How exactly does the United States all at once avoid the resumption of a Verdun-like, endless bloodbath on the Ukrainian-Russian border, reject any negotiated settlement until Ukraine unambiguously wins the war and expels every Russian from all its territory, prevent a wounded Putin from using a tactical nuclear weapon—and circumvent a head-to-head showdown with Russia and its 7,000 nukes?

 Ukraine 

with a Whimper or a Bang?

Putin deserves what he’s getting,

but that moral and strategic victory is still

a very different story from America sliding into

a nuclear confrontation with a desperate autocrat.

By: Victor Davis Hanson

American Greatness

September 14, 2022

Russia started the war with Ukraine in late February with a shock-and-awe effort to grab Kyiv. It failed both to decapitate the government and absorb half the country in one fell swoop. 

Soon the conflict descended into a war of attrition in Eastern Ukraine over the occupied majority of Russian-speaking borderlands. 

That deadlock was eventually going to be resolved by relative morale, manpower, and supply.

Would the high-tech weaponry and money of the United States and Europe allow heroic Ukrainian forces to be better equipped than a larger Russian force—drawing on an economy 10 times greater and a population nearly four times larger than Ukraine’s?

After the latest sudden Ukrainian territorial gains and embarrassing Russian retreats, we now know the answer. 

Russia may be bigger and richer than Ukraine, but it is not up to the combined resources of the United States, along with the nations of NATO and the European Union. 

Most are now in a de facto proxy war with an increasingly overwhelmed Russia. And so far, a circumspect China has not stepped in to try to remedy the Russian dilemma. 

So, what will become the next, and most dangerous, stage III of the war? 

A heady Ukraine believes it now has the wherewithal to clear out the entire occupied Donbas and turn southward to free Crimea. To complete that agenda of rolling back all Russian aggression since 2014, it may step up hitting strategic targets across the Russian border and on the Black Sea.

Again, what will a nuclear Russia—run by an ailing, desperate autocrat—do when a far smaller Ukraine finally and deservedly humiliates her before a global audience?

Will Putin cut off all European energy supplies to force a European end to supplying Ukraine? 

Russia has all but done that. But so far Putin has gained little strategic advantage on the battlefield, despite current European fears of an impending bitter winter.

Will Putin go fully medieval on Ukraine, like the carnage in Chechnya when he leveled Grozny in 2000? 

But a European Ukraine is vast compared to tiny Chechnya. And the Chechens even without allies still withstood a decade of savage Russian brutality.

So how will Putin survive his self-created disaster that may have cost him nearly 100,000 casualties, and now risks losing him all the territorial advances from 2014? 

Will Russia mobilize its entire army, drop its silly euphemism “special military operation,” and finally try to crush Ukraine with a full Soviet-style assault? 

But that escalation might push an already restive Russian population into open and angry defiance. 

Can he just admit defeat, slink back home, and stop the massive Russian hemorrhaging? 

Yet can Putin take his chances that sacked generals, money-losing oligarchs, and the embarrassed Russian street will fear his bloodstained reach too much to neuter or remove him?

Will Putin instead keep declaring that Russia is not losing to Ukraine, but to the United States and NATO—even though the West is only doing to him what an opportunistic Russia once did to America in both its Vietnam and Afghanistan fiascos

Putin would then keep portraying himself and Russia as the victim of this conflict. He would drone on that the United States, by supplying the Ukrainians weapons, is now the “aggressor”—as our new proxy keeps hitting more targets inside Mother Russia, sinks more ships of the Black fleet, and assassinates more Russian generals. 

Putin’s only way to keep his cred, back up his dangerous brinkmanship, and retain power is apparently to play defender of Mother Russia and continue threatening the use of a tactical nuclear weapon—perhaps against the Ukrainian nuclear power complex or Kyiv itself.

That final gambit of an updated version of the Cuban missile crisis is something the American people need to stop simply discounting. Do our leaders know for certain that the man Joe Biden once dubbed a “killer” is merely yesterday’s empty bluffer?

Of course, Putin deserves all he is suffering. And the Ukrainians warrant the world’s thanks for repelling a brutal aggressor. 

But that moral and strategic victory is still a very different story from America sliding into a nuclear confrontation with a desperate autocrat. Do the American people support offering up their nuclear umbrella to a non-NATO, former Russian republic?

And not so long ago, the United States advantageously saw Russia as a useful triangulation to the greater threat of Chinese aggression.

Western agendas is that so far they in toto appear mutually exclusive.

Consequently, the question remains: How exactly does the United States all at once avoid the resumption of a Verdun-like, endless bloodbath on the Ukrainian-Russian border, reject any negotiated settlement until Ukraine unambiguously wins the war and expels every Russian from all its territory, prevent a wounded Putin from using a tactical nuclear weapon—and circumvent a head-to-head showdown with Russia and its 7,000 nukes?

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

ALL FEDERAL EMPLOYEES ARE ANSWERABLE TO THE PEOPLE OF THE NATION THROUGH THEIR CONGRESS: FBI DIRECTOR CHRISTOPHER (HOW IRONIC THAT HIS NAME SHOULD MEAN “CHRIST BEARER”) RESEMBLES THE HEAD OF HITLER’S GESTAPO IN HIS DISDAIN FOR THE AUTHORITY OF CONGRESS

Sen. Chuck Grassley Blows Things Up on FBI Director Wray with 5 Words

Thursday was a tough day for the FBI director. Senator Ted Cruz just had his way with Wray, and Sen. Chuck Grassley finished him off.

FBI Director Christopher Wray appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee on a variety of issues.

Cruz grilled him over how the FBI was politicizing cases, he focused on some patriotic symbols that have been demonized by the department as signs of “militia violent extremism.”

Wray sounded either ignorant or he was lying. 

Sen. Marsha Blackburn took the baton and questioned Wray about Russia collusion and the Hunter Biden laptop. Wray’s case looked even worse after that. He would not even admit that they had the laptop.

The fact that Wray would not even talk about basic truths indicates how compromised they may be. 

What can the director comment on? There was very little revealed by Wray.

When the senators ultimately circled him and called him out on his lack of response, Wray said, “Sorry, guys, I can’t stick around, I have to catch a plane.”

He actually said that to Sen. Chuck Grassley.

The Iowa senator seemed astonished and then absolutely nailed Wray with a simple statement.

“You have your own plane.”

Christopher Wray just couldn’t stand the heat and would not stick around to give the GOP senators even 20 more minutes to ask him questions he wouldn’t answer. 

Somebody should remind the FBI director who he works for, and who pays for his very own plane. 

Former President Trump may be out of office, but there are still committed conservative senators who are focusing on cleaning up the swamp.

The truth is they may need to clean house at the FBI. Wray is not the man to get that job done. 

Step one, take back the House. Step two, take back the White House. Step three, clean house at the FBI. 

Watch Grassley Work:

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

MERRICK GARLAND HAS GIVEN AMERICA OUR OWN VERSION OF ADOLPH HITLER’S GESTAPO


Tucker Carlson was shocked to discover Merrick Garland’s latest abuse of power

Biden Attorney General Merrick Garland is drunk on power.

He’s weaponized the Department of Justice to kneecap the Biden regime’s political opponents.

And Tucker Carlson was shocked to discover Merrick Garland’s latest abuse of power.

https://decide.dev/lad/15117603156727654?pubid=ld-5386-1795&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fpatriotpolitical.com&rid=&width=696&utm_source=patpolnl&utm_campaign=newsletter&utm_medium=email

The FBI is turning a blind eye to the Left’s violence while targeting the Right

Democrats are seething with rage after the Supreme Court put an end to the abortion on demand by overturning Roe v. Wade.

As the late Rush Limbaugh said, abortion is the holy sacrament to the religion of liberalism.

While deranged pro-abortion activists are firebombing crisis pregnancy centers and vandalizing churches, Biden Attorney General Merrick Garland’s Justice Department is sitting on its hands.

Instead of going after actual criminals, the rogue FBI is dropping the hammer on pro-life activists.

Mark Houck is a father of seven, and Catholic, pro-life activist in Pennsylvania.

He regularly leads prayers and protests outside of abortion clinics in the state.

After a deranged Planned Parenthood escort harassed his 12-year-old son outside an abortion clinic in Philadelphia, Houck stepped in to defend him.

The escort filed charges against Houck in state court over the October 2021 incident, but the case was dismissed.

Nearly a year after the charges against Houck were dismissed, the FBI dropped the hammer on him in terrifying fashion.

The FBI unleashed 20 armed agents to raid his rural Pennsylvania home in order to arrest him for supposedly violating a federal law called the Freedom of Access Clinic Entrances Act, or FACE Act, which makes it a crime to interfere or intimidate anyone seeking or providing an abortion.

Houck’s family is completely traumatized by this East German Stasi-style raid

Houck’s wife, Ryan-Marie, appeared on Tucker Carlson Tonight to tell Fox News’ Tucker Carlson about the FBI’s bone-chilling raid on their home.

“My entire front yard, you could barely see it, it was covered with at least 15 big trucks and cars,” Ryan-Marie said. “There were 20, 25, 30, men, women, completely in jackets with shields and helmets and guns. They were behind cars. It was something I would never expect to see on my front lawn.”

The FBI launched a full-scale raid reserved for the most wanted criminals on a father of seven for allegedly committing a minor crime.

