Monday, October 28, 2024

Detachment

 

To My Readers: This week my guest poster, Dominic Caggeso, reminds us of  detachment from the world, and draws amazing parallels between King Solomon and St. Francis of Assisi. Feel free to comment as usual. If you have a specific comment or question for me, I will respond as always, but it may take me a bit longer to do so this week. 

God bless you all, my dear readers---Introibo

Detachment

By Dominic Caggeso

Many years ago, before I settled down to raise a family, I had the occasion to spend two years living in the Sahara Desert. I went there to escape the world and reflect on my life after having spent four years in the dregs and filth of an American University. I needed time to contemplate my life path, and re-evaluate my poor decisions. Despite my intention to self-reflect, I was unprepared for the profound impact this time in the Sahara would have on me, shaping my character and outlook even twenty-five years later as I write this.

I lived in a remote part of the Islamic Republic of Mauritania, among Bedouins and endless sand dunes, under the relentless sun. Life in the rural Sahara moved at a slow pace, and as much as I tried to occupy my time, it largely proved a futile effort. Instead, I had little to do but sit alone with my thoughts, day after day, with no media, books, or places to go. It was initially a painful experience, as my mind craved the high level of activity and distraction that I grew up with as an average middle class American boy.

The prolonged emptiness made me realize just how much of my thoughts revolved around mundane and inconsequential things of this world. With very few externals to capture my attention, I was forced to turn inward and look at myself more deeply. As I sat endlessly, gazing at the barren landscape, large questions continually surfaced in my mind about the purpose of this life, the nature of God, and the question of true belief and religion. 

In the absence of the western world, I was surprised at the amount of joy I derived from the simplest of things. In that vast expanse of sand, I found immense happiness in small pleasures. A can of condensed milk or a care package from my mother, containing window screening to keep out the swarming flies, brought me great delight. This experience taught me an invaluable lesson about the desires for worldly things. I realized that I could train my mind to reassess what I considered necessary or desirable. Through this mental discipline, I learned to maintain a joyful attitude, even with minimal possessions. 

In hindsight, my time in the wilderness was a conditioning period in which God was emptying me of worldly attachments. After two years of materialism detox in the wilderness of Mauritania, I returned home. The stark contrast between living in the desert one day, boarding a plane, and landing in America the next day was a brutal shock. I was immediately overwhelmed by the abundance of “stuff” that suddenly surrounded me and struggled to reintegrate into a normal American life. 

I found that my heart and soul had much more room to pursue the higher goods I was longing for. While this fire was still alive inside of me, I immersed myself in the life of my local parish, where I was confronted with the contradictions of the Novus Ordo. This was a whole other struggle in its own right, but at least I was now capable of asking the right questions. With the intervention of Our Lady of Lourdes, this path ultimately led me out of the Novus Ordo and to the True Catholic Faith, where I would eventually drink deeply of the refreshing doctrines of the Catholic Church.

The Saharan Desert taught me a lesson that I wasn’t seeking, but was grateful to learn. This lesson of detachment gave me a much greater capacity to seek God. In the following years, I would learn of the lives of many saints who lived lives of intentional detachment from the world. Among these saints, perhaps none demonstrate this better than St. Francis of Assisi, who gave up the world and embraced poverty with a laser focused determination.

Parallels Between St. Francis and King Solomon

If you have read my articles before or seen any of my videos on YouTube, you might be aware of how I draw parallels between Church history and the Old Testament. I would like to share one example of this marvelous system of prefigurement by comparing St. Francis of Assisi and King Solomon, an unlikely counterpart. The great spiritual wealth that awaits us when we detach from the world and turn fully to God is magnified in this vivid prefigurement. 

Great Wealth and Wisdom

After the death of King David, Solomon was crowned king of Israel. As an inexperienced young man, he inherited a complex and thriving kingdom with numerous challenges. In a dream, God spoke to Solomon and asked what he desired. Aware of his deficiencies, Solomon requested wisdom. God was pleased with this request and granted him not only unparalleled wisdom but also unparalleled wealth. 

