Blog Post

St. Peter Damian Slays the German Synodal Way

St. Peter Damian Slays the German Synodal Way

 Guest Contributor  February 1, 2023  No Comments

St. Peter Damian Takes Up The Gauntlet Thrown Down by the German Bishops on the Vice of Sodomy 

A Defense of Catholic Sexual Morality and a Condemnation of the German Synodal Way

Part II

By Randy Engel


In February of 2019, thirteen years after my book The Rite of Sodomy – Homosexuality and the Roman Catholic Church[1] was published, this writer founded the League of St. Peter Damian,[2] an international Catholic ministry, to honor this great 11th century Cardinal and Doctor of the Church best known for his lengthy exposition on the unnatural vice of sodomy, the Book of Gomorrah,[3] written in 1049. 

Saint Peter Damian of Ravenna, “Hammer of the Sodomites,” addressed his now famous Letter 31 to another future saint, Pope Leo IX,  a German aristocrat, who had only been in office a few months and who was to become one of the most illustrious popes of the Middle Ages. 

According to Owen J. Blum, O.F.M., Saint Peter Damian’s chief translator and biographer in modern times, the hermit-monk’s spiritual life was first and foremost a life of prayer, penance, and reparation. Peter Damian also promoted and practiced a special devotion to the Blessed Virgin.

The two hallmarks of the holy monk’s teachings on the spiritual life were his great hatred of sin and his fundamental and overriding interest in the spiritual advancement of the Catholic priesthood. Peter Damian thought of the priesthood as an order of the greatest dignity. Indeed, it was the exalted nobility of this office that caused him to speak in such dire terms to priests who forgot their position and tarnished their souls with incontinence.

Peter Damian showed remarkable insight into the importance of model episcopal leadership, stating that the example of a virtuous life filters down from the princes of the Church to all levels of the clergy and laity. The holy monk was equally insistent on the deposition of unworthy incumbents to the priesthood, the duty of which fell to the local bishop. 

Much of the success of his program of clerical moral reform was due to the fact that Peter Damian was able to closely link his own efforts with that of the Papacy. Indeed, his wise counsel and diplomatic skills were employed by a long succession of popes.

Peter Damian died in the odor of sanctity on February 22, 1072, in his sixty-sixth year at Faenza, while returning to Rome from a papal mission to Ravenna. Although he was never formally canonized, he was revered as a saint immediately after his death and his cultus has existed at Faenza, at Fonte-Avellana, at Monte Cassino, and at Cluny to the present day.

Over the centuries, his body has been moved six times, each time to a more splendid setting. In 1898, Peter Damian found his final resting place in a beautiful side chapel dedicated to the saint in the Cathedral of Faenza, seat of the Bishop of Faenza-Modiglina.

A Special “Interview” With St. Peter Damian 

Fortunately for todays’ Catholics, although more than a thousand years have passed since Peter Damian completed the Book of Gomorrah (Letter 31),  it continues to be as pertinent and timeless as the year it was written. 

Part II of this series on sodomy and the German Synodal Way draws upon the knowledge and wisdom of this street-smart and fearless Benedictine monk as made manifest in his response to the arguments once employed against him by his own clerical adversaries, the same being put forth by a majority of German cardinals and bishops intent on promoting sodomy under the ruse of “Synodality.” 

It is not without a great sense of irony that, as this series goes to press, Fr. Joachim Wernersbach, a Benedictine priest at the Abbey of Tholey in Germany, has been publicly condemned by his superior, Abbot Mauritius Choriol, for giving a sermon critical of sodomy and the Synodal Way.[4]

In Part II of this series, I will conduct a modified interview with Saint Peter Damian, inviting his response to my questions and comments, all of which are taken from the Book of Gomorrah. [Some of His Eminence’s responses will be in abbreviated form, with emphasis occasionally added.]   

Interview Opening

Engel: Your Eminence, welcome to the twenty-first century. Would you begin our interview by telling our readers what motivated you to write the Book of Gomorrah and to present it to the blessed Pope Leo IX? 

Cardinal Peter Damian: Since we know from the mouth of Truth itself that the Apostolic See is the mother of all churches, it is proper that if any doubt should arise in matters pertaining to the welfare of souls, one should have recourse to her as to the teacher and, as one might say, to the source of heavenly wisdom, so that from this unique principle of ecclesiastical discipline a light may go forth by which the entire body of the Church is bathed in the utter brilliance that Truth imparts, once the darkness of uncertainty has been dispelled. 

In our region a certain abominable and most shameful vice has developed, and unless it be prevented as soon as possible by the severest punishment, it is certain that the sword of divine fury will be unsheathed, leading in its unchecked violence to the destruction of many. One is nauseated with shame and embarrassment to speak of things so disgracefully foul, or even to mention them within earshot of Your Holiness. But if a physician is appalled by the contagion of the plague, who is likely to wield the cautery? If he grows squeamish when he is about to apply the cure, who will restore health to stricken hearts? 

Engel: My Lord Cardinal, you wrote the Book of Gomorrah in 1049. Some of your critics say you were exaggerating the matter. How would you respond? 

Peter Damian: The befouling cancer of sodomy is, in fact, spreading so through the clergy or rather, like a savage beast, is raging with such shameless abandon through the flock of Christ, that for many of them it would be more salutary to be burdened with service to the world than, under the pretext of religion, to be enslaved so easily under the iron rule of satanic tyranny.

It would be better for them to perish alone as laymen than, after having changed their attire but not their disposition, to drag others with them to destruction, as Truth itself testifies when it says, “But if anyone is a cause of stumbling to one of these little ones, it would be better for him to be drowned in the depths of the seas with a great millstone round his neck.” Unless immediate effort be exerted by the Apostolic See, there is little doubt that, even if one wished to curb this unbridled evil, he could not check the momentum of its progress.

Engel: Pardon me, but before we go any further, would you define the term sodomy as used in your treatise.  

Peter Damian: … there appears to be four varieties of this criminal vice. There are some who pollute themselves; there are others who befoul one another by mutually handling their genitals. Others still who fornicate between the thighs; and others who do so from the rear. Of these, as we proceed through the various degrees, the two latter are to be judged more serious than the others.

The ingenious artifice of the devil contrived these states of corruption, so that the higher the unhappy soul rises in the scale of vice, the deeper it is likely to be buried in hell.

Engel: Obviously thenyou are opposed to the ordination of sodomites?

Peter Damian: … it seems to me to be utterly preposterous for those who are habituated to this filth of this festering disease to dare to present themselves for orders, or to remain in them if they have been ordained. It is clearly contrary to reason and opposed to the canonical decrees of the Fathers. I state this, not to render a definitive opinion … but only to make my position clear. It is not without cause that this shameful deed is considered to be the worst of crimes, seeing that Almighty God is always read to have detested it, even when he had not yet curbed other vices, he already kept condemning this one with the precepts of the Law, under pain of the strictest penalty… In the Law it also says, “If a man lies with a man in the same way as with a woman, both have done a hateful thing; they must die, their blood shall be on their own heads.”

He, moreover, who has committed this crime for which the Old Testament prescribes the death penalty, should not be promoted to ecclesiastical orders.

It is perfectly clear that when a capital crime has degraded a man, no subsequent holy life will reform him to the point where he might receive orders and ecclesiastical status. No one may aspire to reach the heights of preferment who has surely fallen into the depths of mortal sin. Hence, it is as plain as day that anyone proven guilty of fornicating with a man between his thighs, which, without a doubt is a mortal sin, will be promoted to ecclesiastical orders in total opposition to the norms of Holy Scripture and in complete disregard of the regulations ordained by God.

Engel: How do you answer those who claim that sometimes “necessity demands” either the ordination or retention of sodomites or else there will be no one present to celebrate divine services in the Church? 

Peter Damian: I am going to reply to this in a summary way: Was it not a pressing matter, and one fraught with necessity, at the time when the Apostolic See was without a shepherd? Shall we wipe out a vigorous judgment to benefit an individual, but retain it unchanged even to the deprivation of an entire people? If we do not sacrifice a principle to benefit a vast multitude, shall we violate it to promote one man’s advantage?

Engel: What did St. Paul have to say about the poor souls, both men and women, who fall into this dreadful vice?

Peter Damian: Who can turn a deaf ear, or, more to the point, who does not tremble through and through at the words Paul, like a mighty trumpet, blasts at such as these? “God abandoned them to their hearts’ desire and to the practices with which they dishonor their own bodies.”[5]

And almost immediately following he said, “that is why God has abandoned them to degrading passions. For their women have turned from natural intercourse to unnatural practices, and their menfolk likewise have given up natural intercourse with women to be consumed with passion for each other, men doing shameless things with men and getting an appropriate reward for their perversion. And since they refused to see that it was rational to acknowledge God, God has abandoned them to their depraved ideas to do that which was reprehensible.”[6]

Why is it that they are so eager to reach the top in ecclesiastical rank after such a grievous fall? What should we think, and what conclusion should we draw but that God has abandoned them to their depravity? 

Engel: Is there a resemblance between the men of Sodom who were blinded by the angels dwelling in Lot’s house, after which Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by sulfurous fire from heaven, and sodomites who seek ordination, or if already ordained to the priesthood or religious life, seek higher orders? 

Peter Damian:  [Yes] … sodomites attempt violently to break in on angels when impure men attempt to approach God through holy orders. Surely, they are struck with blindness, because by the just decree of God they fall into interior darkness. …Those who lose Christ because of their addiction to sin, never find the gate that leads to the heavenly dwelling of the saints. 

Engel: Thus far, we have been discussing sodomites who are seeking ordination or those who have already been ordained. How would you address bishops who permit or even encourage these  men to seek, or continue in, the priestly or religious life?   

Peter Damian: Unquestionably, one who is not awakened by this awful thunder of apostolic invective must be thought more likely to be dead than asleep. And since the Apostle makes such an effort to intensify the severe punishment of this sentence, and that, not for the faithful among the Jews, but for the gentiles and for those ignorant of God, what, I ask, would he have said had he beheld this deadly wound reeking in the very body of the Holy Church? And especially, what grief, what fire of compassion would kindle his devout heart upon learning that this destructive plague was raging even among those in sacred orders?

Listen, you do-nothing superiors of clerics and priests. Listen, and even though you feel sure of yourselves, tremble at the thought that you are partners in the guilt of others; those, I mean, who wink at the sins of their subjects that need correction, and who by ill-considered silence allow them license to sin. Listen, I say, and be shrewd enough to understand that all of you alike are deserving of death, that is, not only those who do such things, but also they who approve those who practice them.

Engel: What about the case where a bishop or religious superior is guilty of sodomizing his own spiritual sons? 

Peter Damian: What an unheard of crime! What a vile deed, deserving a flood of bitter tears. If they who approve of these evildoers deserve to die, what condign punishment can be imagined for those who commit these absolutely damnable acts with their spiritual sons? Who can expect the flock to prosper when its shepherd  has sunk so deep into the bowels of the devil? What man will continue to be under his authority, knowing that he is so hostilely estranged from God? Who will make a mistress of a cleric, or a woman of a man? Who, by his lust, will consign a son whom he has spiritually begotten for God to slavery under the iron law of satanic tyranny? … What a sorry state of affairs that one’s ruin depends upon another, so that when one dies, the other must necessarily follow.

Engel: My next question concerns the sacrament of confession. Are you acquainted with the common practice of sodomite clerics who confess their sins and seek absolution from the same person with whom they have sinned?

Peter Damian: [Yes] So that we are not unaware of the devil’s clever devices, let me put before you some of the tools that he and his council have designed in his ancient laboratory of evil. 

I would be remiss if I allowed the fact to be hidden, that some of those who are shot through with the poison of this crime, when their conscience begins to trouble them, confess to one another lest their guilt come to the attention of others. 

Despite the fact that, as actual culprits, they are ashamed to look others in the eye, they themselves become judges and each happily grants to the other the blanket forgiveness that he aspires for himself. It follows, then, that they have become penitents involved in great crimes, and still their lips are not pale from fasting nor are their bodies wasted by self-denial. Moreover, since they do not hesitate to gorge themselves, their passions are basely aroused to their usual lust. Thus it happens that he who has yet to weep for the sins he has committed, is guilty of still more lamentable crimes.

The Law commands, however, when one has contracted leprosy, he should show himself to the priests. But when an unclean man confesses to another, defiled by evil that they have committed in common, it is a case of a leper showing himself to a leper and not to the priests. Now, since confession is by definition a revelation, what does he reveal, I ask, who tells his hearer something already known. Or, in what sense can this be called a confession, where nothing is revealed by the penitent but what the hearer already knows? 

By what right or what law can one bind or loose the other when he is constrained by the bonds of evil deeds common to them both. He who is himself tied in chains, labors in vain to release another from his shackles. He who would guide a blind man on his way must himself have sight, or he will be the cause of his client’s fall, as the voice of Truth declares when it says, “If one blind man leads another, both will fall into the pit.”

By these texts from the Gospels it becomes perfectly clear that he who is oppressed by the same guilty darkness tries in vain to invite another to return to the light of repentance. While he has no fear of extending himself to outstrip the other in erring, he ends up accompanying his follower into the yawning pit of ruin.

Engel: Your Eminence, having read the Book of Gomorrah  more than several hundred times over the last 35 years, I cannot but be impressed by the constancy and degree of your condemnation of the sin of sodomy, or, as I have expressed it in the title of this interview, “the devil’s congress.” 

Would you please expand your thoughts on the diabolical origins of sodomy?

Peter Damian: Certainly, it is quite proper for those who, contrary to natural law and right reason, hand over their flesh to demons by such foul practices should share a common nook to pray with the diabolically possessed. Moreover, since human nature itself rebels at these evil deeds, and since the problem of not being of different sex is repugnant, it becomes perfectly clear that they would never undertake such queer and repulsive deeds unless evil spirits had completely possessed them like “vessels of wrath made for destruction.”

But once they begin their possession, they pour out the hellish infection of their malice into those they have seized, so that now they passionately desire, not what the natural emotions of the flesh might demand, but only that which the devil’s urging suggests. For when a man assaults another man to practice sodomy, this is not a natural urging of the flesh but only an incitement of diabolical origin. 

The holy Fathers, therefore, were careful to ordain that sodomites should pray in the company of demoniacs, since there was never any doubt that they had become prey to the same satanic spirit. But how can a mediator, exercising the priestly office, stand between God and the people if he is excluded from associating with the  congregation of the people and is never allowed to pray except with those possessed by the devil? 

Engel: One of the myths circulating in Catholic circles these days is that the crime of pederasty in which monks and clerical sodomites prey on boys and young men is a recent development in the Church. Your treatise in which you quote Saint Basil [330-379] on the punishment meted out for this criminal act belies this myth. Do you mind recalling that quote for our readers? 

Peter Damian: The great Basil says: “Any cleric or monk who seduces young men or boys, or is apprehended in kissing or in any shameful situation shall be publicly flogged and shall lose his clerical tonsure. Thus shorn, he shall be disgraced by spitting into his face, bound in iron chains, wasted by six months of close confinement, and for three days each week put on barley bread given him toward evening. Following this period, he shall spend a further six months living in a small, segregated courtyard in the custody of a spiritual elder, kept busy with manual labor and prayer, subjected to vigils and prayers, forced to walk at all times in the company of two spiritual brothers, never again allowed to associate with young men for purposes of improper conversation or advice.”

Engel: Am I correct in stating that you go one step further and favor the position of Pope Siricius (334-399) who held that sodomites, including those who have done penance and been  reconciled with the Church, should be forbidden entry into the novitiate, and those who have been ordained be removed from office?

Peter Damian: [Shaking his head, yes.] Among my recommendations to His Holiness is that whoever is sullied with the ugly filth of homosexual vice is unworthy of service in ecclesiastical offices. They, moreover, who were once vessels of vice, as we said, are unfit to celebrate the divine mysteries.

Engel: Your Eminence, in the Book of Gomorrah you state that the vice of sodomy surpasses the enormity of all others, so much so that it is impossible to compare with any other vice. How would you describe the spiritual devastation that befalls the sodomite and those he draws into his net?  

