Yes, the Vikings sacrificed children!

“In the wells they found bone remnants of five people — four of them were small children aged 4 to 7.”

and sold their ‘fellow whites’ to the Asians as slaves

Many slaves were sold to the Arab Caliphate because of the high demand. Many European Christians and Pagans were sold to them by the Vikings.”

and they raped nuns, some of whom were children too (see below)

anyone looking up to such murderers, rapists, thieves and traitors is an idiot.
There was no noble Pagan, it was a cult of rape and child murder. This is why God ended their ‘culture’.
Same with Germany:

Then again they’re still denying the Red Army rapes so

Don’t hold your breath.

The Bible says not to suffer child murderers to live. Don’t glorify them in media bullshit.

Between the months of January and August of 1945, Germany saw the largest incident of mass rape known in history, where an estimated two million German women were raped by the Soviet Red Army soldiers, as written by Walter Zapotoczny Jr. in his book, ‘Beyond Duty: The Reason Some Soldiers Commit Atrocities’.

Between the months of April and May, the German capital Berlin saw more than 100,000 rape cases according to hospital reports, while East Prussia, Pomerania and Silesia saw more than 1.4 million rape cases.

Hospital reports also stated that abortion operations were being carried out daily across all German hospitals.

Natalya Gesse, who was a Soviet war correspondent at the time, said that the Soviets didn’t care about the ages of their victims. “The Russian soldiers were raping every German female from eight to eighty. It was an army of rapists,” she said.

This caused the deaths of no less than 200,000 girls and women due to the spread of diseases, especially that many eyewitnesses recounted victims being raped as much as 70 times in that period.

They can also die of heart attack from the stress or bleeding out from injuries. This happened to a teenage girl in the stadium during Katrina. This is why women consider rape worse than murder because it’s like murder with extra steps. If you survive, the prize is often infertility and lifelong trauma.

Red Army soldiers would mass rape German women as a kind of revenge against their enemy: The German army. They felt that it was their earned right to do so as the German army had ‘violated’ their motherland by invading it. In addition to not being in contact with women for long periods causing their animal instinct to be heightened.

No, they were Satanists. That’s why they also targeted virgin adults and children.

“Our fellows were so sex-starved,” a Soviet major told a British journalist at the time, “that they often raped old women of sixty, seventy or even eighty – much to these grandmothers’ surprise, if not downright delight.”

blue balls does not exist, you have hands
also, by definition nobody wants to be raped

and little boys have holes too, which is never mentioned
I find it hard to believe they raped no little boys

In his book, Zapotoczny said that even female Russian soldiers did not disapprove of the rapes, some finding it amusing.

Because they were Satanists.

In 1948, rape cases decreased vastly after Soviet troops were ordered back to their camps in Russia and left residential areas in Germany.

And nothing was ever done. When feminists speak of rape culture, sometimes they have a point. Those pinkos should be swinging. There is no excuse to act like an animal. Boys will be boys isn’t a real historical phrase, it was translated as children will be children. Sowing wild oats myths lead to this sexual emergency bullshit. Enabling rapists is a sign your country abandoned God long beforehand.

You can tell the Vikings were rapists because the PC MSM is calling them model immigrants now:

It was recorded but people try to say it was a metaphor despite literally moving them because of raids.

Quoted in full:

Introduction- The differing viewpoints of scholars about the motives for nuns entering convents and the nuns’ conduct in those nunneries during the Medieval Era-

One viewpoint concerning the early Middle Ages argues that consecrated women in convents prized virginity more than life-

Discussion of whether the tales of medieval nuns defacing themselves to avoid rape were literally true or hagiographic exemplars-

Women who remained virgins were given the Church’s highest regard- they were considered to be elevated to men’s status-

Becoming a nun was also an honorable way to avoid marriage and dangerous childbirth- for some it was a way to obtain an education-

Nuns with strong characters could become prioresses and attain power-

Convents were supposed to be havens of safety for women but the times were violent-

The nobility made attacks on convents but the worst attacks were made by Vikings, Magyars and Saracens-

Strong laws were passed, making the rape of a nun more serious than the rape of other women- discussion concerning the laws- [we call that a hate crime]

Numbers of convents moved inside city walls for safety– a discussion of the raids made on convents during the early Medieval era and the making of more English martyrs-

Convents often burned by invaders in the 9th and 10th Centuries with the nuns inside burned alive

Several accounts of nuns cutting off their noses and sometimes their upper lip during the early Middle Ages to keep invaders from raping them- the nuns were able to die with their virginity intact-

It is not known if the chronicles which reported these stories are true- a discussion of the cases in those chronicles-

An extended discussion of more devices used by women to avoid marriage and keep their virginity-

Nunneries in the later Medieval Era and the question of nuns’ sexual transgressions and breaking their vows of celibacy-

The reliable accounts of women leaving their convents, living with lovers and being brought back- some nuns fled several times- a focus on English nunneries-

The sources that provide records of nuns’ sexual transgressions and breaking vows of virginity and celibacy- literature of the time, general statements from Church councils and the most reliable source- Bishops’ Registers-

There was an active minority of nuns who did not keep their vows-

The Catholic Church was sex-negative- celibacy was difficult for people who had a religious vocation- many nuns did not- the clerics and chaplains eager to have sexual relations with nuns- most cases of sexual transgressions point to clerics-

Many nuns who kept their vows of celibacy were afflicted with psychological disturbances-

Many nuns had freedom to come and go from their convents- they were exposed to the temptations of the outer world- visitors came and went freely- the outside world did not prize virginity as much as the Church-

Many nuns were accepted into convents because their wealthy families donated a large sum of money when the women entered the nunnery- many English convents were in need of money-

A discussion of nuns who left their convent and vows- specific cases of transgressing nuns and the attempts of the Church to bring them back and give them ‘penances’-

An extended discussion of the Church and State coalescing in forcing nuns to return to their convents-

Convents in the 16th, 17th, and 18th Centuries- emphasis on Italian and French monasteries-

Clerics continued to be nuns’ lovers, but now a group of fashionable young men, called ‘monachini’, courted nuns-

Many nuns in convents ignored other nuns’ affairs or helped them to try to avoid a public scandal-

Children born to straying nuns- death rate of all children was high but illegitimate children who lived were not considered with dishonor in that era- priests and some nuns willed money to their illegitimate children-

During the Renaissance, family wealth patrilineal, passed from father to son- daughters took the wealth out of families because they needed dowries which moved money to their husbands’ families-

Parents who tried to retain wealth in their families often sent young daughters to convents to become nuns-

An extended discussion about the fact that such wealthy young women were unwilling to become nuns and had no vocation- no motivation to remain virgins or keep vows of celibacy-

Statistics which prove most of the city convents of Europe housed mainly young women and a few widows from wealthy and noble families- the amount of the donations given by the families- an extended discussion-

An extended discussion of the use of luxurious living in Renaissance convents and lack of rules for the nuns- public outrage at the sexual freedom of the convents– specific accusations against certain convents in the 1400’s and 1500’s- statistics concerning particulars of court cases brought involving sexual transgressions-

An extended discussion of the inhumane system that imprisoned unwilling young women in convents- how some nuns received an excellent education and were able to voice their discontents in their writings- specific authors discussed-

Critiques of the system by male authors and some prelates-

The convents in Northern Europe began to be closed as the Protestant Reformation gained hegemony-

The Catholic Church also tried to conduct some reforms- fathers were urged to leave wealth to daughters as well as sons-

Conclusion- How the Church still represses its nuns in the present day and its attempts to do away with birth control and abortion-


References to the books and articles cited in this talk may be found at the end of the written lecture in the Bibliography at

The history of celibacy and the Christian religion, most specifically the Catholic faith, is well known.  Christianity is a sex negative religion.  But when historians write about sex, celibacy and the convents of the Medieval Era, several different viewpoints emerge, viewpoints which seem to be conflicting in many aspects.  The history of women in convents during the Middle Ages appears to consist of different perspectives about nuns’ reasons for entering religious retreats and their conduct after they had taken vows of celibacy.  I do not believe some of the scholars who write from different frames of reference about women and the convents are wrong.  There is not one answer, but rather varied historical perspectives.  Therefore I have decided to discuss the most salient approaches and then try to reconcile the contradictions by arriving at a middle point.

The first argument, that women prized their virginity to the point of committing self-mutilation when it was threatened, is the most contested one.  Most of the narratives about the heroic defense of virginity by monastic women have come down to us from the early Middle Ages. The most pressing question for the contemporary historian is whether the tales are historically true. There are scholars who argue that the stories narrating the defense of virginity were not literally true. Those experts believe the stories are fictive exemplars meant to inspire women with the desire to guard their virginity at all costs.  [scholars, huh?]

Other researchers argue that the tales had a hagiographic intent- to elevate the saintly women and demonstrate their heroic character. Hagiographies may be defined as idealizing biographies of saints’ lives. Still other writers state that some of the narratives might be literally true. [they were]

Women had different motives for entering convents in the early Middle Ages and later. If you recall from previous lectures at, women who remained virgins were considered superior to those who embraced marriage and child-bearing. Virgins were believed to have elevated themselves to spiritual equality with men.  The Church Father, Jerome (347-420 CE), told virginal women that they had become men. Men were considered superior to women and Jerome believed he was paying virgins a compliment. [nowadays online they’d pretend to pity such women and dare call this ‘traditional’ but not everyone wants to ride a diseased dick due to social pressure, actually]

Convents offered other benefits to women than the ability to retain virginity and to reap a future of heavenly rewards.  The Medieval Era was the first time women had an honorable alternative to marriage, which was often forced on them.  Taking nun’s vows was a respectable way to avoid the very real pain and danger of childbirth.  Depending on the convent, some nuns were able to avail themselves of the resources to attain an excellent education. Most women of that era remained in painful ignorance, unable to read or write. Nuns with strong characters were able to achieve some degree of independence, power and autonomy. Later in the lecture, I shall be discussing the social and economic advantages a noble and/or wealthy family achieved when it placed a young daughter in a convent.  Such families sent their frequently unwilling young women into convents by paying “donations” to have them accepted.

Nunneries were supposedly a haven for consecrated virgins, places to protect women from “spiritual wolves.”  The reality that can be gleaned from chronicles, laws, councils, charters and from saints’ lives is that the convents and the nuns who lived in them were very often vulnerable to violence, rape and plunder during the early Middle Ages. Royalty and nobility alike frequently attacked nunneries and monasteries, plundering them of valuables, killing monks and nuns, raping and abducting nuns and burning their buildings down. Strict laws against the violence were passed, but even when the nobility was deterred from attacking convents and monasteries, there remained many outside threats.  Vikings, Magyars and Saracen invaders made repeated and devastating incursions on religious establishments.

The canon laws of various areas often provided greater penalties for those who dishonored, abducted, violated or killed women who were “consecrated to god.”  The Lombard laws from 713 to 735 CE carried a heavier fine for violence or abduction of a consecrated virgin. The penalty was twice the amount fined for abducting another man’s betrothed lover. The laws of Alfred, 871-99 CE, also levied twice the amount of the fine for seizing a “nun by her clothes or by her breast” than for committing the same crime against a laywoman.  Since the nuns were the “betrothed or brides of Christ,” the offense was believed to be much more severe. [oh look, a real patriarchal approach to rape law]

Another index to the precarious position of female communities was the number of convents that were moved from the outskirts of urban areas to within the city walls. Sometimes the convents were even built inside castles, or were heavily fortified. Such convents sometimes served as refuges for other nuns fleeing their besieged communities. [I’m sure the Vikings just stole things though and never touched them, sure! That sounds logical! /sarc becuase you’d spend all that money relocating people in no real danger!]

But nuns’ convents continued to suffer repeated attacks during the early Middle Ages. The women’s response was similar to the monks who suffered invasion of their monasteries.  They fled when they could, taking their relics with them.  If they were in haste and had to leave quickly, they hid or buried their relics. If they were unable to escape in time, they attempted, sometimes successfully, to hide themselves.

Jane Tibets Schulenburg has researched the data from Knowles and Haddock’s “Medieval Religious Houses: England and Wales.” She has discovered that “…at least forty-one monasteries for women were destroyed by the Viking invaders.” By the time of the Norman Conquest in 1066 CE, there were only nine houses for women that were still in existence in Britain.  Some of those convents had been built in unfortunate locations. One was situated at the same spot which was a favorite landing place for Danes and apparently suffered repeated attacks from the invaders. [keep simping tho]

Schulenberg explains that nuns who were killed when their convents were invaded provided the church with a new generation of martyrs.  There is a list of consecrated women who were put to death by invaders in the 9th and 10th Centuries.  Sources state that Barking Abbey, situated in the east of England, was destroyed by the Danes in 870 CE.  Apparently all the nuns living in that convent were burned alive along with their building. There were other convents destroyed by Danes as well during those years. The clichéd picture of nuns safely praying, working and singing in quiet cloisters is belied by the historical facts. Convents were frequently in grave danger during the early Middle Ages, particularly in England and Wales, but also in France and other nations. [burning the evidence]

There are three well known cases on record of nuns acting to protect their virginity when their cloisters were invaded and one about a virgin who did not wish to be married. The curious and extraordinary tales were related by the chroniclers of the era.  The first three cases all relate to the self-disfiguration of nuns suffering armed incursions on their convents. Such invaders were not only given to violence, but of rape as well. Nuns during that era believed that the worst fate that could befall them was to lose their status as intact virgins. Their solution to what they deemed was their very real peril was to choose to die, which most likely would have been their fate in any case. However, according to the chronicles and hagiographic literature of the times, the consecrated women went to their death with their virginity intact.  They achieved this by self-mutilation.

Before I discuss the nuns’ response to the threat of losing their “heroic virginity,” I would like to comment on the literature of the time. Most of the accounts of such remarkable self harm were written less for historical accuracy than for the purpose of educating and encouraging others.  The tales were meant to inspire readers with the example of saintly women who suffered extraordinary trials. It is important to keep in mind that even though there are some kernels of historic truth embedded in the stories, they are also rich in exaggeration and fantasy. Le Goff has noted that the tales are especially valuable “for providing information about the collective consciousness, the mental structures of society.” We can learn about the beliefs of those medieval societies by examining the tales that were current at the time. We can also discover the peoples’ customs, concerns and values because those structures were mirrored in their narratives. [sounds like the excuses for the Satanic Panic – it still happened]

The question that continues to give rise to disagreement in the present day is whether the alleged lengths the consecrated women took to preserve their virginity are true or simply fantasy.  There must be a small kernel of reality within the tales and chronicles, but scholars remain divided about the credibility question. We cannot know for sure if any of the stories about the nuns who self-mutilated when invaded are historically accurate. [they were targeted, moved, and still burned alive tho – and you’re questioning that reaction??? appeal to incredulity from men centuries later is NOT AN ARGUMENT]

The first reported case of heroic self-mutilation was in 783 CE at the monastery of St. Cyr.  St. Cyr was situated near Marseilles, France.  The abbess of the nunnery was the virgin, Eusebia.  When so-called infidels were on the verge of breaking into the cloister, she addressed her fellow consecrated virgins, who like her, cared much more to preserve their virginity than their lives.  She planned, she said, to cut off her nose and encouraged her nuns to do the same. She told them that this self-mutilation would enrage the barbarians and quell their sexual passions.  The stories claim that all the nuns cut off their noses and that the barbarians massacred all forty of them, who continued to pray to Christ until they died. It may be seen from this tale, as well as the others that follow, how important virginity was considered in the early Medieval Christian world.  The story of the steadfast nuns was told to all young virgins entering the order. [but go ahead and gaslight us about it, bro, thanks]

The arguably best known case of self-disfigurement to preserve virginity was that of St. Ebba and her nuns at the monastery of Coldingham.  Ebba, the prioress at that cloister, came from royal blood, and was the daughter of the King of Northumbria. The abbey was situated in an isolated area of Scottish Coast which faced the North Sea. The Danish invaders were particularly active around that period, circa 870 CE. 

The Danes had the reputation of cutting the throats of anyone, young or old, whom they encountered. The chronicle states that they “shamefully entreated holy matrons and virgins.”

St. Ebba gathered her nuns together, the story goes, and explained that the barbarians were very near.  She told them about the savage deeds the invaders were known to perpetrate. As in the previous tales, the chronicles emphasize that St. Ebba was acting to preserve all the consecrated women’s chastity.  One hagiographer stated unequivocally that the women’s act was an example to be practiced by all succeeding virgins forever. Ebba took up a razor and cut off her nose, after which all her nuns did the same.  When the invaders came the next morning, they were horrified by the sight of the mutilated, blood-stained women and left quickly.  Before their retreat, however, they burned the entire abbey, with the nuns inside. The chronicler ended with the statement that Ebba and her holy virgins had attained “the glory of martyrdom.”

The third case of self-mutilation was the narrative of the medieval Spanish monastery of St. Florentine, which housed about three hundred nuns.  Fearful of losing the virginity they had cherished for so many years, the celibate women lacerated their faces before Saracen invaders could rape them.  When the “Moors” saw those bloody faces, they became horrified and angry, ending by killing all the women with their swords. The chronicler of that incident stated that “to the halo and crown of virginity was added that of martyrdom.” [I imagine the guys blaming rape victims for wearing a skirt would be horrified if all women cut off our noses and took to wearing trousers. We already do the latter. They have no blame to shift when it’s a child or man though. Funny that.]

The last tale is not about a nunnery, but of a simple woman, the Blessed Oda, who died in 1158. Oda had dedicated herself to virginity and Christ, but her parents had no regard for her wishes. They made wedding arrangements for her.  At the wedding ceremony, Oda stated she would not have the groom, or any man, as a husband, as she had already chosen her heavenly spouse, Christ. Leaving the upended ceremony, she returned to her home and prayed to Christ in her mother’s bedroom. The chronicler stated that Oda was very afraid of her father and what he would do to her. She took up a sword she saw hanging from the head of the bed, and hacked off her nose.

The chronicler declared that Oda preferred to mar her beauty rather than live a worthless, secular life. He went on to praise other young virgins who had acted decisively when their chastity was threatened. He claimed that those young maidens killed themselves with swords, jumped from precipices, or drowned themselves. Oda lived, and became a nun and prioress of an abbey. [she doesn’t want your dick, dude]

There was a history of facial mutilation even prior to the Middle Ages. The Germanic law codes specified cutting off the noses and lips of certain law breakers. The punishment was most often applied to women who had violated regulations concerning sexual behavior. Schulenberg argues that the penalty was sex-specific and served as a deterrent to women, as well as a punishment.  The disfigurement of a woman’s beauty guaranteed she would no longer engage in adultery, promiscuity, or prostitution. During the early Middle Ages, disfiguring facial injuries were common, either through injuries or punishments.  The practice would have been known to young women who were determined to preserve their threatened virginity. [but some creeps are incredulous a woman somewhere doesn’t want them like in porn, reddit has deleted threads about this]

The most common and obvious threat to a young virgin’s chastity was her parents’ desire to marry her to a man. The chronicles of the time are replete with miraculous tales of young women being saved from marriage and loss of virginity by the intervention of some type of disfigurement, such as loss of an eye, total blindness, leprosy, tumors and so on.  When the virgins had been freed from the threat of marriage, some of them became cured of their sicknesses or disabilities. [psychosomatic?]

Some young virgins, without becoming consecrated nuns, wore nuns’ veils to hide their beauty. Around 774 CE, it was said that two young Lombard sisters found an amusing and dramatic solution to their threatened rape by Avar invaders. They placed raw chickens inside the band between their breasts. The girls’ flesh and heat rendered the chickens’ bodies putrid and they gave off a horrible smell. The Avars cursed but spared the sisters, deciding that Lombard women smelled very bad.

Were any of the tales told about women preserving their virginity true? It is difficult to be sure. Schulenberg believes that there is some truth to a few of them.  But what is certain is that the religious and cultural priority of that age was virginity.  The women who had consecrated themselves to Christ were in deadly fear not of death, but of losing their virginity. Their motives for undertaking such drastic measures as self-mutilation must be understood.

In most cases, the nuns would have had time to think ahead before having to face their invaders. They would have been forced to come to a decision about their options to avoid rape, which were limited.

 Suicide was not a choice, as a number of theologians did not believe that people were allowed to commit suicide in order to preserve their chastity. But self-disfigurement, cutting off one’s nose and sometimes the upper lip as well, was not only allowed, but praised. The women of that age had already been conditioned by being told over and over that virginity was not always possible to preserve without martyrdom. Women who mutilated their faces would also ensure their reputations by committing such drastic acts.  It was certain that no one could suggest or claim that they had been willing victims to their rape. [willing…. victims….. what. Did they try to ‘what was she wearing’ literal nuns?!]

The nuns who decided to mutilate their faces must have decided that they had little choice but to do so, as it was certain that the  barbarians would act in one of two ways. They would be set upon raping and killing the nuns when they entered the convent, which was their accustomed behavior.  But if they saw bloody women with their noses and sometimes upper lips removed, they would not wish to rape them, but simply become enraged and kill them immediately. If the nuns died intact, they would remain spouses of Christ, with a special place reserved for them in heaven.  They had been taught that if they lost their virginity, they would not be suitable for Christ’s bridal chamber, perhaps not even be suitable for admission into heaven. [does that apply to child rape victims too? which passage was that?]

St. Jerome (347-420 CE) had warned chaste women: “…Unless you use violence, you will not take the kingdom of heaven.” He was speaking about violence to the self in order to preserve virginity.  Quite typically of the era, he did not mention or seem to care what would happen in the afterlife to devout and blameless wives and husbands.   [traditionally, marriage doesn’t buy you a ticket to Heaven, quite the opposite, but America is marriage-mad and acts like it cleanses you somehow]

Marriage was denigrated in favor of virginity and considered to be a lower state; it was chastity and virginity that were the prized attributes of the early Christian church. Virginity was considered a “higher life,” but one that could not be attained and continued without struggle.

The question remains an open one about the stories concerning women’s self-disfigurement in the early Middle Ages.  Were they fact, fiction, or as one scholar believes, hagiographic models? It is impossible to be sure. But virginity and the need to preserve it had a strong hold on the collective religious consciousness of the era. Schulenberg concludes: “Despite the cost, these brides of Christ were not to be denied the meaning of their existence, nor their just rewards for perseverance in virginal perfection.  After all of their years of practice, they were not about to miss the biblical joys of singing with the 144,000 virgins the song they alone could sing.” (This passage from Revelation is controversial. Some theologians insist that the 144,000 virgins would be Jewish men.) [because the etymology of virgin is male in that passage – slutty men all burn in Hell – baptism purifies the soul, it doesn’t change your medical status]

Now I would like to turn to a controversial topic that concerns nuns during the later Medieval Era. The fact of the immorality of many nuns who resided in convents is sometimes denied or evaded, but there is definite evidence from several sources for the accusation. This portion of the lecture will focus on English nunneries, because to expand the text to include Italy and France is beyond our time limits.  As the medieval era advanced into the early Renaissance, the refined sensuality of the Italian, Spanish and French cultures became more widespread and crept into the nunneries of those countries. Young men, called monachini, actually frequented areas near convents or visited them openly, becoming the lovers of some of the willing nuns.

The convents of England were never quite so refined, but there is definite proof that there were violations of the vow of celibacy taken by all nuns.  The tales of the earlier Medieval era, of nuns cutting off their noses to avoid rape, might well have been hagiographic fabrications meant to encourage young women to cherish their virginity at all costs. The truth concerning the moral state of the nunneries, whether English, our focus, or Italian or French, is well documented. The sources are (1) the literary works of the time, (2) the general statements from Church councils, and (3) most importantly, the Bishops’ Registers. The Bishops’ Registers contain the accounts of visitations they or their representatives made to the various convents and the injunctions issued that followed those visits.

In addition, the registers contain the special mandates ordering inquiry into a scandal, searches for apostates and accounts of penances placed on sinners. According to Eileen Power, if a register is particularly complete, one may form a fairly accurate estimate of the moral condition of all the nunneries in a diocese at a particular time. York and Lincoln have long and almost unbroken series of registers, so the financial condition, moral state and other particulars of those areas’ convents may be traced over many years. There are also the Papal Registers. When the Pope sent out a petition in favor of a particular nun or heard rumors about the deteriorating state of a nunnery, the facts were recorded. However, papal letters on such topics are rare.

It is impossible to garner a complete history of the convents of the later Middle Ages. We have only a small portion of the recorded cases of sexual transgression. Some transgressions were never exposed. Some were hushed up and others have been buried in unpublished or lost Registers. 

At the same time, it is important not to fall into exaggeration about the extent of sexual transgressions in the nunneries of that era. The transgressors stand out, but undoubtedly, most nuns kept to their vows of chastity.

One must understand the plight of the transgressing women and regard them with sympathy. Religious hypocrisy is known to be so common that it is easy for the secular mind of the present day to dismiss the nuns’ behavior with some cynicism.  But those women were faced with difficult challenges and temptations.  The first challenge for them was the fact that celibacy is not a natural condition for the vast majority of humans. When the early Church adopted its stance of sex-negativity and insistence on clerical celibacy, it gave rise to many human tragedies.  Celibacy is an unnatural state which is best undertaken by unusual people with unusual goals.  Scholars who have researched the monastic orders have come to the conclusion that the medieval monks and nuns who comprised their numbers were for the most part, average people.  The same was true for the clerics of the Church. [disagree, being an animal is unnatural, self-control makes us human beings you filthy degenerates tarnishing the whole species to excuse your own weakness]

Quite frequently, clerics did not live a life of celibacy during that era. For several centuries, priests continued to keep mistresses and concubines in the face of Church disapproval and frequently against its rules.  In addition, there were many clerks and chaplains who were unattached. Those men were sometimes connected to a church, a chantry or to a wealthy person’s chapel and formed what has been described as an “ecclesiastical proletariat.” All the men had taken a vow of chastity.  But scholars who have looked into the criminal records of the Middle Ages have found how often such men were accused in cases of rape and other crimes. 

There was also widespread suspicion that monks in monasteries continued to consort with women. Some nuns were easy prey for the seducers. The unchanging routine, the hardships of monasticism, and the financial difficulties of the nunneries were frustrating for some consecrated women. 

Many women who kept their vows of celibacy suffered psychological difficulty.  The mystical visions which gave them such intense joy and intense suffering were likely to have been sexual in nature. Even the imagery of those visions was sexually based- the brides of Christ drank from his breast, were pierced with shafts of lightening and so on.  The nuns were bereft of the natural human outlet of sexual intercourse and most of them had no interests or employments that produced enjoyment for them. In the last section of the lecture, we shall be glancing at the many young and unwilling women who were forced to enter convents and take celibate vows. Their youth would have occasioned a natural tendency to have sexual desires.  If women with true vocations had been the only ones to take vows to retain their virginity, there would have been far less cases of sexual transgression in convents.

There was more opportunity for nuns who wanted to stray from their vows during the Middle Ages. An important contribution to nuns’ breaking their vows was the extent of the temptations they were exposed to. Nuns during that era were not really confined to their convents, which exercised little restraint on the movements of their members. Consecrated women paid visits to their relatives and friends, went to feasts and other celebrations, heard the love songs of the wandering minstrels, and the popular songs, often sexual ditties, sung in the public streets.

The nuns might have been harrowed day and night with the praises of celibacy in their convents, but despite the Church’s verbal attacks on sex, virginity was not often praised by many laywomen or the general public. Lip service was paid to it, but ordinary people eschewed celibacy. While walking on the city streets, nuns were exposed to the rowdy behavior of the working classes, where sex, both gross and good humored, was quite often on show. They witnessed the more subtle but more tempting charms of the chivalry practiced by the upper classes.   The nuns were also able to observe at close hand the life of women on the outside.  Many convents had guest rooms that were full of visitors where the monastic women saw the visiting ladies’ lovely dresses, jewels, and pet dogs.  They were aware that some of those fine ladies had lovers.  Some of the nuns, especially the young ones, surely would have wanted to copy those ladies in all ways.

There was still danger to the virginal nuns’ chastity from forays of the Scots in the north, and from the general lawlessness and violence of the time.  The grinding poverty of many nunneries, particularly in England and Northern Europe, along with the concomitant necessity of earning money, made for worldly thinking and behavior. The registers and other documents reveal the precarious financial condition of some of those convents. The convents often tried to improve their finances by accepting young women indiscriminately.  The girls’ families were expected to provide a large donation when they placed their daughters in the nunneries.

To sum up, there were three important factors that tempted nuns to put aside their vows of celibacy. (1) The first factor was the glaring fact that celibacy was unnatural to most people and attempting to follow that ideal was extremely difficult. (2) Young women and some older ones, for example, widows, were often accepted, and even recruited, into convents, because of the large donations made by their families. A number of those women were not suited to the celibate life, either because of their nature or their lack of vocation. (3) Many of the convents of the time were not well enough withdrawn from the temptations and social disorder of the outside world.

I would like to relate some of the stories about nuns’ abandoning their vows. Such cases created difficulties for the forsworn nuns, their convents, the clerical authorities, and sometimes the city government. For example, the 1290 Register of Bishop Sutton of Lincoln contains a notice of excommunication passed against those who had made off with a certain Agnes of Sheen, a nun from Godstow.  The Bishop’s notice explained that Agnes and another nun were peacefully driving home to Godstow in a carriage that belonged to their order. But in the middle of the King’s Highway at Wycombe, certain “sons of perdition” attacked the carriage and seized the unwilling Agnes, carrying her off. However, in 1291, the Bishop made a different announcement.  He charged Agnes of Sheen and Joan of Carru, both nuns of Godstow, with casting off their habits, fleeing from their house and leading a worldly and dissolute life. They were scandalizing the neighborhood where they resided. The Bishop not only excommunicated both nuns, but all those who had helped them!

Eileen Power is quite sure that nuns who broke their vows were always willing partners of the men they made off with.

She explains that few men would be courageous enough to rape a Bride of Christ.  The first section of the lecture described the Viking and Saracen invaders’ rape of nuns, but it is important to remember that they were foreigners. British citizens would be reluctant to face the wrath of their own Church by raping an unwilling nun.  The nuns and their lovers might fool a Bishop for a time, but after more investigation, they were usually exposed. In the end, the Bishops discovered that the so-called abducted nuns were usually part of the plot.  Alleged abductions of nuns were in reality elopements of nuns.

Not all the nuns who transgressed committed such drastic acts as elopements. Some of the more discreet women would meet their lovers secretly in the convent or even outside the convent during the visits they were allowed to make.  The nuns who actually threw off their habits and went to live in the outside world with their lovers had to be very brave. If one was simply caught with a lover, the penalty was a penance.  But to breach their vows and leave their convents was considered apostasy, and the penalty for apostasy was excommunication.  That meant the nuns’ souls, what they believed were immortal souls, were at risk in the next life.

Most nuns returned to their convents after some time. They were individuals caught in the net of church and state solidarity, as the Church did its best to bring the apostates home. The bishops would eventually learn what village or town the nun was hiding in and would call her helpers to appear before him. He would decree than any person who was helping the nun should desist within three days or receive a penance. The usual procedure was for the bishop to then order the straying nun to return to her convent within a week. But many wayward nuns would often return voluntarily, out of sheer terror at their own rebellion.

Once in a while, the nun and her helpers were adamant. Then the Church would simply turn to the state. The nun would be arrested.  She would either be brought or would go voluntarily before the bishop and have to plead for his absolution.  The bishop would usually grant it, and then write to the woman’s convent, ordering the authorities there to receive her as their sister, but to exact the penances laid on her. Penances might be fines, eating only bread and water for a set time, being shunned, being beaten and so on.

The prodigal nun would return to her convent, kneeling outside and begging to be admitted. This was the age of political and religious theatre, when kings who had angered popes would kneel for days outside the Vatican before receiving absolution. Not only were such spectacles a tribute and proof of the power of the Church, they were also excellent examples of what happened to disobedient rebels.

If a nun had repented breaking all her vows and voluntarily returned to her former life, the matter was generally resolved. If, however, she had been hunted down by both the religious and secular arms and forced to return to a life she had rejected, desperation was often the result.  Some nuns left their convents, were forced back, and escaped again, often fleeing several times. [what did they see?]

There was the extreme case of a consecrated woman by the name of Agnes from St. Michael’s Convent in Stamford, who left and began leading a secular life. For about ten years she was hounded and brought back to her convent, from which she continued to escape. The last record of the case occurs in about 1318 CE, when the bishop there ordered the prioress of Agnes’ convent to have her brought back and kept in custody and solitude. [trafficking]

He threatened the prioress with excommunication if she did not do her duty.  It is fairly obvious the prioress was sick to death of the Agnes affair and did not want her back.  One hopes that Agnes was able to remain living the secular life she longed for, but the story ends at that point abruptly and is never taken up again in the registers.

The records reveal that a prioress sometimes did not want a straying nun back and had to be forced to accept the reprobate because of the bishop’s threats.  It is important to keep in mind that some of the rebellious women were so determined to leave that they not only escaped to the secular life several times, but with a new lover each time. Nuns who were so alienated cannot have been a good example. They had often lived in the world for two or three years before returning and experienced adventures which piqued the interest of the other nuns. There must have been a lowering of moral tone when hardened, reprobate nuns were returned, even though many were severely punished.

I previously mentioned how the clerics- the vicars, the chaplains and the chantry priests, were the men who were most often the lovers of nuns. There were stray stewards of the convents, bailiffs of manors and other lay men, married or single, who appeared in the Bishops’ Registers as seducers or lovers of nuns. But it was the clerics, even though under vows of chastity, who were the worst offenders and partners in the poor nuns’ misdemeanors and transgressions. Those clerics, even though under a vow of chastity, often were dressed in a fashionable manner, in short tunics, peaked shoes and wide silvery belts. They had an extra advantage in that they could also absolve the sins of the nuns they tempted.

During the 16th, 17th and even into the 18th Centuries, the convents of France and Italy were haunted by the young gallants I have spoken of, the monachini, who delighted in love affairs with nuns. They were handsome, fashionable and difficult to resist. The convents of England, did not generally have such sophisticated visitors. But according to Power, the less sophisticated English nuns’ seducers in the 14th and 15th Centuries were the chaplains. They were sometimes the convents’ own chaplains and lived on the premises.  For the nun who was interested, there were many opportunities to transgress and breech her vows.

