Wednesday, December 1, 2021

Is This the Worst Time Ever…


…for the Church.

Taken from a clip of a longer discussion with Ralph Martin at Pints With Aquinas.  The entire clip is six minutes, and it is taken from a much longer conversation which I may treat in the future.

Matt Fradd, the host of the channel, begins by offering: There have been many times in Church history where there has been confusion and sin in the Church, even the pope.  What does Martin say?

Is this the worst time ever?  I don’t know, but we do have some unique things right now.  We have confusion in the Church happening at the same time as we have this incredible array of the powers of this world against Christ and His Church. 

Confusion in the Church has happened often.  It hasn’t happened often at the same time as society also wanting to crush the Church.

Martin then goes to Psalms 2: 2 The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord, and against his anointed….

All the levers of power, culture, entertainment, even professional sports going woke and persecuting people for not going along with the global elite agenda.  Education….

He speaks to public schools.  Of course, we cannot forget the universities.

I don’t think you can explain how quick and how thorough it’s been without supernatural power.

Ephesians 6:12 is offered, a verse I have leaned on many times when considering our situation today: For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

Those are instruments of spiritual powers which are incredibly intelligent and incredibly hate filled toward Christ.

This is exactly the theme I have written on here.  We are governed by evil men doing the work of Satan.  By governed, I don’t refer to only state actors.  Church leaders are also featured, and Jesus warned us of such as these.

Martin then takes aim at his own Catholic Church; he is concerned that the Church is being lured into one that is useful to and supportive of this earthly agenda: “lured into a chaplain to the U.N. or a chaplain to the global reset.”  He is, of course, speaking about the current pope and many in the Church who support his agenda. 

Martin then cites Pope Benedict – who seems to be the go-to pope for those less-than-enamored with the current pope:

One hundred years ago, everyone would have considered it absurd to speak of a homosexual marriage.  Today, one is being excommunicated by society if one opposes it.  The same applies to abortion or the creation of human beings in the laboratory.

He then offers that there was recently an announcement about blending mouse cells and human cells.  The Abolition of Man….

Returning to Benedict:

Modern society is in the middle of formulating an anti-Christian creed.  If one opposes it, one is being punished by society with excommunication. 

Benedict concludes: This must be countered by prayer.  What a lovely happenstance that Benedict was exchanged for Francis just in time….

Benedict’s words remind me of the examination by Jonathan Pageau of a speech given by Tim Cook when he won some award from the ADL, which I have written about here.  Pageau titled his video, The Apple CEO, 666, and the Garden of Eden.  This title tells you about everything you need to know of the video, but I offer one snippet from my earlier writing:

Pageau notes: the speech had a moralistic, crusading tone; it was extremely aggressive; Cook spoke with a moral certainty.  He is presenting his moral vision. … Cook is offering a vision of the desired ethic: the only values that matter are 1) inclusion, and 2) don’t oppose the system – including the system of inclusion.  It is a problem if you oppose yourself to this.  It is unethical to be outside of this desired ethic.

Cook goes on to offer Judaism and Islam as examples of teaching to follow, with no mention of Christianity.  As Pageau noted: if you reject the system, you will be the one excluded – or, in Martin’s words, excommunicated.

Then Martin offers something from Archbishop Gomez, head of the Bishop’s Conference, who said something similar to what Benedict said.  He said this, knowing that the bishops are divided, knowing that he would take flack for saying it.

He said that these movements of global reset, and he mentions Black Lives Matter and other things, are in the process of forming an alternate worldview and an alternate religion that has no place for Christ and the Church.  He said that we really need to be honest about this; that’s what we are dealing with now.  We aren’t dealing with a Christian culture now; we are dealing with an alternate religion. 

I am not familiar with Gomez, but a quick look at some of his positions reveals a bit of a mixed bag.  In any case…the text of Gomez’s speech can be found here; Martin does an video examination of it here.  In the speech, he aims at Cultural Marxism, Critical Theories, etc.  According to Martin, the archbishop “hits a homerun,” and asks, “who is next up to bat?”

A snippet from the speech:

An elite leadership class has risen in our countries that has little interest in religion and no real attachments to the nations they live in or to local traditions or cultures. This group, which is in charge in corporations, governments, universities, the media, and in the cultural and professional establishments, wants to establish what we might call a global civilization, built on a consumer economy and guided by science, technology, humanitarian values, and technocratic ideas about organizing society.

In this elite worldview, there is no need for old-fashioned belief systems and religions. In fact, as they see it, religion, especially Christianity, only gets in the way of the society they hope to build.

It is the political strategy of Antonio Gramsci put into action.


During the video, Fradd introduces the St. Michael prayer:

St. Michael the Archangel,

defend us in battle.

Be our defense against the wickedness and snares of the Devil.

May God rebuke him, we humbly pray,

and do thou,

O Prince of the heavenly hosts,

by the power of God,

thrust into hell Satan,

and all the evil spirits,

who prowl about the world

seeking the ruin of souls. Amen.



  1. Tremendously timely, as your posts all seem to be lately. I am an avid follower, but rarely post, but wanted to let you (and all the commenters know) that this community is very appreciated.

  2. I love the St. Michael Prayer. My local priest recently decided to start reciting this at the end of every mass. This was prayed after every mass since it was written by Pope Leo XIII in 1886 after he received a vision of Satan's attack on the church and the world that would occur in the 20th century, but the practice stopped after Vatican II. It's good to see it coming back.

    "...the only values that matter are 1) inclusion, and 2) don’t oppose the system – including the system of inclusion... As Pageau noted: if you reject the system, you will be the one excluded – or, in Martin’s words, excommunicated."

    So let us be excluded then. Secession is the only way forward even if it may mean a substantial decline in living standards, at least in the short term.

    "Let us break their bonds asunder: and let us cast away their yoke from us." - Psalms 2:3

    In the verse after the one Martin mentioned, King David speaks of the proper solution.

    1. Watching this discussion with Catherine Austin Fitts and Jorn Luka (Trueman Show) posted by Charles Burris on LRC today, I wonder if secession will be permitted to succeed anywhere. Is it too late? Very much worth a look. Peg in Oregon

    2. ATL,

      While the verse you mentioned MIGHT be seen as a proper solution to the tyranny being visited on us, that is not what the context of the passage is.

      "Why do the nations rage and the people plot a vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves and the rulers take counsel together against the LORD and against His Anointed, saying, 'Let us break Their bonds in pieces and cast away Their cords from us.'

      Clearly, the context shows a civilization in open rebellion against the High, Holy God and His Anointed (Christ). These people are railing against the (natural?) laws which have been imposed on them and are showing their desire to subvert these "bonds & cords" so they can live life their way without restriction.

      The pivotal verses in this chapter are four and five, which read,

      "He who sits in the heavens shall laugh. The LORD shall hold them in derision. Then He shall speak to them in His wrath and distress them in His deep displeasure."

      This is a game changer.

      As a society and civilization, we have been trying for years, decades, centuries even to throw off the bonds and cords of godly morality and righteousness, substituting our own versions of them. It should not be difficult to imagine God in Heaven laughing at our feeble attempts.

      The most frightening thing about this is that God might be done laughing and has begun to speak to us in His wrath, distressing us in His displeasure.

      Heaven help us if this is accurate.

    3. You've pointed out an interesting difference in translation between KJB and DRB. In the DRB it seems to say that the "bonds" and "yoke" that needs to be cast off is that of those kings of the earth which have united against God. As in let us followers of the Lord cast off the yoke and break the bonds these rebels have put on us. I could be reading that wrong though. I suppose it might matter what historical context this was written in. I have no competency to speak to that.

      "[1] Why have the Gentiles raged, and the people devised vain things? [2] The kings of the earth stood up, and the princes met together, against the Lord and against his Christ. [3] Let us break their bonds asunder: and let us cast away their yoke from us. [4] He that dwelleth in heaven shall laugh at them: and the Lord shall deride them. [5] Then shall he speak to them in his anger, and trouble them in his rage." - Douay Rheims Bible

      Anyway, the main takeaway is the same. Beware you leaders of the earth that rule with a law against that of God's. Trouble is a comin.

      It's a beautiful psalm that I believe is suppose to mirror Christ's return and the events of Revelation.

    4. Roger, let's pray that Abraham is doing some pleading on behalf of the few good men and women...

    5. I did a simple, unscientific study of this at and found out that there is no overwhelming consensus on the translation. About 2/3 of the versions listed read this as 'the kings rebel...saying...let us', bolstering my viewpoint. The rest read as 'the kings rebel...let us', backing up ATL's.

      I am not a scholar and have virtually no knowledge of Hebrew, so I cannot say which is correct. I do agree with ATL that the main point is that there are two laws in conflict and that trouble arises because of it.

      This conflict is not unique to our time. It has been going on from the beginning with the same results every time. Sooner or later, the current evil regime is smashed and something else takes its place, starting the cycle all over again.

      The idea of God laughing at and mocking these "leaders" is metaphorical, but a good historical example would be that of Elijah going up against the prophets of Baal on Mount Carmel. He literally incited them to greater effort through his derision and ridicule until they had gone as far as they could, then he lowered the boom and totally obliterated them.

      I can imagine God doing the same thing to His opponents, knowing their end, knowing they cannot win, and knowing that all He has to do is wait while they destroy and consume themselves.

      To paraphrase Hebrews 10:31, "It is a terrible thing to fall into the hands of a [derisive, mocking, laughing, ridiculing] God."

      The emperor has no clothes. We should not be shy nor reticent about pointing that out.

    6. And, yes, I certainly hope that someone (a lot of someone's) or Someone is speaking on our behalf.

  3. How timely, bionic!
    My gut has been telling me for some time that we either are now or getting close to critical mass on everything.
    This also fits in with Gary North's book Moses & Pharaoh - the three religions - Dominion, Power and Escapist - which have maintained their functional format under different identities.
    It is my opinion that the church at large has evolved into an Escapist (pietist) and thus neutered entity - unable to discern between good and evil - like the Hebrew slaves in Egypt.
    Since everything is religious - Antonio Gramsci represents Power.
    God's Dominion is maintained by a remnant - always present from Genesis to Revelation.
    Much of today's Churchianity is like going to a football game on Sunday - an escape from reality.
    Truly sad, but try to find a conversation with someone about what's going on in the world - almost impossible!
    In always was....and is...a war on Christ!

    1. Crush
      "Truly sad, but try to find a conversation with someone about what's going on in the world - almost impossible!"
      I've been trying to find someone to have that conversation with for decades. I think I know what you are saying.
      The Conflict of the Ages. But who today really believes that? Lots of references to Satan, Evil, Devil etc. etc. etc. But Who really believes that?
      Lots of demeaning and utterly disgusting things said about God and Christ, even by some claiming to believe in Christ.
      Lots of camels swallowed and knats choked on.
      I think that your gut is far more accurate than even you may believe.
      In view of past experience, I don't think we could ever have that conversation on this board. Got any suggestions?
      What do you think about the "difference" that ATL pointed out in his reply to Roger regarding Christ vs Anointed?

      another roger

    2. another roger, perhaps you could suggest a different blog on which you may carry on this apparently forbidden conversation, one more open or appropriate than this one?

      Is there one? If not, perhaps there is a market opportunity for you.

  4. Some semi-inside Catholic baseball, but my local Bishop supposedly told the priests to discourage people from receiving Holy Communion on the tongue, and he was disgusted that he's noticed an increase of people during the pandemonium who want to receive Him on the tongue (as it is in the rest of the world), and then we were denied Communion this weekend in the Diocese of Tucson for that same policy. These successors of the Apostles are such a mixed bag that my mealy-mouther local Bishop deserves at least some praise for only discouraging and not outright banning.

    1. Eric, I have come to the point where I am happy if the pastor or priest at least avoids saying anything destructive, even if he does not speak the truth. At least please don't lie.

    2. The Novus Ordo hierarchy, by and large, are on board with the narrative. They care not for the salvation of souls and definitely do not believe in the Real Presence, thus these silly diktats.

      Eric, it's time to find an independent traditionalist congregation and dump the diocese. There are a few in the Tuscon area administered by the Congregation of Mary Immaculate Queen.

  5. By no means the worst time, ever, if we are to measure by external persecution. In the West, it is certainly a terrible time for enemies within the church, which are always the worst of enemies. It is tempting to see the final collapse of Christendom as the worst thing, but only if we see Christendom as a preferred state of being.

  6. Bionic
    I was thinking more like a one on one with Crush simply because from my limited past experience on your blog I know there are or were things that are not welcome to be discussed or pointed out.
    When you start talking about what is really going on in this world you also have to talk about Who is involved. I base what I believe on God's Word. That Word is Christ. Whenever I read Holy Scripture it is Christ speaking. If He chooses to speak through another person, so be it. I would never think it was some bunch of dudes writing stuff a long time ago. As the female says in one of your articles.
    But I have tried to bring discussion regarding things that are, to me at least, very important when it comes to knowing the Truth. There is a very good example above that ATL has pointed out regarding the actual removal of the Christ from context and replacing Him with another word. A word that could be easily misunderstood.
    My past experience here tells me that this is not a welcome subject because of what it leads to eventually.
    I know there is a big argument to be made about which is the best Bible or which is the True Gospel etc.
    I've said this before and I'll say it again; When you change one "click" on the windage or elevation of your rifle scope, how far out do you have to go before you not only miss the bullseye, but miss the whole target?
    If that's not a fair question maybe you'd care to tell me why?
    If one does not have correct information, how does one make correct decisions? How many Versions of the Truth are there? That question even sounds absurd just to ask it. Christ speaks to the fact of people saying He has said this or that when He has not spoken at all.
    Is the fact that the name Christ has been replaced with another not concern you. When someone takes a part of Scripture and perverts it do you not care to try and correct it? When they click the windage just a tad does it not bother you enough to point it out? Does it not bring the question; "Why would they do this? What is their goal here?" Is the word anointed better that the name Christ. When God says through His prophet; "But I wil joy in our Lord: and wil rejoyce in God my Jesus.", and someone takes away the name Jesus and replaces it with anointed? That's a red flag is it not?
    If those things seem trivial to you then I should go somewhere. There is a warning about casting pearls.
    I'll say no more. I've probably said too much already.
    You can approve this or not. I really don't care. You don't have to answer to me.
    another roger

    1. other roger, my point on this is rather simple: those who take time to read and comment at this blog are not the people best qualified to answer such questions.

      I don't know you. I have no reason to believe you are any more qualified than anyone else who regularly comments at this site, or more qualified than I am.

      The questions you raise are rabbit trails that won't get resolved here at this blog, and, in some cases, haven't been resolved in 2000 years.

      There are other forums, I am sure, where people appropriately qualified come together to deal with such issues.

      For me, at this blog, CS Lewis and Mere Christianity is sufficient. If one can enter the hallway and understand how the value of the hallway plays into our liberty, this is about as far as I feel is beneficial to a fruitful discussion.

      I know that I stray further sometimes, and I know I allow the conversation to stray further sometimes; as long as it doesn't become repetitive or attacking, I am OK with this. But, too often, it crosses such lines. So I am sensitive to the boundaries.

    2. Bionic
      Thank you for your response.

      another roger