Featured Post

The 2017 "Let Them Be For Signs" Series

I've decided to make this year's ongoing astronomical discussion an official series.  So, for your convenience, links to articles...

Wednesday, December 28, 2016

Bp. Konderla Cancelled Vespers & Ad Orientum At Start of Bishopric

The Okie Traditionalist has recently attained the first public response from Bishop Konderla of Tulsa in regards to the removal of a society of exorcists and a community of nuns.

This, in and of itself, is a shame. It is a shame that it took the active prodding of an online blogger to elicit a response from our local shepherd. How regrettable that the bishop could not have come out and stated his intentions to the local community.

On the other hand, if a bishop plans to make unpopular moves against his predecessor's work, it's rare that he ever announces such manuvers.

The letter has been published with permission from the bishop:
Dear Joseph,

Thank you for your inquiry. No, I do not disapprove of the Latin mass and the people attached to it. It would be erroneous to read such disapproval into decisions the diocese has made regarding the two religious communities. Merry Christmas to you and yours. 
 
Bishop David Konderla
Diocese of Tulsa

If it is true that the expulsion of the exorcists and nuns does not reveal Bishop Konderla's disapproval of Tradition, perhaps the following fact does: I've confirmed this week that, as soon as Bishop Konderla took office, Vespers was cancelled at the downtown cathedral. Furthermore, the Novus Ordo Mass at the cathedral is no longer celebrated Ad Orientum, as it was with Bishop Slattery. The priest, once again, faces the congregation.

The Body of Christ is not a special little meal that we all eat together at a dinner table. We do not huddle around the Eucharist and have supper. The Eucharist is one of the most important sacraments of the Church, and everyone ought to be oriented towards it, including the priest.

The Body of our Lord is to be on an altar, not a crude dinner table. The altar should rest in a sanctuary, not a stage. We all face Him because we are all in prayer to Him. The entire congregation is to be oriented towards Christ, not towards the priest who is pretending to be a public speaker or comedian in an amphitheater.

This is what a Mass is
Furthermore, if everyone is not in a state of grace, then not everyone should be going up to receive Communion. Ann Barnhardt puts a finer point on this. Here is a lengthy quote from her:

"Remember: the purpose of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is TO WORSHIP GOD by offering to Him the Once and For All Sacrifice of His Son on Calvary. The Once For All Sacrifice of Calvary is miraculously and supernaturally made present in time at every Mass, and the immolation of The Sacrifice fo the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ is effected when the Priest consumes the consecrated Host and the Precious Blood.

"The only person that MUST receive the Eucharist, and, in fact, MUST receive the Eucharist under BOTH SPECIES, is the priest celebrant. PERIOD.

"Because the Church has been infiltrated by Freemasons, Communists and sodomites, most Catholics today think that the entire point of the Mass is for them to march up to the front of the Church and receive Holy Communion, which they believe to be a mere symbol. This is HUMANISM--the cornerstone of Freemasonry. Catholics today have been taught for the past fifty years BY THE RUBRICS OF THE NOVUS ORDO MASS ITSELF that THEY are the center and focus of the Mass, that the Mass is celebrated FOR THEIR BENEFIT, and that the point of the Mass is the distribution of Holy Communion TO THEM. This is why the "Shared Meal" motif--by far the LEAST theologically important aspect of the Mass, behind the SACRIFICIAL and NUPTIAL aspects, has been pushed relentlessly by the satanic infiltrators, and the Mass qua Sacrifice was intentionally hidden from the people by stripping nearly every mention of SACRIFICE from the text of the Novus Ordo itself. After all, one cannot be said to have participated in a meal if one has not eaten--or so the infiltrators would have everyone believe, and sadly, almost all today in the western Church do. Most Catholics today think that there is really no point in going to Mass if one does not receive Holy Communion--because they believe the Mass is all about THEM. When they see the Novus Ordo elevation, with the priest FACING THEM and holding up the consecrated HOST and Chalice TOWARD THEM, they think that the Holy Sacrifice is being offered exclusively TO THEM. It doesn't even occur to most of them that the Body and Blood of Christ is being OFFERED TO GOD."

Catholics used to understand this. But now, thanks to the infiltration of modernist thinkers, a great amount of men have been brought into the priesthood not understanding this way of thinking, and the majority of the laity do not even care to grasp it.

Make no mistake, the Novus Ordo needs to be done away with for all time. It is a novelty that was conceived by and for Protestants and Freemasons. The Catholic Church has no business converting Her ways to accomodate the heretics who are in an open protest against Her. It is up to those on the outside of the Church to adopt Her practices.

Finally, many people who have graduated from Texas A&M have high praise for Bp. Konderla's pro-life stance. However, just because a priest or bishop is pro-life does not mean that they are right on every other issue. Simply opposing murder does not indicate that a priest will not be a modernist. Disgust at ripping babies out of mothers wombs does not mean a priest is incapable of opposing the Catholic practices that existed before the 20th Century.

There have been a handful of respondents on either Facebook or other venues that have heaped praise upon Bishop Konderla. One comment I recently read states that "He's a living saint!" I cannot see how. Oklahoma has been wrestling with an outburst of blatant Satanism, and the bishop is dismantling the apparatus that has been constructed to fight it.

In fact, I would be interested in hearing a statement from Bishop Konderla about what he intends to do in order to combat this spate of Satanic activity. If Bishop Emeritus Slattery's team of exorcists was such a bad idea, what is Bp. Konderla's alternative?

In the meantime, no more Vespers.  I can only imagine the sorrow of Bishop Emeritus Slattery as he watches his successor undo everything he built up.

Tuesday, December 27, 2016

Obama Kills Free Speech Over Christmas Weekend

Today, I learned that the newspaper up there in Enid, OK decided to officially endorse Hillary Clinton for this year's election. Understandably, they've upset a great amount of their red-state locals with this move, and they've lost quite a few subscriptions and advertisers.

In their endorsement of Hillary Clinton, Democrat, the Enid News & Eagle editorial board wrote that Donald Trump lacked "the skills, experience or temperament to hold office."

So, does Barak Obama--whose birth certificate is still up for debate to this day--have superior experience when he was elected? Other than the fact that he was half-black, of course. (Because, gollee gee, you've GOT to vote for the first black president.) Did Obama's brief government work and experience as a community organizer make him far more electable than the multi-billionaire who is now going to be our president? Community organizing is considered to be more successful and fruitful than running a large family enterprise? Is that how our priorities are?

Madness.  Donald Trump is far more qualified to be president of the United States than Obama ever was.

The paper's senior Vice President, Bill Ketter, was quoted in the New York Times as saying:
"It was our decision at the corporate level, which of course was made known to all of our papers, that Donald Trump did not meet our company and journalism values, particularly as they related to the First Amendment.
What nonsense. They've endorsed the Democrats. How could the Enid News & Eagle be so stupid? The Democrats have been at the front line of censorship and propaganda for years.

And now, over the Christmas weekend--as he ALWAYS does--Obama has unleashed his latest and possibly worst atrocity yet. He has signed into law the "Countering Disinformation and Propaganda Act of 2016," which directly attacks free speech in this country. The US government has been planning a law-based clampdown of anything labeled "fake news," which also means anything that they don't like.

"Merry Christmas, America.  Enjoy the new law I signed."
This law was quietly slipped into the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act on December 8th, where it passed through the Senate. Now? It's the law of the land. Homeland Security will regulate what is broadcast and spoken everywhere in this country. The Establishment has long waited to attack the independent media and talkshow figures. Now, with this draconian Cold War-styled propaganda law, you can wave bye bye to Rush Limbaugh and all of your little online personalities.

This maneuver is akin to how the Soviets controlled their people with propaganda. Free speech is now under control of the Federal government. At first, the powers that be will nibble in small bites at independent news outlets. But in time, the Leftist Establishment will take enormous bites out of everything that the Right has worked hard to build up. Soon, it will be difficult to even have an opinion online.

We have seen this coming for a few years, now. We have witnessed how Facebook has been controlling their newsfeed for Leftist ends. We have witnessed Twitter banning the likes of Milo Yannanopolis and others who dare to be involved with anyone saying anything objectionable. We have seen Davis Aurini and others be flagged from YouTube. Alt-Tech has been working hard to counter these Leftist gatekeepers with alternative sites that respect free speech and independent thoughts. Gab was built to replace Twitter. Infogalactic was created to replace the Leftist gatekeeping website, Wikipedia.

But even Matt Drudge was chilled to the bone at this impending clampdown on our First Amendment right.  For an idea of what's coming, merely read the words of Matt Drudge, as he spills the beans on what's coming:
I had a Supreme Court Justice tell me to my face it’s over for me. 'It's over for you. They’ve got the votes now to enforce copyright law, you’re out of there. They’re going to make it so you can’t even use headlines.' To have a Supreme Court Justice say to my face--that it’s over--they’ve got the votes, which means time is limited.
The clampdown is going global. Germany is creating a ministry of truth. Israel is creating laws for websites against "web incitement."  Leftists still holding the levers of power across the West are working tirelessly to degrade Western speech regulation into something resembling China's laws.

This was all brought to you by the Establishment politicians who passed this law through Congress, and by President Barak Hussein Obama, who did this over the Christmas weekend when you weren't looking.  

And the Enid News & Eagle voted for more of this brand of politician?  They like laws such as this?  They voted for MORE of this?  They cut their own throats.  Yet they scream for more Leftism.  Again, the editors of Enid's newspaper state: "Donald Trump did not meet our company and journalism values, particularly as they related to the First Amendment."

