Open Letter to Certain Bishops and Priests, You Know Who You Are
My Fathers,
I write this letter with a heavy heart, but with the knowledge it must be written. To go straight to the point, too mant of you have abandoned your children and have said it is out of love for them. If this is what you call love, then you do not know what true love is. You say you want to protect your people from this virus, but your actions say that you care nothing about what is happening to their souls. You will say this is not true; actions speak louder than words. You were shocked recently when the Pew Poll came out and said only 30% of Catholics who attend Mass believe in the Real Presence, no wonder, you do not seem to believe. Do you believe in the Real Presence? I have heard too many of you say that receiving “Spiritual Communion” is as good as receiving our Lord at Mass. REALLY?!! In the persecution of the early Christians one governor asked why they had met knowing they would most likely be caught and executed. Their reply was they could not live without the Eucharist.
Today you care more about your flock’s limited time on earth, than that of their eternal wellbeing. You tell us to watch Mass at home unable to receive our Lord. Is this not the same as having starving people stand at the window of a bakery telling them to believe they are fed, but not allowing them to receive anything from within the bakery? You say that is different, you are right. Spiritual starvation and spiritual death are eternal, the torment and suffering will never end. The only thing your actions show is that you care more about yourselves and your image to the world. Remember, you will have to give an accounting for every soul in your care, and whether you believe it now or not, souls do go to hell.
Please, for the sake of your flocks, become true shepherds and not hirelings. For if you do not, many souls in your flocks will be lost, and your own souls as well. May God have mercy on your souls.
Today the Texas Supreme Court ordered the release of jailed salon owner Shelley Luther, just hours after Texas Governor Greg Abbott issued a retroactive order eliminating punishment for violating stay-at-home orders.
“Throwing Texans in jail whose biz’s shut down through no fault of their own is wrong,” Mr. Abbott tweeted. “I am eliminating jail for violating an order, retroactive to April 2, superseding local orders.” He added, “Criminals shouldn’t be released to prevent COVID-19 just to put business owners in their place.”
Moments later a tearful and thankful Shelley Luther was released from jail and delivered remarks. [Video prompted to 05:08]https://www.youtube.com/embed/v7ahJiTYpdk?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&start=308&wmode=transparent
helmhoodsays:May 7, 2020 at 4:26 pmGuest speaker at President Trump’s convention this summer? I can understand if she does not want to have anything to do with politics. But it would be great to see.LikeReply
SOCRATES says:May 7, 2020 at 4:26 pmHopefully someone will show the initiative and run against this judge and replace him.LikeReply
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on THE INSANITY OF WHAT THE JUDGE IN DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS DID YESTERDAY IN JAILING SHELLEY LUTHER MADE ME ASHAMED TO BE A TEXAN. TODAY I AM PROUD OF GOVERNOR Greg Abbott AND LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR DAN PATRICK FOR MOVING SWIFTLY TO RIGHT THE WRONG. I AM AGAIN A PROUD TEXAN!!!!!
Is Rush a better Catholic than Francis & his Bishops because he has Hope in Jesus’ Resurrection?
Why is Hope called a theological virtue?
“Hope is termed a theological virtue because its immediate object is God.” (Catholic Encyclopedia: New Advent, “Hope”)
Francis the Liberal and almost all the bishops apparently have shown by their obsession with the coronavirus hysteria that their “immediate object is [not] God,” but their “immediate object” may be fear of death.
Real Catholics do not live in the obsession of the fear of death. They are witnesses of Hope and Jesus Christ’s resurrection in that they “despise death” as St. Athanasius despised it.
Athanasius tells us the meaning of Hope in his great book “On the Incarnation”:
“All the disciples of Christ despise death; they take the offensive against it and, instead of fearing it, by the sign of the cross and by faith in Christ trample on it as on something dead… all those who believe in Christ tread it underfoot as nothing, and prefer to die rather than to deny their faith in Christ, knowing full well that when they die they do not perish, but live indeed, and become incorruptible through the resurrection… There is proof of this too; for men who, before they believe in Christ, think death horrible and are afraid of it, once they are converted despise it so completely that they go eagerly to meet it, and themselves become witnesses of the Savior’s resurrection from it. Even children hasten thus to die.”
It appears that Rush Limbaugh is a better Catholic than Francis the Liberal and almost all the Catholic bishops.
Today, Rush on his show said:
“You can’t stay hunkered down and shut in for your entire life. You cannot hide from something that’s gonna get everybody. There is only one person in the history of the world who conquered death, and that person is Jesus Christ. Nobody else has conquered it. Nobody else will. It is going to happen to each and every one of us… “
“… Look at what liberals are made of. Everything about liberalism is what’s gonna kill us, what’s gonna kill you, and how not to be killed, and how to avoid it. And these are the same people who at the same time don’t want any religion. They don’t want any god. They don’t want any way of finding a way of dealing with this reality. They want you to join them in the perpetual never-ending fear over death. And so they concoct all these things that they tell you are gonna kill you, from oat bran to caffeine to too many eggs, you take your pick, virtually everything in life that you do, particularly if you’re in America, is going to kill you.” [https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2020/05/06/my-theory-on-democrats-and-death/]
Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Mass and the Church as well as for the Triumph of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on IT WOULD APPEAR THAT RUSH LIMBAUGH IS A BETTER CATHOLIC THAN JORGE BERGOLIO BECAUSE HE HAS HOPE IN THE RESURRECTION OF BELIEVERS BASED ON HIS OWN RESURRECTION FROM THE DEAD
Originally published by the Libero Quotidiano: May 4, 2020
Authorized English translation by Giuseppe Pellegrino Reprinted with permission of the translator
Like the Biblical prophets and the great popes of history, Benedict XVI is both hated by the powers of this world and loved by simple Catholic people. And every time that he comes out of his hermitage to speak the truth, he illuminates the darkness of the present situation of humanity and the Church. He is the object of furious attacks – which have been going on ever since his election as pope – that have now come to the point of the distortion of his words and his moral lynching.
This week great controversy has broken out over the anticipation of the release of Ratzinger’s biography written by Peter Seewald, Benedict XVI. Ein Leben, which is being published in German and will appear in Italian [and English] this fall.
In the book, the Pope Emeritus responds to various questions and explains, for example, his dramatic and enigmatic statement in his homily given at the inauguration of his pontificate [on April 24, 2005]: “Pray for me, that I may not flee for fear of the wolves.”
It is a phrase that has taken on enormous significance since February 11, 2013, when Benedict XVI announced his stepping back. What was he alluding to with those words? Is this where we should try to find the reason for his “resignation”? Was he forced to step aside in such a way that it makes that resignation invalid?
And so Pope Benedict, responding to these questions, invites us to reflect on “how much fear can strike a pope.” Many observers – especially after his stepping back – thought that it had to do with the unfortunate episode of Vatileaks, “but the true threat to the Church and thus to the Petrine ministry,” the Pontiff explains, “does not consist in these things but rather in the world dictatorship of apparently humanistic ideologies that oppose anyone who does not conform to the established social consensus. Even one hundred years ago, everyone would have thought it absurd to speak of homosexual marriage. Today those who oppose it are excommunicated from society. Things are similar for abortion and the production of human beings in laboratories. Modern society is formulating an antichristic faith, which you cannot oppose without being punished with excommunication from that society. And thus it is more than natural to have fear of this spiritual power of the Antichrist, and it really takes the prayer of an entire diocese, indeed of the universal Church, to oppose and resist it.”
In these few lines, Ratzinger – as always – manages to condense extraordinary reflections that merit our deep consideration and reflection.
Of course, the Repubblica immediately tried to distort Benedict’s words, reducing his comments to a rant against “abortion” and “gay marriage,” thereby giving the nod to the entire media establishment and unleashing an onslaught on social media against the pope, who has once again been covered in mud. Ironically, by doing this the champions of one-way tolerance immediately proved the truth of Benedict XVI’s words: anyone who does not fall in line with the mainstream is declared to be anathema.
But the Ratzingerian reflection is much more profound. In perfect continuity with the Magisterium of Paul VI and John Paul II, Benedict XVI has spoken once again to denounce the dominant modern ideology that not only is anti-Christian but is also dramatically opposed to human life.
Like Montini and Wojtyla, Ratzinger captures the apocalyptic connotation of the present moment, in particular that of the “dictatorship of relativism” which opposed him during his pontificate and that today holds power, since it is also widespread within the Church.
