Category Archives: Traditional Catholicism
The great state of Arkansas has sent to the Governor a bill banning abortion, including the cases of rape and incest.
You may say that this is just an exercise in futility before the cowards at the Supreme Court strike this off. However, I think that it is important that such bills are approved and make headlines.
Firstly, the approval of such bills by appointed representatives of the people would, if carried out in many States, put pressure on the above mentioned cowards, and we know now how easy it is to pressure most of them.
Secondly, the bill helps to get rid of those stupidly emotional “rape and incest exceptions”. As if a baby could lose his right to live merely because of the circumstances that caused his life to be, well, an innocent human life. This is a self-defeating, contradictory, utterly illogical position, probably created to win votes among the emotionally challenged but, in the end, denying the premise: if it is wrong to kill an innocent baby in his mother’s womb, no rape or incest will ever make it right.
If the example of Arkansas is followed in many more States, the debate will take different contours. We will not have useless yesmen (and yeswomen. Talking to you, Coney-Barrett) at the Supreme Court. In God’s good times, we will have the right people, and it is wise to start paving the way for when they come.
I know, not one little, innocent life will be directly saved by this bill. But we will never now how many women decide not to abort their child because of initiatives like this one.
As a famous slogan in the UK goes, “every little helps”.
The news reached me today that the rather disgraced Cardinal Wuerl is receiving 2 million dollars a year for his “continuing ministry”.
Boy, how I would like a “continuing ministry”!
How hard does the Cardinal work for the 2 millions? What do all the people whom he employs with such a budget actually do? Or does it fritter everything away with expensive flights and hotels? Or perhaps does he spend the money in other ways, like the infamous Cardinal McCarrick (an old acquaintance of Wuerl, shall we say….) used to do? I have only found about one or two “retreats”, which he could have done pretty much on his own, possibly without even the need of a personal assistant at, say, 250 dollar a day.
It also emerges that this is not money donated by, say, some association of wealthy Friends of Horrible Cardinals, for the exclusive use of our guy. No, this is money that the Archdiocese of Washington could have used any way they please. Instead, they have gone to finance the “continuing ministry” of a retired, rather disgraced guy.
Honestly, I think that pious heads should piously roll.
Heck, if the guy is so eager to work, could he not have asked to be assigned to a parish and continue his work there, at a net saving of probably 1.96 million a year and with many, many more documented hours of “ministry” than what we can see now?
This “poor church for the poor” isn’t half bad or, apparently, half poor.
It seems that 2 million dollar of the faithful are treated like pocket change, to keep some old guy (little) occupied. It seems that it pays to be friends with the humbly powerful and the piously wasteful. Or, perhaps, that it pays to know an awful lot of things, so that those who want to appease you and prevent you from disgracing a lot of people with you prefer to fund an extremely cushioned retirement, sorry, continuing ministry. It could even be (thinking out loud here) that the Cardinal is merely a conduit for bribes paid to others, as a compensation for horrible “services” rendered other, more simply, to keep their mouth shut without the risk of Clintonising them.
I think that Catholics should demand that every cent of this is accounted for, justified, or restituted, and those responsible for this sent to some obscure parish to work for a change.
But hey, what do I know?
I am no friend of paedophiles.
Have you ever been tortured by your confessor? Me neither.
Alas, the Evil Clown disagrees. He is so worried about torturer priests that, in his clownish “intentions” for March (committed to a video, because humbleness), he prays that those who go to Confession may not find them.
Boy, he must think that the problem is quite big!
Being somewhat cynical, and persuaded that Francis is a scoundrel either willingly (if he is a Satanist, which at this point I emphatically refuse to exclude) or unwittingly (if he is, as much more likely, the garden variety of Church-hating atheist) manipulated by Satan, I think I know what it’s going on here.
In my opinion, Frankie The Pachamama Boy is very angry at those priests who refuse to hear the confession of concubines.
You will say that this is just as it should be. But you see, you think like a Catholic, Francis doesn’t! The only Catholic things he has in himself are the job and the title. For the rest, he lives in a Catholic-free space; a space where you are afraid that your confessors may be…. torturers! Oh, the cruelty!!!
Another hypothesis, albeit less likely, is that Pachamama Guy considers torturers those confessors who refuse absolution to the faithful, because they see no repentance. Why do I say this? Firstly, because Francis lives in a Catholic-free space; and secondly because, once again, he appears – from what I can read; I don’t inflict on myself a video of the guy – to fail to stress that it is exactly repentance which, via God’s Mercy, opens the gates of absolution.
In the Catholicism-free space in which Francis lives, I have noticed this often: this idea of unconditional remission of everything, because (and I quote the guy) I have sinned “and I will sin again”. In Frankie’s Circus, you don’t need to do anything you don’t want to, and God just forgives you, because Mercy. Well, if this is the rubbish he thinks, I am not surprised of the rubbish he talks.
So, another month has started, and the Evil Clown has found another way to insult proper Catholics, and his very own priests at that.
What a sad way to approach his own judgment.
If you have not seen Jojo Rabbit, I suggest that you find a way to do it. I don’t give any guarantee of 100% Catholic content; but what I guarantee, is that you will see a nice, funny, deep, even tender movie about a boy of the Hitlerjugend, towards the end of WW II, who discovers love just as life kicks him brutally in the balls, forcing him to grow out of his childish fantasies towards, hopefully, the life of a balanced, sensible adult.
Jojo, the young protagonist, is a bright young boy of (if memory serves) ten, who has an “imaginary friend” in the person of his number one hero, Adolf Hitler.
The imaginary friend is not, however, the real Hitler. It is the Hitler seen, imagined, willed by the young Jojo. Jojo really, really likes Hitler, and he builds for himself a Hitler who is his best friend and confidant; who is childish and at times funny, but tries to help the child as best as .. a child can.
Life and love, and the pain both bring, will help young Jojo to grow out of his imaginary friend, and start on his way to manhood, with all the scars it entails.
Why do I mention Jojo Rabbit? Because I think that, just as Jojo had his imaginary Hitler, many a (good intentioned) Catholic has his own imaginary Benedict.
Like Jojo’s Adolf, Benedict is pretty much the best friend of the faithful traumatised from a scandalous Francis. Therefore, they take refuge in this imaginary friend and attribute to him all the virtues that are necessary to make them sleep at night.
Jojo’s Benedict, like Jojo’s Adolf, can do no wrong. If he talks rubbish, it’s evil Gaenswein who makes him talk that way. If he repeats with all the energy of his many years that there is only one Pope, it’s the Corriere that created a wrong story out of nothing. If Benedict defends Francis, it must have been, I don’t know, the Russians?
I suggest to those faithful that they abandon their imaginary friend or, better said, that they – like Jojo – grow out of it. Same as for Jojo, this growing will not be without pain, as it will require the sober acknowledgment that Benedict always was a lousy Pope, and always was an even lousier Emeritus. It also entails the very painful admission that Francis is Pope, and a scoundrel at the same time. Yes, it can happen. Yes, it has happened many times before. Yes, this time is worse. Yes, V II is also without precedent, and it therefore makes sense – and I think it conforms to Divine Justice – that a rebellion without precedent should lead to a mess without precedent. This is the only way the generations past ours, when all this madness has finished, recognise both the madness and the punishment, and keep memory of the unspeakable arrogance of their ancestors, never to be repeated again.
Like Jojo’s Hitler, Jojo’s Benedict is a very improbable imaginary friend.
He is, clearly, non existent.
Embrace reality with all its suffering, like Jojo did.
You are all too old for an imaginary friend.
Gosh, does anyone read those endless blog posts of Catholic bloggers talking about themselves? Heavens, it makes them look like characters from Louisa May Alcott, or like teenage girls writing a diary; only, most teenage girls have the decency to keep the diary for themselves!
I have been writing this blog for ten and a half year, and no one knows what I do as a job, what great graces I had in life, what challenges I had to go through and what suffering I have suffered, “how I feel right now”, how the people who write bad stuff about me “make me feel” (hint: I don’t give a Creepy Joe) and all that stuff. The most I do is stuff like informing my readers that, say, I will write less about Francis because I don’t want to get a cancer, or that I blog because I think that the Blessed Virgin watches, and approves.
But in the end, and very simply, it is not about me.
In the great scheme of things, we are insignificant. The most we can aspire to, is to be the Blessed Virgin’s warrior ants. I don’t know you, but I was never very curious about the inner life of a warrior ant, or desirous of being subject to the ant going on and on about itself. Go on with the attack to the termite nest and shut up, please.
It’s not about us. It’s that we love the Church, the Church is being attacked (from inside every bit as from outside) and we try to do our best because, one day, we will have to do our redde rationem, and we think that Catholic engagement (as a blogger, a commenter, or a reader) is a better investment in that regard than, say, videogames. But let me tell you this: if the Church were now in the shape it was under Pius XII, I would play videogames.
I also do not see (nor would I allow it to happen) commenters on my blog going on and on about themselves. They write because there are issues, pertaining the Church, about which they want to give a contribution. Do they hope to have a reward for their engagement? I certainly hope they do. Do they make it about themselves? Most certainly not.
I suggest that those who like to write about themselves apply for a job in some women’s magazines.
Or, alternatively, go on with their life like real men do.
Decidedly, Benedict is not like wine.
The gentlest thing that one can say of him, is that he is undergoing the same trajectory as Joe Biden. However, in the case of Joe Biden it is evident that the man struggles to remain on planet earth for more than a short period of time. In the case of Benedict, who even remembers Bishop Williamson and Wikileaks, the jury is seriously out.
Some of the things he says are outrageous. This is not the first time he does that and, if you scour this blog, you will find several other posts with me commenting on Benedict going (almost) full Francis fanboy. Today is no exception: to portrait Biden as “good Catholic”, “personally against abortion” and without a clear position on “gender policy” is either demented or very, very evil, so let’s hope he is demented.
I have given, at the time, all the good will to Benedict that could reasonably be given to him. I have written many times that I thought that he did what he, in good conscience, thought best for the Church, thinking (in his naivete) that a stronger and decidedly Catholic Pope would take his place.
With the years, I have started to grow some doubts. A Pope who resigns because he does not feel strong enough to be a good Catholic Pope does not repeatedly praise a horrible, decidedly un-Catholic Pope. At the very least, an ashamed and dignified silence would have been in order. But no, the man has given now several interviews in which he tries to persuade the Pollyanna Crowds that Francis really is what the Church needs now. Again, it’s either dementia or it is inexcusable.
This is, also, an interview to the Corriere della Sera, not one of those chats with the also very old (97 in April) Eugenio Scalfari. There is no way the Corriere pulls a stunt and simply distorts Benedict’s words like they are the CNN. It is also unthinkable that the man knows that he is misrepresented, and never says a peep. Stop defending him because he is old, or because you love to think this guy is still in charge.
Benedict is either gone, or he is part of the problem. May the Lord have mercy on him when he (pretty soon, judging from the pictures) will stay in front of Him.
Honestly, I would not want to swap my chances with his.
From Father Hunwicke’s blog, I read this quote of Bobby Mickens:
” … it’s not clear what Francis actually does want. And not just on his birthday, but on many things. … Oh, he’s written and said a lot. An awful lot. But that doesn’t mean he always reveals what he’s really thinking. And, at times, he says things that are hard to square with things he has said and done at oher times. In a word, Jorge Mario Bergoglio is somewhat of an enigma. He rails against clericalism, yet he can also be as clerical as anyone.”
Well I think I can help.
Francis is not an enigma.
He is just plain stupid. And childish. And Arrogant.
Think of Francis from the vantage point of his most evident traits: hate for the Church, childishness, arrogance, stubbornness, and total lack of profundity of thought. Put all of this in the blender, switch on for 30 second, and what you must perforce have is, well, him.
The over-rationalising punditry try to construe a system in Francis’ actions, but this is just the same as wanting to unlock the deep meaning and life philosophy behind the tantrums of a spoiled child. Francis is not interested in coherence. He does not care for the opinions of people he despises. He has no philosophy beyond what pleases him on the day. Therefore, all his contradictions and gaffes and provocations and factual blasphemies do not follow a pre-conceived project.
With Francis there is no plan, only a pram.
Look at him in this way and, suddenly, everything he does and says makes perfect sense. His petty revenges, his hatred for Christ, or his contempt for faithful Catholics do not follow a planned strategic plan. No person with a brain would create a long-term plan and have such a stupid, contradictory, utterly embarrassing, and totally self-defeating one.
Imagine a child of twelve given absolute power over the Church, and you are pretty near to a full understanding of what is happening. Add a life of scrounging and resentment, and you get even nearer. Throw in the mix a long life, also marked by defeats and “exile” in unwanted positions, and you will get nearer still (the twelve years old would canonise chocolate and declare spinach heretical; Francis is smarter than that).
The contradictions, hypocrisies, countless embarrassments of this men are an enigma only to a person who wants to explain them away! Francis lies like you breathe. He clearly does not believe in life after death, and is not intelligent enough to care for the way he will be remembered. Does a very obnoxious twelve year old stop and think how he will be remembered if he dies today? No, he doesn’t. What he cares for is his gripe for the day, and how he can be obnoxious to others now. Tomorrow, he will have a new gripe, and a new way of being obnoxious. He will not care for any coherence today with his actions of yesterday. He will only care of what he can get away with. Francis is that child, with the addition of a peculiar mark of shamelessness, apparently due to Argentinian heritage, according to which being caught lying is a sign of smartness.
Every time that I read about these people trying to figure out Francis, I have this image in front of me of a piece of dog’s excrement, in the middle of the walkway, with influential journalists and pundits all gathered, in a neat circle, around it, pensively smoking their pipes.
How is it that that thing stinks, they wonder? How can that object have that peculiar shape? Isn’t it baffling that the object would have that particular consistency, and likely texture, that makes it so difficult to understand what is going on with it?
Gentlemen, open your eyes: it’s brown, it stinks, it has the appropriate consistency and form. It’s a piece of shit, period.
Francis isn’t difficult to understand. He is, actually, extremely easy.
You merely need to apply common sense and basic life experience.
In the last years it has been very, very fashionable to signal virtue and to do things that would have been considered extremely stupid, or actually unthinkable, by the generations before us. You all have examples in mind of the one or other aspect of this worrying disease that has clearly infected the sated, pampered, increasingly childish First World.
Today, I would like to point out one particular aspect of this virtue signalling: the idea that your own Country can be used as the recipient of a vast number of people coming from a foreign environment.
I am, myself, an immigrant. As an immigrant, I can vouch for a simple truth: immigration only works if it is made a) in moderate numbers, b) in the presence of a homogeneous cultural environment, and c) with the immigrants obviously seen as contributing to the Country in which the natives allow them to settle.
The first point is – or better, has been until the Age of Fake Virtue – rather self-evident: every massive influx of new people will cause the natives to feel threatened. It is irrelevant how useful the new people are to the economy. Massive influx will cause massive issues. The second element is to do with another obvious consideration: the newly imported populace must be able to share the same values, the same Weltanschauung of the locals. Without this, there will never be lasting cooperation and acceptance. The third is also self-evident: unless the natives can clearly see the advantages of having immigrants, the latter will be seen as a foreign body and, ultimately, a threat.
When prosperity becomes too high, and no wars have been fought for many generations to protect those freedoms and privileges and comforts people take for granted, all this can be forgotten; because, unavoidably, good times create weak men.
I present to you, today, a case of mass immigration whereby all three elements I have mentioned above have been non only disregarded, but wilfully contradicted; as if it were egotist, or even racist, to point out to their obvious usefulness. This Country is, as you might have already guessed, Sweden.
A Country where cuckoldry was already a badge of honour of sort, Sweden has applied its cuckoldry to the Country at large. The result is what you can read here.
The Swedes got it so wrong not because they have forgotten what their ancestors thought about the issue of immigration. They got it wrong because they thought that they were smarter, and more compassionate, and more evolved, and generally happier in their cuckolded existence, than their ancestors. If you allow me the comparison, if one or two generations are very fine with someone screwing their wife, a generation will come that is fine with strange people screwing their Country. It is the unavoidable regression of the weak males from beta males to gamma males and from there to, ultimately, omega males that did this. Their eunuch attitude delivered the country to the vain emoting of their women, and their inborn cuckoldry made them happy to be drowning in the sea of estrogen they liberated.
Why did this happen, you may ask? It happened for the same reason pretty much everything evil happens: the rejection of God’s rules.
Reject the patriarchy as the fundamental basis of society and you will have weak, emasculated, cuckolded males instead of men. Ask these weak men to react to a societal challenge (say: the estrogen-laden call for indiscriminate immigration, because “solidarity”) and you will see that they are not only inadequate for the task, but they decry it as evil and antiquate. Allow this degeneracy of Christian values to fester, and you will find that the massive importation of a way of life that is in brutal contrast to Christian values is not seen as problematic, at all.
The end result? The weak suffer first. The increase in rapes is merely the first signal of changes that are going to be much bigger, and of challenges that are going to become likely existential in the next decades.
Is Sweden doomed? I hope, and think, not. Make no mistake, they will now have to eat all the excrement they have dished on their own table, and this will go on for a while and, potentially, cause a very bloody conflict. Still, nature will, very likely, take its course before it’s too late. Most likely, hard times will create strong men, and the strong men will take care of the problem the way strong men always do, to wit: doing what is required without giving a fig for the lamentations of the weak.
This is, however, for the future, very possibly a future that is many years to come. For the moment, all those gamma boys and sensitive girls will have to live with all the rapes their weakness, and their love for effeminate virtue signalling, have caused.
God’s rules are not only good in themselves. They are eminently practical. Forget them, or think you can do better than them, and you will be presented with a very expensive check before two or three generations have passed.
This is your check, Sweden. You ordered the meal, now you’ll have to shut up and pay the price of your foolishness.
The situation of Andrew Cuomo becomes more and more untenable.
First, the huge scandal of the Chinese Virus-ill people sent to nursing homes to infect the others and causing thousands of unnecessary deaths. Then, the confirmation that Cuomo had had the number of deaths “massaged” in order not to look (too) bad, and at this point we were already firmly in Watergate territory. At that point, an extremely aggressive and bullying attitude came to light: phone calls threatening people’s careers in the early hours of the morning, or intimations to immediately retract a statement, or else.
Now, a fourth bomb has exploded under Cuomo’s chair: the accusation of ****** sexual harassment ******.
Democrats ******* believe all women *******, so Cuomo is now toast. Better said, it would be if the Democrats practised one tenth of the stupid things they preach.
They did not want Kavanaugh (who proved a coward and a traitor, but this is another matter) to be appointed because of nebulous accusations that perhaps, in an unknown year, in an unknown location, decades earlier, he may have done something inappropriate. This time, we have one of his staffers (100% MAGA-free liberals, all of them, for sure) accusing him of trying to force himself on her and forcibly kiss her.
Predator!!! Toxic male!!!
The ******survivor******* has now (finally) blown the whistle on him and denounced the ****** sexual harassment ******.
If the legacy media had any integrity, they would have been covering this extensively for weeks now. I don’t see anything of the sort. Most of all, I miss the outrage that leftist media like CNN and MSNBC would have shown if Cuomo had been a Republican.
Cuomo has to go. But he is fighting, at least for now, with the legacy media helping him any way they can.
Democrats really have it too easy.
Pope Evil Clown is travelling to Iraq, and – in another show of secular zeal and attachment to every wrong cause under the earth – he has demanded that every person who accompanies him on the travel – mostly journalists, I suppose, with the odd cameraman here and there – be vaccinated against the Chinese Virus. It’s not a polite suggestion. It’s no jab, no jet.
I suppose that the narrative will be that Pachamama Frankie is so, so worried about the health of the participants to his trips, that he wants to make sure he can stomp on every moral or ethical reservation they might have.
I wonder what other requirements concerning the health of the same persons Francis has. If he is, as a oh so good and caring Pope, worried about the physical health of those travelling with him, what about the spiritual one? Why would such a pious, zealous man not impose that all participants in his flight be Catholics, that they go (and are allowed to go in the first place) to confession and communion before the travel and, of course, that on no account they live in sin with their concubine when they board the plane? It seems to me that, of all people, a Pope should be preoccupied about the spiritual health of those around him a lot, before he even begins to waste a thought about their vaccination?
Or is it so, that Francis absolutely does not give a Biden about your eternal salvation, but if you dare not to comply with his vaxx propaganda he will leave you stranded at Fiumicino airport?
It seems to me that this guy does not waste any occasion to show us how worldly his thinking is, what a Christ-free space his mind is. I think he actually enjoys it, as it allows him to show two fingers to the Catholics he so much hates (all the true ones) whilst he tries to look good with the New York Times, Cosmopolitan, or Aleteia readers.
It would have been enough if he had just reminded everybody that frequent, or at least regular, confession is an excellent vaccine against an incurable, once contracted, disease called “damnation”. It wasn’t to be. Instead, we have just another worldly crusade.
The man clearly just does not believe in damnation.
He believes in vaccines, though, big time.