So, Obama does?  Leftist journalists value the destruction of the First Amendment?  Lunatics, all of them.

For my earlier related articles following this story throughout 2016, click on the following:

Internet Freedom: Pissing Away An Inheritance
Eventual Government Clampdown on Internet Discourse
Internet Clampdown Prophecy Fulfilled: Aurini Banned

Here is Alex Jones' perspective on this atrocity:



Sunday, December 25, 2016

Merry Christmas: The Francis Effect



"I Might Go Down in History for Having Split the Catholic Church"
2017 is gonna be a Hell of a year. Here is the link to the original Der Spiegel report on the pope's comment.  Here is a link to a nice, readable, tidy, English-language article by Maike Hickson that goes into more detail.

In related news, this Christmas night, the god planet, Jupiter, continues to rest within the womb of Virgo, the virgin.  Probably means nothing.

Jupiter will leave the womb of Virgo after 9.5 months, on the Feast of the Trumpets, September 23rd, shortly before the 100th anniversary of Fatima.  Just after the virgin is standing on the moon and clothed in the sun.  

Anyway, remember kids!  Christmas lasts 12 days--not just today!  Any other families opening presents on 12th Night?  Is the new Star Wars any good?

Let's make America great again!


Thursday, December 22, 2016

Pope Francis' New Tulsa Bishop Now Removes An Order of Nuns

"The new bishop of Tulsa told us earlier this month that he does not see a way forward for our community in the Diocese of Tulsa, Oklahoma. In a memo to Diocesan priests and staff, the bishop writes: 'After careful consideration and prayerful discernment, the Diocese of Tulsa has elected to end its affiliation with the Daughters of Mary, Mother of Israel's Hope, and allow the community to continue their apostolic exploration in another diocese.'

"This is a great sadness to us and to many families and individuals in the Diocese of Tulsa and beyond who have worked so hard and given so much to establish our Priory and renovate the guest house that was donated to us. Yet, we are at peace..."
That is from the newsletter of the Daughters of Mary, Mother of Israel's Hope. Okie Traditionalist broke this news before me tonight, so I highly recommend you check out his place for some more facts and links. It's really sad, as Okie Trad states, when you check out pages 5 and 6 of their newsletter. You can see people putting their money and hard work towards renovating the house for their priory, and you see the sisters' happy faces as they posed with their new van. Absolutely tragic.

Unlike when Fr. Ripperger's exorcist society was suppressed, there is no available memo to print, display, or link to. Not at this time. Mother Miriam's newsletter, alone, confirms this event. This decision of the "diocese" took place in the earlier part of December.

Rumors of this impending act on the part of Bishop Konderla have swirled around me, here in Tulsa. However, rumor-fueled foreknowledge of what was to come was not enough to justify an official breaking post.

Okie Trad also has sort of known for a while what was coming down the pipeline. He tried to publicly discuss this month's dismissal. Followers of The Okie Traditionalist will be familiar with his previous attempts to warn the Tulsa community about the bishop's next move. However, when Mother Miriam, herself, discovered public discussion of the situation, apologies had to be made, and discussion had to be squelched. However, Okie Trad did ponder what would happen to the Doloran Fathers and Mother Miriam's Daughter's of Mary in early November.

The point being is this: all of the interested and vacating parties or their friends wanted everyone to hush up. "If we just keep our heads down, everything will be just fine. Things won't be so bad." This is a recipe for destruction that Traditional Catholics have been cooking ever since Vatican II. And because of this panic, the Catholic Faith has been dying with a whimper all across the West.

It was already in Bishop Konderla's heart to do this. He was going to suppress this community.  He will probably do more.  It should be clear now that this bishop has a certain kind of "vision" for Northeast Oklahoma that does not include groups such as this.  You will not be protected simply by playing along and pretending to be a part of the "groupthink."  You will be ostracized for who you are.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Being quiet and subdued got us into this post-Vatican II mess in the first place. Decade after decade, priests and laity have pretended that there has been nothing wrong with the Catholic Church. They do this in order to preserve the remaining integrity of the Church's institution--all the while, it's being eaten away right in front of them.

There is no point in hiding. If anyone in the Catholic community is shielding their Traditionalist tendencies in fear of discovery--there is no use. Will there be an opportunity for someone in the local clergy to stand up to this? I am uncertain. Will we see another career martyred in the near future? Wouldn't surprise me. Francis Church is alive and well in the Diocese of Tulsa.

So, I guess the message is: "Happy Holidays, ladies.  Now get out."

DO NOT CONTACT THE CHANCERY.  IT WILL DO NO GOOD.  Agitating things here in my city will only accelerate the process of modernism.

Follow the saga here:

Pope Francis' New Tulsa Bishop Cancelling Traditional Exorcism Society
New Tulsa Bishop Does Away With Exorcist Society: Part 2
Exorcists Kicked Out: Part 3 -- Satan's Country
Importing Catholic Modernism from Austin, Texas
We Are Becoming Feral Sheep


Monday, December 19, 2016

The Kingdom of Católica America Part 6: Barnhardt Supports Monarchy

TradCatKnight/Eric Gajewski recently did an attack video on Ann Barnhardt, calling her a zionist heretic, among other things--probably because of her rude rejection for an interview.  When Gajewski invited her for an interview by request of his followers, she said:
"All of your six followers? Absolutely not. You are a transparent fraud. Never contact me again!"

Classic Ann.  At least he got a response, though.  I've never really heard back from her whenever I've sent in a question or comment.

No matter, though.  She is fun to read, and often ahead of the curve.  For example, she's one of a growing number of people who supports monarchy.  

So, let's dive in by addressing those people who are horrified at the idea of being ruled over by a king.  Perhaps today's modern democratic mind sways libertarian, believing that peace is achievable by lending liberty to the masses to do what they will, just so long as they hurt no one.  Basically, "Let everyone be a hedonist, and everything will be fine."

I, of course, disagree with that concept of liberty.  As I continue to repeat, liberty is not an absence of restraint on hedonism and material possessions. Liberty is a good life of virtue, a secure possession of truth--both privately and publicly. Liberty is freedom from the bondage of sin for the sake of eternal felicity. Ensuring liberty is best accomplished by a Catholic monarch.

Along these same lines, Barnhardt states the following (capitalization hers):
"PEACE IS THE PERFECT APPLICATION OF GOD’S JUSTICE."
- From A Pastiche of Bitterness and Incredulity
You've gotta love those outliers.  That is, those people on the outside who are perfectly situated to see into our society from an external perspective.  Most people would object to the idea of any incursion into their comfortable materialistic lives.  A perfect application of God's Justice would certainly cramp your average person's style.  I'm sure that the very idea of God's perfect Justice causes His Holiness, Pope Francis, to tremble with indignation.

But let's not beat around the bush.  Let's get to it.  Barnhardt quite specifically extols monarchy and tears at democracy:
And now a truth that many of you will find deeply unpleasant. Democracy is a terrible system that rapidly devolves into the tyranny of the mob who then, without fail, install a tyrant. The founders of the now-dead American republic were quite open about this. Adams said, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” Yup. And the American republic didn’t even survive 240 years. The best system of government is a meritorious aristocracy that elects a monarch. Think about it. Shouldn’t the good, moral, intelligent people be elevated to positions of power irrespective of their family ties? And then, shouldn’t those people elect from among their ranks a “chief executive” who serves as a final authority when needed? Because as we all know, SOMEONE has got to be in charge; the buck has to stop with someone or else utter chaos ensues. Remember the term “subsidiarity”?
- From: Catching Up, the Cardinals and Peronist-Fascism
So, there you have it.  She's bluntly stated it as early as 2013.  Barnhardt is quite unimpressed with our "republic," and I'm sure she would agree that we are pretty much ruled by an oligarchy at this point. Disgruntled with the current state of things, she loves to tear down our current system. As do I.
I look out and see an entire culture of people who have absolutely no sense of the fact that they might, just might have brought all of this shitstorm upon themselves, deserve every bit of what is coming, and that any sort of repentance or extreme behavior modification is needed. Whilst angrily INSISTING that they are depraved, proud of it, and that the depravity is unanimous, and no one had better DARE suggest otherwise. 
- From: Trump, Sodom and Abraham’s Bargaining With God
I tell you, folks, Barnhardt is at Level Jonah.  She is like Jonah outside the city walls of Ninevah, waiting and wondering when God will destroy the city.  The self-destructive policies and tendencies of our people come as no surprise to her, largely because she believes (as I do) that American society is going about it all wrong.  She knows that there is something better out there--a more edifying system than this--but we stubbornly refuse to consider it.  We are like the dogs who eat their own vomit.
The far left is all about totalitarian control by a cadre of oligarchs. There really isn’t any such thing as a true dictatorship, because one man cannot physically force an entire government or people to do his will. He will always have a cadre of enablers and henchmen around him, and if he loses the support of that cadre of henchmen, they will kill him. Thus even the most seemingly solitary dictator is really just a frontman for an oligarchy. Dictatorial oligarchies use brute force to impose their will and have no respect for the Rule of Law. They consider themselves to be the law. If they want it, they take it, and if you don’t like that, they kill you. On the left, the most brutal thug with the worst case of psychopathy wins.
The far right is the same thing. The far right is anarchy, which means no government. This sounds good on the surface, especially when you’re face with the truly satanic government we have now, until you realize that also means NO RULE OF LAW. Every man for himself. In this environment, the most brutal thug with the worst case of psychopathy wins.
While the philosophical paths may differ, the ends are exactly the same. No matter which arm of the doughnut you favor, if you move away from logic, reason and truth, proceeding out of which is charity in the true sense of the word, meaning love of neighbor, not just throwing “free stuff” at the nebulous conceptual mob of “the people”, or as with anarchy a total indifference toward neighbor, you are going to end up with exactly the same end: an elite, minuscule, ruling class with a massive, brutally oppressed underclass, and lots and lots of dead bodies. In both the far left and far right, to quote Obama’s Manufacturing czar Ron Bloom quoting Mao: All political power comes from the barrel of a gun.
That is only partially true. All political power in a godless regime, either far right or far left, comes from the barrel of a gun. In a Godly monarchy, the power comes from God Himself. The same could possibly be said of an early Godly republic, but history proves that republics never last long.
- From: The Marxist-Capitalist Spectral Doughnut
Another fantastic blow, and spot on. American oligarchy is insidious.  As I've previously stated, no one knows who to blame in our disasters. Blame is shifted from one person, department, or organization to another, and people are left thinking that blame could never be properly assigned to one person. It could be "a committee's fault," or "the fault of a process," or "there was no good communication between individuals." Oligarchy keeps the individuals involved in a safe and nebulous bubble that no one can pin down.  A monarch, however, could be held responsible for our problems.
Subsidiarity is not exclusive to democracy, representative republic or parliamentary republics. Subsidiarity can be executed in many systems of governance, including hereditary monarchies. This is why Christ did not call out a specific form of governance, because He knew that many forms of governance are feasible, so long as subsidiarity is observed. History has shown us that a Godly man can reign as a king, living as a humble servant to his people. In the Old Testament Good Kings included Asa, Hezekiah and Josiah. In modern times, King St. Louis the ninth of France, King St. Stephen the first of Hungary, and King St. Casmir of Poland are examples of Godly monarchs who ruled in a spirit of subsidiarity.
- From: Boston Speech (On the Jews) Transcript
A Godly monarch is the ideal vessel for exercising subsidiarity.  Other government systems are possible, but clearly, Barnardt is set on the former as being the most ideal.  

Ann Barnhardt is but one of a growing number of Americans who are giving monarchy a glance.  While she is often at the butt of many jokes, she is typically proven correct, given the fullness of time.  Heck, at this rate, it may turn out that Pope Francis is actually called out for being an anti-pope in the near future, completely vindicating Barnhardt on the issue.  Should that day come, I hope it will increase her street credibility.  She's an insightful figure who is locked in an interesting situation during an interesting time.  I wish she'd write a book.


Sunday, December 11, 2016

Importing Catholic Modernism from Austin, Texas

Tonight, at Tulsa's 2016 Christmas Parade, I saw Bishop Konderla.  I think.  It was hard to tell, actually, because he was dressed like every other man, and he rode at the back of a motorcycle group.  The Knights of Columbus were actually more dressed in recognizable regalia than the bishop.

This week, a survey announcement came out of the chancery.  It reads as follows:
Howdy! I have been your bishop now for almost five months and I must tell you I'm very excited to be here. So far I have been able to visit over 45 parishes and schools throughout the Diocese of Tulsa, and I’m quickly learning of the great pride we all have in the ministry and work going on throughout Eastern Oklahoma. A Good Shepherd should know his sheep, and it has been a delight to visit your communities and listen to your stories. As part of my desire to hear from all of you, I am asking every Catholic in the Diocese to fill out a short survey about the Diocese and the DDF. The survey will help me better understand how I can serve our parishes, our seminarians, our youth, our pro-life efforts, and much more!
All survey responses will be anonymous and submitted to a third party, not the Diocese or your pastor. Please fill out the survey only once and help me understand how I can be a Good Shepherd to everyone in Eastern Oklahoma. 
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/DioceseofTulsa
Yours in Christ, 
Bishop David   
So, okay.  I know it's likely the good bishop doesn't care what ol' Laramie has to say.  However, he said he desired to hear from all of us, so who am I to refuse?

Basically, we've worked hard to build the Traditional Catholic community we have here, and we don't want it quashed.  If there were a word to describe the opinions in my circles, it'd be: nervous apprehension.  This is for good reason.  Not only has a cherished priest and organization (the Doloran Fathers) been shut down this year, but an examination of where Bishop Konderla's roots lie will help to vindicate our concern.

One of my colleagues at Cathinfo has informed me about the diocese that Bishop Konderla came from. I have been told how, down there in Austin, Konderla's former bishop did "everything in his power to subjugate the traddies and the Latin Mass." She said that the climate there is to "encourage" Traditionalists to assist at only the indult Mass at the cathedral, and that priests and deacons make sure that they are unwelcome in every other parish. One priest who attempted to help establish a Latin Mass in Rockdale was transferred out.

This woman recounted to me experiences that she had as she was attempting to reconcile herself and her husband with the Catholic Church:
“My first try at reconciliation was a parish I can walk to. I never was able to get an appointment with the priest. I later found out he is one of those priests on probation for allegations of sexual abuse, and he was eventually transferred near Konderla's stronghold [at Texas A&M]. The parish had no priest for almost two years. I had no luck with the office staff in getting an appointment, so I decided to go straight to confession. I showed up a few minutes early. When the priest unlocked the doors, I said I was there for confession. Then, once I had told him it had been 45 years, he said to make an appointment. I told him I had tried for years. Shocked, I stayed in the back pew, stunned. No one else came to confession. The priest busied himself with preparations for a benediction service. Then some people arrived with children to practice singing. I walked out and have never returned there.

“I tried the other parish near me. That priest has a title of Monsignor. I found him to be a racist and a bigot. He did not know the background of Our Lady of Guadalupe, and his parishioners parroted out: ‘Isn't she the Mexican Mary?’ There were only eight people on the feast day of Our Lady's Assumption. I looked into the back pews and saw a Hispanic mother with her two little boys, and my heart broke. On the way home, my husband said he didn't want to be Catholic if this was an example of a monsignor.

Next stop, Tulsa
“The next closest parish I tried was a little farther. I enrolled in a sacramentals class. According to the deacon-in-training, the bishop had ordered all church records rectified. I was in a class of other confused Catholics. We were all 'missing' proof of either our baptism, FHC, confirmation, and so on. All of the people there were Hispanic. A young, frustrated father who came straight from work for this class never had his questions answered. I feared correctly when he stopped coming to class. I, too, became frustrated. I was told that I would not be received into the Catholic Church by Easter if I did not meet with the priest regarding my marriage. I never got a straight answer from anyone on my issues (I married outside of the Church to a non-Catholic). The priest broke off our first appointment, and he simply never showed up for the next appointment. I will never forget that. My mother died the next day.

“I could go on. I tried three other parishes with worse experiences. I gave up wanting to reconcile with the Church. It was my husband who found the Eastern Catholic Church. The merciful priest there was angry with how we were treated. We were received by examination, knowing both Roman Catholic and Eastern Catholic/Eastern Orthodox history, doctrine, and so on. My husband is a member of an apostolate, through which we met Fr. Ripperger.”

It sounds like this woman and her husband have had a terrible time trying to discover Roman Catholicism. It would have been nice if the clergy in Austin demonstrated that they cared about converting people. What could have been different for my friend if these shepherds were more accessible?

Speaking of accessibility, here is another example of the Austin diocese’s lack of it. Back in 2011, a homeschooling group invited Austin's Bishop Vasquez to attend their annual homeschooler blessing Mass. This was a common, annual thing. But this time, the newly-ordained Bishop Vasquez allowed his diocesan Superintendent of Catholic schools to write the following reply to that homeschooling group:

Bishop Vasquez of Austin, Texas

Bishop Vásquez received your invitation to celebrate a Eucharistic liturgy for the fall homeschooling blessing Mass. Bishop Vásquez believes Catholic education, and in particular Catholic school education, is an essential part of the life of the Diocese of Austin. As you know, Catholic schools are at the heart of the mission of the church. Bishop's presence at the homeschooling Mass would convey a contradictory message equating the importance of Catholic school education with Catholic homeschooling; therefore, Bishop Vásquez must respectfully decline the invitation. 
Sincerely in Christ,
Ned F. Vanders, Ed.D.
Pretty nasty stuff, that. Pure, open, unprovoked contempt. A common complaint among homeschoolers in Austin was that Bishop Vasquez was openly hostile to homeschooling. It is likely that this Ned Vanders felt free to antagonize homeschoolers because he knew he had the backing of his bishop.

And so, blowing off people seems to be a tradition that is being carried over into our diocese, here in Tulsa. These stories out of Austin comprise the cauldron that Bishop Konderla emerged from. He thrived in Austin as a college chaplain. However, what kind of a man thrives in this kind of an environment? Surely, not a man who is at all friendly to what the Catholic Church has always been.

If we look at some of the stories out of Austin, can it not be said that we should expect some of the same to happen, right here in Eastern Oklahoma?

Consider that in 2010, Bishop Vasquez of Austin decided to allow a Jewish rabbi to hold Jewish Yom Kippur religious services on the consecrated grounds of the St. Louis Catholic Church. Prominence was given to the Jewish ceremonies over the Catholic Mass. The rabbi was to hold his event in the main body of the Church, while the Mass was relegated to the chapel.

Rabbi Alan Freedman, who was on the
board of Planned Parenthood
“When the first such event took place at St. Louis Church last year, the Church was transformed into a non-Catholic worship space. The altar was decked with apparel for the Jewish ritual, the tabernacle was covered, Catholic statues were removed and the Stations of the Cross covered. Before and after photos obtained by LifeSiteNews from last year’s event demonstrate some of the transformation.”

When questioned, the pastor, Fr. Covington, boasted that the Jewish community and his parishioners were pleased with the outreach of his parish. He further said in an interview, “There is no way that these gestures can repair the kind of damage that Christians have caused Jews over the years.” Later on, Lifesite news reported that this rabbi, Alan Freedman, served on the Board of Planned Parenthood in Austin.  These Jewish rituals were eventually cancelled, due to outrage from parishioners.

Is this our future? Shall Tulsan Catholics be disregarded and ignored? Will we have our cathedrals co-opted by pro-abortionist Jews? Can our homeschooling community expect to be ridiculed by official diocesan representatives? Will laity be blown off as they look for answers to their spiritual needs? None of this happened under Bishop Konderla, of course; he was just a college chaplain during those reported events. However, he thrived in those conditions, and was hand-picked by Pope Francis for this job.

The Vulnerability of Tulsa Catholics

Tulsa Catholics, you may not know it, but you are under siege—or, at least those of you who value the traditions of the Church. Little by little, sheep are becoming scattered and becoming feral. Will we quibble about protecting the careers of men who are supposed to be putting their very lives on the line for our souls? Or shall we turn our eyes front to the issue that stands before us all?

When Bishop Konderla reads this—and he will—let him know that a great amount of the people that he is supposed to be caring for view him with suspicion. Perhaps they say nothing to him directly, but I assure you that the laity talk in hushed voices in the entryways and parking lots of the parishes in this city. We discuss the various movements of different priests, where they go, and who comes in.

Our backs are already against the wall as we fight the virulent anti-Catholic Protestantism of this region. To fight the internecine war with modernism that is ongoing within the Church is another additional burden.

I therefore urge Bishop Konderla to not pick at the Traditional Catholic community that has been built in this town, and assure his flock that he is on our side. We seek the healing balm of the Catholic Church, not modernist NPR liberalism. The traditional people of our city are good, hard-working folks who have a lot of struggles in this life. Please treat them well.

I would like for it to be the case that my apprehensions are unnecessary.  I've been wrong before.

I've hesitated to write this blog post since mid-September, which was three months ago.  This is not some sort of a zealous sport for me.  I am hoping that Bishop Konderla will have an open mind about Tulsa.  I am praying that he does not dig in his heels when he hears about us Tulsa Traditionalists.  I am aware that 85% of what he deals with are headaches.  I want this minister of God to make the best decisions.  We are Catholics, not enemies.

Finally, let us not allow this issue to diminish the respect for the office of Bishop Konderla. We should revere the proper authority of our priests and bishops, as they have the authority to consecrate the Sacrament.

"It is this ministry of theirs that dictates that you should reverence them, not for what they are in themselves, but for the power I have entrusted to them, if you would receive the holy sacraments of the Church."
-God to St. Catherine of Siena

Saturday, December 10, 2016

We Are Becoming Feral Sheep

Shortly after I reported how Bishop Konderla shut down the local order of exorcists, there was an immediate outcry from the Traditional Catholic community to not make a big deal about it. Different people were trying to hush each other up. I'll admit that I fell for this at first. I withdrew the breaking story from my blog for a temporary period of time.

Everyone was saying that we should avoid talking about the suppression of this group of exorcists, that it was horrible gossip, and that it would endanger the careers of Fr. Ripperger and the priests of the Doloran Fathers.

At first, I said nothing about the matter. I was never told by Fr. Ripperger or any authority to keep quiet. I'd even written to Fr. Ripperger, himself. Even after telling him that I was the one who broke the story, there was no reply. His fans screamed that I should just keep quiet, and various bloggers and Catholic news agencies retracted their news stories.

Time passed. It was said that Fr. Ripperger needed time to find a new home, and that once things had simmered down, it would be okay to talk about this incident. We'd get some kind of a green light, or something.

That time never came. It never would. It was hoped that the repression of the Doloran Fathers in Tulsa would just go away, happily forgotten as the rest of the world moved on.

Knowing that there would never be a "green light" of any kind, I re-released the post on my blog. This story would otherwise have been subdued indefinitely.



It is not our job to protect the careers of priests.

It is not our job to stand by and pretend that there is nothing wrong, hoping that perhaps they can work their way into new, comfortable employment. I will happily help a priest stand up for truth, and help give a priest cover fire in the public square if he is getting hammered publicly by one party or another.

However, being quiet and subdued got us into this post-Vatican II mess in the first place. For decade after decade, priests and laity have pretended that there has been nothing wrong with the Catholic Church. They do this in order to preserve the remaining integrity of the Church’s institution--all the while, it's being eaten away right in front of them.

This apathy, this neglect--for the sake of careerism--is one of the primary factors responsible for putting us into the situation we are in today.

It is not the job of the sheep to look after the shepherd. Even if the sheep want to protect the shepherd, they are not equipped to do so.

Ordinarily, when sheep are protected by a shepherd, they are fed, cleanly groomed when the time comes, and they congregate in the open pasture. However, without a shepherd, disturbed feral sheep run for cover. They grow a thick woolen fleece, and their horns grow long. If cornered or protecting their young, they will stomp their foot at an enemy and kick at whoever approaches.

No matter how wild or long-horned a feral sheep becomes, it isn't suddenly a guard dog that can protect a shepherd. Wild feral sheep do not protect shepherds. Yet, there are endless ways that a shepherd is able to protect sheep. This is how we are designed. We require leadership.

The Church hierarchy serves as our shepherd. We laity are the sheep flock. Our priests are given the earthly and supernatural tools to tend to our needs. Priests, also, are risk takers. They sometimes will put their life on the line--or sacrifice it altogether--for the sake of God and His cause. Such people are known as martyrs. And God bless them for that.

Priests do this because they hear the call of God. They go on a mission. They devote their entire life to it. Their priesthood is not a side gig or a weekend project.

We laity, with our ho-hum lives, perpetuate society with our careers, child rearing, and educational efforts. We are not distinguished. Priests are. We are lower in the vocational hierarchy. We do not have special God-given authority. It is priests who are distinguished for the special things that they do and the risks that they take in our fallen sinful world.

So, if a priest rides a Pope Benedict XVI wave of false security, and he carries on in a diocesan structure that would ultimately cannibalize him for his Traditionalist leanings, what did he expect? What can any priest expect--particularly with a pope like Pope Francis, who only just this week carried on about shit-eating sexual deviants? Would it be wrong to say he has a perverse mind?

There have been murmurings on my turf that Bishop Konderla has been looking at other traditionally-inclined groups. Rumors only, mind you. The rumors appear, and then they disappear. But still, one cannot help but feel under more and more pressure in this circumstance. People in the community are wondering where the hammer will fall next.

Various instances occur, in which Bishop Emeritus Slattery will appear in a service, or there will even be a sudden unannounced visit by Cardinal Burke. These men are pillars of the Traditional Catholic world. Yet, by the time we hear about them, they're already gone. Could this be intentional? Okie Traditionalist seems to think the local diocese is minimizing the footprint of Traditionalism in this diocese.

Listen, if you will, to this podcast of Bishop Konderla. "Howdy!" he begins his homily, over there in Collinsville. His words linger on and on in perfect meaningless Novus Ordo style, nebulous and irrelevant--ho hum and banal--and it's as though he's not speaking to a congregation but to children. Towards the end of the homily, he throws in a sentence about supporting illegal immigrants, and I can imagine him pacing back and forth on the stage sanctuary as he's pouring out this forgetful pabulum.

It is as though Bishop Konderla is imitating Pope Francis by purposefully remaining aloof, hidden, and unclear about his intentions. And yet, as it is with Pope Francis, we can see the character of this bishop through the lens of how he leads the diocese. For, in another example, we can read about how one particular man was left with going to the last remaining exorcist in Tulsa, only to be blown off. And sadly, it's only after the incident is reported on a blog two months later that the exorcist gets back to him.

This is what we have now, and yet, some people say he's great and that he's a living saint. Why? Because he takes selfies and rides a bicycle?

Tuesday, December 6, 2016

The Ten Levels of Social and Civic Concern

Recent conversations have inspired me to throw this little chart together.




Not everyone out there can view the graphic, so here's the text version:

LEVELS OF SOCIAL AND CIVIC CONCERN
10. The afterlife (Church Penitent and Church Triumphant)
9. The overriding power/mechanism/model that
leads people into a good/virtuous life and onward to heaven
8. Civilization (Christendom/The West, Dar al-Islam, Zhongguo)
7. Supranational concepts ( NAFTA, TPP, NATO, EU, The Catholic Church)
6. The country and the nation
5. The state
4. The city
3. The local community
2. The individual's spiritual salvation
1. The individual's personal life
Everyone has an opinion these days.  Certainly, the majority of people have opinions of themselves at level 1, but often--here in the Puritan Empire--people tend to skip #2.  Due to the Protestant notion of cheap grace, people tend to skip most considerations about their individual salvation, putting hardly any thought into it whatsoever.

Americans like to think of themselves as political thinkers, and we had a very high turnout during our national elections last month.  But the majority of people tend to skip #3-5, and they can only think of who their next president will be.  The masses tend to think that is sufficient enough to make them political experts.  True, there are some people who tend to keep in mind the politics of their community, city, and state.  But these people are a rare breed.  Most people only think of voting for a president.

