Archive for the ‘Christianity’ Category

The Bitterness of the Hags

Today, on SG, a brief and rather comical event reminded me that it is important for men, especially married ones with children, should be aware of the bitter, wall-smashed hags that will orbit their happy family with the evil intent to destroy it, merely to satisfy their Satanic ego.

The “argument” started because one such fat, very much post-wall hag, took exception to my simple statement that the reason we are in the current situation Church wise, is essentially because we stopped running heretics through with swords, as St. Luis suggested we should.

The point was made as a rhetorical corrective to a gentleman that had admitted giving people who do not deserve it (because they are deceivers and liars) the benefit of some charity. In this specific case, he was referring to the known liar and demonstrable deceiver, Jay Dyer, on which you can simply avail yourself of this 3 hour long proof (which I tried to make entertaining too) if you care enough to do so.

Being retarded, stupid, and thinking she now “had me on the ropes” She promptly rushed to make the accusation I was calling for the murder of protestants. It’s about the level of intellect you expect to deal with when it comes to these creatures. She of course did no such thing and her lies and idiocy was promptly and correctly nuked by one of the mods, which is as it should be on that platform.

There is now the minor issue of explaining for any wandering retards why my comment is not the advocacy for murder of non-Catholics, which I will address now, because as always, I am a kind and charitable person that hopes some of these absolute morons will be struck by lightning and grow 50 IQ points to put them in “normal range”, but please keep in mind this is not the point of this post. It’s a distraction from it.

The Catholic Church, as part of its unchanged dogma throughout its existence has ALWAYS made it clear that you are not to convert anyone by force, nor is it acceptable to try and kill people that disagree with Catholicism. HOWEVER, and there is a however, an important one. A Buddhist or a Muslim, or an Agnostic or even an Atheist going about minding their business is one thing, but a HERETIC, is quite another. A Heretic, by definition, is someone that professes, promotes and promulgate falsehoods about Catholicism. To make it personal, because morons only think on the solipsistic level, it’s one think if someone goes around thinking you are an assholes and has all sorts of wrong ideas about you. It’s another if they start accusing you falsely of being a wife-beater or a cheating slut that lies to her husband about her affairs and so on. In the first instance, you can absolutely ignore the person, and even be unaware of their ideas and existence. In the second, they are now a lying scumbag that needs to be punished for their lies.

Now, let’s take another example. Closer to the point. I absolutely do NOT like Islam or Judaism as religions, they are demonstrably pedophelic in nature along with many other issues I have with them, but I do not lie about their belief systems or activities. I simply document them and explain why I do not like them.

Heretics on the other hand, demonstrably lie and make false accusations about Catholicism. This is not difficult to see, verify or understand, In fact anyone honest can do so. Including convinced Protestants like Rodney Stark who wrote a whole book on some of the major lies that Protestants have been telling about Catholicism, in his excellent book, Bearing False Witness.

In what was Catholic Christendom, blasphemy laws were in effect for a long time, and it has been only to the detriment of civilisation that the Freemasonic infiltrations have removed most such laws from most countries (Italy still has some). The point being that there absolutely should be a severe punishment for defamation and calumny against a religion. Especially when ALL the rules of such a religion, ALL the dogmas of it, are set down in writing, in plain, simple, logical ways to understand according to Roman Law. Catholicism fulfils all of these criteria.

Protestantism does not, because the entirety of their only rule is basically “Interpreth as thou will”, which is absolutely a Satanic standard. Different denomination among their 40,000 ones (to be generous, because in reality since each one of them can and does interpet as they want it’s more like 900 million denominations, one per person) will tell you they so do have a standard, and promptly disagree with each other within minutes of you asking them to define it clearly, even among their own supposed congregation.

Again, making an analogy, I do not subscribe to Islam, I think it is a Satanic inspired religion and the best of the Muslims are simply seriously deceived people, like the Novus Ordo “Catholics”, but all that said, if I ever get hit by lightning and decide to visit Saudi Arabia, I will educate myself on their rules and laws and will follow them for my duration of the visit. And if I break any of them, I fully expect to be punished according to their laws, including having my head cut off if it reaches that point. This is really not difficult to understand.

If the relevant punishments for blasphemy in the Catholic Christendom had been fully retained in their most severe form, I am absolutely certain that the Novus Ordo Satanic Cult would not have been able to cause as much damage to Catholicism as it has. Again, this is not hard to understand, and really should not require the above 7 paragraphs to grasp, but retards gonna retard, and as I said, I am charitable. But all the above is beside the point.

In this specific case, while I chuckled at the seething chubby, I wondered, how does one of these creatures devolve to this level? As a natural scientist, I am curious about all sorts of weird and disgusting animals and life cycles, and while I readily admit that the study of strange insects is far more interesting and entertaining, the pondering of how the post-wall hags of fatness come to be, is probably more relevant to general human happiness.

If we can reduce their number or get rid of them entirely, the world can only become better. And for the retards, no, it is not a suggestion we gas them en masse, no matter how hypothetically entertaining the idea might be, but rather, the hope is that if we can discover the main mechanism by which these disgusting and unpleasant noxious beasts form, we may be able to prevent them from forming from na early age. Of course, the existing ones are beyond help, short of truly divine intervention on a grand scale, so this is not in the hope of “healing” these parasitic, oxygen thieves and noxious creatures, but merely to study and understand their undead “life cycle”.

Of course, brutal feminism must be at the core, as readers here will know, feminism is a terrible and pestilential thing introduced for the very purpose of destroying the nuclear family, and its evils are broad and deep and devastating, so we know that much.

Secondly, these creatures are generally unpleasant to look at as well, which inevitably results in their being mostly shunned by all but the most desperate of men, and as any man that has lived on Earth for a sufficient time while rooted in reality, the absence of both sex in general, as well as real affection renders women practically toxic and insane. It does it to men too, but in a less socially destructive way, aside the occasional mass shooting. the damage the post-wall toxic fattie does to society is subtler but far more extensive and pervasive and constant.

Like vampires, they perpetuate the lies of feminism at every opportunity, modulating it from soft whispers to strident squealing depending on their target. But this is just their permanent radiation. they also infiltrate families, usually by the pretence of being a “kind and loving” aunt, family friend, grandma, mother-in-law, and so on, whose only aim is to “help” and “improve” the targeted family unit. They inevitably do this by essentially becoming the homunculus on the shoulder of the wife and mother of the household and then proceed to metaphorically shit in their ear and brain in a Chinese water torture fashion. Gossiping, maligning, subtly at first and more directly later, the husband, the wife’s life and situation (which is inevitably never her choice but the oppressive enforcement of it by her evil husband, and so on and on, and on). She will malign and “correct” things to your wife and children without hesitation.

Women being social creatures, if your wife is not an uncommonly strong-minded and logical person, it is quite common that this noxious and sulphuric stench, seeps gradually into their brains until they come out with one or more of the various feminist narratives as being wholly true or even remotely applicable to them. Suddenly, from being a happy wife and mother they will gradually go to becoming a weakened, self-doubting, unhappy, “oppressed” woman at the “mercy” of an “overbearing”, “possessive”, “narcissistic” and “controlling”, “gaslighting”, evil husband. While the entire truth of the matter is that life is hard and shit happens, and you should just get down to it and get on with it while supporting each other as husband and wife against all the lies, slings and arrows the entire world sends your way pretty much constantly. And within your fortress of a marriage, make it as happy and content and loving as you can, while you keep making the moat around it deeper and shark-infested, and firing your cannons of truth at all the attempting invaders.

But what drives these human wreckage to do this? Invariably, without a single exception, it is because their own lives are so absolutely miserable. And in the truest foundational aspect of feminism, they will do everything they can, to reduce every woman, and especially married ones with children, to their own miserable, single or post-wall and post-divorce, misery.

And for that there is no excuse. Such creatures invariably also decry their own past victim status, whether it is real or imagined, as if it were some kind of excuse for their own toxic behaviour, but it never is.

I have known personally both men and women that were raped as children and did not become bitter, destructive human beings. Quite the contrary in fact. And I have known personally people that suffered horrible things. One of the kindest women I got to spend a little time with revealed she had been not only abused in childhood, but also gang-raped, stabbed and left for dead. She still had the stab scars on her body. Terrible things happen to all of us on some level and certainly some are far worse than others, but they are never an excuse for your own shitty behaviour. We do have free will (despite what protestant Calvinists necessarily believe if they could o any logic whatsoever and understood the consequences of their much loved “predestination”), so ultimately, how we behave, is on us.

Whatever their reasons, such creatures will never accept the factual reality that Catholic patriarchal society has created the best possible situation for human beings than any other religion or culture ever has on planet Earth. While you can criticise individuals and even (valid) Popes throughout the history of Catholicism, you simply cannot avoid the fact that following its infallible laws and dogma, created and creates, the best possible situation human beings have ever experienced. It’s not even close to ANY other religion or ideology. There simply is no comparison. Not in duration in terms of time, nor in terms of artistic, architectural, but most important of all, sociological achievements that are truly positive, and not just “progressive” which is now essentially code for Satanic.

And in case you doubt it, please understand the original “debate” on SG was prompted by a meme that Vox, who is NOT a Catholic, shared on his blog that nevertheless makes the point succinctly and utterly unavoidably. I reproduce it here below for your own contemplation in light of the above.

Pretty much what is wrong

With the world today.

It may sound unrelated, but this kind of machinations, mentality and way of living is why you are almost guaranteed that in our lifetimes, we will no longer see the building of a medieval style cathedral the likes of which were normal even in little villages.

If you can understand what it takes to want to build a proper Catholic Cathedral, the likes of which exist throughout Italy, for a total of some 100,000 of them, funded by the people who live in each little village especially, with all the relevant attention to detail, you might begin to understand why Catholicism is the only Christianity.

One Mass, in one language, regardless of country, one set of unchanging beliefs that govern one’s life and make the core of society the nuclear family. Communities where crime was essentially low to non existent and productivity and society was fundamentally geared to making life decent instead of its purpose being solely profit or the benefit of giant, faceless corporations.

Take some time and think on it.

The Innate Arrogance

…of Protestants in general and Calvinists in particular, is exemplified by this “argument” I had several years ago via FB messenger. The screencaps below have been so his name and icon do not appear. My words are in blue and his in gray.

Please notice that the absolute arrogance of his position is literally so baked in that he feels justified in using his own subjective feelings to justify it as not being present. It really is quite the study on just how irrational, blinkered, and intellectually calcified Protestant “thinking” is.

And please realise this guy is what I would consider one of the “smart” ones. And he clearly has some level of ability and intelligence in other areas. Unsurprisingly, he was single, and I believe he still is and probably always will be, because that level of rigidity of mind when clearly in an untenable position of logical error, is not anything the female subconscious finds attractive either.

And this is a side note that is not relevant to the entire “once saved, always saved” retarded position that he is arguing for here, but it needs pointing out that a man’s unmovable position of certain true and relevant things, is a very different thing from a man’s rigidity of position based on fear, lack of intellectual ability, and ignorance. One is actually appealing to women, at least unconsciously, even when they may disagree with the man in question. The other is repulsive, instinctually, even if they might otherwise be initially fooled into mistaking this for the other version, once the discovery of the difference is made, there is usually no recovering from the instinctive repulsion almost all women feel towards such a position. Especially when you can’t even justify it at a baseline logical level (women do not “logic” very well when it’s applied to them, but you bet they are very able of applying it to others, especially if to justify their feelings of instinctive repulsion!)

At any rate, enjoy. The conversation opens with my statement that knowing anyone’s status of salvation is essentially impossible for humans, since, unlike God, we don’t know anyone’s inner heart.

Let me know what your thoughts on this are.

Update: A reader has already let me know his take by text, which I found both amusing as well as insightful.

You have to have some level of intelligence to exercise this kind of stupidity. [It’s] Midwit word magic dressed as logic to protect emotions.

My response was that personally I find this sort of thing rather frustrating, because in reality I am an eternal optimist.

I keep thinking (erroneously) “but surely… if I can just show him in baby steps that 2+2=4…”

And invariably the response even before I finish the thought is, roughly: “NOOO! Purple!! ice cream! ICE CREAM!” Just as they start flinging their own excrement at the walls.

Kurgan Mail

An honest man wrote to let me know how Protestantism works. I have added a link to the stream in question, and redacted his name and a few lines to make identifying him impossible, since his family is still deep into Protestantism, with several of his relatives being “pastors”.

I’m emailing you to thank you for your work, in my struggle to wake.
In exchange, I’d like to add to David The Good’s answer to your question on your old stream, regarding about what Protestants think was going on for the first 1500 years of the Church. I’m speaking from personal experience, [redacted] I dare not attach my name publicly for fear of insulting otherwise fine and rational people:


First, you need to understand that as per the infinite love of God and the infinite wisdom of John Calvin (PBUH), not only is predestination real, but everyone is predestinated for salvation. Don’t think about the metaphysical implications of this too deeply.


Second, the germ of the real Church laid dormant for 1500 years, so that for the next 400 years we could rediscover all of the wisdom that was suppressed, and then in the 75 years that followed we could discard all of that wisdom and return to paganism. Again, don’t think about the implications of this.


Third, do not challenge base assumptions, no matter how tempting it is. Even if you went from something as innocent as evangelizing to slaves in one century, to jumping to the front of the line to bless sodomy in the next. Respectability is paramount, don’t be labelled a crazy. We’re all being saved anyway, so I’m sure God will understand.

It is quite revealing how deep the cognitive dissonance goes, and how blatant and obvious it is when spelt out in very simple and honest terms.

God bless this man, and I hope he finds his way to the real Church soon if he has not done so already. Ultimately the truth will set you free indeed. You just have to want to actually know the truth first.

Once more on Adam

An interesting post by Adam again was this one, for which he apparently received some pushback.

Having read it, I would say he only made the window-dressing error of the title he chose, and this singular phrase:

You treat your daughters as property that must be protected 

It is the natural poisoning of the mind that occurs in the predominantly Protestant zeitgeist of English-speaking countries, to reduce things to a simplified (and usually binary) mode of thinking. And such thinking is almost always a mistake. Few things in life are so black and white and when you apply an oversimplification to a complex situation, you are invariably in error to some degree or other.

Sometimes needs must: If I have only 2 weeks to train a battalion for war, some trainees will likely die in training, but the others will have a better chance to live through the war. But in matters of social engineering, it is worth taking careful observation of reality rather than play fast and loose with broad definitions that are going to fall short of the mark.

Adam’s piece is otherwise completely right, but those two unfortunate uses of the word “property” when applied to women in general, are an error.

In fairness to Adam, I think he quickly realised this and he wrote a follow-up that expanded on his thoughts.

I it he tries to better explain what he means by stating that “women are property” or should be treated as property, but the sneaky thread of sulphurous protestantism remains even in his expanded explanation. And this is important to note, because this is precisely how evil works. It infiltrates as tendril of mildly erroneous wordings or concepts and inevitably expands into a cancer on life in general.

Even in his expanded explanation, whether because of persistence in his error or perhaps some hint of pride in not wanting to admit it, Adam continues in his insistence of stating women as property. This is absolutely not a Catholic belief, but rather a purely Protestant one, and, tellingly, a Pagan one too.

Before I go on to correct the error and hence better represent Catholicism as it is, instead of how Protestants insist on trying to present it as (falsely, obviously) let me be clear that I am not taking shots at Adam. He is a friend, and a good man, (yes, even though he is Australian, proving we Catholics truly understand forgiveness!) and the point here is not to bash his good intent, or even his error, rather, I would say, the intent on my part is of iron sharpening iron. Adam is a good exponent of Catholicism in general and the more accurate he can become, the better the influence he will have on others who may be ignorant, fooled by the lies or confused in general.

Now back to the topic at hand.

In Catholic thought, women are not, and never have been, “property”, other than in (somewhat) one specific, and by the way equal, way: in marriage, they do not have authority over their body, their husbands do, and equally, the husband has no authority over his body, the wife does (1 Corinthians 7:4). And it is very much the case that this passage in the Bible refers pretty much only to the sexual congress that occurs between husband and wife. In other words, marriage constitutes a perpetual sexual access to your body by your spouse. Even then, this is not a mechanistic “sex doll” clause, as the immediately following passage in the same section makes clear (1 Corinthians 7:5).

Even then, the wife (or husband’s) body is not treated as “property” but rather as the spouse having authority over it. That is rights. Not ownership as such, but authority to use it sexually; a subtle but important difference.

In fact, Catholicism was precisely the very religion that freed women (and children) from being thought of as actual property.

Now, all that said, let me also be clear that Catholicism is also not the other side of the Protestant coin: the pedastilisation of women, where they can do no wrong, are spiritual saint purely by virtue of being female etcetera, etcetera. No. As always, Catholicism simply describes reality as it is, and recognises that women are the more fragile sex when it comes to dealing with the world. As such, they are to be protected from it and from their own, mostly unwise responses to it. Just as it is a parent’s duty to protect a child from his own unwise responses to a fallen and dangerous world.

The complainers that this “negates the agency of women” are retards bleating in the wind of their own ineptitude. The simple reality is that yes, generally speaking, children have less agency than adult women, and adult women generally have less agency than adult men. This is simply reality. Just like the sky is mostly blue in daytime, or black at night-time. Neither state is rigidly absolute, but only a complete moron would argue against these facts as being the obvious reflection of reality that it is.

So, while it is absolutely correct that as a father of four daughters it is my duty to educate, protect and love them, it is not true that I ever have, or ever will, treat them as property. And ultimately, while it absolutely is my duty to instruct and teach them and do my absolute best to see they are prepared to deal with the hellscape of the world we find ourselves in, at some point, I will be dead, and they will need to rely on themselves to navigate the world well if they have not yet found a worthy husband.

While I am alive, I will certainly help them evaluate any prospective suitors, but while that is a fundamental part of being a father and parent, ultimately, as is also clear in Catholic dogma, marriage has to be a freely chosen sacrament by all parties involved. In short, a better analogy is that while you can teach someone to drive, you can never be actually controlling their every move by some remote system of control. They may crash. They may die or run someone over. All I can do is teach them all I know as best I can. After that, it’s up to them, the choices they make, hopefully the good husbands they pick, and finally, the Grace of God.

In Catholic belief, all things are ultimately subject to God’s Will. Which is not to say we sit on our arses like Hindus or Muslims because in any case, the wheel of reincarnation will evolve us or Allah will do whatever he wants anyway so why bother. No. Catholic belief is that you absolutely must get off your arse and work tirelessly and to the bone to be the best you can be, and even then that is only to TRY to secure a place in Purgatory, which is by no means guaranteed, so that you might, eventually get to Heaven, instead of Hell, where the path to it is “wide and well-travelled”.

In short, if and when you do work your arse right off, then, God, invariably does bestow His Grace upon you.

One of the filthiest of the many lies Protestants created about their fake Churchianity, is that no one is “saved by works”. A twisted half-truth designed to leads untold millions to Hell.

While it is true that a lot of busywork without any faith achieves not Heaven, it is equally true that a faith that does nothing practical is also just as fake, sterile, and useless. Teaching people that all you need to do to be saved is “accept to at Jesus Christ is King” is literally telling people to have the same “Christian” standards that Demons have.

Demons too know very well that Christ is King.

And that is really the only “prescribed” rule of Protestantism, not can it be any other way once you teach people that they are all entitled to interpret the Bible (and everything else) as they choose. Which is literally a Satanic law (the only Law is that there is no Law, so you can do whatever you want is entirely Satanic, and Protestantism can be absolutely defined as “interpreth as thou will”, just another version of the Satanic law “do as thou will”).

The squeals of Protestants to the contrary —sounding so much like the noises made by demon-infested pigs as they run towards the sea— the reality is that no two Protestants can even agree on what the definition of a Christian can or should be. Which is why they have reduced it to meaningless nonsense like “accepting Jesus in your heart”, “being a Jesus follower”, “knowing and accepting Christ is King” or “having a personal relationship with Jesus”.

All complete generalities with less consistency than a thin fart in a high tornado. Ask them to define with precision what the rules for being a Christian are, and they become babbling gibbering mouthers, more prone to speaking in tongues than make a coherent argument, much less a united one.

The situation is, of course, entirely different if you ask any two Catholics how to define what a Christian is, they will tell you the Credo for a start; and all that is implied in it can be found in the Code of Canon Law of 1917, plus the Papal encyclicals and documents referred to therein, as well as those produced between 1917 and up to 9th October 1958, when the last valid Pope died. That is it and can often be quickly received in summary format by the guidance of a good priest or Bishop, of which there are only a few left, but they do exist, and will continue to do so, as they have through all the dark times the Church has navigated through.

Returning to the errors of Protestant infused thinking with regard to women, their level of agency, and the duty of men to protect them from the world and their own emotionally driven unwise choices, once again, the Catholic perspective is based in reality and as such infinitely superior to all other attempts at “controlling” or even merely understanding women.

Women are less capable in the practical navigation of the fallen world we inhabit, and as such need to be protected, cherished and helped through it by men who correctly see the world as it is, and inevitably, the best of such men can only be properly Catholic (i.e. Sedevacantist) because Catholicism is the best method we have ever had of seeing reality as it is, with logic, reason, and Divine Grace all working in perfect unity.

All content of this web-site is copyrighted by G. Filotto 2009 to present day.
Website maintained by IT monks