Friday, February 29, 2008

Orwellian society update: Germany, Ireland condemned by European Commission

From Catholic World News:

European Commission challenges Ireland, Germany on equality guidelines

Brussels, Feb. 25, 2008 ( - The European Commission is threatening action against Ireland for making Church-run institutions exempt from laws that ban discrimination on the basis of orientation and belief.

Irish law allows Church-related institutions such as schools, hospitals, and social agencies to reject employment applicants whose views or activities would violate religious norms. But Vladimir Spidla, the employment commissioner for the European Commission, has cited that policy as a violation of European law. The Irish government has not yet responded to the challenge from the European Commission. The European Commission is also challenging Germany's policy allowing same-sex couples to enter into civil unions. The European Commission argues that the German policy does not give same-sex couples all the legal benefits of marriage and therefore discriminates against homosexuals.

So much for religious freedom. The commissars of the Brussels autocracy have decided that homosexuality must be accommodated on its own terms, but no such accommodation is in turn to be extended to Christian institutions.

But there is another, vastly more important issue at stake here. Irish law mercifully grants to such institutions a right not to be forced to employ persons whose ethos and lifestyles contradict the moral teachings of the Christian religion. “European law”, however, would revoke that right. But this is Ireland, for goodness’ sake! Since when does “European law” trump Irish law within the borders of this republic? Is Ireland not then an independent state, a sovereign nation, with the freedom and authority to manage its own affairs, to regulate its own government, and to execute its own laws? Shall not the government and people of this nation of Ireland inform this Vladimir Spidla and his commission very politely that they may fuck off with themselves and with their “European law” and their equality legislation?

In this country, we, the people, elect to parliament those whom we choose to represent us in a general election held, under normal circumstances, every five years. After such elections (the most recent of which was held in 2007) the elected members of parliament (Teachta Dála in Irish, hence the abbreviation TD) have the mandate to form, among themselves, the next government, and from the ranks of whom the Taoiseach (prime minister) and ministers of cabinet are drawn. It is these Teachtaí Dála — and they alone — who are charged with the rule of this state, having been chosen for that purpose by the Irish people through the exercise of their suffrage.

The Irish people have not elected this Vladimir Spidla, or the members of his commission, nor have they chosen him to represent them in any capacity whatsoever. Nor is the kind of interference wherewith he has had to affrontery to reproach us provided for in any way by the Constitution of this state.

How dare this man, with his “European law” — which has no authority in this republic regardless of whatever treaties the Irish government may foolishly have ratified since the Third Amendment to the Constitution in 1972 — presume to assert that the laws of this country are “in violation” of norms passed by unelected committees in a foreign country with no authority over this sovereign nation of Ireland.

Ireland has as yet (Deo gratias) made no legal provision for the recognition of pseudo-matrimonial sodomitical unions, although the matter has been raised in the Dáil. Will Mr. Spidla and his commission henceforth attempt to force the hand of the Irish government, and attempt to decree into existence by sheer foreign bureaucratic might a state of affairs which, in time, would have come about in a perfectly legal and democratic fashion owing to the secularisation of this formerly Christian country? Or will Mr. Spidla attempt to have some kind of sanctions imposed on Ireland until this country should comply with his foreign will?

But Melancholicus wonders whether Ireland will not now be expelled from the EU altogether, since the Irish have grievously offended their serious, humourless European neighbours by daring to send a turkey to the Eurovision song contest, thus showing their contempt for that ridiculous carry-on and the way in which it has been manipulated in recent years.

Good luck, Dustin! There is at least one citizen of this formerly free state whose backing you have!

Thursday, February 14, 2008

You've got to be kidding me

From the same nation that spawned the bishop who calls God Allah and whose Dominican province gave us priestless “masses” celebrated by Joe and Jane Bloggs, married or single, male or female, gay or straight, comes this latest howler:

Lent is now the “Christian Ramadan”!

From The Telegraph:

Lent fast re-branded as 'Christian Ramadan'

By Bruno Waterfield

Dutch Catholics have re-branded the Lent fast as the "Christian Ramadan" in an attempt to appeal to young people who are more likely to know about Islam than Christianity.

The Catholic charity Vastenaktie, which collects for the Third World across the Netherlands during the Lent period, is concerned that the Christian festival has become less important for the Dutch over the last generation.

"The image of the Catholic Lent must be polished. The fact that we use a Muslim term is related to the fact that Ramadan is a better-known concept among young people than Lent," said Vastenaktie Director, Martin Van der Kuil.

