Daily Archives: August 3, 2016

“Hide Or Run”. Say Hello To The Age Of The Lamb

Better than every motorcyclist policeman...

The Metropolitan Police (also familiarly known as “Scotland Yard”) today revealed a new, in time 600-strong “rapid deployment force” created to deal with what we all know (but the Met won't say) is the threat posed by Muslim terrorists.

Well-armed, trained for urban warfare, and motorcycle mounted, the 600 are supposed to be there very rapidly after a terror attack has been launched.

Alas, at that point you and many others will be dead already.

In line with the slightly surreal exercise of training 600 to protect 7 million, the police has suggested that, in case of attack, we should firstly “hide”; and, if it does not work, “run”.

What a continent of pussycats we have become.

This would be the time for the British Government to make new laws making it far easier for the sound population to get a permit to carry, obviously looking closely into the background of the applicant. This would be the time to say to the people of London that in the same way they reacted to the threat of the Blitz all together, they should now all together react to the new Muslim threat and protect each other. The new enemy does not come from the sky, but from the nearest train station, the underground carriage, the double decker bus. It is necessary that the defence is as diffused as the threat is. The best and most immediate defence is always the one put in place by the people who are there, not the largely psychological measure of a motorcycle policeman arriving after you have been executed.

Nor can one say that this is too dangerous, London having too many Muslims. I can't imagine a single Muslim terrorist stopped in his tracks by the fact of not having a gun permit; but I can imagine a huge number of decent citizen prevented from defending themselves for the same reason.

A Country whose police force suggests to grown men to hide and run (I am sorry, dear wife and child; you are clearly not fast enough; but I will remember you fondly…) instead of arming, training and preparing themselves is a Country that emasculates his own people, reducing them to sheep to whom it is told the biker-mounted shepherd dog should arrive fast enough to save, hopefully, some of them.

A man has not only the right, but the duty to protect himself and those he loves. A government that does not allow him to do is a government that conculcates a basic human right of his citizen.

But hey, we will soon have 600 needles in a 7 million haystack.

How reassuring.

M

 

Reading Francis Through Satan: Extraordinary Deaconettes

 

Photo-20160519131533978.jpg

“Let us ‘study’ the bloody obvious and confuse the faithful as much as we can!”

 

And it came to pass the Evil Clown appointed a “commission” to study the bloody obvious, and debate about heresy. 

Predictably, he included the open dissenter Phyllis Zagano. Equally as predictably, the usual stupid feminist “I want a prick, or at least to be a priest” organisation

“praised the commission’s “gender-balanced” and “lay-inclusive” appointments and mentioned Zagano by name”. 

Therefore, yours truly poses himself two questions: why the Evil Clown does this, and what will come out of it.

The first question has an easy answer: Francis does this in order to sow more confusion about the Priesthood, give some fodder to the feminist pigeons, and enhance his image as the Pope of dissenters, heretics, and perverts. He can’t change the priesthood more than he can change the rules of physics; but what damage he can do, he will. of course, the “commission” will end up stating the bloody obvious, but he will find the way to insert a foot note or two insinuating that maybe, just maybe, things aren’t so clear after all.

However, I think something more subversive than talk will come out of it.

Think of this: the V II church reacted to the Sixties and Seventies by parroting the Protestants with the new position of the “extraordinary minister for making oneself important”.  They are, by universal admission, not ordained. Yet, they parrot the priest as much as they can. A lot of small “c” catholics live with it perfectly well, feel like little priest as they stand there with the chalice like idiots, and do not see a problem at all. 

It stands to reason that this time the same will happen with the office of the Deacon: the Vatican will reaffirm that a Deacon is ordained, and can therefore only be male. However, it will waffle at length about “inclusion”, and end up with the institution of the equivalent of the “extraordinary minister” for the Diaconate. This office might be called the “extraordinary Deaconette”, for example, and be allowed to do as much of what the deacon does (which, I think, will be a lot. What does a lay deacon do? I think he visits the infirms, gives spiritual counsel to people, helps the priest in organising the work of the parish, things like that) and be called an “extraordinary Deaconette”, or some such like rubbish. The rabid feminists will condemn the “exclusion” but welcome the “step forward” (and demand a prick),  the Pollyannas will be all excited that (phew!) “doctrine hasn’t been changed”, and the secular press will praise the Pope who, though clearly uncomfortable with Catholicism, does all he can to demolish reform it. 

Outlandish, you say?

Ever read Amoris Laetitia?

M   

  

 

%d bloggers like this: