There are currently some 4,000+ people in the UK who are in jail, their lives now destroyed, for the "crime" of voicing an opinion or telling the truth about the true state of the UK. The price of spiritual ruin leads to moral ambiguity whereby one can no longer trust even their own senses. For instead, they are expected to deny the truth of what they perceive and instead live the lie of moral unconsciousness that disconnects one from life.
Sarah, this is truly one of the best articles you've ever written. And one of the most important. All of Europe has fallen under the spell of moral ambiguity in the name of diversity and harmony. Look at Sweden. They used to be one of the safest nations on earth. Today, things are so bad that the police no longer investigate crimes such as rape, assault or robbery. However, if you post anything on social media critical of diversity, they will arrest you an destroy your life.
It's clear that evil is taking over the UK and all of Europe. They've destroyed spiritual mortality and replaced it with spiritual indifference. Do whatever you want if you're a foreigner, but if you're a white citizen who tells the truth, you are now a criminal.
They're pushing for digital ID, central bank digital currency and a complete loss of personal freedom. They want to replace God with an all powerful state. It's a horror show. They way out is a return to spiritual faith and morality.
The tyrants who wish to rule with an iron fist know they cannot do so over a people whose morality is firmly based in God. They can only rule over chaos and moral indifference.
Use this filter: The Grifter and the Gull. Charles Manson had a natural genius for grift. Squeaky Fromm was a hopeless Gull. She was the most dangerous of the two. The government is using proxies to terrorize the public as if antipersonnel mines cause accidents. Until the fight causes pain to the tyrants they will spend blood like found money.
“Previous civilizations have been overthrown from without by the incursion of barbarian hordes. Christendom has dreamed up its own dissolution in the minds of its own intellectual elite. Our barbarians are home products, indoctrinated at the public expense, urged on by the media systematically stage by stage, dismantling Christendom, depreciating, and deprecating all its values.”
Malcolm Muggeridge – English Journalist, Satirist and Author (1903 - 1990)
It seems as though the majority of the Catholic hierarchy are still living in the delusional world of boomer hippie liberalism. Thankfully, we seem to finally (though gradually) be waking up from the nightmare they created, as more and more people begin to see it for the evil that it is, but obviously we’re not fully out of it yet.
All of the Catholic faithful who gave their lives in service of Christ have been dishonored and degraded by the acts of the man calling himself the pope while he has also dishonored and degraded the very office of the papacy and thus dishonored and degraded Christ.
Changing scripture to accommodate the CCP satisfies the definition of apostasy. We need a Catholic Church and let those who think to usurp it go form their own Church. In the US we worship as we choose, we choose liturgy by celibate men in Latin; we do not choose liturgy by bipocs in lesbian queef. We need the Catholic Church in America strong! In Italy the Vatican can do whatever; they have no power here.
All of Europe has abandoned Christian values and has embraced a nihilistic, self-hating, suicidal mindset. I can’t fathom how far the continent has fallen.
The Euronazis we call them. The nations of Europe agreed to a common currency. That has been taken as an invitation to destroy the national identity of every country, to commit total ethnocide. Their plans have changed not at all: The World is not enough. All that stands in their way are the faithful. Faith. We can be beaten, yes it will come to pass but we cannot ever be defeated.
We have to be aware that there's been a concerted, semi-clandestine war that's been waging for more than a century to homogenize the peoples of Europe and the United States. I believe they still bestow a European leader every two years with an award named after Richard Cloudenhove Kalergi whose plan it was to introduce third-worlders into Europe and smear the native peoples there until they were indistinguishable. This plan was not for the betterment of the native peoples, but for the advantage of those who would presume to rule over them.
White Christian males established a country ruled by its nation. It came to be beloved of its nation and enriched thereby. All other countries on Earth were affected so that tyranny was repudiated around the world. The tyrants never forgave them for that. Their soldiers pulled down statues that fit that description not understanding that white and male had nothing to do with it. Now we receive the welcome that came to Lot when he entertained the Angels. They will find no comfort among men who never knew them. Bless you Sarah, for putting our straits so neatly. We will overcome.
Yuval Harare thinks that the effect of a process can be put into a can. If he can do it why then, power to him, I think he'll like being inside a computer. His soul, alas, won't be in the header file. We'll still have to dispose of the remains.
I think the upload your consciousness to the cloud and live forever is a tricky depopulation program created by people who claim there are too many people.
I compare it to a cult that tells you jumping head first through their magical woodchipper will teleport you to Godhead, proving your conviction.
A leap of faith following a death cult has an obvious result, you die.
Come visit Western Ukraine. You’ll get a taste of Christian Rome under Constantine once again. The Ukrainians are the only Europeans I know who are brave enough to defend their sovereignty from foreign invaders, both immigrants and Persia, hold fast to their faith, and see that "Beauty is truth, truth beauty,—that is all Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know."
Bravo Crusader Gal! Thomas saith to him: Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way? Jesus saith to him: I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man cometh to the Father, but by me.
Thanks for this perspective Sarah, I haven't given much thought to ecumenism before and I will think more about what you wrote here but my first gut reaction is to respectfully push back on the idea that ecumenism in general and Pope Leo's actions in this case specifically, deserve this criticism. I started explaining why I feel this way and then I realized my ridiculously long comment was better suited as an essay - so thank you for the inspiration! I do agree with your criticism of England's policies and I especially appreciate your comments about natural law I just don't think it's fully relevant to the larger critique offered here. In addition there seems to be an unfair assumption made that by praying alongside King Charles implies Pope Leo is "praising" or agreeing with his policies. I understand what's happening in England hits close to home for you; I wonder if you might explore more objectively and philosophically, through a different lens that doesn't involve King Charles, what exactly is wrong with ecumenism/synodality/interreligious dialogue (I'm making an assumption based on this article you don't feel great about any of these things) and if there is any way to do these things without sacrificing truth.
I have an article coming out for New Oxford Review in December about Ecumenism and the heresy of pluralism (which most lay Catholics, when polled, now fall into today). I’ll make sure to send you a copy when it comes out. It doesn't mention England, since that seems to be desired.
As for a piece that's more objective and philosophical, I'd urge you to look at the saints and martyrs that died rather than acquiescing to other faiths. We've always urged those from without to come into the fold, and that is different from simply praying together or encouraging them in their errors. That's why we once sent missionaries out to convert. It was about saving souls, even at the risk of martyrdom. Balthasar's approach led to the condemnation of proselytizing, which has transformed so much of the modern Church (for now).
Yes, I'm aware of Nostra Aetate and the disgusting history of Gregory Baum, who largely wrote it... before leaving the Church.
If you want a history of the Church's stance on this topic throughout most of her being, and the theological reasons thereof, I can't recommend Deadly Indifference enough, by Eric Sammons.
I suggested a more objective examination because the state of English politics seemed to distract from the real heart of the issue at stake which you have clearly named here as the “heresy of pluralism” - what I’m interested in learning and hoping to read in your future article is how exactly ecumenism/synodality/interreligois dialogue and the general post Vatican 2 vibe of the Church are in fact condoning pluralism or “acquiescing to other faiths.” When I carefully read documents like Nostra Aetate, Ut Unum Sint, and Dominus Iesus I do not see language that condones pluralism. In fact they all clarify the opposite. I wonder if you are familiar with “logos theology” - and as it applies to our debate, the specific concept of “logoi spermatikoi”?
The difference between this concept (and its rational implications) and pluralism is delicate and easily blurred which is why polling data might be misleading and many lay Catholics might be confused. I would be interested to know the specific language used in these polls as I doubt it could be long/detailed enough to articulate that nuance. Are you referring to the pew poll? Because that language is not specific enough to tease out the distinction I mentioned above. “Many religions may be true” isn’t precise enough to distinguish “elements of truth” from true pluralism - “equal validity of all paths.”
I am aware of the English saints and martyrs who died for the Faith and I agree their stories are important and their martyrdom to be taken seriously. However I am struggling to see how this applies to the true issue at stake - this deserves to be fleshed out more but, as it stands, it feels a little like an appeal to emotion rather than a substantive argument.
I don’t agree that praying alongside a Protestant necessarily qualifies as an encouragement in error. I think that’s a delicate area, and framing prayer itself as dangerous may miss its deeper purpose.
In regards to the comment about Gregory Baum…I will learn more about him but at first glance the term “disgusting” seems…misplaced. Also I have to point out that this comment is an ad hominem fallacy and an attempt to “poison the well.” I could do the same to a traditionalist easily, there is no shortage of corrupt men to choose from who wrote documents and contributed to a more traditionalist perspective. But this wouldn’t be productive as even when a corrupt man claims 2+2 = 4 the fact that he is corrupt has no bearing on the truth that 2+2 indeed equals 4.
Pope Alexander VI’s personal corruption didn’t invalidate the Catholic tradition he defended in the same way Gregory Baum’s moral choices don’t invalidate the theological insights of Nostra Aetate.
The continuity of truth in the Church does not and has never depended on the virtue or character of its human instruments - that’s the point of the doctrine of indefectibility.
Generally I view the Church as a safe haven from the left/right division of politics and our society that I find incredibly exhausting and damaging so I am admittedly a bit hostile to any take that encourages this sort of politically tinged divide between Catholics within the Church (that is my bias). I also realize it’s not possible to be truly neutral or center (as much as I want to be), admittedly it appears I lean slightly progressive and you more strongly traditional. But I’m aware of my bias and open to exploring the possibility that truth may land harder on one side or the other - just because I don’t want that to be the case doesn’t mean it’s not true. So thank you for your voice in helping me to explore that; I look forward to your article.
You seem to misunderstand what the essay was about. It wasn't an essay that got lost in a distraction about Leo's meeting with Charles. That was literally the point. It's what I do--write about news items within the context of the traditional Catholic worldview. So, it wasn't a piece about ecumenism or pluralism, but about how this particular item relates to them.
I mentioned the English martyrs in my earlier comment, because they considered the nuances between Anglicanism and Catholicism worth dying over, rather than merely "agreeing to disagree". Check our Campion's "Decem Rationes". My narrated version should be out next month, God willing.
When you wrote, "The difference between this concept (and its rational implications) and pluralism is delicate and easily blurred," I breathed a sigh of relief. Exactly! 100%. Our dogma hasn't changed, but because we've moved in public presentations and messaging towards an emphasis shift from the ordinary means of salvation to the extraordinary means, lay Catholics are left confused and misinformed. What Catholics believed about salvation and about Protestantism between 1925 and 2025 has flipped completely, yet the dogma hasn't changed (not least of which because no new dogmas were declared in V2). The messaging and public presentations through which our clergy engage with other faiths without ever calling for their conversion, have resulted in this change. This point is much better expanded in my article for NOR in December, because that was its focus. I think it's more the kind of essay that you were hoping this one would be.
We can be certain there is a Truth if only because reality is a certain way. However, finding that truth may be beyond our mental capacities. Searching for it will get us closer but there is no guarantee that we will ever arrive. Many intelligent and sincere people believe that Jesus is that Truth, but other equally intelligent and sincere people disagree. It is mere presumption to dogmatically assert that those who believe in Jesus have found the Truth.
There are currently some 4,000+ people in the UK who are in jail, their lives now destroyed, for the "crime" of voicing an opinion or telling the truth about the true state of the UK. The price of spiritual ruin leads to moral ambiguity whereby one can no longer trust even their own senses. For instead, they are expected to deny the truth of what they perceive and instead live the lie of moral unconsciousness that disconnects one from life.
Sarah, this is truly one of the best articles you've ever written. And one of the most important. All of Europe has fallen under the spell of moral ambiguity in the name of diversity and harmony. Look at Sweden. They used to be one of the safest nations on earth. Today, things are so bad that the police no longer investigate crimes such as rape, assault or robbery. However, if you post anything on social media critical of diversity, they will arrest you an destroy your life.
It's clear that evil is taking over the UK and all of Europe. They've destroyed spiritual mortality and replaced it with spiritual indifference. Do whatever you want if you're a foreigner, but if you're a white citizen who tells the truth, you are now a criminal.
They're pushing for digital ID, central bank digital currency and a complete loss of personal freedom. They want to replace God with an all powerful state. It's a horror show. They way out is a return to spiritual faith and morality.
The tyrants who wish to rule with an iron fist know they cannot do so over a people whose morality is firmly based in God. They can only rule over chaos and moral indifference.
Use this filter: The Grifter and the Gull. Charles Manson had a natural genius for grift. Squeaky Fromm was a hopeless Gull. She was the most dangerous of the two. The government is using proxies to terrorize the public as if antipersonnel mines cause accidents. Until the fight causes pain to the tyrants they will spend blood like found money.
“Previous civilizations have been overthrown from without by the incursion of barbarian hordes. Christendom has dreamed up its own dissolution in the minds of its own intellectual elite. Our barbarians are home products, indoctrinated at the public expense, urged on by the media systematically stage by stage, dismantling Christendom, depreciating, and deprecating all its values.”
Malcolm Muggeridge – English Journalist, Satirist and Author (1903 - 1990)
Very important and well-written post. Thank you.
It seems as though the majority of the Catholic hierarchy are still living in the delusional world of boomer hippie liberalism. Thankfully, we seem to finally (though gradually) be waking up from the nightmare they created, as more and more people begin to see it for the evil that it is, but obviously we’re not fully out of it yet.
Lord have mercy.
That is one of the most important articles you have ever written. The truths you mention need to be made known.
All of the Catholic faithful who gave their lives in service of Christ have been dishonored and degraded by the acts of the man calling himself the pope while he has also dishonored and degraded the very office of the papacy and thus dishonored and degraded Christ.
Changing scripture to accommodate the CCP satisfies the definition of apostasy. We need a Catholic Church and let those who think to usurp it go form their own Church. In the US we worship as we choose, we choose liturgy by celibate men in Latin; we do not choose liturgy by bipocs in lesbian queef. We need the Catholic Church in America strong! In Italy the Vatican can do whatever; they have no power here.
All of Europe has abandoned Christian values and has embraced a nihilistic, self-hating, suicidal mindset. I can’t fathom how far the continent has fallen.
The Euronazis we call them. The nations of Europe agreed to a common currency. That has been taken as an invitation to destroy the national identity of every country, to commit total ethnocide. Their plans have changed not at all: The World is not enough. All that stands in their way are the faithful. Faith. We can be beaten, yes it will come to pass but we cannot ever be defeated.
Not all. Come visit Ukraine.
We have to be aware that there's been a concerted, semi-clandestine war that's been waging for more than a century to homogenize the peoples of Europe and the United States. I believe they still bestow a European leader every two years with an award named after Richard Cloudenhove Kalergi whose plan it was to introduce third-worlders into Europe and smear the native peoples there until they were indistinguishable. This plan was not for the betterment of the native peoples, but for the advantage of those who would presume to rule over them.
Yes! Wonderful, thank you, Sarah.
White Christian males established a country ruled by its nation. It came to be beloved of its nation and enriched thereby. All other countries on Earth were affected so that tyranny was repudiated around the world. The tyrants never forgave them for that. Their soldiers pulled down statues that fit that description not understanding that white and male had nothing to do with it. Now we receive the welcome that came to Lot when he entertained the Angels. They will find no comfort among men who never knew them. Bless you Sarah, for putting our straits so neatly. We will overcome.
Let me fill you in on an unpopular but essential opinion… they will not make your life better, they will enslave you with technology, then kill you:
https://open.substack.com/pub/soberchristiangentlemanpodcast/p/the-cybernetics-deception-transhumanist?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=31s3eo
Yuval Harare thinks that the effect of a process can be put into a can. If he can do it why then, power to him, I think he'll like being inside a computer. His soul, alas, won't be in the header file. We'll still have to dispose of the remains.
I think the upload your consciousness to the cloud and live forever is a tricky depopulation program created by people who claim there are too many people.
I compare it to a cult that tells you jumping head first through their magical woodchipper will teleport you to Godhead, proving your conviction.
A leap of faith following a death cult has an obvious result, you die.
Amen.🙏🏻
Come visit Western Ukraine. You’ll get a taste of Christian Rome under Constantine once again. The Ukrainians are the only Europeans I know who are brave enough to defend their sovereignty from foreign invaders, both immigrants and Persia, hold fast to their faith, and see that "Beauty is truth, truth beauty,—that is all Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know."
Bravo Crusader Gal! Thomas saith to him: Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way? Jesus saith to him: I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man cometh to the Father, but by me.
Thanks for this perspective Sarah, I haven't given much thought to ecumenism before and I will think more about what you wrote here but my first gut reaction is to respectfully push back on the idea that ecumenism in general and Pope Leo's actions in this case specifically, deserve this criticism. I started explaining why I feel this way and then I realized my ridiculously long comment was better suited as an essay - so thank you for the inspiration! I do agree with your criticism of England's policies and I especially appreciate your comments about natural law I just don't think it's fully relevant to the larger critique offered here. In addition there seems to be an unfair assumption made that by praying alongside King Charles implies Pope Leo is "praising" or agreeing with his policies. I understand what's happening in England hits close to home for you; I wonder if you might explore more objectively and philosophically, through a different lens that doesn't involve King Charles, what exactly is wrong with ecumenism/synodality/interreligious dialogue (I'm making an assumption based on this article you don't feel great about any of these things) and if there is any way to do these things without sacrificing truth.
I have an article coming out for New Oxford Review in December about Ecumenism and the heresy of pluralism (which most lay Catholics, when polled, now fall into today). I’ll make sure to send you a copy when it comes out. It doesn't mention England, since that seems to be desired.
As for a piece that's more objective and philosophical, I'd urge you to look at the saints and martyrs that died rather than acquiescing to other faiths. We've always urged those from without to come into the fold, and that is different from simply praying together or encouraging them in their errors. That's why we once sent missionaries out to convert. It was about saving souls, even at the risk of martyrdom. Balthasar's approach led to the condemnation of proselytizing, which has transformed so much of the modern Church (for now).
Yes, I'm aware of Nostra Aetate and the disgusting history of Gregory Baum, who largely wrote it... before leaving the Church.
If you want a history of the Church's stance on this topic throughout most of her being, and the theological reasons thereof, I can't recommend Deadly Indifference enough, by Eric Sammons.
Also, this recent video on the topic was a good one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnZ93iwabvU
I suggested a more objective examination because the state of English politics seemed to distract from the real heart of the issue at stake which you have clearly named here as the “heresy of pluralism” - what I’m interested in learning and hoping to read in your future article is how exactly ecumenism/synodality/interreligois dialogue and the general post Vatican 2 vibe of the Church are in fact condoning pluralism or “acquiescing to other faiths.” When I carefully read documents like Nostra Aetate, Ut Unum Sint, and Dominus Iesus I do not see language that condones pluralism. In fact they all clarify the opposite. I wonder if you are familiar with “logos theology” - and as it applies to our debate, the specific concept of “logoi spermatikoi”?
The difference between this concept (and its rational implications) and pluralism is delicate and easily blurred which is why polling data might be misleading and many lay Catholics might be confused. I would be interested to know the specific language used in these polls as I doubt it could be long/detailed enough to articulate that nuance. Are you referring to the pew poll? Because that language is not specific enough to tease out the distinction I mentioned above. “Many religions may be true” isn’t precise enough to distinguish “elements of truth” from true pluralism - “equal validity of all paths.”
I am aware of the English saints and martyrs who died for the Faith and I agree their stories are important and their martyrdom to be taken seriously. However I am struggling to see how this applies to the true issue at stake - this deserves to be fleshed out more but, as it stands, it feels a little like an appeal to emotion rather than a substantive argument.
I don’t agree that praying alongside a Protestant necessarily qualifies as an encouragement in error. I think that’s a delicate area, and framing prayer itself as dangerous may miss its deeper purpose.
In regards to the comment about Gregory Baum…I will learn more about him but at first glance the term “disgusting” seems…misplaced. Also I have to point out that this comment is an ad hominem fallacy and an attempt to “poison the well.” I could do the same to a traditionalist easily, there is no shortage of corrupt men to choose from who wrote documents and contributed to a more traditionalist perspective. But this wouldn’t be productive as even when a corrupt man claims 2+2 = 4 the fact that he is corrupt has no bearing on the truth that 2+2 indeed equals 4.
Pope Alexander VI’s personal corruption didn’t invalidate the Catholic tradition he defended in the same way Gregory Baum’s moral choices don’t invalidate the theological insights of Nostra Aetate.
The continuity of truth in the Church does not and has never depended on the virtue or character of its human instruments - that’s the point of the doctrine of indefectibility.
Generally I view the Church as a safe haven from the left/right division of politics and our society that I find incredibly exhausting and damaging so I am admittedly a bit hostile to any take that encourages this sort of politically tinged divide between Catholics within the Church (that is my bias). I also realize it’s not possible to be truly neutral or center (as much as I want to be), admittedly it appears I lean slightly progressive and you more strongly traditional. But I’m aware of my bias and open to exploring the possibility that truth may land harder on one side or the other - just because I don’t want that to be the case doesn’t mean it’s not true. So thank you for your voice in helping me to explore that; I look forward to your article.
You seem to misunderstand what the essay was about. It wasn't an essay that got lost in a distraction about Leo's meeting with Charles. That was literally the point. It's what I do--write about news items within the context of the traditional Catholic worldview. So, it wasn't a piece about ecumenism or pluralism, but about how this particular item relates to them.
I mentioned the English martyrs in my earlier comment, because they considered the nuances between Anglicanism and Catholicism worth dying over, rather than merely "agreeing to disagree". Check our Campion's "Decem Rationes". My narrated version should be out next month, God willing.
When you wrote, "The difference between this concept (and its rational implications) and pluralism is delicate and easily blurred," I breathed a sigh of relief. Exactly! 100%. Our dogma hasn't changed, but because we've moved in public presentations and messaging towards an emphasis shift from the ordinary means of salvation to the extraordinary means, lay Catholics are left confused and misinformed. What Catholics believed about salvation and about Protestantism between 1925 and 2025 has flipped completely, yet the dogma hasn't changed (not least of which because no new dogmas were declared in V2). The messaging and public presentations through which our clergy engage with other faiths without ever calling for their conversion, have resulted in this change. This point is much better expanded in my article for NOR in December, because that was its focus. I think it's more the kind of essay that you were hoping this one would be.
We can be certain there is a Truth if only because reality is a certain way. However, finding that truth may be beyond our mental capacities. Searching for it will get us closer but there is no guarantee that we will ever arrive. Many intelligent and sincere people believe that Jesus is that Truth, but other equally intelligent and sincere people disagree. It is mere presumption to dogmatically assert that those who believe in Jesus have found the Truth.
Modernism was the door that opened the trapdoor through which all is lost.