“And the Lord appeared to Solomon in a dream by night, saying: Ask what thou wilt that I should give thee. And Solomon said: [...]  ‘I am but a child, and know not how to go out and come in. [...] Give therefore to thy servant an understanding heart, to judge thy people, and discern between good and evil.’ [...] And the Lord said to Solomon: [...] ‘Behold I have done for thee according to thy words, and have given thee a wise and understanding heart, insomuch that there hath been no one like thee before thee, nor shall arise after thee. Yea and the things also which thou didst not ask, I have given thee: to wit riches and glory, as that no one hath been like thee among the kings in all days heretofore.’”

- 3 Kings 3

The wealth and glory that God bestowed on Solomon would later indirectly lead to his fall from grace. With such wealth and glory, he was able to attract and afford 700 wives and 300 concubines. Many of these wives were pagans, influencing Solomon to not only allow them to perform their profane sacrifices in the kingdom of Israel but also compelling him to do the same.

Like King Solomon, St. Francis of Assisi also faced an iconic and pivotal decision concerning wisdom and wealth. We all know the famous story in which St. Francis renounced his inheritance and even the very clothes he wore, choosing to stand without any possessions before his Heavenly Father. He embraced complete poverty and detachment from worldly goods. As a result, he was granted vast spiritual wealth, heavenly wisdom and the freedom to live totally for God. In contrast to King Solomon who gloried in his wealth and courted many women, St. Francis courted Lady Poverty and gloried in his spiritual wealth.

More Striking Parallels Between King Solomon and St. Francis of Assisi

To further round out the parallels between King Solomon and St. Francis, consider the following:

1.Great Builders: King Solomon was tasked by David and permitted by God to build the Temple in Jerusalem, God’s house on Earth in the Old Testament. Similarly, St. Francis heard the audible voice of God telling him, while kneeling before a crucifix, to rebuild God’s house. Initially, St. Francis took this literally, rebuilding the dilapidated church at San Damiano. Later, he realized that God was asking him to rebuild the entire Catholic Church, which had fallen into spiritual disrepair. With the wisdom and zeal gained from renouncing material possessions, he attracted many followers, and together they revitalized the Church, reorienting the faithful towards the riches of Heaven and away from earthly wealth and glory, the diametric opposite of King Solomon.


2.Divided Kingdoms: After King Solomon’s death, his high taxes caused unrest among the northern ten tribes of Israel. His arrogant son, Rehoboam, further inflamed their outrage, leading to a revolt and the formation of the northern kingdom of Israel, dividing the nation. Similarly, near the end of his life, St. Francis managed to quell disagreements within his Franciscan order regarding their vow of poverty. The Zelanti faction advocated for strict poverty, while the Relaxati favored a more pragmatic approach to accept donations they deemed necessary to accommodate the orders rapid expansion. After St. Francis’s death, these differences could not be resolved, leading to a division within the order.


3.Temporary Dwellings for Their “Brides”: While St. Francis did not have an earthly bride, St. Clare was deeply inspired by his example and teachings. She left her noble life to become his chaste counterpart, founding a sister organization to follow his example and pray for the Franciscan mission. When St. Clare fled her family, St. Francis placed her in the Benedictine Convent in San Paulo, Italy, while he and his brothers constructed a house for her and her sisters at San Damiano. Once completed, St. Clare moved into this new house, the first mother house of the Poor Clares. Similarly, King Solomon housed his most high-profile wife, the Egyptian princess, in Jerusalem while he completed her permanent residence in Mello.

These parallels, while not directly reflecting on detachment from the world, highlight the similarities between St. Francis and King Solomon and contrast the difference between the material wealth of one and the spiritual wealth of the other. Spiritual wealth is harder to gauge and perceive, making St. Francis’s detachment from earthly possessions more challenging to quantify. In contrast, King Solomon’s riches were easily counted. Nonetheless, spiritual wealth is a real and valuable concept, increasing in direct correlation to our detachment from this world and attachment to the riches of God.

Conclusion

I will leave you with these two quotes from Catholic Saints that speak of the need for us to detach ourselves from this world and depend upon the Providence of our Loving Father in Heaven.

“That thou mayest possess all things, seek to possess nothing.”

St. John of the Cross , Ascent of Mount Carmel,  pg. 58, 1922, London, Baker

“Complain not, then, Philothea, of your poverty; for we never complain but of that which displeases us, and if poverty displeases you, you are no longer poor in spirit.”

St. Francis De Sales, Introduction to the Devout Life, pg. 144, 1885, M. H. Gill and Son, Dublin

53 comments:

  1. Beautiful reflection on our materialistic world and on the impossibility for it to fill the heart. Jesus tells us that we cannot serve two masters: God and Mammon. We know who the world serves. It has turned its back on the true God and has created a society of consumption and pleasures that do not fill the heart since there are many unhappy people, some seek refuge in drugs, alcohol, porn, and others commit suicide. If I remember correctly, Saint Augustine wrote: "You made us for yourself, Lord, and our hearts are restless until they rest in you." This is why the world is unhappy, because it has rejected God !

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, and well said! We cannot serve two masters. I am sadly amazed, because the world is relentless in its efforts to flood into one's life. :( I can't wait until we don't have to be constantly alert and on guard against it.

      Delete
    2. This need for detachment is necessary, especially in our times. This world is wicked and I see it every day. Evil is everywhere and there is no one left to promote good. Politicians and media opinion leaders work for Satan and even the modernist sect is on their side. These are truly evil days ! May God have mercy on us !

      Delete
  2. What a wonderful piece of writing Dominic . It gives much food for thought .Thank you brother

    D

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thank you for sharing how it was like living in the desert for a couple years. I'm sure it wasn't easy in many more ways than one.

    Some of my favorite saints were St. Paul the hermit and St. Antony of the Desert who happen to meet each other on one occasion. I always wonder what that conversation was like when they met.

    Lee

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Where the muslims kind, mean, or both?

      Delete
    2. I wish I would have been a devout Catholic when I was living in the Sahara Desert. What an opportunity it would have been to grow in holiness! Living with the Muslims was a whole other life lesson! It was just after 9/11 when I lived there, so when I came back to America, I felt like I had tremendous insight into the Muslim mind. In many ways, I felt like I was living in the Old Testament. But the perversity and baseness of Islam was apparent to me, even back then when I was a worldling.

      Delete
  4. Dominic I think if asked you this before

    If the Antichrist is dead why hasn’t the general judgement, of triumph of the church happened. And why did nobody claim to be the messiah, and be worshipped by the whole world (including Protestant end times fundamentalists)? The antipopes did none of this it would seem that at most one of them was or far more likely Will be the false prophet.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Of course, these are great questions. Antichrist is a mystery in the sense that it (he) is wrapped up in an inverse and perverse way with the "mystery" of the Church, the papacy and the Faith. It is not easy to address these questions quickly.... so I would by very happy to send you a free copy of my book (which is an exposition of all my thoughts on this topic). Just email me your mailing address and I'll put a complimentary copy in the mail for you.

      But to address your questions somewhat here, I would say that in the broader sense, Antichrist is the anti-church, anti-Mass, anti-popes, anti-priests, anti-saints, and all other aspects of our holy religion that the Novus Ordo has counterfeited, all the while deceiving the rest of the world (and Catholics) that it (the NO) is the true Church of Christ. In this way, the false NO religion is truly antichrist, in the fullest way possible. For the true Church is the Body of Christ (and the Bride of Christ). A true pope is a Vicar of Christ. A true Mass is Our Lord truly present on a Catholic altar. A true priest is "in the person of Christ", etc. Thus, the NO is truly Antichrist in the fullest and most complete sense. Thus, the fall of the NO (however that happens) will be the fall of Antichrist (in the broad sense). It does seem also, that there was a particular antipope who was THE Antichrist. But my reasons for this assertion are spelled out in my book.

      Great questions and comments! I truly appreciate this conversation and I would love to share my thoughts with you more fully.