Benedict XVI is not afraid to speak of the Antichrist, causing many critics who believe they are enlightened and progressive to rise up against him, but ironically by doing so they simply display their ignorance of the many books and philosophical and theological debate on this topic. There are actually many non-Catholic thinkers who have addressed the theme of the Antichrist in recent years. The Marxist philosopher Mario Tronti said in 2013 after the “resignation” that the pontificate of Joseph Ratzinger was “an heroic attempt hold back the post-modern form of the Antichrist.”
Similarly dramatic reflections have been made by Massimo Cacciari (I refer to them in my new book Il Dio Mercato, la Chiesa e l’Anticristo [The God of the Market, the Church, and the Antichrist]). Among other things, Cacciari declares: “We could speculate that Ratzinger resigned because he was no longer able to hold back the antichristic powers within the Church herself.” But now “the Church finds herself facing, for the first time, the true essence of the Antichrist.” Cacciari also published a more philosophical reflection in 2013, Il Potere che frena [The Power that Restrains]. The essay by Giorgio Agamben is also valuable: Il mistero del male (Benedetto XVI e la fine dei tempi) [The Mystery of Evil: Benedict XVI and The End Times].
In light of Benedict XVI’s words – “And thus it is more than natural to have fear of this spiritual power of the Antichrist” – we could well be led to believe that he had to flee “before the wolves,” which would render his “resignation” invalid.
But what sort of “resignation” did he make? As he explained on February 27, 2013, he remains pope “forever” and he preserves his papal name and title.
In my book, The Secret of Benedict XVI (Angelico Press, 2019), I demonstrated that, due to the enormity of the Enemy who was facing him – and since he felt his strength diminishing – Benedict XVI humbly made “a step to the side” in order to make space for someone whom he could assist by his prayer and counsel in the task of being theKathécon (“the one who restrains” cf. 2 Thess 2:6-7). Thus was opened a new and unprecedented era of “collegiality” in the papacy – unprecedented because it is apocalyptic.
But then the cardinals chose the man who had opposed Ratzinger in 2005, who is now the pope beloved by the worldly powers. And so today Benedict XVI finds himself called mysteriously to a task that only God knows. He remains on a mission from God.
SHARE THIS:
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on Like the Biblical prophets and the great popes of history, Benedict XVI is both hated by the powers of this world and loved by simple Catholic people. And every time that he comes out of his hermitage to speak the truth, he illuminates the darkness of the present situation of humanity and the Church. He is the object of furious attacks – which have been going on ever since his election as pope – that have now come to the point of the distortion of his words and his moral lynching.
Dear Bishop Gracida,I read your missives regularly and appreciate them.I am forwarding something that I think will interest you.The current issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association discusses “passports” that are being considered to certify whether you are supposedly immune to CCCV (Communist China Corona Virus), also known as Covid-19. Your constitutional rights, ability to work, etc. might be made dependent on such certification.Much like what the left has been trying to do for the last few decades, where they have wanted to conduct “health” research on guns, with an eye to circumventing the constitution for health reasons.If it does not come through properly, let me know.
Daniel M Giovanni (@danielmgiovanni)says:May 7, 2020 at 9:41 amAnd some also may ask why Doctor Fauci (as well as others) might hesitate regarding the overwhelming evidence of using hydroxychloroquine along with azithromycin as a successful treatment for COVID-19.It’s really quite simple. If they acknowledge that this combination works to combat the virus, then it torpedoes their efforts to both extend the lock-down and roll-out a mandatory global vaccine. Fauci’s connection to both the Gates Foundation and the WHO is well documented. They are globalists with a global perspective. Extending the lock-down works to the advantage of the globalist agenda that seeks to reconstruct the world economy according to their desire. The prerequisite to this vision is the collapse of the global economy. The more the lock-down is extended, the better the chance for a global economic collapse. Similarly, a mandatory global vaccine is another arrow in their quiver to implement global controls.We successfully moved past both Aids and Sars without a vaccine. But they can’t acknowledge that in this case because once again it will shatter their master plan. They can’t risk losing this opportunity.Some might say that this is nothing more than a conspiracy theory. But it’s not because it is clearly presented in their own documentation. One need look no further than the 2010 document developed by the Rockefeller Foundation Global Business Network titled, “Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development.” (As a side not, it is no coincidence that the Rockefeller Foundation was also very influential in the formation of the WHO.) You can find the document here:This document lays out the strategy that outlines precisely what we are experiencing worldwide. It details their objective to establish a “Global Political and Economic Alignment” that advocates for a, “tighter top-down government control and more authoritarian leadership, with limited innovation and growing citizen push-back.” Notice that it was written in 2010 and yet it simulates a future pandemic and the steps that will be taken to reach their stated goals. It is remarkable how the descriptions in this document declare with precision what we see all around us today.My hope is that this will give us the ammunition we need to challenge the individuals bent on imposing their will over the rest of us.God Bless,
Following my article yesterday, on May, 6, 2020, which sustained that Peter Seewald’s new Biography of Pope Benedict XVI demonstrated that Benedict XVI is still the pope, because his renunciation was vitiated by substantial error, LifeSite News published a very fine article by Maike Hickson, entitled, “Pope Benedict: I resigned but I kept ‘spiritual dimension’ of papacy”.
