This post is about the illusion of power, or actual power, exhibited by the world in contrast to God’s Love or the Gospel of the Kingdom of God. The worldly kingdom perpetually tries to present itself as a replacement of reality, which is of course God. The natural world is an instantiation of God’ s reality, to use the terminology of object oriented programming. One of the ways our current age tries to replace God is through vaccines. Without refuting some role of vaccines in medicine, we can show that this industry is disfigured, for the sake of that illusion of power.
It’s as if we are under a curse with COVID. More with the world’s reaction to it rather than the virus itself. A world gone mad. The disease has no where near the morbidity that warrants the responses. And the mortality rates have been based on dying with the virus, rather than from the virus. The response has become a symbol, a religion. Without recognizing God more deeply, the world is entering into a war of responses to the virus, so that the winner will be the “best” responder, instead of addressing the fraud itself. This urgency towards stupidity has been witnessed in our recent times with 9/11. The world went into a mode of responses rather than address the fraud itself. These responses became permanent. Pointing out the fraud is always met with an accusation that we are denying the event, that 9/11 did not happen or that the virus does not exist. But the fraud is in the shallow analysis and the emphasis on pre-selected responses.
A large red flag has been available for us to see that this was coming. By this we mean a distorted and abusive emphasis on vaccines. This red flag is the widespread vaccination of newborns for Hepatitis B, a disease predominantly of prostitutes and IV drug abusers. This has been going on for decades now. Every physician learns in medical school that newborns have effectively no ability to illicit an immune response, including to a vaccine, having only the undeveloped tools to do so later in life. Otherwise mother and baby would be at war with each other. This article summarizes this: Two immune systems, one body. Incredulously, after a detailed presentation of the science, the article spends a few sentences at the end still recommending the vaccine, and using allegory rather than any science. We know that the baby can’t handle the vaccine in any constructive way, but they still should get it. What’s another baby cry? This happens in fact before the mother can even hold the baby.
This is about power. The state simply wants their mark on every new human being surviving the abortion industry. It’s the state’s “baptism”. How can this be anything else? If not that, then at the very least it is the effect of a payment scheme of some kind, like we have had the flu shot for years now. I don’t even blame the health care workers. There is large void in our soul, made vacant by lack of any piety or appreciation of the Divine. So that after a science is established, a thin veneer of logic crosses the line into a tyranny and people swarm to it, thinking that they will become safe. Medicine by mob rule.
Another huge red flag about COVID-19 has been the gross denial of prior art regarding the virus and the proposed vaccines. Large volumes of studies on treatments, nutritional aids, and cautions on the start of the vaccinations were systematically ignored. Pubmed is an online searchable database for the medical community and even cursory searches show thorough research. Here are two examples: 1, 2. Even if these other studies prove to be wrong, ignoring them from the start is not how real scientists and doctors function. Combine this with the fact that coronaviruses have been tweaked and patented in the last few years, you will know who you are dealing with. This is an attempt at embedding a modern technological scrutiny on a mild co-factor in the causes of death that has been in existence for thousands of years.
God’s mercy is always available for the living. We all need to forgive ourselves for this. But even in a world where human pride prevents us from admitting a fraud we have bought into, history will move on. In the scenario where we never admit the fraud, the best responder will still win. That responder will be the one who also moves on, even with a placebo vaccine of normal saline.
This post is not about whether the consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart has been sufficiently done as instructed by the Virgin Mother of God in the early 20th Century. I believe the declarations and suggestions of the Latin Church leadership that it has. I could be wrong. I would think that there would be nothing wrong with a repeated or more formalized consecration now. Maybe to be more sure? It can’t hurt.
Instead this post is about a more encompassing historical perspective for the consecration, its meaning for the reign of Christ the King and with perhaps an unexpected conclusion. Asking for the reader’s patience through what could be perceived as a disjointed and even superficial discourse, we will suggest at the end that a solution of our times may be a practical agreed upon footnote from the Council of Nicaea, in the 4th Century.
Certainly we know that the evils of communism began with and were spread by the Soviet Union. Our Lady of Fatima spoke of this danger for the whole world. However there is a meaning that has its roots in ancient times and echoes throughout history. It has all to do with the tug of war between secular man’s power, represented by an expanding government, even to take captive the soul, and God’s Kingdom of Love.
The Request for an Earthly King
A beginning point is when the ancient Israelites complained to God for a worldly kingdom. The passages speak for themselves:
1 Samuel 8: 7 And the Lord told him [Samuel]: “Listen to all that the people are saying to you; it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected Me as their king. …9 Now listen to them; but warn them solemnly and let them know what the king who will reign over them will claim as his rights.”…11 He [Samuel] said, “…17 … and you yourselves will become his slaves. 18 When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, but the Lord will not answer you in that day.”