      Delete
    2. I would rather not give my mailing address

      It’s all good and true that the novus ordo is antichrist at least as an institution but I cannot bring myself to say the person of the antichrist is already come and gone, firstly wouldn’t THE Man of sin be the LAST leader of the antichrist antichurch as opposed to someone like wojtyla or Ratzinger? Secondly this seems to forget the distinction between the antichrist and the false prophet. I am all in for saying that the novus ordo antipopes are THE false prophet of revelation, but the person of the antichrist? You said how could one impersonate Christ more than by impersonating his vicar, but what if said person claimed to be the messiah that the Jews have awaited, and that the false prophet claimed to be his pope. That seems to be much more coherent.

      You also claim that the Holy Week liturgy of Pius xii coincides with the Last Supper but how do we reconcile that with the infallibility of universal disciplinary laws?

      and no matter how coherent bit seems it just seems wrong to name Pius xi and Pius xii among the heads of the beast.

      And it’s not even that coherent because roncalli through Bergoglio aren’t even valid kings of the Vatican anyway

      anyway it can’t have been the last week in 2013 because the world hasn’t ended

      Maybe the last week is full of longer weeks?

      Also if we are living in the parallel of Maccabees, that the antichrist wouldn’t have come yet, because Christ came 160 years later, that would make sense, we are not living under the person of antichrist but rather the parallel of antiochus epiphanes who is paving the way for this person, while the Novus ordo maybe is the abomination of desolation Montini certainly was not THE antichrist, maybe he was THE false prophet but then so would his sucessors be and the novus ordo is still in rome so THE person of the antichrist may still come with the abomination even if he didn’t set it up. Montini most likely is the parallel person of antiochus epiphanes, and that means his successor will be the parallel of Peter, further confirming teh persons of antichrist and false prophet have not yet come

      And the mass never ended correct me if I’m wrong, we’re there not always faithful clergy saying at least 1 valid mass somewhere in the world? Under the person of the antichrist will the mass not END, as in not just leave rome but END for a period of time.

      It makes sense if the institution of the Novus bogus was the passion of the church but it seems more to be a prefigurement of an even worse passion, surely the cruxifiction was worse than the abomination of antiochus epiphanes, even if the New Testament parallel fits perfectly with Pur Lords Passion, something worse must be on the horizon

      God bless

      Delete
    3. Also you said that Constantine’s mother is a catholic saint which is true but isn’t Constantine also a saint? he was venerated by Uniates? Did the church approve this?

      Delete
    4. If your works prove one thing it is Thomistic predestination and physical premotion

      Delete
    5. On second thoughts your works are index of prohibited books material, I mean saying that about true valid popes and good ones too ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR MIND

      This is why laymen aren’t supposed to be doing this sorta stuff. You Cannot. Cannot. Cannot. Cannot say that about popes Pius XI and Pius XII, and you bring up the credo pilgrimage SERIOUSLY what does the schismatic novus ordo church una cum have to do with the beast having power over the saints, what if that wasn’t schismatic novus ordos but eastern schismatics, then would you celebrate their pilgrimage as the end of the beasts power over the saints. Get over yourself, if the beast has already had power over the saints then that was quite mediocre because we still exist, there were no martyrs, the beast didn’t claim to be the messiah, many heretics hated the beast.


      And if anything they are the beast from the earth not the beast from teh sea you are mixing things up

      Delete
    6. The Novus ordo is clearly the false prophet. This is actually ridiculous that you would skip this to calumnate these two holy popes. Your books should all be burned and a real pope will hopefully put them on the index.

      Delete
    7. When the real antichrist comes you will be too busy insulting real popes

      Delete
    8. Ok sorry Dominic for saying all those things but I actually found something

      What if the Novus Ordo is The whore of Babylon, The last one is the beast out of the earth and the beast from the sea is the antichrist which is Jewish - the seventh head was not Ratzinger, but Bergoglios successor - the false prophet

      And the antichrist is a Jewish man who claims to be the Christ

      Delete
    9. That was really foul language from me my apologies

      Delete
  5. Introibo:

    1. Do you know why CMRI and the Roman Catholic Institute each have a chapel in Brooksville, Florida? The chapels are less than 15 miles apart.

    2. Do you know if Bishop Pivarunas has ever met Bishop Sanborn?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon6:04
      1. No. I always wonder why, with so many Traditionalists lacking a priest, various groups set up Chapels near each other.

