As Is The Feeling,
So Is The Result.
Fratelli tutti derives from mal-exegesis of the Parable of the Good Samaritan. All lefties hell-raisers use it, throw it in the teeth of Christians, who they expect to apologize for not forcing everyone to give up their wealth for the greater good and empowering government agents to force everyone to submit (Islam). This is called exegetical and theological FUBAR. It also is called a security state. But its nature is simple: theft. Bergoglio promulgates it.
Archbishop Viganò on Fratelli Tutti:
here, and here, and here.
Strong and certain remedies are ecclesial processions through streets of towns and cities, singing the Glory of God, cross and candles in the van, choir following, clergy bringing up the rear in inverse rank order. These proceedings drive from the streets, homes, and air the demons of envy, anger, and fear.
4th of July parades, Christmas caroling, traditional Salvation Army street corner singing, spiritual revivals, even political rallies with a beloved candidate for public office are forms of ecclesial procession. They are imbued with love and so drive away hatred and welcome unity, purifying thereby a town, a city, a life.
Ironically, hell-raisers burning down towns, cities, and lives also are conducting ecclesial processions, only in reverse. They too want unity, but forced, as Bergoglio wants. Instead of the spontaneous, glorious, and unifying volunteerism of love (Parable of the Good Samaritan), hell-raisers want a steered, grim, and uniform vacancy of ruination (Fratelli tutti‘s Communitarianism). See, everyone wants unity, the feeling of togetherness, commonality, amidst our numberless and necessary uniquenesses. E pluribus unum is a spiritual principle before it is a political one. Our unity is our divine nature (imago dei).
Christians serve their brothers and sisters of every creed, country, and color, by instituting public ecclesial processions to drive away the demons of envy, anger, and fear from towns, cities, and lives. Let the singing of sacred songs in procession be enthusiastic, cheerful, and fearless. Start one and watch, people will come and join in. This is how to protect a neighborhood, a town, a city, a country. Drive out the demons with happy talk, specifically singing, and formally in procession through the streets.
Embarrassed Pope Suddenly Realizes
He’s Been Reading The Bible
Upside Down
This Whole Time
Operation Crossfire Hurricane (OCH) was tellingly named. On its surface, the meaning is clear: a military / para-military action to engage a target with crossfire of hurricane-type force: not survivable. This means OCH was conceived as an ambush, not as straight-ahead frontal assault. Crossfire is an ambush tactic. Direct fire is a frontal assault tactic.
Below surface appearance, one may observe from its name that OCH was an aggressive ambush, an offensive, an attack, not a law enforcement action. Law enforcement actions are defensive, to protect the polis against someone attacking them. OCH was offensive military action of the ambush type, an action Genghis Khan — and Mongol leaders of his and later years generally — mastered, not a law enforcement action, which also may use the ambush technique, but starting from a defensive rather than an offensive posture.
OCH was a sua sponte offensive, lacking USA legal grounds, which, had such existed, would have made OCH a defensive, law enforcement action. Someones took it upon themselves to appropriate law enforcement assets they could access to mount a military-grade embuscade against someones and/or somethings over whom and/or which they had no jurisdiction. Do not assume law enforcement personnel only were included among these someones.
Why was the offensive conceived, planned, ordered, and executed? Why? For what strategic reasons, specifically? Personal pique is not a strategic reason.
Farther below surface appearance, several queries present. Who delivered the crossfire? Did they execute as planned. Was their delivery as decisive as intended? Who / what was the primary target of the offensive? Who / what were the secondary and tertiary targets of the offensive? An intelligent attack does not occur against one target only. Assume OCH was an intelligent attack.
Assume, always, that an enemy does and always will do what he should do to defeat you. Assume he knows you better than you know him.
Far below surface appearance, who conceived, who ordered, and who planned the OCH offensive crossfire? What fields of battle and what fields of fire did those offenders select for their primary, secondary, and tertiary attacks? What strategic values, what force vectors did they intend and attempt to eliminate. What outcomes did they expect their attacks to produce: where, when, and how? What did they expect by way of reaction from their targets? What follow-on operations did they contemplate, plan, and/or execute, and when: before, during, and/or after commencing their initial attacks?
Who staffed the offensive? This is different from the questions of who conceived and who executed it. Who engineered the attack’s personnel, intel, operations, logistics, strategic planning, signals, and force protection functions? Who gave the order for the attack to commence? It was a military operation, not a law enforcement one. Expect it carried out as a military operation should be. Who wrote, edited, and saw the OpOrds?
Who in that congeries of worthies would benefit from the OCH offensive? How, specifically? Did one or all of them consider the attack a success, a failure, a partial success or failure? Are yet more offensives planned, underway, awaiting orders to commence? If so, who, why, what, where, when?
Coup d’œil: military-style ambush by a non-military force has failed (OCH), law enforcement ambush by Lawfare Blog has failed (Impeachment), medical ambush by TWANLOC MDs has failed (Fauci / China / CDC), direct assault by CIA / NGOs is underway (voting fraud, disinformation operations, assassinations, and — in advanced stages of planning — ambush and direct assault by a military force).
Again: who, why, what, where, when?
Archbishop Vigano:
Open Letter To POTUS 25 October 2020, Solemnity of Christ The King
Archbishop Vigano: EXC – The Great Reset: Bannon Interviews Archbishop Vigano
Maike Hickson: Archbishop Viganò discusses the Great Reset, gives hope in light of Our Lady of Fatima
Robert Moynihan: The Vigano Tapes
When one person exudes the pride that he alone can sing Bhajans well among the group, naturally others develop anger, jealousy, hate, malice and such other deleterious traits. Love alone can root out the weed of pride from the heart. Love all considering all as so many forms of God, appearing in these various roles. A heart without Love is as dreary as a town without a temple. Spiritual pride is the most poisonous of all varieties of pride; it blinds and leads the person suffering from it into ruin. Beware of pride; be always aware that you are but instruments in My Divine Mission of Dharma sthapana – Revival of Righteousness. Try to be more and more efficient as such instruments. The Hand that wields the Instrument knows how and when it has to be applied. If there is righteousness in the heart, there will be beauty in character. If there is beauty in character, there will be harmony in the home.
- Sathya Sai Baba – Divine Discourse, January 13, 1970 / Daily Email, Sai Inspires: Subscription
Βασιλεία του Θεού