FATIMA: the prophecy of a crisis and the promise of an eagerly awaited triumph

 From Rorate Caeli:

Francesca Bonadonna

Famiglia Domani

May 22, 2014

Blessed Jacinta Marto

Blessed Jacinta Marto

Almost a century has passed since the great Fatima event when Our Lady, messenger of God, appeared to the three little shepherds to give an immensely important message and to offer Her maternal intercession for a humanity afflicted by sin – a humanity, more narcotized than ever by creeping secularisation. Most Holy Mary is the Queen of the eagerly awaited kingdom, foreseen according to Her promise and unforeseen according to its time and modality; the hope of a new millennium for the children of Light i.e. the militant forces of the People of God moved by the Holy Ghost amid the breakers of unrest and disorder but heading towards the safe harbor described in St. John Bosco’s dream, which points to the two pillars of salvation: the Holy Eucharist and the Virgin Mary.

In 1917 at the Cova da Iria, Our Lady launched a strong, clear message – a message that very few have accepted into their lives: the Consecration to Her Immaculate Heart, unfulfilled, according to the instructions given to Sister Lucia, for us to avoid the errors of communism and the outcome of wars and persecutions to Holy Church and the Holy Father. Human weakness and the failed response to the Divine call have irremediably determined the frightful, perverse scenario of our times of which we are helpless onlookers.

This frightful scenario is like an overflowing river that engulfs us each day, crossing our paths, our squares, our cities, our country and the entire world. The TV channels and radio stations are polluted by a cesspit of lies, where there is nothing that refers to God for the edification of society: on the contrary, we have promoters of easy conquests like the non-fulfilling politicians and statesmen, at the service of skilful direction, who make false promises which shortly after come to nothing.

A crisis that was foreseen and made known in 1917, is now full-blown: at little less than a century away we are at the countdown for the shortening of these times of iniquity, prepared by the false myths of science which, more than ever, dare to challenge God’s creative omnipotence by changing and shunning the natural law based on the procreative action of the family, the only source of life and the only school of universal, perennial values.

An induced disorientation, that displaces the best consciences and confounds the toughest intellects, blinded by their lust for power and fame, led astray by the satanic illusion of false promises that depart from the service of the good to which we must be devoted until the end. Our Lady spoke to the three little shepherds in order ‘to scatter the proud in the imagination of their hearts and exalt the humble’, in a time of apostasy activated to annul the dogma of the Faith and turn absolute truths upside down. It is the Church that suffers because of the betrayal of Her ministers who, having been sucked into the vortex of corruption, drive the sheep away from the fold, helpless as they are, to discern the voice of their shepherd.

We are on the threshold of the Great Promise of Fatima, that of the Woman Clothed with the Sun, at the dawn of a new era of peace: She, who will triumph with a sudden mysterious act and will clothe humanity in a new light – the radiant light of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, Spouse of Christ, who continuously prays, cries and suffers with His Church, for the loss of Her children, hoping to the very last for their salvation, as a mother does on the threshold of giving birth to new life.

[A Rorate translation by contributor Francesca Romana]

ACT OF CONSECRATION TO THE IMMACULATE HEART OF MARY

930884b919b4f0509452d9f740ae26e8O Immaculate Heart of Mary, Queen of Heaven and Earth, and tender Mother of men, in accordance with thy ardent wish made known at Fatima, I consecrate to thee myself, my brethren, my country, and the whole human race.

Reign over us and teach us how to make the Heart of Jesus reign and triumph in us, and around us, as It has reigned and triumphed in thee.

Reign over us, dearest Mother, that we may be thine in prosperity and adversity, in joy and in sorrow, in health and in sickness, in life and in death.

O most compassionate Heart of Mary, Queen of Virgins, watch over our minds and hearts and preserve them from the deluge of impurity which thou didst lament so sorrowfully at Fatima. We want to be pure like thee. We want to atone for the many crimes committed against Jesus and thee. We want to call down upon our country and the whole world the peace of God in justice and charity.

Therefore, we now promise to imitate thy virtues by the practice of a Christian life without regard to human respect.

We resolve to receive Holy Communion regularly and to offer thee our prayers of the Rosary each day, together with our sacrifices, in the spirit of reparation and penance. Amen.

 

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

66 Responses to FATIMA: the prophecy of a crisis and the promise of an eagerly awaited triumph

  1. toadspittle says:

    “…we are at the countdown for the shortening of these times of iniquity, “
    The sooner the countdown the better.
    Which will be brought about by the clash between religious Islamic lunacy versus Israeli intransigence and Christian fundamentalism – in my opinion.
    While secularists stand by gaping.
    ..the false myths of science which, more than ever, dare to challenge God’s creative omnipotence…,
    Nothing to do with the “myths” of science. (What “myths” are these, anyway? If any parts of science are myths, (which they are not, or they’re not science) we can safely ignore them. As we can with any myth. False myths challenge nothing. Not even God. How can they?