Ryan-Marie said FBI agents raided their home with “guns drawn” while her husband was put in “shackles” and the couple’s children watched.

“It was devastating,” Ryan-Marie told Carlson. “As you can imagine, it’s hard to even express the victimization and how traumatized we all are due to this unnecessary thing that happened to us.”

Ryan-Marie said the FBI’s gestapo tactics traumatized her children, leaving them “crying” and afraid to sleep alone.

“The older ones, we can talk, we can cry,” Ryan-Marie said. “We’ve had some counseling, we have more counseling to do. And the little ones, they’re scared. There’s a lot of crying and a lot of unrestful sleep. A lot of kids in our bed at night and in the morning.”

Merrick Garland’s Department of Justice is stooping to unthinkable new lows in his crusade against the Biden regime’s political enemies. 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

It is obvious that many bishops do not understand the role of a bishop. It is not a bishop’s role to be as obedient as possible. It is to sanctify his people as much as essential obedience allows. This is why bishops have broad powers to dispense from universal Church law, to make diocesan law, and even to replace elements of universal law with particular law. Within the limits of Catholic doctrine and of essential obedience, sanctifying his people requires taking them—rather than the pope—as the basic point of reference.


Crisis Magazine

A Voice for the Faithful Catholic Laity

SEPTEMBER 30, 2022

When Bishops Put Obedience Above Charity

JAMES BARESEL

Burbidge

Fifteen years ago, Bishop Michael Burbidge, then heading the Diocese of Raleigh, instituted one of the best plans for implementing Summorum Pontificum. Two months ago, he announced one of the worst policies for implementing Traditionis Custodes in his current Diocese of Arlington. Public understanding of this policy has been confused by half-truths from both the diocese and its critics. The reality is in some ways better and in some ways more disturbing than it seems.

Beginning on the positive side, the number of locations offering the Tridentine Mass every Sunday has only been reduced from ten to eight. Eleven parishes had the Tridentine Mass on a limited basis, often only on a handful of weekdays each month. Provision for the laity remains reasonable, though hardly “generous” as the diocese fatuously claims. A generous bishop would have dispensed all twenty-one parishes from Traditionis Custodes on his own authority. A great one would have encouraged eleven of them to begin weekly Sunday Masses. 

But limiting locations to a reasonable number is not the whole story. Three were transferred from parish churches to school cafeterias and gyms, another to a former church recently turned into a hall and stripped bare. Parishes have been told not to list Tridentine Mass times in their bulletins.

These policies were not enacted because Bishop Burbidge decided to choose appeasement or because he was later hounded by Rome. They were enacted because Bishop Burbidge chose a path which he and his representatives are calling “faithfulness” but is more accurately termed “servility.”

I do not use the term lightly. I do not use it because Bishop Burbidge disagrees with those who believe current circumstances justify certain forms of disobedience or with what can and cannot be done during a grave crisis. I do not use it because of any disagreement I may have with Bishop Burbidge as to the bare minimum which Church law strictly requires.

I use the term because Bishop Burbidge is not interested in determining the bare minimum Church law strictly requires and then facilitating use of the Tridentine Mass as much as possible. His policy is to embrace Pope Francis’ decision to restrict the Tridentine Mass as much as he can while still providing reasonable access to it. The reason is that Bishop Burbidge misunderstands how obedience ordinarily works under normal conditions.

According to St. Thomas Aquinas, perfection consists primarily in choosing God as the supreme good. Obeying Him as the supreme authority is an essential element of that—not the core of perfection. We most directly choose God as the supreme good in prayer. In necessary obedience we indirectly obey God as the supreme authority. The perfection of prayer is the perfection of choosing God and uniting ourselves to Him as the supreme good. Perfection of obedience through nonessential obedience is not an essential precondition for perfect prayer and is virtuous only insofar as it does not impede the higher good.

Later writers inverted St. Thomas’ principles. For them perfection does not consist primarily in choosing God as the supreme good but in obeying Him as the supreme authority. Perfecting obedience was then elevated above perfecting prayer. The natural but absurd conclusion is the belief that to pray less deeply but under perfect obedience pleases God more than to pray perfectly while being minimally obedient.

More simply, in the view of St. Thomas, we obey God as a necessary aspect of loving Him; in an anti-Thomist view, we love Him as a necessary aspect of obeying Him. But, ironically enough, acting on the Thomist view is more obedient to the hierarchy of goods which finds its origin in God Himself.

All other things are distinctly unequal when nonessential obedience impacts others. Charity is greater than obedience. When nonessential obedience negatively impacts others, minimal obedience becomes virtuous and sometimes necessary under pain of sin.

Bishop Burbidge has decided to make a strong effort to implement whatever the pope of the moment’s liturgical policy is—and argues that this is virtuous. Hence, on July 15, 2021, Bishop Burbidge was committed to promoting use of the Tridentine Mass in accordance with Summorum Pontificum, and on the following day he was committed to restricting its use in accordance with Traditionis Custodes

His abrupt change of course is due to the fact that his priority is not to foster his people’s spiritual lives as much as essential obedience allows. His priority is to be as obedient as he can be, provided his people’s spiritual lives are adequately fostered. He chose to be sufficiently charitable so he could be more obedient rather than sufficiently obedient so he could be more charitable.

Such prioritization of nonessential obedience over charity is ultimately rooted in the anti-Thomist view and culminated in nineteenth-century ultramontanism. Such excessive submissiveness to the pope is precisely the danger which St. John Henry Newman warned against. Newman ultimately welcomed the First Vatican Council’s dogmatic definition of papal infallibility because he always believed the doctrine and the definition made clear how limited the scope of infallibility is. His earlier reservations were motivated by the fact that some ultramontanes wanted a definition which would push infallibility beyond its traditional limits, or at least be vague enough to insist upon nonessential submission to Rome in practice.

Newman’s anti-ultramontane principle of minimalization—of examining what we are strictly required to submit to and beyond that considering ourselves free to act on our own judgement as to whether greater obedience or something else is more reasonable in particular circumstances—accords with the Thomistic position that perfection consists primarily in choosing God as good. Belief that perfection consists primarily in obeying God as the supreme authority leads to the nineteenth-century ultramontane uncharitable attempts to pummel Catholics into nonessential obedience to Rome, which caused Newman to call them “an insolent aggressive faction” and to describe their behavior as “tyrannousness and cruelty.”

From the perspective of the doctrines of both St. Thomas and of St. John Newman, Bishop Burbidge has been even more incoherent by thoroughly implementing papal policies based on opposite theologies. Summorum Pontificum, as the bishop himself once accurately articulated, was based in Pope Benedict’s “hermeneutic of continuity.” Cardinal Roche has plainly stated he wants the Tridentine Mass restricted because he believes in the “hermeneutic of rupture.” 

Either Bishop Burbidge has not investigated the reasons for the law which led him to impose drastic restrictions or he knows those reasons are unorthodox and went ahead anyway. Saints Thomas and Newman would insist that the choice between maximum and minimum obedience must take into account the good or evil ends intended by the superior.

From this it is clear that Burbidge does not understand the role of a bishop. It is not his role to be as obedient as possible. It is to sanctify his people and as much as essential obedience allows. This is why bishops have broad powers to dispense from universal Church law, to make diocesan law, and even to replace elements of universal law with particular law. Within the limits of Catholic doctrine and of essential obedience, sanctifying his people requires taking them—rather than the pope—as the basic point of reference.

Other bishops have done their jobs and worked to sanctify their people by allowing the Tridentine Mass to continue as before. They understood that they are Successors of the Apostles, not regional managers. Bishop Burbidge has not even had the integrity to openly admit he freely chose to do more than strictly required, relying instead on platitudes about “faithfulness.”

Catholics in Arlington have overwhelmingly tried to be polite and deferential. But our bishop has chosen to act like a Quisling rather than like a Successor of the Apostles. So, within the bare minimum of absolutely strictly essential obedience, it is time to embrace the joyful defiance of Quisling’s eminent contemporary, who recognized that “without victory there is no survival” and declared We Shall Never Surrender.

Baresel

BY JAMES BARESEL

James Baresel is a freelance writer. Publications for which he has written include Tudor LifeCatholic World ReportAmerican HistoryFine Art ConnoisseurMilitary HistoryCatholic HeraldClaremont Review of BooksAdoremus BulletinNew Eastern Europe and America’s Civil War.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Civilization alone permits humans to pursue sophisticated scientific research, the arts, and the finer aspects of culture.

By: Victor Davis Hanson

American Greatness

September 29, 2022

Civilization is fragile. It hinges on ensuring the stuff of life.

To be able to eat, to move about, to have shelter, to be free from state or tribal coercion, to be secure abroad, and safe at home—only that allows cultures to be freed from the daily drudgery of mere survival.

Civilization alone permits humans to pursue sophisticated scientific research, the arts, and the finer aspects of culture.

So, the great achievement of Western civilization—consensual government, individual freedom, rationalism in partnership with religious belief, free market economics, and constant self-critique and audit—was to liberate people from daily worry over state violence, random crime, famine, and an often-unforgiving nature.

But so often the resulting leisure and affluence instead deluded arrogant Western societies into thinking that modern man no longer needed to worry about the fruits of civilization he took to be his elemental birthright.

As a result, the once prosperous Greek city-state, Roman Empire, Renaissance republics, and European democracies of the 1930s imploded—as civilization went headlong in reverse.

We in the modern Western world are now facing just such a crisis.

We talk grandly about the globalized Great Reset. We blindly accept the faddish New Green Deal. We virtue signal about defunding the police. We merely shrug at open borders. And we brag about banning fertilizers and pesticides, outlawing the internal combustion engine, and discounting Armageddon in the nuclear age—as if on autopilot we have already reached utopia.

But meanwhile, Westerners are systematically destroying the very elements of our civilization that permitted such fantasies in the first place.

Take fuel. Europeans arrogantly lectured the world that they no longer need traditional fuels. So, they shut down nuclear power plants. They stopped drilling for oil and gas. And they banned coal.

What followed was a dystopian nightmare. Europeans will burn dirty wood this winter as their civilization reverts from postmodern abundance to premodern survival.

The Biden Administration ossified oil fields. It canceled new federal oil and gas leases. It stopped pipeline construction and hectored investors to shun fossil fuels.

When scarcity naturally followed, fuel prices soared.

The middle class has now mortgaged its upward mobility to ensure that it might afford gasoline, heating oil, and skyrocketing electricity.

The Pentagon must keep America safe by deterring enemies, reassuring allies, and winning over neutrals.

It is not to hector soldiers based on their race. It is not to indoctrinate recruits in the woke agenda. It is not to become a partisan political force.

The result of those suicidal Pentagon detours is the fiasco in Afghanistan, the aggression of Vladimir Putin’s Russia, the new bellicosity of China, and the loud threats of rogue regimes like Iran.

At home, the Biden Administration inexplicably destroyed the southern border—as if civilized nations of the past never needed such boundaries.

Utter chaos followed. Three million poured into the United States illegally. They entered without audit, and largely without skills, high-school diplomas, or capital.

The streets of our cities are anarchical—and by intent.

Defunding the police, emptying the jails, and destroying the criminal justice system unleashed a wave of criminals. It is now open season on the weak and innocent.

America is racing backward into the 19th century wild West. Predators maim, kill, and rob with impunity. Felons correctly conclude that bankrupt postmodern “critical legal theory” will ensure their exemption from punishment.

Few Americans know anything about agriculture, except to expect limitless supplies of inexpensive, safe, and nutritious food at their beck and call.

But that entitlement for 330 million hungry mouths requires massive water projects, and new dams and reservoirs. Farmers rely on steady supplies of fertilizer, fuels, and chemicals. Take away that support—as green nihilists are attempting—and millions will soon go hungry, as they have since the dawn of civilization.

Perhaps nearly a million homeless now live on the streets of America. Our major cities have turned medieval with their open sewers, garbage-strewn sidewalks, and violent vagrants.

So, we are in a great experiment in which regressive progressivism discounts all the institutions, and the methodologies of the past that have guaranteed a safe, affluent, well-fed and sheltered America.

Instead, we arrogantly are reverting to a new feudalism as the wealthy elite—terrified of what they have wrought—selfishly retreat to their private keeps.

But the rest who suffer the consequences of elite flirtations with nihilism cannot even afford food, shelter, and fuel. And they now feel unsafe, both as individuals and as Americans.

As we suffer self-inflicted mass looting, random street violence, hyperinflation, a nonexistent border, unaffordable fuel, and a collapsing military, Americans will come to appreciate just how thin is the veneer of their civilization.

When stripped away, we are relearning that what lies just beneath is utterly terrifying.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Later writers inverted St. Thomas’ principles. For them perfection does not consist primarily in choosing God as the supreme good but in obeying Him as the supreme authority. Perfecting obedience was then elevated above perfecting prayer. The natural but absurd conclusion is the belief that to pray less deeply but under perfect obedience pleases God more than to pray perfectly while being minimally obedient.


Crisis Magazine

A Voice for the Faithful Catholic Laity

SEPTEMBER 30, 2022

When Bishops Put Obedience Above Charity

JAMES BARESEL

Burbidge

Fifteen years ago, Bishop Michael Burbidge, then heading the Diocese of Raleigh, instituted one of the best plans for implementing Summorum Pontificum. Two months ago, he announced one of the worst policies for implementing Traditionis Custodes in his current Diocese of Arlington. Public understanding of this policy has been confused by half-truths from both the diocese and its critics. The reality is in some ways better and in some ways more disturbing than it seems.

Beginning on the positive side, the number of locations offering the Tridentine Mass every Sunday has only been reduced from ten to eight. Eleven parishes had the Tridentine Mass on a limited basis, often only on a handful of weekdays each month. Provision for the laity remains reasonable, though hardly “generous” as the diocese fatuously claims. A generous bishop would have dispensed all twenty-one parishes from Traditionis Custodes on his own authority. A great one would have encouraged eleven of them to begin weekly Sunday Masses. 

But limiting locations to a reasonable number is not the whole story. Three were transferred from parish churches to school cafeterias and gyms, another to a former church recently turned into a hall and stripped bare. Parishes have been told not to list Tridentine Mass times in their bulletins.

These policies were not enacted because Bishop Burbidge decided to choose appeasement or because he was later hounded by Rome. They were enacted because Bishop Burbidge chose a path which he and his representatives are calling “faithfulness” but is more accurately termed “servility.”

I do not use the term lightly. I do not use it because Bishop Burbidge disagrees with those who believe current circumstances justify certain forms of disobedience or with what can and cannot be done during a grave crisis. I do not use it because of any disagreement I may have with Bishop Burbidge as to the bare minimum which Church law strictly requires.

I use the term because Bishop Burbidge is not interested in determining the bare minimum Church law strictly requires and then facilitating use of the Tridentine Mass as much as possible. His policy is to embrace Pope Francis’ decision to restrict the Tridentine Mass as much as he can while still providing reasonable access to it. The reason is that Bishop Burbidge misunderstands how obedience ordinarily works under normal conditions.

According to St. Thomas Aquinas, perfection consists primarily in choosing God as the supreme good. Obeying Him as the supreme authority is an essential element of that—not the core of perfection. We most directly choose God as the supreme good in prayer. In necessary obedience we indirectly obey God as the supreme authority. The perfection of prayer is the perfection of choosing God and uniting ourselves to Him as the supreme good. Perfection of obedience through nonessential obedience is not an essential precondition for perfect prayer and is virtuous only insofar as it does not impede the higher good.

Later writers inverted St. Thomas’ principles. For them perfection does not consist primarily in choosing God as the supreme good but in obeying Him as the supreme authority. Perfecting obedience was then elevated above perfecting prayer. The natural but absurd conclusion is the belief that to pray less deeply but under perfect obedience pleases God more than to pray perfectly while being minimally obedient.

More simply, in the view of St. Thomas, we obey God as a necessary aspect of loving Him; in an anti-Thomist view, we love Him as a necessary aspect of obeying Him. But, ironically enough, acting on the Thomist view is more obedient to the hierarchy of goods which finds its origin in God Himself.

All other things are distinctly unequal when nonessential obedience impacts others. Charity is greater than obedience. When nonessential obedience negatively impacts others, minimal obedience becomes virtuous and sometimes necessary under pain of sin.

Bishop Burbidge has decided to make a strong effort to implement whatever the pope of the moment’s liturgical policy is—and argues that this is virtuous. Hence, on July 15, 2021, Bishop Burbidge was committed to promoting use of the Tridentine Mass in accordance with Summorum Pontificum, and on the following day he was committed to restricting its use in accordance with Traditionis Custodes

His abrupt change of course is due to the fact that his priority is not to foster his people’s spiritual lives as much as essential obedience allows. His priority is to be as obedient as he can be, provided his people’s spiritual lives are adequately fostered. He chose to be sufficiently charitable so he could be more obedient rather than sufficiently obedient so he could be more charitable.

Such prioritization of nonessential obedience over charity is ultimately rooted in the anti-Thomist view and culminated in nineteenth-century ultramontanism. Such excessive submissiveness to the pope is precisely the danger which St. John Henry Newman warned against. Newman ultimately welcomed the First Vatican Council’s dogmatic definition of papal infallibility because he always believed the doctrine and the definition made clear how limited the scope of infallibility is. His earlier reservations were motivated by the fact that some ultramontanes wanted a definition which would push infallibility beyond its traditional limits, or at least be vague enough to insist upon nonessential submission to Rome in practice.

Newman’s anti-ultramontane principle of minimalization—of examining what we are strictly required to submit to and beyond that considering ourselves free to act on our own judgement as to whether greater obedience or something else is more reasonable in particular circumstances—accords with the Thomistic position that perfection consists primarily in choosing God as good. Belief that perfection consists primarily in obeying God as the supreme authority leads to the nineteenth-century ultramontane uncharitable attempts to pummel Catholics into nonessential obedience to Rome, which caused Newman to call them “an insolent aggressive faction” and to describe their behavior as “tyrannousness and cruelty.”

From the perspective of the doctrines of both St. Thomas and of St. John Newman, Bishop Burbidge has been even more incoherent by thoroughly implementing papal policies based on opposite theologies. Summorum Pontificum, as the bishop himself once accurately articulated, was based in Pope Benedict’s “hermeneutic of continuity.” Cardinal Roche has plainly stated he wants the Tridentine Mass restricted because he believes in the “hermeneutic of rupture.” 

Either Bishop Burbidge has not investigated the reasons for the law which led him to impose drastic restrictions or he knows those reasons are unorthodox and went ahead anyway. Saints Thomas and Newman would insist that the choice between maximum and minimum obedience must take into account the good or evil ends intended by the superior.

From this it is clear that Burbidge does not understand the role of a bishop. It is not his role to be as obedient as possible. It is to sanctify his people and as much as essential obedience allows. This is why bishops have broad powers to dispense from universal Church law, to make diocesan law, and even to replace elements of universal law with particular law. Within the limits of Catholic doctrine and of essential obedience, sanctifying his people requires taking them—rather than the pope—as the basic point of reference.

Other bishops have done their jobs and worked to sanctify their people by allowing the Tridentine Mass to continue as before. They understood that they are Successors of the Apostles, not regional managers. Bishop Burbidge has not even had the integrity to openly admit he freely chose to do more than strictly required, relying instead on platitudes about “faithfulness.”

Catholics in Arlington have overwhelmingly tried to be polite and deferential. But our bishop has chosen to act like a Quisling rather than like a Successor of the Apostles. So, within the bare minimum of absolutely strictly essential obedience, it is time to embrace the joyful defiance of Quisling’s eminent contemporary, who recognized that “without victory there is no survival” and declared We Shall Never Surrender.

Baresel

By James Baresel

James Baresel is a freelance writer. Publications for which he has written include Tudor LifeCatholic World ReportAmerican HistoryFine Art ConnoisseurMilitary HistoryCatholic HeraldClaremont Review of BooksAdoremus BulletinNew Eastern Europe and America’s Civil War.

SUBSCRIBE TO CRISIS

(It’s Free)

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Chinese campaign donor Johnny Chung famously stated that the Clinton White House was “like a subway. You have to put in coins to open the gates.”

THE CATHOLIC MONITOR

SEARCH

The China Syndrome: “Beyond parody even by Bergoglian standards, the Archbishop’s canonisation of the demonic ChiComs betrays the same signs of mental illness”

Chinese campaign donor Johnny Chung famously stated that the Clinton White House was “like a subway. You have to put in coins to open the gates.”

Personified nowadays by “Beijing Joe” and the Biden Crime Family, the venality, as noted earlier, is no longer the worst of it.

In detailing “the secret deals wealthy Americans have cut to help China build its military, technological, and economic might,” Schweizer reveals the ideological progression of the Rockefeller-effect: how nowadays very many of these elites also “quietly believe the Chinese dictatorial regime is superior to American democracy.”

Useful Roman idiots

And not only the secular elites. Today, even the reigning pontiff and his Vatican entourage are channelling David Rockefeller.

Apparently treated to the same choreographed tour as the trillionaire, Argentinian Archbishop Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo, chancellor of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences, returned from a 2018 trip to Beijing to inform the world he had discovered “an extraordinary China” with an exceptional work ethic.

“You don’t have shantytowns, you don’t have drugs, young people do not take drugs. There is like a positive national consciousness, they want to show that they have changed, and now they accept private property.” The Chinese, he insisted, “look for the common good and subordinate other things to the general welfare.” “The Chinese,” he concluded, “are the ones implementing Catholic social teaching best.”

Inverting Catholic social doctrine throughout his interview with Vatican Insider [2/2/18], the diabolically disoriented prelate went on to praise Beijing’s “moral leadership,” insisting China defends “the dignity of the person” better than other countries.

Whereas western neo-liberal thought has “liquidated the concept of the common good,” he explained, “the Chinese, on the contrary, propose work and the common good,” displaying “a moral quality that you don’t find in many places.”

Organ donation “has increased enormously,” he enthused by way of example, studiously skipping the ‘donors’: political ‘dissidents’ who are frequently murdered and their transplantable organs harvested for Party sycophants.

Beyond parody even by Bergoglian standards, the Archbishop’s canonisation of the demonic ChiComs betrays the same signs of mental illness so often flagged by his papal superior. – Christian Order

The Catholic Monitor is greatly honored to post, with permission, the full 2022 February editorial “The China Syndrome” of the most influential Traditionalist Catholic journal in the United Kingdom, the Christian Order:

The China Syndrome

THE EDITOR

Polish friends have long reiterated how the Communists wear a population down not just through force, fear and propaganda but with minutiae. Endless arbitrary changes to rules and regulations that govern daily life simply tire people out. As fatigue sets in, hearts and minds become ever more lethargic, docile and pliable.

Though sobering and educational, this first-hand knowledge of oppression was too far removed from workaday Western life to really hit home. Seeing, however,is believing. The East European experience has become far more comprehensible now that our putative democracies have made this debilitating “strategy of tension” their own. While ruthlessly applying the same coercive methods at the service of vested interests high and low, they too have exhausted everyone with minutiae: ever-shifting policies and measures, most of them baseless and futile, which confuse, infuriate and further divide and demoralise the electorate.

The Communistic parallels are striking for the simple reason that China is the inspiration and template for the global sanitary dictatorship, and the interrelated “social credit system” by which the pseudo-elites wish to assume total technocratic control.

Psychopaths of the world unite!

A joint creation of the Chinese Communists and their Deep State comrades which should be designated ChiComDS-19, the Wuhan virus itself merely accelerated this cherished goal of the money powers, whose love affair with totalising regimes, left or right, never flags. The Rockefellers for one have always touted the need for global governance (under their direction, of course).

Typically, the late David Rockefeller once exalted China in the New York Times (“From a China Traveler,” 10 August 1973, p. 31).

After a 10-day Cook’s tour arranged for him with “remarkable thoughtfulness” by his “hosts,” Rockefeller returned home to variously laud every aspect of Chinese life, from “the sense of national harmony” and “loud patriotic music” to “a very real and pervasive dedication to Chairman Mao and Maoist principles.” He gushed that “Streets and homes are spotlessly clean, and medical care greatly improved. Crime, drug addiction, prostitution and venereal disease have been virtually eliminated. Doors are routinely left unlocked.”

It is a measure of the psychopathy of the Western elites he personifies that Rockefeller marvels at it all in full knowledge that the trip was “choreographed precisely by our hosts.” While conceding that “We saw what they wanted us to,” he dismisses the deception of his psychopathic brethren as easily as he waves away the fact that “The universities are rigorously politicised, with little room for inquiry unrelated to Chairman Mao’s thought,” and that “Freedom to travel or change jobs is restricted.”

Neither the choreographed illusion nor the brutal facts mattered one jot. Before the torture, enslavement and genocide for which his “hosts” are synonymous, all he could muster was a passing comment that “a stiff price has been paid in terms of cultural and intellectual constraint.” Apart from that unfortunate hiccup, he assured his equally self-deluded NYT readership that “Whatever the price of the Chinese Revolution, it has obviously succeeded not only in producing more efficient and dedicated administration, but also in fostering high morale and community of purpose.”

Rockefeller lives!

Nearly thirty years later, in a telling 15 January 2022 podcast, the pitiless spirit of Rockefeller was channelled by Chamath Palihapitiya, who declared that “nobody cares about what’s happening to the Uyghurs.”

A venture capitalist who counts minority ownership of an American basketball franchise among his affluent ‘toys,’ Palihapitiya is unmoved by the ethnic cleansing of the Uyghurs, a religious minority in Northwest China whose organs are also being harvested by the Chinese Communist Party. “Nobody cares about what’s happening to the Uyghurs. OK?” he snapped. “You bring it up because you care and I think it’s nice that you care. The rest of us don’t care.”

(A poster-boy for bleeding heart-liberal duplicity, ensuing outrage dictated that, suddenly, he did care after all. Coercive-compassion?)

Palihapitiya is hardly an outlier.

Consider the mindset of Peter Walker, a former senior partner of consulting firm McKinsey & Co., a group that works with Chinese state-owned companies. On 1 November 2019 he gushed:

“What I discovered in China was the people were happy, they were proud, they were energised. The government officials I met genuinely wanted to do the right thing by the people.”

Reminded by Fox News commentatorTucker Carlson that the Chinese response to Wuhan was to lock people in their homes and leave them to die, snatch people off the street and bundle them into police vans never to be seen again, etc., etc., Walker’s admiration only heightened:

“I think the harsh action that they took, given the scale of China and the number of big cities, was exactly what they needed to do in order to prevent the outbreak from going any further.”

Noting that Wuhan is roughly the size of the New York metro area, and that New York lost more people to the virus than the Chinese at least publicly admit to having lost, Carlson then asked if New York authorities would also deserve praise if they locked New Yorkers in their homes until they starved to death. Walker dodged the question, forcing no-nonsense Carlson to ask again until Walker finally proffered: “Those specific actions I think were overly harsh, were insensitive.” In other words, not unspeakable and homicidal but mere government overreach.

On his website, Mr Walker rationalised that “In the US, human rights are inalienable and absolute; human rights in China are relativist and weighed against other societal needs…. Including food, shelter, borders, stability, and safety.”

Sounding like a Rockefeller puppet in a Splitting Image sketch, he then offered as  an example, “the treatment of the Uyghurs. China would point to dramatic improvements in the Uyghurs’ quality of life… in terms of literacy, prosperity and longevity as well as a sharp reduction in Islamic terrorist incidents to the benefit of all Chinese.”

Referencing those comments, Carlson pondered: “That’s what China got out of putting a million people in concentration camps. Do you think that was a fair trade off? It sounds like you do.”

Walker bristled:

“No, actually I don’t. I understand that from the government’s point of view, clamping down on Islamic terrorism was a high priority. And one of the things when you spend a lot of time in China as I have, is, they are fanatics about stability. Do I agree that locking down a million people in internment camps is a smart way to deal with Islamic terrorism? Absolutely not.”

“Well good,” acknowledged Carlson. “But may I ask: why would you note that their literacy had increased? I guess the obvious question is, who cares about your literacy if you’re in a concentration camp?”

Touché!

Walker quickly changed tack, underlining “the huge disconnect” between Chinese collectivism and US individualism, the US view of the sanctity of every life as opposed to China locking up a million people in a region of 80 million, which, he explained, they view as interning a mere 1% for the betterment of 99%.

He then extolled Confucian “values” that prioritise family and country over the individual, and said the Chinese always look at “getting the maximum number of people out of poverty, education, whatever it is.”

“Oh, I bet they do. I bet they do,” nodded marvellous Tucker, signally unimpressed.

“That’s a pretty handy way to excuse putting a million people in a concentration camp,” he pointed out before delivering this coup de grâce:

Listening to you, it seems like a pure apology for fascist behaviour. Let me ask you the obvious question, because I don’t think anyone would do this for free. How much money have you made over the course of your career with McKinsey, in China? If you could just put a rough estimate out there, it might be helpful to understand this. Just ballpark.”

“Look, I probably spent a quarter of my time in China, over the course of a dozen years, something like that,” conceded Walker.

Carlson went on:

“I guess the point I’m making is, this country, in part at the urging of McKinsey, is so economically tied to China, that you’ve got to wonder if the values you describe, which are repulsive — I think most Westerners would agree with that; exterminating individuals for the sake of the group — I wonder if that’s in fact hurting our country. I mean, why would you want to be aligned to government that grotesque? Is that a fair question, do you think?”

Exposed and exasperated by Tucker’s integrity, Mr. Walker came clean.

“Well look,” he blurted out, “I’m a real pragmatist.”

The problem with pragmatism

You bet!

And there’s the rub.

The bottomless Chinese money-pit makes for professional pragmatists, even and especially Vatican ones, as China’s fake largesse turns amorality into a very lucrative business. A Chinese strategy of “soft power,” it compromises and corrupts everything it touches. Not least the World Health Organisation and those countries foolish enough to hook up with the Belt-and-Road express — China’s imperialistic infrastructure and investment juggernaut stretching from East Asia to Europe.

Italy for one suffered for its snatching at Chinese cash when ChiComDS-19 flew direct from Wuhan to its northern airports, courtesy of Xi Jinping and the 100,000 Chinese workers they invited (and Xi directed) to work there. This influx inevitably triggered a viral crisis among the elderly and generally unhealthy population of heavily polluted northern Italy, killing many. Then, as an added thank-you for being the only G7 member to jump aboard Belt-and-Road, Italy was rewarded with a “donation” of Chinese medical supplies, which magnanimity turned out to be a multi-million dollar sale. Worse still, what Italy received and paid for was its own equipment — genuinely donated to China at the height of its Wuhan crisis!

Before such cold-blooded opportunism, grabbing Chinese carrots is suicidal enough. The self-harm beggars belief. After all, how difficult can it be to comprehend the myriad long-term dangers of lucrative short-term gains offered by a death cult of Communist psychopaths who not only traffick in organs they plunder from the living (dwarfing in nature and scale even Planned Parenthood’s wickedness), but also preach and practice a strategy of total war, beyond any and all moral and ethical limits, into the bargain? Calculating the tragic denouement is not rocket science.

But it all goes far beyond the Big Sticks of economic dependency and Chinese colonisation by stealth. Ultimately, it effects the deeper moral malaise that cyclically rots and destroys nations and entire civilisation from within.

As with Western Deep State actors forever profiting from the misery and death of others, mendacity, cynicism and cruelty constitute the DNA of the Chinese Communist Party. Before the global mayhem triggered by Xi censoring information about the virus, spreading it abroad via international flights, ‘disappearing’ Wuhan truth-tellers etc. etc., journalist Daniel Flynn truly observed:

Communists, ever believers in ends justifying means, do that. They lie. They do that not in moments of human failing but always and everywhere as anideological commitment. And people who do business with them… end up compromising their values, too. … Morality is more contagious than any virus.

Indeed. And yet the amoral infection is already so deep and pervasive that even the ChiComDS-19 catastrophe is unlikely to wean Belt-and-Road junkies off their Chinese addiction. If Iran’s initial fury with its Chinese ally-cum-sugar daddy over the heavy viral toll on its elderly citizens was pure political theatre (one dictatorship posturing with another), the West has too many self-serving fingers in the lucrative pie to bother with high-sounding appeals to airy-fairy notions about a “common good.”

What is that? they ask; after the fashion of Pontius Pilate, the patron saint of pragmatists who stood face to face with the Source and Summit of that Good. And since the Supreme Good’s Vicar on earth now doubles as Communist-appeaser-in-chief, they can pose their rhetorical question with even greater cynicism.

Of course, Belt-and-Road is only part of it.

Effectively describing the elites of every continent, Congressman Michael Waltz recently lamented that American business and mainstream media leaders are “totally drunk on Chinese dollars and are willing to compromise our values,” pointing out that China has “deliberately cornered the market on our pharmaceuticals, computer chips, and rare earth minerals. They’ve done it deliberately,” he warned, “and they’re threatening already to choke off those supply chains if we don’t see the world the way they want to.”

All the while, he added, President Xi Jinping, “is openly talking about replacing the American dream with the China dream and being the new dominant world power. The sad irony of it always is that it is American companies that are funding it.” [Newsmax, 8/2/22]

Ideological turn

Congressman Waltz also took aim at the grotesque hypocrisy of American companies that “like to preach social justice” in the United States but turn “a blind eye to millions of people in concentration camps and the modern-day slavery that’s used to make their products.”

But whereas the human misery and corpses piled high were once obscured by dollar signs alone, from their Olympian vantage point of wealth, privilege and power the godless now see an atheistic creed to be admired and a methodology of ends justifying means to be emulated, as their venality and amorality coalesce into an ideological mindset.

Sadly, these Rockefeller clones now populate the globalist food chain from top to bottom. Less and less shy about proclaiming their alien outlook, it often bursts forth in declarations by the most unlikely apparatchiks. Barack Obama’s White House Communications Director, Anita Dunn, comes to mind.

Obama himself was mentored in his youth by card-carrying Communist Frank Marshall Davis, then cultivated by hard left socialist organisations before launching his political career in the living room of domestic terrorist Bill Ayers, a murderous Marxist (see “The Obama Transition,” CO, June/July 2009).

Little wonder, then, that even the lowly Dunn once boasted that one of her favourite political philosophers was Mao Tse-tung. Such breathtaking idiocy recalls the razor-sharp title of Daniel Flynn’s 2004 work, Intellectual Morons: How Ideology Makes Smart People Stupid.

Dunn’s admission, Obama’s pedigree and Flynn’s book title also call to mind a local comrade of note: one Susan Michie.

A 40-year member of the British Communist Party whose first husband was a key adviser to former Labour leader and doctrinaire Marxist Jeremy Corbyn, Professor Michie doubles as a senior member and spokesman for SAGE; the scientific advisory group behind destructive Covid policies.

In a scathing letter of 22 August 2021, signed by more than 130 UK medical professionals and sent to the Prime Minister and other government officials, SAGE was among the government bodies specifically accused of causing “massive, permanent and unnecessary harm” to the country — economic and human devastation that confirms two hallmarks of Communism.

Firstly, that sacred socialist ends justify all means of advancing the revolution, as inhumane Covid measures surely have.

Second, that “collateral damage” to the hapless proletariat never impacts higher-ups like champagne socialist Michie; a wealthy descendant of aristocracy, who, a few years back, sold a family-owned Picasso to the Saudi Royals for £50 million.

The same treacherous Red Thread runs through the key institutions of most nations.

As researchers such as Diane West and Peter Schweizer have thoroughly documented, the entire Washington establishment is littered with ideological Marxists and self-serving fellow travellers. Schweizer, a regular best-selling author, says that his latest work, Red-Handed: How American Elites Get Rich Helping China Win (Jan. 2022)is the scariest investigation he has ever conducted in his 25-years as an investigative journalist.

Billed as exposing “the nexus of power between the Chinese government and the American elites who do its bidding,” the publicity blurb explains that after a year spent “scouring a massive trove of global corporate records and legal filings to expose the hidden transactions China’s enablers hoped would never see the light of day, Schweizer and his team of forensic investigators lay bare the bad actors at both ends of the political spectrum who are eager to help the Chinese dictatorship in its quest for global hegemony. Presidential families, Silicon Valley gurus, Wall Street high rollers, Ivy League universities, even professional athletes—all willing to sacrifice American strength and security on the altar of personal enrichment.”

The likes of Bill and Hilary started selling out for filthy lucre decades ago. Chinese campaign donor Johnny Chung famously stated that the Clinton White House was “like a subway. You have to put in coins to open the gates.”

Personified nowadays by “Beijing Joe” and the Biden Crime Family, the venality, as noted earlier, is no longer the worst of it.

In detailing “the secret deals wealthy Americans have cut to help China build its military, technological, and economic might,” Schweizer reveals the ideological progression of the Rockefeller-effect: how nowadays very many of these elites also “quietly believe the Chinese dictatorial regime is superior to American democracy.”

Useful Roman idiots

And not only the secular elites. Today, even the reigning pontiff and his Vatican entourage are channelling David Rockefeller.

Apparently treated to the same choreographed tour as the trillionaire, Argentinian Archbishop Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo, chancellor of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences, returned from a 2018 trip to Beijing to inform the world he had discovered “an extraordinary China” with an exceptional work ethic.

“You don’t have shantytowns, you don’t have drugs, young people do not take drugs. There is like a positive national consciousness, they want to show that they have changed, and now they accept private property.” The Chinese, he insisted, “look for the common good and subordinate other things to the general welfare.” “The Chinese,” he concluded, “are the ones implementing Catholic social teaching best.”

Inverting Catholic social doctrine throughout his interview with Vatican Insider [2/2/18], the diabolically disoriented prelate went on to praise Beijing’s “moral leadership,” insisting China defends “the dignity of the person” better than other countries.

Whereas western neo-liberal thought has “liquidated the concept of the common good,” he explained, “the Chinese, on the contrary, propose work and the common good,” displaying “a moral quality that you don’t find in many places.”

Organ donation “has increased enormously,” he enthused by way of example, studiously skipping the ‘donors’: political ‘dissidents’ who are frequently murdered and their transplantable organs harvested for Party sycophants.

Beyond parody even by Bergoglian standards, the Archbishop’s canonisation of the demonic ChiComs betrays the same signs of mental illness so often flagged by his papal superior.

John Paul II’s biographer George Weigel for one is in no doubt.

Turning “a blind eye to repression and persecution in order to indulge” socialist “fantasies,” he wrote in reaction to Sorondo’s comments, “requires something approaching a psychotic detachment from reality.” Moreover, he added, they “inevitably implicate the pope he serves, and cast doubt not only on the prudence of the Vatican’s current attempts at a démarche with [China]…but on the integrity of the Holy See.”

The Dictator Pope is not for turning, however. China’s totalitarian temper suits his own. And so, thanks to his lead — at once immoral, cruel, and venal (through acquiescence in the persecution of Catholics involving reportedly massive Chinese kickbacks, to service Vatican debt and who knows what else) — the Church is paying the same stiff price as everyone else with a snout in China’s money trough.

Catholic anchor

It is difficult for the normal and decent to comprehend this bewildering admiration and promotion of totalitarian control and the disdain for human life it engenders. Its myriad manifestations on the flimsy pretext of Covid (—the sudden eager transition of police into brutal Brownshirts, to cite just one shocking example) has finally alerted many to dark agendas they had never imagined, never mind pondered. But they should also understand its less obvious trickle-down effect on Western electorates.

Certainly, disinterest in the recent Winter Olympics hosted by China was a sign of hope. Doubtless Francis, Sorondo and the entire curia were glued to their TV for the duration (— did they cadge a Sky Sports package from their buddy Xi, the “great moral leader”? I think we should be told.) Outside the Vatican City bubble, however, viewer-ratings tanked. After all, if serial murderer Ted Bundy hosted a barbeque, then how many neighbours might attend? Happily, very many did not care to watch a Winter Olympics hosted by homicidal ChiComs.

So, you still can’t fool all the people all of the time. Deo gratias. And yet… While Chamath Palihapitiya generalises he does not wildly exaggerate when he says “the rest of us don’t care” about Communist atrocities.

Polls regularly reveal the broad swathe of dumbed-down, brainwashed Western youth who favour socialist and communist governance, or at very least do not view it unfavourably. Corporate executives like Peter Walker and Palihapitiya speak not just on behalf of the amoral corporate world, it seems, but for pragmatic Western electorates long cut adrift from Christ and His Church.

Alas, as the useful-idiocy of Archbishop Sorondo and the ensuing article confirm, the masses are unlikely to be thrown a moral, doctrinal or liturgical anchor by a Vatican that has made common cause with China in particular and Marxism in general. Under this heretical, hyper-political pontiff, the proper relations of Church and State are being muddied as Catholic social teachings are inverted and trashed along with everything else.

We do well, therefore, to set forth the truth of the Church’s authority and role vis-à-vis the State as willed by God (all human efforts to spoil that sublime complementary balance notwithstanding). To that end, we commence in this edition a series which will enlighten and affirm the reader amid the current confusion and extreme polarisation within and without. Not least in providing Catholic context and meaning to shorthand socio-political terms like “patriotism,” “individualism” “nationalism” and the like, so often understood in a secular light.

Although comprising Catholic study papers delivered during a conference held in 1935, the topicality and relevance of their content is striking. Even more so in light of the rise of Nazi Germany at that time; a totalitarian menace mirrored today in the rising surveillance state of the Chinese Communist-Deep State Capitalist alliance, and its global web of unaccountable technocrats led by Klaus Schwab, the son of a Nazi-engineer no less. The shameless disregard with which the coercive gene-therapy experiment masquerading as mass ‘vaccination’ is shredding the Nuremberg Code and other protective post-war moral and ethical Agreements not only justifies the totalitarian parallel, its underscores the dogged intent.

Perfect diabolic storm

Don’t be fooled. The implacable quest for technocratic hegemony rolls on.

The most welcome relief provided by the current lifting of many Covid restrictions in some nations, including the UK, must be viewed in a realistic light: not as a victory but a lull — a respite that we hope will lead on to ever greater exposure and total expulsion of the underlying evil. For without that final and definitive resolution we will remain forever on tenterhooks, awaiting further lockdowns and next-level technocratic tyranny amid intermittent periods of calm; not unlike that experienced by the German people during the 1930s, as the storm clouds gathered.

Caution is especially necessary given the continued jabbing of zero-risk British children, and the deepening vax-controls still ruining lives and livelihoods across the Channel and elsewhere.

Even as we count our local blessings, the plight of the peoples of Italy, France, Austria, Germany, Australia, New Zealand and other sorely oppressed countries and American states should give us pause. For these citizens, Yuri Bezmenov’s blunt depiction of a Marxist takeover remains palpable. “If you’re not scared by now,” said the ex-KGB propagandist, describing the demoralisation phase of that process, “nothing can scare you.”

There are burgeoning signs that “humanity is withdrawing its consent from government tyrants all over the world,” as some reasonably claim. It is also true that when faced with a galvanised populace the elites often retreat with surprising speed. But, only to bide their time. They have far too much invested in a globally centralised transhuman future to change direction.

Like David Rockefeller, prominent central banker Paul Warburg was never shy of grandiose proclamations. He once declared on behalf of his brethren: “We will have a world government whether you like it or not. The only question is whether that government will be achieved by consent or conquest.” More precisely, to be a slave, or not to be a slave: that is his (purely rhetorical) question.

Having spent so much time, effort and money turning science-fiction into Frankenstein-fact, the one certainty in an uncertain world is that the Rockefellers, Warburgs, J.P. Morgans et.al, will intensify their efforts to bring their dystopian Prison Planet to fruition.

While we pray, hope and work always for deliverance from these megalomaniacs, sooner or later we must expect them to launch further false flags attacks of equal or even greater magnitude and inhumanity than ChiComDS-19 — viral, financial, environmental, cyber, military… whatever facilitates, or distracts from, their darks deeds.

In his 1973 paean to China, David Rockefeller gave advanced notice of this unyielding pursuit of total control. Looking back from our vantage point of the Covid coup, two of his warnings stand out.

Firstly, his statement of admiration that “Enormous social advances of China have benefited greatly from the singleness of ideology and purpose.

And secondly, against all humanity and sanity, his declaration that “The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao’s leadership, is one of the most important and successful in human history.”

The chilling conclusion to his China travelogue, this maniacal assertion assumes even greater significance before the global expansion of said “social experiment” through a virus manufactured in his favourite nation in cahoots with his favourite industry; which nexus — between the Chinese political template and the eugenic movement equally beloved by the Family from Hell — constitutes the perfect diabolic storm. For, it was the Rockefellers who founded the pharmaceutical cartel over a century ago, imbuing the Big Pharma syndicate with the eugenic spirit now manifest in a coercive gene-therapy experiment being perpetrated on the entire human race.

The UN building in New York – built on Rockefeller land and fronted by this statue:
a man wielding a hammer and holding a sickle-shaped sword, as if to underline the
family’s public admiration for the total power and control afforded by Communism.
The brutal figure is even more ominous now that China controls UN agencies like the WHO. 

Infowars

None of this is to lose sight of the constant stream of good news, reported outside fearmongering mainstream outlets, which tells us everything is still to play for!

As Melissa MacKenzie conveys in her spirited summary of the American landscape, a time of electoral reckoning draws nigh for the Covid enablers in America as everywhere. Unfortunately for the Davos crew, even as their weaponised press continues to dismiss and demonise the popular mass resistance being mounted worldwide against crushing ‘vaccine’ mandates and passports, alternative media continues to counter the orchestrated blackout. Its reportage of the ‘dissident’ Canadian truckers and their brave stand throughout the country could not be more important.

The truckers have shown up the fear of the establishment, galvanising opposition to bought-and-paid-for PM Justin Trudeau (who sought to characterise them as swastika flag wavers, even as his state media labelled them Russian agents!). In the process, they have pressured the provincial governments of Saskatchewan, Alberta and Prince Edward Island, among others, into lifting their local mandates.

To cite just one of many other huge freedom protests: on 12 February Australians descended on Canberra en masse. Well over a million vehicles entered the city and surrounds in the week leading up, far exceeding normal traffic. If just a third of the vehicles carried 2-3 protestors, then the numbers dwarfed the entire population of the small city! The Federal Police Commissioner himself admitted it was the biggest protest he’d ever witnessed. And yet, as Reignite Democracy Australia noted in the aftermath: “The disgraceful Australian media performed its now familiar job of lying and distorting. Newspaper reports said that there were only 10-20,000 people there; one outlet even said only 4,000. A glance at the aerial shots indicates how dishonest that is.” 

Truth is power!

The fate of the West hinges on this battle for objective, factual reportage.

It is a fearful state of affairs.

Yet if the times are scary, as Bezmenov forewarned, the spine-stiffening answer to the problem of intimidation and lies is always within our grasp: to insist upon the truth.

And since the Covid Stasi will only stop when we stop them, let each within their own sphere of influence, great or small, continue to expose this naked totalitarian coup, until the number of righteous truth-tellers becomes overwhelming. Praying always that, as in Catholic Poland, the Holy Spiritwill bless and guide this righteous resistance unto the collapse of the socialist New World Disorder long cherished and relentlessly pursued.

Pray, too, that the Dictator Pope and his rebellious Modernist cohorts will repent, or depart. For, afflicted with the China Syndrome and drawn to its warped utopian vision like prideful moths to a revolutionary flame, they imperil both Church and State; their thunderous “Non serviam!” echoing the cry of the Luciferian elites, who would dethrone God, and enslave us all.

Faith! Freedom!

Pray an Our Father now in reparation for the sins of Francis’s Amoris Laetitia.

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Stop for a moment of silence, ask Jesus Christ what He wants you to do now and next. In this silence remember God, Father, Son and Holy Ghost – Three Divine Persons yet One God, has an ordered universe where you can know truth and falsehood as well as never forget that He wants you to have eternal happiness with Him as his son or daughter by grace. Make this a practice. By doing this you are doing more good than reading anything here or anywhere else on the Internet.

Francis Notes:

– Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt the possibility of a heretical pope and what must be done by the Church in such a situation:

“[T]he Pope… WHEN he is EXPLICITLY a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church MUST either deprive him, or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See.”

(The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306)

Saint Robert Bellarmine, also, said “the Pope heretic is not deposed ipso facto, but must be declared deposed by the Church.”

[https://archive.org/stream/SilveiraImplicationsOfNewMissaeAndHereticPopes/Silveira%20Implications%20of%20New%20Missae%20and%20Heretic%20Popes_djvu.txt]

– “If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2020/12/if-francis-is-heretic-what-should.html

– “Could Francis be a Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2019/03/could-francis-be-antipope-even-though.html

 –  LifeSiteNews, “Confusion explodes as Pope Francis throws magisterial weight behind communion for adulterers,” December 4, 2017:

The AAS guidelines explicitly allows “sexually active adulterous couples facing ‘complex circumstances’ to ‘access the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist.'”

–  On February 2018, in Rorate Caeli, Catholic theologian Dr. John Lamont:

“The AAS statement… establishes that Pope Francis in Amoris Laetitia has affirmed propositions that are heretical in the strict sense.”

– On December 2, 2017, Bishop Rene Gracida:

“Francis’ heterodoxy is now official. He has published his letter to the Argentina bishops in Acta Apostlica Series making those letters magisterial documents.”

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church by the bishops by the grace of God.

Election Notes: 

– Intel Cryptanalyst-Mathematician on Biden Steal: “212Million Registered Voters & 66.2% Voting,140.344 M Voted…Trump got 74 M, that leaves only 66.344 M for Biden” [http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/intel-cryptanalyst-mathematician-on.html?m=1]

– Will US be Venezuela?: Ex-CIA Official told Epoch Times “Chávez started to Focus on [Smartmatic] Voting Machines to Ensure Victory as early as 2003”: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/will-us-be-venezuela-ex-cia-official.html

– Tucker Carlson’s Conservatism Inc. Biden Steal Betrayal is explained by “One of the Greatest Columns ever Written” according to Rush: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/tucker-carlsons-conservatism-inc-biden.html?m=1

– A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020:

http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/01/a-hour-which-will-live-in-infamy-1001pm.html?m=1

What is needed right now to save America from those who would destroy our God given rights is to pray at home or in church and if called to even go to outdoor prayer rallies in every town and city across the United States for God to pour out His grace on our country to save us from those who would use a Reichstag Fire-like incident to destroy our civil liberties. [Is the DC Capitol Incident Comparable to the Nazi Reichstag Fire Incident where the German People Lost their Civil Liberties?http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/is-dc-capital-incident-comparable-to.html?m=1 and Epoch Times Show Crossroads on Capitol Incident: “Anitfa ‘Agent Provocateurs‘”:

http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/epoch-times-show-crossroads-on-capital.html?m=1

Pray an Our Father now for the grace to know God’s Will and to do it.

Pray an Our Father now for America.

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of MarySHARE

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

In America and the Catholic Church, we are losing the Nones, the young and the confused who are unaffiliated. I think that things are even worse: these  Nones seem to define the post-Christian world in which we live and that becomes very much like a post-post-Christian world. Because we are in a world that has lost an appreciation for the true, the beautiful and the good. This is really two steps back from Catholicism.

Let’s meet the Nones and go together to the altar of God

Dr. Jean-Francois Orsini, OP, Ph.D.

In America and the Catholic Church, we are losing the Nones, the young and the confused who are unaffiliated. I think that things are even worse: these  Nones seem to define the post-Christian world in which we live and that becomes very much like a post-post-Christian world. Because we are in a world that has lost an appreciation for the true, the beautiful and the good. This is really two steps back from Catholicism.

I happen to be in a very special and rare bubble: I am a specialist of management and I am also a traditional Catholic. There are very few of us. In most courses of management that are offered in Catholic colleges and universities they use textbooks that bow to the worst narratives of the psychological and sociological “sciences”. 

But I am here to tell you that we can change the world of the Nones and our world at this precise level point of the courses of management.

Indeed, let’s take a look at history and how religion existed within the past economic cultures. The economies were principally based on agriculture. Up to 90% of the population were occupied in farming 1. What is the mindset of a farmer? He has to deal with many variables for the success of his labor, some he can work with and others he cannot. Among the variables he cannot deal with are of some of formidable imports: the climate, droughts, strong rains, insects, hail, etc. What can he do about these? Turn himself to God and pray. Religion showed them all the farmers stories from the Bible and told them that in all things they have to rely on God’s will. They could connect with that and religion flourished.

Coming back to the Nones. What are their principal modes of survivals? Well, it is their career and the professionalism they need to build their careers. How dire is their situation? Very dire! 64%2 of the population live paycheck to paycheck. They spend their income on invoices and taxes without building significant savings. Losing a single paycheck, for one month, is a serious problem. Especially when statistics say that in average, they may spend up to 6 months3 finding another job. 

Now what does the Church do to help them with this problem? Answer very little. So, why is the Church not helping the executives, the white-collar workers and the myriad of small businesses that represent the great majority of the working population, young and not so young? Is it that there is a bias against them as they are viewed as the non-poor? Others than poor? And taking care of the poor is such a major requirement, we are told, for our plans of spiritual development?  Is it that there is a feeling that counseling the non-poor would necessitate talking about money and that is felt to be an unclean matter? Is it that to deal with the better-off as the non-poor may be considered to be having to go into major economic and political matters which are not advised for the clergy to go into? To respond to that later consideration we just have St. Pope John Paul II who wrote in his encyclical “Laborem Exercens” (On Human Work): the key to socio-economic question is Work. I am paraphrasing: Capital is something completed on, that thing which a person works on. A sheet of music is capital, the professional singer following the sheet is doing work. When the song is recorded on a disk, it becomes capital and so forth.

Actually, the Catholic Church possesses very powerful tools to advise these non-poor but genuinely in need Nones. These tools are the virtues that have been held high by the Church but are really the fruit of human wisdom and human patrimony. They are the cardinal virtues which were first mentioned by Plato in the Phaedo before being mentioned by Isaiah, according to Joseph Pieper. He even mentions them as if they were old hat already in his time.

St. Antoninus of Florence who is one of these saints who are saintly at avery young age knew about them. He was quite cognizant of the realities of the world of commerce as the principle of double accounting was invented in his city. In his Summa he lays the principle of genuine business ethics. He wrote that it is simply about applying the virtues to commerce.

These virtues are what should really be appealing to the Nones, because the Cardinal virtues are very practical.

A Jesuit (sorry I did not retain the source) professor of management at Santa Clara University did a study with successful businessmen. He asked them what was the most important element that was necessary for their business success. In his questionnaire, he offered many possible responses, including marrying the boss’s daughter. They responded that what was the most important secret of their success was “good judgment”. Indeed, good judgment       is the virtue of Prudence. Prudence is essentially being able to find, develop, imagine, the tools to attain a desired objective. It is the foundation of correct planning. Peter Drucker, perhaps the most prominent management consultant – and someone who taught Catholic catechism in Rome before becoming the chief consultant of General Motors – invented the concept of “management by objectives” … doesn’t it sounds like teleology? Shouldn’t our Moral Theologians be interested in getting involved now?