Make no mistake: any “decision” of the Supreme Court after the steal could only have been either an exercise in acquiescence (if deciding for Biden, which they would have done) or one in absurdity (if deciding for Trump).
At this point, the cowards who have robbed the American people of fair elections, and created an extremely dangerous precedent for all other Western Countries, have made the only choice their corruption and cowardice left open to them; they have, very predictably, decided to just cover their excrement and hope that the Country forgets soon; which, frankly, I do not think it will do.
At least two, and perhaps three, Justices I would like to exempt from this condemnation: Thomas und Alito. Gorsuch appeared to have some spine yesterday, but I don’t remember having him on our side when it counted. All the others, including Kavanaugh and Coney Barrett, are little cowards with no excuses.
This event, and the events starting in November, also tell us something going beyond the vote: the combination of a bullying, ideologically and socially perverted administration and a cowardly Supreme Court is an extremely explosive one.
Brace yourself for these “originalists” (when it was convenient to them) to decide that the Constitution originally meant to give trannies every conceivable fake right under the sun. When you have already lost face, like Kavanaugh and Coney Barrett did, what is one, or twenty, more acts of acquiescence to their demented master in Washington? Nor will the lesbian, the fat liberal, or the alleged Lolita Express guy decide that now it’s the time to start behaving properly.
Despicable people, all of them, but Kavanaugh and Coney Barrett in a very special way. I would be ashamed to be their child. Make no mistake, their children will have privileges and opportunities no-one of my readers ever dreamt of.
Such is, I am afraid, the way of the world. It pleased God, this time, to have the wicked triumph.
It will not always be this way in this world, and it will most certainly not be this way in the next.
Do you want to know why so many media “celebrities” (of various degrees of celebrity) are so bent on putting on display their woke credentials?
Let me count the ways.
Firstly, there are the consolidated media personalities looking for easy publicity. Actors and singers, but particularly actors, need to stay in the news, to have their name talked about, and they know that most publicity is good publicity. if you are a leftist. Therefore, an incendiary tweet here and there makes economic sense. Their agents will officially try to dissuade them from “tweeting while drunk”, but they will both know that drunk-virtue-signalling is all the rage now. If you are one of those actors who, whilst well-known now, are at constant risk of being, if not forgotten, sent down the slippery slope of “once famous actor”, a bit of woke rage makes sense. Particularly as, being pretty well-known now, they can leverage the outrage for their own benefit. Ron Perlman, Edward Norton, or Alec Baldwin do not seem to have suffered any professional damage from their woke antics.
Secondly, there are the emerging starlets. They are famous now. In 12 or 18 months, who knows. They need to consolidate their name, to become household figures. Let us start some activism outrage. It will certainly not do any damage. Emily Ratajkowski is a point (actually, cough, two) in case.
Thirdly, there are the declining “celebrities”. Things are going down fast. They need to reinvent themselves. I know of a very mediocre quarterback (for NFL standards, of course), who was staring at the end of his NFL career in the face. Hey presto, let us start the outrage engine! The guy had a wonderful success. Afro instead of America, this is his recipe. Works for him, for sure.
But then there is a fourth category, which could be the worst of them all. It is the category of the very rich who are embarrassed of their vast wealth, but certainly don’t want to give it away. At that point, activism is the only way how they can validate their vapid, empty selves. This is not a money issue anymore. It’s not a career issue, either. It’s merely the desire to feed a huge ego and try to fill an empty life at the same time. Beats overdose or suicide, I suppose.
Look at this one, for example. After hoovering all that could be hoovered around her, and reaching a huge success without any talent for singing, or acting, or even thinking, this slut with the blasphemous name, who made a career out of being, well, the worldwide village slut, needs to validate her poor self in any way she can; particularly after her pathetic attempt to still look attractive at 60 – carried out, unsurprisingly, showing her naked backside to the laughter of the nation – did not prove the ego boost she was counting on. I’d post the picture, but my readers deserve better.
You put these four typologies together and you understand why woke-ism is so much en vogue in and around the entertainment industry. If you are a leftist, it is difficult that any big downside hits you. Those who managed to do it (Jennifer Lawrence comes to mind) have gone so far out, that even John Lennon would have suffered a lot. But then again Lawrence doesn’t seem to be a genius, so there…
Whenever you read about the next entertainment fool making a clown of himself, and getting publicity in return, feel free to have your fun in putting the guy, or gal, in one of the four categories.
This way, you’ll be able to say that they were good for something.
five chairmen of the U.S. Bishops’ Conference condemned the Equality Act, saying it would “impose sweeping new norms that negatively impact the unborn, health care, charitable services, schools, personal privacy, athletics, free speech, religious liberties, and parental rights.”
“The Act’s unsound definitions of ‘sex’ and ’gender identity’ would erase women’s distinct, hard-won recognition in federal laws,” the bishops said.
Look, the US Bishops are meowing again!
First of all, note the language: in the modern world, nothing is, anymore, wrong because it offends God. The average XXI Century US Bishop is worried about stuff like health care, personal privacy, or athletics first, second and third. Things are bad, always, for reasons an atheist could share. The religious thinking has completely gone out of the public parlance of the hierarchy. Look, Bishops: no one needs you to worry about athletics. Let others examine athletics. You should be worried about Salvation.
Similarly, the Act’s absurd, deranged, absolutely perverted definitions of “sex” and “gender identity” are defined – wait for this – “unsound”, possibly the new PC word used in order to avoid the already PC “gravely disordered”.
Unsound. Perversion and abomination on a scale unthinkable to our forefathers are now unsound, say our Bishops. What a bunch of sissies.
But this is not even the worst. The worst is that these idiots have, in their great majority, done all they could to support Joe Biden and his perverted agenda. That they now even dare to (pretend to) complain shows not only their infinite hypocrisy, but the contempt in which they hold us, the Catholics, who know better than siding with the Devil for some sort of fake “social” reasons. This is every bit as hypocritical as those Republican politicians now clamouring they want to look into the 2020 elections.
Mind, I despise Joe and the Hoe. I loathe all these deranged, perverted, or prostituted politicians. But the ones I loathe the most are the ones who are supposed to be on our side.
Spare us your outrage, Bishops. You are accomplices and enablers of all this. This is all on you.
And you will, one day, seriously repent or pay the very, very serious price of your insolence.
Do I remember correctly, that when the news of the Chinese Virus first came out, no-one was thinking of lockdowns? Do I remember correctly, that when the first news of the Chinese lockdown came out, this felt like something a Communist regime would do? Do I remember correctly, that when the first European lockdowns came, they were supposed to be an absolutely exceptional, one-off event?
How come, then, that eleven months later we are all still held hostages, and told what we can and cannot do, as if we were all children of six?
I think of this and the only answer I can find is: because, collectively speaking, we are children of six! Our politicians treat us as such, because they see the huge call for us to be treated this way. Power being, by its nature, expanding, it is no surprise that it would immediately occupy every inch of space left to it. Imagine a controlling mother told by his teenage child that he wants to be controlled by her in every aspect of his life. Then multiply by ten. This is the gravity of the issue we are facing.
At this point, the damage may well go far beyond this virus hype, and impact all our lives in a very direct way. Politicians all over the West have seen what kind of obedient sheep they are dealing with.