      2. No.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. Yeah number one is bad, one of them should have given priests to one of their missions so that people have mass every Sunday

      Delete
  6. is the official position of the cmri that it is ok to attend una cum masses?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon6:18
      I don't know if it is an "official position," but it does seem so. Several years ago, I spoke with a CMRI priest and asked him, "What would you say to a Traditionalist who asks if it is permissible to attend the so-called 'Una Cum' Mass with a validly ordained priest who rejects Vatican II and is not part of the sect? Can he attend?" The priest (a true gentleman), said he would check with his bishop. I gave him my phone number. Two days later he called and said, "The person may attend. The priest is mistaken as to the identity of the pope, but the Mass is OK to attend."

      I thanked him for the response. I believe that is the answer you will receive from the CMRI clergy, even if not "officially" written down.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. How could a priest say una cum and be not part of the sect

      Delete
    3. Also there is absolutely no way Bergoglio is Petrus Romanus, if you are going to go along with the Prophecy then you would have to go along with teh descriptions which call Petrus a good pope, meaning he won’t be a bad pope and certainly won’t be a false pope, which Is what Bergoglio is, more likely Bergoglio is “ In persecutione extrema ”

      Delete
    4. Wrong comment I replied to sorry Introibo I meant to reply to a comment far above

      Delete
    5. @anon3:41
      Please see my post:
      https://introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2023/03/undeclared-heretics.html

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    6. But the una cum is still union with an false pope, telling a lie by calling him a pope

      Delete
    7. @anon11:03
      That would be the sin of the priest alone, and even then, he may not be guilty in the internal forum. I know a valid Benedictine priest (ordained 1962) who uses the name of Bergoglio "just in case" he is the pope, and will "convert." His theology is off but his heart is in the right place. He is also of advanced age. I don't think he is held guilty of sin. Nor is it "in union" with Bergoglio. In my post I cite where priests used to insert their own name in the Canon. Were they praying "in union with themselves"? There is more than ample evidence from theologians that the pope is being prayed FOR not praying WITH.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  7. Introibo --

    I'm new to your site and also to the Sede position (and don't agree with all therein, however that's not important now) and was struck incredulous by a comment, and your reply, on an old post regarding either Roncali or Cdl. Siri the brief discourse of which was that saintly Fr. Depauw was summoned to Rome by JPI on the pretext that he wished to abolish VII and it's horrid liturgy and that a mere couple of days later the latter was, of course, found dead.

    This strikes me as a most extraordinary revelation -- extra-extraordinary -- which leaves me almost aghast at what might have been though sadly never was.

    I reason, having listened to an interview with yourself regarding your history with Fr. Depauw, that this must've occured several years before your first encounter; however, do you have any further information? Can you elaborate at all? This seems most significant.

    God bless you and the Virgin protect you

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon2:44
      I was converted by Fr. DePauw in 1981. Obviously, that was three years subsequent to the brief so-called Pontificate of Luciani. I cannot elaborate further on what he told me without giving away certain information he did not wish to be made public. Suffice it to say, your basic contention is correct. Father received a summons to the Vatican to basically dismantal the Vatican II sect and the Novus Bogus. That's why I hold the sedeprivationist theory as tenable. I believe it was **possible** that Luciani repented and became pope.

      Fr. made one thing clear---he said (not as speculation) that Luciani was MURDERED (his word) by high ranking Freemasons in the Vatican because of what he planned to do. I remember the mournful look in his eyes as he said to me, "If only he had lived longer..."

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  8. Thank you very much for your response. That really is, in the proper sense of the word, fantastic. Incredible to think what may have been; or, I suppose more accurately, may not have been, or come to pass.

    Luciano may well be in the glorious army of Martyrs.

    Curious, however, as to why he would've chosen the name 'John Paul' let alone adopted the self-appointed appellation 'the First'.

    Perhaps he was being canny.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. His predecessor usurped the name Paul, who’s predecessor usurped the name John so why not John Paul

      Delete
  9. Introibo:

    If Luciani was going to reverse Vatican II, why do you think that he accepted the Novus Ordo?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon3:43
      He was a Modernist who accepted V2, the Novus Bogus, and everything that went along with it. What I believe may have happened is that he came face to face with the evil forces in such a way that he converted to the True Faith, and THEN was going to reject and suppress it all.

