I was a child in the late Sixties/early Seventies, and the world was already nearing a global catastrophe. Or so the Leftists said.
Oil was about to be depleted. The global cooling (you have read correctly) was a very big issue. We were too wasteful, too superficial, too self-centred. We were destroying the Amazonian Forest. We weren’t as wise as the Chinese and Russians, who refused “consumerism”. We were too many, all four billion of us. Soon there would be no place anymore for all of us. Not enough to eat, see. Terrible wars would ensue.
As I grew up, it went on. Nuclear power plants would soon kill us all. The German forests were clearly dying. The Polar Bear was almost no more. The oil reserves were still about to be depleted. It was, clearly, all our fault. Particularly because Ronald Reagan wanted to kill everyone is a nuclear holocaust.
AIDS came, and soon it was phantasised as a global threat, when those who were threatened were, largely, perverts. Doesn’t mind. The scaremongering soon attracted more money for fag research than for cancer research. AIDS became the New Deal of an entire generation of bogus scientists looking for research money, tenures, fame, and women. We were still very bad.
The Nineties came, and with them new global, or regional, scares: “Mad Cow” would, obviously, cause millions to die prematurely, and if you had eaten liver sausage for the past two decades a will was a very sensible idea. Polar bears were, inexplicably, still almost-but-not-quite extinct, but the Amazonian forest was now dying really fast, exciting tree huggers to a paroxysm. The Amazonian forest produces, they say, 20% of the world’s oxygen, so you can prepare so say farewell to jogging, swimming, bicycling. Sorry, mate. This is where Capitalism has led you. The ozone layer was also about to be destroyed, and the Australians were all in a frenzy. No dying in your own bed for you. Skin cancer will take care of that. Ah, we must be paying for our sins…
In Germany, the frenzy was followed with typical German, reckless abandon. Two extremely cold winters ensued. Germany and Europe forgot all about it. Waiting for the next scare.
The second wave of anti-Capitalist global warming mania exploded between 2006 and 2008, and has suffered a massive setback since 2009; but everyone who hates the West cannot be persuaded to let it go. They think they are still in with a chance.
Because a world that has forgotten God has become so unspeakably stupid that it believes that God’s creation is as fragile as an antique vase, and it is ready to be shattered in thousand pieces unless you do what Francis – and other revolutionaries subversives – tell you to do, all the time.
And no, yours is not to reason why. Ipse dixit. Shut up.
They do not believe in God, Francis and the other revolutionary subversives. But one thing they do: they hate the West. All of them. They will use every excuse to tell you how bad you are, how wrong your way of living is, how selfish and materialistic your “mode of production” (commie speak at its best, peddled to us at school as if it were something wise) always will be.
Look at the prostitutes in the slums of Buenos Aires instead. Look at the children born out-of-wedlock; look at the corruption, the misery, the brutish godless world always engendered by abject poverty unwilling to improve, or to seriously pray, much less afraid of damnation. There is the virtue, my boy.
Smell like a sheep. It will do you good. Look at our Pope, the stinkiest of them all.
This revolutionary, subversive mentality changes global scare like you change a car, every so and so many years. Whenever one scare is exposed, a new one is invented. But the war is always the same, and it is fought always by the same revolutionary prophets of doom. These prophets of dooms hate the West, they hate Christianity, and they hate you. Francis is now making a bid to become their worldwide leader.
To the anti-Capitalist rhetoric of “inequality”, Francis is about to add the other anti-Capitalist rhetoric of Environ-Mentalism. As always, he will go into this head on, like a stupid child, either too arrogant and stupid to understand his own immense arrogance and stupidity or, more likely, confident that his role as Pope will allow him to get away with pretty much everything that does not imply denying dogmas or the Sacraments.
Perhaps he has decided that the war for the communion for adulterers is not to be won, and his all-important image must therefore be polished in another way. Perhaps he is just so drunk on himself that he doesn’t think of anything until he smashes his nose against a wall, as in October. Perhaps he is just hugely stupid in that arrogant, Castroite, atheist way of his.
And where is Christianity in all this? Where are sin, repentance, salvation, damnation? What does this man do to further one aspect of Catholicism? In what is every word he says different from what every idiot – or the Dalai Lama, which is the same – could say?
Francis is shoving down your throat a new religion in which a fantasy Christ is but a prop to his socialist and environ-mentalist madness. He does not believe in the message of the Gospel, and he does not want you to believe in it. He is the bearer of a new gospel, that he is smuggling into your own house and family under a bad disguise of the old one; a fake like a cheap Chinese knockoff pretending to be the real thing and peddled by illegal immigrants on the sidewalks of Rome, for those stupid enough to think that buying the lie will give them a whiff of the truth.
Francis is the illegal immigrant selling you the fake Gospel. He hates you, your morals and your prayers, your fear of the Lord and your faith. He hates your respectability more than anything else. He also hates the doers, the risk-takers, the hard workers, the pioneers, the tough men and women who, all together in their own way, built the wonderful Christian, Western Civilisation of ours. He hates the Capitalism that produces amazing wealth, because it is intolerable to his petty, envious mind that some may have – much less inherit – more than others. He cannot stomach that some are smart and some dumb, some industrious and some lazy, some tenacious and some quitters; he hates that some are huge gamblers, and at time their gamble pays huge dividends; and that some are just fortunate, and may God bless them too. If Francis can stomach it, he can’t stomach that their good fortune – or the fruit of their labour – is not taken away from them; because in his petty, envious world everyone must be a loser so that there are no winners. Francis is the kind of person who would complain of “inequality” in Connecticut – one of the richest States in the US and, therefore, one of the richest corners of the planet – because of the many billionaires who live there, making in many ways life easier for all the others.
This is the source – beside a boundless personal vanity – of Francis social and environ-mental concerns; concerns that are typical of those who do not believe, and most evident in him who does not believe at all.
There is nothing that Francis would not sell you to further his anti-Western, anti-Catholic, anti-morality agenda. In 2015 it will be poverty and global warming; but it could be AIDS and global cooling, Mad Cow disease, the end of oil extraction, the extinction of the baby seal or the Polar Bear, or the cutting down of the Amazonian forest: every rubbish would be equally good to sell you his agenda.
As always, there will be many takers: the losers, the envious, the lazy asses, the Pollyannas, the alternatives of all sorts, the perverts, and the outright stupid. Francis’ audience from day one.
I smile already at seeing how much this enviro-moron in white will cover himself in ridicule if he dares to, as reported, dedicate no less than an encyclical letter to Environ-Mentalism; thus childishly trying to play Leo XIII as he consigns himself to public mockery for all centuries to come. He will be made into little pieces, ridiculed by everyone with a brain in front of everyone with a brain; not very many, perhaps, but enough to destroy this other dream of greatness of this petty, old, vain man. If the Synod has shown anything is that the world is, as I write, not quite as rotten yet as Francis believes. With his encyclical Francis would, very probably, explode a hand grenade in his own Ford Focus.
He should try with the encyclical if he feels like it. Let’s see what good it does to him. I am reminded – as, probably, many of you – of “dirty Harry’s” words in the movie:
Make my day.
The mindless, populist cretin calling himself the Dalai Lama has now announced that, contrary to previous affirmations of him, the way for a She-Lama is now barred, because after him the job shall not be advertised anymore. The people will be its own spiritual guide, or such nonsense.
This one reminds one closely of Francis: stupid, populist, and so much in love with himself he wants to put everyone of his predecessors in the shadow. This one, in facts, even wants to prevent any of his successors from giving any shade to him.
The funniest in all this is that a chap calling himself Dalai Lama is supposed to believe that he is the reincarnation of his predecessors. Therefore, to fear – as he has half-jokingly, half-stupidly indicated – that an hypothetical successor of him could ruin the reputation he himself has gained for the office means to insult himself with the same breath with which he glorifies… himself.
We will, therefore, have no further dreamed-of reincarnation of him as Dalai Lama, or so the deluded man seems to think. Of course he wants to reincarnate himself “as long as there will be people suffering”, which means forever. But in his wisdom, he thinks that the help is best given not helping in the role of spiritual guide; rather in the role of humble nurse, or the like. Boy, this one reeks of Francis like the shepherd reeks of the sheep.
I obviously salute the announced death of the Dalai Lama as an office. That's one impostor less on the planet, which must – and will one day – recognise Christ as the King of Kings. But I also salute the announced demolition of a fake religious institution whilst the occupant is still living, as the boundless vanity of this man appears now evident even to the readers of the “Guardian”.
No She-Dalai, then, or further reincarnation crap. At least if the man has his way.
But will he have his way? I am afraid not. The Chinese Government has already said they are very interested in a Dalai Lama (how the times change!), and actually want to have a say in the appointment. An entire chaste of religious will see itself at risk of self-implosion without a visible head and symbol of unity. The end of the Dalai Lama would also – like it or not – be a severe blow to Tibet's fight for independence. Too much speaks for the next baby to be hand picked as the Dalai Lama – with or without China's agreement – shortly after the death of the mini-Francis now in charge. Hoping, as I am sure the religious do, that he will not be such an ass as the present one.
I celebrate the announcement of the death of the Dalai Lama.
I am just not entirely persuaded that the stupidity of this man's statements will survive his own death.
Once again, the utterly disquieting theology of the Bishop of Rome has come to the fore.
It is clear that to this man damnation is not a possibility concerning the quisque de populo. “Normal” homosexual priests, or adulterous spouses, do not comply with the minimum requirements to merit damnation. To them, the “slap in the wrist”-theory applies.
This, Francis extends outside of the Catholic, even of the Christian religion.
The result? Muslim should hang on to their Korans and receive his message of congratulation for their beautiful spirituality at Ramadan; Jews should be reminded to eat kosher; and Atheist should be encouraged to follow their conscience.
If most people are saved, is there any necessity to convert others to Catholicism? No, no, no!
If most people are saved, Proselytism is a solemn foolishness.
If most people are saved, Christ does not have to be brought to them; because you see, they are already pretty much there, on Christ’s side, where they are! They are whenever they hold on to their Korans, eat kosher, and follow their conscience!
If most people are saved, and if they are saved irrespective of their faith, or lack thereof, salvation isn’t really an issue and therefore proselytism a waste of time. If most people are saved, then peace, harmony, social justice, and synchronised Tambourine play must take precedence. If Christ is everywhere, there’s no need to bring him anywhere. If mortal sin has been all but abolished, being Catholic has been made all but superfluous.
If most people are saved, who isn’t?
Those Francis really doesn’t like, he appears. Mafiosi are, we are told, not saved; though why the adulteress should go to communion and Don Francesco down in Trapani should not has not been explained. I am now informed arms producers are also going to be damned. A strange proposition in a country, like Italy, where the defence industry is in large part in state hands, and the citizens are therefore all arms producers. A strange proposition also for anyone older than six, then one wonders why on earth to produce a tank should be more of a sin than to produce a kitchen knife, a baseball bat, and the countless other objects with which evil people can do harm. With the important difference that seriously evil people will not be stopped by your knives, much less baseball bats. But do you think this man is grateful to the countless people working for other people’s security, individual as well as collective? ‘Course not. It does not tingle the worst instinct of the mob, you see. Of the same mob who in great part owe their freedom to those very arms the Bishop of Rome finds to sinful.
There isn’t much Christianity in Francis. Rather, there is a lot of rehashed Gandhi-cum-Dalai-Lama, a mix of New Age and Woodstock mentality that would have been painful in 1969 and is utterly comical today, after traumatic attacks to the West’s liberty and way of life had to be countered with something more robust than cutlery, or off-the-cuff papal sermons. Still, this does not prevent the man from criticising weapons as bad. Those same weapons, mind, who have saved his well-nourished backside from Communist dictatorship.
Francis has the depth of a Coca Cola ad, without having any of the (possible) youth and freshness. His senseless slogans and patronising, superficial, more than vaguely populist rants are thinking-free waffle for the brain-free. He is the apostle of the common place, the paladin of the easy slogan, and the undisputed Platitude King.
Enough with Pope Dalai The Humble.
“All the world’s major religions, with their emphasis on love, compassion, patience, tolerance, and forgiveness can and do promote inner values. But the reality of the world today is that grounding ethics in religion is no longer adequate. This is why I am increasingly convinced that the time has come to find a way of thinking about spirituality and ethics beyond religion altogether.”
This incredibly senseless twitter statement comes from a man who can be considered the epitome of the stupidity of our times: the Dalai Lama. A man so in love with himself and his “popularity light” among people who need a smattering of spirituality whilst they go on living their heathenish life, the man attempts to go “beyond religion” in his quest for a better spirituality and ethics.
Let us examine the implications of what the man says:
1) Truth changes, and he is the man to tell us when it does. Grounding ethics in religion used to be adequate, but this is no longer the case. Says who? The Dalai Lama, of course.
2) There is a “reality of the world today” that is different from the reality of the world of all ages past and future. For some unfathomable reason (other than the desire of the man to be universally popular among the ignorant world masses) human nature and human condition have now changed. Says who? The Dalai Lama, of course.
3) The man is “increasingly convinced”. He doesn’t really know. His truths are evolving. Sounds like a monologue of one who has had one vodka too much, and shouldn’t have been left near a computer. But it sounds very modern and in tune with the times, so it must be fine.
The entire blabber is entirely senseless. Truth is either unchangeably true, or it isn’t Truth. It can’t be “evolved”, become “inadequate”, or need to go beyond itself. As a religion is a set of beliefs based on the faith in a supernatural entity and the truths this entity wants its follower to know and live by (irrespective of what their personal preferences are; otherwise it is not a religion anymore), to say that religions are becoming “no longer adequate” is tantamount to say that this supernatural entity needs to be corrected by the Dalai Lama himself when he (she, it) begins to go astray, or goes past best before date, or his message becomes inadequate for the “new times”.
Unsurprisingly, this astonishingly brainless twitter message received vast support from the “spirituality light” crowd, the “let us all be oh so inclusive” set who want to be free to do whatever they please without any restriction than their own, very conveniently shaped idea of what is right and wrong.
This is what happens when people follows false prophets: the blind leading the blind.
The orgy of populism this twitter message seems to introduce (it is very easy to see what the Dalai Lama is thinking about: a kind of “a-religious” “ethics” where everyone can feel comfortable whatever his behaviour, “beyond religion altogether”) will fit very well with the lifestyle of so many in the West; those, that is, whose entire spiritual life is based on wholly concepts like “inclusiveness” and “tolerance”, and whose ethical values consist in doing whatever they please, and allowing everyone else to do just the same. They certainly deserve the new ethics “beyond religion” of the Dalai Lama: Similia similibus solvuntur.
Unsurprisingly, this man is on the side of easy approval on pretty much every modern controversy: be it about feminism, environmentalism, sexual perversion, or even abortion, there’s no way of catching him out saying something the masses might be seriously displeased with, and he will not take a stance he knows to be seriously unpopular.
To show you the enlightenment of this self-appointed “incarnation of bodhisattva” here is, verbatim, his opinion about homosexuality:
“If someone comes to me and asks whether homosexuality is okay or not, I will ask ‘What is your companion’s opinion?’. If you both agree, then I think I would say, ‘If two males or two females voluntarily agree to have mutual satisfaction without further implication of harming others, then it is okay.'”
“A la carte” morality, and perfectly coherent with the gradually emerging discovery that religion is now passé, and ready to be substituted for extremely profound concepts like “if there’s no harming others, then it is okay”.
I complain about our trendy bishops, but this here is on another scale altogether.
Seriously, what an ass.
The LA Times feels the need to tell us that, on average, atheists know more of religion than the faithful. What is not clear is why this should be surprising.
Firstly, it is apparent that an atheist has had to inform himself about why he doesn’t believe (thank God, we still live in times where you can’t go around for long saying “I’m atheist” without someone reacting, a vague form of Christianity is still mainstream) whilst a believer is never checked about how deep is his knowledge. Or can you tell me when it was last time that someone has said “I am a Christian” and someone else has challenged this belief. I mean, I do it at times with some people (particularly with the “but people”; “I am a Christian, but…”), but you are not likely to meet me very often. Also note that other religions do not fare much better.
This is rather normal: few people – when left to themselves – spend time in deepening what they already believe. I can’t give you a scientific demonstration that the earth rotates around the sun; I believe it and that’s all I need to know, end of story. On the other hand, if I were of the opinion that the sun rotates around the earth I’d have all the Ptolemaic knowledge at my immediate disposal.
Secondly, this is not a survey about the militant Christians, or the informed Christians. This is a survey about the generic Christians, those with a lick of Christian varnish, often several decades old and sometimes never applied at all; those who think that Jesus was a chap who came on earth to bring peace, or to tell us that we “shouldn’t judge”, or who believe that Jesus wouldn’t have had any disagreement whatsoever with Gandhi or with the Dalai Lama. Therefore, the conclusion of the LA Times that it would be better to ask an atheist than a Christian if you want to “know more about God” is not really intelligent. If you want to know about God, you ask someone who knows the Truth, because the truth is nothing to do with statistics.
Thirdly and as far as we Catholics are concerned, this ignorance is nothing else than the product of fifty years of terrifying catechesis. Considering this, it is in my eyes encouraging that 60% of the surveyed Catholics still get the transubstantiation right. I can imagine many Catholic priests and bishops saddened at the fact that there are still so many. This is the situation on the ground and this problem has been denounced for decades now by conservative Catholics. This is also what is permanently shouted from Catholic blogs all over the planet, so nothing new here.
What therefore the LA times achieves is to show how right conservative Catholics are. This newspaper article should be pinned at the door of every parish disgraced by a trendy priest who has fed his sheep with convenient bollocks all these years, letting many of them go away and keeping the others in abysmal ignorance of even the basics.
A last point I’d like to highlight is the issue of the “education”. The LA Times seems to consider an acquired truth (and I would like to read more data about that anyway) that better educated people tend to be more atheists than less educated people. Even if this were true, though, it would certainly not show that religion is a fantasy for the less educated, but purely that the wrong type of education lets people become haughty and endangers their souls.
I would vastly prefer to be an uneducated peasant living and dying with a simple but solid faith than a faithless sophisticated urban professional living a life of privilege and dying without Christ, because The former has the knowledge that really counts whilst the latter has a fake knowledge that blinds him and leads him to perdition. As Father Corapi would say the peasant knows much more than the educated professional, because he knows the Truth.
This is one reason more to insist that one’s offspring is educated in the proper way.