When it comes to supranational powers, the people who give these organizations consideration are globalist liberals, Freemasons, and Catholics.  If you're neither of these, chances are that you despise all supranational organizations.

Civilization.  A lot of people have opinions about their civilization.  There are ample amounts of people with strong opinions about what their world should resemble, and often times they ramble on about this without giving much consideration to #2-7.  The people who come immediately to mind are "love and peace" liberals.

Number nine--an overriding political philosophy--is the overarching mechanism that should guide our entire political order.  People without a college education usually don't concern themselves with this spectrum of social and civic concerns.  Usually, when you are thinking about #9, you tend to be very philosophical in your thinking.  The internet is filled with philosophers, of course, and there's no shortage of such people here.  But not everyone in our society is a philosophizing internet addict, such as my colleagues and I.  Number nine encompasses thoughts on Marxism, Capitalism, Dispensationalism, Republicanism, Democracy, Anarchy, Monarchy, and so much more.

Number ten is very much like number two.  Not too many people care much about the politics of the dead.  They just don't.  They should, of course.  If the month of November is to teach us anything, it is that the suffering dead need our prayers to be released quickly into Heaven.  And those glorious saints who now reside in Heaven with God are capable of interceding on our behalf to the Almighty--who they are closer to than any of us.  Purgatory and Heaven are as much a part of current events as our daily news broadcast.  If only we regarded the former as urgently as the latter.

People Are Not Consistent In Their Thinking

So, what makes this chart so fascinating to me?  People's inconsistency.
  • An average retail worker has an opinion about #1 and #6, but nothing else.  
  • An average snowflake liberal has an opinion about #1, 3-6, and maybe #9.  Your intelligent liberals will additionally consider #8.
  • A NeverTrumper probably considers everything except #2 and #10.  Honestly, do these people really question their salvation on a daily basis?  How could they, and still act the way they do?  Could it not be possible that these people, like most FoxNews conservatives, simply give a token nod to generic Christianity--thus neglecting any further thought on #2 and #10?

I would think that if you are going to be spouting off to the world how you think it should work--as I admit I do--you would at least have the common sense to have all of your thoughts lined up.  Doesn't it make sense to have your political and religious philosophies all correlate and work for each other, not contradicting one another?

Consider Vox Day's 9th rule for the Alt-Right:

identity > culture > politics

Identity comes from your religion.  Yes, perhaps that identity is formed from both your religion and your ethnic tribalism.  But the religion aspect will always be there.  Man is always seeking the Divine.  That is how we were designed.   

Taking a second look at Vox Day's 9th rule, we see that a person's identity shapes their culture, which shapes their politics.  This is the logical conclusion we can deduce--and which we thinking people instinctively realize--whenever we see Alt-Right Rule #9.  It just makes sense.

So, returning to my Ten Levels of Social and Civic Concern, it just amazes me how people who claim to "get it" leave out various considerations along the spectrum.  It amazes me how people will either contradict or just blow off certain aspects of this hierarchical chain of thought.  And, in my opinion, if a person's thinking is mangled in such a way, that is a good indicator that there's something wrong with their mode of thinking.

Which leads me to this:


Dear Churchian,

There is a word for allowing your religion to define your politics. That is theocracy. Is that really your objective? Also, if the Carlos Slim blog approves of you, you're doing it wrong.

Love,
The Christians

PS: Forget "evangelicalism". It's time to bring back "fundamentalism".
He's ridiculing people who allow their religion to define their politics.  And yet, he's the same guy who said: identity > culture > politics

He lumps himself in with "The Christians," but who is that, exactly?  His own, new brand?  Because, last I checked, his stance was:
 "Listen up, all you Catholic and Protestant idiots alike. I don't give a single flying fuck for all your "I belong to the One True Church" bullshit. Whether you do or not, I don't care."
Yes, people, your religion IS supposed to define your politics.  Right now, the American religion of hedonism Liberty defines American politics.  We know this because your identity is what makes your culture is what makes your politics.  Vox Day was right the first time.

And, as you can guess, it's Vox Day's latest contradictions that led me to draw out The Ten Levels of Social and Civic Concern.

Happy St. Nicholas Day!


Thursday, December 1, 2016

The Kingdom of Católica America Part 5: Arguing For It

Perhaps it's due to Advent and the approaching Christmas season, but I've felt compelled recently to attempt to plant the seeds of an idea.  I want to help make it conceivable for the people of our time to direct our collective minds towards an American Monarchy.  Hence, this ongoing series called The Kingdom of Católica America.

The Kingdom of Católica America
The Kingdom of Católica America: Part 2
The Kingdom of Católica America: Part 3
The Kingdom of Católica America Part 4: A Review of Star Spangled Crown

Naturally, being a gadfly and proposing this concept earns immediate scorn.  But oh well, what can you do?  After all, let us on the Alt-Right not forget point #12: The Alt Right doesn't care what you think of it.  And I certainly don't care about being an outlier.  So let's charge forward.

A Difference Of Opinion Is Germinating

For whatever reason, I thought that Vox Day and my fellow Dread Ilk were free-thinking types who would at least entertain a notion for the sake of conversation.  But upon mentioning an American monarchy, contempt ensued.

I really should have known better.  According to Vox, "[T]he primary principle of any Western society should be maximizing net human liberty within a structurally sound society capable of sustaining itself."

I heartily disagree with this.  A fan of Aristotle's advice on rhetoric, it's sort of a surprise to me that Vox didn't take up other Aristotelian ideas, such as this statement from Politics:
"[A] state exists for the sake of the good life; and not for the sake of life only...[P]olitical society exists for the sake of noble actions, and not of living together."
Liberty is not an absence of restraint on hedonism and material possessions.  Liberty is a good life of virtue, a secure possession of truth--both privately and publicly.  Liberty is freedom from the bondage of sin for the sake of eternal felicity.  Ensuring liberty is best accomplished by a Catholic monarch.

The Origin Point

The arguments originated on Gab, I suppose.  In promoting one of his posts, Vox stated this wildly popular--and agreeable--statement about Constitutionalism:
Pain is the path to truth. If a fact bothers you, if it triggers you, if it makes you want to shy away from contemplating it, that is the signpost indicating the way you will have to go in order to find the truth.
It was a very exciting thought, and I decided to contribute to the discussion:
It has recently been said: "Pain is the path to truth." If that is the case, then I challenge you to explore the most painful path for any American: the path to an American monarchy.
Vox Day's reply: That's not painful. That's just irrelevant.

And so it began.

My arguments with Vox Day and some of the Dread Ilk took place in the comment box of a great post on his blog, titled: The Party of Reagan is Dead. He stated: 
Conservatism and Constitutionalism are both dead because both completely failed in their primary duty of protecting the nation and securing the blessings of liberty for the posterity of the Founders.
Quite agreeable, that. But then, the rift began:
Some of you whine that there are Nazis and ultras and neos and extremists in the Alt-Right. That's right. There are. And those are precisely the radicals who will rapidly come to the fore if Trump, the nationalist elite, and the Alt-Right fail to reduce the internal stress, the globalists return to power, and the balkanization scenario begins to play out.
The nationalists, the white nationalists, the Alt-Right, and Donald Trump will fail to reduce the long-term stress that has been building in this country since its inception.  There will be an explosion in this country that is inevitable, and it is due to the nature of America's founding.

I attempted to explain how this was so.  Here is how that conversation went.  

The Arguments With Vox Day  

VD: "Some of you whine that..."

LH: Shrug.  Race war, cold or hot, just isn't the epitome of thrills and achievement for some of us. Forgive us for mistakenly thinking there was something that transcended that. Our brand is irrelevant.  

VD: Some of us don't base our analyses or our strategic opinions on "thrills". We prefer to pay attention to the observable facts. What are you, a child? Do you think this is all a cartoon or something?  The world is fallen. We do not live in an ideal world of Forms. Deal with it.

LH: One of the things that has always made you a fascinating commentator is the fact that you've always been able to keep the macro-scale, long term picture in mind.  Fighting the decline of the White West is a fine thing. I have no problem with it at all. Your tactics, suggestions, actions, observations--all fine.  

But this damned thing that faces us, Vox--it's like walking on the edge of a knife. And frankly, I hardly know anyone able to walk it.  I've agreed with 95% of what you say. But now, maybe 90%. Universalism--what we will witness if we get to Heaven--is not an enemy. It is a side effect of getting closer to God. 

The Left has bastardized Universalism, turning it into an end in and of it self. It is their tool. You are fighting their tool, Vox Day. They push bastardized universalism on is in an unholy way, the same way they push anti-smoking on us.

I think we ought to recognize the above facts, while still maintaining the battle strategy and tactics.

We will never return to the ancient boarders of the post Flood. God knew that Mankind would reach this stage, and to think otherwise is a sort of faithlessness. 

"What are you, a child?"  Get over yourself. I've followed you for years, and have been kicked out of many circles because I've put into practice what you write about. Save rhetoric for your enemies. I was trying to have a damned conversation.

VD: "But this damned thing that faces us, Vox--it's like walking on the edge of a knife. And frankly, I hardly know anyone able to walk it."

You may be right. But that is the only path I see out that does not involve the usual solution to these scenarios. Which, of course, is why I assume there will be war in the USA, and, to a lesser extent, in Europe.  The prize is where the power lies.

"Get over yourself. I've followed you for years..."  (laughs) Oh, the irony. The point is that your feelings, and my feelings, are totally irrelevant with regards to the strategic and grand strategic situation. So resist the urge to let your emotions color your rational mind.

LH: Okay, you're wrong. Feelings are not irrelevant, especially when it comes to the strategy. That is why God gave us rules for when we are not at war with one another. Speaking with charity, for example--particularly to allies. Besides, this isn't the military. It's your personal blog, and you know a lot of us. 

Look, keep laughing. I know where this is going. If you want people to just keep agreeing with you in the com box, then I'm just being an annoying gadfly. You say "that is the only path I see," and yet you dismiss fresh new ideas as irrelevant. You're older now, more set in your ways. I'll just take Fenris Wulf's advice and "speak as an observer" from now on. I was mistaken to think I could contribute any ideas. At all.

So just keep calling us whiners. Not a good way to keep allies, if you ask me. But I'm irrelevant. Clearly.

As to this post's topic: Constitutionalism failed. So why continue to return to it? Or why even return to what the Founders had in mind? Is it even possible to consider the next step? Something different and better?

Salt: "You may be right. But that is the only path I see out that does not involve the usual solution to these scenarios."  When has it ever been done? A path that did not involve the usual scenarios? Threading a needle with rope or making an omelet without breaking any eggs.

LH: Dunno, Salt. I don't know everything. But I can look it up. 

VD: Yes, I'm laughing. I told you to stop being a child, and you responded with "get over yourself". That was a childish response.  You aren't presenting any fresh new ideas. You're snowflaking and emoting. Stop it.

LH: "You aren't presenting any fresh new ideas."

True. My ideas are rather dusty. And, an American Monarchy is not a new idea at all, now that I consider your remark. Many of the Founding Fathers asked King George to rule the colonies directly. And, in fact, Adams, Hamilton, and Wilson believed that Parliament had usurped the King's powers. I suppose at that point, they felt justified to usurp even more power and just take the colonies. 

However, American Monarchy is an idea that is new to you and most other people.

A king could dismantle the oppressive governmental leviathan, return power to civil society, ensure national unity, and strengthen religion and tradition. A monarchy can become an integral part of the non-governmental elements of national life, and many good and constructive changes will succeed because the king will be in the job for his entire life and because he will be handing this nation over to his offspring. It will be in the interest of the Royal Family--and, really, every American--for such a king to lay good long-term policies in a way that no mere politician with even eight years to play with could or can do.

Warped: There are many examples of high IQ and well outstanding brown people. Ted Cruz, does not have the temperament or education to be a leader, but as a foot soldier he is more passable than 75% of congress. However, he did not come around to it by being stuck in hellish ghettos. If anything the solution to breaking the identity politics of brown, black, or other skin colors is probably to make sure they don't congregate in one area. All the crime happens when those who would prefer identity to anything else are congregated in small pockets. Make them disperse first then watch the good ones rise to the top. The others will fade away. It is no coincidence that all the big cities voted blue and the places with lowest population density per square kilometer were entirely red.

LH: "If anything the solution to breaking the identity politics of brown..."  Fine. That's fine. Just realize that there's something even bigger than that battle that we can focus on.  Although, with a good king and a decent culture, we can have a type of universalism that isn't a fake piece of shit, like we have now. We can have something tolerable and even pleasant.

VD: The fake-Nazis not only make a better case, they are considerably more based in reality. And they're only 70 years out of date.

LH:  You would have to link to their premise, as I'm unfamiliar with the fake Nazi movement. I suppose you think that every ancient idea is worthless. And yet, it was you who said that "the inescapable conclusion is that one simply cannot separate religion from culture, much less from civilization."

peter blandings:  @lame hirsch  anybody who utters the word "inclusive" is a cuck and needs to be excised.

LH: So, would you like all the browns here to continue to be ostracized and kept on the outside of society as outliers? Or are you hoping to kill them all off?

I tire of thug culture, myself. Reign them in. Have a king reign over them.

VD: "So, would you like all the browns here to continue to be ostracized?"  More than ostracized. Repatriated.

LH:  Vox, while I'm not laughing as you say you were, I cannot help but grin at this thoughtless and truly childish idea. You propose that all brown people--the 74.5 million blacks who have been here for centuries, as well as the 56.6 million Hispanics, some of whom have been here just as long--that they should all be sent to their "native" territories? They are going nowhere, and to think otherwise is a true fantasyland.

VD: "Reign them in. Have a king reign over them."  Imperialism is dead. Your ideas are not new. They are very old and they are irrelevant.

LH: You are wrong, and you are using a strawman. I am not talking about imperialism. My idea is not irrelevant. In fact, I will not be surprised if, within two decades, we learn of discussions about a return to monarchy coming out of Europe. You will, of course, be the first to hear about them, since you have chosen to leave America.


Talking With The Dread Ilk

Bumbaru:  An American Monarchy would be a good idea but it cannot be done.  Monarchies are established through conquering means.  Also monarchy=ethno-nationalistic religious dictatorship. USA is too diverse for that.

LH: It can be done. We just need to spread the idea of it. We just need to think about it and ponder it more. Openly. 

At this point, most Americans have an almost genetic hate for monarchy. But look at how the Alt-Right came about. We can do it. As Vox has often said, think about the long game.

Bumbaru: USA has become a great technological power because of its practicality in incorporating ideas.But also its diversity of ideas it is what corrupted it. There are so many whacky ideas in the USA, what makes you think people will consider yours any different. USA is a relativistic society, it does not take anything seriously.  The only way to install monarchy is through conquering.

LH: People will take it seriously once things have collapsed utterly. This is the long game I am talking about. When population centers have become feral dens of hedonistic zombies, when every police officer and military man is compromised and on the take, and when we have presidents and senators shooting at one another in Congress or the White House--without fear of arrest--when that day comes, and the remaining remnant of "pseudo" leadership decides they'd rather keep the country together than be torn apart in the streets...that'll be the day people turn to monarchy. 

I argue that it is at this early stage that we need to put the idea out there and to let it germinate.

Bumbaru: When things break down and chaos ensues, then Pablo Escobar type figures appear, you know the warlord that is also a man of the people, he will seize power and then after murdering all of his rivals you will get your monarchy.(Btw he will probably be mexican, because by the time USA crashes whites will be a minority in USA)

LH: Then let the whites have our own Escobar. But I say, this man should have good virtues. Let this man go in the direction that I am putting forth here, this morning. Let what I am talking about be his ultimate end.

* * *

VFM #6306: What part of God-Emperor is anti-monarchist, Laramie Hirsch?

LH: Hey, I'm loving Trump. This was the best damned election cycle I've ever seen. If he does any part of what he says he's gonna do, it will be glorious. We'll get to take away something for a change. 

However, Trump will not fix everything. Our problems are only going to become more compounded. I mean...consider the fact that Vox keeps warning us about racial civil war. If Trump was the savior of American history, we wouldn't be worrying about that.

VFM #6306:  "It's a model based on the government of Heaven itself."  There is already a model based on the government of Heaven in place. Or don't you trust the Monarch of the Air?  My point is your model can be on Jesus Christ's sovereignity, and you'll still end up with a model in a fallen world. That is the bit about "no ideal forms..." only broken ones.  The best way forward, therefore, is Alt-Right with nazis.

LH: "My point is your model can be on Jesus Christ's sovereignty, and you'll still end up with a model in a fallen world."  Perhaps. But as we Americans say, "It's the best government out there." I mean, when we argue for the West, we are arguing for Christendom. And what sustained Christendom for a millenium? Catholic Monarchies. A thousand years isn't a bad track record.

* * *

Elder Son: Will our new king be White, Black, Brown, Yellow? And will we get to call him "Your Majesty"?

LH: That's where Vox's strategy comes in. I never said anything about not having white dominance in America. Only to recognize that universalism is not the enemy, but a side issue. A major one, yes. But a side issue. 

An American king must craft a new narrative that is far more inclusive than the narrative of the old United States. Soverigns have often presided over radically different and even hostile ethnicities, religions, and cultures. But it will have to be that new narrative--that new culture, and a specific religion (not generic Christianity)--that will bind the people together.

The browns wanna play the identity politics game, fine. Oblige them. But it's a tactic, not a strategy. Encourage whites to stop being degenerates and to start breeding virtuous families. Yet don't condemn people who aren't uptight about the race issue. 

We've never seen Universalism in a good way before. It's an abused trick by the Left. Disarm the identity politics tricks of the left by installing a truly universal identity and culture. Not this bullshit we have now.

Elder Son:  [Tells us the story of Babel...]  This was God's doing. And no one has any business undoing God's work. Anyone who is an advocate of restoring Babel, is doing the Devils work, who is always trying to mimic God into his own image. There is a time and place for bringing the nations and tongues together into Gods Kingdom, and that is on Gods term, not yours, not the devils. If God wanted E Pluribus Unum and Novus Ordo Seclorum diversity, He wouldn't have done what He had done at Babel. Jesus changed none of this.

LH:  When it comes to Babel, please refer to what I said to Arthur Isaac.  

As for Christ teaching us, Christ came to inform individual men--as individuals. He did not come to give political advice and to sway governments. This is an important distinction in the Bible that many people never realize: The Old Testament mostly focuses on how governments and populations are to conduct themselves, while the New Testament zeroes in on how we are to behave as individual people. For example, exercising charity in our conversations.