Peter Damian: Without fail it brings death to the body and destruction to the soul. It pollutes the flesh, extinguishes the light of the mind, expels the Holy Spirit from the temple of the human heart, and gives entrance to the devil, the stimulator of lust. … It opens up hell and closes the gates of paradise, changes a citizen of the heavenly Jerusalem into an heir of Babylon, and turns a heavenly star into chaff for eternal fire; it cuts off a member of the Church and hurls him into the depths of the devouring flames of hell. … 

It is this vice that violates temperance, slays modesty, strangles chastity, and slaughters virginity with a knife dipped in the filthiest poison. It defiles all things, sullies all things, pollutes all things; and as for itself, it allows nothing to be pure, nothing to be spotless, nothing to be clean. … 

This vice excludes a man from the assembled choir of the Church and forces him to pray with those possessed and obsessed by the devil; it separates the soul from God to associate it with demons. …

Once this poisonous serpent has sunk its fangs into this unfortunate man, he is deprived of all moral sense, his memory fails, and the mind’s vision is darkened. Unmindful of God, he also forgets his own identity. This disease erodes the foundations of faith, saps the vitality of hope, dissolves the bond of love. It makes way with justice, demolishes fortitude, removes temperance, and blunts the edge of prudence.

Shall I say more? … Surely, once this savage beast has seized a man in his cruel jaws, it restrains him with its chains from performing any good deed, and then lets him rush unchecked in wild descent into the worst depravity. Then once one has fallen into the depths of utter degradation, he becomes an outcast from his heavenly home, is severed from the Body of Christ, is rebuked by the authority of the whole Church, is condemned by the judgment of all the holy fathers, is despised among men on earth, and is rejected from the company of the citizens of heaven.

He cannot be happy while he lives, nor hope for heaven when he dies, for now he must bear the derision of men and afterwards the torments of eternal damnation. 

Engel: I was very moved in the section of your great work in which you state that “we should be sorry for the soul that does not lament.” Can you quote or paraphrase your feelings concerning the unrepentant sodomite?

Peter Damian: Miserable soul, I weep for you with unrelenting grief because I do not see you weeping. For this reason I lie prostrate on the ground for you because  I see you wickedly standing erect after your grievous fall and even striving for the highest rank that the ecclesiastical order may offer. 

If, on the other hand, you had restrained yourself with humility, I should have rejoiced with the Lord with all my heart, assured of your reform. If compunction, which is the property of heartfelt contrition, had shaken your soul to its foundation, I would have rightly cheered and danced for joy. 

But as it is, you are truly to be wept over because you do not weep; and thus you need the grief of others because you do not grieve over your perilous calamity. And since you appear to be undisturbed by any personal sad feelings of regret, you need all the more the bitter tears and compassion of your brothers. Why do you merely neglect to gauge the measure of your damnation? 

Engel: Your Eminence, there are many somewhat unusual but important insights that you reveal in the Book of Gomorrah. One that especially attracted my attention was your statement that the services of an unworthy priest will spell ruin for the people. This topic is rarely addressed by members of the hierarchy, or the laity, including those whose parish  priest is an active homosexual. What would you say to such an unworthy priest?  

Peter Damian: For God’s sake, why do you damnable sodomites pursue the heights of ecclesiastical dignity with such fiery ambition? To what purpose are you so eager to ensnare the people of God in the meshes of your own perdition? Is it not enough that you yourself are plunging headlong into the depths of sin? Must you also expose others to the danger of your fall? 

Suppose someone comes to ask us to intercede for him with a powerful man who is angry with him, and suppose we do not know this powerful man. We would immediately respond: We are unable to come to intercede because we are not familiar with him. So, if someone is bashful about interceding with a man of whom he presumes little, in what frame of mind does a person who does not know whether he is a friend of God’s grace through the merits of his life occupy the place of intercession with God for the people? 

Everyone, in fact, should discreetly judge himself and not dare to accept the office of the priesthood if the accursed vice still has power over him. Nor should he who is a victim of his own depravity aspire to become an intercessor for the sins of others.

Forbear, I beg you, and dread to inflame the inextinguishable fury of God against you, lest by your very prayers you more sharply provoke Him whom your wicked life so obviously offends. If you are willing to accept your own destruction, beware of being responsible for the damnation of others. 

Remember this: The more circumspect you are about your present lapses into sin, the more readily will you rise in the future when God in His mercy extends His hand, inviting you to penance. But if Almighty God Himself refuses to accept the sacrifice from your hands, whom do you think you are in presuming to thrust them upon Him against his will? “The sacrifice of the unclean is abhorrent to the Lord.” 

Engel: Dear Cardinal Peter Damian, please accept my apology for this interruption, but you have hit upon a vital issue that is in need of clarification as we currently have certain German and Flemish  bishops and  cardinals who are  ordaining known sodomites and extolling the virtues of homosexual priests. It’s as if they believe that their vocation alone is enough to save them. Are these men totally oblivious to the fact that, as you have written, “no oblation, soiled by impurity, is acceptable to God”? 

Peter Damian: Here are the words of Isaiah, renowned among the prophets, or rather the Holy Spirit speaking by the mouth of Isaiah: “Hear,” he says, “the word of the Lord, you rulers of Sodom; listen to the command of our God, you people of Gomorrah. What are your endless sacrifices to me, says the Lord? I am sick of the holocausts of rams and the fat of well-fed beasts, and the blood of bulls and sheep and of goats revolts me. When you come to present yourselves before me, who asked you to trample over my courts? Bring me your worthless offerings no more, the smoke of them fills me with disgust. New Moons, sabbaths, and other festivities I cannot endure; your assemblies are wicked. New Moons. Your New Moons and your appointed feasts I hate with all my soul. They lie heavy on me, and I am tired of bearing them. When you stretch out your hands, I will turn my eyes away from you; when you multiply your prayers, I shall not listen. Your hands are covered with blood.”

You will notice, consequently, that even though the sentence of God’s condemnation bears commonly on the evil inherent in all vice, it is principally leveled, however, at the leaders of Sodom and Gomorrah. If, perhaps, the rash opinion of those who would contest this view is not prepared to believe human evidence pointing to the moral quality of this vice, it should at least agree with the testimony of God.

Engel: Many traditional Catholics, including myself, often speak about the abuses of offering communion in the hand, but there seems to be little interest or objection to the Blessed Sacrament being held in the hands of a sodomite priest. Would you care to comment?

Peter Damian: As Peter says: “When angels sinned, God did not spare them; He sent them down to the underworld and consigned them to the pits of hell, to be held for punishment until the day of Judgment … And He reduced the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to ashes and destroyed them completely, as a warning to those who would act wickedly in the future.”

Engel: My Dear Saint Peter Damian, it is obvious that you consider the salvation of souls the primary task of priests and monks. Instead of encouraging sodomites in their sin, what should the German and Flemish bishops, indeed all members of the Catholic hierarchy from the pope down,  be advising clerics, whatever their station, who are caught in the homosexual vice?

Peter Damian: Let these miserable souls learn to inhibit this detestable vice, manfully conquer the wantonness of enticing lust, repress the lascivious urging of the flesh, and fear in their bones the terrible judgment of divine anger. Let them always recall the threatening words of the Apostle when he says, “It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.”

Remember the Philistines, indeed, had the power to shave Samson’s locks but not to uproot them, which means that the evil spirits too, even though for a time, they may deprive you of the charismatic gifts of the Holy Spirit, they will never succeed in denying you the remedy of God’s forgiveness.

Begin an unremitting struggle against the flesh, always standing armed against the dangerous disease of passion. … Think again of the peril of this exchange, that for momentary pleasure experienced at the moment of ejaculation, a punishment will follow that will not end for thousands of years. Ponder how sad it is that because one member is not satisfied to the full, the whole body together with the soul is afterwards tortured forever in a dreadful holocaust.

It is also well worth the effort that you constantly keep in mind the promised rewards of chastity and that, stimulated by their sweetness, you may with unencumbered faith overcome any obstacle thrown in your path by the wiles of the crafty plotter.

Engel: As we draw near to the end of our interview, would you address the charges that were leveled against you by your fellow episcopal critics who accused you of being “an informer and a delator” of your brother’s crime. I’m sure similar criticisms are being conjured up in the minds of those Church leaders today who are calling for the ordination of homosexuals and the blessing of sodomite relationships under the banner of “Synodality.”

Peter Damian: I have no fear, moreover, of the hatred of evil men nor of the tongues of detractors. I would surely prefer to be thrown innocent into the well like Joseph who informed his father of his brothers’ foul crime, than to suffer the penalty of God’s fury, like Eli, who saw the wickedness of his sons and remained silent. 

Who am I, when I see this pestilential practice flourishing  in the priesthood to become the murderer of another’s soul by daring to repress my criticism in expectation of the reckoning  of God’s  judgment? I should become responsible for another’s crime in which I was in no way involved.

How, indeed, am I to love my neighbor as myself if I negligently allow the wound, of which I am sure he will brutally die, to fester in his heart; if, moreover, I am aware of these wounds of the spirit and fail to cure them by the surgery of my words?

I might also add, that if blasphemy is a terrible thing, I am not aware that sodomy is any better. The former indeed causes a man to err; the latter brings him to perdition. The one separates the soul from God; the other joins it to the devil. The former expels one from heaven; the latter buries him in hell. The one blinds the eye of the soul; the other hurls one into the abyss of ruin. 

And if we are careful to investigate which of these crimes is the weightier in the scales of divine scrutiny, a search of Sacred Scripture will provide a satisfactory answer. There, indeed, we find that the children of Israel who blasphemed God and worshiped idols were taken into captivity; but we notice that sodomites were devoured in the sulfurous flames of a fire from heaven.

So let no man condemn me as I argue against this deadly vice, for I seek not to dishonor, but to promote the advantage of my brother’s well-being. Take care not to appear partial to the delinquent while you persecute him who sets him straight. If I may be pardoned in using Moses’ words, “Whoever is for the Lord, let him stand with me.” 

Engel: Thank you so much Saint Peter Damian for  this instructive interview which I hope will receive world-wide attention especially among the German and Flemish bishops. Do you have any parting words for our readers, including the many who are learning of you and the Book of Gomorrah for the first time?

Peter Damian: Permit me to end our interview with the last sentence of the Book of Gomorrah presented to His Holiness Pope Leo IX  in the year of Our Lord, 1049:  

Most reverend Father, may Almighty God be pleased during your pontificate to utterly destroy this monstrous vice, that a prostrate Church may everywhere rise to vigorous stature.

The End

P.S. A reminder to our readers that the League of St. Peter Damian is making available the complete [electronic] text of the Book of Gomorrah as translated by Father Owen J. Blum, O.F.M., as well as Pope St. Leo IX’s Decree on Sodomy written in response to Peter Damian’s Letter 31, free of charge. The text is completely footnoted so that the quotes taken from the Book of Gomorrah can be seen in their original context. Send your request to:

[1] Randy Engel, The Rite of Sodomy, 2006, is available as a five-volume set from or from New Engel Publishing, Box 356, Export, PA 15632.

[2] For additional information on the League of St. Peter Damian see Home | League of Saint Peter Damian (

[3] The Letters of Peter Damian Letters 31-60, translated by Owen J. Blum, O.F.M., The Fathers of the Church, Mediaeval Continuation, Catholic University of America Press, Washington, D.C., 2005, pp. 3-53. In connection with Part II of this series, the League of St. Peter Damian is  making available the complete [electronic] text of the Book of Gomorrah as translated by Father Owen J. Blum, O.F.M., as well as Pope St. Leo IX’s accompanying Decree on Sodomy (1049), free of charge to our readers. The text is completely footnoted. Send your request to:

[4] See

[5] Rom 1.24.

[6] Rom 1.26-28.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment




Blog Post

Exposé: The German Bishops’ Advancement of Sodomy

Exposé: The German Bishops’ Advancement of Sodomy

 Guest Contributor  January 24, 2023  No Comments

Challenging the German Bishops’ Advancement of Sodomy –  “The Devil’s Congress

A Defense of Catholic Sexual Morality & Condemnation of the Synodal Way

Part I

By Randy Engel


If there is one lesson that faithful Catholics the world-over need to learn from the more than half-century of the rule of the Robber/Counterfeit Church,[1] aka, the Novus Ordo, is that neverever, say, “it cannot get worse,” because it  always does.

Last year’s pro-homosexual debacle lead by prominent members of the German and Flemish hierarchies under the banner of  Pope Francis’ new vision of a Synodal Church via a Synodal Way[2] is a powerful lesson in point. 

While there are other continuing recycled controversies associated with the Synodal Movement – including a more egalitarian reshaping of the Catholic Church’s hierarchical structures, and the opening up of the “new priesthood” to women, intersex and transgender candidates – there can be no doubt that the sanctification of sodomy is the linchpin that binds together the entire German Synodal doctrinal and moral wrecking apparatus and its crew. 

The primary focus of this article is the 28-page German Synodal Forum IV document  “ Life in Succeeding Relationships – Living Love in Sexuality and Partnerships,[3] presented by the German Episcopal Conference (Deutsche Bischofskonferenz)  and the lay Central Committee of German Catholics (ZdK) at the IV Plenary Assembly of the Synodal Way held in Frankfurt in 2022. 

Together, the two entities form the 230-member German Assembly known as the Synodaler Weg, that is, the Synodal Way. The group is comprised of all the German bishops plus clerical and lay representatives from Catholic religious orders, dioceses, parishes, lay movements, academia, and ecumenical associations that include non-Catholics and non-believers. 

The first time I read “Life in Succeeding Relationships,” I felt it impossible not to fall to my knees and kiss the crucifix of my Rosary in tears of reparation. More than six months have gone by, and I still can’t find myself letting go of the report without taking some action. Hence, this two-part series which will review the German document in detail. It will then be followed-up by a classic response from Saint Peter Damian, courtesy of yours truly, who, for the record, is the founder of the League of St. Peter Damian dedicated to the promotion and application of one of this saint’s greatest works, the Book of Gomorrah (1049).[4]  

The MHG Study – Prelude to the Synodal Way

“Life in Succeeding Relationships – Living Love in Sexuality and Partnerships,” which received world-wide publicity in the fall of 2022, was not conceived in a vacuum. It was based on a much earlier German bishops’ study titled “Sexual Abuse of Minors by Catholic Priests, Deacons and Male Members of Orders in the Domain of the German Bishops’ Conference”[5] and released in 2018.

Known as the MHG Study,[6] [also abbreviated as the MSG Study], this research project was commissioned in 2011 by the German Catholic Conference. It involved all of Germany’s twenty-seven dioceses and took seven troubled years to complete.

The MHG sex abuse report remains critically important as it resulted in the hemorrhaging of hundreds of thousands of Catholics from the Church in Germany. When the German faithful learned of the extent of child sexual abuse at the hands of Catholic clerics and religious, and the subsequent cover-ups by the German bishops, many of them disaffiliated themselves from the Catholic Church amid calls for radical reforms.

Moreover, the MHG report is especially important to this article because it provided the dominant themes that inspired and buttressed the pro-homosexual actions taken by the majority of German bishops, clerics, and lay delegates years later at the 2022 Synodal Way assembly.        

The original Director of  the interdisciplinary MHG taskforce was Professor Christian Pfeiffer, a Protestant German criminologist, and Director of the Institute for Criminological Research of Lower Saxony (KFN).[7] Pfeiffer ruffled some feathers early on in the game when he admittedly told a conference of general vicars that celibacy was at the root of the Church’s clerical sex abuse crisis – a strange claim since clerical sexual offenders are by definition not celibate. 

In any case, Pfeiffer and his team did run into some legitimate problems surrounding the accumulation of raw data as they never had access to the German Church’s original case files. 

Instead, it soon became clear that many of the sex abuse case archives and files from 1945 onward, had been radically manipulated, censored, shredded, or otherwise destroyed by diocesan staff on the orders of their bishop.  At the time of his employment, Pfeiffer was unaware of the fact that Church rulings permit the destruction of abuse files after a ten-year period making serious research on the offenders and victims almost impossible.  

Less than a year later, on December 12, 2012, at a private meeting in Munich under the heretical and pro-homosexual Cardinal Reinhard Marx’s watch,[8] Archdiocesan officials attempted to bribe Pfeiffer to resign with an offer of 120,000 euros, the cost of the study. When Pfeiffer rightly saw this as an attempt to silence him and censor his findings, the powers that be threatened to destroy his name and career. 

In the end, Pfeiffer left, but not quietly.[9] He was replaced by psychiatrist Prof. Harald Dressing of the Central Institute of Mental Health, Mannheim.[10] Under the new research contract, the German bishops gained total censorship over the public content of the final MHG Report which was published in 2018.[11]

MHG Summary – Poor Theology and Poor Science 

In its introductory statement on methodology, the MHG Report openly admits as to one of its most serious shortcomings:

All the findings are purely descriptive in nature. Due to the research method that was used, statistical proof of causal relationships between individual phenomena or variables cannot be provided. At best, hypotheses can be generated on the basis of existing findings.[12]

The MHG study covers alleged [not proven] cases of sexual abuse of minors involving 1,670 priests, deacons, and male religious for the period from 1946 to 2014. The figure was deemed “conservative” with probable numbers going much higher. Similarly, the number of child and juvenile victims was recorded as 3,677, another low estimate considering the nature of the crimes. 