    “…on the contrary, we have promoters of easy conquests like the non-fulfilling politicians and statesmen, at the service of skilful direction, who make false promises which shortly after come to nothing.”
    When, in history, did we not? In 1917?

  2. toadspittle says:

    A confident prophecy from Toad.
    Unless we obey the words of Jehovah, and Allah, and Christ – very bad things will happen to us all – very soon. And many of us will end up dead.

  3. Rushintuit says:

    Check out “thirdsecret.net”.

  4. JabbaPapa says:

    While secularists stand by gaping, …

    … and turning their backs upon the countless thousands who have died or will from genocide, as the secularists sit unmoved and uncaring, convinced by their own delusions that these are the be-all and end-all and the acme of morality and civilised-ness.

    The Enemy is at the gate, but instead of giving all assistance to his victims, the secularist offers his hatred of the Christian and the Jew and of all that are Godly as a firelighter into the oven of Moloch that so many martyrs are already being consumed in.

    Let them devour each other, thinks the secularist, smugly, as he turns to the more important matter of typing into the internet how all priests are paedophiles, how his existentialist mind games are worth more than any religion, and how the natural principles of family life must be trodden underfoot by the marching jackboots of a gay pride march.

  5. toadspittle says:

    ” “Interior vision” is not fantasy but, as we have said, a true and valid means of verification. But it also has its limitations. Even in exterior vision the subjective element is always present. We do not see the pure object, but it comes to us through the filter of our senses, which carry out a work of translation. This is still more evident in the case of interior vision, especially when it involves realities which in themselves transcend our horizon. The subject, the visionary, is still more powerfully involved. He sees insofar as he is able, in the modes of representation and consciousness available to him. In the case of interior vision, the process of translation is even more extensive than in exterior vision, for the subject shares in an essential way in the formation of the image of what appears. He can arrive at the image only within the bounds of his capacities and possibilities. Such visions therefore are never simple “photographs” of the other world, but are influenced by the potentialities and limitations of the perceiving subject. “
    …Sounds suspiciously like weaseling, to Toad.

    Nor will the secularists be standing by gaping when the nukes start going off. They will be just as dead as the religious loonies that started it all. There’s a comfort.
    Nice bit of invective, Jabba, if just a trifle paranoid and hysterical. If only believers hadn’t been responsible for several genocides themselves.

    “…and how the natural principles of family life must be trodden underfoot by the marching jackboots of a gay pride march.”
    I suggest “prancing” jackboots, would be more felicitous?

  6. johnhenrycn says:

    Valuable link, Jabba. Too much to digest in one sitting, but thank you.

    There is a Novena to the Holy Spirit, ascribed to St Maximillian Kolbe, and reading about him today I learned that he founded the Militia of the Immaculata, a group of Franciscan friars dedicated to the total consecration of the world – not just Russia – to Mary on 16 October 1917, three days after the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima, not in response to that miracle (this was in the days before things could go ‘viral’ on Youtube), but rather in response to an antipapal march by Freemasons in Rome:

    “In 1917, Maximilian Kolbe watched in horror as the Freemasons, celebrating their bicentennial, marched through the streets of Rome carrying banners depicting Satan defeating St. Michael and declaring: ‘Satan will rule on Vatican Hill and the Pope will serve as his errand boy.'”

    http://www.thirdorderofsaintdominic.org/Freemasonry.html

    An interesting coincidence? Or not.

  7. toadspittle says:

    Wouldn’t mind seeing such a banner.
    Pretty flashy, I bet.
    There’s a few on here that already believe Francis is Satan’s errand boy.
    Makes yer fink. dunnit?
    Coincidence? I doubt it.

  8. johnhenrycn says:

    “I suggest ‘prancing’ jackboots, would be more felicitous”, says Toad.

    Jackboots is certainly an apt word to describe the sartorial tastes of one segment of the Gay Brigade, but not ‘prancing’. A better one might be ‘mincing’, although I often mince (in the kitchen, never in parades), so maybe we’d better stick with ‘prancing’.

  9. toadspittle says:

    “capering”?

  10. johnhenrycn says:

    Speaking of homosexuals, there’s good news and there’s bad news. First, the good news:
    1. Homosexuals tend to be found in careers like modeling, acting, interior decorating, fashion and other fields demanding creative and artistic talent.

    Now the bad news:
    ___
    2. Homosexuals love costume balls.
    3. Homosexuals are far more socially competitive than normal people.
    4. Homosexuals prefer to be hairless from the neck down.
    5. Homosexuals prefer boys.
    6. Homosexuals love to shop, especially for expensive clothes.
    7. Homosexuals love tight pants and padded swimtrunks.
    8. Homosexual humour is focussed on the malicious.
    9. Homosexuals invented ‘camp’ and ‘camp’ is their overarching paradigm.
    10. Homosexuals have lots of money to spend on themselves because they have no families to support.
    11. Homosexuals intentionally discriminate against straights in every occupation and everywhere else where they are dominant.
    12. Homosexuals often speak in a way to identify themselves as such.
    13. Homosexuals invented group dancing (in bars and nightclubs) to avoid being arrested, and passed that custom on to the rest of us.
    14. Homosexuals are much more inclined to sado-masochism than normal people.
    15. Homosexuals are much more inclined to suicidal thoughts than normal people.
    16. Homosexuals love to talk about their mothers, but not their fathers.
    17. Homosexuals love to talk about psychotherapy and their therapists.
    18. Homosexuals invented fisting, footing and other forms of anal sex.
    19. Homosexuals are far more likely to be drug abusers than normal people.
    20. Homosexuals count their partners in the hundreds.
    21. Homosexuals seek to obliterate their identities by surgery.

  11. Tom Fisher says:

    Your last bit of drivel was one for the books Johnhenry. Typing your paranoid fear and hatred of homosexuals on a blog is less edifying than you might think.

  12. Its not drivel.Johnhenry is spot on ! Philip Johnson.

  13. johnhenrycn says:

    Well, Mr Pussy, think what you will of me. On blogs, as in art, there are two approaches: broad brushstrokes on the one hand, and pointillism on the other. You prefer the latter? I (occasionally) prefer the former. But here’s the thing: every observation I made above about homosexuals has previously been made by more perceptive minds than mine, and I could not have thought of them all without their help, especially Midge Decter, the Jewish lady who wrote this 18 page piece The Boys On The Beach for Commentary – a Jewish journal of opinion you may not be acquainted with – about 30 years ago, and which still has many wise things to say about homosexual ‘communities’ – in her case, the one on Fire Island next to New York City where she and her husband used to vacation in the 1970s.

    ..as for “paranoid fear and hatred of homosexuals”, get on your bike. People here who know me better than you can attest that, on a personal and family level, I’ve sympathized with and tried to explain in a constructive way the plight of homosexuals, including (in my case) lesbians.

  14. johnhenrycn says:

    …and another thing, Tom Fisher, being a Catholic, you are bound to accept the pronouncements in paragraph 2357 of the CCC that homosexual acts are of “grave depravity” and “intrinsically disordered”. Furthermore you are bound to accept that even homosexual tendencies and inclinations, not just the act, is “disordered” (2358). So tell me this: Tom Fisher, if you think my listing of disordered homosexual inclinations is paranoid and hateful, what does your list consist of? In your view, are there any specific disordered inclinations that homosexuals are more susceptible to than the rest of us? At least I’ve tried to be specific.

  15. mkenny114 says:

    Which will be brought about by the clash between religious Islamic lunacy versus Israeli intransigence and Christian fundamentalism – in my opinion.
    While secularists stand by gaping.

    I’m amazed, as we now look back on the most bloodsoaked century in history, where the vast majority of that blood was spilled by avowedly secular regimes, and live in an age where secularism gleefully erodes from within everything that has made Western civilisation what it is, creating a growing cultural instability and an indifference to the Good such that allows things like the abortion holocaust to occur with hardly mainstream comment, that you think it will be ‘religious loonies’ that will bring about any forthcoming catastrophe. The ‘religion is the cause of all violence in the world’ argument really doesn’t stand up to scrutiny I’m afraid (which is not to say that there have been no instances of religiously motivated violence, obviously, only that the extent of religious influence in this respect is greatly overstated).

  16. toadspittle says:

    “The ‘religion is the cause of all violence in the world’ argument really doesn’t stand up to scrutiny I’m afraid “
    True, Michael. Only some of the violence in the world. Too much.

    8. Homosexual humour is focussed on the malicious.
    Unlike JH’s. (or Toad’s)
    22: Homosexuals have a wonderful sense of rhythm. (Oh, no – that’s black people.)

