"The inability to kneel is seen as the very essence of the diabolical..."

Lifesite News reports:


"A Catholic church in the United States’ island territory of Guam is forbidding the faithful from kneeling in prayer during church services in reaction to the COVID-19 pandemic.


A parishioner sent LifeSiteNews a photo of one of the pews at St. Jude Thaddeus Catholic Parish in Sinajana, bearing a sign asking the faithful, 'PLEASE DO NOT KNEEL.' The parishioner also said that a priest at the church had stopped administering Holy Communion on the tongue.

A July 12 notice published to the church’s Facebook page lists 'do not use kneelers to pray' among a list of health rules for indoor services, which also includes mandatory face masks and temperature screenings, hand sanitizer at the entrances, and forbidding handshakes during the 'sign of peace.'

'I didn’t go back the following Sundays because of the sign,' said one parishioner, who wished to remain anonymous. 'I decided to go to another church that does not post such nonsense.' The parishioner added that posting the signs 'indicates to me lack of faith in the Eucharist.'"

____________________________________________


I've said this many times before, masonic forces seek to subvert the Church from within and to create a 'new church' created in the image and likeness of man. The new humanitarian religion will result from a quiet revolution within the Church. This new religion will be anti-supernatural. And it will embrace the Socialistic New World Order and the Reign of Antichrist. This is the false church Venerable Anne Catherine Emmerich saw in her visions.

In this false church within the True Church, the cancer within the Mystical Body of Christ, there is a loss of the sense of the sacred.  Which is why Fr. Miceli wrote that, "Much of the new liturgy has been drained of the numinous and the sacred.  The new forms are without splendor, flattened, undifferentiated.  Why was kneeling replaced by standing?  Jesus himself fell on his knees and on his face as he prayed to his heavenly Father.  Satan too knows the meaning of worship and man's need for it.  He tried to get Jesus to fall down and worship him.  Why has the liturgical year and the Mass been so unfortunately mutilated against the wishes of the faithful?  In fact, the faithful are now confused about the Mass, the feast of the saints, the holy seasons.  Why was the Gloria, that prayer of total consecration on God's Majesty and Goodness, restricted practically to Sundays alone, and only to those Sundays outside of Lent? Moreover, is the faith really renewed and vivified by by obscuring our sense of community with the Christians of apostolic and ancient times?  The new liturgy no longer draws us into the true experience of reliving the Life of Christ.  We are deprived of this experience through the elimination of the hierarchy of feasts and the at random changing of the dates of famous feasts....

Then too, the new forms are the result of experimentation.  But one experiments with things, with objects that one wants to analyze.  Experimentation is the method of science.  The wretched idolatry and vulgarity of tinkering with sacred realities has, unfortunately, penetrated the Church and produced a mediocrity-ridden liturgy, a show for spectators that distracts from the holy, frustrates intimate communion with God and trivializes, where it does not suppress, sacred actions, symbols, music and words.

In reality, such diminished liturgies have renewed nothing.  Rather these innovations have emptied churches, dried up vocations to the priesthood and sisterhood, driven off converts and opened the doors wide to a flood of renegades.  Even though valid in its essence, such a new liturgy cannot inspire for it is colorless, artificial, banal, without the odor and flavor of sanctity.  A humanized and popularized, man-oriented liturgy will never produce saints.  Only a divinized, God-oriented liturgy can accomplish that miracle.  One suspects that many priests realize the banality of the new liturgy.  That is why they often become, during the Mass and other ceremonies, actors and entertainers.  They put on a show in order to gain the attention of the congregation.  These comedians in chasubles preach a utopian Christianity rather than the true Christianity.  Their treasure is man rather than God; their emphasis this-worldly rather than other-worldly; their goal progress rather than sanctity; their apostolate is immanent rather than transcendent; their means to their goal is the way of revolution rather than the way of the cross; they preach a secular Church instead of the Sacred Church founded by Christ; the essence of their morality is self-assertion rather than self-denial; the Christ they present to the congregation is the Humanist Christ rather than the God-Man crucified Christ...they genuflect before the world and stand before Christ...they are moved by resentment and envy instead of radiating the joy of Christ.."

In his book The Spirit of the Liturgy, Poor Benedict XVI (then Cardinal Ratzinger) wrote: "..there is a story that comes from the sayings of the Desert Fathers, according to which the devil was compelled by God to show himself to a certain Abba Apollo. He looked black and ugly, with frighteningly thin limbs, but most strikingly, he had no knees. The inability to kneel is seen as the very essence of the diabolical.  See here for example.

But I do not want to go into more detail. I should like to make just one more remark. The expression used by Saint Luke to describe the kneeling of Christians (theis ta gonata) is unknown in classical Greek. We are dealing here with a specifically Christian word. With that remark, our reflections turn full circle to where they began. It may well be that kneeling is alien to modern culture — insofar as it is a culture, for this culture has turned away from the faith and no longer knows the one before whom kneeling is the right, indeed the intrinsically
necessary gesture. The man who learns to believe learns also to kneel, and a faith or a liturgy no longer familiar with kneeling would be sick at the core. Where it has been lost, kneeling must be rediscovered, so that, in our prayer, we remain in fellowship with the apostles and martyrs, in fellowship with the whole cosmos, indeed in union with Jesus Christ Himself."

Worcester City Councilor Sarai Rivera engages in historical revisionism

As noted here, Worcester Councilor Sarai Rivera has failed (at least for now) in her bid to have a statue of Christopher Columbus removed from the city's Union Station.

Rivera, a Pentecostal Minister, is quoted as having said that,  "the statue should be removed because of atrocities and devastation caused for indigenous people in the Caribbean, Central America, and North America."

Rivera identifies as Afro Taina and claims descent from the Taino indigenous people of Puerto Rico. She said she never participated in Worcester's annual Columbus Day Parade.

“I could never go to celebrate someone who committed genocide on my ancestors,” she said, according to the Worcester Gazette & Telegram.

“Columbus is not about heritage. Columbus is about hate,” Rivera said to the council meeting, according to the Boston Globe."

Rivera is obviously no historian.  Columbus never committed genocide on any people.  This is explained by noted historian Warren Carroll, Ph.D here.

In fact, as Dr. Carroll explains:


"Upon the islands that he first discovered on the other side of the Atlantic, Columbus found native inhabitants, whom he called Indians, believing himself to be in 'the Indies' of Asia. And here began the long and troubled story of Columbus' interaction with the native Americans.

Before going into the historical details of that interaction, it is essential to clear away the fog of idealization and special pleading that now surrounds so much talk about the American Indians. First of all we have to understand the situation that existed in the world of the Indian of the Caribbean and mid-America when Columbus arrived.

It seems to be true, as is so often repeated today, that when Columbus found them, the Indians inhabiting the Bahama Islands, Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the great island the Spanish called Hispaniola (now divided between Haiti and the Dominican Republic) were a gentle, happy, attractive people living peacefully in good ecological balance with their surroundings. They were known as Taino, or Arawaks.

But they were not destined to remain in their Eden-like situation for long, even if Columbus and the Spanish had not come. Advancing steadily northward from the long chain of Caribbean islands called the Antilles was one of the most ferocious people in recorded history, the Caribs. They were savage conquerors who practiced cannibalism, not as an occasional cultic ritual, but as a regular diet. Captured prisoners were immediately eaten. Conquered peoples were systematically devoured. On every island they seized, the Caribs soon exterminated every Taino. On no island did the two tribes coexist.

Across the island-studded Caribbean Sea lay Mexico. Though politically and culturally advanced beyond most other Indian cultures, the Mexica had a large army, a well-developed governmental administration, a system of writing, and stone temples, their empire, which we call Aztec, carried out ritual human sacrifice on a scale far exceeding any recorded of any other people in the history of the world. The law of the Mexica empire required a thousand human sacrifices to the god Huitzilopochtli in every town with a temple, every year; there were 371 subject towns in the empire, and the majority had full-scale temples. There were many other sacrifices as well. The total number was at least 50,000 a year, probably much more. The early Mexican historian Ixtlilxochitl estimated that one out of every five children in Mexico was sacrificed. When in the year 1487 the immense new temple of Huitzilopochtli was dedicated in Tenochtitlan (now Mexico City), more than 80,000 men were sacrificed, at fifteen seconds per man, for four days and four nights of almost unimaginable horror."

Speaking of hate, Ms. Rivera supports the hate group Black Lives Matter.  For more on this sinister group, see here.

If we will not have Christ, we will have chaos

An editorial in The New York Post:


"In yet another sign that idealistic protests have given way to mindless destruction, vandals over the weekend targeted two statues of … the Virgin Mary.

It was graffiti in Elmhurst, Queens: 'IDOL' spray-painted across her skirt in the early morning outside the Cathedral Preparatory School and Seminary on 92nd Street.

And arson in Dorchester, Mass.: a statue outside of Saint Peter’s Parish damaged by burns to the face, hands and arms. Fr. John Currie, the pastor, was 'disappointed' by the desecration, noting, 'Our image of our lady is so important to us in our faith.'

Maybe these are simply anti-Catholic bigots who figure they might as well join in on the attacks against monuments.

Maybe the perps pretend they’re somehow forwarding the Black Lives Matter message — after all, BLM thinker Shaun King recently said that images depicting Jesus as a 'white European' should be torn down as forms of 'white supremacy' and 'racist propaganda.'

Whoever’s behind it, it shows that mob rule leads straight to madness."

But the protests we've been subjected to were never "idealistic" expressions of moral outrage.  But rather the immature and hate-filled rage of angry haters of God, His Commandments and His order.

The violence we are witnessing across America today is rooted in hatred of truth.  Today there is a demand for sex without love, for a licentiousness in sex which has wrought a heartless society in which individuals do not care for anyone but themselves. The fruit of this demonic theology is the slaughter through abortion and euthanasia of human beings created in the Imago Dei. It is a theology of violence which is rooted in hatred of truth. For at the heart of immorality is falsity, the hatred of truth.

Fr. Vincent P. Miceli, in an essay entitled "The Taproot of Violence," explains: "...violence entered creation from the rebellion of Lucifer. This rebellion arose from the heart of pride. But the sin of pride is the offspring of the vice known as hatred of truth. Hatred of truth is the result of the creature's attempt to rearrange God's hierarchy of beings and values into an order which the creature prefers to the plan of God. This attempt immediately produces the violence of disorder, the chaos of falsity and immorality. For hatred of truth is really hatred of God who creates all things wisely and governs them lovingly. Lucifer, the Morning Star, was instantly deformed into the Prince of Darkness because he attempted to live a lie. He wanted to dethrone God and become God himself..."

We live in an environment where there is a "violence of disorder" because we have abandoned truth.  And hatred of truth leads to violence.  It is the very root of violence.  Jesus said to the Pharisees, "If God were your Father, you would love me, for I proceeded and came forth from God; I came not of my own account, but he sent me.  Why do you not understand what I say?  It is because you cannot bear to hear my word.  You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires.  He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him.  When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.  But, because I tell the truth, you do not believe me." (John 8: 42-45).

It is rejection of truth which leads to violence.  And so we read in verse 59 of the same Chapter, "So they took up stones to throw at him; but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple."  If there is exaggerated rhetoric and violence across our society, it is because many have rejected God's created order.

But there is a consequence to this rejection of truth.  As Dorothy Sayers reminded us, if we will not have Christ, we will have chaos.

Only real men can adequately fulfill the role of priest and pastor..

As I've said so many times at this Blog over the years, see here for example, the Cult of Softness and associated effeminacy have permeated the Catholic Church since Vatican II.

Several years ago, in a piece entitled "Priestly Identity: Crisis and Renewal," Annamarie Adkins interviewed Father David Toups, Associate Director of the Secretariat of Clergy, Consecrated Life and Vocations of the U.S. episcopal conference.  Annamarie Adkins wrote, 'A general crisis of authentic masculinity in society has also affected the priesthood as only 'real men' can adequately fulfill the role of priest and pastor, says Father David Toups. Father Toups, the associate director of the Secretariat of Clergy, Consecrated Life and Vocations of the U.S. episcopal conference, is the author of 'Reclaiming Our Priestly Character.'

In this interview with...Father Toups, he comments on the identity and character of the priesthood, and the various challenges it faces today.

Q: Your book focuses on recovering what you call the 'doctrine of the priestly character.' Can you describe this 'doctrine' in a nutshell?

Father Toups: The 'doctrine of the priestly character' is about the permanent relationship the priest enters into with Christ the High Priest on the day of his ordination. The priest is always a priest; he is not a simple functionary who performs ritual actions, but rather he is configured to Christ in the depths of his being by what is called an ontological change.

Christ is working through him at the altar, 'This is my Body,' and in the confessional, 'I absolve you of your sins,' but also in his daily actions outside the sanctuary.

The character that the priest receives is a comfort to the faithful inasmuch as they realize that their faith is not based in the personality of the priest, but rather the Person of Christ working through the priest. On the other hand, the priest is called, like all of the faithful, to a life of holiness. The character received at ordination is actually a dynamism for priestly holiness. The more he can assimilate his life to Christ and submit to the gift he received at ordination, the more he will be a credible witness to the faithful and edify the Body of Christ.

Q: Is it your view that the nature of the priesthood is unknown or misunderstood by many priests? Is mandatory 'continuing priestly education' the answer?

Father Toups: Studies show that there has been confusion regarding the exact nature of the priesthood among priests themselves depending on the timing of their seminary training.

Immediately following the Second Vatican Council, there was confusion among priests and laity alike about the difference between the priesthood of the faithful and the ministerial priesthood.

Vatican II’s intention was not to suppress one in order to highlight the other, but rather to recognize the universal call to holiness and the dignity of both.

The ministerial priesthood is a specific vocation within the Church in which a man is called by Christ in the apostolic line to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Priests are different by virtue of ordination, as confirmed by the council itself in paragraph 10 of 'Lumen Gentium,' which emphasized that the baptized and the ordained share in the one and the same priesthood of Christ, but in a way that differs 'in essence and not only in degree.'

This difference certainly does not mean better or even holier -- that would be a major error -- but it does mean that there is a distinction.

Cardinal Avery Dulles points out that, if anything, the priesthood of the faithful is more exalted because the ministerial priesthood is ordered to its service. Hence, a recovery from the confusion lies in the need to understand the balance a priest is to find; he is both a servant and one who has been set aside by Christ and the Church to stand 'in persona Christi' -- not as a personal honor, but as 'one who has come to serve and not be served.'

The priest need not be embarrassed about this high calling, but should boldly live it out in the midst of the world. Pope John Paul the Great regularly reminded priests: 'Do not be afraid to be who you are!'

This brings us to the second part of your question, namely, is mandatory 'continuing priestly education' the answer?

In the book, I use the term 'formation,' not education -- though learning is an important, component part.

Ongoing formation is essential for every Christian vocation. In the midst of full liturgical schedules, parish councils, leaking roofs and hospital visits, the priest must continually open his heart and mind to Christ in prayer and study, annual retreats and seminars, as well as times of recreation and vacation, if he is to thrive as an individual and as a man of faith.

Ongoing formation is about deepening one’s interiority and fostering a relationship with Jesus Christ. It is about an ongoing conversion that reminds the priest who he is as a minister of the Gospel and whose he is as a son of God."

________________________________________

If we are to have an authentic reform within the Church, and a new Springtime of evangelization, we will need more mature priests who fashion themselves after masculine saints like John of Avila.

Weak, tepid priests will not inspire the faithful to become the Church Militant and to fight against the Devil and his angels while being salt and light during a time of diabolical disorientation.

We need men who are filled with missionary zeal and who are determined to challenge the culture while bringing souls back to Holy Mother Church.

Effeminate priests and Deacons, sissy clerics, are not up to the task at hand.

Priest administering Holy Communion to Marines,
Invasion of Okinawa

Woman protecting priest from a few raindrops

Falling headlong into the destruction they have voluntarily chosen

In his Encyclical Letter Annum Sacrum, No. 10, Pope Leo XIII warned that, "In these latter times especially, a policy has been followed which has resulted in a sort of wall being raised between the Church and civil society. In the constitution and administration of States the authority of sacred and divine law is utterly disregarded, with a view to the exclusion of religion from having any constant part in public life. This policy almost tends to the removal of the Christian faith from our midst, and, if that were possible, of the banishment of God Himself from the earth. When men's minds are raised to such a height of insolent pride, what wonder is it that the greater part of the human race should have fallen into such disquiet of mind and be buffeted by waves so rough that no one is suffered to be free from anxiety and peril? When religion is once discarded it follows of necessity that the surest foundations of the public welfare must give way, whilst God, to inflict on His enemies the punishment they so richly deserve, has left them the prey of their own evil desires, so that they give themselves up to their passions and finally wear themselves out by excess of liberty."

This punishment, this chastisement, is in evidence everywhere in our latter times.  We have forgotten that when moral liberty is detached from Natural and Divine Law, it degenerates into license. Pope Leo XIII reminds us in his Encyclical Letter Libertas Humana that, "Liberty, the highest of natural endowments, being the portion only of intellectual or rational natures, confers on man this dignity - that he is 'in the hand of his counsel' and has power over his actions. Yet he is free also to turn aside to all other things; and, in pursuing the empty semblance of good, to disturb rightful order and to fall headlong into the destruction which he has voluntarily chosen...

Pope Leo XIII reminds us that how our dignity is exercised, "is of the greatest moment, inasmuch as on the use that is made of liberty the highest good and the greatest evil alike depend. Man, indeed, is free to obey his reason, to seek moral good, and to strive unswervingly after his last end.

Therefore, the nature of human liberty, however it be considered, whether in individuals or in society, whether in those who command or in those who obey, supposes the necessity of obedience to some supreme and eternal law, which is no other than the authority of God, commanding good and forbidding evil. And, so far from this most just authority of God over men diminishing, or even destroying their liberty, it protects and perfects it, for the real perfection of all creatures is found in the prosecution and attainment of their respective ends, but the supreme end to which human liberty must aspire is God."

Americans who have succumbed to license, to their own base desires, have fashioned a Chastisement with their own hands.  That Chastisement is a dictatorship of relativism which Pope Benedict XVI warned of.  We are witnessing its fruits.

The liberal mainstream media, through its silence, promotes anti-white racism

Further evidence not only of media bias in the mainstream media, but of a reverse racism here.

The MSM refuses to look at stories such as this or to acknowledge certain facts, such as the fact that white police officers are 8 times more likely to be assaulted or killed by a black man than a black man is likely to be assaulted or killed by a white police officer.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church, a sure norm for teaching the faith, in paragraph 1931, explains that:


"Respect for the human person proceeds by way of respect for the principle that "everyone should look upon his neighbor (without any exception) as 'another self,' above all bearing in mind his life and the means necessary for living it with dignity." No legislation could by itself do away with the fears, prejudices, and attitudes of pride and selfishness which obstruct the establishment of truly fraternal societies. Such behavior will cease only through the charity that finds in every man a 'neighbor,' a brother."

