Deflections, Or: The Bishop, The Trads, And The Saintly Switchboard Operator. 


I think I should say a word or two about the mounting controversy about the Bishop, The Trads, and The Saintly Switchboard Operator.

First things first: Bishop Stika is The Gayest Fool Of All.  He is  (I have already written this, but repetita iuvant) a Christ hating Bishop.

Stop for a moment and reflect on what must happen in the mind of a Bishop who goes above and beyond the already cowardly attitude of his Bishops’ conference and gives a public order to deny communion on the tongue. Really, we are talking here of stuff who would not have been believed, would have been considered an absurd, and not even funny, joke only two generations ago.

What we have here is a Bishop who self-appoints himself as the ultimate health expert and pretends to “protect” his flock from this most dangerous practice, the reception of Our Lord as this has always been practiced in the history of the Church before the Age Of Effeminacy. It really is beyond stupid, it goes into the realm of outright insult to the Sacrament. The fact that the Bishop pretends not to see it (I think he does it very well) goes to show what an irrelevance Christ has become in his eyes, and how great is his need to signal virtue and to show how very aligned he is with the current madness. What do I say, aligned? He wants to show that he is better than everybody else!

Truly, this is of Satan, and no discussion allowed.

Still, what I want to discuss today is a trick used by liberals, women, and more or less gay bishops all over the world: the deflection. The Bishop complains that the angry trads have insulted his own telephone operator, who is so saintly and has just lost her husband! What cruel Nazis these trads are!

Give me a break.

Firstly, the saintliness of the operator is nothing to do with the facts at hand, and is merely an emotional handle to make people look bad, or worse than bad. It is certainly wrong to abuse anybody on the phone who is innocent of denying communion on the tongue to faithful Catholics who actually care for Christ and the Sacraments. But this is wrong irrespective of the saintliness of the person abused. This is a deflection.

Secondly, I very much doubt that said, saintly switchboard operator said to the person or persons on the phone, “my dear Sir, can you please kindly consider that I am not only a saintly person, but have recently lost my husband?” Consequently, the sad bereavement of the saintly operator should really not be part of the conversation. This is, also, a deflection.

But the third,  and most important, deflection is this: the Bishop should have addressed the matter at hand, instead of throwing mud on his critics by lamenting an episode totally unrelated to it. We all know there will always be the occasional intemperate person, and we all know this controversy is not about that.

This deflection and accusation of rudeness is, by the way, the passive aggressive stuff often seen in women: “blablablabla HE WAS RUDE!!! blablablabla”.  The issue at hand is not addressed; but hey, you are supposed to lose, because you hurt her feelings.

Bishop Stika is doing exactly this; albeit, being born with, at least physically, manly attributes, he needs a saintly switchboard operator to get his desired deflection.

In my eyes, Bishop Stika should do the following:

  1. Get real for a moment and reflect that people who are angry at him, and perhaps even people who – wrongly, of course – abuse the saintly receptionist on the phone, do so because they love Christ, His Church and Her Sacrament vastly more than the Bishop will ever be able to understand, and his behaviour makes their blood boil. 
  2. Get real again, grow some figurative balls to go together with the physical ones, announce urbi et orbi that he has made a mistake, and make clear that his diocese will henceforward follow the guidelines of the Bishops’ Conference, without any of that gay, virtue-signalling stuff. He lives in Kentucky, for crying out loud. There will be no liberal revolution.

But no. It had to be the effeminate “y’all are so, so, sooo rude” non-answer.





Posted on May 17, 2020, in Catholicism, Conservative Catholicism, Traditional Catholicism and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 7 Comments.

  1. Nowadays, that the truth itself is considered rude by so many it has become a truism.

  2. If you don’t wish to discuss the topic at hand, an emotional deflection works nicely. Make it all about something else. We’re so easy. I don’t know this bishop at all, but my radar goes up whenever we see a man willing to become a public spectacle by demonstrating his relative power against an opponent. He wants the last word. (Reminds one of Bergoglio) Simmering anger about something can often be perceived. Bishops should not be known for public pissing matches on social media.
    Not one Catholic should follow those insane “directions” for Holy Communion. Not one.
    It is time we stopped playing this game. Don’t go up for Holy Communion. Stay in your seats. Pray, contemplate, stare at the priest. But don’t go up. We don’t need to go up, spiritual communion is a real thing. Part of the problem is us. We think we go to the place and get the white thing or it’s not Holy Mass. We didn’t “get”, what we need, if we don’t go up. We need to re-orient our thinking. The Mass is the Holy Sacrifice even if we don’t go up. Many saints received the Blessed Eucharist only a few times a year. If we have one sin on our minds, not confessed, we shouldn’t go up.
    Don’t play games like this with any bishop or priest. We do not have consecrated hands, even if we use Purell, the good stuff. We should not receive Our Lord into our un-consecrated hands.
    We should not play the game of Hygienic Gymnastics that some clergy want us to play before they deign to let us gather and give us Holy Communion. Precautions are indicated, in my opinion, with Covid. Keeping a distance, and masks, and I get protocols for Holy Communion, but what he is proposing is insulting, over the top, and we ought not to play.
    Personally I wouldn’t mind if only the priest received at this time, and we all made a spiritual communion. For the time being, what’s wrong with that.

    • I think what’s wrong with that is that you deny Communion to the faithful who want it; something, to my knowledge, not done even in the time of the plague narrated by Manzoni.
      Let the priest wear a mask if he wants to. Take reasonable precautions. But give God what is of God.

  3. Paul Jackson

    Sometimes names reveal far more than they ought to!

    For example a corrupt banker in my neck of the woods, jailed for fraud, surnamed Grede.

    Crass crudity warning.

    Rick Stika is one such name. One only has to use an alternative diminutive of Richard to get the point.

    Whether directly applicable to him or not, he certainly appears to support such behaviour.

  1. Pingback: The week Adam could not do links because it is too hard. – Dark Brightness

  2. Pingback: Cupich: How To Keep Churches Closed Whilst Pretending To Open Them | Mundabor's Blog

%d bloggers like this: