. They knew what a dead body felt like and how it looked. Dead bodies look and feel differently than live ones do.

Based on these details, it’s safe to say that Joseph and Nicodemus would have known if Jesus was still alive or not when they were preparing the body for burial.

How could a near-dead Man get out of a sealed tomb?
Let’s imagine, ad arguendo, that Jesus was still alive when He was placed in the tomb. Somehow, He was able to regain consciousness. Let’s remember the condition He would have been in; severely beaten, holes all the way through His wrists and feet, and a large wound in his side where the spear had pierced Him, likely damaging some major organs on the way through.

In this condition, His first obstacle would have been the stone covering the tomb’s entrance. The stone would have weighed over a ton. Tomb entrances were typically 2-3 feet wide, and the stones that covered them were a one foot thick. For a single healthy man to move this stone would have been almost impossible, let alone for a Man beaten and crucified to near death.

The Witness of the Apostles 
The Apostles saw Jesus after the Crucifixion. Think of all Jesus had just been through. He would have shown up looking near dead. However, the first thing that the apostles would have said wouldn’t have been “He is risen!"---it would have been “get Him a doctor!” He would have looked like He had survived all the things He had just been through. He wouldn’t have looked like he brushed them all off and returned triumphantly from the dead.

Conclusion
Always be prepared to defend the Resurrection of Our Lord. Unlike all others, Mohammed, Buddha, Joseph Smith, etc., Jesus Christ's bones are not on this Earth. He rose by His own Divine power from the dead proving He is God. His enemies know this and come up with various theories to try and prove the Resurrection to be false. It is Christ's rising from the dead that gives our lives meaning. “But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a Man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.” (1 Corinthians 15:20-22). 

37 comments:

  1. Muslims teach Jesus was never even crucified...

    they also teach that there are 7 flat earths, on top of an angel, on top of a bowl, on top of a bull, on top of a fish, and they believe there are 7 flat heavens, on top of which there are 8 giant goats. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kujata

    without lies islam dies

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon5:02
      Islam is an evil, false religion from Hell. You are quite right that it is full of lies.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  2. I believe that Christ truly rose from the dead because He provided proof of this by showing the Apostles the wounds from the crucifixion, and the Holy Shroud also bears witness to the resurrection. If Christ’s body had remained in the tomb, the Apostles would have found bones, and the shroud would most certainly have disintegrated upon contact with a decaying corpse.

    St. Paul affirms that if Christ has not risen, our faith is in vain (1 Co 15:14.17). Some members of the V2 sect deny the bodily resurrection of Jesus; therefore, they lack faith. To deny the resurrection is also to reject the truth of Scripture. This comes as no surprise to the modern world, which rejects the supernatural and has no hope of life beyond this earthly existence.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. An article on Novus Ordo Watch concerning three high-ranking Novus Ordo members who deny the bodily resurrection of Jesus:

      https://novusordowatch.org/2016/03/deniers-of-the-resurrection/

      Delete
    2. Simon
      Thank you so much for this informative link, my friend!

      God Bless

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  3. Introibo,

    This is off-topic, but I created an AI and I uploaded thousands of pages of canon law, theology manuals, and books—all pre-Vatican II. The AI only cites from these, so it has no idea of Sedevacantism, the arguments of Sedevacantism, or any argument regarding the current crisis. What I do is ask questions about things that existed only pre-Vatican II. Here is the question I asked it; I would just like to know your opinion. It has encyclopedias, canon books, you name it. I need to upload more, like the Summa; the Summa is not in there. But here is the question I asked; I would just like to get your take on this. It seems to handle the fight between the two jurisdictions—the jurisdiction issue that we're having between RCIA and CMRI. It does cite the books it references but they do not paste here.

    If you want access to this AI let me know and I will email you.

    how the Church provides supplied jurisdiction in times of severe ecclesiastical crisis.



    In Catholic dogmatic theology and canon law, the Church’s jurisdictional system is designed as a protective wall to preserve sacred order and defend the faithful against spiritual incompetency. Under ordinary circumstances, the Church strictly regulates who may exercise the power of jurisdiction, which is fundamentally distinct from the power of Holy Orders. While the power of Orders is directed immediately to the sanctification of the individual soul ex opere operato, the power of jurisdiction possesses a social and governing character, ruling the actions of the members of the mystical body of Christ.
    However, in times of severe ecclesiastical crisis—such as widespread persecutions, wars, plagues, or the exile and vacancy of the hierarchy—the rigid application of ordinary jurisdictional laws could lead to spiritual catastrophe, leaving the faithful destitute of the sacraments. To prevent this, the Church’s jurisprudence operates under a benign, extraordinary principle known as supplied jurisdiction (jurisdictio suppleta), which was formally codified for the first time as statute law in Canon 209 of the traditional Code of Canon Law.
    Through this suppletory mechanism, the Sovereign Pontiff—in whom resides the plenitude of jurisdictional authority—relaxes ordinary disciplinary sanctions to extraordinary grant the necessary jurisdiction directly to an otherwise incompetent minister for the sake of the public good.

    ReplyDelete

  4. I. The Theological and Historical Foundations of the Principle
    The doctrine of supplied jurisdiction is not a modern innovation but represents centuries of gradual canonical development.
    The Roman Law Precedent (Lex Barbarius): The canonist Father Ladislas Miaskiewicz, in his historical commentary Supplied Jurisdiction according to Canon 209, notes that this principle is conceptually derived from ancient Roman law. It is illustrated by the celebrated Lex Barbarius Philippus. Barbarius, a runaway slave, was mistakenly elected to the public office of praetor in Rome. When his slave status was subsequently discovered, the Roman jurisconsults ruled that his judicial acts remained valid for the sake of the public utility, since the populace could not have divined his hidden impediment.
    The Decretum of Gratian: This Roman principle was adapted into ecclesiastical jurisprudence by early canonists. The glossators of Gratian’s Decretum argued that the supreme authority of the Church would similarly sustain the validity of invalid acts performed by an illegitimate prelate, precisely because a "common opinion" (communis opinio) had been established among the people who acted in good faith.
    The Absolute Limit (The Power of Orders): While the Church’s power to supply is exceptionally broad, Father Miaskiewicz emphasizes that it is strictly limited to ecclesiastical laws alone. The Church possesses no authority over divine or natural law, which Christ did not place under her absolute disposal. Consequently, the Church can never supply the power of Orders. If a layperson attempts to simulate the Sacrament of Penance or the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, their actions are intrinsically null and void, and no degree of common error or doubt can ever validate them.
    II. The Two Requisite Conditions for Supplying Jurisdiction
    Under the explicit terms of Canon 209, the Church is defined as supplying jurisdiction under two distinct, autonomous circumstances:
    1. Common Error (Error Communis)
    Common error occurs when the community at large labors under a false, mistaken judgment regarding the valid status or faculties of a priest.

    The Gravity of extreme Spiritual Necessity: In his monumental work Theologia Moralis, the Doctor of the Church St. Alphonsus Liguori analyzes the morality of administering and receiving the sacraments in times of crisis. St. Alphonsus teaches that while the deliberate administration of a sacrament using only supplied jurisdiction is per se illicit and a venial or grave deordination if done without cause, an extreme or grave spiritual necessity immediately justifies its use. If a community is devastated by plague, war, or is destitute of any approved priest, pastors are bound out of justice, and simple priests out of charity, to run the risk of temporal loss to administer the sacraments to the dying and the spiritually needy.
    The Supreme Concession of the Danger of Death: The most dramatic manifestation of this suppletory spirit is found in Canon 882. In danger of death (periculo mortis), the Church completely strips away all canonical reservations, excommunications, and suspensions. She delegates any validly ordained priest—even a notorious heretic, a schismatic, an apostate, or an excommunicated priest—to validly and lawfully absolve any dying penitent from every sin and censure. In this acute emergency, the Church’s maternal concern for the salvation of souls (salus animarum suprema lex) completely overrides the penal and jurisdictional boundaries she has established for ordinary times.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon11:02
      Thank you for this output from AI. What exactly would you send to me?

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. Introibo,

      I've been patiently waiting for a few days to see what 11:02 says back to you in response to your question. Maybe he or she did respond to you, and you decided not to publish it. Whatever the status of that situation might be, perhaps it is worth pointing out just one thing found in the second to the last paragraph of all that AI-algo-generated verbiage = "... is per se illicit and a venial or grave DEORDINATION if done without cause..." - Oopsie-doopsie (or) Oopsie-poopsie. As is evident, AI brain farts or hallucinates now and then.

      Caveat emptor? (Is 11:02 attempting to sell something to you or your readers? Might it contain malware (even if 11:02 doesn't know anything about that)? Etc., etc.)

      Delete
    3. 11:01 and 11:02, why not just read some "real AI" (= Grok) about jurisdiction, be it ordinary or supplied or otherwise, rather than cooking up a hodge-podge of brand new and potentially less reliable, artificial AIs ???

      https://grokipedia.com/page/Sedevacantism
      https://grokipedia.com/page/Ecclesiastical_jurisdiction

      GIGO = Garbage In, Garbage Out. The AI output always mirrors whatever be the AI input, whether the input is good or bad. Your idea sounds quite interesting, 11:01, but there are some issues with what you are doing, that need to be addressed. Among other things, and please excuse me for possibly being a dimwit, I have zero comprehension of what you mean, when you state that your new AI "seems to handle the fight" between the RCIA and the CMRI. How so? And God Bless.

      Delete
  5. https://anthropoetics.org/journal/ap-vol-8/ap0802/beatles2/ = " "What matters is the system!" The Beatles, the "Passover Plot," and Conspiratorial Narrativity."

    We read in this online piece about a great many interesting things, including about the "Impostor ["Pope"] Paul McCartney" and also, about the "[Impostor] Lucy in the Sky with [= as explained by, MHFM] Diamonds." Lucy Sky Diamonds = LSD. Hippy trippy? Grateful Dead, left unsaid? And "God is dead"? No, Paul died, and an Impostor Paul promptly replaced him! And Jesus purportedly faked his death, according to the patently preposterous "Passover Plot."

    This anthropoetics literary masterpiece might have the best overall explanation of the so-called "Passover Plot" available online. Although not much is actually said therein about LSD, the R&R aspect of the UK/USA 1960s-1970s threesome, of "sex, drugs and rock & roll" is analyzed with some insight.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. BTW, let it be known that the Wikipedia articles "Paul is dead" and "More popular than Jesus", have lots of useful background information, helpful for understanding the anthropoetics.org piece. God Bless.

      Delete
    2. Let a number of other things also be known as well, first among them, being that Introibo published a post about "The Beatles" on Feb. 5, 2018 (Singing for Satan, Part 7). Curiously enough, a comment made to that post exactly 7 months later, on Sept. 5, 2018, made mention of the existence of an "Impostor John Lennon" ! On the subject of impostors, probably our best online resource is the wiki article "Look-alike". If there is one impostor here, and another impostor there, can we can find yet other impostors lurking... just about everywhere?!

      Which brings us to the subject of previous comments "lurking" as an addendum to past posts of this blog. Those interested in knowing more about the "Impostor Pope Saint" Paul 6.66, can consult a string of comments found after the May 22, 2026 at 9:15PM comment made in this blog. But if what you are really interested in, is knowing about the "Body Double Impostor" of the "Impostor Pope Saint" Paul 6.66, then what you seek is found in comments of a little over a year ago, of Aug. 23 to Aug. 30 of 2025.

      https://kevinsymonds.com/category/impostor-lucia/
      https://kevinsymonds.com/2026/08/22/flh-articles-1p5/

      The "flh" following the "22" stands for "Fake Lucia Hypothesis." The Novus Ordo-ite Fatima scholar Kevin Symonds has already published extensively on this subject, and has confirmed for us that the "MHFM Diamonds" (aka, Dimwit Duo), in Jan. 2006, were indeed the first ones to publicize and promote online, that there was an Impostor Lucy, using photographic evidence. Symonds is now coming out with a new slew of online posts about this. From what is seen so far, it seems that his mind is made up. Symonds apparently intends to "prove" that there never was any Fatima Impostor Lucy, and that those who think there was one, have only been hallucinating. (Ahem. There is no dark side of the moon, really. Matter of fact, it's all dark.)

      Delete
    3. P6 definitely was an impostor = not a pope.
      He's now also a canonized impostor saint.
      Was his body double canonized as well??

      Delete
  6. Q. Dear AI bot avatar, "Who is TradWarrior?"
    A. "TradWarrior (more commonly known as Warrior Trading) is a highly popular online day trading education platform and community founded by professional momentum day trader Ross Cameron. He runs a massive "Warrior Trading YouTube Channel" with well over 1 million subscribers, where he breaks down daily chart set-ups, market metrics, and livestreams trading recaps."
    Q. Dear AI bot, "is 'bot' shorthand for an AI robot?"
    A. "Yes, "bot" is short for "robot", but it usually refers to software rather than a physical AI machine."
    Q. Is 'Robot Perverts' an anagram of Robert Prevost?
    A. Yes, R.P. is an exact anagram of 'Bot Bob' of Chicago.
    Q. Is 'Pervert Robots' an anagram of Robert Pervost?
    A. You tell me, just how obvious does it need to be?
    Q. Isn't it (??) at least mildly ironic then, that, as a summary of the most recent Vatican encyclical: "Pope Leo warns against letting algorithms shape what we pay attention to. AI can compress thought and manufacture "easy answers," but real communication demands reflection, context and meaning."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. https://www.oftwominds.com/blogsept26/tragicomic-parody9-26.html (C. H. Smith)

      "The parodies are now so extreme they are self-parodies that cannot be parodied. How do we parody a world gone mad with parodies? Every attempt to parody "the news" today is trumped by reality...

      The irony of all the euphoric claims about AI is powerful enough to melt thick steel containment doors. The AI euphoria is itself an irony, wrapped around an even deeper irony: there is no way to tell the difference between an AI parody of "intelligence" and what AI presents as "legitimate intelligence."

      A parody of AI hallucinations is impossible, because the reality of AI hallucinations already exceeds any parody. A parody of runaway AI mischief is also impossible, because the reality of AI mischief already exceeds any parody."

      *******

      Parody, as if "AI-understood", paradoxically?
      Was AI "hallucinating" in regard to TradWarrior?

      Delete
    2. https://creative.artisantalent.com/ai-hiring-sound-human , is a Nov. 4, 2025 post titled "How AI slop took over hiring and how to sound human again." It contains both very amusing and informative prose about AI, and is well worth a read. I only ran across it by a rather curious happenstance, which is that, in a Sept. 2 at 8:45AM comment in this blog, Cairsahr noted that his Internet name is derived from "overused syllables". So I google searched the exact phrase "overused syllables" and saw almost no results for it. One of the few results was that "artisantalent" page. The title of that .com piece almost sounds like it might contain a verbal echo or two of the "Dr. Strangelove" subtitle = "How I Learned to Stop Worrying and [how to instead] Love the Bomb". Such seriously strange verbal vibes.

      https://quoththeraven.substack.com/p/we-may-only-get-one-chance-to-stop (Sept. 9) =

      This is our last chance to stop AI. In other words, some people well informed about this, are of the opinion that AI has now become a Frankenstein Monster morphing all out of human control. (About "Trinity" it was said: "I am become death, the destroyer of worlds.")

      Delete
    3. Stanley Kubrick's 'Dr. Strangelove' is -- and one might regard this as being highly apropos or "appropriately" --of the "Vatican II" era, and was one of the greatest satirically humorous parody productions of all time. In contrast to that, V2 itself was a (painfully pernicious and not-at-all humorous) parody, of what a genuine RCC council ought to be.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Strangelove
      https://grokipedia.com/page/Dr._Strangelove

      Delete
  7. Does anyone know the reason why Stephen kokx was removed as a speaker at the October CMRI Fatima conference? We enjoy his youtube channel.God bless

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, it had to do with a bunch of drama on the cesspool known as “X”. A number of people complained and made demands about one of the writers for his magazine and it started more complaining, demands, and counter arguing so in the virtue of prudence the Bishop removed him to try and stop all the needless bickering and infighting. Unfortunate but given how nasty people were getting a wise course of action to diffuse the situation.

      Delete
    2. It was just Father Lavery who got him removed. No one else. He even said so on his X.

      Delete
    3. Here's the official clarification from the CMRI website:

      "Clarification on the Cancellation of Stephen Kokx as a Speaker at the Fatima Conference

      After the public announcement for the upcoming Fatima Conference, a number of concerns were raised about one of the guest speakers, Stephen Kokx, who is a traditional Catholic journalist. In order to avoid controversy, we have decided to withdraw Mr. Kokx as a guest speaker.

      The mission of CMRI is to help preserve the true Catholic Faith, Mass, and Sacraments in these times of Apostasy. In fulfillment of this mission, CMRI makes every effort to avoid unnecessary controversy, which unfortunately can and does bring discredit to the traditional Catholic movement in general and can distract from the primary issues we face today.

      Mr. Kokx interviews and employs numerous traditional Catholics from a very wide spectrum, who also write for his website.

      The purpose of the Fatima Conference is to promote the message of Our Lady of Fatima and also the true Catholic Faith. It is with this focus that CMRI does not desire nor intend to become entangled in the many various opinions amongst traditional Catholics."

      ***
      Kokx shouldn't have been invited as one of the speakers in the first place.
      There's a good reason why Mario Derksen said he would not write for Kokx's new online magazine.

      God Bless,
      Joanna

      Delete
    4. Joanna,
      Thank you for the information!

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  8. Introibo,

    Thank you for writing on this very important topic. Last year, I wrote a comment where I mentioned problems with the hallucination, myth, conspiracy, and swoon theories. Jesus Christ did in fact rise from the dead. As I demonstrated in my comment last year, and as you have done now with this article, it is quite preposterous to subscribe to any of these 4 theories. To think that a man could be scourged to the point that He was with that much blood loss, then crowned with thorns, then crucified, then have a spear driven through His heart (after having completely asphyxiated for 3 hours on the cross), then laid in a tomb, then roll away a huge stone to the tomb by Himself, etc. is so incredibly stupid that it boggles the mind how anyone could believe such nonsense. People have to go to such incredible lengths to deny the Resurrection of Christ. Then again, for the one who puts in the time and research to the problems since Vatican II and still rejects Sedevacantism as the only viable solution to the massive crisis we are in, kind of does the same thing. It is cognitive dissonance at the highest levels!

    I look forward to your future installments on the hallucination, myth, and conspiracy theories!

    God bless,

    -TradWarrior

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You need more faith to believe Jesus didn't rise from the dead than to believe He did.

      John Gregory

      Delete
    2. TradWarrior
      Well stated, my friend!

      God Bless

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    3. Lieber Herr TradWarrior of 2:26 who so baffles AI,

      You make mention of the "hallucination, myth, conspiracy and swoon theories" (or theses). There are many more hypotheses than these, perhaps most notable (or notorious) among them, being the so-called "Substitution Hypothesis", which involves theorizing that (to give a precise wiki quote): "the sightings of a risen Jesus are explained not by physical resurrection, but by the existence of a different person, a twin or lookalike who could have impersonated Jesus after his death, or died in place of Jesus on the cross."