Everyone should look upon his neighbor WITHOUT ANY EXCEPTION as another self.  The liberal mainstream media rejects this truth.  For those who produce these sham media, only black lives matter and only whites are capable of racism.

But watch the video from Ben Shapiro.  Watch as that black man smashes his fist into the face of the white man.

This isn't hatred?  This isn't racism?  What then is it?  Love?

More racial hatred here

Soon Christianity will be outlawed

Writing for Conservative Review, Daniel Horowitz explains that:

"When Anthony Kennedy discovered a right to force states to redefine marriage in the 2015 Obergefell case, he promised that religious liberty would remain untouched. 'The First Amendment ensures that religious organizations and persons are given proper protection as they seek to teach the principles that are so fulfilling and so central to their lives and faiths, and to their own deep aspirations to continue the family structure they have long revered,' wrote the former justice for the majority at the time.

Yeah, right.

Thanks to Justice Gorsuch’s contorted reading of the word 'sex' in anti-discrimination law, you now have a right to sue for protection for biological traits you do not possess. This means that legitimate rights of others will now have to yield. Anyone who can’t see the devastating real-world effects of this decision – well beyond firing someone simply because you hate their private behavior – is clearly not paying attention.

Codifying into anti-discrimination law the concept that a man who says he is a woman must be treated according to his mental illness is not something we can live with as a society. Gorsuch might want to dismiss the earth-shattering ramifications of his opinion, but he knows well that there are already pending lawsuits to demand that men be treated as women, in very dangerous or disruptive ways that go well beyond trying to use the boot of government to stamp out mean or discriminatory behavior.

Here is an outline of some of the most immediate threats from this decision. These are not hypothetical societal and legal problems; these issues are in contention as we speak and have now been decided by this court.

Forcing states and doctors to perform castrations

Forcing employers to retain gay employees and not fire them simply because of their private behavior sounds very innocuous and even laudatory. But what about forcing doctors to perform 'sex change' operations and forcing states to fund them? Codifying the desires of someone afflicted with gender dysphoria into sex-based anti-discrimination law will force states and hospitals to treat anyone who believes they are really the opposite gender as that preferred gender.

In fact, the Supreme Court has already tacitly mandated this. In May, justices declined to take Idaho’s appeal from the Ninth Circuit, where the lower court ordered the state to pay for a castration surgery for a male serving time in Idaho prison for sexually abusing a 15-year-old boy.

Similarly, a federal judge in Wisconsin mandated that the Badger State use its Medicaid funding to pay for 'gender confirmation' mutilations, which can include castration, mastectomies, hysterectomies, genital reconstruction, and breast augmentation.

Those radical decisions will now be backed up in all circuits. There are already numerous lawsuits suing employers to provide castration and hormone procedures under the employer health insurance mandate of Obamacare. Obamacare uses civil rights laws to bar discrimination in offering health care coverage. It would be easy for the courts to now apply Gorsuch’s interpretation of Title VII to other areas of discrimination in the ACA statute.

Will Gorsuch be there for us to overturn those decisions?

Women’s bathrooms, locker rooms, and all-female sports

Barring a male who says he is a female from an all-girls sports team, bathroom, or locker room now constitutes sex-based discrimination. Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 reads as follows:

No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.

It’s not even a jump to apply this ruling to that law; it’s a logical outgrowth. All separate gender school activities and private dressing rooms are out the window because the 1972 law, which liberals already felt included transgenderism, will now be so interpreted.

College dorms

As Justice Alito warns, similar lawsuits may be brought under the Fair Housing Act against colleges that have separate dorms for males and females. Also, female prisoners will be subjected to males living with them. Again, once sex is redefined, it is no longer limited to employment or animus-based discrimination. As Alito warned, “The Court … argues, not merely that the terms of Title VII can be interpreted that way but that they cannot reasonably be interpreted any other way. According to the Court, the text is unambiguous.” This wasn’t even a close call for the majority, and it will therefore reverberate across all areas of law, politics, and society.

Religious schools must become pagan

We were told not to worry about Obergefell creating a right to gay marriage because it was merely an issue of a marriage certificate and would never affect private religious institutions. Well, what happens now if a cross-dresser or a prominent homosexual activist wants to teach in a Catholic, Orthodox Jewish, or Muslim school? The majority opinion blithely denied these concerns and noted how title VII protects religious liberty by offering some long-standing exceptions. However, those exceptions have been interpreted more and more narrowly as time goes on. The same way Gorsuch has evolved on the definition of a sex, the courts are evolving on religious protections, and the former will now accelerate the latter.

What about pedophilia, nudity, and the next frontier in our “evolving” society?

Justice Gorsuch dismissed (p. 30-32) the dissent’s charge that he was backfilling into the statute ideas that its crafters would regard as absurd and immoral as “naked policy appeals” and as complaints about “undesirable policy consequences.”

What happens when the next letters of the alphabet get codified into the sacrilege of the sexual behavior legal protections, such as “N” for nudity and “P” for pedophilia?

“My sexual orientation is to be with children.”

“My sexual orientation is to express myself freely and be proud of my body, not to hide it.”

You might laugh, but at the speed with which transgenderism became in vogue, there is nothing stopping more sexual fetishes from joining the quasi “legal” distinction with a fancy acronym. The mainstreaming of pedophilia is already under way. Could employers still not fire those individuals for being disruptive to the decorum of the office the same way they can’t fire a man who walks in one day dressed like a woman, even if he has to deal with clients? Those ideals can be read into the word “sex” of a 1964 statute just as much as transgenderism can. After all, gay expanded to LGB and T, and then an undefined “Q” got added in. Others add on IAPK to include “intersex, asexual, pansexual, and kink.” It has broadly become known in those circles as “LGBTQ+.”

So, Justice Gorsuch, now that man and woman no longer mean what they mean, can you tell us what is and is not included in “sex” and why there should be protection for some fetishes or mental disorders over others? Can we lay down that marker now so that it doesn’t grow?

Freedom of speech

As Justice Alito warned in his dissent, the New York City government has already made it a criminal offense not to address someone by his or her preferred pronoun.

'After today’s decision, plaintiffs may claim that the failure to use their preferred pronoun violates one of the federal laws prohibiting sex discrimination,' wrote Alito..."

______________________________________________

For 30 years, I've been warning this was coming.  Back in 2005, on this Blog, I wrote:

Those who are promoting the homosexual agenda are using time-proven tactics which have been employed by secular humanists for some time now. In the words of Ralph Martin, "First, a plea is issued for a dominantly Christian society to 'tolerate' what appears to be a deviant behavior. Then pressure is applied to place the deviant behavior on an equal footing with traditional Christian values. Secular humanists argue that a pluralist society cannot do otherwise. They then try to make the deviant behavior seem normal and behavior governed by Christian values seem abnormal - a threat to a pluralist society. The last step is often to use the legal system to protect immorality and to undermine what Christians have always considered righteous behavior." (A Crisis of Truth, pp. 101-102).

Professor James Hitchcock, in his excellent work entitled "Catholicism and Modernity" (New York:Seabury Press, 1979, p. 86), explains the role of the media in this entire process:

"The media's alleged commitment to 'pluralism' is at base a kind of hoax. The banner of pluralism is raised in order to win toleration for new ideas as yet unacceptable to the majority. Once toleration has been achieved, public opinion is systematically manipulated first to enforce a status of equality between the old and the new, then to assert the superiority of the new over the old. A final stage is often the total discrediting, even sometimes the banning, of what had previously been orthodox."


America has become a filthy termite kingdom, a haunt of demons.  Faithful Christians, Jews and others of good will now see the handwriting on the wall.  Soon their religious beliefs will be deemed criminal and it will be necessary to go underground.

Preparation for the Reign of Antichrist.