Daily Archives: February 3, 2014
If one throws himself under a train he has not “lost his battle against the train”. He simply chose to throw himself under it.
If one throws himself out of a seventh-floor window he has not “lost his battle against the pavement”. He simply chose to smash himself into it.
If one shoots himself in the head he has not “lost his battle against the bullet”. He chose to plant the bullet exactly where the bullet went.
It is, therefore, rather singular that when Philip Seymour Hoffman dies of the overdose he injected himself, the PC media should report that he has “lost his battle against heroin” as if heroin were something happening to one, and as if he had died of, say, cancer. Heroin just doesn't happen, nor have I ever heard of people injecting cancer into themselves, and being told of having “lost their battle” when they die of it.
Still, in today's oh so tolerant society Seymour Hoffman – a great actor, by the way, whose acting qualities I greatly admired – can die of 100% self-inflicted and self-injected heroin overdose without any major outlet daring to say half a word about the fact of life that this is just what is not unlikely to happen to people stupid enough to drug themselves. Heck, the BBC is even very timid in saying openly he died of overdose. Police found heroin near him. Nincompoops.
This timidity or tolerance in turn gives to drug addiction a character of normality – or, in the case of a famous actor, even “coolness” of sort among the slow of intellect – that will all but cause other people, equally slow of intellect, to drug themselves and die of their own stupidity.
Nor should you hold your breath waiting for Catholic prelates – say, an Archbishop – pointing out that taking drugs is most certainly a grave matter, and it is difficult to imagine one would inject himself into an addition without deliberate intent to, well, drug himself. I am not the one to judge about the internal forum of the man as he was injecting his deadly dose – erm, sorry: losing his battle -, but I very much fear what a good confessor would say of the probable destiny of the man who put himself in such a state as to come to that point. The good and merciful God knows everything, sees in every soul and know how to judge every such situation with perfect mercy and justice; and Seymour Hoffman at this point knows his destiny, too. I wish him from heart he saved his ass, but don't ask me to bet my pint on it. Still, one point must be clear:
Seymour Hoffman did not lose any battle.
He drugged himself to death.
Say a prayer for him, poor man, in the hope he did manage to avoid the worst. But please, whenever you speak of the man in your circle of acquaintance, consider making some reflections akin to the ones above. Every little helps, and the culture of understanding for absolutely everything under the sun will only end when people stop having understanding for absolutely everything under the sun.
Try, then, to make, if the occasion arises, some observations like these ones. It's fair to say Heaven will reward you for the accusations of bigotry, intolerance, hypocrisy – everyone takes drugs nowadays, don't ya know – and general moralism that are very likely to follow.
“No one saves oneself. The community is essential”.
This is, alas, Francis tweeting.
The tweet is a good example of his papacy: senseless waffle, 100% Catholicism-free, that confuses the faithful and means either nothing or something very bad, but it certainly sounds cool among the uninstructed, the teens and the stupid.
Promptly, 5825 people with no clue retweet, and 5,290 put this sugary sounding rubbish among the “favourites”. I can imagine the excited girlie talk: “I have just favourited the Pope!”. “I have retweeted him! Isn't he sooo cool?”. “Yeah! totally wicked, totally!”.
So: what does this nonsense mean? One of three, I would say:
1. Nothing. It sounds good, though. “Community” sells. Can you feel the fluffy feeling? We are the world, we are the children…
2. We must help each other. When we help each other and the environment we will earn salvation because we have been so supportive of one another, and of the environment; and we know already from Francis that God always forgives, but Nature will frock you very hard if you displease her, and she will not forgive you at all. Cool tweet, then. So Pelagian.
3. We need the Church to be saved, because there is no salvation outside of the Church. But wait, let us not say “Church”. It's so controversial. Muslims and Jews could get angry and say I am not inclusive. I can't do that. Particularly now that I am getting “man of the year” awards like it's going out of fashion, and the Dalai Lama is green with envy. So, let me find an inclusive word instead; one that faithful of every religion and none will find acceptable. Oh, yes, “community” will do admirably. “The community is essential”. Ok, only God saves in the end, and there is no salvation outside of the Church. I know that, so it's all fine. Hey, I am a son of the Church, no? No problem then: “community” it is.
And so Francis tweets, or approves of, this nonsense. Hundreds of thousands, most of them clearly as Catholic as my cat, read in it the only thing it is possible to read: we, the brave community of the inclusive, help each other to salvation – whatever that means, and without excluding those for whom it doesn't mean anything – by being so inclusive, fighting against “H8”, and loving the Polar Bear Cub.
Nothing to do with Catholicism, of course. But then again so is most of what Francis says. Predictably, the heathenish crowds are extremely pleased. Archbishops – or archdioceses – start to retweet. Because it's so smart.
Mind, I do not say Pope should necessarily not tweet. But if they really want to tweet, and if they really care for the job description, Twitter could be a wonderful instrument to spread the Truth in a crystal clear manner.
“There is no salvation outside of the Church” is, say, a sentence wonderfully fit for tweeting and, in stark contrast to the tweet at the beginning of this post, actually Catholic. Many such brutally Catholic and brutally true messages could be sent through a medium like Twitter. The slanderous insults would have no end, giving another beautiful example of world hating the Truth. The number of those who follow the Pope because they are at least honest enough to know he will write uncomfortable things would probably also rise.
But you see: he wouldn't be popular. He would be hated and vilified. That's just not Francis, the ringmaster of Circus Bergoglio.
“Community” it is, then.
Not many days ago a famous, extremely successful, beautiful, very talented singer and actress died in circumstances which are not yet entirely cleared but will very probably have to be retraced – directly or indirectly – to her crack cocaine addiction. I liked Whitney Houston a lot in younger years, and was saddened (though not very surprised) as everyone of us. I would have written the usual Mundabor-like article with the usual cautionary tale (nowadays called “being judgmental”) but alas, I had better things to do and it slipped.
Reading around, though, I found here and there some very questionable concepts expressed, and at that point I felt a “judgemental” blog post would be rather in order.
First of all, let me say that I know already that crack cocaine changes one’s brain. All drugs do this, and every child knows that. This is the reason why the popular language…
View original post 756 more words