The Kingdom of Heaven Established
Now fast forward to after the Resurrection of Christ, the Acts of the Apostles and the early centuries that followed. Christianity was rapidly expanding east and west. A peculiar event however recorded in the Acts of the Apostles gives one pause:
Acts 16: 6 Paul and his companions traveled throughout the region of Phrygia and Galatia, having been kept by the Holy Spirit from preaching the word in the province of Asia. 7 When they came to the border of Mysia, they tried to enter Bithynia, but the Spirit of Jesus would not allow them to. 8 So they passed by Mysia and went down to Troas. 9 During the night Paul had a vision of a man of Macedonia standing and begging him, “Come over to Macedonia and help us.”
With repeated emphasis and with outward geographical meaning [look up the locations of those regions], God directly intervenes in shifting the emphasis of the evangelization from east to west, directing Paul’s zeal. Although ultimately a mystery, a logical reason for this is the destined location for Primacy of Peter in Rome, the capital of the Roman empire. Also, within the organizational backdrop of the Roman Empire, a council can convene to create statements of doctrinal orthodoxy for the whole of Christendom, for all the churches in the orbit of the empire. Here we see the benevolence of God who does not put His Kingdom at odds with government. Rather He proposes a marriage with government through conversion of the hearts of peoples who understand His Kingship present among them.
The First Ecumenical Council
The first such ecumenical council occurred in Nicaea in AD 325. The primary focus of this council was the defense against Arianism, which denied the full Divinity and full humanity of Christ. God’s Kingship has been established and in harmony with cultures, nationhood, and sovereignty. This dual nature of Christ, is also directly stated with the title of Mother of God, since God, taking the nature of man, must have a mother. In fact this title would have to be defended a few years later at the Council of Ephesus (431 AD).
The Parable of the Weeds
Our next point has to do with workers of deception that latch on the blessings that God gives man in constructing a just civilization, trying to replace it with a purely worldly governance that dominates rather than frees. Everyone benefits from the presence of Christianity, but there are those, among whom are Christians, who with time forget the grace of God. And there are those outside Christianity that build empires on the backs of the workers of God’s Kingdom. The betrayal of the doctrine of the dual nature of Christ defined at the Council of Nicaea has been presented here in a prior post. Although our Lord may have been referring to a different specific point in time, His parable of the weeds, reminds one of this kind of betrayal:
Matthew 13:24 Jesus told them another parable: “The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field. 25 But while everyone was sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and went away. 26 When the wheat sprouted and formed heads, then the weeds also appeared. 27 “The owner’s servants came to him and said, ‘Sir, didn’t you sow good seed in your field? Where then did the weeds come from?’ 28 “‘An enemy did this,’ he replied. “The servants asked him, ‘Do you want us to go and pull them up?’
29 “‘No,’ he answered, ‘because while you are pulling the weeds, you may uproot the wheat with them. 30 Let both grow together until the harvest. At that time I will tell the harvesters: First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned; then gather the wheat and bring it into my barn.’”
Readers can familiarize themselves with history between the time of the First Ecumenical Council with Emperor Constantine, who was at the Council, and the rise and fall of his nephew Emperor Julian the Apostate. Julian represented the return to paganism for the empire as the Arian heresy spread and became the dominant theology amongst the bishops. From the fall of Julian, the fragmentation of the empire began, bloated from corruption, top heavy, heterodox, and mired by foreign entanglements. The fall of the empire is a type of a “time of harvest” from Jesus’ parable. The building of a worldly government always entails moral decay on a personal level, breakdown of families, loss of sovereignty, and foreign wars. This should remind us of our present time.
The Mother of All Heresies and the Mother of All Councils
In denying the Divinity and humanity of Jesus, Arianism opens up the historical figure of Jesus to all sorts of interpretations, such as that of Islam who describes Him as only a human prophet. Heterodox (errant) teachings also explode. This is touched on in our prior post. One can think of the First Council then as where Christ’s Kingship was defined for all of history just as the heresy that it countered was one from which all errors emanated. Future councils can then be thought of addressing corollaries of orthodoxy just as the heresies they fought are variants of Arianism. This is the implicit or stated position of the present day Orthodox Churches not in communion with the Roman Church, who were, nonetheless present at the Council of Nicaea via Apostolic succession. These were the eastern Churches in the orbit of the empire at that time. The future councils that followed then were increasingly concerning the Roman Church, eventually to counter the more specific and western cultural errors of the second millennium, such as those from which emerged with protestantism, moral relativism, modernism, and the like. For the smaller and more regional Orthodox Churches, these councils seem unimportant. The Latin Church, or See of Peter, headed by the Pope, is in this interpretation the spearhead of Christianity. Where the devil concentrates his attacks in history. Without this perspective, we find ourselves arguing over the differences in titles like of the Immaculate Conception and the title All-Pure which pervades the eastern liturgy.
A Timeline Overview of a Slow Schism and Isolation Starting after the Council of Nicaea
Most scholars put the final break between the Roman Catholic Church and Eastern Orthodox Churches at the formal schism of 1054. Until that time, theological and political differences between Eastern and Western Christianity slowly accrued for centuries. Details of these differences include issues of the procession of the Holy Spirit, using leavened or unleavened bread in the liturgy, the role of other patriarchies. But these are better presented by scholars. Rather, we would like to point out a perspective by stepping back for an overview of this history, from the directing of the Apostle Paul’s zeal westward leading to the Council of Nicaea and to the present time. At Nicaea Christendom is defined for the faithful and for all time to follow. What follows is a slow isolation of the Apostolic Churches, Orthodox and Roman Catholic, while keeping the Sacraments available for those who chose to be faithful to them. At the latter part of the timeline, in the 9th Century, the Byzantine monks Saint Cyril and Saint Methodius translated the Gospel to the Slavonic language setting up the Christianization of the Slavs, including Russia, in the 10th Century. Suddenly, a very large chunk of the East became Christian, reaching the Pacific Ocean, and curiously just before the schism was formalized.
Becoming the last major Apostolic Church before the formal schism and one that did not exist in the orbit of the Roman Empire before its breakup, can we see perhaps why it was in Russia that the evils of communism began as a major political movement in the 20th Century? The western (Roman Catholic) church in the millennium after the schism and leading up to Communism, defended western attacks on the physical Kingship of Christ such as protestantism, moral relativism, modernism, secularism, etc. Being the Holder of the Keys of the Kingdom, the Latin Church was still able to effect vast eastern evangelizations in her fight against these errors and her internal corruptions. The evangelizations of Saint Francis Xavier comes to mind.
But if we are to take the warning of our Lady of Fatima seriously, the widest threat from a secular world government came from the country wherein is the last Apostolic Church before the schism, the Soviet Union. A Church that was not in the orbit of Christendom at the time of Council of Nicaea. We can see now more meaning behind the consecration of Russia.
Interestingly, the formation of the College of Cardinals, the body used to elect the Pope, was approximately coincident with the final Schism and isolation of the Churches, certainly by 1099.
There is much meaning to learn from timelines.
The Isolation of the Churches May Have Run its Course and a Footnote from the Council of Nicaea
Combining this timeline overview and the times we live in, particularly the compromise of the See of Rome with secular and shallow world government movements suggests that the isolation of the Apostolic Churches may have run its course. God exists independent of time however and promises that no trouble can befall His faithful without a way out, a grace for all trouble and temptation we undergo.
1 Corinthians 10:13…fidelis autem Deus qui non patietur vos temptari super id quod potestis sed faciet cum temptatione etiam proventum ut possitis sustinere.
Christ promises that He will return, not during trouble, but AFTER the Gospel is preached to all the earth (Matthew 14:14). So all available graces have to used first. All graces come from Christ’s supreme act of salvation on the cross and these graces became available for all time at Pentecost. The Council of Nicaea defined the true natures of Christ and addressed other matters as the empire’s first ecumenical council after Pentecost. It is the ecumenical council most proximal to Pentecost and is the last such council before the subsequent slow fractioning and isolation of Apostolic Churches.
So was there a grace defined at the Council of Nicaea as contingency for what was to follow? We point out an agreement somewhat obscure and certainly dwarfed by the definition of Christ’s dual nature:
Let the ancient customs in Egypt, Libya and Pentapolis prevail, that the Bishop of Alexandria have jurisdiction in all these, since the like is customary for the Bishop of Rome also. Likewise in Antioch and the other provinces, let the Churches retain their privileges. And this is to be universally understood, that if any one be made bishop without the consent of the Metropolitan, the great Synod has declared that such a man ought not to be a bishop.
While this Canon has been debated over the centuries, it should be clear that it includes the appointment of bishops by each Apostolic jurisdiction (how these patriarchies are defined I would leave for those more qualified than me). That the granularity of the Church is preserved by the patriarchies appointing their own bishops is made explicit by the last sentence. It also states that the patriarchy’s authority is the same as that for the Bishop of Rome. By using here the term Bishop of Rome, the Canon is not stating that the Patriarchies have independence from the See of Peter as the Holder of the Keys of the Kingdom. That is a different jurisdiction, instituted by Christ Himself, and not by the Council.
Recall that it is Christ that appoints the Apostles, not the Apostle Peter. It is Christ who admonishes the seven bishops in Asia Minor. The Vicar of Christ can admonish an eastern bishop but he does not appoint him. A bishop appointed by Rome is no guarantee of orthodoxy, as is so clearly evident in our time. Rome cannot even guarantee her own orthodoxy especially with the present College of Cardinals, let alone the orthodoxy of an eastern bishop. Is the neglect of this canon a source of pride for both sides that amplifies schisms and breeds heresies and their innumerable flavors. Providence has defined this canon at the same time when Christ’s Nature was defined for all times to follow. Could the canon be a faint reminder of Christ’s advice in the parable of the weeds, a remedy for the ubiquity of evil? Preserve the granularity for the final harvest?
“There is, in fact, among the bishops only one Church, only one soul, only one heart… There is, through the institution of Christ, one and only one Church, spread out over the whole world, one and only one episcopacy represented by a multiplicity of bishops united among themselves… The Church forms a single whole, whose bond is the union of bishops” (St. Cyprian of Carthage, 3rd Century).
This heart is the Immaculate Heart or heart of the Theotokos, present at Pentecost.
There is a quote from the story of Saint Joan of Arch who’s martyrdom had everything to with the loss of her county’s sovereignty, a corrupt bishop, AND THE DENIAL OF ACCESS TO THE SACRAMENTS . “Act. And God will act.” So was Russia sufficiently consecrated to the Immaculate heart by the various Popes in the 20th Century? Maybe. Is a return to the norm of Canon 6 from the Council of Nicaea needed? With the present state of affairs, it sure can’t hurt. After all, all sides signed it.
 This is why I believe that we are not at the time of Christ’s second coming. But this is just my opinion.
To You, Champion Leader and Lord, the Vanquisher of hell, I, Your creature and servant, offer a song of praise, for You have delivered me from eternal death. But as You have ineffable loving kindness, deliver me from all dangers, that I may cry out to You:
This post attempts to close the circle of understanding from some of the more recent posts, both on economics and a currency, taxes of a nation (1,2), and the current pandemic (3,4,5) (although referencing those prior posts is not necessary to follow this post). As discussed in the last post, I do not subscribe to the philosophy that some things are just too complicated for average people to understand. Rather, if something is supposed to be common ( e.g. money or health), it should be understandable by common people, and using common sense. We make several simple points that any average person can understand, to help us understand what is going on. The points can tie things together for us and the conclusions should be reasonable.
POINT # 1.
There is something that can occur with taxes called the misallocation capital. To use a crazy example, we know that in the winter people need to pay for heat. Suppose a government however imposes a winter tax on people, and uses that tax money to support businesses that build air-conditioners during winter season instead. So the money that could be used to pay heating bills is taken away and used for something contrary to what the people need. The point here is that a government tax can allocate money wrongly. People of course can use money wrongly also, but in this case the damage is limited to the person that makes the wrong decision. Not the whole country. And why would a government ever appropriate money away from what people need? Maybe we can figure that one out.
POINT # 2.
We all hear about how governments are in debt. This means that there must be a lending institution or bank that is loaning money to the government. This lending provides the currency to be used for the exchange of goods and services for that country. Bank loans at different rates defines their business, a commercial enterprise. It should come as no surprise then that taxes people pay could be paying interest. If a country’s currency and liquidity are defined in this way, then the country becomes exactly that: a commercial enterprise. Note that at this point if you are a person or institution that does not pay taxes, such as the apostolic churches in the west, you may not care about this and may even discourage people to read on.
POINT # 3
We now look at a remarkable coincidence (or not) regarding the COVID-19 pandemic. The observation centers on the so called overnight repo interest rate. This source describes what this rate is but there are other sources. From the link:
“Overnight repo rate is the interest rate at which different market participants swap treasuries for cash to cover short-term cash needs. The repo rate is helping to ensure banks have the liquidity to meet their daily operational needs and maintain sufficient reserves. The repo rate usually trades in line with the Federal Reserve’s target interest rate.”
The distilled point from this definition for the sake of this article is that the rate provides the means of liquidity (cash) for banks to meet their daily operational needs. So if these means are not met, people’s money would be in jeopardy. The daily commercial lives of people would have to be limited somehow and the banks would have to set a cap on withdrawals. A cap on the exchange of capital. But is there another way to do this? Is there another way to shut down the economy? Look at the figure from the link:
There is a point in October 2019 when the control over the rate seems to have been lost briefly. Also the inflection where the graph flattens to near zero near the end coincides exactly with start of the COVID-19 pandemic or at least when the attention to the virus started.
One could say this is a coincidence. Or one could say that the rate was adjusted because of the pandemic. The virus is after all real. But if you want to define your country as a commercial enterprise, where its very existence, its very soul, is defined by a loan, then could we not expect at least some manipulation of reality based on interest rates?
POINT # 4.
This last point delves into some speculation but is based on another fact of banks: they are instruments for investments. And since the currencies of nations come into existence by loans, we should expect countries to do what banks ask them to do. It’s nothing personal. Just business. And the way some banks operate today, existing loans are used as “assets” to solicit new loans and business. This could explains how leaders seem empty, almost soul-less, with no personality, and scripted, while knowing exactly “what needs to be done”. They are employees of a new venture. So if a solicitor of business, such as the vaccine industry or other entity, provided the cash for an investment idea, a stimulus may be offered to support the investment. For example: providing billions of dollars to consolidate and even exaggerate the diagnosis and death rates of COVID-19 to hospitals now on the verge of bankruptcy, financing press releases disguised as news, financing studies that downplay alternative treatments, or making state bail-outs conditional on lock-downs.
There is much literature on the nature of a currency and purpose of money that blames “fiat” currency for our problems. That money comes into existence out of nothing and that those that print money in this way are the problem. These critics say that money should be gold or silver based. But a country still needs liquidity, or some kind of means to adjust the amount of money supply to support the exchange of goods and services of her people. Wouldn’t it be easier to just stop defining countries as commercial enterprises? Just stop defining the currency by a loan. Look again at the curve above. The rate is almost at zero. Why not keep it there for good and let the supply of money continue as needed. Leave interest rates to the realm of commercial banks and borrowers in the free market. The currency supply could be adjusted on the value of gold or silver, or some other resource. How about on the number of families, babies, or small businesses? Just stop basing it on interest, because the loaner will always think that money is really theirs.
We live in an age where the Hippocratic oath is not operational. One of the weapons doctors can use to help do no harm in this age is educate themselves about treatments using concepts that are understandable, to communicate the concepts behind treatments in very simple terms so that the average person can understand them. In part due to the limits of my own intellect, I have tried to do this with my patients so they can actually understand when a treatment is of little benefit or worse, hurtful. This way there is no hiding behind authorities, policies, marketing, technical terms, fancy names, stock quotes or statistics. Statistics is a sometimes abused field where a link between nonsense and rubbish can be made to look impressive. Things have to make sense, common sense, and in the field of health this means associations and questions have to have biological plausibility.
The following is on the nature and complications of viruses and vaccines and presents well-know concepts followed by questions that are logical, based on the underlying understanding. An average person should be able to come up with the questions. There are no links, because the concepts are well established and can be easily searched. Note the questions put the burden for answers on the vaccine industry, not me, nor the public. They are natural questions that arise from the understanding of the process. The concepts are presented simply and the simple terms are not an invitation for attack by experts in the field. The burden of teaching concepts for the common person falls also on the industry. Remember: biological plausibility.
Viruses are non-living infecting agents that come “alive” only in our cells. In our cells, the viruses reproduce the proteins to make up the virus itself which then can be released to infect other cells. The damage is done when our immune system goes after the cells infected resulting in inflammation. This damage can be mild or can kill a person.
Antibodies are binding proteins we generate in response to the infection that can trap the virus and hold them for breakdown by our bodies. They are produced by the initial infection and saved for the next infection. They are our defense but they also bring along an inflammation response.
Vaccines are pieces of viruses we introduce to stimulate the production of antibodies, to protect us from future infections. So when we get infected, we are ready this time. The antibodies bind and our bodies clean up (with inflammation as a result). The infection is gone. Or is it? Remember we said that virus are non-living proteins. In the case of a bacterial infection, antibodies will bind and the bacteria are killed, along with the other treatments we use for bacterial infections. Bacteria are living organisms, now dead. Gone. The proteins and protein pieces that make up a virus, as well as those protein pieces that come from vaccines, may linger within or as part of our cells even after the infection and inflammation have subsided. This is especially true because the vaccines are grown in animal cells, introducing the stored up virus and host proteins that come from whatever species was used to develop the vaccine. This does not occur with treated bacterial infections. Bacteria die. Viruses cannot die. They are like a code that linger. With a new vaccine shot, the already-present antibodies from before may also start a new inflammatory response to some degree.
QUESTIONS #1: Since these proteins could linger in different tissues in our bodies after an infection or after a vaccine, could the antibodies that have been generated actually attack our cells even when there is no threat? Could this be a cause of the so called auto-immune and chronic inflammatory diseases that some people get? There are multiple diseases people can get after a viral infection is finished (for example: acute disseminated myelitis). Why then should we not expect the same after vaccines? If Chicken pox can result in a reactivation decades later (shingles, different and more severe) why can’t a vaccine? Could repeated vaccines, especially those related to each other or a prior related viral infection, stir up the pot, disturb the peace, of people who are not sick, triggering the now primed antibody response to attack their own tissues? Can we start classifying and naming the post vaccine diseases? Do you think that this is reason enough that we should limit the number of related vaccines? This brings up a strange concept that has been introduced into our culture that related vaccines need to be taken more than once in a lifetime. Like the yearly flu shot. More on this at the end.
One of the defenses viruses have against our immune system is that they can mutate, or change protein codes to evade the antibodies we have made to eliminate them. RNA viruses, such as H1N1 (the flu) or coronaviruses generally have high mutation rates compared to DNA viruses. One of the ways viruses can change is via genome recombination when there are at least two viral genomes present in the host cell. Genetic recombination can be thought of as an exchange of traits between two viruses. This is similar to how a baby gets characteristics from both father and mother in their genetic code. Genetic recombination also can occur between viruses and vaccines, which are the weakened versions of the virus.
QUESTIONS #2: Since genetic recombination can occur between viruses and vaccines, effectively producing a mutation, could the use of repeated related vaccinations increase the mutation rate in humans so that we actual become incubators for mutations? Could even a vaccine be designed to introduce a specific trait or feature in the proteins of a host previously infected? Could this be another reason we should limit the number of related vaccines?
QUESTION #3: Given certain viruses, like COVID-19, have no or mild symptoms in the majority of people to begin with, is a vaccine even worth it, let alone a mandatory vaccine for all, given that
Some inflammation can be started by the vaccine itself?
There is a risk of disturbing the peace to cause antibodies to attack the host?
There is a risk of genetic recombination?
Once upon a time vaccines were designed to be done deals . Get them once and you are protected for life, maybe with a booster or two. How we got to the point of accepting a yearly vaccine, I am not sure of. But to make the absurdity of the notion hit home, consider how one day appendectomies could be limited to just snipping off the end of the appendix so that we could have yearly appendectomies, for the rest of our life. Providing sustainable income for the health industry for years to come. Not the best analogy but I’m sure you can get the point. Welcome to the world without the Hippocratic oath.
 Although the vaccine industry staked its proofs in the early 20th Century, their “proofs” never corrected for the emergence and coming of age of general public hygiene and increased medical knowledge , which could have accounted for much of the improved health of the public.
Update-4/17/21. This “side effect” of introducing foreign proteins in our body is much more explicit in the new generation of so-called mRNA vaccines.
This post is a follow-up to a prior, Science 101, and is written on Easter Sunday April 12, 2020. The marketed nightmare for the Corona virus COVID-19 rages on, promoting the cancellation of public Easter Liturgies all over the world. Bishop after bishop cancels Masses based on the reaction of “authorities” without any attempt of a creative solution or compromise to extend the Eternal to mankind, something armies and tyrants could never do to this extent. To understand the degree of this deception, try imagining every news post or article about the Corona virus, substitute the word “Common cold” instead and you will know. At worst this is a virulent strain of the common cold, engineered in a lab or not, while the statistics have still not broken from prior morbidities of Corona viruses and still not reached the levels of morbidity of the flu (Influenza A – H1N1). What is most virulent is the marketing campaign and the contagion of reaction, symptoms of sick society without any grounding. Coronaviruses have been around 100’s years, with known treatment. Are we to expect a maintained PR campaign for the same? Can we at least use the knowledge we already have about Coronavirus? With all the afflictions of society ignored, including the mass slaughter of thousands of the unborn a day, the time was ripe I suppose.
And what of the intellect? With an ounce of intellect and a measure of time, anyone can realize that the mass media will lie about what you know to be true at some point, if it has enough funding and is in the interest of some “authority”. This is simply the age we live in. This is the nature of “uncountries”. Remember the relentless media campaign to invade the wrong country after 9/11? Now the media will admit their mistake but say it is too late to do anything about it. Too late to withdraw the troops. So it will be with the new measures coming to handle the “pandemic”.
Here is a reminder to “authorities”. The scientific method was not born yesterday. It was not born with Descartes. The method to recognize the natural world has always been around with humans. It is the background needed to recognize a miracle. And almost 2000 years ago a collection of manuscripts were compiled by peer review. They are called the Gospels and Christ was risen from dead.
He is indeed risen, Hallelujah.
Addendum: Please watch and pass on this video. Send the video link to your Bishop. While we can hope that they will use their intellect to understand what is going on, they would a least know that there are those out there who are.
Coronaviruses are the second most common class of viruses that cause the common cold after the rhinoviruses. They typically have peaks of activity every 2-4 years. Most cases are mild. Severe cases typically occur in 3-8% of people. Treatment has been available years. These statistics are consistent with worst current data on COVID-19. Current data of most hit regions, such as in Italy, show deaths only occur with co-morbid conditions.
This new strain could have a predilection for lung involvement when severe, but this predilection has not increased the chance of severe cases so far compared to the 1980’s data. The statistics for COVID-19 still have not hit the levels for Influenza (the flu) according to the CDC.
Coincidently, when the flu is severe and involves the lungs, the presentation is bilateral with peripheral infiltrates. This is how the presumed COVID-19 pneumonias are being described.
Cecil Textbook of Medicine, Part XIX, Section 3, 325/326 “The Common Cold”. 17th Edition, WB Saunders Company, Philadelphia, PA 1985.
The devil cannot read our thoughts. For the devil’s craving to fill our mind with temptation and distraction, God designed a protection from satan’s plan for each of us through our will. Privacy, discretion, and prayer. So that each of us become like a portal to and from Heaven while living in a corrupt world. In our early years, it is the family that is supposed to protect our mind for lack of will. Protected in these ways we become invisible to satan.
Once our thoughts take on concrete word or action however, they become visible to satan. He then can show up. Look only how Jesus lived hidden from the world most of His life beginning with His conception in the womb of the Virgin. Even the angels of God did not know the exact moment of His conception, but could only announce it beforehand.
“The angel announces the birth to the virgin not after the conception, lest she should be thereby troubled, but before the conception he addresses her…”
St. John Chrysostom
“…the virginity of Mary was meant to baffle the prince of the world, who, when he perceived her espoused to a man, could cast no suspicion on her offspring.”
Satan showed up however once Jesus was directed to become public by the Virgin mother at the wedding feast of Cana. There was no temptation of Jesus in the wilderness before that. There was no visibility. When Jesus attempted to become public as a youth by teaching at the temple, He was whisked away by His mother and stepfather. Zeal is not a sin but timing is everything. With this invisibility, Satan’s only option are indiscriminate attacks, like the mass killings by King Herod, triggered by a moment of indiscretion by the three wise men. Note also, for later discussion, the context of the Nativity, which was the call to government census.
So are our holy thoughts to remain in us, never manifesting into action or word? Of course not. This is the realm of Holy prudence, discretion, patience and restraint. Designed to protect us from the devil and enemies. There is an incubation period needed. A formation. Charity can always manifest however in invisibility and can even enhance it, so do not restrain that. But charity can be imprudent and presumptuous sometimes. In phony cultures, the government deems charity must be public, such as for tax exemption, but that is not the way God works (Matthew 6:3). In fact, most of God’s work is hidden from the world (John 21:25).
We can also act without speaking first to maintain invisibility. Not everything needs to be announced. God is the important witness of our acts.
How can we know more about when to act or speak? By God of course. But who protected and directed God the Son? The Virgin Mother. And who protected and directed her? Only God could have done that. The whole story of Jesus, from His conception to His crucifixion cries out that she must have been prefigured without sin. The devil may be in the details but the details of God are in the Virgin Mother. Christianity without the Virgin Mother is unrestrained, even reckless.
In our understanding of all this, what can we make of our culture’s and government’s obsession with records, data, details of your life, notoriety, and fame. How can it be for any good? Can it really be for our protections or is it a framework for satan and our enemies. God certainly does not need it for our sanctity. Take pornography for example: If the very act that creates us is public domain, then you have the guarantee that your life will be public domain from conception to grave. A corporation or government that spies on citizens has gone beyond their definitions. One that does the same while professing to be Christian is quite a distortion. But let’s restrain ourselves there.
“But still more has it baffled the prince of this world, for the malice of devils soon detects even hidden things, while they who are occupied in worldly vanities, cannot know the things of God.”
When a family starts, parents immediately start investing in their children. This investment is multifaceted but includes financial investment and is balanced with the cost of maintaining the home. The financial investment for the children is based on the number and each child’s potential. Each child has a potential that the parents gauge and develop and the financial investment is proportional to that potential. This determines the amount of money that becomes available. The child is meant to produce and their “return” on this investment is the honor and love back to the parents. If there is no such return, parents chalk it up. They did their job. If they are stingy with their investment, the child’s development may be stunted. If the financial investment is disproportional to their potential, they run the risk of spoiling the child. Producing a brat. Both parents might then be considered bad parents. What would be worse however would be if the parents put a price on their money. Charging interest. In addition, these bad parents may even demand a return on their money, principal and interest. One would have then to wonder what kind of parents these are and whether they are even worthy of the title. We could call them an “unfamily”.
The family can be considered the fractal of society. A fractal is a unit object, a building block, whose shape resembles the whole it makes up. So then one would expect the larger units to resemble the shape and function of its unit parts. This is how countries are defined. Originally it was the propagation of individual races that kept this shape but there is no reason why countries with multiple races cannot preserve this form and function. To preserve their definition as a country.
Countries, like families, also have the the obligation to provide a currency to maintain themselves and to provide a means for her citizens to exchange goods and services. This is the purpose of money. It is the birthright of nations. If the country cares for her citizens, the currency would be produced and volume gauged for the potential of her resources, citizens, her families, and communities. This determines the amount of money that becomes available. The citizen is meant to produce and the country’s “return” on this investment is the honor and love back to the country. If there is no such return, the county chalks it up. They did their job. If they are stingy with their investment, the country’s development may be stunted. If the financial creation is disproportional to their potential, they run the risk of becoming a country with little productivity. This country might then be considered a bad one to live in. What would be worse however would be if the country put a price on their money. Charging interest. This is different from individuals, companies, and private banks charging interest, which is their choice and the choice of the borrower. We are talking about the country putting a price on its money. Charging interest for money to come into existence. With each baby born. Why do people even care about fiat currency? What about fiat currency with interest? Why do people care about leveraging assets for liquidity when leveraging based on the “asset” of a loan is much worse? If all that has been done in recent history could be done with such a system, couldn’t it be done without charging interest? What exactly is point of charging interest?
In addition, such an odd country may even demand a return on their money, principal and interest, hidden in the form of taxes. This is while they have the power to issue currency to pay for its services and maintenance to begin with and without a tax since they are providing liquidity for their existence anyway. One would have then to wonder what kind of country that is and whether they are even worthy of the title. We could even call that an “uncountry”. And what type of citizenry would warrant such power to decide interest rates for allowing money into existence? This is the key point. If the medium of exchange of a country is based on a loan, then there will always be a perception that the money really belongs to the loaning institution and not the country. It doesn’t. Laws like Glass-Steagal are meant to keep a lid on that perception, but that has not been brought back and the better solution is to issue a currency without interest.
Can a country become more disfigured than this? Yes. There is one more iteration of this degradation. The worst of the bad is if the “uncountry” so disfigured exports its currency to other countries. Or simply persuades other countries to similarly put a price on their currency or by issuing them a loan so that even their taxes go to paying interest. Thereby making them into “uncountries” and exporting all that comes with that disfigurement.
I pondered them in my mind and then accused the nobles and officials. I told them, “You are charging your own people interest!”
This post can be an extension of the a prior, Taxes and the Incarnation of God, where the idea that a tax exemption for a religion as a corrupting element is introduced. Jesus Christ, God Incarnate, paid the tax of His time then to serve as an example for us in our time. However the true story that follows can also be taken at face value about the history of early Christianity and provide insight into the propagation of heresy, and how seeds were sown for times that followed, including our own. The history of the time is well-documented in many references but the particular details come from the reference, The Place of the Patriarchs of Antioch in Church History, by Exarch Elias B. Skaff, 1993, Sophia Press.
With the Edict of Milan in 313, Emperor Constantine ended the official persecution of Christians in the Roman Empire. In fact the Edict gave freedom to all religions while it ended all ordinances hostile to the Christian religion. Constantine also gave the Church a tax-exemption status.
Meanwhile a disseminating heresy, formalized by Bishop Arius, resisted the idea that Jesus Christ is God as God the Father. This heresy was addressed at the Council of Nicea in 325, where the defense of the co-substantial nature of Jesus with God the father (Greek term: homo-ousios) was championed primarily by Saint Athanios, a deacon from Alexandria, and Saint Eustathius, Bishop of Antioch. The Arian heresy was important to counter, because anything less than the co-equal Divine Nature of Jesus Christ with God (the Father and Holy Spirit) meant a return to the monotheism of Judaism or monotheistic variants where Jesus was less than God. Jesus is the eternally-begotten Divine Son of God the Divine Father. Eternally begotten also means that there never was a single point in time when He was begotten, before which the Father was alone without Him. He was, is, and by the definition of the word eternal, will always be begotten .
The condemned Arius was present at the Council of Nicea and his followers were influenced to sign the Nicean Creed at the urging of the sister of Constantine, Constancia. Within a few years, Constancia’s influence on the Emperor resulted in the re-admitting of Arius into the Church. Bishops leading the Arian heresy regained imperial favor which resulted in the replacement of Saint Eustathius, Bishop of Antioch, with an Arian. A persecution of Athanios began. A slow and labored fracturing at the Church of Antioch was started, whose first Bishop was the Apostle Peter. Antioch is also known as the seat of the famous Bishop and martyr St. Ignatius in the 2nd Century. At one point, the majority of bishops in both eastern and western churches followed the Arian heresy. Even after Arianism waned, divisions among the orthodox prevailed at Antioch and despite the works of Saints Basil and Chrysostom, the center of eastern orthodoxy shifted to Constantinople. Antioch continued in orthodoxy, with the Melkites dividing off to formally recognize the primacy of the Bishop of Rome in the 18th Century.
The sequels of the Arian heresy may not be obvious to the casual observer of history and for our time. Consider however the following quote from the monotheistic religion of Islam:
“He, God, is one! God, the Eternal One! He will not generate, nor was he generated, and none is equal to him!” (Koran, 112, 2,4).
And for the Christian in the current age, are there heresies or unorthodox teachings, such as those for contraception that are related? Consider again the following quote by Saint Athanios about an Arian Bishop of Antioch, Leontius, who sterilized himself to live with a woman:
“How can sterile and ignorant persons understand the eternal birth of God?”
Note carefully. Baptism imparts the pro-creative Nature of the Trinity on us. Even without us physically procreating. In fact much more so than procreating. Meet the only religion of God, the ONLY religion compatible with our physiology.
Can then the dilution and weakening of Christian teachings then be related to the influence of government or empire? Is one mechanism of influence of empire over the Church that of tax-exemption? Do Christians have to oscillate from persecution and physical martyrdom to heresy of teachings during “official” offers of freedom of religion but with outside influence? Can the worship of “officialdom” in our time explain the lukewarmness and even doublespeak of bishops and shepherds? Note that it only took a a generation for the persecutions of Christians to resume under Constantine’s nephew, Julian the Apostate.
 With the Incarnation of God in the flesh, His eternal begotten nature becomes manifest in the flesh through the Virgin Mother. The Eternal has now entered the physical realm. That is why she is ever-virgin, and mother of the new eternal race.
 This understanding of the eternally begotten nature of Christ (past, present, and future) has the potential to solve the Filioque controversy, since the Holy Spirit, with the same eternal nature has to exist (in mystery and outside the constraint of time) in the “was”, “is”, and “will always be” begotten nature of the Son. Only in the “will be begotten” understanding of the Son, can we see how the Holy Spirit can proceed from the Father alone.