The majority of the victims, 62.8%, were male, mostly between the ages of 12 and 13, with others fourteen and older. One of the seven sub-projects indicated a homosexual orientation among 72% of the accused clerics. 

Consistent with other official Catholic Church sex abuse diocesan studies, the MHG Report uses the term paedophilia, rather than pederasty, to describe the nature of the predominantly homosexual acts performed on adolescent male victims by clerics – a clear indication that the researchers intended to disclaim any connection between homosexuality and the clerical sexual abuse of young boys, which, as we will see, they did in fact, do.[13]

The MHG report also indicates systemic grooming techniques were employed by alleged offenders. These include emotional and psychological blackmail, threat of physical violence, and exploitation of authority. More than 80% percent of the young victims suffered “hands-on” offenses, that is, acts associated with physical contact including anal, vaginal and/or oral penetration.[14]

Church sanctions and penalties against convicted clerical offenders were lenient or non-existent across the board. Admission of guilt and expressions of remorse on the part of the accused were conspicuously absent. In contrast, the majority of victims appeared to have suffered greatly, many for a lifetime. 

Laicization and excommunication of clerical offenders was rare under canon law, while the removal and transfer of criminal clerics to other parishes or institutions or dioceses was the common line of action taken by the German bishops.

MHG Technical Recommendations

Among the technical recommendations identified in the MHG study – recommendations common to the many other diocesan and independent reports on clerical sexual abuse this writer has reviewed over the years – is the need for “binding, uniform, transparent and standardized reporting,” as well as long-term recordkeeping of abuse cases, including follow-up reports to accompany any transfer of clerics;[15] the establishment and financing of independent professional contact entities for alleged victims; the updating of canon laws and procedures dealing with criminal sexual acts against minors and vulnerable adults, and the promotion of penalties which are commensurate with the gravity of the respective crime.[16]

Thus far, there appeared to be no significant surprises reported in the MHG study when compared to similar large scale clerical abuse studies conducted in Catholic dioceses in other countries including the United States. 

It’s not until to the last section of the study dealing with “Catholic sexual morals,”[17] that the real fireworks go off. 

MHG Study Rejects Catholic Sexual Morality 

The opening paragraph of the recommended plans of action to be taken by the Catholic Church to address clerical sex abuse of minors and vulnerable adults reads: 

The results of the study make it clear that the abuse of minors on the part of clerics belonging to the Catholic Church constitutes not only misconduct committed by individuals, but also that attention must be paid to the risk and structural characteristics that are specific to the Catholic Church and which encourage the sexual abuse of minors or make it more difficult to prevent such abuse [bold added].[18]

But what specifically are “the risks and structural characteristics” of the Church that “encourage” and make the prevention of sexual abuse of minors “more difficult”?

Let’s see how the creators of the MHG report attempt to square the circle:

According to the MHG study team, “Homosexuality does not constitute a risk factor for sexual abuse.”[19]

Following this denial of their own research, they state, “There is an urgent need to reconsider the fundamentally negative attitude of the Catholic Church towards the ordination of homosexual men.”[20] They recommend rather “an open, tolerance-promoting atmosphere”[21] toward advancing openly homosexual candidates to the priesthood. Rebuking the Church for its use of  “idiosyncratic terminology” (e.g., “deeply-rooted homosexual inclination”), the researchers recommend instead the use of modern sexual medicine language and the implementation of sexual science’s findings.[22]

The Roman Catholic Church’s celibacy requirement also takes a hit, even though the MHG admits it is not an eo ipso [by itself] contributor to the sexual abuse of minors. Maintaining the sacramental seal of confession in abuse cases is also questioned.[23]

The issue of “clericalism,” defined as “an abuse of power facilitated by the authoritarian-clerical structure of the Catholic Church,”[24] is a main theme of the MHG report especially as it relates  to clerical sexual abuse. 

According to the MHG recommendations: 

A change in clerical power structures requires a fundamental examination of the ordained ministry of the priest and of his understanding of his role vis-à-vis non-ordained persons … Clericalism denotes a hierarchical-authoritarian system that can lead the priest to adopt an attitude of dominating non-ordained individuals in interactions because he holds a superior position by virtue of his ministry and ordination. Sexual abuse is an extreme manifestation of such dominance. [Emphasis added] [25]

That is, the Roman Catholic Church needs to abandon its hierarchical structure in favor of more egalitarian governance because sexually abusive clerics, religious, and bishops use their office to commit unpardonable crimes against minors and other vulnerable people – male and female. 

The German Synodal Assembly, Hessen, Frankfurt, September 8-10, 2022

Returning to the Controversial Frankfurt Synodal Assembly

As noted earlier, the German Catholic Conference of Bishops and the lay Central Committee of German Catholics, aka Synodal Assembly, met in Frankfort for three days, September 8-10, 2022. The Assembly produced fourteen texts based on the findings of the 2018 MHG sex abuse report that centered upon (1) clerical power (2) the role of women in the Church (3) the priesthood and (4) Catholic sexual morality. [26]

Having reviewed the case of the modernist  “ecclesiastical politics”[27] that dominates the German MHG Report, I expect that the reader will better appreciate its decisive role, four years later, in influencing the direction of the  IV Synodal Path in Germany and its controversial document,  “Life in Succeeding Relationships – Living Love in Sexuality and Partnership,” key portions of which are cited below.

Preamble – Church Teachings Foster Abuse[28]

It is the contention of the German Synodal Assembly that the centuries-old Catholic Church teachings  on “love, sexuality, and partnerships,” have been marred by “rigid moral dictates,” and “merciless attitudes,” which in turn have prompted acts of “sexualized violence in Church institutions, congregations and communities.” 

According to the Assembly, the brunt of these alleged harsh teachings has been unwed mothers, fornicators, adulterers, homosexuals, the divorced and remarried, and contracepting married couples. Horror of horrors, these individuals have been “forced into complete abstinence.”[29]

The Synodal Assembly continues:  

This suffering also includes the countless reprimands to which religion teachers and theologians, Catholic institutions and societies were and are subjected when they try to be critical of the current teachings of the Church. In doing so, we have marginalized people, deeply wounded them, and hindered their developing humanity. Time and again, people’s privacy and decisions of conscience were not respected. We see today that the Church’s sexual ethics also facilitated the crimes of sexual abuse in the Church. We ask forgiveness from the bottom of our hearts from all those who have suffered from the effects of the Church’s sexual teachings.[30]

As a Synodal Assembly, we see it as our duty to follow up this admission with actions, and to formulate impulses for a reorientation of the Church’s pastoral care.[31]

The Synodal Assembly is convinced that it will not be possible to reorient pastoral care without re-defining the emphasis of the Church’s sexual teaching to a significant degree. The Synodal Assembly therefore suggests a major re-emphasis in the Church’s doctrine, and considers an urgent need to exist to overcome some of the restrictions in questions of sexuality, for reasons of sexual science as well as theology. In particular, the teaching that sexual intercourse is only ethically legitimate in the context of a lawful marriage, and only with a permanent openness to the transmission of life, has caused a wide rift to open up between the Magisterium and the faithful. This threatens to completely obscure other important accents of God’s Good News which could have a liberating effect on shaping dignified sexuality. [Emphasis added] [32]

Section A: Synodal Assembly Cites MHG Study

Having thrown down the gauntlet that challenges every aspect of two-thousand years of Catholic sexual morality, the Assembly credits the MHG report with providing the motivations and orientation for its subsequent actions, especially the finding that “homosexuality (…) does not constitute a risk factor for sexual abuse” – a finding which “thus demonstrates the need for a change in Church teaching on partnership and sexuality.[33]

The Assembly, throughout all its deliberations, promotes the constant MHG theme – that of the alleged  “irreparable disconnect” between the “lived sexual experiences”[34] of the Catholic laity and the norms of the Church’s teachings on sinful sexual acts, including contraception [almost all of which have an abortive mode of action], homosexuality, fornication, masturbation, etc.[35]

According to the Assembly, even those who actively dissent from the Magisterium on sexual matters can “enjoy joyful, liberating relationships” which can be successfully measured by recognizing the dignity of the other person and by a standard of non-violence, to which are added committed friendship, fidelity, respect, mutual tender affirmation, and responsible parenthood.[36] To be rejected are sexual acts and relationships that are “exploitative and violent sexuality” including “forced prostitution, rape and other forms of sexualized violence,” especially the sexual abuse of minors.[37]

Not surprisingly, this section is followed by a lengthy exposition on Biblical Scripture and the primacy of “love” and man’s “inalienable dignity.”[38]

“Consensuality on the part of partners in sexuality and partnership is a sine qua non,” the Assembly stresses.[39] “Since children cannot yet consent to sexual acts,” the Assembly states, “Sexual acts before, with and on children are to be evaluated without exception as violence.”[40]

Section B – Preface to Motions 

This brief section waxes lyrically on various Novus Ordo themes including (1) Sexuality as a gift and as a creative mandate of God; (2) God’s affirmation of the individual [terms like men and women, husband and wife, are rarely used in the text]; (3) God’s unconditional forgiveness; (4) responsible freedom; (5) and the primacy of conscience.[41]

Homosexual couples are equated with “married couples” throughout the text.

Motion 1. [Principle 1] 

Based upon the above criteria, the first motion of the Assembly is to affirm that:

Human sexuality is a fundamentally positive life force given by God, and that every individual has the right to sexual “self-determination and self-perception” hence “the fundamental mission of the Church is to respect and honor sexual identity in its diversity across the lifespan  – regardless of age or sexual orientation [emphasis added].[42]

The Church’s Magisterium also acknowledges that homosexuality is an orientation that is not chosen  [emphasis added].[43]

Motion 2. [Principle 2] 

Since the Assembly writers erroneously claim that homosexuality is biologically determined and that self-perceived sexual orientation must be respected, it logically follows that the report vigorously opposes any form of  therapy: 

Both sexual orientation and gender identity are the result of a deeply personal growth process, and it is up to the person concerned to identify it. All forms of discrimination and promotion of its manipulation in a manner not medically indicated, such as via conversion therapies, are therefore prohibited [emphasis added].[44]

The Assembly report states that “human sexuality” is fluid, and “polyvalent” and takes “various forms of expression.”[45] The report is a celebration of “diversity.” It  adopts the “Kinsey Scale,” that  classifies sexual orientation on a spectrum from 0-6, with zero representing “exclusively heterosexual” and six representing “exclusively homosexual, with asexual, intersex and transgender people sandwiched in between, rather than acknowledging that heterosexuality is the norm for the human species.[46]

The Virtue of Lust

Among its more euphonious insights into human sexuality is the report’s attempt at rehabilitating lust traditionally defined as a disordered desire for, or inordinate enjoyment of, sexual pleasure.[47] Lust, Church tradition tells us, is one of the seven deadly sins. It brings about “blindness of mind, which excludes almost entirely the knowledge of spiritual things,”[48] and “darkens the intellect.”[49]

Not always claims the Assembly report:

Ontogenetically (development of the individual), the lust dimension in conjunction with the experience of human nearness usually forms the first step of a person’s life.[50]

…One need have no profound knowledge of the human sciences or of sexual medicine in order to know that no dimension of human sexuality must be realized in each expressive sexual act in order to enable the other dimensions to be realized. …For each of the dimensions of sexuality is itself ambivalent: The experience of sexual lust targets the positive experience of one’s own self as well as of the other; but it can also tip over into a narcissistic self-isolation that instrumentalizes another person as a mere object of lust [emphasis added].[51]

 Motion 3. [Principle 3] Contraception Justified

The report hails the “primacy of love” as “polyphonic” in all its sexual expressions and dimensions.[52]

For example, the term, “fertility,” is not limited to the biological transmission of new life via marital intercourse. … Beyond its biological fertility, neighborly love, mediated in the flesh, assumes a social responsibility for the human community as a whole. This assumption of social responsibility can also be based on a conscious decision to use contraception in a certain situation, or in an option against further biological children [emphasis added].[53]

In this sense, ‘fertility’ is essential for all interpersonal love. It is however disputed whether biological fertility in terms of openness for the transmission of human life – and that in each genital-sexual act –  is essential.[54]

And it is undisputed that each sexual act must respect personal dignity and be characterized by the gift of mutual love and grace, and may of course be performed together with full lust and joy.[55]

… The unconditional linking of each sexual act to biological fertility constitutes an impermissible absolutization of the reproductive aspect which threatens to level out the qualitative difference between human sexuality and that of animal reproductive behaviour.[56]

Humanae Vitae Not Compelling

The principle of inseparability asserted itself in the teaching of the Catholic Church for the first time in the Encyclical letter Humanae Vitae (1968), where it was referred to as “the inseparable connection, established by God, which man on his own initiative may not break, between the unitive significance and the procreative significance which are both inherent to the marriage act.”(HV 12).[57]

… In any case, the consequences of such a principle are severe: debasement, even delegitimization of all sexual acts which by themselves cannot beget children. This not only concerns sexuality between homosexual individuals… [emphasis added]. In this respect, precisely because of its severity, this principle of inseparability is rejected by the majority as a failure to recognize the human significance of human sexuality for each individual, and as an imposition that lacks plausibility.[58]

Readers, I am sure, will not have missed the point the Assembly report is making. Sodomy/anal penetration or “the devil’s congress” as it was known in the Middle Ages, is not a debasement of human sexuality, but the Church’s anti-contraceptive stand is a debasement of the marital act. 

Motion 4. [Principle 4] 

In still another plug for sodomy, the report states that the social dimension of fertility provides homosexuals with the opportunity to be “fertile” by raising children, in part, an underhanded way of putting the stamp of approval on adoption by male homosexuals and lesbians.[59] No mention is made of the catastrophic moral dimension of commonly used artificial forms of manufacturing babies used by homosexuals, aka, in vitro fertilization and paid sexual surrogates.

Grace-filled Homosexuality

Under the subtitle “The fertility of homosexual partnerships,”[60] the report reiterates its claim that homosexuality is a natural inborn variant of human sexuality. Therefore, homosexual acts can fulfill the same physical expression of personal love experienced by heterosexual couples. 

The writers of the report question “whether one can seriously demand that a core feature of a person’s identity be frozen, only because it does not fulfil certain normative expectations, without thereby harming that person or any other person.[61] That is to say, homosexuals can harm themselves by not acting out on their special nature in the form of sodomy or other habituated perverted acts.[62]

It follows then that the Assembly again demands the renunciation of conversion therapies:

These aim to change same-sex desires, and to “cure” homosexuality. They fundamentally presume that homosexuality is a disease. In doing so, they ignore the acknowledgement in the human sciences of homosexuality as a disposition, which is also advocated by the Magisterium.[63]

[Spiritual] guidance should be provided. It does not aim to carry out therapeutic conversion, but at bringing about acceptance of a self-determined life decision of the individuals receiving spiritual guidance. The pastoral guidance of homosexual faithful should fundamentally aim to positively integrate the sexual orientation into the individual, and not to promote the repression or suppression of the sexual orientation.[64]

… same-sex relationships should always be unconditionally recognized if they – like any form of sexual relationship – respect the dignity of the individuals concerned and are characterized by heartfelt, enduring love and grace [emphasis added].[65]

   Motion 5. [Principle 5] 

The principles and criteria of sexuality lived out in Christianity – respect for self-determination and responsible sexuality, as well as fidelity, permanence, exclusivity and responsibility for one another in relationships – also apply to homosexual people.[66]

The authors of the report then restate that homosexuality does not exclude candidates for the priesthood or religious life and that all attempts at conversion therapies, “are to be strictly rejected and put to a stop.”[67]This pronouncement is followed by further commentaries on “making sexual lust life-giving in its beauty.”[68]

Our Lady of Fatima told Blessed Jacinta that, “More souls go to Hell because of the sins of the flesh than for any other reason,”[69] but the German bishops and lay assembly members, indifferent to St. Paul’s warning,[70] are preaching a different Gospel: 

A highly skeptical attitude towards sexual lust prevailed for a long time which made human sexuality as a whole appear to be an ultimately dangerous, explosive and quickly invasive energy that had to be contained and tamed by means of strict moral and legal norms. Lust, and with it sexuality, are understood less as drive-bound arousal, the exuberant potential of which would have to be relieved by the satisfaction of drives, but as the consummation of a physically-experienceable energy which owes itself to the attraction of Eros, and thus lends expression to the sense of well-being of physically-perceived nearness. The productive elements of human lust – also and especially in the area of sexuality – are now being perceived and taken seriously.[71]

   Motion 6. [Principle ] Sex Education and Masturbation

 …It is the task of sex education, as of Christian education and upbringing as a whole, to promote the life-serving and thus mindful and dignified formation of sexual lust over the whole span of human life, to sensitize it for its moments of pleasing, and thus to protect it from trivializing degeneration.[72]

The report put special emphasis on the deprived sexuality of the “disabled”:

The premise for the emotional-sexual education of disabled persons is inherent in the conviction that their need for love is at least as great as anyone else’s. … People with disabilities too seek authentic relationships in which they can find appreciation and recognition as a person. Sexuality shows itself as the language of physically-mediated appreciation and recognition.[73]

Where is all this heady talk on sex for the disabled (and others) heading? Towards the benefits of self-stimulating sexuality for everyone, of course:

… It [masturbation] opens up the possibility of discovering and experiencing oneself in physicality, and of experiencing the dimensions of the sexuality of lust, identity and transcendence. This experiential space is significant over the whole lifespan. It is an important gradual development for the psychosexual maturation process in almost every person. Self-stimulating sexuality is not a form of pure self-love, but another important form of human sexuality besides interpersonal relationships. It is each person’s task never to make the pleasurable self-referentiality of human sexuality absolute. It is however an expression of human sexuality on this side of relationships between couples.[74]            

Motion 7 (Principle 7)

Since “sexuality lives in and from relationships, including people’s relationship with themselves,” the report states as a matter of principle that:

Experiencing one’s own body through self-stimulation in a pleasurable way can be an important building block of self-acceptance for everyone. This does not deny the danger inherent in the self-stimulated sexuality of each person: to become encapsulated within oneself, and thus to dry up the richness of relationships with other people as a source of one’s own life.[75]

Marriage and Divorce

The next large section of the German Synodal Assembly report is an extended muddied verbal collage on marriage and other “committed relationships.” The long discourse on marriage as “relationship” pays little attention to the primary end of marriage, which is the begetting and education of children, but does manage to give considerable space to divorce and remarriage of one spouse to a new “partner” a la Pope Francis’ Apostolic Exhortation, Amoris Laetitia (The Joy of Love):  

Conjugal sexuality is interwoven with ups and downs in the same way as conjugal love as a whole. … The mystery of sacramentality especially reveals its liberating character here: Spouses regard God’s salvific, strengthening nearness not as a promise for the future which they themselves must first earn, but as an encounter which has already taken place and on which they can build.[76]

God’s promise does not protect even Christian marriages from exhaustion and failure. …This is one reason why an increasing number of marriages are dissolved by civil law. A divorce dissolves the civil bond, and also terminates the partnership (covenant) outwardly.[77]

… Although, according to current doctrine, this second marriage cannot constitute a sacramental marriage because of the indissolubility of the first, the question nonetheless arises for the Christian faith community as to whether and how the persons concerned can participate in the life of the Church if they so wish. … Pope Francis has taken important steps in this regard towards recognition in his post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia – according to the pastoral maxims of “accompanying, discerning, integrating.”[78] …The question remains as to how the Church can enable people in such new partnerships, many of whom experience a longing in terms of their faith, to experience God’s merciful care through His blessing.[79]

The Blessing of Homosexual Partnerships

Having opened the door to legitimizing Catholic divorce and remarriage, we get to the long-anticipated bottom line concerning fornicating and cohabiting couples and  homosexual partners: 

God’s sustaining strength is promised not only to married couples, but to all people who seek caring, committed relationships [emphasis added]. In this respect, they seek to consciously and explicitly place their relationship under God’s promise, and therefore ask for the blessing of the Church. Some consider this very request, which occasionally even leads to a request for a formal marriage, to express esteem for the ‘institution’ of marriage as a covenant for life that is made binding by a formally-concluded bond.[80]

Acts of blessing for same-sex couples are controversial in the Church. Separate rituals and acts of blessing therefore can and must be found for other forms of cohabitation than marriage – despite the unfavourable judgment of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith of 15 March 2021. This will not only support loving couples, but also all those relatives and friends who accompany them on their journey through life.[81]

The Assembly report acknowledges that the Roman Catholic Church condemns homosexual deeds [it also condemns lustful thoughts and words, willingly entertained by homosexuals and heterosexuals], and forbids sodomite and lesbian “blessings” as well as “marriage,” but dismisses these puerile objections outright:

… the Church should not and may not deny to committed partnerships God’s succor as promised in the blessing. God’s succor is said to encompass all relationships – in particular those which, in addition to loving affection and reliable support, are also lived in exclusivity and faithfulness.[82]

Motion 8 (Principle 8) 

Though the Assembly report acknowledges that marriage remains the most frequently chosen form of relationships in our society, it repeatedly argues that other forms of partnerships must be accepted: 

Trust in God’s salvific acts does not rule out painful failures. But it does encompass trust in the presence of a God who accompanies the lives of all people through life with His goodness and care, and who surprisingly reveals new chances of success, especially in seemingly hopeless situations.[83]

Same-sex partnerships seeking to take the risk of an indissoluble life together also draw on such trust. Therefore, they too should be able to see themselves as placed under the blessing of God, expressly granted by the Church, and live from it [emphasis added]. This also applies to people who enter into a new partnership after a marriage has failed.[84]

Recalling the Königstein Declaration

As the Assembly report draws to a close, its authors mention, for the first time, the German bishops’ infamous Königsteiner Erklärung (Declaration of Königstein) written in 1968 as a renunciation of  Pope Paul VI’s encyclical, Humanae Vitae:

In the follow-up to the Encyclical letter Humanae Vitae, the “Königstein Declaration” already referred to the conscientious personal decision of spouses to use so-called artificial methods of birth control. It thus follows the tradition of both the Bible and of the Church, which assigns to the conscience of each person the central position of a responsible way of life, and which was again brought to bear by the Second Vatican Council: As the Pastoral Constitution of the most recent Council summarizes the doctrinal tradition of the Church, “Conscience is the most secret core and sanctuary of a man. There he is alone with God, Whose voice echoes in his depths.” (Gaudium et Spes 16).[85]            

The fact that a conscience-based judgment always binds each person in terms of his or her conduct in life – irrespective of any possible error – is undisputed [emphasis added].[86]

… The Second Vatican Council remains within the doctrinal tradition of the Church when it holds to another path of the discerning of conscience: The Council considers the ‘voice of God’ to be audible in conscience: “In a wonderful manner conscience reveals that law which is fulfilled by love of God and neighbor.”. And adds: “In fidelity to conscience, Christians are joined with the rest of men in the search for truth, and for the genuine solution to the numerous problems which arise in the life of individuals from social relationships.” (Gaudium et Spes 16).[87]

… the Magisterium also guides the faithful in their formation of conscience; but it cannot take its place: “We [the Magisterium] have been called to form consciences, not to replace them.” (AL 37) The Magisterium may rightly expect from all the faithful the Christian obedience owed to the traditions and teachings of the Church – also in questions of moral conduct (cf. can. 212 CIC). But it is never blind obedience that dispenses with its own responsibility for the knowledge of what is morally right and true and takes refuge in the exculpatory arms of an authority. According to the Church’s teaching and to canon law, it is in fact always an obedience “conscious of their own responsibility.” This responsibility consists of “freedom which is obedient to one’s own insight and conscience.”[88]

Motion 9 (Principle 9) The Criteria of Love aka Sex 

The Assembly report again repeats the mantra that sexuality – that is “responsible sexuality” – is a universal avocation based on the Commandment to love one another. The criteria it gives for  truly authentic and successful loving relationships includes (1) free consent) (2) fidelity and exclusivity of genital activity (3) and the absence of exploitive behavior, sexual violence (especially against minors) and all forms of humiliation.[89]  

Ironically, the report uses the writings of St. Paul to indemnify all forms of sexual depravity that the Apostle repeatedly condemns, most especially sodomy.[90]

The Pauline “freedom from the law” implies the promise that, with the experience of God’s salvific and liberating nearness ‘behind us,’ it is possible again and again to take the risk of life-embracing love without having to despair of one’s own or the other’s weaknesses and mistakes. And that is indeed directly liberating: accepting the reality of one’s own existence – including its potential for salvific change – without being crushed and oppressed by the romanticization of an ideality.[91]

Motion 10 (Principle 10) The Successful Life

The Synodal Assembly report ends with “a call to holiness”: 

Holiness and perfection are part of a common growth process, initiated by God Himself (cf. Eph 5:27). Holiness stands for the promise of growing steadily in a successful life, with the experience of God’s salvific presence, until it reaches flawless heavenly perfection through the mercy of God’s choosing and redeeming. 

The freedom for which Christ has set us free (Gal 5:1) is freedom from the compulsion to assert ourselves towards others through egoistic self-centeredness, or to justify ourselves before God through a seemingly flawless, outwardly law-abiding lifestyle. 

It is freedom to be able to engage in the ventures of love and committed partnerships, as well as in responsible sexuality [emphasis added]. 

… we can and must carefully respect the realities of people’s lives today and hold out to them, in the midst of their concrete circumstances, the promise of a successful and abundant life – including sexuality that takes as its standard the God-given dignity and uniqueness of each individual person.[92]

A Revolution in the Making 

The above Forum IV text on the “renewal” and “reform” of Catholic sexual morality was presented to the Synodal Way membership on September 8, 2022,  the first day of the meeting, as Germany’s contribution to the worldwide synodal process initiated by Pope Francis. According to the German Catholic news agency KNA, all proposals were formulated for the pope’s consideration and not as independent dogmatic changes by the German church.”[93]

When the prepared text came up for a vote, a minority of bishops, some representing the Forum of German Catholics, the conservative organized opposition group to the Synodal Way, managed to block its adoption with a vote of 27 against and 33 for, not enough to meet the required episcopal two-thirds majority.[94]

There were cries and the gnashing of teeth from the pro-homosexual majority of bishops and laity, some of whom departed from the bitter and extended  debate that followed the vote. The KNA reported that the conservative bishops and laity made a second more “nuanced” appeal, in the course of which some opinions apparently change. But whose opinions changed and in what direction?

KNA doesn’t tell us, although the news agency does report that after moderator Bishop Georg Bätzing, President of the German Episcopal Conference bishops’ conference, secured a measure that provided for a 20-minute consultation behind closed doors before each “sensitive vote” by the attending bishops, there were no further attempts at blocking any votes by any bishop even though debates still occurred during the plenary sessions.[95] Which I guess answers my question.

During the next two days of debate, the “reform” aka  “change doctrine” -minded members of the German hierarchy, including Bishop Bätzing of Limburg and big-hitter Cardinal Reinhard Marx of  Munich and Freising,continued to press the Assembly agenda forward on the grounds that the pope wanted a “synodal Church,” and that the German Church was simply following his lead.[96] Some bishops said they would implement pro-sodomite measures in their own dioceses, including blessings for homosexual couples, male and female, and employing homosexuals in services of the Church.  

Gregor Podschun, lay chairman of the Federation of German Catholic Youth, argued that the church owed it to the victims of clerical sexual abuse to change its doctrine and structure in such a way that these crimes could no longer happen.[97]

In wrapping up the Synodal Way, co-President Irme Stetter-Karp said:  “We have achieved a lot, and we are not going to stop here.”[98]

I, for one, am taking Stetter-Karp at her word. 

Quo Vadis the German Synodal Way?

The German Synodal Way is due to end with a fifth General Assembly in Frankfurt in March 9-11, 2023, at which time a final vote on the revised and updated Synodal Way documents is expected. The Continental Assemblies deadline for submitting final documents on three reflection questions is March 31, 2023. The feedback from the seven Continental Assemblies on the Document for the Continental Stage (DCS), will be used as the basis for another instrumentum laboris or working document, that will be completed in June 2023 to guide the Synod of Bishops’ discussion.  

On October 4-29, 2023, the First Session of the XVI Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops will convene in Rome under the title “For a Synodal Church: Communion, Participation and Mission.”  Pope Francis had extended that deadline to October 2024. 

In the meantime, the proponents of the German Synodal Path are carrying on smaller local forums on doctrinal changes in sexual morality, the need for a new more secularized priesthood, an expansion of women’s roles in the Church including the diaconate and priesthood and the issue of “clericalism”, throughout Germany and its 16 constituent states. 

There are also open discussions on canon law revisions and the creation of a permanent Synodal Council made up of bishops and laity to  oversee the German Church. 

Perhaps, most importantly, there is a call for a Third Vatican Ecumenical Council to implement Synodal Waydoctrinal and administrative changes in the Church.

Heaven help us!

Yes, I thought this latter comment would grab your attention. 

If so, I hope that you will join me for Part II of this series in which Saint Peter Damian offers an antidote to the German Synodal Path poison designed to obliterate Catholic sexual morality. This remarkable Benedictine provides a truly Catholic response to the challenges posed by the forces of organized perversion inside and outside the Church today.

P.S. In connection with Part II of this series, the League of St. Peter Damian is proud to make available the complete [electronic] footnoted text of Book of Gomorrah as translated by Father Owen J. Blum, O.F.M., as well as Pope St. Leo IX’s accompanying Decree on Sodomy (1049), free of charge to our readers. Send your request to:

[1] See the classic work The Robber Church by Patrick Omlor that should be on every Catholic’s bookshelf. Available from

2.For an introduction to a “Synodal Church” and the “Synodal Way” see the Vatican document of the International Theological Commission,  SYNODALITY IN THE LIFE AND MISSION OF THE CHURCH issued in 2018 at Synodality in the life and mission of the Church (2 March 2018) ( its 9th Quinquennium, the International Theological Commission undertook a study of synodality in the life and mission of the Church. The work was carried out by a specific sub-committee, whose president was Mgr. Mario Angel Flores Ramos… General discussions on this theme took place during the meetings of the sub-committee and during the Plenary Sessions of the Commission itself, held between 2014 and 2017. The present text was approved by the majority of the members of the Commission during its 2017 Plenary Session, by means of a written vote. It was later approved by the President, His Eminence Cardinal Luis F. Ladaria S.J., Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, who authorized its publication on 2nd March 2018, after receiving a favorable response from Pope Francis. The following paragraphs taken from the ITC document summarizes the essence of “Synodality” which was in the past limited to members of the hierarchy, but has now been expanded to include the “People of God,” as well as the “People of No God,” or just “People” including non-Catholics, atheists, and heretics. 

3.4.2 The Synod of Bishops

99. The Synod of Bishops, instituted by Blessed Paul VI as a permanent synodal structure, is one of the most precious legacies of Vatican II. The Bishops who compose it represent the whole Catholic episcopacy, so that the Synod of Bishops is evidence of the participation of the College of Bishops, in hierarchical communion with the Pope, in care for the universal Church. It is called to be an “expression of episcopal collegiality within an entirely synodal Church.”

100. Every synodal assembly evolves in successive phases: preparation, celebration, and implementation. The history of the Church bears witness to the importance of the process of consultation, which aims to receive the opinions of Pastors and the faithful. Pope Francis has suggested a line of approach to achieve this: to listen more broadly and more attentively to the senses fidei of the People of God by putting in place procedures of consultation on the level of local Churches, in such a way that the Synod of Bishops can “be the point of convergence of this listening process conducted at every level of the Church’s life.”

Through the process of consulting the People of God, the ecclesial representation of the Bishops and the presidency of the Bishop of Rome, the Synod of Bishops is a privileged structure for implementing and promoting synodality at every level of the Church. Through consultation the synodal process has its point of departure in the People of God and, through the phase of enculturated implementation, it has its point of arrival there, too.

[3] See 18_6.1_SV-II-ENG_Synodalforum-IV-Grundtext-Lesung.pdf ( Note that the document  uses as its foundational text for discussion and approval an earlier draft passed at the Second Synodal Assembly held from September 30th to October 2nd 2021.

[4] The Letters of Peter Damian Letters 31-60, translated by Owen J. Blum, O.F.M., The Fathers of the Church, Mediaeval Continuation, Catholic University of America Press, Washington, D.C., 2005, pp. 3-53.

[5] “Expeller Missbrauch an Minderjährigen lurch katholische Priester, Diakone und Mannlicher Ordensangehörige im Bereich der Deutsch Bischofskonferenz.” Only a summary of the report, (Version 13), was ever made public. It was released on August 13, 2019. 

