Featured Post

For Those Who Disregard Prophecy

People who snub prophecy bewilder me. They say, "I'm not obligated to pay any attention to private revelation. The strict teachin...

Monday, July 31, 2017

Aurini's Sunday Sermon: Enabling Priest Pederasty

It's amazing to witness how news of the Crisis within the Catholic Church has spread to different quarters.

Coming out of the Alt-Right's corner this Sunday, Davis Aurini put out a brand-spankin' new...sermon, for lack of a better word.  In it, he discusses how basically we, the laity, are responsible for normalizing the gay culture that's spread like a metastasizing cancer within the Institution.  By turning a blind eye towards the decrepit and vile filth of perverse sexual deviants, pederasty and sodomite culture run rampant within the hierarchy, making life very difficult for any good priest who tries to navigate the storm.

Davis Aurini with trademark vices and skull accessory
This recent Youtube video is one of his better and more pertinent episodes.  I recommend you check it out for yourselves.  It's a brief thirteen minutes in length, but for those without access to video, I've provided a typed transcript for you below.

Here's the hyperlink to the video itself, Pederasty, Homosexuality, and Priestly Celibacy in the Catholic Church:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvhyAnuzc0M


- - -

So the Catholic Church has been in the news again recently.  As usual, for all the wrong reasons.

Child molestation in Mexico.  A cocaine-fueled gay orgy on Vatican property, organized by a 50-year old priest who is the secretary to one of Pope Francis' #1 advisers.

And, you know, I could try and argue that the sexual perversion--the child molestation--is statistically insignificant when compared to other institutions.  But that would be completely missing the point of what's going on with all of this.  

As the saying goes, "it's not the cover-up; it's the crime."  And certainly, any institution that takes care of children is going to have pedophiles who are attracted to it.  It's an institution that's organized by men, run by men.  Corruption is inevitable.

But these aren't the popes of the 14th century who've had a mistress on the side, who were brokering political power for the benefits of their family members.  No, this is the cover up of one of the most damning crimes out there.  A crime that injures the child.  A crime that destroys the faith of that child in the Church and in Jesus Christ.  A crime that damages the community as a whole.

That's what we're talking about here.  The cover up--the turning of a blind eye toward the most serious crimes out there.  Saying that school teachers do it a thousand times more often completely misses the point.

There's been a lot of talk recently about how the problem in the Catholic Church is the vow of celibacy that the priesthood takes.  I would like to dismiss that notion, because that is a non-starter.  That misses the point.  That misses what's really going on, and how much culpability every single one of us has in it.

Saying it's the vow of celibacy is to say that regular heterosexual men, if their wife is off on a business trip, are liable to go grab the local neighbor boy and bugger him in the ass in some sort of "sexual emergency."    That would be laughable if it weren't being tragically used as a defense for Muslim migrants in Europe.  No, the problem is not priests taking a vow of celibacy.  A heterosexual man is not going to go bugger a child in the ass just because he said he wasn't going to get married.  And quite frankly, there are priests who have girlfriends.  There are priests who waver on their vows, and that's been happening for a very long time.

But failing on that vow is one thing.  The sexual perversion of wanting to harm an innocent--of getting off on harming an innocent--that is something else entirely.

Let me put it this way.  Let's try to put this into common sense for a second.  Who's more likely to molest a child under their care?  A priest with a vow of celibacy, or a school teacher with a collection of dildos and a full time membership at the swinger's club?  Which one is more likely to be sexually inappropriate with your children?

No, the problem in the Catholic Church is not the vow of celibacy.  Somebody who respects that vow of celibacy is less likely to harm a child.  In the same that a married man who got married at a young age who has stayed faithful to his wife and she to him is less likely to molest a kid than some drug-addicted, orgy-attending pervert who just uses people as a means of getting off.  That's the problem we have.

The problem we have is that we have been enabling perverts and sodomites getting into the Church--getting in to these positions of power--for decades if not centuries.  We have been enabling it.  We Catholics are the ones who have been making a joke about it--a joke out of the priest liking the little boys in his choir.  We have Catholic mothers, those who should be defending their children, turning this into a joke.  We have parents sending off kids who suffer same-sex attraction to go become priests in places like Notre Dame, where it's the worst-kept secret in the world that they're all homosexuals there.  We as Catholics are the ones not taking this seriously.  We are the ones willfully turning a blind eye, enabling the homosexual priest, enabling the homosexual clergy, and making it that much harder for any priest who respects his vows.    
     
And in return, what do we get?

A priest who falls to regular human weakness and gets a girlfriend on the side--that's bad enough.  He's disrespecting the vows of his office.  But a priest who willingly engages in a degrading sexual act that harms himself and the person he's doing it with, that treats people as disposable objects for his own pleasure?  That person is going to go give the Sacrament?  We enabled that, and that's perverting the Church.

We are the ones who are responsible for this, who allowed this to happen.  And is it any bloody surprise that the sexual fetish which is based on corrupting, manipulating, and blackmailing people--and destroying one's self in endless hedonism--is it any surprise that the practitioners of this sexual perversity have taken over the Vatican at the highest levels?

You know, Ann Barnhardt estimates at this point that ninety percent of the Vatican, of Rome--ninety percent are practicing homosexuals.  Now, you can write that off as typical Barnhardt cynicism.  But I'll tell you what.  It's a hell of a lot more than the three percent that we see in the population everywhere else.  And we turn a blind eye to it.  We turn a blind eye to it in our personal lives and in our political lives.

Every year, the number of people supporting gay marriage in the Church goes up.  And the stats are out there.  Homosexuals are two to three percent of the population, yet they commit about fifty percent of child molestation.  Stats are out there about the drug addiction.  Stats are out there about the abuse, about all of this.  We choose to ignore that.

The Church hasn't failed us.  We have failed the Church.  We need to get right with God...because this is terrifying.  A 2,000-year old institution dedicated to prayer, to worship, to spiritual betterment--and this sort of filth is running rampant in it?  This is terrifying.  This is not mere human corruption.  This is much, much worse.

Whatever issues you might have with the Catholic Church--if you're a Protestant or an atheist--this isn't the Church collecting money and being greedy or being sinful in all those fallen human ways.  This is far, far worse.

There is a silver lining, however.  All of this corruption--every bit of sexual addiction, molestation, and cover up that you hear about--it comes from the secular clergy.  It comes from those who engage with the secular public.  It does not come from the religious communities.  The monasteries, the convents?  There's the occasional one of those that will go bad.  But the widespread corruption and cover ups just aren't there.

So I implore you folks, get right with God.  Start calling out corruption when you see it in your personal life.  Because it's only by living virtuously in our personal lives that we deserve a virtuous Church.  And if we don't?  Interesting times ahead.

Deus Vult
Aurini out.


Sunday, July 30, 2017

TLM Troubles in Tulsa

There is no avoiding this any longer.  The time has come for an update about what's going on in Tulsa.

In this town, I've attended the Novus Ordo, the FSSP, the SSPX, or the diocesan Latin Mass.  Ninety nine percent of the time, I try to favor the Traditionalist parishes.

I ended up going to confession today at a Novus Ordo parish in midtown Tulsa.  It was a very comfortable place.  Very cozy.  There were many well-dressed, well-manicured, healthy-looking people chuckling, laughing, and talking loudly in the lobby.  It was SWPL Land.  There was no concern, fear, or awareness of trouble outside of the community "bubble."

Some ladies were dressed more casually and scantily than I'm used to when going to church.  When I saw them line up in the pews in the front row before their afternoon Mass, I cannot recall any of them on their knees praying.  Instead, they sat back in the pews like an anticipating audience at a movie theater.

These guffawing folks have nothing to worry about.  They have no fears.  There is no reason to believe that the Church hierarchy will ever come down upon them.  Parishioners can donate as much money and time into the parish as they'd like, knowing full well that their contributions will endure without fear of being erased.  The warm syrup of a post-Vatican II liberalized Church washes over them again and again.  They are completely materialistically secure, probably for their entire lives at that parish.

This is not the case at the only diocesan parish that offers the Latin Mass.


Bye Bye To Traditional Priest Fr. Davison

At Sts. Peter and Paul parish, here in Tulsa, the famous Fr. Tim Davison has been "allowed" to go care for an ailing family member, far away in another state.  So, he's on sabbatical.  But then again, who doesn't have an ailing family member somewhere out of state?  Is that a reason to just leave the flock?

Fr. Davison's contributions to Sts. Peter and Paul were substantial.  He brought dignity, respect, and reverence to the parish.  For a time there, the Latin Mass community was a growing phenomenon.  He had changed the spartan, bare, Presence-less sanctuary into one where the tabernacle was front and center.  The English Novus Ordo Mass was celebrated ad orientum.  Additionally, thanks to his ties to Latin American culture, Fr. Davison earned the respect of hundreds from the Hispanic community, and he had a shrine to St. Toribio Romo built on the parish property.  Though the Hispanic Mass was a Novus Ordo Mass, he also celebrated that one ad orientum.  Fr. Davison's amazing presence at Sts. Peter and Paul had even attracted some very notable figures in the American Catholic Church, such as Fr. Ripperger the famous exorcist, and Mother Miriam who ran a radio show that addressed Catholic domestic issues.

But we here at The Hirsch Files know what happened to Fr. Ripperger's order and Mother Miriam.  And now, in correlation with the new Francis-chosen Bishop Konderla--former college chaplain at Texas A&M University--Fr. Davison has been sent away.

True, Davison's tenure at the parish had lasted 14 years.  But if I'm not mistaken, Monsignor Gier recently had a celebratory jubilee Mass for his 50 years as a priest--and 17 years as a rector at Holy Family Cathedral.  (I can recall at that jubilee Mass how excited they were to discuss Msgr. Gier's suggestions for the aesthetic changes and paint schemes he wanted to make in the Cathedral last decade.)

It goes without saying that there are rumors that Fr. Davison was pressured out, though this is not presently a certainty.


The Diocesan Latin Mass Has Always Been In Danger

There is a clear reason why those folks at the midtown Tulsa Novus Ordo parish are able to lounge and wallow in their climate.  There is also a clear reason why the people at the remote north Tulsa neighborhood were unable to settle happily and pour themselves and their funds into their parish.

At the former, there was never any danger.  They will never have to worry about being attacked or bullied by either Bishop Konderla or the presbyteral council that guides the bishop's actions.  Such a parish is recognized as the up-and-coming thing.  It is the new way.  That parish fully embraces the New Springtime of Vatican II.

The Sword of Damocles
But at Sts. Peter and Paul, parishioners always knew that the Sword of Damocles hung over their heads.  The parishioners always knew that once Bishop Slattery was gone, anything was fair game.  Even before Bishop Slattery had to retire, some families had already jumped ship from the diocesan Latin Mass to the FSSP, which was stationed across the Arkansas River and extremely out of the way.

Why did those families abandon what seemed like a solid community and a solid priest who was attracting real Traditional Catholic stars?  Perhaps the writing was on the wall.  Perhaps it was already assumed that the Latin community at Sts. Peter and Paul had a finite shelf life.  Fr. Davison's attempt to restore Catholic Tradition in a diocesan structure was an idea that was on shaky ground, and people knew it.

Therefore, because the sandy ground was ready to open up beneath them, parishioners had no cause to make any kind of long-term contributions.  Temporary contributions, perhaps, but nothing serious.  Purchasing a multi-thousand-dollar stained glass window would be out of the question, as it would only be a matter of time for a new bishop and a new priest to come in and orient things back to FrancisChurch standards.  Why would a community build a cathedral, only to have FrancisChurch come along later on to bulldoze it down?

I will not even be surprised if the changes that Fr. Davison made to the sanctuary are reversed by the new priest, and the tabernacle is returned once more to the side.

When parish life is this unreliable, what motivation is there to contribute anything towards it?  When a community can be eaten away by a brand new disapproving bishop who is pressured by the other liberal priests in the diocese, why bother?  The plan of FrancisChurch in this case is to neglect and starve the Traditional Catholic phenomenon until it is dead.  It is a non-confrontational, effeminate, passive-aggressive way to attack enemies.  Just as Pope Francis refuses to acknowledge the existence of the Dubia, so too will the local power structure refuse to acknowledge the willful destruction of Catholic Tradition in the diocese of Tulsa.      

Simply put, traditionalists in Tulsa are the niggers of the diocese.


Forecast

Before Fr. Davison left, he made sure to train one of the other parish priests how to say the Latin Mass.  I've attended one of his services, and he does the Mass quite well.  Problem is: he speaks hardly a word of English; Spanish and Latin only.  So, an English-speaking deacon delivers the homilies.

Modernist FrancisChurch changes have already made their way into the parish.  Novus Ordo Mass is no longer celebrated ad orientum.  Now, the priest celebrates Mass versus populum, so that the community can worship itself so that the priest faces the people.  Daily Latin Mass has stopped, as the new priest sees no purpose for holding it with low numbers.  Confession has been reduced from two days a week to one day a week.

Some families have already left, now that Fr. Davison is gone.  I suspect the rest will follow eventually.  With no support from higher authorities, and a potential indifference towards Latin by the present priest, it is only a matter of time before the tree withers.

The future of the Latin community at Sts. Peter and Paul looks bleak and dreary.  Traditional Catholics want to worship God in the most reverent way the Church can offer.  But modernist Catholics would rather worship their own good feelings and comfort--and Church hierarchy is happy to oblige this appetite.

Once the Latin Mass is gone from Sts. Peter and Paul, will the presbyteral council go after the FSSP next?  Many Traditionalists in Tulsa in various different parishes have speculated about this.

My recommendation is this: for Traditional Catholic Tulsans, perhaps their long-term investments would be better served in purchasing tent poles, folding chairs, and saving up for hotel conference room fees.          


Saturday, July 29, 2017

This Blog: Where It Is, Where It's Going

Howdy gang.

The numbers of readers of this blog have been increasing exponentially since late 2015.  So, I'd like to thank you all for taking the time to come and read whatever perspective or news I have to share with you all.

As you have probably noticed, my posting schedule has been a bit haphazard.  Allow me to explain.

I try to provide at least two posts for you a week.  Usually these articles are posted on Sundays and/or Tuesday or Wednesday.  Family and work keep me busy during the second half of the week.

If I could have it my way, I'd put up a post a day.  Religious posts about the Church would go up early in the week, starting on Sundays.  Political posts would go up in the middle of the week (Tues. or Wednesdays).  And cultural or social posts in a third category (such as movies or literature) would be going up toward the end of the week.

Unfortunately, there's simply not enough time for me to do all of this, and I'm left doing the best that I can.  But I do not intend to stop.  I'm a writer, and I write because I must.  It is edifying to use this craft to provide you with dialectic and insight--and I hope that it is likewise good and useful for you all to read my work.

So, please continue to check in to the Hirsch Files, and expect at least one if not two posts a week.  I will definitely try to provide more articles, but I cannot make any promises.


Two Future Ideas

First, I've actually considered changing the font and background of this blog.  I've heard a few times that it would be desirable to have a whitish background with black font.  Please let me know in the comments if you support this change.  I've also considered setting up a poll on this matter.

Second, I've considered monetizing the site in order to provide a way for you to support my work.  I despise ads.  Google has been trying to get me to use Ad Sense on my page, but I don't think it's worth it.  I would only advertise for companies and individuals I specifically trusted and supported.

The two methods of income I've considered are a basic PayPal donation button, or income from a book.  I've been working on a politico-religious book for a few months, but it's been slow going.

For now, if you are interested in supporting my work, consider purchasing this and leaving a review:

https://www.amazon.com/Bovodar-Bears-Jack-Mikkelson-ebook/dp/B00GNABG5E

All profits from my writing endeavors will be put back into my work in order to improve and expand what I can do.


Thank You

Thanks again, everyone, for visiting my page.  I'm happy and thankful that I've been able to provide another friendly voice in this crazy world.


Tuesday, July 25, 2017

Agreeing with VD: Modern Writing Sucks

I always felt like I was drowning in a lake of bullshit when I was forced to read modern "literature" at the university. One of my degrees was English Literature, so I had to read a lot of it.

The classics always offered clarity, while the new stuff about fags or failed sexual encounters always seemed self-serving to the writer. Why lit professors or others of that brand keep tagging themselves to that pointless charade will always bewilder me. It's one of the most flaccid things to take an interest in, and their literature preference can probably serve as a beacon warning others of their sodomitical lifestyle.

From today's Vox Day post, Modern Literature Is Bad Writing:
Speaking of bad writing, this 2001 Atlantic essay on the form and purpose of modern literature is magnificent. The author, BR Myers, rightly crucifies several doyennes of modern literature, including one, Cormac McCarthy, whose popular appeal I have never understood in the slightest(...):
"While inside the vaulting of the ribs between his knees the darkly meated heart pumped of who's will and the blood pulsed and the bowels shifted in their massive blue convolutions of who's will and the stout thighbones and knee and cannon and the tendons like flaxen hawsers that drew and flexed and drew and flexed at their articulations of who's will all sheathed and muffled in the flesh and the hooves that stove wells in the morning groundmist and the head turning side to side and the great slavering keyboard of his teeth and the hot globes of his eyes where the world burned.
(All the Pretty Horses, 1992)
"This may get Hass's darkly meated heart pumping, but it's really just bad poetry formatted to exploit the lenient standards of modern prose. The obscurity of who's will, which has an unfortunate Dr. Seussian ring to it, is meant to bully readers into thinking that the author's mind operates on a plane higher than their own—a plane where it isn't ridiculous to eulogize the shifts in a horse's bowels."
I know a copywriter. He was basically my mentor through college. He writes (and edits) damn well. He wrote a book about the rodeo lifestyle not too long ago, and I recommend it to y'all heartily. Any male with a working set of testicles who likes to read should check this one out.
It's called Ride On, by Michael Hearing

https://www.amazon.com/Ride-On-A-Rodeo-Novel-ebook/dp/B019VO8246

You should probably have some classic country playing in the background while you read it. (Waylon, Nelson, Hank Jr., etc.)

I suppose I could always push this book that some have attributed to me.

Monday, July 24, 2017

Two Fathers: A Rolling Stone and An Abuser

In the last three years, I have read two articles about each  of the latest two popes being described as a literal father figure in a nuclear family.  

The perspective differs according to the different dates they were written.  The first article is a little more sedate and pleading, as it was written after the first two years of Pope Francis' pontificate.  But the second article is readily more cutting, gritty, and unforgiving, as it was written recently, four years after Pope Francis was elected.  

The Abuser

The blog article that I actually featured here in January 2015 described how Pope Francis was an abusive father.  It is called: A Verbally and Metally Abusive Father.  This vision of a father is one of a man who seems self-absorbed, disconnected, and indifferent to the sufferings of the family.  If the children are having a problem, and they go to this father, he yells at them abusively:
"Imagine a father who lives in the picturesque suburbs. He has a good job, a loving wife, and several beautiful children of various ages. Many people look up to this man as an exemplary model within the community. Most say he is on his way to sainthood.
"As an outsider, this is only a part of the full picture. Now imagine if this same father spends more time playing with the other children in the neighborhood than he does his own children.When his children ask why their father would rather play with the other children and not his own, he in turn starts teasing them, making fun of them, and insisting that they are being whiny brats, instead of getting a loving answer in regards to why he is neglecting their emotional health.
"Additionally, his children are victim to several bullies in the neighborhood, tormentors who are relentless and look for any flaw in these children in order to persecute them. The father’s words and actions give these bullies ammunition to use against his children. Then the aggressors pounce upon the children and use the father’s own words against them.
"When some of the children get rightfully upset and complain about their father supporting the bullies more than themselves, their siblings yell at them and force their ideas into submission. “You can’t criticize Dad! He’s our father! You have to be obedient and submissive to his will, after all, he knows better than you do.” With this, the family has become more divided than before. Not only is the father allowing the world to abuse his children the same way he does, but some of the children viciously defend his abusive actions."

The Rolling Stone

There is a second article that came out recently that a lot of us are better acquainted with.  This is the article written by Ann Barnhardt: Letter From An Absentee Father To His Children.  It is very cutting, and sadly, it seems as something a lot of us are able to relate to.

Unlike the first article I mentioned, this one actually discusses the fatherhood of Pope Benedict XVI, who a lot of us originally thought was going to be a good pope.  In this description, we envision a father who decided to abandon the family to "go do his own thing."  This is a father who places emphasis on "finding himself" at the expense of his family's welfare.  And in his place comes a foster father who is very abusive and destructive.
Dear Children,
It has been over four years since I abandoned you and declared myself your “father emeritus”, but I wanted to write this letter to you in the hopes that it would console you.  As I said when I was walking out the door, I have not ceased to be your father, I have just chosen to only be your father in the passive, contemplative, inactive, absentee sense. After all, who is to say how many “fathers” a child can have?  What’s important is not who is or is not your father, but rather what fatherhood MEANS.  Fatherhood for me means withdrawing from the active duties of fatherhood while maintaining the spiritual aspect, and in doing this, stepping aside and making way for another man to become your “active father”.  In doing this, I have expanded fatherhood, thus permanently transforming fatherhood into a collegial, synodal paradigm. At least, that is what I tell myself.
I want you to know that I am fully aware that since I abandoned Your Mother and all of you, that a raging psychopath calling himself your “active father”  has moved into your house and is now raping and beating Your Mother before your eyes on a daily basis. I am also aware that he is beating you, emotionally abusing you, poisoning you, and is exposing you to his cabal of friends, almost all of whom are sodomites/boy rapists.
I want you to know that I am aware of this, and assure you of my closeness to you in prayer.  I hope this consoles you.
Further, I want you to know that things are going to get much, much worse.  Don’t ask me how I know this.  Let’s just say that when I was still your Active Father, I … was made privy to certain… secrets.
The psychopath and his sodomite/boy raping friends are going to rape and beat Your Mother so badly that it will literally require a supernatural miracle to save her life.  She will not die, but she will be raped and beaten unto death.  All of this will be done before your very eyes.  In fact, the psychopath and his sodomite gang will luxuriate in the fact that you, the children, will see this happen.
As for you, my dear, dear children, many of you will not survive this.  You will be beaten, berated, poisoned and some of you will also be raped.  For many of you, this abuse and terror will be so intense that you will abandon Your Mother and commit de facto suicide.  Others of you will turn into exactly the same kind of psychopathic monsters as your “active father” and his gang.  The only promise I can make to you is that at least ONE of you will survive.  It is possible that ALL BUT ONE of you, my children, will be lost.
But take heart!  I am aware of what is happening to you, and I am close to you in prayer.
Since this second article was written a full four years after the Church welcomed Pope Francis, we have the full benefit of hindsight.  There is no longer room for giving him the benefit of the doubt.  We are fully aware of what kind of man Pope Francis is.  But we are also fully aware of what kind of man Pope Benedict XVI is.  The latter is a quitter who fled for fear of the wolves, leaving us all to be eaten alive.

I could wholly connect and relate to each of these articles.  I expect them survive into the future and be read as historical literature by future generations, in order to better help our descendants understand what, exactly, we went through at this time.

A quick note for the unsavvy: I did not include all of the articles.  You can read them in their completed form by clicking on their hyperlinked titles.      
 

Sunday, July 23, 2017

Scandalous Victorian Horror Is Incomparable To FrancisChurch



"Just my soul?  Seems like a good idea!"
I wonder if perhaps it seems excessive to a lot of Catholics to keep harping on this horrific scandal of a drug-fueled priest orgy in the Vatican.  But...uh...this was your pope's buddies.  And honestly, Pope Francis and Friends™ have royally screwed over the Church from now until the Chastisement.  Before, in 2001, there was the scandal of priest pedophilia.  That was pretty damned bad.  But a fag train of men snorting cocaine off of each other's backs--right over there in the Vatican itself, and someone this close to the pope, no less--well, I simply cannot see how the Church's reputation will ever recover.

Matthew Taylor
Successful writer, age 20
The entire scandal sort of brought me back to an old Victorian horror novel I read in college.  This book was called The Monk, by Matthew Lewis.  I sort of doubt my readership is going to run out and buy this novel.  It was written in 1796, and it's been lumped in with Vathek, The Castle of Otranto, Frankenstein, and Dracula.

The very existence of a book like The Monk reminds me of a line from the prophecy of The Virgin at La Salette, where she says:
Evil books will be abundant on earth and the spirits of darkness will spread everywhere a universal slackening of all that concerns the service of God.
I cannot help but wonder if The Monk would be considered such an "evil book." It has always seemed to me to be written with the intention of delighting the reader with the scandalous ruination of a Catholic in a religious station.  The pleasures and schadenfreude that this work offered weren't exactly wholesome for the time it was written.  The Monk was condemned by Samuel Taylor Coleridge as being blasphemous and obscene, but Lewis was praised by the Marquis de Sade.

It goes without saying that this sultry and sensational work was an immediate best seller.  Lewis was only 20 years old.
 
Hear me out, and let me tell you this story.

 

Summary of Matthew Lewis' The Monk 
The story takes place in Spain, which at that time was a land of heated, romantic, unbridled passion.  There, in Madrid, the people have unquenched desire.  They clamor all over one another, there at the Church of the Capuchins.  They are a fomented, overzealous mob.  
Do not encourage the idea that the crowd was assembled either from motives of piety or thirst of information.  But very few were influenced by those reasons; and in a city where superstition reigns with such despotic sway as in Madrid, to seek for true devotion would be a fruitless attempt.  
One cannot help but wonder if Lewis is painting his target audience here.  
After some waiting, the man of the hour arrives.  The monk himself, "The Man of Holiness," Ambrosio, Abbot of the Capuchins, steps out to give his sermon.  And his sermon is a demonstration of his ability to spell-bound the crowd.  And, for that matter, the crowd is not a devout collection of the faithful.  The entire episode is a show.

Now, there are a few fresh victims characters I should introduce at this point.  There is the strapping young Lorenzo and the beautiful Antonia who meet during Ambrosio's sermon.  There is a second couple named Raymond and Agnes (Lorenzo's sister)--and real quick, these two get separated, but are reunited at the end; Agnes, who was pregnant, was cruelly kept in a convent by a prioress at the bottom of a secret staircase in a crypt.  

A couple more characters I should mention include Elvira, Antonia's mother.  And then there's Matilda, a mysterious woman who comes to Ambrosio (the monk) because she's infatuated with him.  Oh, and even the ghostly Wandering Jew makes a cameo appearance.  I'll never forget that scene.  (Let me know in the comments if you want me to provide you with that scene.) 

Amid all of the scandal, demons, and ghosts, the story goes like this.  

Ambrosio seems like a pious monk to the public.  But then we get a scene of him where is admiring a painting of the Virgin in a highly inappropriate sexual manner:  
"Oh!  If such a creature existed, and existed but for me!  Were I permitted to twine round my fingers those golden ringlets, and press with my lips the treasures of that snowy bosom!"
This is the interior mind of this "man of God."  He is not holy, but compromised.  

When he is eventually approached by Matilda, who seems to be a witch, her charm overcomes Ambrosio.  This woman appears obsessed with him.  As a matter of fact, at a point in the story, Matilda admits that she was the object of study in that portrait of the Virgin he admired:
"Yes, Ambrosio; In Matilda de Villanegas you see the original of your beloved Madonna.  Soon after I conceived my unfortunate passion, I formed the project of conveying to you my picture...I heard you daily extol the praises of my portrait."
As expected, the monk breaks his vows and has sex with Matilda, who seems somehow more aloof to the natural order of the universe than Ambrosio realizes.  

Ambrosio then becomes overcome with lust for Antonia--the innocent young girl I mentioned in the beginning.  He keeps visiting her family's house.  He deceives the family and says he's there to counsel Antonia's ailing mother, Elvira.  But Elvira, seeing through the pretense, tells the monk to leave before he harms the girl.  

"This deal seems legit!"
Matilda, at this point, helps Ambrosio by summoning a demon for him.  The demon gives the monk a magic myrtle branch that unlocks the doors of Antonia's house.  When Ambrosio the monk goes into the girl's house one night, her mother catches Ambrosio.  So...the monk kills her mother and runs off.  
  
Later, when Antonia is stricken mad with grief because she thought she saw her mother's ghost, Ambrosio the monk rushed "to her rescue" to take advantage of her.  He is advised by his lover Matilda to give the girl a drink that makes her sleep.  The monk then takes Antonia down to a dark crypt, rapes her, and then stabs her to death before she can escape.  

Ambrosio and Matilda are turned over to the Inquisition, as they are at this point known for rape, murder, and sorcery.  But then, Matilda convinces Ambrosio to sign his soul over in blood to the devil in order to avoid the execution.  

At that point, a devil appears to Ambrosio and helps him escape:
"'I have triumphed!  You are mine past reprieve, and I fulfill my promise.'  While he spoke, the door unclosed.  Instantly the demon grasped one of Ambrosio's arms, spread his broad pinions, and sprang with him into the air.  The roof opened as they soared upwards, and closed again when they had quitted the dungeon."
"Goodness, what a surprise!  I
totally didn't expect this to happen!"
The fiend reveals that that Matilda was also a demon all along, that Antonia was actually his sister, and that Elvira was his mother.  Ambrosio is then carried upward, dropped onto a sharp rocky precipice, from which the monk tumbles down to a river bank, and while still barely alive, his blood is being drunken by swarms of insects, and his body is ripped apart by the crooked beaks of wild mountain eagles.




The Monk Ambrosio Compared To Today's FrancisChurch Priests
I can remember the awkward confusion I felt as I witnessed my professor get a perverse thrill from teaching us about this novel.  It was downright naughty for its time, and certainly, it paints the Catholic Church in a bad light.    

So, yes it is a very horrible thing when a monk involves himself with sorcery, breaks his vows of chastity with a woman, rapes his sister, and kills his mother.  That's pretty bad.  BUT IT IS NOTHING COMPARED TO A COCAINE-FUELED GAY ORGY IN THE VATICAN THAT'S HOSTED BY A HIGH-RANKING VATICAN MONSIGNOR.    

I do not think that even the writer Matthew Lewis could have conceived of the kind of evil that now takes place in the center of what was once Christendom.  In The Monk, Ambrosio is led by his passions from one trainwreck into another.  His actions are not thought out.  They are hasty.  They are rash.  He gives into temptation, but he's no warlock.  He's a fool who got played by the Devil.  

For those not in the know, this homo-erotic
picture is actually a mural in a church, commissioned by
Archbishop Paglia.  That's him in the picture, with the hat.
A Vatican apartment filled with a drug-induced naked sausage party is another thing altogether.  It requires premeditation, arrangements, coordination, and a thought-out schedule.  "Let's all get together on this night in this place, purchase these drugs, have this kind of sex from this time to this time.  Be sure to contact this guy, this guy, and that guy, and make sure they tell so and so."  This is nothing like what Ambrosio did.  

At least Ambrosio the monk was attracted to women.  But this orgy...this vile thing that happened this year...this is planned evil.  These men have engaged themselves in a long-term commitment to wickedness.  This kind of diabolical depravity is a systemic groupthink with those priests, and their lives are attached to a program of sorts that enables this kind of crime.  

Ambrosio was merely a lustful heterosexual idiot bumping into one demon after another.  At the end of his life, cornered by the demon, he actually gave a thought to repentance shortly before the devil destroyed his hope:
   "On hearing this sentence, dreadful were the feelings of the devoted wretch!  He sank upon his knees, and raised his hands towards Heaven.  The fiend read his intention and prevented it--
   "'What?' he cried, darting at him a look of fury: 'Dare you still implore the Eternal's mercy?  Would you feign penitence, and again act an hypocrite's part?  Villain, resign your hopes of pardon.  Thus I secure my prey!'"
The monk Ambrosio had a touch of remorse.  Although out of self-preservation, he at least gave Heaven a glance with regret, and desired a last chance to correct his soul.  

Msgr. Capozzi
But the sodomite club in the Vatican is not populated by monks.  It consisted of priests, which is a much higher office and greater responsibility than a monk.  In fact, Monsignor Luigi Capozzi--the drug-running host of these recurrent orgies--was set to become a bishop, courtesy of his boss, Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio, who has often said that Catholic leaders should focus on the "positive elements" of faggotry, and emphasize the "positive realities" of such homosexual relationships brief encounters.

Cardinal Cocco
Sodomites typically have no remorse.  They're usually narcissists.  And narcissists are unlikely to care about anything external to their own egos and pleasures.  Narcissists like that scoff at religion, and they are happy to try to change the Faith if they can--as we have seen with Cardinal Cocco.  Groups like the Coco Club don't bump into one accidental fling after another as the monk Ambrosio did.  Instead, they flaunt their gay pride, and they look at traditional morality as a societal and temporary inconvenience.  

If these men remain unrepentant, then their afterlife tortures will resemble a fate far worse than Ambrosio's death:

As He said this, darting his talons into the Monk's shaven crown, He sprang with him from the rock. The Caves and mountains rang with Ambrosio's shrieks. The Daemon continued to soar aloft, till reaching a dreadful height, He released the sufferer. Headlong fell the Monk through the airy waste; The sharp point of a rock received him; and He rolled from precipice to precipice, till bruised and mangled He rested on the river's banks. Life still existed in his miserable frame: He attempted in vain to raise himself; His broken and dislocated limbs refused to perform their office, nor was He able to quit the spot where He had first fallen. The Sun now rose above the horizon; Its scorching beams darted full upon the head of the expiring Sinner. Myriads of insects were called forth by the warmth; They drank the blood which trickled from Ambrosio's wounds; He had no power to drive them from him, and they fastened upon his sores, darted their stings into his body, covered him with their multitudes, and inflicted on him tortures the most exquisite and insupportable. The Eagles of the rock tore his flesh piecemeal, and dug out his eyeballs with their crooked beaks. A burning thirst tormented him; He heard the river's murmur as it rolled beside him, but strove in vain to drag himself towards the sound. Blind, maimed, helpless, and despairing, venting his rage in blasphemy and curses, execrating his existence, yet dreading the arrival of death destined to yield him up to greater torments, six miserable days did the Villain languish. On the Seventh a violent storm arose: The winds in fury rent up rocks and forests: The sky was now black with clouds, now sheeted with fire: The rain fell in torrents; It swelled the stream; The waves overflowed their banks; They reached the spot where Ambrosio lay, and when they abated carried with them into the river the Corse of the despairing Monk.       

Bye.

Friday, July 21, 2017

Republicans Fail. Next? Zionist Laws!

So the Republican aristocracy, our oligarchs, have demonstrated to us this month that no matter what we give them--majorities in the House and Senate, and a very fiscally conservative, guns-loaded, ready-to-go president--they will continue to fail us.  This means that no matter what we give the Republican Party, there is pretty much no realistic hope to ever reverse any kind of insanity the government brings down on our heads.  

And then, there's this:
But now, a group of 43 senators — 29 Republicans and 14 Democrats — wants to implement a law that would make it a felony for Americans to support the international boycott against Israel, which was launched in protest of that country’s decades-old occupation of Palestine. The two primary sponsors of the bill are Democrat Ben Cardin of Maryland and Republican Rob Portman of Ohio. Perhaps the most shocking aspect is the punishment: Anyone guilty of violating the prohibitions will face a minimum civil penalty of $250,000 and a maximum criminal penalty of $1 million and 20 years in prison.
So, if I here on this blog support a boycott against Israel, I will owe the federal government more money than I can possibly muster--at least $1,250,000--and I will go to prison for 20 years where I will be harassed and trained in the criminal arts, while my family becomes destitute and leaderless without their husband and father.

The religion of America is Zionism.  This law is a blasphemy law.  It makes perfect sense that the American Overlords would even consider this insanity, as we are a rebel nation based on Hebraic Puritanism.  

Vox Day is actually the one who brought this to my attention today.  Both of us recognize that the problem is the fact that we suffer under an oligarchy.  His solution, however, is to make America a direct democracy, while my solution is to go the other direction and have a monarchy, where there is a single man we can hold to account for everything.


The Three Forms of Government:

Democracy, Aristocracy, Monarchy


Thursday, July 20, 2017

The Sins of Our Oligarchs...

...could be used for blackmail.

After all, why else would these people do a complete 180 from their previous positions on Obamacare?  In fact, two senators who voted to repeal Obamacare in 2015 now refuse to do the same.

I'm probably entering conspiracy territory on this one.  But oh well, conspiracies do exist.

Let us to return to something that Limbaugh said earlier this week on this matter:
In the real world, they would be scared to death to be such hypocrites. To openly pass legislation that repeals it, knowing it isn’t gonna happen, and in the campaign promising to do it for real if they get control of the House and Senate. Then they don’t, and they then go out for reelection, what do they expect is going to happen? Do they think the public’s gonna forget? Do they think voters are not gonna mind? Do they think voters are gonna understand why they couldn’t do it?
My point, something matters more to them than what they’re going to face during reelection. They are willing to incur the wrath of the voters by failing to repeal it after promising to do so. They would rather incur the wrath of voters than to face whatever else it is that greets them if they do it. They’re afraid to do it. They’re afraid to repeal it. Why? Afraid of what? Who are they afraid of? What in the world has them more frightened than facing you on the reelection campaign trail? You answer that question, we answer that question, and we will know a lot more than we know now.
Consider the possibility that these people are being blackmailed.  Recall how just recently, we have read about the deaths of the following people investigating the Clinton Foundation: Seth Richards, Peter Smith, and Hatian government official Klaus Eberwein.  For that matter, recall that shooting of House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, who was recently shot down during baseball practice.  Little do most people know that Scalise was fighting pedophilia and human trafficking.

Blackmail is real, and it happens in both U.S. politics as well as in the Vatican.

Now, I'm unsure these senators are taking the Lolita Express to Epstein's orgy island.   Yet when I heard Limbaugh talk about senators who were more afraid of something unspoken, rather than the rage of voters, blackmail was one of the first things that came to my mind.  But what else could be so incriminating than some sort of sexual scandal?

No telling.  I could be completely wrong.  For all I know, maybe they'll vote to repeal Obamacare next week.  However...it's just a speculation, and there you have it.

 


Wednesday, July 19, 2017

The Healthcare Bill: American Oligarchs vs Americans

This week featured such a momentous occasion.  The Republicans have failed to destroy Obama's socialized healthcare program.  After seven years of easily passing token votes through the House and Senate--all the way to President Obama's veto pen, the Republicrats of the Senate have demonstrated that they were never serious about their promises to the American people.

For seven long years--ever since the Senate Democrats snuck socialized medicine into America that Christmas weekend, briefly after the death of their good ol' buddy Ted Kennedy--the Republican party has passed nothing but "show votes."  I would say that their votes meant nothing.  But that would be wrong.  The votes of the Republicans do mean something in this instance.  Their votes indicate that they hate you, the people.

During times like this, it is always interesting to see what Rush Limbaugh has to say about such a phenomenon:
"[I]t is abundantly clear that the career Republicans in Washington don’t want to touch Obamacare. They don’t want to repeal it. And they don’t want to do tax reform. And they don’t want to build a wall. They don’t want to do any of the Trump agenda.
They were not going to contribute. They were not gonna make this easy for Trump. It has never been about Trump unifying the Republican Party in order to beat the Democrats, and that’s been the mistake. That’s not the fight here. The fight is not Republican versus Democrat. The fight is Donald Trump and his cadre and you, the Trump base, versus the Washington establishment. It has always been that and nothing more."
And now, clear for one and all, we can see the perils of being run by an oligarchy.  That grand democratic myth that the politicians really speak for the people as a whole has shown itself to be nothing but a fiction for the gullible.

Cornered, Trump will do the only thing he can do now.  He will allow the madness of Obama's horrific program to continue on.  It will build and build, the stench filling the land, growing more horrible with each passing year.  Our healthcare will become completely unaffordable as the premiums and deductibles rise higher than any common man can afford, and we shall fall out of the status of a first-world nation.


Oligarchy

It is not easy to blame a single particular person for this.  That is because this work is not the fault of one man.  It is the fault of a committee.  We can see these senators in their public lives, but there are also those who run them who hide in the shadows.  This is the nature of oligarchy.

As Nassim Taleb states:
The problem is that by creating bureaucracies, we put civil servants in a position to make decisions based on abstract and theoretical matters, with the illusion that they will be making them in a rational, accountable way.  
Indeed, who are we to blame for this?  As I've argued before, now that things have become terrible, there is not one single person to pin this problem to.  The villain is an amorphous committee.  Blame can be shifted from one person to another in this matter, until we've reached a point where blame cannot be assigned to anyone.  It's the fault of "a process."  Or, one might argue, "there's not been enough communication."  All of this translates to: responsible parties do not take any blame.    

At least we have a name for these people.  We call them "the Republican Establishment."  And who is The Establishment?  They are a group of people who live and breathe Washington D.C. liberalism.  They are a group of people who know nothing about the kind of world that you live in.  They are individuals who have never worked in healthcare, yet have all the answers.

Rush Limbaugh expands on the nature of these beasts:
You think these people in the establishment are paying a scant bit of attention to what the public thinks? They’re not. They hold the public in contempt. In their view, the public doesn’t know enough to know the right thing.
Not all members of the establishment are equally powerful. There are those who run it. You don’t know who they are. They don’t seek office. They’re not officeholders. They are the chess players, the puppeteers.  These are the people who assign roles. These are the people who determine how much money from the pile goes where, how much they get, and they then have the power (because of their ability to disburse the money), who gets it and therefore who remains loyal to the power and the elite club known as the establishment. They’re all aligned and unified now to deny Donald Trump — and if they can, to sabotage his presidency.
This is what America is subject to.  When we "fight for freedom" with our proxy wars, this is what we are working to preserve.  For whatever reason, this is the political system we revere, defend, and argue for.

Godless, pluralistic, unprincipled America produces bad characters when it comes to our politicians.  These people who become our archons are the product of our culture.  We are a raft of debris floating in the ocean.  We have no direction, no rudder, no propeller, nothing.  We drift according to our lusts.  We cannot command our own urges, and so the populace begs to be exploited.

Look forward to more hard times ahead when it comes to getting medical treatment.  When Trump says he's going to let Obamacare implode, that means he's going to let the stability of your lives implode.  Trump has no control over this; he has been on your side in whatever faculty he could.

Your welfare instead rests in the hands of this system controlled by an establishment of oligarchs who probably do not have your interests at heart.

Tuesday, July 18, 2017

Trump: Winning. Congress: Continually Losing

The Republicans in Congress have failed us again.  Socialized health care was not repealed--once again.  Our president and Republican Congress have the bully pulpit and the mutual support necessary to pass anything through in Congress if they were of one mind.  Yet, pettiness still reigns.

But I want to be positive today.  There is much to be positive about.  

Most people who read this blog are thinking men.  And as thinking men realize, Trump is not the Republican Congress and the Republican Congress is not Trump.  In fact, the "republicrats" are thoroughly cucked passive-aggressive enemies of this president.  And this president is clearly the choice of the people of the United States, as is seen from the drama of last year's presidential election.  The mask was ripped off of the pollsters--who, as we now know, were shown to be public liars and truth benders.

So hated is Trump, that he is not even allowed to fill the top jobs in his own administration, as Senate Democrats have been using obstruction techniques to ensure that the president has only 33 confirmed administration positions as compared to Obama's 126 confirmed officials at this point in office.

It is argued by the New York Times that Trump has not nominated enough senior officials fast enough.  But is it not possible that he simply doesn't bother to try too hard, realizing that the Congress opposes him as an outsider?  Perhaps it may be that Trump intends to run a skeleton crew while in office.  It may also be that this is one of his strategies for cutting government waste.  Building up the oligarchy, after all, doesn't seem like a Trump thing to do.

Others on the Right, such as Michael Savage, were yesterday denouncing Trump's administration for admitting 15,000 additional temporary workers into the United States this week.  Savage argued that we are somewhere in one of the five stages of grief with Trump, and he argued that this is not what he worked towards for a year and a half.  (Savage argues we are in the Denial stage.)


We Have A Good President So Far

I would like to throw some cold water on the situation.  If Trump did absolutely nothing at all during his presidency, he would be one of the best presidents we've ever had since Calvin Coolidge, who once said: "The business of America is business."  Coolidge spent most of his presidential time fishing.  I can think of no better activity for an American president at this point than fly fishing.

30th President of the United States, doing what he does.  Fishing.
The next ten presidents after Trump should do this.

Trump is not only allowing America to catch its breath for four years.  He is also reversing things in whatever capacity his blackballed-by-Congress situation allows.

For example, just yesterday, the Border Patrol Union President has praised President Trump for the sharp dropoff in illegal border crossings.  They've never seen such a drop in illegal immigration like this.  Obama, to the contrary, actually kept border agents from performing their sworn duties.

But to assist you in realizing just how decent this "wild card" president has turned out, allow me to cite some of Trump's achievements from Conservapedia:

Trump has been whittling away at Obamacare, halted Obama's transgender policies, and weakened the Johnson Amendment that prevents churches from their 1st Amendment speech rights.  Last month, he even refused to proclaim June 2017 as LGBT Pride Month.

He extened the Veterans Choice Act, allowing veterans to seek medical care outside of problematic VA systems, and he signed the Department of Veterans Affairs Accountability and Whistleblower Protection Act.  This latter act expands protection for VA whistleblowers, ends bonuses to convicted employees, and makes it easier and quicker to fire bad VA employees.

Under Trump, Attorney General Sessions has called for the resignation of 46 leftist U.S. attorneys appointed by Obama.  Local control has been given back to police departments, while Obama was working to actually federalize police departments to a certain degree.  James Comey was rooted out and fired.  Sessions also ended the Obama era of pursuing light sentences for criminals.  As of last week, the DOJ charged 412 people for health care fraud schemes that defrauded taxpayers of $1.3 billion.

International Planned Parenthood has been defunded globally.  Trump stopped funding the United Nations Population Fund (pro-one-child policies).  Pro-life advocates have been appointed to the Department of Health and Human Services.

As far as gun laws, under Obama, a background check registry included a mental disability check.  To have a gun under Obama, you had to not be mentally disabled.  But the process was so murky and nebulous, that perfectly competent and mentally healthy citizens would have been barred from owning firearms.  Trump repealed this.  Now, it will be ten years before the Social Security Administration is allowed to come up with any kind of new criteria at all for supplying names to the background check registry.

Trump has ordered the Secretary of Education to review Department of Education regulations.  He intends to return the power of public schools to local governments and out of the Federal government's hands.

Treasury Secretary Mnuchin is to look at the U.S. tax code and investigate what unnecessary regulations can be removed.  Federal regulations on job-training programs are to be loosened.  Apprenticeships and vocational learning are now being encouraged.  After Trump's first 100 days, the national debt has actually decreased under this president by $100 billion--something we haven't seen in the eight years of Obama's presidency, where the debt grew by almost $600 billion by the same point in his presidency.  Credit scores of Americans have never been higher, the economy rose rapidly, and so far 222,000 jobs have been added to the American economy.  Jobless claims applications and benefits have fallen, and U.S. factory activity rose to hits highest level since August 2014.

Improvements in energy and immigration policy have been remarkable.

Trump greenlit the Keystone and Dakota Access pipeline projects.  He's ordered that all pipelines be made with quality American steel, and that manufacturing regulations be streamlined.  He forced the G-20 to remove mention of climate change from its joint statement, and to add to the hilarity, he refused to sign the G7 joint statement.  He repealed Obama-era coal regulations and revitalized the industry.  The coal industry is now in a rebound after being at historic lows during Obama's disastrous presidency.  President Trump also repealed an offshore drilling ban signed by Obama.  Land in Alaska's National Petroleum Reserve has been opened up for drilling.  Much for our delight and to the chagrin of Obama and liberal world leaders everywhere, our American President withdrew from the Paris climate agreement.  He closed the bureaucratic Office of International Climate and Technology.  

Though the wall we've been waiting for has not been built yet, Trump nevertheless signed two executive orders ordering the immediate construction of a physical wall on the southern border.  Five thousand additional border control agents have been hired.  Catch and release policies for illegal immigrants have been halted.  Trump has banned admission of Syrian refugees for at least 120 days, and he has made it clear that he would help Christian refugees--something our previous Muslim-friendly president was not known for at all.   Last month, the Supreme Court came down in Trump's favor to ban refugees from countries with a high risk of terrorism.  Deportation of imprisoned illegals has sped up.  There are now tougher vetting policies at U.S. border crossings.

The government has been cracking down on MS-13 and other illegal immigrant gangs.  ICE now has a Spanish media outlet in order to combat media distortion.  Illegal immigrants no longer are granted privelages in detention centers.  Even those illegal immigrants who were given a quasi-amnesty in the form of "administrative closure" by Obama have begun to be repatriated back to their home countries.  An old policy of Obama's, DAPA, almost gave amnesty to 4 million illegal immigrants, but the federal courts under President Trump's control have cancelled this policy.  Also, Obama wanted to speed up the vetting process for people seeking visas; Trump rescinded that policy.  ICE agents continue to enforce U.S. immigration law in "sanctuary cities," despite constant opposition by liberals.


Conclusion

Do you feel better now?  Do you feel edified and healed?  I do hope so.  I hope that boosts your morale.  All week, we'll probably be hearing about the failed passage of the Obamacare repeal.  But that's Congress' failure.

What I have written is not even half of what President Trump has achieved so far in this nation.  The Right's "wild card" vote has so far paid off.  Even without the feckless Congress, President Trump has been healing and restoring this country.  He has taken many bullets and attacks from the media and every Leftist rabble-rousing critic for our sake.  

Yes, it is true that more could be accomplished if only the Republican House and Senate were of one mind on policy.  And let's not forget, many congressional Republicans hate both Donald Trump and the lowly Republican voters who put him into office.  They are pretty much Leftists with an "R" beside their name.  

But in considering these achievements, and after considering that it's only been 6 months since Trump has been in office, I cannot wait to hear him rattle off his achievements at the next State of the Union Address in front of a pugnacious congress that wants to impeach him.  Trump has been a man of the people thus far.  The oligarchy Congress has proved itself otherwise.    


Monday, July 17, 2017

The Kingdom of Católica America 12: Today, John C. Wright Opposes Monarchy

"I hope to be able to encourage conversations tending toward a definition of Christian monarchism in the abstract."-Charles Coulombe, Star-Spangled Crown

Recently, in a blog post titled Uanswered Inequality Challenge, I've had some brief conversation online with a fellow who is strongly opposed to monarchy.  What I find surprising is that this man is none other than John C. Wright, a fantasy and science fiction writer, and a Catholic convert.

His distaste for monarchy is amazing to me for several reasons.

For starters, like me, he is a Catholic convert.  This means that at some point he has opened his mind to a new idea, a new philosophy, and a new way to go on in life.  Typically with converts, we become very intense and full of zeal for our new faith.  This happens because the Faith can fill our insight if we choose to let it, and so the knowledge and wisdom of the Church is rushing into our minds like a jet stream of water from a fire hose.

Yet, on this issue--when it comes to government--Wright has either turned down the flow of Catholic influence, or shut the valve completely.  I am uncertain he has read any of the arguments put forth by either Coulombe or Medaille.  I am even more uncertain if he has read what St. Thomas Aquinas or St. Bellarmine had to say on the issue.  Yet supposing Wright has read these writers' opinions--how could he disagree?  After all, the Catholic Church Herself is a monarchy.  That alone should open a Catholic's mind to the subject.

There is a second reason I find Wright's distaste for monarchy surprising: he is a fantasy and science fiction writer.  People who write such fiction are usually capable of imaginations that transcend the bounds of reality.  Writers like him derive a certain inspiration from even the overlooked things of this world.

But when it comes to monarchists, Wright scoffs: "I suspect a romantic attachment to tales of King Arthur is to blame."  And, in fairness, he describes himself as a "cold and remorseless thinker, as logical and dispassionate as a Vulcan."

Yet, ought not a fiction writer be inspired by such things?  Is not the mind of a fantasy writer naturally subject to inspirations from Scriptures, the mundane features of life, and the extraordinary tales that we grow up with as children?
"We’re all born Monarchists. Or, at least, we used to be. Every boy raised by parents who want their sons to become gentlemen will be given the example of Prince Charming. Every little girl should be lucky enough to be Daddy’s Little Princess. Every child wants to live in a castle, sees his father as a king, or her mother as a queen. No little five-year-old dreams of living in an executive mansion or imagines his mother to be a charming and able politician’s wife."-Michael Davis, "Why I'm a Monarchist"
History has shown that it is kingdoms, not republics, that last the longest.  The inspiration of leaders and heroes is what helps a nation endure through the ages.  Archetypes instill a lasting impression in even the hearts of children.  Not administrators or representatives who cave in to lobbyists.  "The hands of the king are the hands of a healer," as Tolkien once wrote.

There is one final reason Wright surprises me with his strong and outspoken opposition to monarchy.  Not only is he an active Catholic who appears open to reading and writing about extraordinary things, but he could also be categorized taxonomically with the current batch of men on the Right who have abandoned the self-imposed restrictions that prevented any kind of outside-of-the-box thinking.  

It is true that Wright firmly states he does not wish to be a part of the Alt-Right (see also HERE).  Yet, honestly, I can think of few other currently-published fantasy and sci-fi authors who think more outside of the box than Wright.  For proof, I would direct you to read his work Awake in the Night Land.  A reading of that book will help you to conceive just how original, surprising, deep-thinking, and marvelous his writing can be.

Despite the fact that Wright is living through a sort of Renassiance on the Right, however, there are some stifling boxes he prefers to remain in.  The American Myth has a firm hold on his heart, and he is an adherent to the spirit of the "Shining City on a Hill."  His politics seem four parts Catholic and one part Hebraic Puritan.  A step towards Christendom is simply not the direction he desires for America, as we shall ever be a rebellious Lucifer among the nations.  

Time will tell if his thinking develops on this issue.  The fact that Wright is a staunch Americanist, however, should not deter you from reading his amazing fiction.  He is truly a taste of the times, and I recommend supporting him with your patronage.  He is a good and thoughtful Catholic who has worked to argue against some of the more unfavorable directions of the Alt-Right.  Namely, he has taken a bold stance against the hopeless ethnonationalist tendency in some extreme circles (see HERE, and  HERE).  As my readers know, for what it's worth, I have certainly joined him in efforts to steer away from blatant American ethnonationalism and to bring some sort of a direction to this new political energy.

In spite of our slight political differences, I do still think a lot of Wright's ability, and I continue to remain a fan.  That being said, though, I think that Tolkien would be on my side when it comes to monarchy:
All that is gold does not glitter,
Not all those who wander are lost;
The old that is strong does not wither,
Deep roots are not reached by the frost.
From the ashes a fire shall be woken,
A light from the shadows shall spring;
Renewed shall be blade that was broken,
The crownless again shall be king.







Monday, July 10, 2017

Catholics: What do we do? How do we hold out?

A friend and I were chit chatting this evening.  We were lamenting about how most people lack the knowledge and wisdom necessary to overturn the present corruption that has infested both secular government, as well as the Church hierarchy.

We recalled the latest news of our pope's right hand man, that he was involved in throwing a cocaine-fueled gay orgy in the Vatican a couple of months ago.  We lamented about something Ann Barnhardt recently related to us all, when she reported from a Vatican source that
there is now a resignation to the fact that the infiltration of sodomites and Freemasons  is so severe that it is not humanly possible to remove the infiltration. This can ONLY be solved by supernatural means, which all understand means a Sodom and Gomorrah type event, except on a much, much larger scale. Massive destruction, with many, many people dying on a level never before seen by mankind, just as the Blessed Mother has warned so many times, particularly over the past century.
There are those who blow this kind of news off and roll their eyes, scoffing, and telling us the world has always been this way.  It's always been like this.  

But history has not always been like this.  It has never been this bad.  Though there is an immense availability of knowledge these days, there is hardly a scrap of wisdom to be found in people.  

My friend and I wish that authority would come to its senses and grab hold of the reins, putting the West back to right.  But that will not happen.

What to do while waiting for the asteroid?

Well? What now, then?  

First, I want to tell you about two definitions.  

#1. Secular clergy - Clergy who are engaged for the most part in pastoral work and who are not members of a religious institute. They are not bound by a vow of poverty or community life. But their celibacy, in the Latin Church, is under solemn oath and they promise obedience to a bishop as their immediate superior under the Pope.

#2. Religious communities - These are monks and nuns, orders, and the small folks that you don't hear about too much.  There are many different kinds of religious communities: apostolic communities, contemplative, monastic, and cloistered communities, missionary communities, motherhouses, knighthood orders, and more.

Now, considering these two important definitions, I would like to repeat what the Virgin Mary told us in Ecuador 400 years ago.  I gave you this quote last week, but it is crucial to drive this point home.  

Our Lady of Good Success foretold of these very times that we are living in.  But tonight, specifically, I want to again focus on this paragraph:
"Religious communities will remain to sustain the Church and work with courage for the salvation of souls.… The secular clergy will fall far short of what is expected of them because they will not pursue their sacred duty. Losing the divine compass, they will stray from the way of priestly ministry mapped out for them by God and will become devoted to money, seeking it too earnestly."
Does this not clearly speak to the troubled times we Catholics are dealing with this very week?  Throughout the Church hierarchy, on the whole, from priests all the way up to the pope, we have been witnessing the secular clergy "fall short" of what we need from them.  And, in fact, perhaps the Holy Mother was making an understatement.  I would argue the clergy has fallen quite far from their duties.  Not all of them.  But a majority?  That's arguable.  

And so, as the secular clergy fails, let me now direct you to the religious communities.  Once again, I want to direct you to what Hilary White said in one of her recent Remnant articles.  In it, she makes a list of "the holdouts."  White is referring to those religious communities that I am referring to, and to whom the Holy Mother was referring.  White calls them "The little guys out here in the big and little pockets of resistance."  She goes through a list of religious orders and Catholic organizations who are still holding the line.  White is showing us those religious communities that the Holy Mother talked about, and who can help us retain our sanity through the times to come.  

If you need to know who to support with your tithe money, your presence, and your public support, might I suggest you turn to the religious communities for your inspiration?

Secular clergy falls short, but religious communities can sustain us.

As for you people who disregard prophecy and private revelation, pay no heed to this article.  I am but a silly fool applying perceived words from Heaven to the present reality.  No doubt, you consider it a frivolous exercise.

Sunday, July 9, 2017

Obsessing Over Englishmen, Brawling With Anti-Monarchists

We return to 250-year old arguments.

This post serves a dual purpose.

1. It's sort of a public reminder note for me which obligates me in front of you all to return to these public arguments.

2. It alerts you good people of the dust up that's going on.  I like a crowd, after all.


"Rights of Englishmen" Obsession

Vox Day is once more bringing up the Rights of Englishmen, which I have addressed in detail here:

The "Rights of Englishmen" Series

Vox Day's post, The Magna Carta and Posterity, is his attempt at ramming home his mistaken perennial point that only English people descended from England are capable of cherishing and perpetuating the rights that stem from the Magna Carta.  Never mind the fact that the Englishmen who became the first Americans argued, fought, bled, killed, and died for the idea that these self-evident rights were actually universal.  John Adams said we are to be "a government of laws, not men."

I have entered the comments box for some salty discourse.  We shall see what happens in the fullness of time.

Meanwhile...


Catholic Convert Writer Argues Against Monarchy

Back in 2014, an article was circulating that discussed the Dark Enlightenment--which, as we now know, would later morph into or fall under the designation "Intellectual Alternative Right."
"The Dark Enlightenment is an ideological analysis of modern democracy that harshly rejects the vision of the 18th century European Enlightenment—a period punctuated by the development of empirical science, the rise of humanist values and the first outburst of revolutionary democratic reform. In contrast, the Dark Enlightenment advocates an autocratic and neo-monarchical society. Its belief system is unapologetically reactionary, almost feudal."
Unapologetic indeed. 

So, as you know, I'm a big fan of promoting a Catholic Monarchy.  The order that a traditional Catholic Monarch offers is quite substantial, once we stop to consider how insane this latest era of republics has become.  

The Kingdom of Católica America Series

That being said, it is easy for me to forget that the path that led me to the conclusion for Catholic monarchy took some time and convincing.  I was not fully on board with the idea at first.  I never even considered it.  The path that led me to this place took time in much the same manner that it took time to accept the legitimacy of the SSPX.  

Yet, I could not help but be surprised when I read that the thoughtful and brilliant fiction writer, John C. Wright, appeared vehemently opposed to our growing movement of Catholic Monarchists, in his recent post: Unanswered Equality Challenge.  But, to give him some leeway, it is likely that he has not given monarchy the benefit of the doubt.  It is likely he has not read any arguments for that form of government with an open mind.  

So, for my own personal intellectual growth and amusement, I shall accept his challenges.  In the near future, I will examine his statements and arguments against Catholic monarchy.  My expectation is that my stance will be bolstered and axioms added for this noble cause.