Praise is deserved where praise is due. And it has been a long time since LifeSite News or Hickson confronted the problem without any polemics: that is, without any push to interpret the facts one way or another.
Here is the meat of her article:
It is here that Pope Benedict then draws a comparison with the papacy. For, such a retired bishop, he adds, “does not anymore actively have an episcopal seat, but, still finds himself in a special relationship of a former bishop to his seat.” This retired bishop, however, thereby “does not become a second bishop of his diocese,” explains Benedict. Such a bishop had “fully given up his office, yet the spiritual connection with his former seat was now being acknowledged, also as a legal quality.” This “new relationship with a seat” is “given as a reality, but lies outside of the concrete legal substance of the episcopal office.” At the same time, adds the retired Pope, the “spiritual connection” is being regarded as a “reality.”
“Thus,” he continues, “there are not two bishops, but one with a spiritual mandate, whose essence it is to serve his former diocese from within, from the Lord, by being present and available in prayer.”
“It is not conceivable why such a legal concept should not also be applied to the bishop of Rome,” Pope Benedict explicitly states, thus making it clear that according to his own ideas, he fully resigned his papal office while maintaining a “spiritual dimension” of his office.
As can be seen Hickson has laid out the problem. If Pope Benedict still retains the mandate of the papal office in any sense, he has not completely renounced. And if he has not completely renounced, then he is still entirely the only one true pope, because a partial resignation is a doubtful resignation, and a doubtful resignation is an invalid resignation.
At the end of her article she quotes Msgr. Nicola Bux who says that the Petrine Office contains 2 mandates, the spiritual and the visible, and that you cannot renounce just one of them and share that with someone else.
I am not sure what Hickson means by “mandate”, whether she has translated the German, Mandat, or the German, Verantvortung. (Hopefully, someone on Twitter will ask her and post her reply in a comment below.) Regarding the papal mandate, it might be described in spiritual and visible terms, but it is only one. So Msgr. Bux is partly right and partly wrong.
But the Papal munus is the Verantvortung, or charge, and, as everyone knows, Benedict never renounced that.
It is important to note here, that Verantvortung, is often rendered as responsibility in English. And, in fact, as was shown by Dr. Edmund J. Mazza, here at FromRome.Info, in March, and as I explained the same day, in my commentary on his article, for Pope Benedict XVI it is clear that he never had the intention to renounce the spiritual responsibility of the petrine office, only the active ministry, and that thus, he remains pope.
LifeSite’s decision to turn off the polemics of “Bergoglio is certainly the pope” and “The Renunciation is certainly valid” marks, I hope, a watershed moment for LifeSite News.
All of us who remain or have returned to communion with Pope Benedict XVI want nothing other than that all come to the truth through knowing the facts.
Therefore, Maike Hickson and Lifesite News deserves high praise today. And I gladly give it.
In the future, I think the papal law on elections should require the Cardinals to give the newly elected a catechism lesson on what the papacy is, before asking him to accept it, because it is becoming increasingly likely that the truth is, that Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger did not know what he accepted the day he accepted his canonical election — And though that does not touch the validity of his accepting it, nevertheless, it does make it impossible for him to renounce it, because as I said in the documentary I produced recently, on the Renunciation, to renounce a thing, you have to know what you are renouncing, so that you name it.
Finally, perhaps I am being too hopeful for LifeSite News, because they recently changed their position and included sodomy as a Family-related issue, seemingly to placate the LGBT Movement, which is rejoicing over this change. So this article about Pope Benedict XVI might be neutral to a certain extent only to draw traffic to their site.
+ + +
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on Peter Seewald’s new Biography of Pope Benedict XVI demonstrated that Benedict XVI is still the pope, because his renunciation was vitiated by substantial error, LifeSite News published a very fine article by Maike Hickson, entitled, “Pope Benedict: I resigned but I kept ‘spiritual dimension’ of papacy”
Chris Ferrara Called for an “Imperfect Council” & his Mentor called Francis an Antipope
On September 17, 2018, Chris Ferrara, president of the American Catholic Lawyers Association wrote an article calling for a “imperfect council” to be enjoined to investigate and possibly “declare” Francis “deposed” from the papacy:
“The Synod [of Sutri in 1046] was convoked by Henry III, the German king and soon-to-be-crowned Holy Roman Emperor, a pious and austere Christian and an exponent of the Cluniac spirit of reform. The Synod declared that Benedict IX (who had refused to appear) was deposed notwithstanding his attempt to undo his resignation. As for Sylvester, the Synod declared that he be “stripped of his sacerdotal rank and shut up in a monastery.” Gregory was also declared deposed, either by the act of the Synod itself or by Gregory’s own voluntary resignation in view of the Synod [Historian Warren Carroll states in “The Building of Christendom” that it was by his resignation, Page 464.].”
“… What would be the grounds for a declaration of deposition at such a gathering of prelates? One could readily point to the evidence that a faction that included Bergoglio himself had agreed upon his election before the conclave, and that all those involved, including Bergoglio, were thereby excommunicated latae sententiae in accordance with Article 81 of John Paul II’s Universi Dominici Gregis, which provides:
‘The Cardinal electors shall further abstain from any form of pact, agreement, promise or other commitment of any kind which could oblige them to give or deny their vote to a person or persons. If this were in fact done, even under oath, I decree that such a commitment shall be null and void and that no one shall be bound to observe it; and I hereby impose the penalty of excommunication latae sententiae upon those who violate this prohibition.'”
“To quote Cajetan on this point (citations taken from the linked article by Robert Siscoe), deposition by an imperfect council is appropriate ‘when one or more Popes suffer uncertainty with regard to their election, as seems to have arisen in the schism of Urban VI and others. Then, lest the Church be perplexed, those members of the Church who are available have the power to judge which is the true pope, if it can be known, and if it cannot be known, [it has] the power to provide that the electors agree on one or another of them.’”
Why don’t you in 2020, again, call for a “imperfect council”?
Moreover, everyone knows that Ferrara good friend and mentor was Fr. Nicholas Gruner before he passed away.
My next respectful question to Mr. Ferrara is:
Why don’t you write a article explaining why you disagree with your mentor and close friend Fr. Gruner that Francis is an antipope because Pope Benedict XVI didn’t resign the “munus”?
Here is Fr. Gruner exactly and precisely saying what Ann Barnhardt and Br. Alexis Bugnolo are saying on German youtu.be:
Mr. Ferrara, please, be honest and explain why you disagree with man who mentored you in Catholic theology.
Stop running away from the issue. Go on your new friend Taylor Marshall’s show and tell everyone why you disagree with your mentor.
I notice when teaching the works of Christian thinkers such as Athanasius, Augustine, and Hildegard of Bingen that something often mystifying to students is the metaphysical aspects of their thought. They have trouble grasping that God is not a being, but rather the Creator of All Being.
They have a similar difficulty understanding that evil is a privation of Being, so that when a creature turns away from God, he or she turns away from the Source of its very Being. Turning away in this way would be like a sunflower turning away from the sun. The sun would not need to send a solar flare to kill the sunflower as punishment. Without the sun, the sunflower would simply wither and die.
There is no setting any earthly good or any combination of earthly goods, no matter how vast or wonderful, over against God, because God is the Source of All Goodness. It would be like choosing a few golden eggs of various types and sizes over the goose that lays the golden eggs.
Now it is true, metaphysics is often difficult to wrap your mind around, so there are legitimate reasons my students would have trouble understanding the metaphysical underpinnings of these great theologians. But there may also be something else lurking, something more troubling.
Proclaiming that God is the Creator of All Being nails down the claim that the stories about “the Lord” are not just “stories” – stories about some divine figure in mythic time or in imaginative literature, such as the stories about Zeus or Apollo or Marduk or Odin. No, this is the God of the Real World, not just the God of imagination or of my subjective feelings about the world.
And that is hard to accept. It is like the difference between saying that the bread and wine of the Eucharist symbolize Christ (so we can say “we feel his presence among us”) as opposed to saying “He is present – as present to us in this church, here and now, as He was in upper room to Peter, James, John, and Thomas, whether we feel it or not.
His actual presence does not depend upon my perception of His presence. He was actually there in the church, bodily, whether I was aware of Him or not.
When we recognize that “the Lord” is the complete and continual cause of the Being of all that is, it is a fundamental category mistake to think of “the Lord” as though He were a “clockmaker” god who could create the universe, get it “ticking,” and then go away. “If the sun and moon should ever doubt, they’d immediately go out,” wrote the poet William Blake. The sun and moon cannot doubt, but if God ever did, then they and we would “immediately go out.” If God were not imparting Being to His creation at every moment, it would cease to exist.
*
The metaphysical dimension of theology tells us insistently that the Biblical stories are not just “stories” that do not touch upon the “really real.” “The Lord” is not just the “house god” of the Israelites, He is the God of all times and places, of every cosmos and all of history, because He is the Creator of All from Nothing.
With metaphysics, when done properly, you run headlong into the hard brick wall of reality, like saying that the bread and wine really are the body and blood of Christ. Or like saying that this flesh-and-blood man really was God incarnate, not just a “nice guy” who said some nice things. He is the Word, through whom all things were made, become flesh.
If you can’t accept the possibility that Christ can be really present in the Eucharist, fine, but then we might wonder whether you think God could be really present in a human person. Was Jesus really God incarnate? Or was he just that nice guy, maybe even a “holy” guy, but in the end, just a guy?
Because if Jesus was just a “good guy,” then in the end, he was simply swallowed up by an angry, meaningless universe, which is what is in store for us. So the sooner we admit it, the better. Jesus is either the Word made flesh, or Marx was right, and Christianity is “the opiate of the masses.” Nietzsche called the bluff on living in that illusion.
In this vast universe – the universe we really have, the “really real,” with all its vastness and complexity, its good and its evil, its beauty and its horrors – is there a meaning that encompasses all of it, and yet cares for me, this little person in some corner of an obscure planet at the edge of an immense galaxy? Who could possibly believe that? Christians who recite the creed at least say they do.
If Christianity is just a nice story to make people feel better, the problem is that it will only make you “feel better” as long as you’re convinced it’s true, not merely imaginatively, but really, with the reality of a brick wall or an exploding sun – real enough to stand up against exploding galaxies, spreading pandemics, and murdering Nazis. When something like a pandemic hits, you either believe in a God who has all things in His providential care, or you relegate “God” to that category in which you placed Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, and Yoda: too good to be real.
The God of the Bible is not just a god, a “creator” in that Bible story, the way Zeus or Odin are characters in their stories. He is the God who is the Creator of the universe’s story – the Creator of everything that has existence: every quasar, every black hole, every galaxy, every quark, every neutrino, every cosmic force, and every person who ever lived. As C.S. Lewis once said: “Christianity, if false, is of no importance, and if true, of infinite importance. The only thing it cannot be is moderately important.”
Randall B. Smith is a tenured Full Professor of Theology. His book Reading the Sermons of Thomas Aquinas: A Guidebook for Beginners is available from Emmaus Press. And his book Aquinas, Bonaventure, and the Scholastic Culture at Paris: Preaching, Prologues, and Biblical Commentary is due out from Cambridge University Press in the fall.
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on MAYBE YOUR PROBLEM IS THAT YOU HAVE DIFFICULTY GRASPING THAT GOD IS NOT SIMPLY A BEING, BUT RATHER THAT HE IS BEING ITSELF, THE CREATOR AND THE PERSONIFICATION OF ALL BEING
I’ve heard friends and also mass media announcers say, “I’m mad that our government didn’t act sooner.”
I’ve also seen that said in quite a few posts and on many news stations.
It’s a thinly-veiled accusation that President Trump didn’t act quickly enough.
Well, I’m mad, too.
· I’m mad that Pelosi and the U.S. House wasted close to 3 months pursuing an obviously futile impeachment of the President.
· I’m mad that Pelosi sat on those very impeachment papers for 28 days before sending them on to the Senate.