[6] An unofficial 17-page summary translation of the MHG Study is available at MHG Studie (

[7] Prof. Dr. Christian Pfeiffer – KFN

[8] Cardinal Reinhard Marx teaches a New Gospel on Catholic doctrine and morals. “Homosexuality is not a sin. It corresponds to a Christian attitude when two people, regardless of gender, stand up for each other, in joy and sorrow,” he states. In March 2022, he celebrated Mass in honor of the 20th anniversary of “queer services” in Munich. Marx has admitted to having blessed homosexual couples. He has publicly called for a change in Catholic teachings on sodomy. Marx’s Munich diocese financed a separate sex abuse study in 2010, but the results were kept secret except for an 8-page summary report stating the study’s research methods and some general observations. See Cardinal Marx calls for change in church teaching on homosexuality, admits to blessing same-sex couples | America Magazine.

[9] See Former head of German sex abuse study claims bishop threatened and tried to silence him – LifeSite (

[10] To his credit, Dr. Dreßing was critical of the cover-up tactics of the German bishops, and the fact that none of the offenders  resigned their posts in the light of evidence against them. He also noted that the clerical sex abuse issue is far from over in the Catholic Church.

[11] Pfeiffer was in possession of the May 7, 2012, letter from Cardinal Marx’s Munich diocese that laid out new conditions for the research project including final censorship.

[12] MHG Studie (, p. 4.

[13] The terms paedophilia and pederasty have a different history and etiology. The former was introduced into medical and psychiatric literature in 1912, so it is of a fairly recent vintage. It describes the condition in which a (usually) heterosexual adult male is sexually attracted to young children, usually of the opposite sex, while pederasty, derived from the ancient Greek word paiderastes, literally means a lover of boys. Until the late 1960s, Vatican documents involving the criminal attack of a cleric upon an adolescent youth employed the term pederasty. While there are common overlapping  traits to be found among both categories of sex offenders – both are emotionally immature, narcissistic, and highly compartmentalized individuals, that’s where the commonality ends. The pederast is a different breed of sexual offender: He has no real emotional attachment to his victim;  he has many more victims; and his victims are male youths which introduces another level of sexual deviancy; but most importantly, the homosexual offender performs the same violent and orgasmic forms of  sexual abuse including fellatio and sodomy on his young victims as he does on his adult homosexual partners. All clerical sexual abuse of minors reports including the MHG study bears this out. For additional insights into the difference between paedophilia and pederasty see Pederasty and Paedophilia – What’s the Difference? And What Difference Does It Make? – Part II – AKA Catholic.

[14] MHG Report, p. 7.

[15] Ibid., p. 14.

[16] Ibid., pp. 14-15.

[17] Ibid., 14.

[18] Ibid.

[19] Ibid., p.15

[20] Ibid.

[21] Ibid.

[22] Ibid.

[23] Ibid., p. 16.

[24] Ibid., See

[25] Ibid. 

[26] The 31-page “Women in Ministries” text lauds genderless-based ministries opening the Catholic priesthood and religious life to intersex and transgender persons. The 20-page text “Priestly Existence Today,” which highlights the MHG Report findings calls for programs to develop the priest’s personality, and  for an inclusive priestly ministry and  “truly inculturated” into contemporary society. See What do the German synodal way’s documents actually say? – (

[27] Among the most vocal critics of the MHG Report was Father Dominikus Kraschl, a Franciscan professor of philosophy in Switzerland who called into question the “founding myth” of the German synodal path. Kraschl’s criticism anticipates that of this writer. He states that the study denies valid scientific statistical proof; he asks why the Church’s immemorial teachings should be shunted aside for “modern sexual medicine”; and he charges that  the study was driven by “ecclesiastical politics.” See Priest criticizes German bishops for using ‘amateurish’ abuse study as basis for ‘synodal path’ – LifeSite (

[28] Preamble, Presentation of Synodal Forum IV “Life in Succeeding Relationships – Living love in sexuality and partnership” based on the First Reading at the Second Synodal Assembly (30 September – 2 October 2021). Full text available at 18_6.1_SV-II-ENG_Synodalforum-IV-Grundtext-Lesung.pdf (

[29] Ibid. pp. 1-2.

[30] Ibid. p.2.

[31] Ibid.

[32] Ibid.

[33] Ibid., p.3.

[34] A favorite ploy of the Homosexual Collective, the “lived experience” argument was condemned  as a Modernist heresy by Saint Pius X in Pascendi Dominici Gregis on the doctrine of the Modernists (September 8, 1907): “…If anyone says that divine revelation cannot be made credible by external signs, and that therefore men should be drawn to the faith only by their personal internal experience or by private inspiration, let him be anathema” (De Fide can.3).

[35] “Life in Succeeding Relationships,” p. 3.

[36] Ibid., pp. 3-5.

[37] Ibid., p.5.

[38] Ibid., pp. 6-8. 

[39] Ibid., p.7.

[40] Ibid., p.8.

[41] Ibid., pp. 8-10.

[42] Ibid., p. 10.

[43] Ibid., p. 11. The Assembly states that the vice of homosexuality is innate, and that the Church’s Magisterium supports its position. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith 1986 document “Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons” does not support this erroneous position. The 1975 document Persona Humana [Declaration on Certain Questions Concerning Sexual Ethics], Section 8, however, does refer to homosexuals “who are definitively such because of some kind of innate instinct or a pathological constitution judged to be incurable.” This mischievous and false statement opened the door for the unscientific and unproven  argument that homosexuals are “born that way.” 

[44] Ibid., p. 12.

[45] Ibid.

[46] Ibid.

[47] Catechism of the Catholic Church 2351.

[48] St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae II, IIae 15.3.

[49] St. Paul, Romans 1:18.

[50] “Life in Succeeding Relationships,” p.12. 

[51] Ibid., p. 13.

[52] Ibid., p. 14.

[53] Ibid., p. 15.

[54] Ibid.

[55] Ibid.

[56] Ibid., p. 16. The Assembly report gives so-called “natural family planning” a back-handed slap in the face when it suggests that it can “dramatically increase the number of unwanted pregnancies, and thus the risk of killing human life through abortion.” See p. 

[57] Ibid.

[58] Ibid., pp. 16-17.

[59] Ibid. 17.

[60] Ibid.

[61] Ibid., p. 18.

[62] Ibid.

[63] Ibid.

[64] Ibid

[65] Ibid.

[66] Ibid., p. 19.

[67] Ibid.

[68] Ibid.

[69] MAY 13: OUR LADY OF FATIMA MESSAGE (7): “NO” TO IMPURITY. – Catholics Striving For Holiness

[70] Galatians 1:8.

[71] “Life in Succeeding Relationships,” p.19.

[72] Ibid., pp. 19-20.

[73] Ibid., p. 20

[74] Ibid.

[75] Ibid.

[76] Ibid., p. 22.

[77] Ibid.

[78] Ibid.

[79] Ibid., pp. 22-23.

[80] Ibid., p. 23.

[81] Ibid.

[82] Ibid.

[83] Ibid., p. 24

[84] Ibid.

[85] Ibid., See ‘Humanae Vitae’ and Catholicism in Germany| National Catholic Register (

[86] “Life in Succeeding Relationships,” p. 24.

[87] Ibid.

[88] See Gerhard L. Müller: Was ist kirchlicher Gehorsam? Zur Ausübung von Autorität in der Kirche. In: Cath 44 (1990), 26-48. 28.

[89] “Life in Succeeding Relationships,” p. 25.

[90] Ibid., p. 26.

[91] Ibid

[92] Ibid., p. 27.

[93] Germany’s 4th Synodal Path Meeting Ends with Reform Resolutions – The Southern Cross (

[94] Ibid., Note: The voting structure of the Synodal Way is obviously different from traditional formal Catholic Church synods in which only bishops participate. It permits both bishops and lay members to vote and be represented in equal numbers. However, church law does not allow laypeople to impose a decision on a bishop, thus,  the Synod Way decisions are, at most, recommendations for the bishops who must decides for themselves whether and how to implement the group’s recommendations in their own dioceses. Synodal member, Dr. Juliane Eckstein, insisted the decisions of the Assembly are not “legally” binding, but are “morally” binding on members.

[95] Ibid.

[96] Ibid.

[97] Ibid. 

[98] Ibid.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment


A Primer on Medical Gaslighting

Analysis by A Midwestern Doctor

  • February 06, 2023



Pfizer Admits ‘Directing’ the Evolution of COVID-19 Virus

USA Today Smears Mercola Over Vitamin C and D Information

medical gaslighting


  • The medical industry has a vested interest in concealing injuries from its products
  • A cruel but common method for accomplishing this is medical gaslighting
  • Two of the most common diagnoses use to gaslight patients severely injured by the COVID-19 vaccines are “anxiety” and “functional neurologic disorder”
  • Most doctors do not intend to gaslight their patients, but this behavior is an almost inevitable consequence of of their training and the modern practice of medicine. A patient understanding their perspective helps make it possible for doctors to see that patient’s medical injuries

One of the classic ways an abuser controls their prey is to manipulate the environment so that the abused individual begins doubting their own observations regardless of what is occurring in front of them.

In the 1944 movie, Gaslight, this was accomplished by the villainous husband (played by Charles Boyer) adjusting the intake to gas-powered lights (causing them to flicker) and simultaneously denying that any change was occurring to his mentally abused wife (played by Ingrid Bergman). The term gaslighting originated from this classic movie.

In modern times, this is accomplished by having medical providers all echo the same message that a patient’s injury has nothing to do with the pharmaceutical (or other medical procedure in question). Most commonly, it instead is argued that the symptoms they are experiencing are due to pre-existing psychiatric issues the patient has (e.g., anxiety), which are treated with medications that often create additional issues.

Before we go any further, I want to emphasize just how miserable this is to go through as an injured patient. Imagine what it would be like if (due to the medical injury) the world you had previously known collapsed around you and every single person you trusted (including your friends and family who defer to the judgment of “experts”) told you that it was all in your head and you just needed psychiatric help. It’s a perfect recipe for going insane.

For example, let’s consider the recent experiences of Maddie De Garay in the pivotal Pfizer trial that was used to argue for the safety of the COVID-19 vaccines in the adolescent population:

Pfizer’s trial only vaccinated 1,131 children so a single serious injury would have made the vaccine too dangerous.

Maddie’s story shows just how far medicine will go to betray and gaslight patients who threaten its narrative. We may never know who else was swept under the rug.— Pierre Kory, MD MPA (@PierreKory) January 11, 2023

Note: This was clipped from episode 280 of the Highwire which we shortened (e.g., much of what she had to deal with in the hospital was cut out) so her story could reach a broader audience.

Although Maddie’s experience was atrocious, it was sadly not unique and many others had similar experiences in the COVID-19 vaccine trials. Similarly, I have heard many similar stories from other people who were harmed by the medical system.

Pharmaceuticals are inherently toxic. For example, most medications work by inhibiting enzymes(which are essential for life) and because of how interconnected the body is, this inhibition will create a variety of unintended consequences.

Similarly, most vaccinations function by making the immune system (often with the aid of toxins that help provoke that response) have an unnatural and narrowly focused response to a target substance.

The creation of this immune response unfortunately also often creates dysregulation within the immune system as this provocation can cause the immune system to be diverted away from attacking things it is supposed to address (e.g., microbes and cancers), while simultaneously triggering it to attack the body’s own tissue.

Since toxicity has always been inherent to the practice of allopathic (Western) medicine, the profession has gradually come up with a playbook to prevent its inevitable medical injuries from sabotaging business. This has essentially been accomplished by doing the following:

• Telling patients the adverse events they experienced either are not occurring or are unrelated to the toxic pharmaceutical.

• Developing an elaborate scientific apparatus that provides evidence refuting the link between these injuries and pharmaceuticals on the market, while concurrently training the population to defer to the scientific consensus rather than trusting their own observations.

• Making competing forms of medicine that lack a similar degree of inherent toxicity illegal, therefore making the only choice within the existing medical monopoly be a toxic form of medicine (similarly consider how allopathic medicine is always considered to be the best form of medicine every other approach must find a way to measure up to).

This is also why we have the doctrine in allopathic medicine that every treatment has risks and the treatments are chosen because its benefits outweigh its risk (as opposed to just exploring systems of medicine without those risks).

All of this in turn results in the tragic phenomenon known as medical gaslighting, or as some like to put it “allopathic medicine gaslights you to death.”

Why Can’t Doctors Diagnose Medical Injuries

I have found numerous documented examples of medical gaslighting stretching back to the late 1700s and in each case, typically only a minority of the medical profession is willing to acknowledge the injuries that are occurring could be linked to their pharmaceuticals.

At the same time, it’s rare for me to meet doctors I consider to be evil; on the contrary, most tend to be remarkably intelligent and well-intentioned individuals who genuinely want the best for their patients.

At this point, I believe medical gaslighting is a natural consequence of our training. Since the therapeutic toolbox of allopathic medicine is quite limited, most doctors cannot practice their craft without administering unsafe pharmaceuticals to their patients, and thus for the sake of their self-identity, they must fully believe in their pharmaceuticals (this subject was discussed further here).

It is an enormous personal investment to become a physician and it is extremely difficult for someone who goes through that to acknowledge that much of what they learned is highly questionable.

Similarly, no well-intentioned doctor wants to harm a patient, and since they often do, the reflexive psychological coping mechanism is to deny the possibility of each injury that occurs (discussed further here).

This first dawned on me at the start of my medical education when one of our professors inserted a tirade against anti-vaxxers into his lecture and concluded his argument with “… and just think about it. Do you really think pediatricians would vaccinate their patients if they thought vaccines could harm them?”

Although widespread denial of the harms that Allopathy causes likely explains some of my profession’s predilection for gaslighting, I do not believe it is the primary issue. Instead, I believe it is a result of the training doctors receive making them unable to recognize medical injuries.

The Origins of Medical Blindness

Because the human body is immensely complex, humans in every era face significant difficulties in being present to everything that is occurring within a human being. Most medical systems address this challenge by creating diagnostic models which simplify the immense complexity present in each patient down to the key things that must be focused upon to positively affect patient wellbeing.

The downside to this approach is that there will always be things in each patient that lie outside the diagnostic model being used to evaluate them. When this happens, those things understandably will not be recognized (unless the medical practitioner innately can perceive a complexity that transcends the limitations of their diagnostic model, something the majority of the population is not capable of).

In the case of allopathic medicine, we are taught a diagnostic model that is excellent for identifying many things (particularly indications for prescribing pharmaceutical drugs). However, our model also fails to notice many other things which are critical for health and wellness.

For example, much of medicine is taught by having a series of lists to memorize that are plugged into linear algorithms. Because this requires breaking many complex subjects into a binary “yes” or “no,” many important things that lie between these two polarities get lost in translation.

This is the easiest to illustrate with the nervous system (but the issue is by no means exclusive to it). When evaluating it, one of the things we are all taught to do is quickly check if the twelve cranial nerves are functioning normally (e.g., can you swallow, make a smile, or follow a finger with your eyes).

Frequently, although the cranial nerves are “generally normal” they will have some difficulty firing (e.g., at some point in the motion arc as the eyes travel side to side, they will jump instead of moving smoothly). These “minor” deficits often have a significant impact on a patient’s quality of life, but in most cases (except when evaluated by certain neurologists or neurosurgeons), the function of those nerves will be noted as normal and ignored.

One of the most common signs of a vaccine injury is a subtle cranial nerve dysfunction (discussed further here). While these are very easy to recognize if you are trained to look for them, that training does not exist within allopathic medicine, and as a result, most physicians simply cannot see the large number of vaccine injuries occurring around them.

Simplifying Illness

The cranial nerve example unfortunately is only one of many areas where a complex presentation of symptoms is simplified into a box that excludes an inconvenient diagnosis from ever being recognized. Another common way this boxing occurs is when an authoritative diagnosis is used to define a complex phenomenon without actually stating what it is.

For example, many disorders in medicine are simply symptoms written in Latin. Dermatitis quite literally translates to “inflammation of the skin,” and in most cases is simply treated with a cream that suppresses that inflammation.

Conversely, in many other medical systems, inflammation of the skin is recognized as an important sign of something being awry in the body, and the exact character and location of the inflammation are focused upon to identify and address the root cause of that inflammation (to some extent this is recognized in dermatology, but even there it occurs nowhere to the degree that it should).

Similarly, “migraine” headaches, although not exactly Latin, falls into a similar boat. While many things can cause migraines (e.g., they are very frequent after COVID-19 vaccine injuries) their cause is rarely focused upon, and instead, the standard medical approach is to throw pharmaceuticals at them until something improves the headache.

In my medical practice, I frequently treat migraines. In these patients, I find over and over that they have seen numerous doctors (including highly regarded specialists). Despite this, it is very rare anyone they saw was able to recognize the diagnostic signs or aspects of their history that point to the root actual cause of their headaches, and thus, not surprising that they will simply be prescribed more and more medications in the hope one will work.

Framing the Iatrogenic Debate

Iatrogenesis is the term for any type of illness or medical complication resulting from a bad reaction to medical care (e.g., a complication from a surgery or a pharmaceutical). A common pattern I’ve observed for decades is everyone denying a particular iatrogenic complication exists (e.g., “there is no evidence”), and then once overwhelming evidence exists that it does, it will be acknowledged.

Once this happens, the harm from the drug will be reframed so that only the accepted harm can be bad and an underlying assumption is created that nothing else is a possible complication.

For example, fluoroquinolones (e.g., Cipro) are fairly toxic antibiotics that can severely harm people and are frequently given for many minor infections (e.g., urinary tract infections) where their corresponding toxicity is simply not justified.

In medical school, everyone learns that a tendon rupture (something unique and hard to ignore) is a side effect of these drugs, and as a result, when doctors evaluate for harms, they will look for that but not be able to recognize most of the other well-documented complications from them.

My favorite recent example of this reframing occurred with the J&J COVID-19 vaccine. At the start of Operation Warp Speed, I hypothesized that a major goal was to get mRNA technology onto the market since it held the promise of trillions of dollars in future revenue for the pharmaceutical industry (but since there were safety challenges with it, nothing short of an “emergency” would be able to break the barrier to human testing).

Because of this, I suspected that once vaccine safety concerns emerged, a non-mRNA COVID-19 vaccine would be thrown under the bus to make the mRNA technology look “safe.” This is what then happened with the J&J vaccine when six cases of an extremely unusual blood clot being linked to that vaccine caused the FDA and CDC to pause its administration for 11 days.

By doing so, it created the perception the FDA was monitoring for vaccine side effects with a fine-tooth comb and was willing to pull the vaccine if it caused a rare side effect in a very small number of people.

Nothing could be further from the truth as the mRNA vaccines have caused far more blood clots than the J&J vaccine. Similarly, investigation after investigation shows the FDA is ignoring the endless deluge of red flags from the COVID-19 vaccines.

Unfortunately, this ploy worked, and in the odd instances where I hear a doctor willing to debate the safety of the vaccines, one of the most common arguments they still utilize is that if the FDA was willing to temporarily pause J&J after six blood clots, there is no possible way a larger unaddressed problem exists with the mRNA vaccines.

Psychiatric Complications and Iatrogenic Injuries

As the above points have shown, a variety of factors work against doctors being able to recognize the presence of medical injuries. The question then becomes, how will the injuries that inevitably occur be explained?

As you might imagine, the default strategy is to fold the injury into an amorphous diagnosis which (instead of allopathic medicine) can take the blame for the medical injury and then put that label on everyone with the injury. Typically this is done with psychiatric diagnoses, but recently COVID-19 infections have also been appointed to that role (both of these diagnoses were used to gaslight patients in the clinical trials for those vaccines).

The earliest references to this gaslighting I have found were at the time of Freud, where his new model of psychoanalysis was used to explain the complex symptoms observed within patients doctors otherwise had difficulty making sense of. However, as detailed in The Age of Autism: Mercury, Medicine, and a Man-Made Epidemic, an outside evaluation of Freud’s case studies suggests those patients’ problems actually arose from mercury poisoning.

Mercury, despite being extremely toxic, was used by the medical profession for centuries (and to some extent still is). Frequently, individuals with mercury poisoning would develop a wide array of complex diseases which included neurological and psychiatric complications (which like many other conditions were often attributed to “female hysteria”).

Freud’s message that these complications were the fault of the patient (e.g., as a result of unresolved sexual desires) rather than the physician was an immensely appealing message to the medical profession, and as a result, became the party line.

Ever since this time there has been a systemic failure to recognize that neurologic damage can produce psychiatric symptoms. Instead, neurologic symptoms are viewed as a manifestation of a pre-existing psychological illness that must be treated with psychological counseling and psychiatric medications.

One of the best examples of this issue is “Functional Neurological Disorder” (FND) which recognizes that something is wrong with the brain, but since no explanation can be found, it is assumed to have been due to pre-existing psychiatric conditions.

If you review the National Institute of Health’s description of FND, you will see that the above description is no exaggeration, and it is extremely sad to hear about the experiences vaccine-injured patients go through since FND is one of the most common diagnoses they receive.

When I look at FND cases, the cause of the disorder (e.g., seizures) can frequently be found, but since neurologists (including friends of mine) do not want to consider the actual cause, the tests needed to diagnose it are often not ordered or even known about by the doctors attending to the patient.

If you review Maddie’s story, you will note that this is also exactly what happened to her and her permanent paralysis from the vaccine was labeled as FND resulting from a psychiatric condition. Because of this gaslighting, she was not able to get appropriate care when her neurological reaction to the vaccine was occurring (that would have prevented permanent disability).

I believe this occurred because the chief investigator was fully aware that a severe neurologic reaction to a single participant would have made the vaccine too dangerous for children to take, so he decided to gaslight Maddie so her injury would not need to end up in the trial. Sadder still, Maddie’s experiences were not unique, and their experiences that indicate systemic fraud in the vaccine trials were detailed here.

Another common symptom doctors place the blame for medical injuries on is “anxiety.” The two major problems with this process are:

  • Failing to recognize that having a life-changing injury will normally create distress, and similarly failing to recognize that being collectively gaslighted by medical providers is not good for anyone’s mental health.
  • Pharmaceutical injuries frequently cause tissue damage that will trigger anxiety.

Sadly, very few doctors recognize that damage to the nervous system (which is a common toxicity of pharmaceuticals) can also create psychiatric disturbances. Instead, they only can recognize that psychiatric distress can often worsen neurologic symptoms, but do so without also realizing that it is much rarer for psychiatric distress to be the originating cause of a neurologic issue.

Similarly, many common psychiatric disorders have organic causes (e.g., chronic undiagnosed infections, traumatic brain injuries, or nutritional and metabolic deficiencies). However, in most cases, psychiatrists prescribe medications based on the symptoms a patient presents with (e.g., you are depressed so you need Prozac) rather than looking at the underlying cause.

I believe this is because doing the former pays well but the latter typically does not and is not emphasized in a psychiatrist’s training.

In addition to neurological damage frequently creating psychiatric complications (e.g., vagal dysfunction creating anxiety), damage to other organ systems can as well (Chinese medicine does an excellent job of mapping these correlations out). One of the best examples I have seen with the COVID-19 vaccines relates to the heart and I have had variations of the following conversations multiple times since 2021:

Friend: I have been having severe anxiety attacks since I got the vaccine. My heart starts beating rapidly, and I start to have pain in my chest. I never had this problem before, but now everything makes me anxious and it’s so hard for me to be calm.

Me: You should get your heart looked at.

Friend: What do you mean? Everyone told me it was anxiety due to stress.

Me: Trust me, you need to get your heart looked at.

(Time passes)

Friend: How did you know I had myocarditis?

Damage to the heart (or the vagus nerve) will often create an irregular heart rate and chest pain, and these palpitations often provoke anxiety. Unfortunately, since these symptoms are also triggered by anxiety, when they are observed, doctors will often default to a diagnosis of anxiety and look no further.


There are essentially two models of medical practice which are followed:

  • The paternalistic model (where you are expected to unquestioningly trust and comply with everything the doctor tells you).
  • The collaborative model where the physician is your partner in working towards health.

Although the paternalistic model was the standard for most of allopathic medicine’s history, in recent times, there has been a push for the collaborative model. Presently, many patients are seeking out collaborative physicians (especially since system doctors have to spend so much time going through checklists that there is little time for actual engagement with their patients), and the market is economically rewarding physicians who are making this change.

A key misconception much of the public holds about doctors is that we are infallible beings (which is a key justification for the paternalistic model). In reality, once you peer behind the lab coat, we struggle with many of the same issues you all do too. Being able to genuinely recognize this and respectfully treat the physician you see as a fellow human being is one of the most effective strategies for initiating a collaborative doctor-patient relationship.

Although doctors sometimes gaslight injured patients for self-serving reasons (e.g., to protect Pfizer’s vaccine in its clinical trials or under the misguided belief it will protect a doctor from a lawsuit), I believe the majority of cases occur because the doctors simply cannot see the injury occurred. As a result, these doctors believe they are doing the best for the patient when in reality they are just gaslighting them.

One of the largest issues in our modern era is how disconnected we have become from ourselves and others. Within the doctor-patient relationship, this disconnection makes it much less likely a physician will be able to recognize what is happening in a patient (e.g., a medical injury) or feel compelled to go to bat for them while every other healthcare provider is gaslighting them.

When people ask me for their best options to avoid being gaslighted, I thus suggest pursuing one of the following options:

1) See a physician who you pay directly (rather than one who takes insurance). This business model matters because it forces the doctor to have a collaborative doctor-patient relationship and stay in business (no one will pay to see them if they just get gaslit). I am a big believer in the statement “you get what you pay for” and if only see system doctors who base their practice around insurance payments, you often do not get a good outcome.

For example, I had a patient recently who I felt exemplified this issue. He had what I felt was a relatively straightforward problem that had significantly impacted his life for 25 years. When I reviewed his history, he told me he had seen a dozen (insurance-taking) doctors, many of whom promised they could fix the problems with elaborate procedures from their specialty (all of which did nothing or made his issue worse).

What was striking about his story was that only one of them had ever even performed an extensive evaluation (e.g., talking with him about the history of his disease) to try to figure out what was causing the problem.

2) However, while seeing a private-pay physician often is an excellent investment, many patients simply cannot afford to do so. In this case, the ideal scenario is to find an insurance-taking physician through word of mouth who has earned a reputation for forging collaborative doctor-patient relationships. Unfortunately, these recommendations are hard to come across and typically these doctors will have full practices that are hard to get into.

3) The third (and often the only available option is to take the initiative to forge a collaborative relationship with the doctor through having a respectful demeanor where you treat the doctor as a fellow human being rather than “the doctor.”

In general, this approach will be the most effective on doctors who recently completed their medical training (everyone becomes more rigid with age, plus their practices are not yet full), and in medical settings where the doctors get longer per visit (you can’t really build a collaborative relationship in 10-15 minutes).

Regardless of the option you choose, it is also often important to provide the documentation to support the occurrence of your medical injury. This includes records establishing a timeline of the injury following the medical therapy and scientific literature substantiating the link between the two.

Physicians in turn (especially younger ones) will be the most receptive to considering this link if it is presented in a composed and thoughtful way rather than a confrontational manner, because like every other human they tend to become defensive. Given how upsetting the process of being gaslighted is, maintaining this demeanor can be extremely challenging.

Sadly though, it is necessary because doctors are trained to see these injuries as being psychological in nature, and a patient expressing their completely justifiable feelings about the situation will often feed into the doctor’s erroneous perceptions about the patient’s mental health.

About the Author

A Midwestern Doctor (AMD) is a board-certified physician from the Midwest and a longtime reader of To find more of AMD’s work, be sure to check out The Forgotten Side of Medicineon Substack.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment


Pfizer Admits ‘Directing’ the Evolution of COVID-19 Virus

Analysis by Dr. Joseph MercolaFact Checked

  • February 06, 2023



Operation Warp Speed — A Technocratic Chess Piece?

A Primer on Medical Gaslighting


  • January 25, 2023, Project Veritas released an undercover video of Dr. Jordon Trishton Walker, director of Research and Development for Strategic Operations and mRNA Scientific Planning at Pfizer, discussing an internal plan to “direct the evolution” of the COVID-19 virus in order to make more money from COVID boosters
  • According to Walker, Pfizer is doing research to make the virus “more potent,” and this research is “ongoing”
  • Walker explains how the drug industry has captured American regulators, and states that while it’s good for the industry, “it’s bad for everyone else in America”
  • At 8 p.m., January 27, 2023, two days after Project Veritas released the video, Pfizer finally published a response which, oddly enough, seems to substantiate rather than refute Walker’s claims
  • Pfizer basically denies using “directed evolution” in its vaccine development, but suggests it may be used in ongoing Paxlovid-related research

By now, many of you will have seen Project Veritas’ undercover video of Dr. Jordon Trishton Walker, director of Research and Development for Strategic Operations and mRNA Scientific Planning at Pfizer, discussing an internal plan to “direct the evolution” of the COVID-19 virus in order to make more money from COVID boosters. The video was released January 25, 2023.

Allegedly, the undercover journalist working with Project Veritas also worked at Pfizer. This would help explain Walker’s surprising candor. However, during a later confrontation by Project Veritas, Walker insisted he’d “lied” to impress a date.

“I’m literally a liar,” Walker said when confronted by Project Veritas journalist James O’Keefe in a New York City café. “I was trying to impress a person on a date — by lying.”

Pfizer Considering Mutating COVID to Drive Profits

In the undercover video, you can hear Walker saying:

“You know how the virus keeps mutating? Well, one of the things we’re exploring is, like, why don’t we just mutate it ourselves so we could focus on — so we could create and preemptively develop new vaccines, right?

So, we have to do that. If we’re gonna do that, though, there’s a risk of, like, as you could imagine, no one wants to be having a pharma company mutating f**king viruses.

So, we’re like, do we want to do this? So, that’s like one of the things we’re considering, for, like, the future, like maybe we can, like, create new versions of the vaccines and things like that.”

“OK. So, Pfizer ultimately is thinking about mutating COVID?” the Project Veritas journalist asks, to which Walker replies: “Well, that is not what we say to the public. No. That’s why it was, it was a thought that came up in a meeting.” Later Walker says:

“Part of what they [Pfizer scientists] want to do is, to some extent, to try to figure out, you know, how there are all these new strains and variants that just pop up.

So, it’s like trying to catch them before they pop up and we can develop a vaccine prophylactically, like, for new variants. So, that’s why they like, do it controlled in a lab, where they say this is a new epitope, and so if it comes out later on in the public, we already have a vaccine working.”

“Oh my God. That’s perfect. Isn’t that the best business model though? Just control nature before nature even happens itself, right?” the Project Veritas journalist says. “Yeah, if it works,” Walker replies. When asked for an explanation, Walker replies:

“Because some of the times there are mutations that pop up that we are not prepared for, like the delta and omicron, and things like that. So, who knows? I mean, either way, it’s going to be a cash cow. COVID will probably be a cash cow for us for a while going forward [laughs].”

Is Pfizer Engaged in Illegal Gain-of-Function Research?

While Walker, at one point, states that this is just an idea they’re considering for the future, later he claims efforts to mutate the virus are “ongoing.” So, which is it? Here’s a transcription of that conversation:

Project Veritas journalist: “So, I mean, when is Pfizer going to implement the mutation of all these viruses?”

Walker: “I don’t know. It depends on how the experiments work out because this is just, like, something we’re trying, right?”

Project Veritas journalist: “It sounds like gain of function to me.”

Walker: “I don’t know, it’s a little bit different. I think it’s different. It’s, like, this [thing] — it’s definitely not gain of function.”

Project Veritas journalist: “It sounds like it is. I mean, it’s OK [laughs].”

Walker: “No, no, no. But directed evolution is very different.”

Project Veritas journalist: “Directed evolution, OK. Well, so, I mean, is that what it is?”

Walker: “Maybe. I don’t know [laughs] … Well, you’re not supposed to do gain-of-function research with the viruses. They’d rather we not. But we do these selected structure mutations to try to see if we can make them more potent. So, there is research ongoing about that.”

As noted by Carlson, it very much sounds like Pfizer is engaged in illegal gain-of-function research. Merely making up another term (directed evolution) doesn’t change the end result. Walker clearly stated that Pfizer is doing research to make the virus “more potent,” which is what gain of function is all about. That research, Walker also admitted, is “ongoing,” which means it’s currently happening, and not something merely pondered as a future possibility.

How Is Pfizer Mutating the COVID Virus?

Assuming Walker was telling the truth to his “date,” just how is Pfizer going about mutating COVID into something “more potent”? According to Walker:

“… they’re still kind of conducting the experiments on it, but it seems like, from what I’ve heard, they’re kind of optimizing it. But they’re going slow, [be]cause everyone’s very cautions.

Like, you know, obviously they don’t want to accelerate it too much. But I think they’re also just trying to do it as an exploratory thing, because you obviously don’t want to advertise that you’re figuring out future mutations …

But you have to be, like, very controlled to make sure that this virus that you mutate doesn’t create something [that], you know, just goes everywhere — which, I suspect, is the way that the virus started in Wuhan, to be honest. Like, it makes no sense that this virus popped out of nowhere. It’s bullshit …

Don’t tell anyone. Promise you won’t tell anyone. The way it [the experiment] would work is that we put the virus in monkeys, and we successively cause them to keep infecting each other, and we collect serial samples from them.”

As noted by Carlson, if you suspect the COVID pandemic was the result of a lab-created virus that got out, why would you conduct the same kind of experiments and risk another, possibly worse, pandemic?

Walker Admits Regulatory Capture Is Real

Walker also explains to his “date” how the drug industry has captured American regulators:

“It [Pfizer] is a revolving door for all government officials. Yeah, for any industry though. So, in the pharma industry, all the government officials who, you know, review our drugs, eventually they come work for pharma companies. And the military, all the Army and defense government officials eventually go work for the defense companies afterward.”

When asked how he feels about that revolving door, Walker replies:

“It’s pretty good for the industry, to be honest. But it’s bad for everyone else in America.”

When asked “Why is it bad for everybody else?” Walker explains:

“Because if the regulators, who review our drugs, you know that once they stop being a regulator they want to go work for the company, they are not going to be as harsh on the company where they’re getting their job.”

As noted by Carlson, this is a very clear and succinct description of regulatory capture, which we’ve long suspected to be real. We’ve just not heard an industry executive admit it.

Is Walker Really a Pfizer Exec?

In case you’re wondering if Walker might have lied about working for Pfizer, Project Veritas did its homework before putting the video out. Screenshots1 from Pfizer’s HR system “Workday” confirm Walker works under Global Pipeline Planning, just two levels below CEO Albert Bourla. His immediate supervisor reports to Dr. Mikael Dolsten, who in turn reports directly to Bourla.2

jordon walker pfizer hr system workday

Walker’s LinkedIn also confirmed his position. Additional corroborations of his position can be found on Brian O’Shea’s Substack.3

jordon walker linkedIn

One of the strangest features of the Hall of Mirrors in which we now live is that the public facade of powerful institutions and corporations is staffed with people who seem stunningly incompetent and unserious. ~ John Leake

As reported by the Substack Pharma Files:4

“He works under Global Pipeline Planning. These are the people who plan new drugs (i.e. analyzing disease trends and unmet needs and evaluating the demographics to see if these drugs would be profitable).

One of their primary responsibilities is ensuring R & D money goes into the right therapeutic areas. For example, spend less R & D money on finding treatment for diseases in some poor countries and put more R & D money into finding treatment for diseases in developed countries because those governments are rich enough to subsidize expensive drugs.

So, when you work in Pharma, usually there are terms that you use ‘publicly,’ and there are terms that you use ‘privately.’ So, for example, his job description would be ‘to evaluate potential future diseases and unmet treatment needs.’

But privately, they are just looking for future drugs that potentially turn into cash cows. That’s why you hear him talk casually about ‘cash cows.’ This is very common among execs in Pharma.

Terminologies are essential in Pharma because they don’t want to get caught. Another example is that he insists that this is not a ‘Gain of Function’ but ‘Directed Evolution.’

For example, people who work in the Commercial side of Pharma are constantly trained to say ‘increasing patient treatment’ instead of ‘increasing sales’ whenever they discuss marketing tactics. You don’t want to get caught, especially since some junior staffs capture these in meeting minutes, and these meeting minutes might go public.”

‘Stunningly Incompetent and Unserious’ Link

That people initially doubted Walker could be a Pfizer executive isn’t surprising, considering his behavior. As noted by John Leake, who coauthored “The Courage to Face COVID-19” with Dr. Peter McCullough:5

“One of the strangest features of the Hall of Mirrors in which we now live is that the public facade of powerful institutions and corporations is staffed with people who seem stunningly incompetent and unserious …

[It] does seem incredible that a major corporation — one that has played a key role in perpetrating a global criminal fiasco — is staffed with an executive who seems to have been recruited at a frat party.”

Walker isn’t the only example of incompetence at Pfizer. During an FDA Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) meeting, (see video above) the FDA wanted to know why Pfizer’s shot only contained 3 micrograms of mRNA while Moderna’s contained 25 mcg. Was Pfizer’s mRNA just more efficient at making cells produce spike protein?

The Pfizer executive’s response was that they “obviously, we don’t have a complete understanding of the nature in which the COVID vaccine works in terms of producing an immune response.”

They just experimented and found that 3 mcgs seemed to work, but why that dose, they have no clue. In other words, we’re dealing with something that is the complete opposite of precision medicine. This Pfizer representative also lied, stating that the primary benefit of the shot is that it “prevents infection,” which it never did, and wasn’t designed to do.

Pfizer Press Release Does Not Refute Walker’s Statements

At 8 p.m., January 27, 2023, two days after Project Veritas released the video, Pfizer finally published a response via press release.6 Oddly enough, the press release actually seems to substantiate Walker’s claims rather than refute them:

“New York, N.Y., January 27, 2023 — Allegations have recently been made related to gain of function and directed evolution research at Pfizer and the company would like to set the record straight.

In the ongoing development of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, Pfizer has not conducted gain of function or directed evolution research. Working with collaborators, we have conducted research where the original SARS-CoV-2 virus has been used to express the spike protein from new variants of concern.

This work is undertaken once a new variant of concern has been identified by public health authorities. This research provides a way for us to rapidly assess the ability of an existing vaccine to induce antibodies that neutralize a newly identified variant of concern. We then make this data available through peer reviewed scientific journals and use it as one of the steps to determine whether a vaccine update is required.

In addition, to meet U.S. and global regulatory requirements for our oral treatment, PAXLOVID™, Pfizer undertakes in vitro work (e.g., in a laboratory culture dish) to identify potential resistance mutations to nirmatrelvir, one of PAXLOVID’s two components. With a naturally evolving virus, it is important to routinely assess the activity of an antiviral.

Most of this work is conducted using computer simulations or mutations of the main protease — a non-infectious part of the virus. In a limited number of cases when a full virus does not contain any known gain of function mutations, such virus may be engineered to enable the assessment of antiviral activity in cells.

In addition, in vitro resistance selection experiments are undertaken in cells incubated with SARS-CoV-2 and nirmatrelvir in our secure Biosafety level 3 (BSL3) laboratory to assess whether the main protease can mutate to yield resistant strains of the virus.

It is important to note that these studies are required by U.S. and global regulators for all antiviral products and are carried out by many companies and academic institutions in the U.S. and around the world.”

In a Substack commentary,7 Dr. Robert Malone noted that Pfizer “only denies directed evolution as a component of vaccine development, but leaves that research door open for ongoing research supporting Paxlovid … They literally say they engineer viruses that don’t even exist outside of simulations … There’s also no direct response suggesting that Mr. Walker was lying. Interesting … Doesn’t look like they denied anything.”

Worldwide Media Blackout

Not surprisingly, while this is clearly one of the biggest stories of the pandemic, legacy media hasn’t printed or said a word about it, except for Fox News host Tucker Carlson (see video above).

The U.K. Daily Mail did post a summary of the video, but the article was taken down minutes later.8,9YouTube also blocked and removed the video for violating community guidelines on COVID-19 vaccines, but by then it had already racked up more than 20 million views.

If you haven’t seen it, you can view Part 1 on the Project Veritas website. Carlson also featured parts of it in his report. Part 2, which shows Walker’s response when O’Keefe confronted him about what he’d said, is embedded below.

According to Project Veritas, there’s also more undercover footage of Walker that they haven’t released yet. If you’re in New York City, you can stop by Pfizer’s headquarters at 235 East 42nd Street and view the video “live.” Project Veritas parked a van with video screens on all sides right outside their office, with the video playing on a constant loop.10 Link

In his Substack commentary,11 Malone also reviewed evidence suggesting a massive collaboration between Pfizer and Google took place in the hours after the video’s release to censor online searches and memory-hole anything related to Walker:

“Almost immediately after the first Veritas video dropped, we all got a masters class in the amazing power and capabilities to control narrative and information which Pfizer has assembled …

People are hitting Google like crazy with queries regarding Jordon Walker, Pfizer and Veritas. As they did when I said ‘mass formation psychosis’ on Rogan #1757, Google manually interferes with the searches, returning wishy washy ‘these results are changing rapidly’ screens instead of actual links.

So, now we have a pretty clear smoking gun involving collusion between Pfizer and Google to suppress the story. Then everything, anything, having to do with Jordon Walker, MD gets memory holed. Wiped from the internet, including the Wayback machine.

And then the chaos agents, bots and trolls descend on all social media channels. Sowing doubt that Jordon Walker is even a real person. Floating paranoid conspiracy theories that this is all a big deep-fake set up of Veritas, O’Keefe and myself.

Which of course get amplified by the usual actors. Now THAT is an example of Fifth Gen Warfare power! And by the way, I gently advise that readers who were aware of this as it was happening set a check-bit in their brains on the names of those chaos agents who actively promoted this false narrative …

Pfizer legal … finally dropped a response at 8:00 PM EST Friday night. Again, classic textbook timing. Designed to bypass the Friday PM news cycle and more importantly to give Wall Street maximal time to digest the news before opening bell next Monday. These guys are professional grade.

To recap, they have shut Google searches down, memory holed/scrubbed the internet, deployed an army of bots, trolls and chaos agents to cause confusion and doubt on social media, and almost completely suppressed any coverage of the story by the many corporate media outlets that they have been pumping money into over the last three years.”

McCullough and Kirsch also discussed Project Veritas’ drop on Tommy Carrigan’s podcast, below. Link

The COVID Cash Cow

Pfizer has made record-high revenues these past two years and it seems the waterfall-like cashflow may have gone to their heads. In 2021, they had a net revenue of $81.3 billion12 — a 92% operational growth in revenue from 2020 — and in 2022, they raked in $100.3 billion, more than half of which came from COVID jabs and Paxlovid.13 It’s worth noting that BOTH of these drugs promote COVID reinfection, which in itself appears to be part of Pfizer’s revenue-growth strategy.

With uptake of boosters dwindling, they expect revenues to drop by 33% in 2023,14 and that’s despite quadrupling the price of the shots. Still, that revenue stream is relatively secure, as the the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) has added the unlicensed shots to the U.S. childhood, adolescent and adult vaccine schedules.

The European Union is also considering paying more for fewer doses, as governments already have too large a stockpile, so Pfizer will make out like a bandit there too.15

The question now is, is Pfizer also mutating the COVID virus to keep demand for reformulated boosters going? If Walker is telling the truth, the answer appears to be yes. In January 2023, Pfizer suffered the largest monthly loss of value since 2009,16 and down-trends are never viewed favorably, no matter how much money they’ve already made.

That’s one of the problems with many companies. They must continue to grow, but how do you surpass the success of more than doubling growth in just two years? In this case, could they be resorting to crime to keep milking the cash cow that is COVID?

Sen. Ron Johnson Calls for Investigation

It’ll be interesting to see what happens next. Pfizer’s financial downturn occurred before Walker spilled the beans on Pfizer’s plans and made himself, and therefore the company, appear foolish, shallow, callous and incompetent at best, and criminal at worst. Just how many scandals and how much criminality will the American people and Congress accept before they say “Enough”?

Time will tell. For now, in response to Project Veritas’ undercover video of Walker, Sen. Ron Johnson has taken the lead and is calling on Congress to investigate vaccine manufacturers and the COVID jab approval process. In a January 26, 2023, tweet, Johnson wrote:17

“Federal health agencies have been captured by Big Pharma and grossly derelict in their duties throughout the pandemic. It’s time for Congress to thoroughly investigate vaccine manufacturers and the entire COVID vaccine approval process.”

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

 A review of mortality data showed that in-hospital mortality for cardiac patients increased by 62% during COVID-19. One of the most vulnerable times for patients is when they’re being moved between units in the hospital

A study from the European Journal of Preventive Cardiology showed alarming trends in mortality for cardiac patients in the hospital setting. A review of mortality data showed that in-hospital mortality for cardiac patients increased by 62% during COVID-19. One of the most vulnerable times for patients is when they’re being moved between units in the hospital. Staff can’t easily monitor vitals during transport due to technology limits.

“Standard cardiac telemetry systems in hospitals don’t offer both mobility and uninterrupted monitoring,” says Stuart Long, CEO of InfoBionic, a Massachusetts-based digital health company. “Remote telemetry is designed to move with the patient with no loss of monitoring capability.”

The Solution 

InfoBionic’s cloud based MoMe™ ARC (Advanced Remote Cardiology) Platform captures and delivers cardiac data as patients move between hospital units. The system is effective for low-acuity to higher-acuity patients and is compatible with existing blood pressure cuffs, oximeters, and scales.

Stuart Long, CEO of InfoBionic, can speak on the following:

  1. What are the risks of severe cardiac episodes during intrahospital transport?
  2. The limits of standard hospital telemetry systems?
  3. How the MoMe™ ARC increases safety in patient transport?

To speak with Stuart Long, contact me via or call 727-777-4619

About InfoBionic

InfoBionic’s digital technology has transformed the efficiency and economics of cardiac remote patient monitoring. The company’s MoMe ARC platform vision is to remove the roadblocks hindering remote diagnosis and decision-making. The Massachusetts-based team of seasoned entrepreneurs have had successful careers in healthcare, IT, medical devices, and mobile technology and bring specific expertise in remote monitoring and cardiology. Visit

Media Inquiries:

Karla Jo Helms



Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment


War On Religion Spiking In U.S. And U.K.

February 6, 2023 Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the war on religion in the West:
People of faith, mostly Christian, in the United States and the United Kingdom, are being harassed and arrested by government agents at an alarming rate. The most common reason why these non-violent persons are being bullied is their biblical objection to the radical LGBT agenda. Their freedom of speech and freedom of religion are being trounced, and most civil libertarians are cheering it on, so far gone are they from their founding principles.
Here are a few examples of this war on religion.
United States:
In January, 2023, a dozen Catholic students and their chaperons from a Greenville, South Carolina Catholic high school were ordered out of the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum in Washington D.C. because they wore beanies with pro-life messages. In town for the annual March for Life, they were allegedly mocked and cursed at by the museum staff.In January, 2023, Ivan Provorov, a hockey player for the Philadelphia Flyers, skipped the warmups on Pride Night because he was expected to wear a pro-Pride jersey. A member of the Russian Orthodox Church, he was subjected to hate speech by some fans and commentators. “I respect everybody’s choices,” he said. “My choice is to stay true to myself and my religion.”In January, 2023, Paul Shoro, a black Christian, walked into the Mall of America in Bloomington, Minnesota, wearing a T-shirt that said, “Jesus Is The Only Way.” Security officers, responding to complaints, said to him, “If you want to shop here you need to take off that shirt.” He was explicitly told that “Jesus is associated with religion and it is offending people.” In August, 2022, on the first day of class at George Washington University, a female psychology professor, Lara Sheehi, berated a Jewish female student in class because she said she was born in Israel. The professor continued to harass Jewish students throughout the semester, smearing their reputations and using bigoted and obscene language to describe Israel on Twitter.In April, 2022, three students at the University of Idaho were asked by a fellow student why the Christian Legal Society (to which they belonged) required its members to believe in the Christian understanding of marriage. After they gave a biblical answer, they were reported to school officials, and three days later the university’s Office of Civil Rights and Investigation censored their speech, ordering the Christian students to stop all communication between them and the complaining student.  In January, 2022, a Michigan junior high school student filed suit in U.S. District Court against his high school district because he was suspended for three days the previous fall for stating his Christian beliefs in a private text conversation in a hallway at Plainwell High School.In January 2022, a U.S. Army veteran was arrested for holding a sign that said “God bless the homeless vets.” He was standing on the sidewalk in front of Alpharetta City Hall, a town in Georgia. He was handcuffed by police and charged with “panhandling,” though all he did was to hold the sign. He sued a year later.In October 2021, a scholar-in-residence at Christopher Newport University in Newport News, Virginia, who “proudly and openly identified as a Christian woman of color,” was condemned for criticizing DC Comics for making Superman’s son bisexual. Students protested and wanted her removed from the campus, despite the fact that she deleted her tweet. 
United Kingdom:
In December, 2022, a Christian English woman, Isabel Vaughan-Spruce, was arrested for silently praying outside an abortion clinic. She faces two years behind bars.In December 2022, a Christian English man, Adam Smith-Connor, was accosted by the police for silently praying outside an abortion clinic. The British army veteran was asked, “Can I ask what is the nature of your prayer today?” He was fined 100-pounds (roughly $123.65).In April, 2022, Pastor John Sherwood was arrested by London police for causing “alarm and distress” to pedestrians. His crime was publicly quoting from Genesis about God’s design for mankind. In April, 2022, a 76-year-old grandmother in Liverpool, England was questioned by the police, and then fined, for praying silently on a public street. 
Notice that in every one of these cases it was militant secularists who complained about, or bullied, people of faith, most of whom are Christians. It is not the latter who are seeking to deny the rights of secularists; no, it is secularists who are punishing people of faith.
While all of these incidents are horrific, none smacks of totalitarianism more than the English cop who asked the army veteran, “Can I ask what is the nature of your prayer today?” That is right out of Stalin’s Russia, Hitler’s Germany and Mao’s China. If they can find the technology to read your mind, some will demand that Christians caught praying in public be shot. That’s where we’re headed.
Stay up to date on our social media posts. Follow us on Facebook and Twitter and subscribe to ouRumble and YouTube Channels. 
Phone: 212-371-3191E-mail: pr@catholicleague.orgSign up for our email alertsShare This Email  Share This Email  Share This Email
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment


That’s So Interesting

Posted by 

Richard StrachanUpdated 1y

“Do you know who this is a photo of? Chances are you don’t, but don’t feel bad because probably not one American in one million does, and that is a National tragedy. His name is Eugene Jacques Bullard, and he is the first African-American fighter pilot in history. But he is also much more then that: He’s also a national hero, and his story is so incredible that I bet if you wrote a movie script based on it Hollywood would reject it as being too far-fetched.

Bullard was an expat living in France, and when World War 1 broke out he joined the French Infantry. He was seriously wounded, and France awarded him the Croix de Guerre and Medaille Militaire. In 1916 he joined the French air service and he first trained as a gunner but later he trained as a pilot. When American pilots volunteered to help France and formed the famous Lafayette Escadrille, he asked to join but by the time he became a qualified pilot they were no longer accepting new recruits, so he joined the Lafayette Flying Corps instead. He served with French flying units and he completed 20 combat missions.

When the United States finally joined the war, Bullard was the only member of the Escadrille or the French Flying Corps who was NOT invited to join the US Air Service. The reason? At that time the Air Service only accepted white men.

Now here is the part that almost sounds like a sequel to ‘Casablanca’: After WWI Bullard became a jazz musician in Paris and he eventually owned a nightclub called ‘L’Escadrille’. When the Germans invaded France and conquered it in WW2, his Club, and Bullard, became hugely popular with German officers, but what they DIDN’T know was that Bullard, who spoke fluent German, was actually working for the Free French as a spy. He eventually joined a French infantry unit, but he was badly wounded and had to leave the service.

By the end of the war, Bullard had become a national hero in France, but he later moved back to the U.S. where he was of course completely unknown. Practically no one in the United States was aware of it when, in 1959, the French government named him a national Chevalier, or Knight.

In 1960, the President of France, Charles DeGaulle, paid a state visit to the United States and when he arrived he said that one of the first things he wanted to do was to meet Bullard. That sent the White House staff scrambling because most of them, of course, had never even heard of him. They finally located him in New York City, and DeGaulle traveled there to meet him personally. At the time, Eugene Bullard was working as … An elevator operator.

Not long after Eugene Bullard met with the President of France, he passed away, and today very, very few Americans, and especially African-Americans, even know who he is. But, now YOU do, don’t you? And I hope you’ll be able to find opportunities to tell other people about this great American hero that probably only 1 American in 1 Million has ever heard of.”

Tyneka Santiago de Laveau

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

A separation of propaganda and reality is called for to avoid what is becoming a popular descent into yesterday’s way of thinking.


By: Bill Schoettler

February 3, 2023

We hear a lot about racism so let’s discuss it. 

Basically, it is thought of in many different ways. Racism could be the attitude one individual exhibits toward another of a different ethnic grouping. Or it can be a group expression or even the negative attitude of one race toward another. 

Let’s start with a one-on-one situation. I hold a mental evaluation of a member of a different (from mine) race that is “negative” toward this other person. 

If we stop at the moment of just holding a judgment, an opinion, even acknowledging the opinion is based solely on the race of the other person, we have to examine the issue of mentation, of thinking, of what is not [yet] expressed…merely a mental process.

How I happen to come by this judgment or opinion is irrelevant; I hold it. Now, is there any way that any other person can determine that I hold this opinion? Of course not. How I think, how any of us think is one of the few, truly private “acts” that are possible in today’s world. And, at least presently, there is no law against how any person thinks or against any opinion a person holds.

The next step, the next issue becomes the iteration, the broadcast, the physical demonstration of that privately held opinion. If I orally express my opinion to others then I am displaying my racism. Expressions of racism can be done by speaking, writing, or conduct. Denying another employment, an opportunity or recognition of the other, or any conduct which may be considered detrimental to the other solely based on the other’s race is against the law. 

Why is it against the law? Because in this country we have laws that are designed to protect people from harm, and “harm” can be defined in many ways. You can harm another with words, with conduct, or with writing. When such harm to another can be found to be against some law, particularly when the harm is prompted by and caused by the opinion or judgment the actor has against the victim, punishment may be administered.

But what we are discussing so far is the conduct of and the opinion and judgment of an individual. Now let us consider the judgments of a group of people. Here we deal with any grouping that is called upon to express a unified opinion or judgment. We’re not talking about members of a race but members of an organization such as a club, a partnership, or a segment of society. The holding of similar opinions toward others, opinions based solely on the race or ethnicity of others is, by itself innocuous. It is when the group acts [to the detriment of the other] upon such “group” opinion and the action can be labeled “discriminatory” that the conduct becomes unacceptable…and frequently against the law. 

Next, we look at the privately held opinions of a society. Here we can discuss an entire race within a geographical area such as [to describe the favorite whipping boy] all members of the white race living in the United States of America.

Again we must accept the right of the individual who holds but does not act upon discriminatory opinions. It is the action, the outward manifestation of such opinions that result in a negative fashion toward members of the “target” race that we condemn. 

The right of any individual to hold private opinions, and to make private judgments is something that cannot be challenged. We recognize that opinions and judgments can be changed and the efforts to change such judgments, so long as the proprieties of social conduct are observed, are perfectly acceptable. But the right to hold any opinion, to make any personal and internal judgment about any subject is inviolate. 

What about expressing opinions in a public way? Writing a book, a newspaper, or a magazine article…what about speaking on the radio or appearing on television and expressing opinions that, by definition are “racist”? Can this be acceptable? If so, by whom?

Historically, the enemy has always been fair game. Identifying the enemy is usually easy. During wartime, the enemy is/are those against whom you are fighting.

This brings up another idea. What constitutes “wartime” and how do we define or recognize the “enemy”? Considering that we regularly hear from newscasters and some politicians that blacks are regularly victims of racism, even when there is a black-on-black “attack”, it would seem that many blacks consider themselves involved in a wartime situation with non-blacks being the aggressor and blacks the perennial victims. Thus events like climate change are the result of racism…or at least white supremacy.

This brings up another term that would appear to be either an offshoot of racism or perhaps a synonym. I suppose if you’re a white supremacist, you’re automatically a racist.

Now let us consider the real relevancy of racism. First, of course, is the regular use of the word by black politicians and black television commentators. If they don’t like something, in fact, if they dislike anything from climate change to gas stoves to the police they use either the term racist or white supremacy as an integral part of the expression. As in “climate change is the result of white supremacy” or “the police are all racist”.  These terms are used with such frequency that they would seem to lose any serious meaning. In fact, it would seem that anything in the world a black person dislikes is either the result of or itself an example of white supremacy or racism. 

A careful examination of such statements suggests first, there is no genuine evidence of any connection between the classical definitions of either word and the objects to which they are being applied. As just mentioned, these words have become, in the lexicon of those who regularly use them, common pejoratives which misuse has made meaningless. Objects cannot have such characteristics as prejudicial thoughts or conduct and when these words are applied to universal organizations such as corporations or political groups or even entire police departments the average listener/reader automatically ignores them. 

Reality and propaganda seldom have strong similarities. Propaganda is usually the vehicle used to convince non-believers whereas reality appeals to an objective analysis that is commonly devoid of emotional content. Calling a person, a group, or a thing racist, the way it is so commonly heard today is sure to evoke a response that recognizes the term is inaccurate. In fact, when the term is applied in the contemporary way, many listeners immediately run a mental comparison between the apparent accused and their personal interpretation of the word. Such comparisons invariably fall on the side of a rejection of the term.

Misuse or overuse of these pejorative words delivers a negative reaction that infects the entire message sought to be delivered by the accuser. Credibility is thus lost and the messages sought to be delivered are ignored. 

It is perhaps unfortunate that when anything is overused it becomes so commonplace that real significance or meaning is lost. This is probably why expressions that become popular in youth culture are so frequently changed. I recently heard the word “sick” used to describe a successful and complex athletic feat. My father would have called the feat “spiffy”, I would have used the term “neat”, and my wife suggested “cool”. I won’t begin to speculate on what terms will be used tomorrow, but I would hope to hear tomorrow different terms to describe individuals who have warped senses of reality. A separation of propaganda and reality is called for to avoid what is becoming a popular descent into yesterday’s way of thinking.

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments


Hated Speech

By: Judd Garrett

January 25, 2023

Last week at the World Economic Forum, the vice president for Values and Transparency for the European Commission, Věra Jourová predicted that hate speech laws that are now in place in Europe will soon be imposed upon the American public, despite the Supreme Court’s precedent of protecting such speech under the First Amendment. FBI Director Christopher Wray supported her prediction when he discussed the “significant strides” that have been made in “the level of collaboration between the private sector and the government, especially the FBI” in controlling speech on the internet.

Banning “hate speech” sounds good on the surface. The less hate in the world, the better. So, banning hateful things, should make the world a better place, right? The problem is how do we define hate speech? Representative Sheila Jackson-Lee tried to do just that when she introduced an anti-hate bill in Congress last week, designed “to prevent and prosecute white supremacy-inspired hate crime.” Interestingly, the bill only focuses on hate crimes motivated by white supremacy. Apparently, she doesn’t care about stopping hate crimes committed by people of color against white people or other minorities.  

The legislation outlaws “material advancing white supremacy, white supremacist ideology, antagonism based on ‘replacement theory,’ or hate speech that vilifies or is otherwise directed against any non-white person or group.”Once again, it only prohibits hate speech directed at non-white people. So, it’s legal for her to spew vile, hate-filled racist speech as long as it vilifies white people, which she does regularly. 

She was also careful to include “replacement theory” into the wording of her legislation which means that pointing out how the Democrat Party is promoting mass illegal immigration to change the electorate to win more elections is now considered as promoting white supremacy, and would be a crime. So, we are not allowed to speak out loud about what we see happening right in front of our eyes. 

They never try to win an argument based on the merits because their positions have no merit. They use the accusation of racism as a weapon and a shield against their opponents. The open-borders crowd claims that borders are racist, so they can label anyone who is against unfettered illegal immigration into our country as racist, and have them silenced. 

That’s how this all works. They pass a law to censor “hate speech”, and then they use the flimsiest thread to label any speech that they don’t like or is inconvenient to them as “hate speech” or “racist” so they can censor it. And they use this strategy on almost every issue. Secretary of Transportation, Pete Buttigieg has labeled certain bridges and roads as “racist”. So, if you disagree with Pete Buttigieg tearing down a bridge or rerouting a highway, you could be charged with engaging in “white supremacy” and arrested.

Far-left magazine, the Atlantic, claims that the concept of meritocracy is racist. So, if you espouse the belief that people should earn what they get, and not be given handouts such as welfare and food stamps, by the government, then you could be charged with violating “hate speech” laws and thrown in jail.  

The Seattle Public School System claims that mathematics is racist, stating that “math has been and continues to be used to oppress and marginalize people and communities of color.” So, if your white daughter gets a 100% on her math test, then she is a racist and has violated federal law. Therefore, all white students must fail their math tests or they could possibly be thrown in jail.

Astrophysicist at Colorado College, Natalie Gosnell, Ph.D., stated that the field of Astrophysics is “steeped in systemic racism and white supremacy… The tenets of white supremacy that show up [in physics] of individualism and exceptionalism and perfectionism.” So, the human qualities which were necessary to help physicists discover and understand the Laws of Newton, the equations of Einstein, and the movement of the planets through space are now racist? 

But we all know that if the students of color were performing better in math and astrophysics than the white students, the same people claiming that fields of math and astrophysics are racist would be extolling the virtues of merit-based scholarship in those disciplines. No one is claiming that the individualism, exceptionalism, perfectionism, and meritocracy which define the NBA and the NFL are racist. These types of speech laws are not designed to protect anyone. They are designed to give the people in power the ability to shut down speech they don’t like so they can control outcomes in their favor.

Climate change activists have argued for years that not doing enough to stop climate change is racist. So, when Jim Hagemann Snabe, the chairman of the German manufacturing giant Siemens, told the panel at the WEF that one billion people should stop eating meat to save the planet from climate change, he was really saying, if you do not want to eat bugs, and you want to eat a steak, then you are engaging in white supremacy. You must eat what we are telling you to eat or you’re a racist.

Colombia’s far-left President, Gustavo Petro took it one step further when he told the WEF that for the world to survive climate change, humans must “overcome capitalism.” So, once again, if you believe in the capitalist system, and also believe that Petro’s socialist system in Colombia is destroying that country, then you are not combatting climate change, and therefore, you are racist and should be thrown in federal prison. 

The diversity, equity, and inclusion crowd are the least diverse and inclusive people out there. They want no diversity of thought and will exclude anyone who has a belief that is different from theirs. This is why they are the champions of anti-speech laws. They do not want to hear a different point of view, and some of them even want people to be arrested if they have a different opinion than they do. If you claim to be a champion of diversity and inclusion then you must be willing to include a wide range of diverse beliefs and ideologies, even the ones with which you adamantly disagree. That is what diversity and inclusion means. But sadly, the people who want to control our speech only want to hear that with which they agree.

If you do not take an interest 
in the affairs of your government, 
then you are doomed to live under 
the rule of fools.
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment


Living, Breathing American Woman Sent to Funeral Home in Body Bag!

If you’re ever placed in a home for the elderly, the last thing you want happening is being mistaken for a corpse. While that does technically sound impossible, one woman experienced this earlier in January.

According to reports done by state inspectors in Iowa, a resident at the Glen Oaks Alzheimer’s care center was taken in, due to her declining health in late December last year. Several days later, she was found to be dead.

Special care center fined $10k for sending living woman to funeral home

The problem is she actually wasn’t dead.

Collect hundreds of warriors! Play free!

Check out new PVP arena battles!

Raid: Shadow Legends! Play Now!

Check out this new online game!

The worker who checked for her pulse must’ve not felt it and declared her to be dead. That’s despite her having her eyes wide open, which led to what can only be described as one of the most horrific experiences anyone could go through.



The next morning, a funeral home director arrived at the facility and helped place the supposedly “dead” woman onto a gurney and into a body bag.

However, it wouldn’t take long for the staff to notice the bag soon began to move. As they unzipped it, they found the woman inside was gasping for air and they called an EMT to assist her.

Despite her showing signs of life, her eyes remained fixed in place. She wasn’t speaking to anyone in the room, which may be why the staff at the care facility thought her to be dead.


After receiving emergency medical care, the woman was transported back to the care facility, where she was placed in hospice, only for her to die two days later, with her family right next to her.



Poor judgment from the family

Records show the woman was originally taken into the facility in late 2021 when she was diagnosed with end-age and early-onset dementia.

Starting in December 2022, almost a full year after she was admitted, the woman was placed into hospice with strict do-not-resuscitate orders.

While the service the facility provided was sufficient up until her “death,” the irresponsible treatment that followed was found to be inexcusable by the state court. Glen Oaks was fined $10k, which is embarrassingly low for an incident of this caliber.

On the other hand, Glen Oaks doesn’t fall under the federal regulations that standard nursing homes do, seeing as it’s not a skilled nursing facility per se.



Actually, Glen Oaks is nothing more than a residential care home that offers daily living activities with some minor assistance for its residents. They can’t be held fully accountable for what happened.

What this means is the woman should’ve been placed in a qualified nursing home, rather than a care facility, seeing as she doesn’t fit the requirements for being in one.

Due to this, the Iowa Department of Inspections and Appeals was light on the Glen Oaks care facility and decided the entirety of the blame doesn’t fall on them, but also on the family.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment