The US Election—Fools Rush In

This expands on first reactions posted on Facebook this morning. There is a lot to take in this morning.

Radio 4 was quietly but obviously confused when I awoke this morning. The result surprises me but does not surprise me as well: I thought the early voting would clinch it for Clinton but on the other hand the last few years have seen the political order in both Church and state upended across the globe: Brexit, Pope Francis, Duterte—a real mixed bag.

Trump has been politically toxic; Clinton is morally terminal. Now we must see if Trump can keep the promises which truly count. Forget the wall; it will never happen. But defunding Planned Parenthood: that could happen, especially now that it seems certain that Trump will be able to work with Republican House and Senate. It would not take much to do. If he got that done quickly, and endangered those dark satanic mills of sanitised slaughter, then one might begin to have some hope. Perhaps too he might calm Putin down, abate the pace of Russian posturing and aggression, and restore some stability to the geopolitical situation.

Someone, I forgot who, predicted Trump would not do much in office and leave the work of ruling mostly to Vice-President Pence. Good idea. If Trump were to surround himself with an A-1 team, this might turn out very well indeed.

This is the thing to look at now: his team. If President-elect Trump were to pick the best and most able of ministers and advisers, and give them leeway to get things done efficiently, painlessly and justly, we may find this nasty shock turn into a pleasant surprise. If he exhibits schoolboy impetuosity and intervenes at whim, then we are probably sunk.

With Clinton, her actions would have been totally predictable. Social engineering of almost Macchiavellian quality, un-Christian moral stances made the norm, the Church and the Christian voice in general increasingly marginalised and, in legal terms, persecuted. She would have furthered the secret agenda of Wall Street, in whose pay she clearly is. On foreign policy, she would have continued the often disastrous interventionism in places where the US (and the West) should have acted with greater reserve and discretion, and the catastrophic failure to act where we should have, not least in defence of the Christians and other minorities being slaughtered by Daesh. The US failure has allowed Putin to step in a Christian saviour, and that is worrying. Clinton accepted large donations from such countries at Qatar, who are well-known to have funded Daesh/IS.

The general disenchantment with the smug political establishment has reached a zenith today. The liberals have only themselves to blame for this. Take the aggressive program of social indoctrination and engineering surrounding the transgender issue, with such lunacies as “gender”-free toilets, and the whole of the militant LGBT etc agenda, which has actually harmed the prospects of sane and sensible homosexual people who seek to live their lives in peace and quiet and not impose their socio-political agenda on the world, making the world victims in a sort militant LGBT etc vendetta against a society that for a long time did not accept their sexual behaviour. The problem with revenge, and making the most of power when you get it to impose your will on others, is that it inevitably inspires a counter-reaction, often far worse than what had once obtained. Many fools rushed in to revile and mock Trump (and he can be mockable, to be sure), and to burn bridge after bridge in their relationship with him. Now what are they going to do?

The election of Pope Francis needs to be seen in this light. It was a reaction against the very forces that worked against Pope Benedict time and time again. Accepting Hans Küng’s faulty analysis that Ratzinger was a liberal made conservative by the student unrest on 1968, many have held Ratzinger to have been a traitor to the progressive cause, having claimed him as one of its leading lights. These forces were as active in the Vatican curia as they were in the religious orders and western liberal dioceses. Their manoeuvring has won them Pope Francis, who is moving to realign radically the nature and work of the Curia. The liberals are not too worried about that as he is largely amenable to their agenda in his apparent humanism.

But the next pope… I wonder. Another tsunami washing away the status quo? A reaction against the confusion and liberal machinations that have prospered over the last three years? Pope Burke? Everyone laughed at the prospect of President Trump, and now they are laughing on the other side of their posteriors. A Pope Burke is not so impossible now, especially given the vigorously renewed prosecution of the liberal agenda in the Church, from liturgy to morality. It will surely provoke a backlash. The battle is already engaged over the reception of Vatican II, and, in scholarly terms at least, the liberals are losing it.

After Francis’ election, I called him the pope of our punishment. Trump will be the president of our punishment. Punishment can be retributive, but it can also be medicinal. Let us pray that medicine triumphs over retribution. Much will depend on the team Trump chooses. Something now to be praying fervently for.

Yes; I just ended a sentence with a preposition. No status quo is safe now.


6 thoughts on “The US Election—Fools Rush In

    1. Any good hardly balances the patent evil of abortion. The Church would happily provide counselling, support and adoption services, as it does in so many places. Hitler brought full employment to Germany; that does not in any way balance the evil he did. And before people get hysterical: this is an analogy.

      PP has lots of supporters among Democrats. The rich ones, like multi-millionaire Clintons, could always cough up some of their money if they feel strongly about it.

      Liked by 1 person

  1. Will there be a successor to Pope Francis ? St. Malachy and Nostradamus both seem to claim this is the final Pope.

    And numerous other links!

    With Benedict XVI did we not feel that at last we were going to get on track with the exigencies of Vatican II with regard to the celebration of the sacred liturgy?

    Yesterday we celebrated our Community annual Mass for our Deceased Religious and Benefactors. Here’s a turn up for the books: this concelebrated Mass for the Dead [Missa Defunctorum] was offered in GREEN vestments !!!!!!!!!!!

    Things go from bad to worse and, of course, should I say anything negative about this… I would become the Forty-first Martyr of England & Wales.

    A prominent liturgist remarked:
    That is not good, but better days will come. Or the world will end. ☺


    1. Salve Bro Tony!

      There is a Roman tradition that the first Jesuit pope will be the last pope, and thus tends to support ST M and Nostra.

      You have all my sympathy regarding your Mass for the Dead in green vestments. I was celebrant for our equivalent Mass and ensured I was in black, no doubt to the horror of some of my own brethren. You are right to avoid martyrdom by brethren; and let’s face it, there are increasingly more opportunities for martyrdom as militant Islam closes in on Europe in one form or another.

      For now, we must hold fast to what we can and invest our hope in the (relatively near) future. Offer it all up; it is a white martyrdom. It is always darkest before the dawn, or to echo your liturgist, before the bright flash or Armageddon… or should it be Trumpageddon? I have upped my frequency at confession this year. Just saying…

      Pax et bonum!

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.