· I’m mad that the Senate was shut down for 21 days in January and early February dealing with Pelosi’s impeachment, thereby leaving President Trump to deal with COVID alone, with no support from either the House or the Senate.
· I’m mad that the day the President closed travel to and from China, Chuck Schumer declared the action “racist”.
· I’m mad that 28 days after the travel restriction, Pelosi, downplaying the severity of the virus, begged people to visit Chinatown in San Francisco, again playing the race card.
· I’m mad that Pelosi swooped in at the last hour of the stimulus package, adding things that were pure politics and had nothing to do with the dire circumstances at hand.
· I’m mad that the Obama administration didn’t replenish the National Medical stockpile of masks after the H1N1 virus scare – while that shortfall is now being blamed on the current administration.
· I’m mad that there are top doctors and experts in many fields having to waste their time at daily press briefings, just so the ‘media’ can pester them with ‘gotcha’ questions that they think might be their ticket to a Pulitzer, and at the same time trying to enhance the chances of all the Democrat candidates for office in November.
· I’m mad that Pelosi is now talking about an investigation into Trump’s handling of the COVID crisis.
Every day, every turn, every word, every breath since before he was elected, President Trump has been attacked, mocked, accused and belittled by Pelosi and her gang.
(And don’t even get me started on the media.)
So there it is…… I’m mad as hell that our country is going through this,and petty bickering from the left won’t stop, even for people who are dying, and while our economy is imploding.
Hey, Nancy, why don’t you man up and stand side-by-side with the President to work through this mess?
American citizens need to see “all” of Washington working together, but your mob is infuriatingly absent – and I’m mad about that, too. They’re (House of Representatives) all on vacation till early May during the biggest crisis we’ve ever seen!
If you are also ticked off, pass this message on.
If each of us passes this message on to 3, 4, or 5 people … we’ll get the job done before Mother’s Day!
Oh, and justremember: if Trump and Pence were to die from the virus, Pelosi would be our President.
From Trey Gowdy: “I’m not saying Covid-19 isn’t real… But Pay attention folks, there’s much more going on here than what meets the eye. Is it a coincidence that just when the economy is booming, the stock market is setting record highs, we are winning the trade wars, school shootings have stopped, our nation is at peace, the Democratic party is a disaster and so is their likely nominee? (Biden). He hasn’t a chance in hell & they’re not about to let an outsider (Bernie) destroy their scheme. It looks like Trump is a sure bet for reelection after fending off 3 years of investigations and impeachment, then all of a sudden world crisis pandemic. Stock market tumbles, companies are laying off employees, everything is closed and canceled, CEO’s of giant companies are resigning and indictments are coming. Now they say there are a couple ways a President doesn’t win reelection. Those are an unpopular war or a poor economy. But there is something larger going on here driving this sudden outbreak right after Trump beats an impeachment. Especially the fact that it (Corona Virus) originated in China who we are in a global trade war with; brought on by Trump. Let’s not forget Biden’s back door deals with CHINA as well. China doesn’t want 4 more years of Trump either. It all seems rather convenient for the nations and opponents of our current President and economy 5 months before an election. Couldn’t have hit at a more perfect time. With the Democrats running out of campaign talking points, in light of no school shootings, no migrant caravans at the southern border, fighting in Syria winding down, North Korea not firing missiles and Trump beating a sham impeachment. The Corona Virus gave them one last hail Mary to try and point fingers at Trump with the clock winding down in 2020. This is almost the perfect fascist playbook. Control the population with fear-mongering and panic, control the media, spread propaganda and the fan-favorite disarm the population. Oh, and did anyone notice that while they are mad as hell at Trump for not sending aid to Ukraine, they THEMSELVES voted AGAINST giving ANY emergency aid to all Americans ? Sorry but I don’t think we are all going to die. Remember when Ebola was what was going to kill us all, and the media kept showing the piles of body bags that were prepared for the fallout. Then a month later it was totally forgotten. The common flu has killed more people this year already and the media is SILENT! A handful of deaths out of 320 million Americans and we are in panic tearing down our society and costing our economy billions in the wake. It all just seems fishy, a little too well-timed if you ask me.” Trey Gowdy
Brian Baker says:
SOCRATES says:
ABYSSUS ABYSSUM INVOCAT / DEEP CALLS TO DEEP 
You must be logged in to post a comment.