What prevents mass closures of activities to “save the planet” from so-called man made global warming? Banning of cars on (initially) certain days? Forced expropriation of (initially) the wage of two working days to “fight racism”? Where does the nannying end, if the crybabies call for Nanny all the time ?
Nor should you think that this will not impact us directly. If a Government were to permanently ban communion on the tongue with some germ excuse, do you think our bishops would say anything? More likely, they would encourage us to obey and call us unchristian if we don’t want to.
We are witnessing a massive, tragic deterioration of the lived experience and the feeling of freedom, including religious freedom, and democracy. This will leave permanent damage that will be very difficult to remove as it makes our societies easy prey of prophets of gloom with a hidden, likely Marxist, likely godless, most likely controlling and authoritarian agenda.
Like the people of South Vietnam, we are at risk of losing our freedoms, including the religious one, because – collectively speaking, of course – we have stopped caring enough for it.
Beware of every ingerence of Big Government into our life.
Your freedoms, including your religious one, is more endangered than you think.
Lent is here again. This year, though, it’s a markedly different one.
This is, to me, another occasion to develop what I have expressed in several blog posts already: Catholic patrimony is yours, and it is yours forever. Nasty as they are, no Francis and no Biden, no Johnson, no bishop or cardinal preaching the new Cult of the Mask and Creed of the Lockdown can change the way you live your Catholicism.
They can, of course, change the way you practice it, and today is a perfect example. But what they cannot do, without your consent, is to eradicate it from your heart and mind.
This year will be a strange Easter. If both the elected and the electors, not to speak of the pastors, keep being so unspeakably ****dumb****, this might not even be the last one.
So what I will do is this: I will be trying to be more Catholics in what I can do, to compensate for the things I can’t do.
More prayer. More penance. Some contemplation. Some meditation. Perhaps look at a Breviary online, or buy one. Perhaps read more about lives of the Saints, o re-read stuff I have on my shelves.
Let us react to those who want to marginalise our religion in the public sphere by making it stronger in our hearts.
But let it not be said that this will be the merit of all those cowardly prelates for whom worldly concerns and virtue signalling come before Christ. Any increase in Caholic spirit can only be a providential, but unintended consequence of the outright madness we see all around us.
The Evil Clown opened his filthy mouth once again; and, once again, what came out of it was the singular mixture of blasphemy, arrogance, stubborness and pleasure in angering Catholics that is so typical of this quite, quite remarkable individual.
When I read in St Paul that God became sin, I immediately understand that he means that God accepted to take on Himself, on His very own, literal Divine Body the punishment for our sins. I do this because the Bible is the Word of God, and can therefore never be interpreted out of context or out of the inner coherence that is its inevitable corollary. But then again I also know that St Paul could never had told me that, perhaps, the Blessed Virgin felt betrayed at the foot of the Cross. I know that he never tried to Pachamama me. I know that he never berated and insulted me as a Catholic. I know that he never tried to undermine the Sacraments, & Co., & Co.
Francis did all this, and so much more. Therefore, the interpretation of his words must not follow from an attempt to bend ourselves into a pretzel in order to find some orthodoxy in his words. On the contrary, the man must be interpreted in light of what he has been publicly saying for now almost eight years.
I think that not God, but Francis is contaminated. I think that he is deeply, deeply toxic to Catholicism. I think that he is so stubbornly vain that he enjoys angering us, just because he can, and that his thinking is so perverted, so secular, so informed by hatred for the Church which has been giving him his bread for many decades, that he just can’t avoid his vulgar brand of godlesness to show.
Watching Francis talk of spiritual things is like watching John Belushi in the restaurant scene of The Blues Brothers. But at least Jake Blues had a good mission to accomplish. Francis is on a mission from Satan; and, as he is likely every bit as atheist as Karl Marx, he might not even realise it.
Get lost, Evil Clown. Contaminate yourself as much as you like.
We know contamination when we see it.
The delivery guys who bring me my packages tend, as a rule, to deal with me as if I was a leper. Incidentally, I wonder if they know what leper is.
Young colleagues of mine profess themselves scared of the virus. Not for grannie’s sake (grannie only needs to isolate, and Bob’s your uncle…) but for themselves. Some of them might actually even mean it, instead of looking for excuses to work from home.
Countless teachers, here in the UK, are scared not for, but of their children, and none of them approaches 80 years of age.
OK, they are mostly women.
OK, they are mostly commies.
OK, they are mostly lazy.
But I think a lot of them actually believe that rubbish.
All over the West, countless politicians have amply understood that they should have reopened their economies a long time ago, provided they really had to shut it down in the first place. But they are now all too scared, and too clearly held hostages by an evil coalition of media and pressure groups (from think tanks to their own advisory bodies) to do anything. Boris Johnson is a perfect example. He is like a guy who has distributed “laziness pills” to everybody for months, and now does not want to tell them that the time of the happy pill has to come to an end. However, it might be a bit more complex than that.
It is as if the Country were composed of the following segments: the first, now free to abandon itself to their most beloved activity: cowering at home in fear and predicting the end; another one, terrified of actually having to work; a third one, uncaring that the economy goes to the dogs provided they can stay in bed in the morning; and only a fourth one, possibly still a minority, angry at the loss of liberty and the damage for the economy, or scared for their own future.
The Prime Minister does not care for those who actually want to work and go back to normal. He does not care for those fretting for their own livelihood. He does not care for the suicides. He does not care for the most elementary freedoms. He goes on TV and lectures you on why you must be a good boy and keep being punished without complaining.
I reflected on this today, and suddenly it was clear to me why the fight to ban abortion is so far away from victory.
These people do not care for their own freedom. They are scared of even living their own lives.
Imagine how much they care for the lives of the unborn.
First of all, reality. We will not see the day when Francis is removed. Bishops and Cardinals will, very simply, not act. This is the situation on the ground and you better get to grips with it if you want to keep a connection with reality.
But let us say that God gives us the immense grace of growing thousands of clerical spines, all at the same time. What should the newly be-spined Cardinals and Bishops do?
It is a fantasy, and a not very intelligent one at that, to think that quibbling on the process of election would be of any effectiveness. Cardinals don’t denounce themselves. The precedent thus established would be extremely dangerous. Every Pope after Francis would have his legitimacy questioned.
It is shocking to me that, after eight years, there should still be this vain talk about the Conclave. Particularly so, when Francis has been a Pope with a stunning record of heretical (at least in the common parlance, which is more than enough) statements.
Procedural cavils are absurd and dangerous, they are like looking for squirrels when there is an elephant in the room. Plus, looking at the elephant does not require anyone to accuse anyone but Francis.
Therefore, the way – which, make no mistake, will not happen and is just a pious wish at this point – is a fraternal correction followed by an extraordinary council.
The fraternal correction will demand that Francis cans the whole of Amoris Laetitia, and will present him with a very long list of heretical statements to be recanted.
When this does not happen, a council will be called, and this council will examine the evidence and declare Francis a heretic, and therefore deposed.
Mind, this is no very difficult exercise in itself. The bishops can elect a committee organising everything in an instant. Donations to organise this expensive exercise would pour from all over the Catholic world. The logistics would be feasible even in times of flying restrictions. It’s not rocket science.
What is not there is the will; or rather, the spines; or rather, the balls. When it became clear the best we had was Burke, and Burke was just another Benedict with a big mouth and no vertebrae at all, it was clear that this would not happen.
This Pontificate will ravage the Church for as long as God allows it to. At the appointed time, it will end. What happens next, nobody knows, and the signs aren’t good. All this is, however, not in the least impacting our salvation.
Francis cannot send anybody to hell. He can merely accompany those who chose to go there.
Cling to the truth transmitted to us, which is more than enough. Do not be discouraged. Pray, hope, and do penance. Realise that Francis has not spoiled any prize. The prize is still there, its beauty undiminished. You don’t depend on Francis on absolutely anything. Hold your rosary in the hand, and reflect on how impotent Francis ultimately is.
This is one of the greatest beauties of the Church: that, other than a political party or a Protestant sect, no-one and nothing can touch Her truth.
Ignore the clown.
You don’t need him.
It is now February 2021, pretty much exactly eight years after Benedict’s abdication. This is a rather funny number, because Benedict was Pope for a little less than 8 years. Therefore, the guy has now been Emeritus for longer than he has been Pope, as in “in charge”.
I don’t think History will be kind to Benedict; not even considering that what came after him was much, much worse. I think that, however you look at him, he was a failure + Summorum Pontificum.
In my eyes, there are two possible Benedicts, and History will help us ascertain who was the real one: weak Benedict and coward Benedict.
Weak Benedict is the Benedict we have followed in the news: no enforcement of Summorum Pontificum, bad appointments to Cardinal, worse appointments to Bishop, a general atmosphere of V II orthodoxy observed in word as he allowed the same V II orthodoxy to be undermined in fact. The V II orthodoxy was deeply flawed anyway: Benedict also wanted to have his Assisi kumbaya theatre, and he never backpedalled on JP II on, say, capital punishment or doctrine of war. Weak Benedict resigned, in good faith, because he felt he was too weak to carry on the job. Weak Benedict thought that his successor would have a stronger and more effective hand. Weak Benedict was very naive, a remarkable trait in so intelligent and perceptive a man.
Coward Benedict, if such a one he was, simply fled before the wolves. Either he caved to personal threats (an extremely grave fault in a Pope), or he was too weak to keep fighting the “deep Vatican”, or – if you are one of those who love conspiracy theories – he chose to resign to avoid some scandal being revealed, as if scandals were something new to the Church or threatening to Her.
In charity, I always assumed that weak Benedict is the real one, and coward Benedict is a fantasy of the usual conspiracy troops. However, I cannot but notice that Emeritus Benedict has always been, in his public declarations, nothing but supportive of Francis, in a sad show of very, very German gregariousness, made sadder by the fact that Benedict must clearly see the amount of damage he supports.
This tells me that, in the end, Weak Benedict was, too, not a little coward.
I always get an adrenaline spike when I read articles like this one.
The immediate issue here is the fact that Bishop Theurillat “resigned” (read: got the boot) around 5 years before the appointed time. The man had implied that the Church has to decide about wymynpriests.
Still, the article linked states that the usual Francis stated:
“On the ordination of women in the Catholic Church, the final word is clear, it was said by St. John Paul II and this remains.”
JP II did not pronounce any final word on the ordination of wymyn. He never could. The final word is given by the Depositum Fidei, not by this or that Pope.
Reading the words of the Evil Clown, it looks like the question might still have been open before Ordinatio Sacerdotalis; alas, JP II spoke, and that was that. Sorry, folks. It has happened now. If JP had said something different, then… but no, it didn’t happen.
Francis likely says this because to him, everything that came before V II is wrong unless confirmed right by a V II source. Therefore, he sees the prohibition as rooted in John Paul, not the Depositum Fidei, of which I think he barely acknowledges the existence (cfr: Amoris Laetitia).
Alas, we Catholics see it differently: J P has merely reiterated a last word that was there from the beginning of Christianity. He has purely reminded Catholics of an existing reality.
This is not a trivial matter. No Catholics should be led into thinking that a V II Pope can reshape doctrine according to his liking anytime he feels like it. Of course, Frankie boy wants you to think that, but it is simply not the case. Please remind any person, when the occasion arises, about this fundamental traits of the Catholic Church.
As to the Bishop, I wonder why he was given the boot. Was it the matter of the wymyn alone? It could be, but honestly, orthodoxy isn’t particularly high in the Evil Clown’s priorities list. It can also be that Francis disliked the man. It can be that there are other matters we know nothing about.
Whatever this is, wymyn ordination is not a matter settled in 1984, whatever the Evil Clown wants you to believe.
The link here makes, before you understand the context, for a very strange reading. It is, in fact, a critical take of a small number of bishops who have expressed themselves in favour of the criminalisation of acts of sodomy.
The Bishops comes from Dominica, Guyana and Nigeria.
It always makes such a strange impression when a magazine which calls itself Catholic wants to go against the perennial reaching of the Church. It is as if they believed that they are Anglicans, and that you must become an Anglican, too.
Newsflash: truth does not change. Not ever, but most certainly not when it becomes inconvenient and not in sync with an increasingly more depraved world.
A very limited number of Bishops appear to still know this very simple truth. All others seem to have forgotten it. It says a lot about the present state of the Church that a very small number of bishops from remote (to us) Countries make headlines for being Catholics, and for being so very isolated among their own colleagues.
How did St John Chrysostom put It? The road to hell is paved with the bones of priests and monks, and the skulls of bishops are the lampposts that light the path?
Yeah, it seems to me the road will be very well lit.
An Atheist watches a documentary about mechanical watches. The intricate details of the extremely complicate machine fascinate him. He loses himself into all its tiny components, and deeply appreciates the complex way in which these little pieces work together. A mechanical watch truly is a fascinating object, and he should well feel amazed as he discovers the way it works.
Of course, being an Atheist, our friend in front of the TV set does not wonder who made the watch. He does not even think that, if there is a watch, there must be someone, or something, who caused it to be in existence; someone, or something, who put together the little, delicate parts that compose it, and the material of which these parts are made before they were made.
No. Our friend is absolutely sure, utterly persuaded that no one made the watch. The watch simply came to be. It was there. It just was. All its wonderful internal workings, all the extremely delicate balance that allows it to function just exist, without any cause, without any reason, and without any intelligent mind behind it. Actually, our friend – being an Atheist – is incensed at the idea that if there is a watch, then there must be a watchmaker. He can easily get angry when confronted with the simple fact that not only it is impossible that this exceptionally complicated watch could simply be, by itself, out of pure coincidence; but it is also impossible that all the complex, delicate, extremely sophisticated components of the watch could have assembled themselves by themselves, out of pure coincidence and blind luck; hey, he would not even admit that even the raw materials, the very atoms of which the components are made, cannot have created themselves by themselves!
No. Our friend is perfectly persuaded that from nothing came something. Therefore, a sophisticate array of delicate mechanisms all working together in an extremely delicate balance just popped out of absolutely nothing.
What do you say? That the Atheist documentary watcher actually knows that if there is a watch, there must be a watchmaker? That if he goes back to his parking lot in the evening and does not find his car, he knows that something or someone (be that thieves, police, or hurricane) caused that car to be brought away, then the car did not vanish by itself? That if he needs a new car, he knows that he will have to buy one, because cars do not have the habit of creating themselves by themselves, out of nothing?
Well, yes, you might be right. It is, in fact, quite likely that, in absolutely all aspects of his life bar the most important one, our Atheist friend is perfectly persuaded that the principle of causality rules his entire reality. He knows that if there is an effect there must be a cause, and that from nothing comes nothing. He applies these principles all the time, to absolutely every issue under the sun, bar one.
It is only when he has to submit to a superior Power, which then means obey to this Power, that he forgets, literally, the entire universe around him.
Some people will say that he has “his heart in the right place”, and this assertion is, if taken in isolation, most certainly true. His heart is, I wholeheartedly agree, certainly situated in exactly the same place as the heart of everybody else, and I am also absolutely persuaded that he can experience love and kindness, be it for his loved ones, for the Amazonian Forest, for the Panda, or for some abstract, perfect world he has created in his own mind.
Still, think of what I have just written about this man, and reflect about the immense scale of his rebellion; you will, at this point, realise that if, after a life of perfect acceptance of the existence of watchmakers, the man dies refusing to acknowledge, let alone submit to, The Head Watchmaker, he has deserved the punishment; and no, no amount of faith in the existence of human watchmakers, or love for his dog, will be of any help.
I have long searched for the link, but I couldn’t find it. IIRC, in a recent article Archbishop Vigano’ stated that it is fine, if one is persuaded that it is for the good of the Church, to pray for the death of the Pope.
I am tempted to say: you read it here first.
Many years ago, in fact.
However, it is not even so. I have not invented anything, nor do I want to. It has been a long-standing tradition of the Church that it is perfectly legitimate to pray for the death of a Pope who is considered a grave problem for the Church. I remember, on this, that the opinions of theologians differ on whether a good Catholic has the faculty or the duty to pray for such an event, but this does not impact the argument I have been making (I have never told anyone that he must do like me, and pray for the speedy departure of Francis from this vale of tears). Still, as for myself, I most certainly do. Also, in accordance with Tradition, I pray for his painless death: predictably, you can’t wish Francis that he may die of anal cancer and I am (obviously) fully on board with this. If the Lord makes him die peacefully in his sleep, I will consider it a great grace, and may Francis’ “awakening” in the next world be on the right side (difficult, but hey..).
Mind: in a courageous act of quasi-V II sensibility, I even pray that the Lord that He, in His goodness, may free us of the Franciscourge unless he resigns; however, the Three Popes would be quite a spectacle (I never liked the Three Tenors; I saw The Three Amigos too many years ago, but I certainly did not consider it memorable; and Benedict does not seem intentioned to check out yet), one that I would very much like to avoid. Therefore, I’d say that if the Evil Clown kicked the bucket today everything would be copacetic in Mundabor’s world, and I would not even make an effort to cry.
Once again, we see a phenomenon that is becoming more and more frequent: in the total absence of statements containing even traces of Catholicism from the Vatican, Catholics take their Catholicism from elsewhere: that is, from people who – fallible as we all are – are considered better able to teach us sensible Catholicism than that bunch of sissies (or worse) currently in power.
The bad news in all this is: when Francis is gone, don’t bet your pint on his successor being much better. It will very difficult to be worse. It will not be easy even to keep on par. But only Divine intervention will allow us to get a Pope that will condemn, or even make us forget, his predecessor.
Still, I invite you to pray for a new chance, in the hope (long shot, I admit) that God may put an end to our deserved punishment for too many years of Vatican II madness.
Will it never, ever end?
Who is President, Trump or Biden? You know the answer, even if we don’t like it. The one who is the President under the sun is President*, and Trump himself (though he is emeritus) says that he himself is not it anymore. Therefore, no matter how bad Biden’s Presidency* is, and even in the knowledge that Biden actually stole it, it is a fact under the sun that Biden is President*.
Still, it would be easier to fantasize that Trump is still President, then to fantasize that Benedict is still in charge. Any person who abandons himself to fantasies of a Trump’s second term now running knows that there is a new game in 2024; but any person who decides (in his mind) that Francis is not Pope has condemned himself to Sedevacantism, then there is no way you can bend yourself into a pretzel and decide in which way the Cardinals illegitimately appointed by a fake Pope can legitimately elect his successor. Then be honest with yourself and say that you are a Sedevacantist, with all the risks, for your soul first and for common sense second, that this entails.
Someone might ask: “What is your solution then, Mundabor?”
I don’t have to find a solution. God already has the solution. I merely observe the facts, and do not bend them to my fantasies. Facts are facts. Joe Biden is the 46th President* of the United States. Fact.
I have written many times that I do not see (bar a strong, fast Divine intervention Catholics most certainly have not deserved) any solution during my lifetime. Francis could be succeeded by Francis II Cupich, and the latter by Francs III Tagle, and Francis IV might be worse than them all together. When all seems lost, Our Lady will, by God’s grace, intervene and set things right, as promised.
We do not have to concoct abstruse theories about who is Pope. It is bloody obvious who is Pope. Ask Benedict who is the Pope! Ask Trump who is the President*!
What we have to do is stay faithful to the Church and Her teaching, and live and die doing the best out of the situation given to us. If you ask me, my hunch is that God will allow the situation of heretical Popes (nothing new by the way) to go on until Catholics in vast numbers reject the Francisrubbish and demand an authentic teaching again. If my hunch is right, none or almost none of those reading this today will live to see sanity restored.
What is the solution? Christ is the solution. What can you do? Pray more and ask God that He may put an end to this punishment soon is what you can do. There are no easy, human solutions. There should not be, if the affront of Vatican II is to be remembered for millennia to come.
This mess needs to live in infamy for many centuries after it has ended.
Don’t expect an easy way out.
Apparently, it is fashionable, nowadays, to hate Catholics and to tweet it out loud. It happens a lot. Perhaps, this deserves a word or two.
Firstly, I do not hate any category of persons en bloc. Not Atheists. Not Democrats. Not Liberals. Not even Muslims. Yes, I admit to hating atheism, liberalism, Democrat ideology, and Islam. But I am not one of those “basket of deplorables”-types. I would actually even think it the mark of a bad person to think that way.
If I were such a person, I would, I think, at least have the taste to not tweet about it, or agree with such a tweet.
So, ask me: “Mundabor, do you hate Catholics?”
“Not as such, no”, would be my clear answer. However, after that I would proceed to make a further distinction and subdivide the aforementioned Catholics in true and fake Catholics.
Of the first, I would tell you that I like them a lot. I like them, in fact, even when they reproach me for, say, not upholding the standards, be that true or false in the specific case. I recognise, in those cases, that such Catholics strive to make the work of the Lord. If they err in that, or are deficient in prudence, or are even obnoxious as people, is, in the end, secondary to their main trait: that they are, flawed as we all are, soldiers of the Lord. A bad soldier of the Lord is still, in his own way, a beautiful person. I might ban him. I will not, repeat not, hate him.
Of the second, I would tell you that I dislike a number of them. Many, I am sure, are misled and simply confused, not educated enough in all things Catholics, or simply trying to do their best with the limited lights at their disposal. I was, in case you don’t know, one of them for too many years. But many others, who actually should know better, manage to anger me: not, mind, because they are flawed, obnoxious soldiers for Christ, but because they refuse to be such, and want to enrol me and everybody else in their fake army, fully infiltrated by the enemy.
Perhaps I should, on reflection, include in the second subcategory a third group of people: Catholic journalists who hate, or are tempted to hate, Catholics an bloc; who hate them qua Catholics.
Now, this category I would find really bad, and not Catholic at all.
I really hope they do not mean what they tweet, apologise, and reflect that the people they hate actually butter their very bread.
We live in times in which fake news and pseudo science dominate our lives.
Our most basic freedoms are curtailed, at the whim of our rulers, because of statistics that are easily, and factually, manipulated at ease. Millions of people listen without laughing, and actually taking it seriously, when alleged experts tell us whether we need one, two, or three masks. The entire run of Western economies is negatively influenced by news of impending doom peddled by retarded youth and supporters of Communism .
Don’t get me started on the political world, which has now gone full Bizarro. The Vice President* has actually encouraged unrest for months, even inviting her supporter to pay bail for violent criminals and looters, but nothing happens to her. An election is stolen in front of our very eyes, but you are treated as a subversive for purely mentioning the obvious fact. The (legitimate) President calls for peaceful protests to prevent the steal, and he should be impeached from an office he no longer holds. It truly is bizarre.
Meanwhile, in real life, very concrete things happen whose harsh reality is completely ignored by the media. Last time I looked, around 900000 babies were killed in their own mother’s womb, by the will of their very mothers, every year in the United States alone. These are very real deaths, not manipulation of statistics. Nobody ever mentions them. They do not seem to care.
Let that sink in, and reflect on it next time you see on television people discussing about how many masks we should wear to prevent the, if we are healthy, infinitesimal risk of dying of the Chinese virus.
I am reliably informed that the Evil Clown suffers from sciatica, and that the doctors have told him that this is not something that can be solved with some operation or other.
The guy just has to eat less.
As I read the news, I could not avoid thinking that this will be an interesting one. It is, in this Country, not uncommon for very fat people to be told that they need to lose weight before the National Health Service pays for, say, their knee operation. This makes sense, as one who already shot his knee by sheer force of eating can’t be expected to have his lack of discipline paid for by the other contribution-paying members of the Killing Socialist Healthcare Utopia. You broke it, you walk it.
So, Francis is now in front of a choice: discipline or pain. If he does not lose weight in the next months, we will know that he is so lacking in judgment that he prefers to live with the pain for the rest of his days (which, just so we are clear, I wish him short, seen that he does not want to abdicate) rather than acting like an adult. If he does lose weight, we will know that, even to a childish man like him, physical pain is a corrective.
The better part of me can’t avoid wishing, even to him, that the pains of sciatica will serve him as a warning of the much bigger pains awaiting him in hell unless he repents. Still, the realistic part of me can’t avoid picturing him cursing and blaming everybody, from the sciatica to the cook to the doctors, for an ailment that he has, largely, brought on himself.
Let the sciatica be a warning to you, Frankie.
At your age, it might be the last one.
I am not a Medical Doctor. However, I am old enough that I have seen several relatives and acquaintances die.
Many of them did not die like that, instantly, as in when there is a blackout and all lights suddenly go out. Rather, they seemed to die, to stay with the metaphor, like a light bulb that slowly dims out, its light getting weaker and weaker until it vanishes altogether. I think we can all agree on this, as I believe that it matches the life experience of many of my readers.
Now, I wonder: those people who are now very weak, slowly “shutting down” and preparing themselves (or better: their bodies preparing themselves) for their meeting with their Creator, are they not at risk of getting all kind of diseases in their last days? A body that is so weak that it can barely function, will not be very likely attacked by all kind of microbes, viruses, and the like? Is this unreasonable? Am I wrong?
Follow me now: if anybody who enters a hospital when he is about to die is tested for Covid, will it not be the case that very many of these dying people, who entered the hospital for the only reason that they are already dying, will be tested for Covid, found positive, die (as largely expected and factually inevitable) shortly thereafter, and land in the ominous statistics of people who “die within XY days of testing positive for Covid?” After which, countless of mindless liberals with a safe job in the public administration will insist for the 34th lockdown, and please make it hard, because I am so, so scared and love humanity, I just don’t care for all those who are going to be ruined.
Were these dying people all tested for the flu and all sorts of other infective diseases in years past? Or were they not tested, because it is really not important whether someone who is dying, and whose natural defence are giving up one by one, gets – say – the flu, or the Chinese Virus, in his last 18, or 26, or 72 hours of life?
You know where I am getting: I think that people who are about to die get all sorts of infections, including Covid, in their last days, which is – I would think – the unavoidable result of their bodies losing the ability to defend themselves against them. This is, normally, not really tracked or recorded, as hospitals don’t waste resources to test dying people for all sorts of diseases. But now, that the resources are there, every dying person is recruited in the number of the “tested positive for Covid” people (though they might not even show any specific symptom!), so that Dr Fauci can go on TV and tell us how many masks we need to wear.
Again, I am not a doctor. I am thinking out loud here. It seems to me that there is some common sense in what I have just said.
If I am wrong, please correct me.
If I am right, please reflect that the daily army of the dying is being recruited to make life impossible for the much bigger army of the living.
I do not know if you are observing the same, but it seems to me that this “they/them” thing has gone way too far.
I have been taught, when learning English, that the plural, when people of both sexes are mixed together, is “he” or “him”. This is the same as in Italian. “If a driver is found speeding, he will be fined”. At some point, the utterly pointless “he or she” stuff began, because people wanted to point out that squirrels, generally, don’t drive. Then we had the “they”. I was told that this has been taught in school for a long time. Strange world.
But now it is getting worse, and it is clearly “gender theory”-motivated. You see people mentioning an obvious male (e.g. John Smith) and then refer to the same person as “they”, as in “John Smith had an accident driving his car. They were taken to the hospital”.
I can only imagine that this is first-class, hard-core gender rubbish. I think it is meant to mean that whilst this person is legally known with the name “John Smith”, we do not dare to assume his gender as he could identify as one of the 100 or more “genders” apparently in existence.
This is becoming mainstream, folks. It is slow, but it will happen.
I suggest we do two things: First, we *correct* the person (“Who is they? He is a man!”). Secondly, we use the “they” staff in derogatory manner, when bantering with colleagues, or the like. Same as all those other political correct stuff, like “non seer” for “blind” and “differently able” for “stupid”.
Language is a powerful tool. The leftists know it and use it relentlessly. The people on the right side, too often, don’t understand that words shape thoughts and adopt the use of the left in order to look moderate and kind. It sickens me when otherwise reasonable sites like Breitbart and American Thinker use the word “gay” to say “homosexual” or “sodomite”. They are, wittingly or not, selling out.
Don’t sell out.
Fight for the proper pronoun.