    Many thanks to all concerned on this thread (except Toad, of course).
    Wonderfully funny, every line of it.
    Jabba wins the gold star, though. (IMAO)

  17. Robert says:

    The miracle of Fatima was announced months prior. It was witnessed by a crowd 70000 who had been standing in the rain. This was a Catholic miracle in an Age of the Camera, planes iron ships and a World War. It ordered Rome Obedience by a written instruction to be opened 1960.
    The Sun Danced at Fatima.
    Portugal at that time was anti church, had exiled its Catholic monarchy and shut Church’s. Priests and Religious could be thrown into Prison.
    I do not understand the secular word religion? There is Truth which was Made Flesh and was Crucified. Truth and Untruth.
    Understand that Eugenics (Mass murder) is expressly a child of Evolution. Eugenics (The Pill, Abortion) is the greatest Mass murder ever known to mankind.
    Fatima is clearly a warning to Mankind, else why mention World Wars?
    The Atom bomb of WW II was the power of the Sun used as a weapon that ended WW II and threatens to be the Weapon of WW III.
    Today the world is again at War since terrorism has been seen in all the continents. Terrorism is already a world War.
    I do not subscribe to the flattery that Fatima is behind Us nor that there is some easy road solution to the Triumph Of Mary.
    The Road of Jesus and Mary is the Passion, derision, scorn, rejection and the condemnation and rejection of so many Judases. The Triumph of Jesus and Mary can only be through the Cross. The Cross which is repugnant to modern Man.

  18. Tom Fisher says:

    18. Homosexuals invented fisting, footing and other forms of anal sex.

    How do you know that Johnhenry?

  19. Tom Fisher says:

    Tom Fisher, if you think my listing of disordered homosexual inclinations is paranoid and hateful, what does your list consist of? In your view, are there any specific disordered inclinations that homosexuals are more susceptible to than the rest of us? At least I’ve tried to be specific.

    20. Homosexuals count their partners in the hundreds.

    What about those that refrain from sexual activity because of their religious beliefs? Surely your pathetic calumniating trash doesn’t apply to them? Or does it?

  20. Tom Fisher says:

    Its not drivel.Johnhenry is spot on ! Philip Johnson.

    We’re all aware of Church teaching on homosexuality. His disgusting list has nothing to do with that.

  21. johnhenrycn says:

    TF at 23:39 –

    Are you that unaware and uninformed about homosexual practices? Just google “fisting homosexuals” and you’ll get 324,000 results. Or is it my statement that homosexuals “invented” the practice that you object to? If so, aren’t you just the pettifogging pedant.

    As for homosexuals who you say “refrain from sexual activity because of their religious beliefs”, when or where did I say there are no such persons? Do you not know what I meant (at 20:20) by “broad brushstrokes”? For example, did I say every homosexual has hundreds of partners? Why can you not argue honestly?

    TF at 23:44 –
    My “disgusting list” has everything to do with why the Church condemns homosexual inclinations, although I admit my list is incomplete. Why do you think the Church condemns homosexual acts and inclinations? Where is your list?

  22. Tom Fisher says:

    Why do you think the Church condemns homosexual acts and inclinations? Where is your list?

    The Catholic Church teaches the following:

    the only appropriate context for sexual congress is between a man and woman joined in holy matrimony, and engaging in sexual activity that is open to the possibility of new life.
    All other forms of sexual congress, including homosexuality are sinful, and disordered uses of human sexuality. The inclination to homosexuality is in itself an inclination towards sin, and therefore disordered.

    Your ‘list’ on the other hand, has nothing to do with Catholicism. It’s purely an act of sneering nastiness towards homosexuals. It is a confection of sweeping generalisations, truths, half truths, and pure calumny. It is neither derived from, or endorsed by Catholic teaching.

  23. johnhenrycn says:

    I don’t think I want to discuss with you why the Church condemns homosexual acts and disapproves of homosexual inclinations until I see your list of reasons why the Church does so. I showed you my list, now you show me yours.

  24. Rushintuit says:

    Robert, I think it is reasonable to conclude that if the Pope had released the Third Secret by 1960 and established devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary soon after, we would have enjoyed an easy road to the promised triumph of Our Lady. Our leaders chose a different road. A road filled with suffering, apostasy and the wholesale loss of souls for all eternity.

  25. Tom Fisher says:

    I don’t think I want to discuss with you why the Church condemns homosexual acts and disapproves of homosexual inclinations until I see your list of reasons why the Church does so. I showed you my list, now you show me yours.

    Church teaching on homosexuality is perfectly clear, and what I said at 01:02 is sufficient for purpose.

    Are you really claiming your list is intended to show why the Church condemns homosexual acts and disapproves of homosexual inclinations? Take an item at random: 7 say, Homosexuals love tight pants and padded swimtrunks. — Is that a reason for Church teaching, or is it a puerile attempt at sneering humor?

  26. johnhenrycn says:

    Goodnight Mr Pussy. Your ‘list’of objections to homosexuality is deliberately mealy-mouthed and non-specific because you cannot bear to confront what homosexuality means. Next time we’ll stick to discussing brands of single malts and avoid important subjects for which you have no stomach.