The tales and records of the shameless clerics and romantic nuns cannot hide the human tragedies buried underneath the desire of a convent to avoid a scandal. Sometimes the love affairs of a nun were ignored or even aided by fellow sisters who did not want their convent to receive an evil reputation. But the power of the Church was sometimes not strong enough to conceal the inevitable outcome of some love affairs. In those days of unsatisfactory birth control and abortion, there were children that were born as a result of the liaisons. Sometimes the nun was allowed to stay in her convent, hidden, until she gave birth.  At other times, a pregnant nun would go to any safe haven that would take her in, bear the child, and return to her nunnery.

Infant mortality was high during that era and many babies and young children died. But it was not considered a terrible dishonor to be illegitimate in that age, and surviving children often inherited in their fathers’ wills, along with legitimate children. Young men born out of wedlock were not supposed to be ordained or hold clerical positions, but dispensations could be given or bought that would allow them to hold those offices.

If a nun had money of her own through her family, she could dower a daughter.  One prioress sold the goods of her convent to provide her daughter with a dowry. Obviously prioresses that were weak or having affairs of their own were often those who had the loosest convents. It was not unknown for prioresses to give birth to children. As we know from the records, some of the women who had taken the vow of chastity gave birth to several children, sometimes with different fathers.

There was an attempt at reform in the middle of the 13th Century, but the Bishops’ Registers for the second half of that period do not seem to show much difference in recorded monastic sexual violations than during the 14th and 15th Centuries when monasticism had definitely passed its prime.  There was a steady downhill movement in its last two centuries in England alone. Henry VIII, the English King, decided to emulate the Germanic countries and establish his own church when the Pope would not grant him a divorce.  He also most likely coveted the Church’s riches.  Henry dissolved the monasteries and nunneries of England and named himself Supreme Head of the Church of England in 1531 CE.

Celibacy is unnatural and living in monasteries and nunneries, sometimes unwillingly and with no vocation for it, was an unnecessary and degrading situation for people.  It is part of the human condition to desire freedom and sexual pleasure.  Sympathy may be found for the nuns who kept their vows virtuously and quietly, as they had been taught they were living a life of superior sanctity. One can also sympathize and admire those rebels who flouted their vows and discarded their saintly habits to find the love, liberation and worldly happiness denied them by the Church.

Now I would like to turn to Renaissance monasteries and speak a little more about the convents in other countries, such as Italy.  I have given an earlier lecture about the nuns who were motivated by religious sadomasochism. (Please see “Religious Sadomasochism” at Those women starved themselves, beat themselves and tortured themselves for the purported love of god.  Many of those nuns are quite famous, such as Catherine of Sienna, for example. In other lectures, I have also mentioned well-read and creative nuns of the Middle Ages. They were willing, some of them very eager, to live out their lives in convents. But in this talk, I would like to continue with the enforced entrance into convents of women with no vocation for celibacy and no interest in holiness.

This part of the lecture necessitates a brief return to some customs of pagan Rome. I have mentioned before in this series of talks that the Roman father decided which of his infants should live or die.  The wealth of the Roman family descended patrillineally from father to son. Too many heirs would have spread the family wealth too thin, so fathers did dispose of some sons. But they allowed more sons to live than daughters. Most Roman fathers chose two daughters to live and doted on them.  Other girl children were placed for adoption to families of lower social status or left to die by exposure to the elements. [ this is what Jesus found]

The Christian father of a later age had fewer options than a pagan Roman. Infanticide was forbidden, abandonment discouraged, and oddly enough, adoption was almost unknown. But there was often family wealth that needed consolidation. Daughters required dowries that accrued to their husband’s families. However, there were safe places where young women could reside and not drain their family’s resources. 

Convents that were dedicated to the preservation of celibacy came to be considered ideal for families that did not want to or could not pay out the large sums needed for their daughters’ dowries. Fathers disposed of superfluous daughters in those convents for much of the history of Europe.

The early Middle Ages saw the creation of convents in large numbers. Young girls and widows were consigned to them. Families sent young children to them as “oblates,” and gave the nunneries a monetary donation. The donations were welcome and well-used by many convents which managed to guard their wealth.  The young girls were taken care of there and were assured of a secure future. Boys, too, were sent to monasteries as oblates, but in nowhere near the numbers of girls who were sent to nunneries.  Widows, wives and sisters in need of asylum were also delivered to the convents. This lecture has earlier discussed the violence of the time and some convents were fortified and safe. The system worked well, but there was always difficulty because of women who were not suited for celibacy. By the time of the Renaissance, convents in cities, built there because they were safer, added to the number of nunneries already built in agrarian areas.

According to Margaret L. King, whose statistics I am using, a great many of the Renaissance convents, very likely the most, “served the elite of the community.”  The early Benedictine establishments took up the surplus young women from the royalty.  Then the expanding groups of monastic orders accepted the daughters of the lesser nobles, magnates, burghers and patricians.

Most of the best established convents of France, Germany and Italy housed nuns who came from the nobility. For example, in Florence, Italy, the monetary donation for nuns entering a convent was 435 florins, while the donation for future wives was only 417 florins.

But to marry off a large number of daughters with rather small dowries would entail marrying the girls to men of lower social status.  Even though the donation was higher for a girl to be placed in a convent, noble families did not want their daughters to marry beneath them.  The option of convents was chosen instead. However, the young women placed in them were forced to take vows of celibacy, and those vows were very often taken unwillingly.  According to King, as many as half of the women in some elite Florentine families resided in convents by the 16th Century. [now look at Italy]

Poor women were also allowed to live in convents, but as servants and workers. The nuns themselves came from wealthy lineages. It was those families that needed to consolidate wealth, and that wealth was threatened by fertile young daughters. Therefore, they were humanely removed from the cycle of reproduction. Widows, too, whose reproductive duties had ended, were placed into the safety of convents. Venice, Italy was particularly given to the practice of sending extra daughters to convents. In the mid-17th Century, there were nearly 3,000 nuns in the city, which was 3% of the population. By 1815, about 3,789 former nuns received state pensions. In general, the numbers of nuns in southern Europe increased after a slight decline during the plague. In Northern Europe, there was a fairly continuous decline, which ended with the closing of the monasteries and convents in the German states and England, as the Protestant religion gained hegemony. [Italy doesn’t get to bitch about birth rates]

But the wealthy convents of Southern Italy had many problems as well. The morale, or esprit de corps, of earlier dedicated celibates declined as the convents filled with the luxurious conditions that were expected by nuns from wealthy families. “As with male monasteries, incomes that had sustained a hundred residents now served as few as ten, and all evidence of austerity vanished.” In Strasbourg, France, the spirit of reform began to take fire when the townspeople saw the luxurious condition of the convents and became infuriated.  A wealthy mother, Christine de Pizan, visited her daughter’s convent and lived with the luxuries she was accustomed to in her own home. She ate off silver and gold plates, toured the entire nunnery, and chatted with her daughter for hours. No limits were imposed on this noble family.

But the luxury enjoyed by wealthy women who had been placed in convents was not the only cause of unrest from the population. The freedom and sometimes licentious behavior of some of the nuns gave rise to bitter criticism.  The rules of claustration were completely ignored. As in England, the French and Italian nuns went out freely and mixed with the public. Visitors, especially male visitors, to the convents came and went, entertained with, and entertaining behavior, that the rules of chastity forbade. The well known author, Boccaccio, told tales in his 1353 volume, The Decameron, about nuns’ frivolities and even worse behavior, and there was a realistic basis for his claims.