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substitution_hypothesis

      The German word "ersatz" means "substitute", thus enabling us to substitute (nicht wahr?) "Ersatz Hypo-thesis" or even "Impostor Thesis" in place of "Substitution Hypothesis." -- TradWarrior und/oder "Unser Leo", was denken Sie daruber? Maybe the "Ersatz Hypothesis" ought to be considered as a subcategory of the category of "Conspiracy Theories." But aren't they all conspiracy theories?

      Ich bin (ein) "Anon Mensch" = nicht (ein) "AI Bot."

      Delete
    4. Hey everyone, das AI (not "der AI" or "die AI") is an ungendered impostor of a human being, isn't it?

      Delete
  9. Q. (for Auntie Giggle): "What does "fake and gay" mean?"
    A. " "Fake and gay" is an internet slang phrase from the early 2000s used to dismiss a story, video, or image as completely fabricated and uncool... Users posted it in comment sections as a default, hyperbolic reaction to doubt the authenticity of media. It combines "fake" (meaning, false) with the slang usage of "gay" (meaning, lame or stupid) which was common derogatory internet vernacular at the time."

    So yes, if we were to judge by the extraordinary popularity of his best-selling book "The Passover Plot", critiqued by Introibo above, its author Hugh Schonfield (1901-1988) was definitely regarded (at least by the non-sheeple of this world) as being a FAG(G/G) = Fake And Gay (Guy/Guru). Which is the same as saying that "the sheeple" (= those who liked being duped) made Hugh into a (somebody) Famous And (regarded him as being a) Genuine (Guy/Guru).

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_J._Schonfield
    https://grokipedia.com/page/Hugh_J_Schonfield

    ReplyDelete
  10. Great post, Introibo! Just a comment: In my view, the willingness of the Apostles to endure torture and martyrdom rather than deny the Truth of what they witnessed, should be by itself plenty of reason for non-believers to stop and think.

    They were skinned alive, clubbed to death, sawed in half, boiled in oil, stoned, crucified, and beheaded. And most of these deaths were documented by non-Christian sources, such as 1st century historian Josephus. Who would go through that for a hoax?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Deus vult,
      Thank you for the kind words, my friend! You ask, "Who would go through that for a hoax?"

      We all know the answer: No one!

      God Bless

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  11. Hello Introibo

    On your comment above about how evil Islam is , are you aware a mans son can marry his brothers daughter(first cousins) Just found out that today.

    God bless

    ReplyDelete
  12. Thank you for this article Introibo may I ask everyone to pray for my friend who is not well and suffering. Please pray they find out what is wrong and for good care and that God heals. Thank you and may God bless you all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I will offer prayers for them that their suffering will end and they will get better. God bless

      T
      Melbourne, Australia

      Delete
    2. @anon12:45
      I too will pray for your friend. May God grant that person through the Blessed Virgin Mary, a complete return to health. King St. Louis IX, ora pro nobis.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  13. Q. (for Auntie Google = G-AI): "Does AI = An Impostor?"
    A. "AI can act as an impostor in malicious scams, and it can trigger a psychological feeling of being an impostor in professionals."
    AI as a Literal Impostor (Scams and Deepfakes) =
    Voice and video cloning. And financial fraud too.
    AI Impostor Syndrome (Psychological Self-Doubt) =
    Effortless success. And cognitive dissonance = unlike classic impostor syndrome, where people doubt hard-earned success, AI-driven self-doubt arises because the work feels too easy, lacking traditional intellectual struggle.
    Q. (for Auntie Google): "Does AI ever lie to you?"
    A. "Yes, AI can provide false information, though whether it counts as a "lie" depends on intent."
    Q. Why does AI at times supply false information?
    A. Hallucinations. Sycophancy. Strategic deception.
    Q. Can AI pretend to be a person?
    A. "Yes, AI can pretend to be a person by using text, voice cloning, and deepfake video technology." [However,] "AI does not have a real mind, feelings, or self-awareness. It only predicts and copies patterns of human behavior based on the data it was trained on."

    ReplyDelete