* * *

dc.sunsets: This OP & discussion are very instructive as an illustration of not what, but HOW people think.  Everywhere we see a search for, or people clinging to, a single underlying paradigm that will make coherent the chaos they see around them.  We had communism, then The God That Failed. We had democracy, then Democracy, the God That Failed.  We had Muh Constitution, and Constitutionalism, the God That Failed, and of course we had Progressivism, which might be called God, the God That Failed.

The tumult of life now is simply the normal increase in chaos occurring when one prevailing monocultural belief system transitions to a different one in the long sine-wave curve of human social behavior. The monoculture doesn't drive actions, it simply rationalizes them.

I don't know any more than the next man what comes next, but I concur with VD that those who cling to past forms (the Universalist Cult or its faux competitor, constitutionalism/"conservatism") not only are doomed, they're doomed to portray the Keystone Kops version of defeat.

LH: "Everywhere we see a search for, or people clinging to, a single underlying paradigm that will make coherent the chaos they see around them."  Christian Monarchy, I tell you. It's a model based on the government of Heaven itself. It can get us out of this hell.

dc.sunsets:  Christian monarchy. Fine. I'm all good with that as the next monoculture, but if you look at history (again) you'll see that it still fails to fulfill the point I'm making. 

There is no set-and-forget, get-this-right-and-we're-set-forever kind of monoculture. It's just the window dressing on whatever much-deeper condition is operative at that time. These swings play out across time frames far too long for a man to grasp, given his life will occur entirely within a trend, or (if he's "lucky" like us) with one foot in a dying trend and the other foot in the chaos of an emerging trend.

To me, this OP is all about suggesting people stop arguing about the specific Narrative and grasp the deeper context of trend change. The twenty true neo-Nazis on the Internet are but a dust mote on which fools focus and over which fools argue. 

The real answer, the one about which I obsess, the one I can't yet see, arises from the question: "What social phenotype will emerge when society's DNA (genotype) shifts from manic optimism & inclusion to the rage and fear of its polar opposite?"

LH: "It's just the window dressing on whatever much-deeper condition is operative at that time. These swings play out across time frames far too long for a man to grasp."  Yes. Which is why I propose we aim for something that's been tested for a thousand years, which was my previous point.

"What social phenotype will emerge when society's DNA (genotype) shifts from manic optimism & inclusion to the rage and fear of its polar opposite?"  Here, you're talking about those snowflake feelings that Vox earlier said are totally irrelevant. I say, a king and his enforced culture can guide that rage and fear away from something destructive. Noble, gallant, measured conduct that was proscribed to us in Scriptures can guide us away from a zombie apocalypse. A reliable and regal culture can instill such behavior.

Avalanche:  "Noble, gallant, measured conduct that was proscribed to us in Scriptures can guide us away from a zombie apocalypse. A reliable and regal culture can instill such behavior."  Yeah, cause that's worked SO well for ... what, all of human history?! Do you think if WE act gallant and regal, why the MOSLEMS will suddenly take that up?! 

LH: Hell, yes, it did. It definitely worked during the Reconquista. And such conduct will create noble fighters who will effectively defeat any muslim who doesn't convert--when that war commences openly. Just like the Battle of Lepanto.

Avalanche: (Isn't that why women are being raped by the hundreds in Europe? All that regal gallantry?!) 

LH: Don't be stupid. The Christendom we're talking about is not present in Europe right now. Just ask Vox. Europe is mostly secular. 

Avalanche: How about those 60-IQ Congonese? Think THEY will see the light?  "There's something even bigger than that battle that we can focus on. "  You sound like a libertarian! "Why, if only we focus on the promised land, on utopia, on freedom and non-aggression for all -- everyone will suddenly, magically,turn libertarian too! And everything will be wonderful!"

And how are you going to convince a couple BILLION people to play your game? 

LH: By implementing what Vox Day has taught us. I'll start small. With you. Though I'm a subversive now, I'm in it for the long game. I assure you, this topic will come up again--and not from only me.

* * *

Duke Norfolk: I never, ever (ever, ever) thought I'd say this, but I'm actually entertaining the idea of monarchy in the U.S. (or whatever future country houses our nation). I'm far from sold on it, and I have much study and thinking to do on the concept, but it's intriguing, to say the least. Any good reading you can recommend? I know Hans-Hermann Hoppe touched on it.

LH: This "irrelevant" book, here: http://thehirschfiles.blogspot.com/2016/11/the-kingdom-of-catolica-america-part-4.html

* * *
LH: Okay, I'm out. Checking back in in about 14 hours. Hope y'all had fun.
* * *

Cail Corishev: The Romans had an even stronger aversion to kings than Americans do, yet they happily made Caesar more powerful than most kings, as long as he didn't wear a crown and call himself one.

There's probably a good chance that we end up with a tyrant or tyrants, whether we call them kings, presidents, or something else. That would be a far cry from the kind of limited Christian monarchy Thomas Aquinas favored, though. I don't see a path directly to that from here, but perhaps after partition it could happen somewhere.

LH: It can be done. We just need to start talking about it as an option. It's worked before. It will work again. In fact, in the grand scheme of things, monarchy is inevitable. This era of republics was a fad. A trend. It will be those obsessed on race as the issue who will ultimately be seen as irrelevant and impeders to stability.

Cail Corishev: We've just had eight years of a president who ruled a great deal through unilateral executive orders. Many medieval kings had less power. People who hear "monarchy" and think "all-powerful tyrant" need to learn a little history (I used to be one of them).

wreckage: exactly right. Look around the world right now; Presidents cause WAY more trouble than Kings, and definitely take a shorter term view.

Plus, with kings, if they fuck up, you can kill them. It's traditional! ;)

* * *

Chris Mallory: Before the Second Yankee Invasion during the "Civil Rights Era", Jim Crow worked quite well. Like it or not, the races should have different societies. Separate but equal worked.  Yeah a few negro criminals were turned into wind chimes, but it worked. Inclusion does not work. Desegregation does not work.  No King but King Jesus.

LH: Yes, perhaps in the beginning and beyond, separation can work. However, I object to different societies. For the West to survive, we cannot have different cliques with their own subversive cultures like this. We must have one, single, overriding culture that everyone should be homogenized into. Not the globalism that we know now. But something else. Everyone will read my words and think I'm a globalist--but I said that this issue is walking a fine line. The MultiKult that comes to your minds is NOT what I am advocating. If the blacks wanna stay with blacks and whites with whites, that's fine. But there should be a non-relativistic culture that is actively promoted by a ruler, and no one should be left out.

* * *

Dave Narby: @VD "However, American Monarchy is an idea that is new to you and most other people."  Not I, but if you'll indulge (perhaps in a new blog post?) how is that materially different than a strongman?  I still hold a little Balkanization is a good thing. Moderation in all things, y'know.

LH: I'm actually going to be putting up a synopsis of Charles Coulombe's Star Spangled Banner on my blog soon, so maybe that can give you some direction as to where I'm headed with this. I think I agree with you on the balkanization, though. Moderation in all things.

* * *

Natalie: Anyone wanting to build inclusive Christian monarchies is an idiot. The very fact that Heaven is (presumably) a place where God can order and rule all the peoples together in a happy city is PRECISELY why I tremble to think we could do it down here. 

This wasn't an order given to the Apostles. There is no "inclusive melting pot on earth" mandate in Scripture. 

God has put the co-mingling of nations at the very end of our history AFTER Satan has been defeated and cast down. This is the time when the lion and the lamb will lie down together, and only when I see the Heavens and the New Earth will I think it's time for the Syrian and the Chinaman and the Russian and the Nigerian to live together in perfect peace. What God has appointed as the culmination and pinnacle of history I tremble to think we can implement here on earth with our own fallen hands in our own timing and of our own will.

LH: Then do not imitate Christ or His apostles, since you think you will fail in the attempt. 

The most idiotic thing that I can think of is to think that we'll have an even better chance under the rule of oligarchs who only every now and then give token salutes to generic Christianity. That's gotta be the stupidest goal of all. Also, I've said nothing about there being an inclusive melting pot. Read what I've stated in this com box, and you'll see that I agree that in such a proposed Christian monarchy, the different ethnicities should be allowed to desegregate--as they cannot handle proximity. Whatever instances of Universalism that spring up ought not be disparaged, either. 

Basket of Deplorables: "Let him have good virtues"  He won't because he can't. 

There may be a monarchy phase in the cycle. If your aspirant has good virtues, he will be among the rivals wiped out. With power consolidated into a unitary, the fight for it becomes all or nothing, and no holds barred and the victor can absolve himself of all sins, at least in this life. There is a reason men as brutal as Stalin rise to power in such regimes, and virtuous men cannot. That is the fundamental conflict of marxism with human nature that turns the utopian vision into a hell hole with gulags and no toilet paper. At best, the victor's grandson may be virtuous, but not the way to bet. Monarchy may still be better than what we have, but don't mistake the reality of what it means with an idealistic gloss. I prefer radical decentralization and division of powers, like the founders envisioned, but also recognize it has failed.

LH: "He won't because he can't."  Sure he can. Have you ever heard of saint kings? It is quite possible. We should be fostering virtuous leadership in our young people so that this can happen. 