Here is another example of the practicality of the virtues in management. During a conference of Industrial psychologists, a speaker mentioned and deplored that his field did not have a concept of effort. Effort indeed is a chief interest to top and middle management who want to ensure that their charges are putting enough effort to complete their tasks well and on time. Now don’t you sense that “effort” is part of the virtue of Courage/Fortitude. This virtue is not limited to the soldier charging the enemy with his bayonet. It can be opened to many other lower risks as long as they aim at achieving a “bonum arduum” a good thing that is difficult to attain. Well, the difficult good to be attained can be found in the workplace. It can be a physical difficulty, but also, mental, financial, intellectual, career related, even ethical, etc. 

I should add examples of the other cardinal virtues applied to management. Justice is ensuring to provide to each what is his due. Before exercising justice, one must look around to find anomalies between what is due and has not been provided to those we call “stakeholders”. This effort of examining one’s environment is important in management as it resembles the need for a constant search not only of inequities but also of threats and opportunities and should spur  to action. Temperance in management goes beyond refraining from goods like food or sex for the purpose of higher goods. So, managers should not hold on exclusively on a preferred product, a method of working, a department, etc. at the expense of a better solution. There is an expression for a manager who fight for his department against another. It is called “empire building”. Let say: his marketing department wishes to spend great sums of money in advertising against the finance department that wants to limit these expenditures; those are typical fights that might jeopardize the financial health of the whole company.

Naturally a virtuous person has to possess all these virtues together. An other important lesson.

Why am I very excited to tell you all these things today? It is because of a certain experience. As I was in the University of Pennsylvania library consulting a collection of academic paper, a long time ago, for my doctoral thesis at the Wharton School, I found a paper that upset me at the highest level. The author was goading me with the statement that nowadays management consultants have the same role with top management of corporations as saints had with kings (like St. Thomas Aquinas with French King St. Louis IX).

Also, I wrote a book to promote the virtues in business called “Virtue Based Management”4. There are two copies selling in Amazon as I had to re-edit it after the fall of communism. Please look at the reviews on the old edition but the newer edition is fresher. I have had a dismal nonsuccess with this complete Catholic and Thomistic handbook of management. Similarly, to the instant realization that all the themes of management can be improved descriptively and normatively by a study of the virtues, which started me on the book, I recently had the flash realization that I had a solution for the saving the souls of the Nones. From the Cardinal virtues, the Nones may be led to the understanding and appreciation of the theological virtues and from there to the whole catechism. 

We have to know our battlefield in this conquest of the Nones through virtuous management. There are very few books of Catholic management. On one hand, there is the typical anti-Catholic bias of publishers, in particular of management books. You can verify that there are many more advice to managers from a Buddhist angle than from the Catholic angle. This is part of the modern culture in which the principle of Karma is much better understood and utilized in the wider population than the principle of transubstantiation for example. 

On the other hand, there is also the bias of Catholic publishers against a book that is not addressing spirituality from beginning to end. When I proposed to Father Joseph Fessio, SJ that Father John Hardon, SJ had communicated to me that my book was “highly publishable”, Father Fessio responded: “Find yourself a publisher”.

Therefore, I had to self-publish.

Another consideration: what about Opus Dei? It has officially placed its protection under St. Joseph the worker. I was involved for several months with Opus Dei who has a center two blocks away from my home. The good Opus Dei priest who did a very good work at operating a backhoe at my sins (their specialty) would place a wall between my spirituality and my work and considered the writing of my book: work. I have joined the Third Order Dominican instead. Being pre-Reformation, their spirituality and charisma does not put walls in doctrine as barriers to contain the heathen protestants.

In conclusion, to promote these efforts to reach to the Nones, we need an groundswell in the Church that will be perceived by these Nones. We need first a great involvement at the doctrinal level from moral theologians. Then a considerable effort at the pastoral level from the clergy and lay people to rally our dear Nones and hold them in our arms. But first we need to understand that these Nones do not necessarily have a materialistic heart and a love of money but are children of God trying to survive in this world’s economy.

If we do this, I would like to predict that we will also be able the rechristianize our culture.

Sources:

1 – https://animalsmart.org/animals-the-environment/comparing-agriculture-of-the-past-with-today

2 – https://money.usnews.com/credit-cards/articles/how-many-americans-are-living-paycheck-to-paycheck

3 – https://www.topresume.com/career-advice/how-long-to-find-a-job

4 – https://www.amazon.com/Virtue-Based-Management-Jean-Francois-Orsini/dp/1588271994/ref=sr_1_4?crid=1L5V94L4VX055&keywords=virtue+based+management&qid=1659973025&sprefix=virtue+based+%2Caps%2C86&sr=8-4

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

DO TRANSGENDERISM AND TREASON ALWAYS GO TOGETHER LIKE A HORSE AND BUGGY?

First Openly Transgender Officer in Army Charged with Giving Info to Russia

The very first openly transgender officer in the Army was indicted this week on charges that they tried to give American service members medical information for the Russian Government. 

The officer, Maj. Jamie Lee Henry was brought before a federal grand jury in Baltimore, MD. Maj. Henry and his wife, Anna Gabrielan who is a Johns Hopkins anesthesiologist, were faced with counts of conspiracy and wrongful disclosure of individually identifiable health information (IIHI), according to court documents. 

Henry and Gabrielan were approached by an undercover FBI agent posing as a Russian diplomat. Gabrielan questioned the agent if she was from the Russian Embassy and the agent said she was. 

Gabrielan gave the undercover agent medical information from Fort Bragg, North Carolina. 

Gabrielan told the FBI agent that she was “motivated by patriotism toward Russia to provide any assistance she could to Russia, even if it meant going to jail.” 

“Gabrielan also told the UC during that meeting that Henry, a military officer, was currently a more important source for Russia than she was since Henry had more helpful information, including on how the U.S. military establishes an army hospital in war conditions and about previous training the U.S. military provided to Ukrainian military personnel,” the court documents said.

There was a second meeting with both Henry and Gabrielan meeting with the UC. Court documents describe this: “During that meeting, Henry explained to the UC he was committed to assisting Russia, and he had looked into volunteering to join the Russian Army after the conflict in Ukraine began, but Russia wanted people with ‘combat experience,’ and he did not have any. Henry further stated: ‘the way I am viewing what is going on in Ukraine now is that the United States is using Ukrainians as a proxy for their own hatred toward Russia.’”

According to The Baltimore Banner, Henry, a doctor at Fort Bragg, gave the undercover agent material on five patients at a military facility. The information reportedly included a retired Army officer, a current Department of Defense employee, and the spouses of deceased Army veterans.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

The contempt that California Gov. Gavin Newsom has for America’s sovereignty is on a par with his contempt for state’s rights and parental rights. All this from a man who helped kill his own mother in 2002, at a time when assisted suicide was a felony in California!


Newsom’s Latest Sanctuary State Scam
September 30, 2022
Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s latest sanctuary state scam:
Illegal aliens who crash our borders can find sanctuary in California. Women who want to abort their child, but live in states with restrictive abortion laws, can come to California to have a doctor kill their baby. Now young boys and girls who are sexually confused, and who live in states where puberty blockers and chemical castration are considered child abuse, can go to California where they will be “treated.”
The contempt that California Gov. Gavin Newsom has for America’s sovereignty is on a par with his contempt for state’s rights and parental rights. All this from a man who helped kill his own mother in 2002, at a time when assisted suicide was a felony in California!
On September 29, Newsom signed a bill, sponsored by a homosexual activist and state senator, Scott Wiener, that legally shields parents and young people who come to California for sex-reassignment surgery from being penalized in their home state. The goal is to undercut the right of states to ban this form of child abuse.
This policy comes on the heels of Newsom’s billboard campaign targeting states that have restrictive abortion laws. Thanks to Newsom, California is not only a sanctuary state for women seeking easy access to an abortionist, his state’s taxpayers are paying for billboards in seven states advertising how welcoming California is to mothers seeking to end their unborn child’s life. In Mississippi and Oklahoma, the billboards even quote the New Testament in support of the killings.
Newsom’s predecessor, Jerry Brown, declared California a sanctuary state for illegal aliens in 2017. Newsom went beyond Brown in suing the Trump administration for building a wall to keep the illegals out. Last week he signed a law granting a state ID to illegal aliens.
On August 30, California lawmakers heard the testimony of Chloe Cole, an 18-year-old girl who described what happened to her when she was 15. At the time she was considering transition surgery.
“My parents were told that the options were transition or suicide. They complied because they were not offered any other treatment solution for my distress. My distraught parents wanted me alive, so they listened to my doctors. I was placed on puberty blockers and testosterone after expressing my gender dysphoria to my therapists, and I was approved for a double mastectomy all by the age of 15.”
She then got pointed. “Who here really believes that as a 15-year-old, I should have had my healthy breasts removed or that should have been an option? SB 107 will open the floodgates for confused children like me to get the gender interventions that many so regret. I am the canary in the coal mine.”
No professionals were there to counteract the advice she and her parents were given.
“So I easily fell prey to the narrative that if I felt different and did not want to be a highly sexualized girl, I must be a boy. I obsessed over becoming a boy. I believed that all my insecurities and anxiety would magically disappear once I transitioned. The mental health professionals did not try to dissuade me of this delusional belief. I was fast-tracked into medical transition after I was diagnosed with dysphoria in California.”
The day after this young woman told her story, the state senate voted 30-9 to make California a sanctuary state for transgender youth and their families. Every Democrat voted for it and every Republican voted against it. And now Gov. Newsom has made it official.
Contact Newsom’s executive secretary, Jim DeBoo: Jim.DeBoo@gov.ca.gov
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment