Archive for the ‘Sedevacantism’ Category

This is what WWIII looks like

As I have been saying for years now, you will not have to fight black-uniformed communists with antifa armbands armed with machine guns.

This is how they will grind you down.

Making everything less affordable and everything requiring permission to be done, permits, medical procedures and so on. Taxes on top of taxes on top of fines on top of regulatory board fees.

All while you are constantly bombarded with propaganda to normalise every degenerate behaviour, starting with homosexuality right down to normalising child rape and bestiality.

While you try to shield yourself mentally, psychically and spiritually from the constant barrage and inversions of truth and reality, they will squeeze you economically and physically. Forcing you to eat crap food that does not let your brain or body work properly (see America), poisoning your water and everything they call “food” and “medicine”. So even if you are not yet sterile, your natural wish to reproduce and your possibility to do so will be limited, propagandised against and attacked from all vectors, starting with the ideological ones which they have been doing for over half a century before kicking off the latest large Overton window of general global austerity and constant state of semi-warfare.

This is why I keep telling you you need to eject, disengage and create your own communities.

This is what I knew was coming from before 2014 when I first voiced the concept out aloud, which was that both Christianity and City States will become ascendant again.

You need to build an alternative before any kind of revolution can succeed, regardless of the type of revolution, pacific or violent as they may become. Your only other alternative is to be either a washed out hermit with zero effect and whose legacy will not even extend to his children or become a “crazed lone gunman” on one of the mass media outlets. Those being the extreme opposite ends of the bell curve where the vast majority just succumb and become herded beasts for the axe.

It doesn’t matter how hard it may be. It doesn’t matter if you have no idea how to start. It doesn’t matter how you feel about it. Either you begin or you become utterly meaningless, as does your whole existence and that of any children who might be so unfortunate as to have you as a parent.

Imagine a community of people that do not to rely on anyone for food, water, power or medical attention. Then, and likely only then will you need to start thinking about armed defence. Look at the Amish. They basically are fine and they are completely pacifist. Eventually they will be fenced in and made an example of, but it will be some time yet. And if there are plenty of like-minded people forming communities like this all around the world, it will be impossible to stop them all.

I’m not even telling you to be like me and make yours Sedevacantist. I think anything other than sede will not stand the test of time, but some initial examples exist, like the boers of Orania, in South Africa.

It is a unique example because the hostility of the surrounding population is so prevalent that in a way it forms a kind of “forced” common ground that is very strong regardless of individual differences, which works during hard times but less so during good times. Catholicism has a better track record in the centuries, but hey, whatever works for you, is dine by me.

Built it. No one else but you will do it.

You might be interested in the following posts:

  1. Violence is Always the Answer

By G | 29 May 2024 | Posted in Clown World, Farming Life, Increasing Happiness, Sedevacantism, Social Commentary, Zombie Apocalypse

Heretics gonna heretic

Mark Bisone asked me to review this post of his after I took my approach to John of Barsoom’s Pagan nonsensical writings about Jesus really being Julius Ceasar and the Gospels being weird “stories” mutated about old Julius instead.

Hi apparent defence of John is basically a MUCH watered down version of my own take, however, this is NOT good. And all it takes to know this with certainty is the first part of his post, which I reproduce below with commentary in the usual way.

Before I do, allow me to point out that the recent olive-branch shared between myself and various writers like the Three of Woe, John of Barsoom and Mark Bisone is a positive thing and I hope it continues and spreads to anyone even just a little bit sane, so that our ideas propagate and eventually rebuild civilisation in a stronger, better, faster, version of the best system we ever had on Earth, which is, of course Catholicism.

So by “our ideas” I mean, of course, the (real – Sedevacantist) Catholic Church (as opposed to the fake, Satanic Novus Orco one), because the ideas of John and Mark and so on, are essentially, fundamentally, structurally, weak. They are wide open to massive infiltration, subversion and degradation over time. So, to be even clearer, I don’t hate these potential allies. And I don’t even begrudge them their false ideas, erroneous thoughts, and cowardly natures. I see them as basically benign NPCs.

I know, I know, that sounds insulting, but look, if you ever played D&D, or any of the awesome pen and paper RPGS from which the term NPC comes from, you know that only a few are adventurers. The rest are NPCs. And while the primary adversary are evil NPCs, a good adventure also has plenty of GOOD NPCs. And sometimes NPCs will literally save your character or even the whole adventure. They are definitely good guys and on our side, but they can’t do the baseline stuff. Or at least, their exposed thoughts, so far, have not given me any indication whatsoever that they are anything other than mostly benign NPCs. I reserve judgement on the Tree of Woe guy on that count because he made a very significant post which I commented on too, which has the potential to really make a small but absolutely fundamental tectonic shift in the zeitgeist of the various intellectuals that might read it. And while my own approach is probably eminently more practical at a tactical level, his perspective is far largere and acts on the strategic level.

But back to Mark, and my dissection of why his “good intentions” are really, just another paved road to Hell. He is referring here to John’s post about the Julius/Jesus thing.

As per usual, it is brilliantly written and elegantly argued. Also as per usual, it’s controversial to the sabre-tip of provocation. But — as I once said to a group of other writers on a somewhat contentious, late-night chat — “That’s what’s great about John.”

I stand by that statement. Still, I knew this series was certain to ruffle some feathers on one side, and attract some ne’er-do-wells on the other. I haven’t read through all the comments on this latest post, but combining those I have with those made on the prior entries, most reactions thus far seem to line up with one or more of the following categories:

  1. John is a blasphemous idiot, cloaking his hatred for the Living God in a trendy bit of revisionist pop-history. By identifying Julius Caesar as the “True Christ”, he inverts the principles of Jesus while simultaneously pretending to understand and advocate for them. The devil has seized hold of his mind. May God have mercy on his soul.
  2. John is trying to build an impossible bridge atop quicksand. He’s clever, but the acrobatic leaps he makes to try to connect the events and character of Jesus’ life to that of Caesar’s would make Béla Károlyi beam with pride. Some of these longer leaps are even counter-productive, as they sound more absurd than the traditional story he’s trying to debunk. 
  3. John is really onto something here. The story as he presents it makes much more sense than the Gospels, which describe events that cannot have possibly happened as recorded because of (atheism, materialism, rationalism, historiography, blah, blah, blah). It also fills in certain blanks in my own brain-movie about the first millennium that have always left me scratching my head.
  4. John is on the path to achieving Gnostic enlightenment, the first steps of which are to invert the spiritual roles/identities of Yahweh and Satan, reformat their relationship to fit the Titanomachy, Prometheus and other classical myths, toss the whole mess in a basket alongside Hermeticism and a jailer-demiurge, and reach the stunning conclusion that all received works of history have been a lie (except for the version he’s stumbled upon, which reflects the unvarnished truth).

There have probably been some other reactions, but these four seem most common. I must be a very different breed of cat, though, because none of them really describe my own.

And so far, so good. Even his generalisation of the 4 reactions is fairly accurate. For clarity, my position would be about 1.5, and I have already explained it at length (see the link early on). That is that while I acknowledge that John is smart, a relatively engaging writer (he is too longwinded, but look from which pulpit comes the preaching of the kettle about the pot!) and he does cover interesting topics and so on. All true. And while I wouldn’t IMMEDIATELY burn him at the stake, as I explained before, he could certainly get himself there with a bit of Giordano Bruno-like persistence. But now we come to Mark’s absolutely broken views.

First off, I don’t have the temerity to go around accusing others of blasphemy. If the search for truth was as easy as reading a book aloud and shouting down anyone who dared to question or differently interpret of any part of it, then Creation is precisely the prison many Gnostics believe it is, and I would gladly seek out a million “lies” with them instead.

At least he admits it right away he is a coward. Filled with fear at the very thought of correcting anyone.

Allow me to explain why. Do you think would be as fearful to call someone that said 2+2 is purple, a moron or wrong, or someone that need psychiatric help? Probably not. Why? Well because he is sure of his facts in this case. So all that Mark is telling us is that:

  • He’s been too lazy to have a position. He couldn’t be bothered to spend the required time, energy and effort to know what he REALLY believes about the very nature of reality.
  • Even if he did have a position, he’s far too timid to share it, or test it, or correct someone driving off a philosophical cliff, because God forbid someone thinks badly of him. I mean THERE MAY BE DOUBT! It’s fine to say a guy that says 2+2 is purple is simply wrong at best, but say that the Filioque is obviously right as the Catholics see it and not the Orthos, and OH MAH GAWD! Someone might point a finger at you and call you a bigot or wrong, or whatever. So… yeah… on this basis alone, I could dismiss Mark entirely as any kind of defender of civilisation. I certainly wouldn’t post him at the gates, or even the parapets. Mark might be a good baker for all I know, and he should stay in the nice, safe, village we Catholics will one day build and he should focus on making bread and being the nice guy I am sure he is. But if I become emperor Mark doesn’t get to vote on much. Certainly not on who keep in or out of the village, nor how the laws of the place are made.

Secondly, he is clearly marinated in the Protestant Zeitgeist, either having been too uninterested, bored, indoctrinated, or incurious and illogical to ever care enough to learn enough of the basics about Christianity, that basic logic clearly demonstrates any of the 40,000 branches of Protestantism must be fake. But he also goes a step further, stating that IF the truth really were all spelt out in one book (it isn’t because the idea, as well as the concept of sola scripture is brain damaged level of retard, but let’s go with the hypotheticals here) and you could shout down anyone who didn’t respect the messages in the book, then God would have to be evil.

I mean, think of how absurd that is. If God, gives you free will, and also the means by which to know his will, easily, simple, readily available just for the asking, but you choose to reject it, then when you end up in Hell. And this is somehow all God’s fault and terribly unfair… why, exactly, Mark?

The truth as it happens resides in more than one book and in a long tradition too, but if you read a decent Catechism from before the 1958 fake Popes, the actual Bible (a Catholic one with all the bits the Protties have removed) and the Pio-Benedictine code of Canon Law of 1917, you do have pretty much all you need to grasp the jist of things, and have enough references within these two books, to go after and use to further educate yourself to the point that to build this knowledge means to live it too. But here is the Protestant Zeitgeist in two concepts:

  • Reason is the whore of the devil, and
  • Once saved always saved.

So as a Protestant, God is some remote figurehead you just have to swear allegiance to once, then you’re set, no matter what, and… don’t you go using your brain, boy, it’s all about the feelz! Nor do you have to DO anything. Like the Hindus, you can just sit on your ass and wait to be called to playing a harp on the clouds (or in their case be reincarnated into a fly, since they love cow-shit too). And while you think a smart guy will see through these moronic facets of that fake religion (yes, Protestantism, and yes, Hinduism) well… don’t be shocked. Professor Cipolla was absolutely right: There are always far more idiots than you can possibly imagine. Everywhere.

The second group doesn’t really reflect my view either, though it’s probably closest to it. In fact, while reading the second essay, part of me suspected the whole series was the setup for an elaborate joke (while simultaneously being a fascinating thought experiment in itself). For example, his contention that “Jesus had an affair with the prostitute Mary Magdalene,” seems not merely to be a reference absent a referent1, but the kind of sophomoric begging that John is far too smart to do by accident. Was the point to inflame and provoke? I didn’t know. But John’s a great writer, so I was willing to let the string play out.

In short: It’s nonsense. I know it’s nonsense, John knows it’s nonsense, we all know it’s nonsense, but hey, John writes great, so let’s just enjoy it.

Riiiiiight Mark… except this is not an Arnie film, or a Stallone film, where it’s all nonsense but it’s so ridiculous it might be funny, so we can excuse it as “mostly harmless” entertainment (it’s far from harmless, but that’s another post), time wasting entertainment to be sure, and not good for you, but hardly a matter to burn you at the stake for. But here we are literally talking about the very core and nature of reality. It deserves a LOT more seriousness and thought than the excuse of “hey, I like how he frames it.” Let me put it this way: Would you ever take the reality of actual child rape and murder by Satanic pedophiles who actually do this, as a real, serious topic, and then say it doesn’t really matter if it’s really happening because it makes a great story? Would you Mark? I pray not. Because if you would then, you sir, are a moral relativists and are scum. And indeed if I become world Emperor you will be left alone as long as you don’t try and infect anyone else with such degenerate, absurd, and ultimately damaging lies and moral turpitude.

There were other epic reaches peppered throughout part two, including that crowds heralding the arrival of two famous men was compelling evidence of their interchangeability. I laughed out loud at this one, recalling the crowds that gathered at a mock-funeral Howard Stern put on for rival DJ Lou DiBella back in the late 80’s. It also put me in mind of Charles de Gaulle. who led a famous march on the same day as Caesar 1891 years apart (and with a very different reception).

Ha-Ha Mark. Funny, Mark. Here’s a colourful beach ball, Mark, bounce it on your nose while you clap like ea seal Mark, ha-ha! Wha-aat?! It’s funny Mark! Go on, post a video of you doing it! Worth it! C’mooooon… I just don’t get why you wouldn’t! What are you some kind of rigid bigot?

Starting to see how this works yet, Mark?

Regardless, none of it angered me. I merely found certain aspects of it intriguing, others less so. Moreover, I had a theory about where it might be leading, and was curious to find out how correct it was. Turned out it wasn’t, but that’s no great loss. It was still well worth the read, because it got me thinking about stories (and “histories”) in a much deeper way than before. And as John himself notes: how strong is one’s faith of Christ if some Barsoomian Internet Warlord can wound it with a few thousand words, to review some book you’ll probably never read?

The only correct point is the one about not getting angry because, quite rightly, what care I if an ant tries to bite me through a Moon-boot? Zero. But the point is this vicious nonsense gets read by ten people, who then spread an even more watered down and absurd version to a 100 people, and so on. Before long you will have some Satanist trying to print the Julius Caesar Bible.

I am not wounded, nor angered. But you bet your ass every time someone says 2+2 is purple, I will be there to take sure that nonsense is exposed. And if the perpetrator keep insisting, and trying to get, say my children, or people at large, to believe that 2+2 is purple, then he may well come to a new conclusion that 2+2 , whatever his idea about it is, actually is a very painful thing if you don’t get it right.

As for John’s conclusions, I think what he has found is a way to re-shoot and re-edit the history movie in such a way that aligns with his spiritual sensibilities. This isn’t in itself a problem — that’s what we’re all doing, all the time.

No. It is not what we are ALL doing, ALL the time. I have no story I need to make up about Jesus. I accept the version the Catholic Church teaches and always has done, found in the Gospels and related traditions. There are probably many little things that I don’t specifically like about Catholicism (because I am a flawed human being like all the others), but that’s not important. The TRUTH is important. And here, in the end, we see that in his error, Mark is so deep, he literally spouts the Satanic inversion of the truth, and that is, that it can never really be known. Which, is of, course, like the entirety of his “reasoning” absolute nonsense.

The problem as I see it is when people confuse this story-editing process with an unearthing of the Actual, or even of the Truth. That is something human beings simply cannot do. It’s a lie we tell ourselves about our capabilities.

Truth exists, Mark. And human beings are and have always been able to discover it. They do it all day, every day. It’s how buildings are built, how math is done, how pretty much everything even remotely related to engineering is done. It’s literally how you manage to tie your shoes in the morning, Mark. There is ONE ABSOLUTE TRUTH about reality. it doesn’t even matter if you believe this or not, because it’s true regardless of anyone’s approval, understanding, wish, or anything else. If you don’t think truth is achievable by human beings, then you should obviously just do whatever you want. Who advises you that “Do as thou will shall be the whole of the law?” again? Do you recall Mark? Red guy? Horns. Hooves.

Ring any bells? Anything at all?

Or worse, it’s a lie that others tell us, in order to gain power over our minds and lives.

The final Gnostic kick at truth, reality, beauty and love.

So THAT is why these people are not your allies. Not really. How can you trust a self-admitted coward who has no idea, nor wish to engage with the truth of anything, since he thinks it’s an illusion? You gonna let that guy fly your plane? Or make you a cup of tea for that matter. Or think of him as some stalwarts defender of civilisation? I sure as Hell will not.

No related posts.

By G | 27 May 2024 | Posted in Catholicism, Christianity, Sedevacantism

John Carter of Barsoom Post

John wrote a very kind post about our interaction, especially considering that he thinks I want to burn him at the stake, which is not precisely correct. Yet.

John tends to write long-form posts that are certainly interesting with some occasional gems in them to make you ponder things quite deeply. I have no complaints about his writing or posts in general, despite their obvious heresy in many instances and his clearly heretical/pagan/generic deism belief system (if I can even try to label it as such).

So from my perspective, and because I am Catholic, so am able to hold various perspectives in mind at once, unlike the Protestants who are basically on/off machines who only see things in 8-bit greyscale at best, the way I see it is this:

  • In an ideal Catholic world, I would permit John to continue spouting his heresy in the written format as long as his writings could in each instance be commented on by a decent Catholic who has a mind similar to my own or better and who is well studied in Catholicism in some depth. That is, his heresy would be permitted to be aired but not without an immediate counter to each missive he sent out. I simply do not have the time to do it, otherwise I might. This may sound “dictatorial” but his having to wait for Catholic commentary on his blasphemous heresies is certainly a far better solution that he would likely have got 500 years ago. I sort of see John as a potential Giordano Bruno. Maybe he has some good ideas and we should not discount everything he says de facto without analysis, and as long as he allows the analysis to happen, all well and good. IF on the other hand, he went full Giordano Bruno and kept producing his heretic writings without waiting for commentary on them (which should be relatively quick, in my ideal world there would be an office of the Inquisition dedicated to responding to these type of people) and insisting his ideas and heresies were right, well… there would be warnings and punishments, but in time, if he persisted, well… it would be himself applying the torch to the stack of wood under his feet ultimately.
  • Just because he is a heretic, lost soul, quasi/Pagan sort, is no reason in and of itself to burn anyone at the stake. That is reserved for certain capital crimes AND for insisting heretics trying to pervert the Church, its doctrine, or its dogmas. You can even continue to hold whatever Satanic nonsense you want in your head. But the minute you try and convince others that say, trans-kids is a thing that should exist, in my world, you get a couple of increasingly stiff warnings (the latter of which are definitely things you will feel with your nerve endings) and then, if there is no correction, it is indeed the stake and cleansing fire for you. I do not expect that there would be that many burnings at the stake in the city square after the first or second year of the Pax Catholic that I would bring to the world if I become planet emperor tomorrow.
  • Even a heretic might come up with some decent idea or concept or technology that is benign and useful. Furthermore, it is against Catholic dogma to force ANYONE to become Catholic. The choice must be freely made without pressure, coercion, force or blackmail of any kind. People are perfectly free to believe whatever nonsense they want, they are just not permitted to try and pervert others with it. Put it this way, assume you understand math and you know how it works. If some moron wants to believe 2 and 2 is purple, so what? Let the poor fool suffer the consequences of his foolishness. But the minute he tries to become a schoolteacher and tries to make his mental illness the norm, well, it’s off to the mental asylum with him. And if his “teachings” were actually threatening the salvation of souls, then he should cease and desist right away. Or else. In increasing levels of seriousness.

So I hope that clears up that little misunderstanding John. Don’t believe all the lies that the propaganda film Highlander said about me. Besides, beheading whiny, pathetic Frenchmen who treat fake Novus Ordo churches as if they were Catholic, is really a sort of public service!

I suggest you all subscribe to his substack, he certainly has interesting topics that he presents. Many of them wander off into rather rarefied aspects of what I would call intellectual theorising, but one should allow the mind to wander far and wide, as long as you have a solid anchoring to reel you back in. This is how exploration works after all.

No related posts.

By G | 24 May 2024 | Posted in Catholicism, Sedevacantism, Social Commentary

Orthobros Complaint

A reader on SG had a comment regarding my piece here, where I essentially bullet-pointed the failings of all religions when compared to Catholicism. It was really a side-issue though relevant to the post, and in any case, the Orthobros came out best of the lot really, nevertheless, we have this comment from Anthony.

Hey man, il just reiterate point I made on SG as you requested. The Orthobros to my knowledge did not spread the Gospel as far as Rome did since they did not have a globe spanning empire to do so. Spain to my knowledge did most of the converting among the Catholics which I credit to this. Other Catholic nations were functionally as “insular” as the Orthodox in their missionary work. Also the Orthodox converted people spanning from the Mediterranean all the way up to Russia which is respectable given their sphere of influence of that time period. 

I have alot of respect for you and your work and look forward to your reply.

He sort of missed out Portugal, but even if we were to concede the point, which I do not, because explain to me if the Orthos were so keen on spreading the gospel it was Catholic missionaries getting boiled alive in oil and crucified in Japan (and samurai secretly converting to Catholicism by putting little crosses on the tang of their katanas) and not orthobros who are literally next door?

But aside that point, it would do absolutely nothing to answer to the following questions:

If the Orthos were such good Christians, please explain how/why:

  • They asked for help from the Catholics after failing to defend their own lands from the depredations of Muslims, some 40 years AFTER they supposedly split from Catholicism?
  • When the Catholics went to help them they immediately turned against them after these won some battles with the muslims and variously, throughout the first and subsequent crusades:
    • Lied about providing food and water and logistics to the fighting Catholics. They would leave them stranded in hope the Muslims killed them off.
    • Made pacts with the Muslims and even joined muslims in battle against the Catholics that had come to rescue them a their request from Islam.
    • Repeatedly failed to help and aid the Catholics and repeatedly sabotaged, lied did not fulfil any promises made to them.
    • They did this for three crusades in a row. And the Catholics STILL came to help them. Then when on the fourth crusade the Catholics finally sacked Constantinople (a “ravaging” according to the Orthos but a very mild sacking by all other objective witnesses at the time that reported on it) they are still whining about it today.
    • Despite all this the Catholic held the line in the Outremer for 200 YEARS! Having to fund it all from Catholic Europe because the Orthos wouldn’t lift a finger to help maintain and recover their own lands they had let the Muslims take until the Catholics put them in their place.
    • When the Catholics finally could not justify the continued expense of maintaining a huge fighting force in lands they didn’t even lay claim to, and they offered to the Orthos to please at least take all the fortresses we built over and carry on protecting your own lands, they refused, letting it all go to the Muslims.
  • The Filioque – It’s a retarded argument. If you actually read the Bible it’s pretty clear that the Catholics are right. The Ortho “argument” is basically Protestant nonsense where you have to twist things just so to “interpret” it so it fits your singular perspective.
  • All the Orthos agreed the Pope was the main dude many times before 1054, and did so again after, including at the council of Florence in 1400-something.
  • You still have the problem that if the Orthos are “right”, like the Protestants, they still need to explain how come they went along with everything for a thousand years plus. It’t the same retarded “argument” the Protties make. It makes zero sense.

In short, no my dude, Orthodoxy is simply not the answer. It comes a LOT closer than protestantism, and it probably fills some lack in the Protestant zeitgeist Anglos are all raised in for a sense of “tradition” just like the average American is bowled over by things like the fact my house dated back to some 300 years ago, but in Europe we have Churches that have stood where they are for well over a thousand years and it’s normal. Plus the Orthos are not in any way coherent among themselves and have various other practices that are in error.

Truth is a hard road, and only a few will take it, we know this, but an honest man cannot help but try and follow it.

I wish you all the best in what I hope will be your continued search.

No related posts.

By G | 23 May 2024 | Posted in Agnostic Christianity, Catholicism, Christianity, Sedevacantism, Social Commentary

The Questionable Agency of Women

I do not know much at all about this Andrew guy debating the woman, I saw (or rather, mostly listened to) over an hour of this podcast he did with a feminist and from first impression he seems to be very cogent, and to give credit to the woman, she is at least trying to respond to his dialectic commentary and reasoning. That is, she is, doing her best, I believe, to reply to his clear logic with actual logic.

What you see here is basically an honest woman being faced with her own solipsism.

Her retreats to rhetoric or “feelings” are generally curbed and although he sometimes has to reframe the question a few times, when she eventually grasps it she tries to answer it honestly. This in and of itself is exceedingly rare, so I have to give her absolute credit for it. In fact, after I wrote this I watched a bit more, and Andrew too gives her the same credit at around 1 hour and 27 minutes.

If feminists could actually do logic and debate honestly, this would be a typical outcome.

Which brings me to the point I wanted to make, which will drive the average woman absolutely batshit insane with apoplexy at my “misogyny”, but which in reality is fully based in the natural patriarchal instinct to wish to protect women in general from their own characteristically irrational tendencies.

I am usually too busy to listen to anything of this length, but I managed to hear about an hour and a half of it, and I will try to hear the rest as I can, but he makes a LOT of very cogent, interesting points that are very fundamental level stuff. Right from the start, he manages to make her understand that everything relates ultimately to force, and although he doesn’t quite get her to understand his point about moral relativism, it is not through lack of trying, and on her part, it becomes quite clear that she simply does not have the intellectual capacity to:

a) keep up with him and fully grasp what he is saying, and

b) either have reasoned out her positions beforehand, or be able to reason them out on the fly.

I fairness to her, she does, honestly reason quite a few of them out on the fly, so she is honestly trying to do that, but the fact she even had to resort to this means she had never really considered these basic questions to begin with, which again, does not put her in a glowing light intellectually speaking.

AND YET… she has performed overwhelmingly better than 99% of feminists I have ever seen trying to stand their ground. I may put her, roughly speaking on a similar footing with Camille Paglia, who is still a trainwreck, but as far as feminists go, she’s not as terrible as the overwhelming majority. This girl is still young, so I sincerely hope there is some time for her to undo some of the indoctrination she clearly has taken on board (as have all of us at some point in our lives).

Now to my point, which is this:

I think this debate, and even this rather polite, intelligent and well-intentioned woman, are strong evidence of the fact that women simply are not, generally speaking able or capable of even understanding the fundamental aspects of civilisation, and that, is ultimately the reason they cannot be entrusted with really any aspect of it beyond those that they are naturally built for, which is child-rearing and taking care of their home in a symbiotic, intimate, and loving relationship with their husbands.

The simple fact is that this young woman, who has not thought about such basic things as the pill affecting birth rates and abortion being anti-natalist, gets to “vote” (not really, none of us do, but we’re looking at the logic of things, not the brutal reality of the nefarious shit going on on top of the lack of logic too). She clearly has no real objective right to do so. She is ignorant and unschooled on such basic things that her vote can only be a vote for chaos, ultimately. And notice how she has zero comment or comeback to the very real point that women were not allowed to vote on a referendum of if they should be allowed a vote, because the overwhelming majority of them were against it because they then understood that to give the women a vote would reduce them to second tier “men” while totally removing their moral benefits that they had purely as a result of being a woman.

If you can follow the logic, this in and of itself also makes it abundantly clear that liberalism, and the eternal pursuit of unlimited freedom, is absolutely Satanic and can ONLY bring to desolation and destruction for all.

It also highlights that the ONLY morality that exists and that can exist is one that derives from divine concepts and laws. If there is no God at all, then all concepts of morality are null and void and all actions are morally equivalent. At best you can define them as preferences, but you have no basis whatever to claim a moral imperative.

The problem then is only, if there is a God, WHICH religion best approximates His will?

And when you get to this point, taking a very high view that encompasses as long a period of history as possible is absolutely vital. The fruits borne by any given religion should give an indication is it is overall good or bad for humanity as a whole, and thus help make it more obvious to you which religion is based in reality, and which is a pack of comfortable lies for other ends.

If you look at all the main world religions, with this broad perspective, it become obvious at a glance that Catholicism is far superior to all other examples. You might disagree, but you can only do so if you are historically ignorant and going on your “feelings”, and are less capable than the woman in that podcast to simply take a look and be honest about things. I’ll give you a primer in comparatives:

Catholicism

  • Ended slavery
  • Ended women being chattel
  • Made marriage permanent until death
  • Made the primary purpose of marriage the production and raising of children
  • Has the golden rule of treating others as you would like to be treated
  • Has the dogma of loving your neighbour and being peaceful and honest to all until or unless they act badly towards you first
  • Even then, it has the dogma of the possibility of redemption and forgiveness (not obviating punishment for transgressions though)
  • It essentially created the real scientific method
  • It dogmatically refers to its dogma and rules as requiring to be in line with reason and logic at all turns and has only a very few accepted mysteries (the trinity for example being one of them)
  • It fosters honesty and admission of faults (confession) on a regular basis, which instills an overall betterment for everyone at large
  • It is a dogmatic principle of Catholicism that defence of yourself or innocents is your duty, and this can include pre-emptive action (the concepts of Self-defence and Just War are part of Catholic dogma)
  • It has absolute respect for justice and hence a dogmatic acceptance and need for the death penalty for certain crimes
  • Children are viewed as a blessing and all life held as sacred (which is absolutely NOT a contradiction with the point immediately above. Because the minute you treat life as chattel, then you get treated as same)
  • It fostered the greatest evolution of art, beauty, honesty, and promotion of all the virtues of justice, love, charity, courage, fortitude and beauty, and justly condemned the sins of pride, avarice, greed, sloth, lust, gluttony, and envy
  • It promotes the veneration of saints, which in turn promotes an understanding and appreciation as well as a remembrance of historical reality and events, both in the good and bad aspects
  • It promotes the respectful treatment of women while understanding that they are not equal to men, nor is this reason to mistreat them

It probably only requires looking at that list to realise no other religion compares to it, and it’s far from complete. As for the negatives that can be attributed to men who professed to be members of it, similar negatives can be seen and counted in all religions by men who profess to belong to that specific religion.

There also a lot of demonstrable lies that have been stated about Catholicism by its enemies that anyone who actually bothers to try and verify will become aware of. In fact, even convinced NON-Catholics who are honest admit this, notably, historian Rodney Stark in his book Bearing False Witness, or perhaps his book named Reformation Myths, though I have not read that one, so am not certain. But Stark has always been an honest historian, even admitting his own faults if his research had not been done properly in later works, which is far more than can be said about most historians.

A sad truth about Catholicism however is that it was absolutely infiltrated fro the last 250 years or so, culminating in its almost total destruction and inversion, which from 1958 onwards has seen only false Popes on the throne of Peter and false Novus Ordo clergy pretending to be Catholics that have fooled the vast majority of would-be Catholics. The only actual Catholic Clergy left (both Bishops and Priests) are Sedevacantist ones, and the only Catholics actually following the religion in any way accurately are sedevacantists, which are a small fraction of nominal Novus ordo “Catholics”, although their numbers are growing very fast as people begin to realise the truth of this situation.

Islam and Judaism

I lump them together for a very simple reasons, aside from the many, many, many, questionable dogmas of it, I think two will suffice to point out why these cannot be any good:

  1. Both these religions say it’s ok to deceive, cheat or even kill people who are not members of it, and it is perfectly fine to pretend to be their friend, but in fact be lying to them until you are powerful enough to impose your will on them.
  2. Both religions accept child rape as normal and nothing to be punished or even considered a crime.

Hinduism, Shintoism and Buddhism

Although quite different in details, these all share some essential features and common origins. The principle of reincarnation being key and Buddhism essentially being an offshoot of the more generic Hinduism, and Shintoism clearly also having Buddhist/Taoist influences.

Hinduism is clearly the worst of the lot as it imposes the concept of caste systems, which one can hardly move out of as a person born in India. The panopticon of so many gods and goddesses which resemble quite a bit all the human failings that we also saw in the Ancient Greek and Roman pantheons make this religion little more than the idolisation of anything from cows, to rats, to false idols and quite possibly demons. It has some roots in historical realities that took place long ago, but the process of “Chinese telephone” that played out over the ages has reduced it to a fantastic nonsensical bunch of disjointed fables.

Shintoism and Buddhism tend to be at least generally pacifist and their belief in reincarnation and veneration of ancestors is not at terrible odds with Christianity, but it is a far less complete guide to life and has far less morality in it than Catholicism. The overall attempt at achieving a total absence of desire is also the pursuit of permanent death, though some Buddhists will deny this, ultimately, that is what Nirvana means. And that kind of mindset is not exactly conducive to a particular virtue of caring for others, your extended family (besides elders holding a position of authority) or any other specific virtues, though overall Shintoist and Buddhists tend to be far more reliable than Hindus, who are not compelled to be honest at all.

Zen Buddhism and Taoism

Is a more separate aspect, of buddhism, and could be considered more a philosophy than a religion, being somewhat similar to stoicism, although ultimately more positive than stoicism. It concentrates on doing the best you can at any given moment, in any given situation. The general concept is also relatively pacifistic in nature, but able to respond with violence when or if threatened.

Protestantism

This is a degradation and secularisation of Christianity (Catholicism) and is wholly responsible for only almost entirely negative results, to wit:

  • The adoption of contraceptive
  • The permission of divorce
  • Which directly leads to sex before marriage
  • Which directly leads to sex mainly for fun instead of daily for procreation
  • Which directly leads to seeing children as a burden
  • Which directly leads to abortion
  • The extended and continuing “progressive” agenda of liberalism
  • Which leads to the adoption of a veneer of “Christianity” that has “personal interpretation” as the only rule
  • Which leads to the over 40,000 “denominations” of watered down, irrational and nonsensical versions of faux-christianity
  • Has been directly responsible for placing emotions above reason, a total inversion of actual Christian (Catholic) dogma, which is no surprise given that its original creator Luther stated that “Reason is the whore of the devil” and in fact, generally speaking, Protestants are indoctrinated in their false religion to the extent thatchy are literally incapable of changing their mind based on objective facts that contradict their emotional comfort zones, similarly to Muslims in this regard, appeals to logic fall on deaf ears.
  • The acceptance, eventual request for “equality” and “recognition” and ultimately forced “celebration” of deviant sexual behaviour and mental illness, like homosexuality and transgenderism respectively.
  • The shielding and “protecting” of Israel and the jewish masters that run the USA as being their “greatest ally” whilst denying the reality of the Talmudic Jewish religion, which have been brilliantly and concisely described by Rob Unz, himself a Jew, here: The Jewish Plot to Enslave Humanity.

Eastern “Orthodoxy”

Among all the religions described, Eastern “Orthodox” are the closest to Catholicism, diverging mostly on a few rarefied theological principles of little practical consequence and the main one being the rejection of the Pope as supreme leader of Christianity, which is a ridiculous reason since Popes existed for all the 1021 years previous to their schism, and were accepted by all as the supreme leaders. Something that was in any case affirmed and even reaffirmed multiple times, including a few hundred years after the schism. But overall their fruits are not as grand or positive as Catholicism, primarily also because they are essentially an insular religion that has strong national identities. Greek “Orthodox” are not in much of any kind of “communion” with Russian “Orthodox”, which in turn are not in much communion with Romanian “Orthodox” or Lithuanian “Orthodox”, and so on. So:

  • Their influence and spreading of the gospel has been weak, and their defence of Christianity abysmal when confronting the Muslims,
  • with whom they ganged up to try and kill the very Catholics that came to their aid some 41 years AFTER the schism. Betraying and murdering the Catholics three crusades in a row and then bitching and crying to this day when the fourth crusade sacked Constantinople (and did so in a relatively mild way, by the way).
  • They also failed to secure their own lands that had been taken over by the Muslims and when after 200 years the Catholics who protected those lands with contributions from Europe could no longer afford to do so refused to take ownership of all the fortified structured the Catholics had built for them and let those lands descent into Islam.
  • And today they are “in communion” with the fake “Catholics” who are actually Freemasons and Satanists (but I repeat myself), led by Arch-heretic and probably never-was-Catholic fake Pope Bergoglio, making them not just schismatics but also heretics too.

Despite all this, the Orthos are the closest to modelling reality AFTER the remaining Catholics.

Paganism

This is just a LARP (Live Action Role Playing Game) With occasional Cos-play aspects (People who get dressed up as fictional comic book characters at fantasy conventions). No one actually “believes” in Odin, or Freya, or Apollo, or Zeus, or Quetzalcoatl, or Cit-Bolon-Tum, they just pretend to. No one would give up their life rather than denounce one of these fake “Gods”, while hundreds of thousands if not millions have become martyrs for Christ over the last two millennia.

Returning to the baseline point

If you are wondering how we went from a podcast on feminism to the differences between religions, then I’d say it’s safe to assume that you have not been able to follow the logical thread and I advise you to go back and review it, but the overriding point is that since religion (as a model of objective reality) is the only way that morality can be defined in a way that is valid (assuming there is a God) then looking at the religions of the world is paramount in order to understand which one is best and:

  1. Best models reality, and
  2. Produces the best result for humanity at large

And if you think that Catholicism too is invalid, as are all the other religions (and Catholicism expressly states this, all other religions are false) then you have to note that the ABSENCE of any religion, including even ones like Islam has invariably resulted in massive degradation and mass murder. The Atheists of communism are responsible for over 100 million murders in just the last century alone. In short, the BEST thing that has ever happened to humanity at large, and by a HUGE margin, id Catholicism, and absolutely every aspect of human history demonstartes it in aces all the way.

So… in that context, women have a role that is pretty clearly understood, and is frankly better than any other system, including the current one that has ever existed on this Earth.

In Catholicism women are:

  • Protected (including from their own irrationality and wild emotions)
  • Cherished
  • Accommodated inasmuch as a man is generally able to, so as to make their life as easy and comfortable as possible
  • Shielded from the general ugliness of the world as much as a man is generally able to do so
  • Treated with respect

Commensurate with these benefits also come various duties, which generally speaking are:

  • Accepting the fact that generally speaking (and if they have been wise in their choice of husband) their husband, though an imperfect human being will do whatever he does PRIMARILY to benefit his family, his children and his wife and himself, in THAT order.
  • Accepting the fact that being generally more practical and given their instinct to place their family before themselves, absent a quite large gap in IQ where the woman is considerably smarter and wiser, a man will tend to mostly make good decisions for their shared future and while this will not always be the case, a good husband will also listen to a wife’s concerns if she has valid ones.
  • Accept that generally speaking, she should overall be more in charge of the day to day running of the household and the raising of children, particularly in their early years.
  • Be a positive, nurturing, supportive and respectful mate to her husband.

It does not mean a woman cannot work if she has that inclination, but surely, as a general rule, no role, no job, is more important than being a mother, and given this consideration, all other concepts of work or career become subjugate to it.

In essence, Catholicism recognises what has been demonstrated in the podcast I refer to at the start, that essentially, women are less capable of making important decisions and follow through with corresponding action for the benefit of civilisation as a whole than men are and this difference is notable, important and enough to determine if a civilisation thrives or dies.

Just as you would not want children to run industry, government or the military, neither should women. And just as you wouldn’t want children to be able to vote (because they would be fooled by literally every nonsensical scam and lie that politicians would tell them) neither should women, and essentially for the same reasons. They are not really equipped to have thought the issues through and be able to consider the ramifications, nor are they as capable at implementing any of the necessary systems that civilisation requires, from enforcing law and order to constructing nuclear power plants, and no, the rare exceptions of women who might be capable to, do not exist in any meaningful numbers and do not, as a whole, have any meaningful impact on the greater society at large. Which is not to say they do not exist and should not be celebrated when they do produce some meaningful contribution. St. Joan of Arc being one of many examples one could mention. But every one Joan of Arc, we have a hundred or a thousand St. Pauls or St Adrianus, or even just non-saint Jean-Parisot Le Vallette, or Nikola Tesla.

You might not LIKE the conclusions I describe here, but I think it is really quite impossible to dispute them. And as such, it makes far more sense to accept them and work sensibly towards working together to create a far more Catholic world than we have now.

You might be interested in the following posts:

  1. Sex and Relationship Lies
  2. The Lies You are Told
  3. Clown World Comes at you FAST!

By G | 22 May 2024 | Posted in Actual Science, Catholicism, Female Socio-Sexual Hierarchy, Increasing Happiness, Relationships, Sedevacantism, Social Commentary, The Enemy Within, The Jews

Assassins Creed IRL

𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝗠𝗮𝗻𝘆 𝗖𝗼𝗶𝗻𝗰𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲𝘀 𝗨𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗹 𝗠𝗮𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝗜𝗺𝗽𝗼𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗯𝗹𝗲?

𝗠𝗮𝘆 𝟳𝘁𝗵: Fake news about an assassination attempt against Saudi Crown Prince.

𝗠𝗮𝘆 𝟭𝟯𝘁𝗵: Turkish President Erdoğan holds emergency meeting following warning of possible military coup.

𝗠𝗮𝘆 𝟭𝟱𝘁𝗵: Assassination attempt on Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico.

𝗠𝗮𝘆 𝟭𝟲𝘁𝗵: Citizen arrested for threatening to assassinate Serbian President Vučić.

𝗠𝗮𝘆 𝟭𝟵𝘁𝗵: Saudi Arabia’s King Salman hospitalized for second time in four weeks.

𝗠𝗮𝘆 𝟭𝟵𝘁𝗵: Helicopter crash involving Iranian President Raisi and Foreign Minister Amir-Abdollahian.

What do they all have in common?

And what about all the leaders who were against the whole Covid scam and WHO new rules etc etc who didn’t make the news in a big way but who, if you paid attention went against the globohomo narrative of enslavement of humanity pretty hard?

Let’s take a look at them:

You still think you’re not in WWIII?

You still think this is all just some kind of antisemitic “conspiracy theory?“

And keep in mind that Rob Unz is himself Jewish, before you go accusing him of being some kind of Nazi.

You still think they are not satanically after your children?

You still think the laws being put in place are for your benefit?

And you still think you are too smart, educated and objective for propaganda to have an effect on you? If so, then tell me, why does the words and image below give you such a sense of discomfort just to read silently to yourself, much less speak them aloud to your friends and family, never mind acquaintances?

And why is this labelled as “white supremacy” and no one bats an eyelid at it being labelled that way?

Are you not curious at all as to why romance is supposedly wrong and evil and racist? Or why loving your nation is also wrong and evil and racist? Or why printing stickers that say “It’s ok to be white” gets you two years in jail in the UK?

Or why the image below on its own is also supposedly evil, wrong and racist to the point that you avoid putting it on your social media because you will be labelled as some evil, vile, racist, white supremacist?

You wouldn’t post that image above on your curated social network that would be seen by your employer, but you are not affected by propaganda?

Right.

You are in a war. You have been in one all your life, as have all of us, it’s just been too subtle and poisoning you a little at a time for you to notice until now. Now, for the first time, you can begin to see a little. And if you use that ability to notice things more objectively than you have for your entire life you just might begin to notice that this war has been intensifying greatly over the last 100 years. It’s the timespan that is slow and long that makes it hard to see things properly, which brings to the fore the concept that who is behind it all, is more than a mere human mind. And while certainly there are humans running things with a long term view of things, like the Rothschilds, and they are driven by a multi-generational religious belief in their ultimate destiny to rule over you with an iron fist, there is a far superior intelligence behind them that truly does hate humanity. In any case, whether you are able to see the larger religious/spiritual pattern or not, the human one and its perpetrators and victims should at least begin to be obvious to anyone with even a modicum of objective observation skills.

I’ll leave you with this video of a few minutes that gives you a historical perspective that is never discussed.

The Rothschild Banking Dynasty fomented war and assassination attempts on four presidents in order to create the Federal Reserve Bank. The Rothschild family began the War of 1812 because Congress failed to renew a 20-year charter for their Central Bank as well as how the ensuing debt of the war forced Congress to renew the charter.

Hopefully Cold fury and Western Rifle Shooters pick this one up to, and you too reader, maybe are becoming less afraid to share a link to this post with some people.

Because awareness that you are, and have been, and will continue to be, in a war of attrition being fought against you by people who hide in shadows is the first and most necessary step required for you to have a chance at reverting all of it. Which can be done in literal days once a critical mass of conscious awareness and popular will is achieved. And the faster and quickest and more sudden the shift, the less painful and bloody and traumatic it will ultimately be. So consider these things and help make others of your nation aware of them. And get over the idea of being labelled a “racist” by people who want to exterminate your entire genetic line.

No related posts.

By G | 22 May 2024 | Posted in Sedevacantism, Social Commentary, The Enemy Within, The Jews

Who is going to jail for being pro-life?

Catholics. Not Protties, not Buddhists, not Eastern “Orthodox”. Nope. Catholics.

What’s that saying about if you’re taking flak you must be over the target?

Now let me clarify something about the Novus Ordo fake Church, for those who may not have read Reclaiming the Catholic Church and thus not be aware of what Catholicism actually is and why Bergoglio and his pedophile buddies in the Vatican are not even remotely Catholic.

People pretending to be CLERGY of the Catholic Church who promulgate ANYTHING related to Vatican II and who do not clearly and unambiguously REJECT every fake Pope from Roncalli in 1958, right up to Bergoglio in the present day are AT BEST heretics, and as such outside the Church.

LAYPEOPLE who have been deceived into being Novus Ordo however are, although quite possibly guilty of the sin of sloth, for not studying what Catholicism actually is, are NOT heretics, they are merely in error (a serious one to be sure), and if they have not come across or investigated the Sedevacantist position that all legitimate Catholics hold today, they cannot be held to be liable and hence heretics.

“Clergy” has no such excuse, because how could you justify being a priest and not knowing or even having read the 16 documents of Vatican II?

It would be like a civil engineer saying he has no idea what a bending moment is. Would you say he’s qualified to build bridges you’d travel over?

How much less so a fake priest then.

Laypeople however, are assumed to be deceived ignorants mostly, and as such, are our brothers in the Church.

Read that article, it’s unbelievable. Seven people spending years in jail for simply wanting to save babies from being murdered.

We are truly entering the times of persecution, mild though it still is compared to where it will go.

No related posts.

By G | 20 May 2024 | Posted in Catholicism, Christianity, Sedevacantism, Social Commentary

Creating the Resistance

The tree of woe has one of the most interesting articles or blogs I have read in probably a decade. It is really good, and although a little long, and using a few technical terms I had not come across before, and while also a little bit theoretical, it is nevertheless one of the best pieces I have read in a long time, simply because he explains things so clearly that I would have struggled to explain in such an easily digestible fashion.

In essence he explains the various dynamics of how a successful rebellion to any tyrannical system, or really any system, is constructed. It is interesting because he provides concrete examples and some historical context too. But what I found quite fascinating is that I came to the same generic conclusions long ago, although my own explanation is a lot cruder (lower resolution if you like) but also a lot simpler to grasp at a baseline level, and it is this:

A group that removes infiltrators with absolute rigour and has a pretty difficult threshold to entry in terms of infiltration, and that has the ability and capacity to go and “convert” strangers to its group rules, all other things being equal, in due course will either be completely destroyed due to no one joining it, or grow to its maximum potential and remain stable once a large enough population to make itself-sustaining is reached.

If the group is also non aggressive as its default setting, it will tend to not attract too many attacks by similarly peaceful groups, and if the response to attacks is a ferocious, instant, counter that is also quite lasting in time, any group that is not overwhelmingly larger will tend to leave such a group alone.

Well. Guess what.

Sedevacantist Catholic communities are all of these things naturally. And they happen to be growing fast too.

I had not considered things in the way that the Tree of Woe guy* did, but given that his presentation makes sense, as does mine, it is always pleasant when a completely different baseline approach to a problem comes to the same conclusion. It is generally an indication you are on the right track and modelling reality relatively accurately.

So… in short, if you want to be part of the Resistance, you really need to become a proper Catholic and join a community of people that are too. Which is why I have started the process here three years ago.

Think about it:

  • It’s going to be pretty hard if not almost impossible to keep up the pretence of Sedevacantist Catholicism if you actually not one, in a community of people who are.
  • As a rule, Sedes will not start an argument or fight, and are essentially peaceful by nature. IF however, they are wronged, the tendency leans towards Just War, Crusades and Inquisitions. In the modern day this generally does not devolve to massive war parties going out to fight, it tends to lean towards ostracism of infiltrators or bad actors, relentless countering to any enemy attacks (which being as they are generally not physically violent in nature, are responded to proportionally) and if it does get to extremes, Catholic fighters/soldiers/warriors have absolutely no problem with doing what is necessary without hesitation. In fact, protecting oneself and innocents is a duty for a Catholic man, dogmatically.
  • The number of people it takes to make a stable community is really quite low. At a gathering not too long ago, three Sede women (among which my wife) lined up for a group photo and there were 15 children there. Another group in another continent has 19 children from 4 women. Get ten such women in a community and you are going to have around 50 other humans being born to them. At least, because none of the 3 women I know have yet reached menopause. Imagine a village or area that has 100 such women and think about the numbers of hardcore Catholics you will produce in a few generations.

Catholics (real ones, i.e. Sedevacantists) are the only ones reproducing at well over replacement numbers (see my previous post on this topic.)

And for all the reasons mentioned in that previous post, no, Protestant “communities” will not be able to muster the same kind of cohesion or numbers. So… if you really mean to make a difference, you may want to start working on why Catholicism is actually the only Christianity that ever did exist, and is the only one that is in fact the Church Jesus wanted to exist on Earth.

*Which, if I read that post right, might be Alexander Macris, since he is supposedly some scary Alt-Right guy. Or whatever. The term Alt-Right was invented by foppish glowie Dick Dispenser as I call him (Richard Spencer) and was retarded from the start, given its origins. But since nowadays stating simple facts like that men cannot ever be pregnant, is apparently equivalent to being Hitler (except you know, the Nazis were National SOCIALISTS, so it’s a bit of a stretch, since, if they even had gas chambers for such things, the Nazis would probably have gassed you if you said men could get pregnant back then, I mean, they certainly burnt the books about trannification and so on, but I digress).

** Oh and Cold Fury and Western Rifle Shooters Association have both been picking up some of my posts, so thanks for that, since I am dismally bad at promoting myself even when it’s a skill I should try and learn one day.

No related posts.

By G | 17 May 2024 | Posted in Catholicism, Christianity, Sedevacantism, Social Commentary, Zombie Apocalypse

Why Protestantism is the Destruction of the West

Andrew Torba has written his regular newsletter, which you can see as a blog post here.

In it he laments the various issues that are ensuring the American population, along with the European one, are falling (and have been for a long time) below replacement value.

He does this by mentioning the issues, while apparently being totally oblivious of how any of these issues became issues in the first place, and what the root cause of all of them was and is.

It’s really quite astonishing. But I think it can be useful to look at this peculiar blindness of his as a starting point to show with a certain level of clarity and obviousness what the baseline issues are originating from, and how, specifically, in each case, this can be demonstrated to have massive evidence for the fact that, at root, all of these issues have the starting point of the Protestant rebellion against the Catholic Church.

Now, if you are a Protestant, irritating as you may find me and my perspectives, I sincerely hope you settle down, muster as much objective consideration for the rest of this post as you can, and consider it calmly and objectively. And if some of my rhetoric infuriates you, pay attention to that, and notice which bits do so the most (these are where your biggest logical hurdles and fallacies are going to be found), then let them go and try, for the sake of argument at least, to imagine they are true and correct anyway (they are, my rhetoric is so unpleasant for people because it invariably is laced with painful truth).

And then see if you can’t understand my points from a bird’s eye view, instead of taking it personally against you as a person, the people who taught you to be a Protestant that you care about, and so on.

Being as Torba is a Protestant himself, and being that Protestants, like solipsistic women, only backwards rationalise any reality in the past that factually makes them responsible for anything, instead of facing the facts squarely on, he seems to think this situation is totally divorced from anything to do with Protestantism. In fact he blindly points out the issues while completely oblivious to the reasons of why, how and when these things became issues.

It really is a kind of perspective of extreme selfishness or self-centeredness to the point of being oblivious of the destruction one leaves in one’s wake. Any damage done is just some magical thing that just happens on its own and is always fully justifiable in just such a way (by some magic) that means it is never, ever, ever, that person’s fault.

What a selfish, stupid, spoilt brat, or a woman (men too, but they generally are more consciously aware than women in this regard) would do on an individual level, Protestants do on a massive social level that covers the last five centuries.

So allow me now to quote Torba from his post and comment on each point in some detail. If you are able to divorce your personal feelings on each issue, and note the broad historical facts in each case, I think you will see that what I say about Protestantism is not just true, but that on some level, you have always known it, because the plastic, veneer feel of the disconnect between the entire Protestant mish-mash chaos non-structure of it, has never married properly to the deep sense of culture, tradition, history and ancestors that created and protected Christendom from the time of Jesus, to:

  • The formation of Benedictine monasteries,
  • The crusades, and the 200 years they held the Outremer while being attacked by both Muslims and the Eastern schismatics they came to the aid of (after they had already split themselves off from the One True Church),
  • The rebellion against God’s Church, under the guise of it being a Protestation against the corrupt men within it, which have always been there, but who never changed the truth of the Church,
  • The siege of Malta and the Catholic knights that defended it from the consequent destruction of Christendom as a whole if Malta had fallen,
  • The gradual, intentional and devastating infiltration of the Church by freemasons (illuminati, satanists, carbonari, etc their name is legion), communists, homosexuals and pedophiles, starting in earnest in the late 1770, alongside the planned and executed destruction of every European royal house; because since the time of Charlemagne, the nobility had been associated with being the protectors of the Church, that is, the physical and worldly protectors of the Church (the guys who fight, as all nobles who took part in the crusades did) and they had to be broken before the Church could be damaged meaningfully from within,
  • The noticing of this by various Popes, culminating in Pope Pious X who started the putting together of the code of canon law of 1917, an amazing document that reviewed tens of thousands of documents written over the last two millennia, in order to ensure there was no conflict, contradiction or logical fallacy among them all, so they could be summarised as the essence of Catholic dogma in one volume, which was completed and promulgated by Pope Benedict the XV in 1917 and stood the test of time from then, through to the death of the last valid Pope, Pious XII, and even beyond it, as the Satanists finally took the throne of Peter in 1958, and have held it since, yet the True Church remains, as does the impenetrable fortress of the Code of 1917, and the last remnant of faithful Bishops and Priests that retain Catholicism as their faith, and not the false, Satanic version of “Catholicism” espoused by the promulgators of Vatican II and its manifest heresies in the form of the deceitful Novus Ordo fake “Church”.

The simple fact is that on some level, every protestant senses that deep down, no matter how genuine their wish to be one with God the Father, Christ the Son, and the Holy Spirit, the entire history of their supposed religion is littered with disconnects and logical fallacies that simply cannot be reconciled. And deep down, they sense too, that one cannot simply be united with Christ by merely saying he is. There are rules. There always were from the start, and they do not change. But I have mentioned the historical perspective starting from the beginning, many times before, and few are willing to take that journey. So today, we will do something different. We will take Torba’s newsletter and dissect the issues he mentions and see how and where they came from in the first place.

You Need To Be Babymaxxing: A Call to Action for Christians A disturbing trend has been emerging over the past few decades: the birth rate of every US state, along with the birth rate in most western nations, has dipped below the replacement population level. This has sparked widespread concern and fear, as this demographic shift could have catastrophic consequences for the long-term survival of some of the world’s most prosperous and influential societies and people groups.

And what might have led to that catastrophic drop in birth rate, when third world Africans, Indians and others keep producing children despite conditions most Westerners can’t even imagine, much less are able to take on in their own lives? Let’s ponder it a bit, shall we?

The root causes of this demographic decline are complex and multifaceted, but there are a few key factors that stand out. First and foremost: the rise of secularism and individualism has led to a decreased emphasis on traditional family values and a growing number of people choosing not to have children. Our culture of atomized individualism in the West has transformed so many into self-centered and selfish monsters.

So… the increase of secularism, individualism and atomisation of society. Where, O WHERE might such an idea come from? Could it possibly have ANYTHING at all to do with going from a global religion that was prevalent throughout the entire West and even much of the East (though slightly perverted and erroneous there) to CHANGING that religion to be… what was it oh yeah…

  • Individualistic (every man interprets the Bible (which was changed from the original used for 1200 years) as he sees fit.)
  • Schismatic at its very root. We now have over 40,000 versions of Protestantism, but even then each of these is really only a shadowy illusion of coherence, because in truth EVERY Protestant feels entitled to be his own Pope, Bishop and Priest and interpret the Bible, and Christianity as a whole, (including the ancient traditions he is usually abysmally ignorant of) as he sees fit, which is why Protestants will change Church like normal people change socks. They are not Churches at all, just lose coalitions where you pick and choose the bits that suit you. What do you think the effect of that is on society as a whole? Might be just a tad atomising? Just a smidge of secularisation creeping in? You think? How would that play out over 500 years?

Additionally, the increasing cost of living and the pressure to pursue higher education and career success have made it more difficult for many couples to afford to have large families. It’s tough, but not impossible, to have a large family when the economy is so rigged against you doing so. Making it happen requires a lot of self-sacrifice and a reevaluation of your priorities.

No lie there, but where does this incessant need to have a “career” and prioritising work come from? Well, let’s see, historically where can we trace this sudden absolute importance of WORK over LIFE? What’s that, I hear? The Industrial Revolution? Right. I agree. Which was taught to me in school as a young boy as this marvel of British Engineering and know-how and just an overall great thing for the advancement of humanity. Except… no one mentioned the social consequences. They all presented the creation of trains and railways and machinery as all positive technological advancements while completely ignoring whether:

  • They actually were positive overall for humanity, or
  • Regardless of that, what social conditions did the much vaunted “Protestant Work Ethic” actually entail in day-to-day activities and family dynamics?
  • What priorities do you think you need to have to come up with the Industrial Revolution in terms of valuing your family time and your work time? What effects on general human interactions do you think are going to be more prevalent? Would a general disconnect from other human beings being seen as other human beings you necessarily relate to, regardless of personal differences, purely on the basis of the reality in front of you that they too are human beings, be useful to foster a general perception of other people being seen more as potential cogs in the machinery of “society” than actual human beings? The deeper implication of this are manifold and absolutely fundamental. A perfect example of this, which is an extreme case, in order to highlight the difference, is that if a Protestant mind were to say, be forced into a war of strife against invading foreigners, he would execute it more or less in cold blood for the most part as a negative but necessary thing. A Catholic would execute it with quite a different frame of mind. Alongside the same practical need, the Catholic would further be driven in his righteous rage that such an event has become necessary as a result of the other side refusing to act like reasonable human beings. So their extermination is not just a necessity for practical purposes, but also a necessity from an educational and spiritual perspective. A Protestant cuts a tree down because it’s in the way. A Catholic evaluates if the tree is noxious, in which case he will dig it up from the roots and burn it, or merely in the way, in which case he will endeavour to dig it up from the roots and replant it somewhere appropriate. It is a MASSIVE psychological difference and affects every aspect of your attitude towards life and all its challenges.

Finally, the widespread availability of birth control and abortion has enabled people to easily prevent pregnancies and terminate them when they do occur, further exacerbating the problem. We are making great strides on banning abortion in many states across the nation, but decades of damage has already been done.

And where did that magical birth control come from? Oh wait, the pill was invented by a Jewish guy. Just a coincidence I am sure, regardless of the fact that Jews (Talmudic Pharisees) have hated the Catholic Church from the start and have tried to destroy it at every turn including their deep infiltration of it over centuries and the Protestantisation of it with Vatican II in which they were instrumental in forming.

But what about the adoption of it? Which kind of people adopted birth control in this form? Not Catholics. Even today, some 66 years after the throne of Peter was usurped by Satanists, the momentum of the real Catholicism that still exists (though crumbling rapidly in the Novus Ordo fake Church) makes it nigh on impossible for the fake Pope Bergoglio to say it’s ok to use. It was Protestants in their legion of denominations that began to accept socially the concept of divorce in the first place. An event that was forbidden by the Catholic Church and only permitted in the sense of an annulment, which has very specific rules to be granted.

But if divorce becomes acceptable, then the entire concept of marriage becomes a store-bought idea, no longer a sacrament for life. And once you accept marriage as a kind of diploma you can buy in a store, well, you should be able to switch diplomas at will if one loses its lustre. And since it might go wrong, it only makes sense to take it for a test run first. Which means sex before marriage. Which could end up with babies with a person you’re just taking out for a test ride! I mean they have a nice body, or maybe are rich, or whatever, so you want to see if you’re “compatible” in terms of orgasms per month, you know, like miles per gallon and so on. So of course you need some baby making prevention thing!

And then it’s a short step from treating sex as a test run for marriage to making it just for fun. I mean sex is really a LOT of fun. Like a lot, lot. Like it messes with you brain and body chemistry level of great fun. So why wouldn’t you want to get addicted to this natural rush that doesn’t even require drugs, and is better than all the rushes you get from a drug anyway, if you practice it enough to really get good at it? Well, of course sex would go from being a test ride for marriage to a sport. And once sex is for fun, the last thing you want is a baby with someone you can’t even have a decent conversation with, but oh my God are they awesome at the orgasms per mile, or whatever the measure was, right?

So, “naturally” the next thing that happens if a baby does come into the equation… and marriage is not a sacrament anymore as a dedication to bringing in new life (that is what marriage is for, making children, I know, it’s a shock, but seriously, look it up historically, sport-fucking doesn’t feature at all. Not even a little bit), well, what else are you gonna do, other than kill that baby, since it’s a nuisance. And so we have gone in a few short steps from allowing divorce –> sex before marriage –> sex for fun –> contraception –> baby killing.

And remind yourself, which secularisation of Christianity movement did that? You can’t blame Catholicism for it. Even the fake “Catholic” Church to date at least can’t advocate for contraception (they will in due course, no doubt, because Satanists are gonna Satanist).

While there is undoubtedly a lot of fear-mongering surrounding this issue, it is not without merit. If the current trend continues it could lead to a significant decline in the population of some of the world’s most prosperous and influential nations, which would have far-reaching consequences for global stability and economic growth.

Note that Torba’s first concern is global stability and economic growth. The ever present and Jewish –> Protestant belief in their true God, the almighty dollar. Profit, wealth. An amorphous “stability” of people and lands so far removed from us you will never see them even once in your life. There is a reason why America is called the great Satan by the Arab world, and while their religion is demonic too, they are not entirely wrong, which is what I tried to explain as gently as possible here.

More importantly it would also represent a tragic loss for the unique cultures, traditions, and values that have been cultivated by these societies over centuries.

Again, while he is not wrong, the point is not that any one specific culture or tradition is really all that relevant in the scheme of things, UNLESS, that tradition and culture also happens to be the best, surest, most tried and tested true and real approximation of how reality actually works as God intended. Then it’s kinda like… ALL IMPORTANT. So, despite your specific and particular distaste for Catholicism, which is based on nothing but lies about what it is, perpetrated down the centuries that you never bothered to look up yourself and the same sense of things passed on to you by your relatives and people you loved, who were just as ignorant of the truth (or more) as you are and they too believed the lies and inaccuracies, you should really make an effort to educate yourself on these things and figure them out by yourself.

Christians are called to be fruitful and multiply (Genesis 1:28). We need to be babymaxxing. This commandment is not just a suggestion or a personal preference, but an essential part of our mission to spread the Gospel and disciple the nations. By having large families and raising our children to be faithful, God-fearing people we can ensure the continued growth and prosperity of our communities and the preservation of our shared values and traditions.

Sounds good? Sure. But it’s a plastic American commercial. “Buy this product, it looks good, it makes you look cool and it’s needed!”

Tell me Andrew, with SPECIFICITY:

  • Continued growth and prosperity for your communities. Exactly WHAT and HOW do you mean this? What do you think will happen if people have a lot of children with only a vague sense of community brought on by a generic, amorphous, non-specific, “belief in X” that has no set rules, no set tradition, no set reality.
  • What “community” are you referring to, PRECISELY. Are the Methodists gonna get along with the Mormons, and the Mormons with the Seventh Day Adventists, and they with the Amish, and they with the Anabaptists, and they with the Baptists, and they with the Lutherans, and they with the Calvinists, and they with the lesbian “bishops” of whatever “Church” that is, and they with the transgender “bishop” that was in the news of another faction and they with…(repeat for 40,000 iterations). Is that the “community” you refer to? Those people all gonna band together under the banner of “Christ” are they? I think not. I think the entire history of America, and all Protestant nations, has shown such people will band together only under the banner of the (previously) might dollar, or German mark, or Pound Stirling. And then only until it profits them. And any true believers in the mix will get stampeded in the overall melee. It’s hard enough to have a community when they actually ARE all Catholics, but it does work and it has for many centuries. It has never worked in any protestant country other than to create more government, more regulation, and a perpetual chase for profit.

Moreover, by focusing on our own households and prioritizing the growth of our families, we can counteract the destructive influence of our enemies, most of whom do not have children of their own. As their ideas and ideologies die with them, our faith and values will continue to thrive, passed down from generation to generation through the strong bonds of family and community.

What faith and values and traditions would those be? The ones that did not manage to survive other than as a thinly veiled veneer of false honesty, respectability and dignity to cover over the perpetual search for profit, worldly fame and fortune? The one that has not managed to keep trannies from claiming the “right” to get “married” in your protestant “Churches” and have “pregnant men” as part of the “accepted reality”?

And before you say “Oh but that doesn’t happen in MY denomination number 38,792!” Stop and think for 5 seconds, what the Hell you’re actually saying and how you are missing the ENTIRE point of what Christianity and being part of the ACTUAL “body of Christ” means and how and where your illogical, historical clown-world “religion”, came to be.

So, what can we do to address this crisis and fulfill our divine calling as Christians?

Well, you can start by actually becoming actual Christians, to begin with, which means the ONLY denomination of Christianity that has always been there from the start: Catholicism. And which today exists ONLY in Sedevacantist Catholicism, aka Catholicism, since the buildings, property, wealth and outer garments of Catholicism have all been usurped, infiltrated and corrupted by the Satanists pretending to be “Catholics” that now infest the Vatican and everyone remotely connected with Novus Ordo heresies.

Here are a few practical steps we can take:

Embrace the concept of “babymaxxing”: This means prioritizing the growth of our families and actively seeking to have as many children as possible. It may require making sacrifices and reevaluating our priorities, but the rewards will be immeasurable.

Support and encourage other Christian families in their efforts to have children: This can take many forms, from offering emotional support and guidance to providing material assistance, such as helping with childcare or contributing to the financial costs of raising a large family.

Advocate for policies that support large families: This can include lobbying for tax breaks and other financial incentives for families with multiple children, as well as pushing for educational and healthcare policies that make it easier for parents to raise large families.

Promote a culture of life: This means working to end the scourge of abortion and advocating for the sanctity of human life at all stages, from conception to natural death.

These are all good suggestions, but completely doomed to fail is they are not founded on a solid bedrock of being connected to truth and reality, and that means, a religion that is itself based in truth and reality. Anything that is a watered down version of the original, with literally tens of thousands of roads down false paths, simply cannot stand the test of time. It has never worked in ANY human endeavour, much less in the experience of mankind other than by the enforcing of it by brutal methods and force, be it Islam or communism. The ONLY philosophy that has thrived and done so entirely voluntarily, is Catholicism, which imposes force ONLY on its declared enemies, and even then, usually only after patiently trying to dissuade them from their evil paths of attack.

Educate and disciple our children: It is not enough to simply have many children; we must also ensure that they are raised in the fear and knowledge of the Lord, instilling in them the values and principles that will enable them to carry on our faith and traditions for generations to come.

Name me ONE Protestant denomination that has lasted unchanged and retained anything even resembling a constant tradition and heritage without multiple schisms for even just 100 years. It doesn’t exist. Not a single one. The Catholic Church has remained steadfast and its rules and dogma unchanged for almost precisely 2000 years.

The demographic crisis facing the world today is a serious and urgent challenge that demands our immediate attention and action. Christians have a unique responsibility to confront this issue head-on and work tirelessly to ensure the continued growth and prosperity of our communities and the preservation of our shared values and traditions. By embracing the concept of “babymaxxing” and focusing on our own households, we can secure the future of our faith and our people and leave a lasting legacy for generations to come.

Not really. Doing so within the context of a properly Catholic community (that is, sedevacantist) has a chance of succeeding because historically Catholicism has risen from the ashes many times, as it will continue to do, because it IS the real Christianity and Jesus promised us He will be with us to the End. Pretending or play-acting that role in a fake “Christian” denomination will only last barely the duration of one human lifetime IF the parties in question happen to have a real personal affinity, that is obviously totally absent from any group of people beyond a couple of families that get on with each other. Catholic communities are not held together by the ephemeral characters of any of its constituents, but by a shared absolute belief in God that transcends petty personal and human failings, of which we are ALL riddled with.

Babymaxxing is not just a personal decision, but a collective responsibility that requires the support and encouragement of the entire Christian community. It may involve making sacrifices and reevaluating our priorities, but the rewards will be worth it.

No group that is not tied together by a bond of religious belief that goes far deeper than mere words and appearances will ever give anything even remotely resembling the kind of helping hand they will inevitably secure for their own family above others. Even among Catholic families this is still an issue, though one that is absolutely muted to a huge extent. I have absolute certainty that if I or any other of the Catholic families we know suddenly won a billion dollars at the lotto, or even just a few million, ALL the Catholic families near them would benefit too. I for one would literally buy houses and land in other people’s names to have them and their children as neighbours, but I am NOT the only one by far. Any one of the people in our Sedevacantist community would act the same, I am certain of it, and this was never the case in any other “community” I was ever a part of, be it people I trained for decades in martial arts with, people I worked as an armed security professional with, and literally risked my life alongside theirs, nor even childhood friends. The bond created by a true religion is of a quality and nature you simply have no experience of until you are in it. And it does not happen as a result of any of the 40,000 Protestant denominations. It might happens between a few families and even then will not last beyond the second generation, but it has been demonstrated to exist and work and remain in Catholic communities even some 100 years after the basic infiltration of the Church was already complete.

All of the chips are on the table with this issue. Those who take it seriously will inherit the future by default as their continued growth and reproduction will ensure the long-term survival and prosperity of their communities, cultures, and values. While the rest of the world struggles with declining birth rates and the threat of extinction-level events, Christians can take comfort in the knowledge that our faith and values will continue to thrive, passed down from generation to generation through the strong bonds of family and community.

No Andrew. The reality is that all groups that are not homogeneously coherent, that is, all the varied Protestant denominations, will gradually be chewed down by the wolves at their edges, and continue to degrade and become diluted generation after generation until they are assimilated by the globular mass that is the entire plan of those who have been putting it in place for literally millennia.

Get married. Babymax. Get to Church. We are going to win.

The advice is sound, but not just any pretend, clown-costumed, “Church” will do. Only the real one will make a difference, as it always has throughout history. And while ULTIMATE victory is assured, no one, not even Jesus knows that day or hour of when that will come, only God the Father. So, the concept of you seeing this victory in YOUR lifetime is iffy at best, so best to not worry about it and get busy building the impregnable, un-infiltratable, ready to throw out anyone not part of it, community that is the only one to have overcome everything from the Roman Empire to the Arian heresy, and who, in time, will also triumph over the present desolation of the real Church, were only Sedevacantists are left to carry the faith.

Andrew Torba
CEO, Gab.com
Christ is King

You might be interested in the following posts:

  1. Clown World Comes at you FAST!
  2. Life Imitates Art
  3. Increasing pressure and the space of variations
  4. And a little more understanding
  5. Violence is Always the Answer

By G | 17 May 2024 | Posted in Believe, Catholicism, Christianity, Clown World, Impostors and Frauds, Reclaiming the Catholic Church, Sedevacantism, Social Commentary, The Crusades - Iron Men and Saints Vol. 1, The Enemy Within, The Jews, Zombie Apocalypse

A Clarification on Nazism

Due to my writing on the Nazi regime of a fictionalised situation, as presented in my overlords of Mars series, culminating in the full trilogy currently available only under the single title Nazi Moon, as well as my continuing observations of the Talmudic religion, Jewish Leaders of the state of Israel and even Jewish behaviour in general, some readers have assumed and ascribed positions to me that I do not hold. In order to be absolutely clear on the matter, allow me then to state my position in very simple (but hopefully not simplified) terms.

1. No human being is precluded salvation other than by choice, as Catholic dogma clearly states. We all have free will and we all are able to know in our heart the order of the Universe because it is written in every grain of sand and every sunset and sunrise. Even lost tribes of indigenous people who have never heard the name of Jesus have a possibility (vanishingly small though it is) of being saved by a merciful God.

2. No human being is guaranteed salvation, not even after conversion. The idea of once saved always saved is an illogical nonsense only a people so historically and logically incapable as Protestants have been trained to be could possibly hold in their poorly functioning minds.

3. In my opinion, in the eyes of God, the soul of any human being has equal importance and He hopes and wishes for every one of us to be saved, but forcing it would invalidate free will, so ultimately, the choice is down to us, and if we seek the truth, by His Grace, He will see to it we find it eventually. Only extremely hard headed idiots like myself need a Road to Damascus event to show us the Way, for most, simple logic and observation is enough to lead to the ultimate truth of Catholicism. I console myself with the fact that even the Apostles were among the ones who had a hard head, Thomas being my favourite Apostle.

4. With regard to Nazism specifically, my position is precisely the one the Church held as per the Papal Encyclical of Pope Pious XI which in part reads:

8. Whoever exalts race, or the people, or the State, or a particular form of State, or the depositories of power, or any other fundamental value of the human community – however necessary and honorable be their function in worldly things – whoever raises these notions above their standard value and divinizes them to an idolatrous level, distorts and perverts an order of the world planned and created by God; he is far from the true faith in God and from the concept of life which that faith upholds. 

9. Beware, Venerable Brethren, of that growing abuse, in speech as in writing, of the name of God as though it were a meaningless label, to be affixed to any creation, more or less arbitrary, of human speculation. Use your influence on the Faithful, that they refuse to yield to this aberration. Our God is the Personal God, supernatural, omnipotent, infinitely perfect, one in the Trinity of Persons, tri-personal in the unity of divine essence, the Creator of all existence. Lord, King and ultimate Consummator of the history of the world, who will not, and cannot, tolerate a rival God by His side. 

10. This God, this Sovereign Master, has issued commandments whose value is independent of time and space, country and race. As God’s sun shines on every human face so His law knows neither privilege nor exception. Rulers and subjects, crowned and uncrowned, rich and poor are equally subject to His word. From the fullness of the Creators’ right there naturally arises the fullness of His right to be obeyed by individuals and communities, whoever they are. This obedience permeates all branches of activity in which moral values claim harmony with the law of God, and pervades all integration of the ever-changing laws of man into the immutable laws of God. 

11. None but superficial minds could stumble into concepts of a national God, of a national religion; or attempt to lock within the frontiers of a single people, within the narrow limits of a single race, God, the Creator of the universe, King and Legislator of all nations before whose immensity they are “as a drop of a bucket” (Isaiah xI, 15). 

12. The Bishops of the Church of Christ, “ordained in the things that appertain to God (Heb. v, 1) must watch that pernicious errors of this sort, and consequent practices more pernicious still, shall not gain a footing among their flock. It is part of their sacred obligations to do whatever is in their power to enforce respect for, and obedience to, the commandments of God, as these are the necessary foundation of all private life and public morality; to see that the rights of His Divine Majesty, His name and His word be not profaned; to put a stop to the blasphemies, which, in words and pictures, are multiplying like the sands of the desert; to encounter the obstinacy and provocations of those who deny, despise and hate God, by the never-failing reparatory prayers of the Faithful, hourly rising like incense to the All-Highest and staying His vengeance. 

13. We thank you, Venerable Brethren, your priests and Faithful, who have persisted in their Christian duty and in the defense of God’s rights in the teeth of an aggressive paganism. Our gratitude, warmer still and admiring, goes out to those who, in fulfillment of their duty, have been deemed worthy of sacrifice and suffering for the love of God. 

14. No faith in God can for long survive pure and unalloyed without the support of faith in Christ. “No one knoweth who the Son is, but the Father: and who the Father is, but the Son and to whom the Son will reveal Him” (Luke x. 22). “Now this is eternal life: That they may know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou has sent” (John xvii. 3). Nobody, therefore, can say: “I believe in God, and that is enough religion for me,” for the Savior’s words brook no evasion: “Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father. He that confesseth the Son hath the Father also” (1John ii. 23). 

15. In Jesus Christ, Son of God made Man, there shone the plentitude of divine revelation. “God, who at sundry times and in divers manners, spoke in times past to the fathers by the prophets last of all, in these days hath spoken to us by His Son” (Heb. i. 1). The sacred books of the Old Testament are exclusively the word of God, and constitute a substantial part of his revelation; they are penetrated by a subdued light, harmonizing with the slow development of revelation, the dawn of the bright day of the redemption. As should be expected in historical and didactic books, they reflect in many particulars the imperfection, the weakness and sinfulness of man. But side by side with innumerable touches of greatness and nobleness, they also record the story of the chosen people, bearers of the Revelation and the Promise, repeatedly straying from God and turning to the world. Eyes not blinded by prejudice or passion will see in this prevarication, as reported by the Biblical history, the luminous splendor of the divine light revealing the saving plan which finally triumphs over every fault and sin. It is precisely in the twilight of this background that one perceives the striking perspective of the divine tutorship of salvation, as it warms, admonishes, strikes, raises and beautifies its elect. Nothing but ignorance and pride could blind one to the treasures hoarded in the Old Testament.

I held this position in essence even before I read the Papal Encyclical for the first time today, although, while familiar with many other aspects of Nazism, my disinterest in Catholicism prior to my conversion was such that I did not care about the relations the Church had with Nazism.

Keep in mind that encyclical was written in 1937. But even before I was Catholic, I have always had a very strong preference for Justice and Truth above all else, so my position was never really far from the actual Catholic Church, which today is to be found only in Sedevacantism, and of which not a shred remains in the Vatican or the impostors of the Novus Orco satanic sect.

I hope this clarifies the situation.

The Nazi reaction to the usual financial skulldrugery, sexual degeneracy and perversion, destruction of basic principles of Christian truth and justice the Jews invariably indulge in was certainly understandable and to some extent even justified, but to assume that Adolf Hitler was some kind of saint, or the Nazis a pure and righteous people without sin is as absurd as thinking every Jew under the sun is an evil monster deserving of death.

Broadly speaking, generalities, like clichés, are based in factual truth and if I say that generally speaking the Jews are an underhanded, sneaky people with principles of philosophy that diverge immensely from Catholic concepts of honour, truth, justice and reality, it is an undeniable fact.

Just as true is the fact that, generally speaking, the Germans of the WWII era were a people so desperate for leadership, and an ingrained sense of following orders and hierarchical authority that they would blindly march into behaviours more commensurate with sociopaths than normal human beings.

Is every Jew a monster? Was every Nazi one?

No. I am certain that in each camp some outstanding examples of human courage and honesty existed. Who, precisely, they might have been, only God knows for sure.

But are Jews today a dominant force for almost all that is wrong in the current dystopian global landscape? Absolutely, yes. Though I need to specify that the string pulling is done by an exceedingly small faction within the Jewish realm, and those within that subset have no problem at all subjecting even other Jews to the same (if not worse) genocidal pressures they envision for the rest of us; as prescribed by their Satanic religion after all, since a sacrifice of their own people, a literal Holocaust, is required before the emergence of their “Messiah”, that is, the Antichrist of our Catholic religion.

No related posts.

By G | 12 May 2024 | Posted in Catholicism, Nazi Conspiracies, Sedevacantism, Social Commentary, The Enemy Within, The Jews

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

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