Three decades ago the Catholic Church was as strict as many Muslims are about Ramadan with a total ban on meat and alcohol during the 40-day Lenten period between Ash Wednesday and Easter.

Most Dutch Catholics now focus on charitable work after the Vatican loosened fasting strictures for all but the first and last days of Lent back in 1967.

Four million Dutch describe themselves as Roman Catholics and 400,000 people attend Mass every week but only a few tens of thousands still mark Lent by fasting, said Mr Van der Kuil.

Vastenaktie organisers hope that by linking the festival to Ramadan they can remind Christians who may be less observant than Muslims of the "spirituality and sobriety" of Lent.

"The agreements are more striking than the differences. Both for Muslims and Catholic faithful the values of frugality and spirituality play a central role in this tradition," said Mr Van der Kuil.

H/T to Dhimmi Watch.

What Melancholicus finds most disturbing is that in the Netherlands, apparently, Catholics are more familiar with Ramadan than with Lent. The chickens of Dignitatis Humanae have truly come home to roost. Furthermore, what kind of idiot could possibly think that the “agreements” between Catholicism and Mohammedanism “are more striking than the differences”? Let us not sully our holy Catholic faith with such a blasphemy now, please.

Out of a Catholic population of four million, only 400,000 attend weekly Mass. That’s 10%. Melancholicus is surprised by this statistic, since he was under the impression that actual Mass attendance in the Netherlands was closer to 2%. But since what passes for “Mass” in the Netherlands may not in fact be Mass at all, the true figure is probably much lower.

The Netherlands presents us with a case study of vital importance; this is a place where, prior to the council, the numbers of vocations and levels of Mass attendance were on a par with Ireland. Being one of the birthplaces of the conciliar revolution, it is the one country on earth in which the conciliar deformation has been carried to its furthest extent. What has happened to the Netherlands should serve as a salutary warning to the Church in other parts of the western world. The Dutch Church — if one can still speak of such a thing — is today a basket case, having descended to the lowest gibbering depths of self-worshipping congregationalism. It is not unreasonable to ask whether anything even remotely resembling Catholicism still exists in that unfortunate country.

Since our Dutch friends are so enamoured of Mohammedanism, why don’t they just observe Ramadan and have done with it? In fifty years the Netherlands will be a sharia state anyway.

Wednesday, February 13, 2008

Orwellian society update: anglican bishop forced to undergo "re-education"

From Catholic World News:

Anglican bishop fined for refusing gay youth worker

London, Feb. 12, 2008 ( - An Anglican bishop has been ordered to pay a heavy fine and undergo “equal-opportunies training” for refusing to approve the hiring of an openly homosexual man for a post in youth ministry.

The Cardiff Employment Tribunal on February 11 settled a discrimination case against Bishop Anthony Priddis of Hereford, ordering the bishop to £47,435 (about $92,000) in compensatory damages to John Reaney, who had complained that the bishop denied him a job as a youth worker because of his sexual orientation. The tribunal ordered that officials of the Hereford diocese who are engaged in hiring employees — including the bishop — should be given training to make them more sensitive to homosexual applicants.

Bishop Priddis said that he may appeal the panel’s ruling.

Let us expose this “equal opportunities training” for what it is: nothing more or less than brainwashing. It is an indoctrination of the kind practiced by communists seeking in a less than gentle manner to wean straying souls away from dangerous counter-revolutionary ideas. Not as overtly violent or psychologically damaging, to be sure, but the principle is exactly the same.

With whom is Oceania at war? Is it Eurasia or Eastasia? Melancholicus does not know, and he doubts that bishop Priddis knows either, but after the equal-ops nazis have done their work, the good bishop will probably be ready to parrot, without a trace of irony, whatever “truths” the henchmen of Ingsoc wish him to.

While Melancholicus does not know the details of this case beyond what has been included in the CWN story quoted above, he would be interested to discover if Mr. Reaney were refused employment solely on the grounds of his sexual proclivities, or if there were other reasons.

But it makes no difference. For once a “minority” of any stripe is refused employment on any grounds whatever, the good people of the middle class, politically correct social elite will assume immediately that such refusal can only be on foot of majoritarian discrimination.

Because Oceania has ALWAYS been at war with Eastasia.

Tuesday, February 12, 2008

Pat Condell on Rowan Williams

A side of the sex industry that is seldom reported

From RTÉ:

Report finds rise in trafficking of women

A voluntary organisation working with prostitutes says it has seen an increase in the number of foreign women who have been trafficked into Ireland to work as prostitutes.

Ruhama also asserts that the women are more vulnerable to violence and exploitation because they are hidden away in brothels. Some, it says, are being held in captivity.

It claims that some lapdancing clubs force women into prostitution and it wants the Government to clamp down on the clubs by denying them drink licences.

Ruhama also wants the gardaí to set up a dedicated nationwide vice-squad and the Government to draft legislation to make it easier to prosecute those trafficking women.

The organisation says in the last two years it has dealt with 91 foreign women who were trafficked into Ireland, some held against their will. The organisation says the figure represents the tip of the iceberg.

Ruhama also drew attention to the recent opening of Ireland’s latest lap-dancing club in Kilkenny, which they have said is indicative of the nationwide growth of the sex industry and its re-branding as a form of entertainment.

This is perhaps the worst aspect of the sex industry: slavery re-packaged as entertainment.

It might be objected by proponents of the sex industry that many who work therein do so of their own volition, with all that blather about “consenting adults” and suchlike.

But how “consenting”, truly, are many of these adults? How many are forced into selling themselves into slavery by the relentless pressure of grinding poverty, or drug addiction? How many women are lured into western Europe from poorer countries with enticing promises of jobs and salaries, only to find themselves the victims of a pimp? Never mind those who have not yet reached the age of legal consent, the exploitation of whom is carefully hidden undeground so as not to sully that face of the sex industry that the mavens of the New IrelandTM find so acceptable.

There will always be those who ply their trade in the industry because they derive erotic gratification thereby, but for the overwhelming majority, prostitution cannot be much more than distasteful if lucrative drudgery. For prostitution commands such a revenue that it can make its practitioners exceedingly wealthy. But how much of this wealth actually remains in the hands of those who do the hard work of earning it in the first instance?

In this, as in every other instance of slavery, the slave does the work; the slave-owner reaps the rewards.

Christopher Johnson on Rowan Williams

Melancholicus has no personal animus against his Lordship’s Grace of Canterbury, but he has a very keen interest in seeing to it that even the remotest possibility of sharia being recognised by British law is ruthlessly and immediately crushed.

Hence he has chosen to dwell on this topic a little longer, and he regrets if the patience of his readers is unduly taxed thereby.

Here is the reaction of the redoubtable Christopher Johnson, of the excellent Midwest Conservative Journal (to which Melancholicus links all too infrequently, alas). Melancholicus could not have said it better than this:

Dr. Williams has no business being shocked by this controversy. Rightly or wrongly, the Archbishop of Canterbury is still one of the most important religious figures in the world so that anything he says is going to paid attention to even by non-Anglicans.

What's tough to understand is Dr. Williams' obtuseness about all this. One reason, I think, has to do with the fact that my gracious lord of Canterbury is a liberal Anglican. Liberal Anglcans believe that all men, regardless of their religion, are reasonable and civilized and that all problems can be solved over a glass of really good Port.

So if the Muslim scholars with whom he regularly confers assure him that sharia is actually gentle and benign, Dr. Williams will be inclined to believe them. He will also be inclined to believe that Great Britain will easily be able to pick and choose which aspects of sharia will apply and which will not.

Confront him with the way that what sharia there is in Britain actually functions and he will profess to be horrified and tell you that "Muslim scholars" view such applications as distortions. Perhaps Dr. Williams and his defenders can explain what comfort the opinions of "Muslim scholars" will be to a Muslim woman dragged into a sharia court and then kicked to the curb by her abusive husband with the approval of such a barbaric "court" for I certainly cannot.

The other reason is much simpler. The idea of calling Muslim savagery what it is, the idea of standing up for the religion he claims to profess and the idea of telling Muslims that they are, well, wrong are ideas too terrifying for men like Rowan Williams to contemplate.

So it is much easier to have "interfaith" meetings than to confront the truth. It is far easier to believe the honeyed words of "Muslim scholars" that sharia doesn't really mean that.

Because if you know what sharia really is and how it is really applied, you have to speak out against such an evil. Unless you value the opinion of the world more than the opinion of your God. Or unless you are a moral coward.

Or both.

Mr. Johnson also links to Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, writing in The Independent, giving a Muslim woman’s perspective on the practice of sharia, and an article which Melancholicus recommends to all his readers.

Al-Beeb to the rescue

Rowan need not worry, since the Beeb is on his side. Melancholicus has learned, via Biased BBC blog, that a concerted effort is now underway to present his views on sharia law and the British legal system as the soundest common sense and to deflect public attention away from the repeated calls for his resignation that have issued forth from within the Church of England.

