Pope's doctors admit "we should have removed the spleen."

The surgeons who removed Pope Francis's semi-colon this week have now admitted that they removed the wrong organ. "We see now that we should have removed his spleen, and probably also the gall bladder in which he stores up all his bile," they said.*

*The board at the foot of the papal hospital bed said "pain in the backside", but this was not a medical diagnosis.

As Evelyn Waugh would have put it: A typical triumph of modern science to find the only part of Francis that was not malignant and remove it.

The pope's behaviour has been increasingly bizarre in recent weeks.

Francis has returned from hospital full of venom and bitterness, and it took him just two days to issue a new Motu Proprio "Traditionis Custodes" (an anagram of "Ass! Idiot! Destruction!" but that is probably just a coincidence). Subtitled "Why Benedict is wrong and I am right", the papal scribbles begin with the phrase Guardians of the tradition, the bishops in communion with the Bishop of Rome, showing that the pope could have had a successful career as a comedian if he had wished.

"Nobody's ever called me a guardian of tradition before!"

So, apart from the obvious question "Quis custodiet ipsos traditionis custodes?" we serious Catholic commentators need to ask some fundamental questions:

1. What is he doing?
2. Why is he doing it?
3. Will he get away with it?

Two popes doing what they do best.

Now the pope's reasoning behind the repeal of Summorum Pontificum without even waiting for Benedict to die may be seen as just another case of loutish bad manners (like refusing to answer the Dubia, slapping pilgrims, snubbing Cardinal Zen, etc.) but in fact it is dealing with one of the worst crises in the church: the popularity of the traditional Mass.

I'm sure that these things are randomly chosen.

After all, there can be nothing more serious! Child abuse, idol-worship, the persecution of the Church in China, Fr James Martin's sodoministry, Devout Catholic Biden's abortion mania, the widespread embezzlement of Vatican finances, the squandering of Peter's Pence on dirty films, heretical papal documents, ... all these are trivialities compared with the use of the same Mass as our grandparents used before Vatican II.*

*Did you genuflect when Vatican II was mentioned? I did. Fun, wasn't it?**

**Remember that Vatican II changed nothing at all. Which is why everything has changed.

The cunning plan:

1. Blame the traditional Mass for causing a schism.
2. Cause a schism by banning it.

"All right, lads. You know where he lives. You know what you have to do.

Priests: if you wish to celebrate a Mass in the Extraordinary Form, it is very simple now: all you need is for your bishop to ask the Pater Sanctus for a signed letter giving permission (one for every time you wish to celebrate). Pope Francis is very good at answering letters (ask Burke, Brandmüller, etc.) and will gladly take time off from his Pachamama devotions to scribble you a note.

Curiously, some bishops are actually giving Pope Francis (and his evil side-kick the sinister Dr Rauci) a shock, by saying that they will continue to allow Latin Masses as before. Some really are "Traditionis Custodes" after all. Amazing!

"Muscles" Barron prepares to celebrate the Extraordinary Form.

Incidentally, all this was foreseen two months ago in the writings of the Prophet Eccles.

Reading Francis through Rex Mottram

In Evelyn Waugh's Brideshead Revisited the character Rex Mottram gives us a useful way to interpret Pope Francis.

'Supposing the Pope looked up and saw a cloud and said "It's going to rain," would that be bound to happen?'

'Oh, yes, Father.'

'But supposing it didn't?'

He thought a moment and said, 'I suppose it would be sort of raining spiritually, only we were too sinful to see it.'

A simple exercise: can you see Francis sitting in this chair, or are you too sinful?

The above picture is a useful test: early in his reign, Pope Francis was reported to have stayed away from a Beethoven concert in his honour. Of course, that would have been simple rudeness: the fact is that he was there, but only very spiritual (saved) people could see him. The rest of you are simple sedevacantists.

We should take the words "Tu es Petrus" literally. Pope Francis is Peter. Send him off to sea in a boat (something that many Catholics have felt like doing recently), and he will come back with a catch of fish. Although you may be too sinful to see them, or even smell them.

"Look at the size of this fish!"

Likewise, when the four cardinals submitted five dubia to Pope Francis, checking that he wasn't attempting to "develop" Catholic teaching on marriage, the Holy Father responded by return of post, affirming that the answers were "No, yes, yes, yes, yes" (a cry often heard in Jesuit seminaries on a Saturday night). However Cardinal Burke and his colleagues were too sinful to realise this.

Pope Francis presents an ecstatic Cardinal Burke with a copy of Amoris Laetitia.

Which suggests that Bishops Scicluna and Grech, in thinking that doctrine had been changed developed, were grave sinners. But we knew that anyway.

This brings us to the latest crisis involving the Order of Malta. It has been claimed that Pope Francis has - like his compatriot General Galtieri - annexed another sovereign state and installed his own puppet government. After all, the order of Malta is/was an independent subject in international law, like the Vatican.

"Thanks for the advice, Vladimir!"

Of course Peter wouldn't do such a thing, and it is your sin that gives you this impression. There is no way you will see the Pope behind bars. Forget it.

Just visiting!