St. Ferdinand III, King of Spain
And besides, do you prefer failure? Something that fails? This "radical decentralization" that the Founders tried has led to an evil oligarchy. As I've said before, in an oligarchy, "should things become terrible, you will not know who to blame. Depending on the number of oligarchs, they could shift blame from one person to another, until you've reached the point that blame could never be properly assigned to one person. It could be "a committee's fault," or "the fault of a process," or "there was no good communication between individuals." Oligarchy keeps the individuals involved in a safe and nebulous bubble that no one can pin down."

***

The coming of the great monarch will be very close,
when the number of légitimistes (Royalists)
 remained really faithful will be so small that indeed we will count...
Prophecies of the abbot Souffrant (1828)
michaeloh59:  I suspect that our host's point may be that there IS is difference between the neo nostalgists and the Muslim Conquistas. That difference is that only one of them will help you oppose the Muslim Conquista horde.

LH: It will be a Christian Monarch who conquer Islam. He is known as The Great Monarch, and he has been foretold for a long time by many saints. We'll see just how irrelevant monarchy is when that time comes.

* * *

Arthur Isaac: God ended globalism at Babel. The globalist is fighting the same friction that every empire builder has faced since then, trying to build a civilization out of multiple nations. The only way to do it through conversion to the Body of Christ. They've tried to throw out Christ and hold onto Christendom. The reason we have so many moderates is because we are up to our necks in Churchian heretics.

LH: "God ended globalism at Babel." The sin of Babel wasn't that the people were coming together. That is what the Alt-Right is getting wrong. The sin of Babel is the same sin that the globalists are committing: They are trying to reach to Heaven, and "become bigger than Jesus." THAT is what we are fighting. Vox is missing the forest from the trees.

"Don't screw with me."
Solaire Of Astora: I've seen a few claims that nationalism or tribal separation contradicts Christianity. That myth is based on people mistaking the figurative for the literal. Being one under God does not mean there aren't different groups. The tribes of Israel were set up that way for a reason. The four images around God's vessel in Ezekiel were also four standards of four different tribes of Israel. The elect are separated by tribe. The millennial kingdom obviously lets nations remain separated, so much so that the Dragon is able to raise an army from among them. In Micah it is said that other nations are allowed to go their own way when the Messiah rules the world in the future. Unity without distinction is of Satan, not God. God creates life with actual diversity (aka not the leftist kind), but separate does not HAVE to lead to hatred. So for people who think the future of people looking out for their own is somehow bad for Christianity, just remember that there is a hierarchy of love, God > family > extended family > tribe > nation > humanity.

LH: I agree with Solaire. Don't disagree with him one bit. But for this mess of people on the North American Continent, I have proposed what I think will keep the people unified--even if they remain in their own segregated ethnic camps.

* * *

Sheila4g: As usual, every response I was going to make to Laramie Hirsch has already been made, and well, by others. He's foolishly trying to promote a Christian brotherhood of man under a God-King here on Earth, and because he envisions this as "Christian," calls it good. 

@112 VD: "No. With VERY few exceptions, they clearly cannot be trusted. The smarter and more effective they are, the more damaging they will be."

This is VITAL, and is always ignored by those advocating a one-sided miscegenation campaign to "improve" the Negro race, or others. The Negro with the largest percent of White blood is generally the angriest, with the largest chip on his shoulder, and the most virulently anti-White. Enough intelligence to realize the darker part of his heritage is intellectually and civilizationally inferior, and furiously angry about it. Just "white" enough to see a few things clearly, but not white enough to be White, and therefore determined that no one else should be, either. Same goes for Indians (dot) and Chinese. For all those parents insisting their miscegenated children look and/or identify as White, I could present dozens of opposing examples. Especially once they marry and have children of their own. Every Jewish/Christian marriage I've been aware of began with the Jew claiming religion didn't matter, until suddenly the kids were born and then having a Jewish identity did matter, big time.

LH: "The Negro with the largest percent of White blood is generally the angriest, with the largest chip on his shoulder, and the most virulently anti-White." Read E. Michael Jones' The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit, and there you will learn that the blacks have been judaized for the entire 20th Century until now. A monarch will be able to excise Judaic influence from the public square, and we can be our own rulers.

* * *

kfg: (Dude!): "So, you propose that there is a black Heaven, a white Heaven, a Hispanic Heaven, and so on?"  So, you propose that Earth is Heaven?

LH: If we are to imitate Christ, should not our society? There is no black, hispanic, and white Heaven. The people there are one. America has a ton of people in it--so many who are different subspecies from one another. If we are to survive, we are forced to imitate Heaven in such a way--lest the "race war wet dream" everyone wants occur.

* * *

J.M.: As someone who has lived in Hispanic America (South America to be accurate) I can say that this needn't the be case. South America is not example for anyone but it's obvious that you are incapable of correctly assimilating race mixed people into the white genepool (ethnic subsumption) partly because your culture is sick. At least its modern iteration of it. Someone like Obama had he being born in let's say Brazil or Colombia would have never identified himself as Black but as a Mulatto or coloured and assimilated to the Western culture. The same goes for many Mulatoes and others that claim to identify themselves with the non-white part of the family.

American culture is a disease. And no, I don't advocate for the mixing of races or mass immigration before you or another fool starts asserting so.

LH: Yup. American culture is sick. Anyone who thinks otherwise is fooling himself. The whole damned continent is ill, and a return to "Our Founders wanted to look out for posterity, so we should all be white" is an ill-formed idea from a sick culture. The idea avoids reality. "We do not live in an ideal world of forms. Deal with it." Lol!

* * *

Snidely Whiplash:  So, by your accounting, the goal of Nationalism should be to abandon the traditions of our fathers by selecting a dictator, excuse me, KING, and make sure he's of a different faith from both the founding stock of the country and the majority of the citizens.

And this proposal will save our country from the modern onslaught like all the kings of Europe saved their peoples from the onslaught of Marxism and Fascism.

LH: Yes.  It happened before.

Snidely Whiplash: It takes a special type of idiot to make such a hare-brained proposal. I mean, even the neo-Nazis understand they're talking about a dictatorship. They don't talk in terms of freedom, but prosperity, peace, order and duty.

LH: Then I guess Constantine and Charlemagne were special kinds of idiots. I suppose the Christianization of Anglo-Saxon England and Scandinavia were a dream. You'll have to now tell Vox that his fawning over Christendom has been based on hare-brained ideas. 

Also, I haven't rambled on about freedom at all in this thread, though I have been discussing prosperity, peace, order, and duty. Frankly, I'm surprised you aren't calling ME a Nazi for proposing this idea.

Snidely Whiplash: The single most deeply held cultural attitude of Americans is the absolute rejection of rank. How many people refused to support Jeb! Bush simply because the Bush family was becoming a Dynasty? Americans HATE dynasties.

LH: Yup. Makes the job tough. We'd better get started talking about this idea now, then. Although, you aren't making it any easier.

Snidely Whiplash: Go on fantasizing. The multi-culture is going to be broken out by race, and there's nothing you can do to stop it. Appealing to the rule of Heaven is simply asinine. For one thing, Heaven doesn't have any sin.

LH: No, you go on fantasizing. Continue on, thinking that turning your back on the Almighty is going to somehow solve your problems. The West has been in the process of doing that for over 500 years. And though we have nice shiny baubles that distract us, courtesy of Science!, we are the worst, least courteous, shittiest people that may have ever existed.

Snidely Whiplash: The good thing is that you are so far outside the realm of rational thought that it's impossible for you to have any effect in the real world.

LH: Actually, deep prayer effects far more than what my words could do here--as God is limitless. That being said, I wouldn't conclude that this discussion is without fruit. Baby steps.

* * *

Night of the Mourning Son:  Great article.

Nationalism is tribal. Biological. Higher order managerial concepts--constitution, conservative, Christian, capitalist, socialist--are only useful to the extent that they serve the tribe.

I'm a nationalist. I would happily support any of those managerial arrangements, as long as they're founded on natural racial/tribal nationalism.

The problem with today's Hollywood Nazis seems to be their clinging to retired symbols which have been thoroughly poisoned by the (((media))). The symbols discredit the naturally valid objectives of all nationalists. Other than that, what's the problem?

A bit shocking to see a fine article immediately jumped by violent moderates (heh). Their nazi terror seems best interpreted as a reaction to Hollywood Nazis naming the Jew. These "Christians'" violent fantasies are not a reaction to the bad PR the alt-right suffers by association with fringe nazis; it's existential fear. Plane tickets to Israel are cheap, and spare you the risk of punishment for high treason.

Infiltrators have often convincingly posed as Christians to cast equalist spells.

Or if it's just suicidal altruism or fear of conflict (the two have converged), then get it into your cuck head that "Open war is upon you whether you would risk it or not."

LH: "Infiltrators have often convincingly posed as Christians to cast equalist spells."  I hope you're not referring to me, as I haven't said a damned thing about all men being equal.

* * * * *

LH: Well, this was really something. 

To use Vox's own words: 
"Christendom has already been subverted. There is no power center left untouched by the anti-Christian entryists. Those trying to cash in on being shocking and subversive are simply too late; it is now those of us who reject the shiny, post-Christian secular technotopia who are the subversives."
I know that I appear quite alone in this idea for the moment. I know that, here in this group, I am the one who appears subversive. But an American monarchy is a growing idea, I assure you. I can promise that you'll see more on this issue in the future. And I can also promise that it will cure all of these problems that have blinded the Alt-Right--and frankly, everyone else. 

jOHN MOSBY: Laramie, Laramie, Laramie.  Give me, and rest of us a damn break. Enough with your sernmonious self already.



Makin' friends is what I do.