  27. Tom Fisher says:

    That’s pathetic Johnhenry. You didn’t answer my question. Is item 7 on your list (and others) an objection to homosexuality, or a sneer at homosexuals?

    You should answer that question.

  28. johnhenrycn says:

    One last thing: before you accuse me of descending to ad homs, it was you who insulted me first on this thread, with your accusations of “paranoid fear and hatred”, and that’s been your style on other threads as well. You treat me with respect and I will return the favour.

  29. Tom Fisher says:

    You treat me with respect and I will return the favour.

    I emphatically reaffirm the nasty content and intent of your grotesque list. I’m engaging with what you choose to post. Respect has nothing to do with it.

  30. Tom Fisher says:

    And you still fail to answer the question. Is item 7 on your list (by way of an example) an objection to homosexuality, or a sneer at homosexuals?

  31. toadspittle says:

    Right.
    Let’s get things “straight” (if you’ll pardon the expression, Sir Elton) round here.
    Tom, don’t be all cross with JH.
    He only ran his list to make our millions of gay readers laugh.
    It’s therapy, see?

    Back to the topic:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/14/world/middleeast/vatican-to-recognize-palestinian-state-in-new-treaty.html?emc=edit_na_20150513&nlid=58561356&_r=0

    Do we consider the deep discontent in Israel and fundamentalist sections of America this gesture regarding “The Holy Land,” will cause, or exacerbate – to be political or religious?
    And does it matter a rat’s pattootie which it is?

  32. toadspittle says:

    “People here who know me (JH) better than you can attest that, on a personal and family level, I’ve sympathized with and tried to explain in a constructive way the plight of homosexuals, including (in my case) lesbians.”
    True, Tom. I can “attest” it personally.
    If Toad remembers rightly, (highly unlikely, to be sure!) JH has a sado-masochistic, suicidal mother-fixated Uncle, who minces about in swim-trunks padded out with paperback copies of “A La Recherche De Temps Perdu,” and is a hairless-from-the-neck-down lesbian.
    Hope I got that right, JH?

  33. Tom Fisher says:

    Dunno Toad, but these three seem to be getting on like a house on fire

  34. JabbaPapa says:

    an easy road

    We’ve never been promised any such thing — instead, precisely the opposite.

  35. geoffkiernan says:

    Homosexuals yes, but still pilgrims through life, like the rest of us. All of us are destined for the Father but for sin. The Homosexual sin cries out to heaven for forgiveness. We shouldn’t confuse a propensity for sin, with A sin.
    Despite the intrinsic evil of their behaviour they are still capable of being ‘saved’ like all of us. It is sorrow for Sin coupled with a resolve not to repeat the Sin that saves. Anyone who kicks with the right foot knows that. If they don’t then they should

  36. toadspittle says:

    “The Homosexual sin cries out to heaven for forgiveness. “

    I suppose that’s a sly reference to JH’s lesbian Uncle Elton, Geoff. Fie! Though who knows?
    Actually, our Canadian friend speaks very highly of the kindly old perverted relative.
    Who liked nothing more than to don his padded Marcel Proust swim-trunks, then dandle the boy on his unpadded knee whilst crooning JH off to The Land of Nod with:

    That’s enough gays for Thursday, Toad – Ed.
    …Oh, all right.

  37. GC says:

    JH, I thought the “Fire Island” in that article sounded familiar (great read, by the way). I now realise why, as I recall it was the title of a song by, you guessed it, the Village People.

    Toad and Tom, if you plan going there I hope you will be extra careful and “not go in the bushes”, as the Village People themselves counsel.

  38. Tom Fisher says:

    It’s all very disheartening, and has changed how I see this blog and its readers. It is always claimed that Catholic attitudes towards homosexuals are determined by Church teaching on homosexuality, and Christian charity. It is always asserted that it is untrue that rank bigotry is not prevalent among regular Catholics. — And yet, when ‘Johnhenry’ posts his confection of every puerile stereotype under the sun, specifically as an uncharitable sneer — silence. No protest, nothing. The people who leap all over Toad for being offensive, and the moderators who delete offensive comments, — silent. It was an eloquent silence, and very depressing.

  39. GC says:

    Here, this will cheer you up, Mr Fisher. The Village People and Fire Island.

    You can even sing along.

  40. Tom Fisher says:

    What does that have to do with the issue GC?

  41. toadspittle says:

    GC is making cruel mock of JH’s lesbian Uncle Elton, Tom.
    Uncharitable, in my opinion.
    ….But what do I know?

  42. toadspittle says:

    …Anyway Toad, needs a good censoring now and again, the malicious little green swine.
    Blows the stink off him.

  43. johnhenrycn says:

    Toad is wrong about my ‘uncle’, but all of my uncles are dead and cannot fight back.