The cries against the poor morals of nuns in Italy were continual and filled with rancor.

There was a 1537 report from a city government titled: “For the Reform of the Church,” which claimed that many nunneries “performed public sacrileges with the greatest possible shame to all.” In 1538, the councilors of Milan asked the Pope to do something about a Benedictine house that they claimed had become so corrupt that far from being virgins pledged to god, the nuns “had become and were held to be lay prostitutes.”

Venice had the worst reputation of all.  In 1497, the friar, da Lucca, preached in the city’s basilica and charged that the nunneries of Venice were “not convents but whorehouses and public bordellos.” A few years later, a chronicler made the same accusation about Venice’s “open convents.”  He said that they were “public bordellos and public whorehouses.” Scholars agree that while such charges cannot be completely proved, statistics garnered from church and city court records support them.

According to Power, “In the 14th and 15th Centuries, thirty-three convents were involved in one or more prosecutions involving fornication with nuns. Nine of them had between ten and fifty-two prosecutions.” But the Benedictine convent of Sant’ Angelo di Contorta, the convent that housed nuns from Venice’s most illustrious families, had the worse reputation of all. Power states: “Between 1401 and 1487, it faced fifty-two prosecutions for sex crimes. The court records tell tales of ‘dissolute deeds’ performed at picnic outings and in convent cells, of illegitimate births, of jealous rages, of fugitive lovers. Those involved were not only noble nuns, but also two abbesses, who shared their favors with aristocrats and popolani alike.” In 1489, the Pope shut Sant’Angelo down.  But other convents, more cautious and quiet about their misdeeds, remained open. 

It is certain that many aristocratic, medieval nuns enjoyed rich food, domestic services, and conversation with foreign visitors. They played the lute and embroidered luxurious fabrics. They also entertained their lovers and gave covert birth to illegitimate children.

Behind the tales of immoral and scandalous behavior lies the human tragedy which took such gently bred girls and young women and forced them into a prison. The Church profited from the system. The families who desired to consolidate their wealth profited still more. The nuns from those families did not enter the convents because of vocations that sought spiritual contemplation.

The customs and the economy of the times did not allow the young women to find employment or to live on their own. They could not be given freedom and could not or would not marry.  In many cases, the family did not choose to or could not provide them with decent dowries to marry within their class.  At the same time, many of those aristocratic parents did not want their daughters to marry into a lower social status. The perfect answer in their eyes was to send the young women off to a convent.

But many were aware that the practice of forcing women into convents was unjust. Peter the Venable (1092-1156 CE) called a newly founded convent “a glorious prison.”  A Venetian law actually lamented the fate of so many girls from noble families who “are imprisoned in monasteries with just tears and complaints.” In 1523, Erasmus (1466-1536 CE), the eminent philosopher, wrote about a young girl who voluntarily entered a convent for intellectual stimulation and independence, but called for her parents to take her home again in twelve days.

Erasmus himself had earlier left what he called the slavery of monasticism and rejoined the secular world.

I would like to quote from one of the very few laments voiced by nuns who spoke for many of the silenced women: “My mother wished me to become a nun to fatten the dowry of my sister, and I, to obey my Mama, cut my hair and became one.” This sad and passive statement could have been echoed by many young women who were not unaware that they were being sacrificed for family honor and family greed. The lecture has discussed the stories of some of the nuns who fled and their unsuccessful attempts at freedom.  But escape was not an option for most of the women.

It was a truism of the Medieval Age that young girls should not be taught to read and write unless they were destined to become nuns. If nuns were willing, they could learn the skills needed to express themselves. So even when they did not choose or could not physically escape, some were most able to articulate their ideas, even if obliquely. It was nuns who made up a large percentage of educated women during that era and they were generally much more literate than their married counterparts. They also had leisure to read and study in the convent. Many of them wrote moral plays and devotional works in the service of the Church, but some cleverly slipped in some protest.

One of the most striking of those works, Amor di virtu, was by the nun, Beatrice del Sera (1551-1586 CE), who was housed in the Dominican convent of San Niccolo in Prato, Italy. She used the images of rock, wall, and tower to convey the unwilling confinement of women in the cloister.

One of her characters claimed that women were not born for happiness but to be “… made prisoners, slaves and subjects.” Del Sera was confined in the nunnery all her life and wrote that she put all her hopes in her future life. The fact that we now know that no life exists beyond our sojourn on earth makes the confinement of that unhappy and intelligent woman even more tragic.

Another nun, Arcangela Tarabotti (1604-1652 CE), also was not ever to escape from her prison.  But for her entire thirty-two years of unwilling confinement, she protested against forced entry into convents, defended the female sex and called for freedom. She was born in 1604, sent to the convent of Santa Anna as a child, and became a nun in 1620. She began her principal work in 1644, knowing it would never be published in her lifetime, but luckily it received publication two years after her death.  The title, Simplicity Betrayed, is telling. However, its original title, Paternal Tyranny, speaks for generations of daughters sent to convents, both unwilling and unsuited, to live a life of confinement and celibacy. Tarabotti wrote eloquently and movingly about young women consigned to a kind of living death by greedy fathers. She argued that the nun’s shaved head was nothing more than the sign of a slave, and insisted that variety in life and not the sameness of convent life, was the natural human rule.

Tarabotti criticized the society of her era which supported the confinement of innocent girls to shore up the wealth of noble houses.  She gave voice to her rage through her writing, and it is astounding how far ahead of her time she was.  Women through the ages owe her a debt for her brilliant and inspired critique of the plight of women.

How many scholars did the world of the Renaissance lose when they confined obedient daughters into what was a living death for many of them? [anti-natalism pretending to be Christian]

Eventually people began to turn against such treatment of young women. Greedy parents seeking to add to the dowry of another daughter or inheritance of a son were reproached by the 17th Century French Bishop, Claude Joly. The well known playwright, Carlo Goldoni (1707-1793 CE), was disturbed by the discontent and unhappiness of his niece and ward. She was being educated in a convent, and wrote him a letter which said she was “in chains.” To her great pleasure, he released her from the nunnery and arranged a marriage for her. This happened in the century which saw the Napoleonic Revolution exported to Italy.  Convents were reorganized, made more rational and less powerful. 

Fathers and other relatives were urged to leave wealth to daughters as well as sons.  The cynical and greedy former dispensation slowly started to come to an end. In England and Northern Europe, the Protestant Reformation of the 16th Century did away with convents and monasteries. Many reforms of monastic orders in other countries were undertaken by the 18th Century. The history of women and the convents demonstrates that the Church had participated in the perversion of an institution which began as a place to house women with a religious vocation. For the sake of monetary donations it helped turn convents into dumping grounds for young women who did not have enough money for proper dowries.  The Inquisition tortured and killed people’s bodies. The convents murdered women’s spirits.