Yesterday, BBC Radio 4’s regular Thought for the Day on the Today programme featured a softly-spoken, educated, urbane and very British-sounding Muslim politely defending Rowan’s wisdom and attempting to calm the ruffled waters. The reader may listen to the broadcast here (requires Real Player; or simply read the transcript). Melancholicus feels that the point, though, was not to defend the archbishop of Canterbury, or even to present his views as reasonable; the point was to enable the BBC to distance itself from any suggestion that sharia law might actually be something insidious and nasty. In the last paragraph it is referred to, pointedly and reverently, as a “heritage of legal wisdom” for Muslims. The speaker made no reference to the fact that sharia law prescribes horrific public punishments for trivial misdemeanours, and is so utterly divorced from both reality and compassion that in countries where this foul code holds sway, rape victims are frequently stoned for adultery.

Andrew Marr is proud of the fact that the BBC employs an “abnormally large number of young people, ethnic minorities and gay people”. That explains a lot. Young people, who don’t know anything about anything, and lack the capability and the motivation to even think of questioning the institutional leftism of the organisation for which they work; ethnic minorities [read Muslims] who unfailingly pursue a line favourable to their own group; and gay people — well, enough said. If ever one wondered why al-Beeb is always in bed with either the Mohammedan or the homosexualist (or sometimes both simultaneously), well here’s the best explanation that Melancholicus has ever encountered.

And on this occasion, the latest outbreak of Rowan Williams’ recurring foot-in-mouth disease, the BBC clearly felt it had to step in and clarify matters — lest Muslims be embarrassed.

Monday, February 11, 2008

Religion of Peace update: right on cue

At the outset of the current furore over the recent tactless remarks by his Lordship’s Grace of Canterbury, Melancholicus considered that all we need to inject a dose of realism into this matter is a good display of how adopting parts of Islamic Sharia law can help maintain social cohesion.

And here it is, right on cue. From Catholic World News:

Christians suffer in Nigerian religious violence

Lagos, Feb. 8, 2008 ( - About 1,000 Christians have been driven from their homes, and every Christian church destroyed, in a rash of religious violence in a northern Nigerian state, reports Christian Solidarity Worldwide (CSW).

The violence in the heavily Islamic Bauchi state began when a young Christian woman was charged with blaspheming the prophet Mohammed, CSW reports. (Christian neighbors say that the young woman was the target of reprisal by a spurned Muslim admirer.) A mob gathered at the young woman's house, police opened fire on the crowd, and a riot broke out in which the Christian minority suffered from assaults, arson, looting, and vandalism.

Nigeria's northern region is dominated by Muslims, and Christians have expressed mounting fears about the imposition of shari'a law and disenfranchisement of religious minorities.

In fairness to Dr. Williams, Melancholicus feels duty bound to acknowledge that he does not believe for a moment that Dr. Williams advocates this kind of carry on, much less public floggings, stonings, amputations and beheadings, or the treatment of women as little more than slaves.

But there is no such thing as a little bit of sharia; if any western government should ever stoop to the folly of legally recognising sharia law, the effect will be to establish a state within a state and to transfer sovereignty from the government to the mullahs. Recognising any individual principle of sharia will be tantamount to swallowing the entire beast. To admit any part will be ultimately to admit the whole, whether intended or not. And the Mohammedans, emboldened by such unexpected success, will press for even greater control over the dhimmified majority.

Thereafter, this kind of mass Islamic violence, which is routine in parts of Africa and Asia, will become routine in Europe also.

Friday, February 08, 2008

What date is it?

It’s January 1943.

Puzzled? It will all be made clear in a moment.

The Archbishop (of happy memory) used to say that there have been three world wars: the first of 1914-18, the second of 1939-45, and the third of 1962-65.

But, with all due regard to the Archbishop’s analogy, the Third World War did not end in 1965; it is still being fought today, in every diocese across the world, in every religious order, in every seminary and Catholic institute of education; even in every parish.

Some readers may consider it an impious thing to compare this putative “Third World War” with the actual Second World War, especially in view of the colossal carnage, destruction, displacement and loss of life occasioned by the latter. But since we are Christians, we have a supernatural view of human history, and the cost to souls as a result of our still-ongoing Third World War has been no less grievous than that of the Second.

German troops of the 6th Army in the ruins of Stalingrad, 1942In January 1943, the Battle of Stalingrad, the bloodiest battle ever fought, was drawing to its end. A massive Soviet counter-attack which began in November 1942 succeeded in encircling and cutting off the German 6th Army which had besieged the city since the previous July. By January 1943, the German position was hopeless. It was by then too late to withdraw; the Germans could have done so earlier and cut their losses by retreating and regrouping—and perhaps they could have attacked again after being reinforced—but, with a determination to fight to the very last man that was almost Japanese in its hysterical fervour, Adolf Hitler absolutely forbade any retreat under any circumstances whatsoever. The forces of the great German Reich could not possibly entertain the notion of retreat! It would be victory or annihilation; and so the 6th Army, comprising the most capable and most experienced of Germany’s fighting men, was abandoned to its fate. Shortly before the end, Hitler even promoted the commander of the 6th Army, General Friedrich Paulus, to the rank of Field Marshal. No German Field Marshal had ever before surrendered, so Paulus knew he was expected either to work a miracle and take the city against all the odds, or else to commit suicide and thus avert the shame of surrender. The Soviets, recognising that the Germans were in an impossible situation, offered to accept their surrender with generous terms. Paulus was a soldier above all, not a National Socialist fanatic, and with the words “I have no intention of shooting myself for that Bohemian corporal”, he surrendered to the Soviet forces on 2 February—the feast of Candlemas. With the defeat of the 6th Army, the Wehrmacht had lost 300,000 seasoned troops, had failed to capture Stalingrad, and the USSR was in a much stronger position strategically and militarily than when the battle had started. With all due regard for the heroism of the Soviet troops who broke the siege of Stalingrad and surrounded the German forces, the 6th Army was defeated not by Stalin or Rokossovsky, or even by the harsh Russian winter; the German 6th Army was defeated by Adolf Hitler.

Despite his mesmeric charisma (upon which many who met him have remarked) and his powerful personality, Hitler possessed nothing even remotely approaching military genius. If he was the reason Germany went to war in 1939, he was also the reason Germany lost the same war in 1945. The brilliant successes of 1939 and 1940 gave the impression to friend and foe alike that the Wehrmacht was unstoppable, and that Germany’s final victory was all but assured. But even at that early stage, Hitler had already shown himself incompetent to command, having overridden the sound advice of his staff—much to the frustration of German military commanders who actually knew what they were doing. The famous evacuation of the allied armies from Dunkirk in 1940 only took place at all because Hitler expressly ordered a halt to the German advance, a halt which bought the allies precious time to escape. Then there was the decision in the same year to focus the Luftwaffe’s attacks on English cities rather than on military targets, a blunder for which Hermann Goering shares responsibility, and which allowed the RAF to continue the fight and then to win the Battle of Britain. Then there was the decision to delay the 1941 German invasion of Russia until June, which meant that winter stole upon the Germans before they could capture Moscow and so their advance bogged down. They never did capture Moscow. The decision to invade Russia at all was itself a blunder. Then there was Hitler’s slow and almost unconcerned response to the D-Day invasion, among sundry other gaffes, not to mention the continual diversion of manpower and resources in implementing the Führer’s racial policies in conquered territories; his obsession with finally solving “the Jewish question” led to one of the most egregious mass murders in history, and significantly detracted from the German war effort: German Jews and leading scientists who had fled from their homeland in the 1930s to escape Nazi persecution were instrumental in the development for the United States of the atomic bomb. When all is said and done, the Germans’ fiercest enemy in World War II was not the British, or the Americans, or the Soviets; it was their own commander in chief.

Melancholicus must admit that the foregoing critique of Hitler as a military commander was a tangent, so let us now return to Stalingrad and to the point of this post. What makes the Battle of Stalingrad so significant is that it marks the first major reverse for the German war machine. Stalingrad was a turning point in the war. Thitherto, everything had been going Hitler’s way. Well, not quite everything. There was the inconvenience of the Battle of Britain, after which Operation Sealion had to be aborted. There was the somewhat more serious inconvenience of the Second Battle of El-Alamein—contemporary, incidentally, with the siege of Stalingrad—which resulted in the expulsion of the axis from North Africa, and the consequent ability of the allies to threaten Fortress Europe from across the Mediterranean. But the failure to occupy Britain and the failure to hold North Africa were not in themselves decisive. It was not until the surrender of the 6th Army at Stalingrad that Germany began losing the war, for the subsequent history of the German campaign in Russia is one of constant retreat and regroup in a desperate and futile attempt to halt the advance of the Soviet counter-attack. For those with eyes to see and ears to hear, the writing was thenceforth on the wall, and the events of April 1945 were from that moment inevitable.

So now, in our analogical comparison between the Second and Third World Wars, we have reached January 1943. We have reached the conciliar church’s Stalingrad. For the past forty years, everything has been going the way of the conciliar revolutionaries. They have, in the ecclesiastical version of Blitzkrieg, marched from triumph to triumph with scarcely a single reverse. They have seized control of seminaries, universities, diocesan chanceries, bishops’ conferences, and practically the entire mainstream Catholic media. Their lackeys write the religious education textbooks used by our children in Catholic schools. Their programmes and workshops have indoctrinated Catholic teachers in conciliar religion. Their revolutionary liturgy is celebrated in almost every single parish in the entire Catholic world. The revolutionaries’ views of scripture, of tradition, of liturgy, of sacraments, of catechetics, of ecumenism, of the respective roles of the priesthood and the laity, of sexual morality, of everything in fact, have become the norm. Our Catholic people have been conciliarised, to the extent that they no longer know what is true and what is false, nor are they even aware of it. Of course the revolutionaries have experienced a few setbacks in the last forty years; much as Hitler was unable to suppress the British in 1940, so the conciliar revolutionaries were unable to have the traditional Roman Mass actually banned by the Holy See (although they tried!). Nevertheless, they were able to hold it—and the entire Catholic faith—at arm’s length for most of this period. Much as the Germans were unable to hold North Africa at El-Alamein in 1942, so the conciliarists were unable to prevent the Archbishop from proceeding with the consecrations in 1988, which meant that Rome had to sit up and finally take the Traditionalist movement seriously. But despite these setbacks—a slap on the wrist for a Küng here, a faint-hearted indult permitting celebration of the ancient Mass under restrictive conditions there—the revolutionaries’ grip on the Church and on the reins of power continued.

Until now. Until the reign of Pope Benedict XVI, whereat the traditions and the faith of our holy Church have at last begun to emerge from the catacombs to which they were consigned after the Blitzkrieg of the revolutionaries. Until the Holy Father’s recent motu proprio Summorum Pontificum, which liberalised not only the ancient Mass, but all the liturgical books in use before the liturgical deformations of Vatican II. No longer do faithful priests have to depend upon the diktat of authoritarian modernist bishops for access to that Mass which is the right of their ordination. The absolute stranglehold of the heretics upon the Church has been loosed; their grip is faltering, their confidence is shaken, and they can see on the horizon the next generation of younger orthodox priests in cassocks and nuns in full habits fast approaching them with a grim determination, like the innumerable divisions of the Red Army which broke the siege of Stalingrad and harried the retreating Wehrmacht all the way to Berlin itself.

Summorum Pontificum is the conciliar church’s Stalingrad, and as such it is a turning point in the war. From this point on, the revolutionaries are in retreat. They still occupy almost the whole territory of holy Church, but their supplies and reinforcements have been cut off. No-one is following in their footsteps; their dissent has inspired no vocations to take their place. They have no heirs.

And now that they are old, or at the very least in late middle age, death and retirement will by degrees remove them from the scene. Their passing will not be mourned. Not by me, not by anyone.

This, to quote Churchill, is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.

It might still be 1943.

The war is not over yet. There is still a long road ahead and much to do. There will be much suffering in this blackest of dark nights before the dawn comes again.

But it will soon be 1945.

We will beat them. We will win.

Grant, we beseech Thee, most merciful Lord, through the intercession of Saint Joseph, patron of the Universal Church, that the peace, beauty and dignity of the Tridentine Latin Mass may be restored to our churches, and that the holy Catholic faith may be restored to its proper place once again.

Wednesday, February 06, 2008

Normal service has been resumed as soon as possible

Regular visitors to this journal will have noticed that no new posts have appeared in the last fortnight. This is the first occasion since the (re)launch of Infelix Ego that Melancholicus has had to apologize to his readers for such an untoward hiatus.

It just happens that at present the author is so busy with work that he hardly has time to lift his head, and in the meantime, patient reader, he begs your indulgence.

Work is such a regrettable thing; it makes one tired, anxious, and steals time away from such valuable pursuits as social intercourse and blogging. True, it provides one with one’s crust, but for Melancholicus it is very much a means to an end, and not something he particularly enjoys.

This spate of frenetic activity will soon pass, and with God’s help we will all be back to normal thereafter.