    Tom Fisher, if you wish to insult people, try enlarging your vocabulary. You’ve used “pathetic” twice. You’ve used “calumny” twice. You’ve used “puerile” twice or thrice. You’ve used “sneer” frice.
    You’ve still some mileage left with “grotesque”, “disgusting”, “paranoid”, “drivel”, “nasty”, “hateful” and “bigoted”, having only used each of them (or their derivatives) once so far.

    Ever heard the expression: “Play the ball, not the man”?

    You accuse me of stereotyping homosexuals, but what you fail to see is that stereotypes are often based on real observations and are therefore useful. You should pick up (and read) In Praise of Prejudice: The Necessity of Preconceived Ideas by the English psychiatrist, Theodore Dalrymple. It’s only 130 pages long. If that’s too much to ask of you, try reading Professor Roger Scruton’s brief essay in the City Journal entitled “Bring Back Stigma”. As he says in it, without stigma we become a shameless society with disastrous consequences.

    In short, Tom Fisher, I stand by my above list of stereotypical homosexual failings and faults, even No. 7 which addresses their sordid phallic exhibitionism. Never been to a Gay Pride Parade, Tom? Well, that’s okay. Neither have I. But a little bird told me they are far more pornographic than even I have suggested.

    Tom, it’s all well and good to read your Catechism, and I’m pleased you have done so; but the brief references to homosexuality in it have to be explored in a deeper way. It’s not just, as you put it at 01:02, that “the only appropriate context for sexual congress is between a man and woman joined in holy matrimony, and engaging in sexual activity that is open to the possibility of new life”, although that is certainly the pith and core of why homosexuality is a disordered inclination. No, the homosexual culture in general is a toxic one, and we need to identify the ways in which it is so in order to fight against it in a persuasive way. Start with my list – some items on which (e.g. costume parties) are admittedly less serious than others – and tell me in what other ways you think homosexuality is harmful to society. Actually, I doubt that you’ll oblige, but there you go. Join Toad on one of his dog walkies if that’s all you’re good for.

  44. toadspittle says:

    What, in heaven’s name – do you mean, “Toad is wrong about my Uncle, ” JH?
    Are you now telling us it’s all a pack of lies about his (or her) padded swim-suit, and his wonderful sense of rhythm, and his suicidal sado-masochism, and all?
    All made up to make our “gay” readers laugh? You’ll be telling us that Nunks didn’t obliterate her identity by surgery next!
    What is the world coming to?
    Toad asks himself.
    Can we trust nobody any more? (Except Toad, of course.)

  45. toadspittle says:

    “…but all of my uncles are dead and cannot fight back…”
    Never been bit by a dead uncle, eh, JH?*

    Tom, I seldom offer advice to others, because I never take any myself – but you are approaching this “gay” gibberish the wrong, well-intentioned, way.
    I’d diffidently suggest malicious sneering. (Not that I’d employ it myself, of course.)

    * Anyone spot the oblique film ref?

  46. mkenny114 says:

    True, Michael. Only some of the violence in the world. Too much.

    I agree – any religiously motivated violence is too much in my opinion. But in terms of the root causes of the world’s violence, purely religious motivations are very small. Also, I would note that to speak of ‘religious violence’ in the abstract is problematic, as there is no such thing as ‘religion’ in the concrete – there are different religions, and some of these are more prone to resort to violence than others, but the idea of ‘religion’ as a homogenous force that always causes violence is something that (in my opinion) secularists have created in order to avoid confronting the problem of one religion in particular (e.g.; Islam) and the concomitant problem that secularism, borrowing what values it does have from the very source (Christianity) that it tries so hard to reject, does not have the resources to understand or confront Islam’s growth or its effects on Western culture.

    Do we consider the deep discontent in Israel and fundamentalist sections of America this gesture regarding “The Holy Land,” will cause, or exacerbate – to be political or religious?

    I’m focusing primarily on Israel itself, and putting America to one side for the moment, but the answer is both, albeit leaning more towards the political. The proposed recognition of Palestine as a state by the Holy See would be a political act, but one motivated primarily by concern for the fate of Christians in that region. The State of Israel itself, though created to provide a homeland for Jews, was formed as a secular state, and the majority of Zionists, from the late 19th Century to the formation of the state itself, were secularists motivated by secular concerns.

    The issue of religion and religious identity here is difficult as the idea that one can be an ethnic Jew without any commitment to Judaism itself, is a relatively late development, and the idea of a ‘secular Jew’ is something that hasn’t really been thought through properly, but came about as a result of growing nationalism in Europe, as well as concern amongst the Jewish diaspora re experiences of anti-semitism (Theodore Herzl, for example, was motivated to start the Zionist movement after the Dreyfuss affair in France).