      We will never know, I suppose, this side of the grave.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. If he had converted to the true faith he would have recognised he was not pope and been able to do nothing papaly anyway

      Delete
    3. @anon7:30
      I beg to differ. This would prove, as far as I'm concerned, sedepriavtionism as true. He might have been guided by an inspiration of the Holy Ghost to know he was NOW pope formally and not just materially. As nothing came of it, I can't say anything for certain. I hold sedeprivationism to be a possibility.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    4. Then luciani can’t have ever been a heretic because of cum ex apostolatus officio yet he is on record calling God a woman! And he was in union with the Vatican ii church which taught

      1. Salvation outside the church
      2. Communicatio in sacris is Good
      3. Collegiality
      4. The jews are God’s Chosen people
      5. Muslims worship the same God as us
      6. The Church of Christ merely subsists in The Catholic Church
      7. Religious liberty
      8. Evolution of dogma


      If Luciani converted and became pope It would at most prove something along the lines of the Montini crooked ears theory

      Delete
    5. Even bishop Guerard des Lauriers recognised that his thesis contained “massive theological errors”

      Delete
    6. @anon10:55/10:56
      You misunderstand sedeprivationism. A material pope is no pope at all, only a man CAPABLE TO RECEIVE THE OFFICE OF POPE SHOULD HE CONVERT.

      Hence, the principle of Cum Ex is not violated by the Thesis. There has never been (at least as far as I have seen) a citation to a trusted source for the alleged "massive theological errors" statement. Bp. Guerard des Lauriers, a top-tier approved theologian pre-V2 would not make "massive theological errors" and certainly not without a disavowal of his thesis--which he never did.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    7. I know that the thesis does not believe he is pope at all but doesn’t cum ex teach that the election of a heretic is invalid not simply that they don’t become pope

      Delete
    8. @anon8:36
      The conclave would be invalid as to an ACTUAL pope, not a potential or material pope. Furthermore, while BASED on Divine Law, Cum Ex is not dogmatic, but disciplinary.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  10. Who ordained Father DePauw to the priesthood?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon6:27
      Fr. DePauw was ordained by His Excellency Bishop Honoré Coppieters, Ordinary of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Ghent, Belgium. Bishop Coppieters was born in 1874, ordained a priest in 1896, and consecrated a bishop by papal mandate of Pope Pius XI on May 15, 1927.

      He ordained Fr. Gommar A. DePauw to the Holy Priesthood (having obtained a papal dispensation to be ordained at 23 years old--below the canonical age of 24)
      on Low Sunday, April 12, 1942.

      Bishop Coppieters went to Judgement on December 20, 1947.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. Did Father DePauw express an opinion about Bishop Coppieters?

      Delete
    3. @anon1:06
      That he was a good and holy bishop and solidly anti-Modernist.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  11. I find one learns how to tune things out or else to make use of them by offering up one's irritation even as one goes about tolerating everything because one has to.

    ReplyDelete
  12. If somebody needs to dispose of religious items, and there is no way to burn them, bury them, or give them away, can the person throw them in the garbage?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon5:28
      No. Keep them in a drawer someplace neatly in a box, or in a space in a closet. Blessed items are consecrated to the service of God and must never be profaned by throwing them in the trash.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. I meant if the person cannot keep the religious items in their possession, because of the danger of desecration(the person is in a difficult situation), and the person really can't burn them, bury them, or give them away.

      Delete
    3. What should the person do about disposing of these religious items? The person has nowhere safe to store the items, and they really can't give them away, burn that, or bury them.

      Delete
    4. Mail them to a Traditionalist Chapel to dispose of them properly.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  13. Movies used to be emulated by the hats code but I red some of the “donts” and the hays code was terrible for this one thing


    It says not to give wilful offence to any creed which is an attack on the social kingship of Christ. Who must be recognised even in movies and placed above the wicked demonic idols of other creeds.

    A good movie should mock Mahomet and b***ha (it’s not good to say the name of demons) and all the other insufferable demonic scum.

    ReplyDelete