REPLY TO BISHOP STRICKLAND

      So, while most normal Americans were observing St. Valentine's Day by honoring someone special in their lives, our very based and Red-Pilled White House was reminding us all not to forget that the New World Order is on the job.

     Ah, that's some very classy stuff. I almost suspected for a moment that Vox Day had gotten a position in the White House PR Department. It wouldn't be surprising since Vox, along with Andrew Tate, Mencius Moldbug, Bronze Age Pervert, Andrew Tate, and Steve Sailer are among the most admired thinkers in the New Right's constellation of intellectuals. 

    One person, however, that the New Right wholeheartedly despises is Pope Francis. The fact that our leaders admire Red-Pill bloggers but hate the Pope speaks volumes about their character in and of itself; but that hasn't caused many Catholics and Christians to stop and think about what they might be supporting.

   Francis has caused an infuriated backlash by having the temerity to suggest that treating groups of people as subhumans and behaving like bullies and thugs wasn't consistent with Christ's teachings. The Pope outlined his views in a letter to the US Catholic Bishops.

   While most of the Bishopric took the Pope's words to heart, a few dissented. Bishop Joseph Strickland, former Vicar of the Diocese of Tyler, Texas, penned a rebuttal of sorts which was published at LifeSite News which, since January 20th, seems to have turned into a 24/7 Praise-a-Thon for the Neocon Wing of the Uniparty. Strickland himself was removed from office by Pope Francis in 2023: for some inexplicable reason doing things like calling the Pope "a diabolically disoriented clown" and suggesting that Francis is an Antipope in the service of Satan caused the Vatican Hierarchy to think that Strickland might not be as committed to the Mission of the Church as he should be.

  Strickland's article only lightly touched on the issues raised in Pope Francis' letter; for the most part the article was attacking the Pope for not speaking out against Biden's policies. Actually, Francis did criticize Biden's policies occasionally---especially Biden's exacerbation of foreign wars---but this wasn't enough to suit Strickland who disingenuously argues that the Pope wasn't intervening enough on the right causes. Granted, the Pope has taken some positions that deserve criticism, but none of these were in the substance of Francis' letter to the Bishops.

   When Strickland does get around to mentioning immigration, he says: "the Catholic Church recognizes the legitimacy of sovereign nations enforcing just immigration laws. While the Church calls for humane treatment of migrants, it does not demand open borders or the abolition of deportation policies."

   The obvious objection here is that Francis acknowledged that Nations had a right to enforce immigration laws and never advocated for Open Borders or the abolition of deportation policies. 

   "One must recognize the right of a nation to defend itself and keep communities safe from those who have committed violent or serious crimes while in the country or prior to arrival," Francis wrote, "This does not impede the development of a policy that regulates orderly and legal migration. However, this development cannot come about through the privilege of some and the sacrifice of others. What is built on the basis of force, and not on the truth about the equal dignity of every human being, begins badly and will end badly."

   The whole idea of 'Open Borders' is a hoax created in Neocon and Neo-Nazi echo-chambers, which evidently Strickland has bought into. He likewise has no criticism anywhere in his article of the inhumane treatment of immigrants, which was the substance of Francis' appeal. For a cleric who complains so fervently about Francis' supposed silence on social issues, Strickland doesn't seem overly bothered by the New Right's continual references to immigrants as subhumans; nor do I recall him ever lifting a word in protest over his own state's brutality in dealing with immigration.

   "There has long been a concern about the Church’s financial ties — particularly with globalist organizations — as well as concern about government funding and wealthy donors who have a vested interest in certain political outcomes." Strickland asserts, "Especially in the case of immigration, there is a large financial element at play. The Catholic Church in the United States receives significant government funding to assist migrants and refugees through Catholic Charities and other organizations. Stronger immigration enforcement means less funding for these programs which is undoubtedly a large factor in the Vatican’s stance." 

   While the Vatican admittedly has been too cozy with Globalist interests, Strickland is being a bit disingenuous in suggesting here that the Republican Wing of the Uniparty is not. That aside, however, Strickland is repeating another canard circulated widely by the Controlled Opposition: namely, that the Church's sole reason for providing relief to immigrants and refugees is from purely cynical and mercenary motives. If this were so, the Church wouldn't be seeking alternative sources of support for their work in the face of persecution, nor would they be engaged in charitable activities abroad in impoverished counties. 

   Strickland concludes by stating that "Pope Francis’ reluctance to address grave moral issues raises legitimate concerns about whether financial and political interests outweigh doctrinal fidelity on the part of the Vatican," which sounds more like psychological projection than anything else. 

   Let us face facts here: the very things that Strickland accuses Pope Francis of 'ignoring' are the very things that the Neocons whom Strickland supports have done. He chides Francis for not speaking out against abortion (Francis has, in fact, spoken out about it), but hasn't a word of condemnation for Trump's commitment to veto an abortion ban nor his tolerance of States performing late-term abortions, nor his shamelessly taking donations from pro-abortion groups. He snorts that Francis has looked the other way and tolerated homo 'marriage' (another hoax, Francis has supported traditional marriage as legitimate); but doesn't seem troubled that Trump hosted such farcical 'weddings' in his own home, raised funds from homo activist groups, or appointed more of these types to high office than Biden did. 

   Of course, it's an exercise in futility to try explaining any of this to these Good German types of Catholics whose willingness to sacrifice their fellow-believers to save their own skins is a disgrace to everything Christianity stands for. Like their kindred-spirits in 1930s Europe, they want to pretend that a national movement predicated on ruthlessness, aggression, and brutality is going to let them live in peace if they just bow and scrape hard enough. Such a policy doesn't work with neurotics and fanatics as they may well learn to their sorrow.