    Similarly, nowadays, one of those most committed to protecting Israel’s borders and most reluctant to move towards a two-state solution (at least not without some important concessions from the Palestinians) is Benjamin Netanyahu, who is a self-described ‘secular Jew’. I don’t really know how this works in practice, but clearly a great many people are committed to Israel’s cause on politico-cultural grounds, not religious ones. As for groups such as Hamas, I dare say there is a good deal of religiously motivated hatred on their side (the language used by them is very religious, for example) but I think most of the real issues are regarding territory and personal/collective histories of revenge.

    Hopefully this will divert things away from the homosexuality issue for a little while🙂

  47. JabbaPapa says:

    ‘Johnhenry’ posts his confection of every puerile stereotype under the sun

    Are you suggesting that all of the activities described in that list are a) perfectly ordinary, b) nothing to do with homosexual activities, and c) perhaps even worthy of public praise ?

  48. johnhenrycn says:

    “Hopefully this will divert things away from the homosexuality issue for a little while.”

    Forgive me, MK, I realize (I think) that you are gently teasing, but is the issue of homosexuality any less relevant to this thread or any less important than events in the Middle East? Five years ago to the day (i.e. yesterday) our beloved Pope Emeritus, speaking at the annual Mass at the Fatima Shrine called same-sex marriage “insidious and dangerous”, and a couple of years before that he opined that the need to save humanity from gender confusion was just as urgent as saving the rainforests.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/7719789/Pope-says-gay-marriage-is-insidious-and-dangerous.html

    Speaking about the homosexual problem frequently and in a forthright, even blunt, way is unpleasant, but essential. That said, you’re perfectly free to avoid it.

  49. toadspittle says:

    Really good comment, Michael. No malicious irony. For once.

    Considerably more significant even, than JH’s lesbian, mincing, sadistic, suicidal, cross-dressing, swim-trunks-stuffing, lesbian uncle.
    What a character she must have been, though!
    “…but the answer is both, (political and religious) albeit leaning more towards the political.”
    Agreed, absolutely – because while everything is political, not everything is religious.
    But I wonder, whether or not, when the location of the “New” Israel was first considered, religion played a significant role in such an appallingly tragic decision for the rest of the planet?

    If it did, well…I rest my case.

  50. toadspittle says:

    “Hopefully this will divert things away from the homosexuality issue for a little while.”
    “Forgive me, MK, I realize (I think) that you are gently teasing,”

    No he’s not, JH – and neither is Toad.
    Your lesbian uncle’s sexual foibles are fascinating, indeed – but irrelevant, now she’s dead.
    We are talking Armadillo here.
    (Or maybe Armageddon?)

  51. johnhenrycn says:

    Toad, now that you’ve decided repeated vulgarisms and cheap personal attacks involving relations are permissible again, let me ask how many of your three ex-wives were lesbians? Talk about putting your finger in the dykes. Look, pal, I’ll be more than happy to see this comment disappear along with the quid pro quo deletion of 5 out of the 6 you posted at 06:47, 09:32, 11:37, 14:06, 16:15 and 16:26, all of which involve the same feeble attempt to be seen as a wag, but which merely confirm that your only remaining purpose in life is to be a dog-walking pooper-scooper.

  52. mkenny114 says:

    Speaking about the homosexual problem frequently and in a forthright, even blunt, way is unpleasant, but essential. That said, you’re perfectly free to avoid it.

    I don’t wish to avoid the issue of homosexuality per se JH, as I agree that it the growing intrusion of things like gender-theory and the confused ideology behind things like the movement for same-sex marriage are as corrosive as they are insidious. I also agree that there are aspects of homosexual culture that are downright dangerous, as well as being disordered in and of themselves, and the fact that said culture is routinely presented as innocuous and even charming is deeply worrying. What I wanted to detract from was the purely personal spat that has been taking place between Tom and yourself in discussing the issue, not the issue itself.

    But I wonder, whether or not, when the location of the “New” Israel was first considered, religion played a significant role in such an appallingly tragic decision for the rest of the planet?

    Well, only insofar as the Jewish people have traditionally been identified as those who practise the Jewish religion, and it was decided by many that a home needed to be found for them. The issue of secular Jewishness is, as I said, something I don’t really understand, but the decisions taken to create the State of Israel were primarily political. There were some religious influences on the British side (and we have an awful lot to answer for in how we handled all this, making and failing to keep promises to both the Jews and the Arabs), in the form of Evangelical Christian Zionists, who believed that the return of the Jews to their homeland would signify the coming of the End Times, but this was a minority position (I think, though I am open to correction here).

    As for the location of Israel, one could argue that this was a religious choice insofar as Biblical territories were used to mark out potential (and some actual) borders there, but really, it seems a bit strange to create an Israeli homeland somewhere else when there is already somewhere with deep historical, cultural, and yes, religious, associations for the Jewish people. The problem is that our (i.e.; the British) government promised lots of Arabs something completely different – we messed it up totally.

  53. mkenny114 says:

    P.S. Toad, apologies for any apparent malicious irony, if it was me you meant. If so, it certainly wasn’t intended.

  54. johnhenrycn says:

    MK: If there was a “purely personal spat” between TF and me, it was mostly (if not “purely”) a one-sided one involving 17 personal insults hurled at me in response to which I made a mere two allusions to my antagonist’s avatar.

  55. toadspittle says:

    “Toad, now that you’ve decided repeated vulgarisms and cheap personal attacks involving relations are permissible again, let me ask how many of your three ex-wives were lesbians? Talk about putting your finger in the dykes.”
    I never got round to asking any of them, JH. Who cares, anyway – except you – it seems. You’re being silly, and even more absurdly pompous than usual now.
    Loosen up! It;s CP&S! Not the Spanish Inquisition! (cue Python video clip.)
    If you post dopey lists of stuff about gays, you will likely get a response, including from me. Not that any of it matters a baboon’s fart.
    The gays care less than I do, I imagine. Still, it was funny of you, and that’s the main thing.
    In fact, we can’t have enough repeated vulgarisms and cheap personal attacks on here, in my opinion. Help yourself, regarding me and my personal life.
    Pity your Auntie Elton’s dead, because he would surely agree. My kind of woman .

    See Tom? That’s how to do it, I suggest. Get them frothing and raging.

  56. toadspittle says:

    “P.S. Toad, apologies for any apparent malicious irony, if it was me you meant. If so, it certainly wasn’t intended.”</i.
    You, Michael? Malicious irony? You jest, surely? Leave all that sordid stuff to good old JH – and his hapless apprentice,Toad.
    It's in our genes, you know. Not yours. Or Tom's.

  57. mkenny114 says:

    JH,

    All I meant was that the debate between you and Tom seemed to be getting a little bit personal (and heated), and that it was this that I wanted to divert attention away from, not the question of whether your points about homosexuality are accurate or not. Re the debate itself, it is of little consequence who started it, or how many insults each side may have heaped up; the thing is that, in my opinion, the overall tone rather detracts from the very (as you rightly point out) serious nature of the topic being discussed.

    Toad,

    Yes, I thought not – it’s just the ‘malicious irony’ bit followed on in your comment in a way that could be read that way, and as my comments have been interpreted in many and various ways in the past, I just wanted to make sure! Thanks for the clarification though.

  58. johnhenrycn says:

    “If you post dopey lists of stuff about gays…”
    What dopey list? Your homosexual ‘chums’ are turning parody into reality:
    Vienna Installs Gay Traffic Lights

    Be careful driving around Vienna, Toadspit. You might get rear-ended.

  59. johnhenrycn says:

    MK (19:36) be assured – my last missive was meant for that old geezer in Spain, not you. But him aside, I really do make an sincere effort to avoid personal invective on this blog unless someone else uses it, and TF unfortunately resorts to it with some regularity.

  60. toadspittle says:

    Now, as usual, Toad experiences the old Catholic guilt about ragging on JH.
    If something is too easy, it’s almost always not worth doing.

    “In fact, we can’t have enough repeated vulgarisms and cheap personal attacks on here, in my opinion.”
    …I said, an hour or so ago. I was wrong. It’s corrosive, pointless, and destructive. And childish.
    So, sorry – JH.
    To both you, and your deceased Uncle.

    And so to bed.

  61. johnhenrycn says:

    Uncle(s) actually, but never mind. Ever hear the expression water off a duck’s back, Toad? That’s all your attempts at abusive wit signify to me 90% of the time. In order to stab a knife into a person’s back, you have to get behind him, which you rarely do.

  62. johnhenrycn says:

    Apologies for the URL glitch at 19:53. The video can be accessed by Googling “Gay-friendly Traffic Lights Installed In Vienna – YouTube”

  63. It seems, JH, that this has turned into a fight between you and Toad, as well as Tom (though if I were them, I’d rather go against the Spanish Inquisition). As to the Palestine issue, the old (Crusader) Kingdom of Jerusalem is my list of Hapsburg dominions to be restored (-we’re working on it, Tom), which I believe (of course) would satisfactorily solve the whole problem.

    And thus ends my one and (hopefully) only contribution to this thread.
    (P.S. How low the Kaiserstadt has fallen since 1918)

  64. Brother Burrito says:

    OK guys, it’s getting ugly now.

    I will close comments on this article, and hope you can better control your “banter” here, in future.

Comments are closed.