Nuns in the present day continue to face many difficulties from the Catholic Church even though taking holy orders is voluntary.  Under the previous Pope, Benedict XVI, the Vatican doctrinal office appointed three bishops in 2012 to overhaul the Nuns’ Group- the Leadership Conference of Women’s Religious. The Vatican believed the group was straying from Catholic doctrinal issues, such as criticizing the all-male priesthood, advocating birth control and sexuality, and critiquing Jesus’ centrality to the faith. Since the 2013 ascension of the new Pope, Francis, there has been a conciliatory tone on doctrinal matters. In anticipation of Francis’ visit to the United States in the fall of 2015, many of the issues have been resolved. The nuns’ groups under scrutiny have not been dissolved or taken over. The new Pope has expressed appreciation of the nuns’ work in the church schools, hospitals and charities. Since they have been administrating those institutions in the United States, he should express appreciation of their contribution and leadership.

According to a New York Times article in 2015, “the number of women religious in the United States is around 50,000, less than a third of that in 1966.” The article went on to say that there are more nuns now over the age of ninety than there are under the age of sixty.

I cannot reiterate enough the harm religion does to human lives, ambition and progress.  When it is combined with the power of the state, extraordinary human tragedies ensue. The states of the Middle Ages enforced the Church’s extraordinary meddling into the lives of ordinary people. 

The lectures in this series on the Inquisition, the Crusades, homosexuality, marriage, sexual hatred, the war on reason and the forcing of young women into convents all demonstrate the cruel, ignorant and tyrannical nature of the Church vis-à-vis the freedom of women and men. We are very fortunate to have a secular government in the United States. A secular government reigns in the excesses of religion. [no]

Religious fundamentalists continuously attempt to convert our nation to a theocracy. But we have seen the misery and suffering theocracies produced in Europe in the past.  We can also observe what comes of such governments in the present day when we observe the injustices in the Middle East.   Let us resist fundamentalists’ efforts to turn back the clock to the times they and their doctrines were in power. The light of reason and secularity has banished the shadows that religion cast over human lives for centuries.

Do not forget; never forget what religion brings when it achieves ascendancy.  The dark days and the burning days have been banished, but there are those who long for their return.  Obscurantists lurk on the edges of our courts and other institutions and attempt to get a law passed here and another one there. They will put one foot in the door if they are allowed and follow it with an army of religious repression. We must be alert and fight the fundamentalists in the hospitals, fight them in the schools, fight them in the courthouses, fight them in the Supreme Court.  It is a battle that we must wage for our liberty and for our children. If we remain vigilant and strong, we shall prevail.

Thank you for your attention.  I am looking forward to our discussion.

63  BIBLIOGRAPHY Sex in Medieval Convents

Abbot, Elizabeth. A History of Celibacy. Cambridge, MA: Da Capo Press, 2000. This volume contains excellent end notes for further reference.

Bullough, Vern L. “Introduction: The Christian Inheritance.” In Vern L. Bullough, Ed. Sexual Practices and the Medieval Church. Buffalo, New York: Prometheus Books, 1982. 1-14.

___________. “Formation of Medieval Ideals: Christian Theology and Christian Practice.” In Vern L. Bullough, Ed. Sexual Practices and the Medieval Church.  Buffalo, New York: Prometheus Books, 1982.  14- 22.

Holland, Glenn. “Celibacy in the Early Christian Church,” in Carl Olson, Ed.  Celibacy and Religious Traditions. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. 65-85.

King, Margaret. Women of the Renaissance. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1991. Excellent Bibliography for further reference.

Kuefler, Mathew S. “Castration and Eunichism in the Middle Ages.” In Vern L. Bullough and James Brundage, Eds. Handbook of Medieval Sexuality. New York and London: Routledge Press, 2010. 279-307.

McGlynn, Margaret and Richard J. Moll. “Chaste Marriage in the Middle Ages.” In Vern L. Bullough and James Brundage, Eds. Handbook of Medieval Sexuality. New York and London: Routledge Press, 2010. 103-123.

McNamara, JoAnn. “Chaste Marriage and Clerical Celibacy.” In Vern L. Bullough and James Brundage, Eds. Sexual Practices and the Medieval Church.  Buffalo, New York:  Prometheus Books, 1982.  22-34.

Power, Eileen. Medieval English Nunneries c. 1275-1530. London: Biblo and Tannen, 1922.

Schulenberg, Jane Tibbetts. “The Heroics of Virginity: Brides of Christ and Sacrificial Mutilation.” In Ed. Mary Beth Rose. Women in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. Syracuse, New York: Syracuse University Press, 1986. 29-73.

EU wants to pass anti-Christian law to force abortions
Would be great if Vox could pick up news like this. While bemoaning birth rates.
Even so-called traditional countries like Croatia are pushing this.
Molech will be pleased.

Note: this includes chemical abortions like the Pill and the blood would be on the hands of both parents, the mother AND the father. The father seems more responsible for the death if you read the Bible quotes describing the death of the SEED.

Also, Macron calls for abortion (infanticide) to be made a human right, despite abolishing the death penalty. Wait, isn’t abortion a type of death penalty? For inconvenient unborn/pre-term babies? Satanists are inconsistent.


When you consent to sex, you are consenting to procreation. That’s biologically what sex is. Otherwise it’s called masturbation and no other human is involved, thus no conception is humanly possible. Left-wingers think of all sex as masturbation because they’re dead inside and cannot connect to another human being nor their actions to the natural law consequences.

How can anyone deny the genocide at this point? Is this being pushed on any other homeland?

They want to deny Christian workers the right to refuse to serve Molech/Moloch.
Thereby converting them to Satanism by complicity.

Whoredom means general promiscuity, money needn’t be involved.
So every promiscuous person sexually, man or woman, or those assisting them (Lev 20:2-5), is a whore.

Specifically, a Satanic whore. Whoredom is the Satanic form of worship. This is why they’re either kicked out or sentenced to the death penalty, according to Biblical law. The same goes for fornication (still whoredom) with single virgins or the already married, it earns the death penalty by stoning for whoredom. The Holy Bible is holy and consistent.

The death penalty is Christian, abortion is Satanic. It’s telling which one they try to ban.

The Masons aren’t pagans


They are ATHEISTS.
There is NO religion to them.
That’s why all the secrecy, the levels and the sign on the door about abandoning God to pass onward.

They are not a religious organisation at all, no.

Even in Victorian times, as this locket clearly demonstrates, there was no Devil worship!

Reminder: this was before the invention of Wicca in the 1920s.

So, what does that star really mean?

So, this locket should not exist. Hint hint. I’m not buying it but one of you might get a kick.

If the Masons were so important, we’d have evidence!

Spiritual despair from c19 !vax & viral possession study

Acedia or a disconnection from the spiritual font (God)?

h/t Vox Day

Viral possession study at end. He didn’t mention that. Probably skipped it. Most noteworthy link at end.

They don’t need to tell you about such things during the experimental period (no answers until 2024, at least).

Debrief happens AFTER the experiment, so any transhuman effects or GM human outcomes can legally be hidden but since it’s an experiment, they need consent.

The video appears to have been removed at least on my browser. At least we have the transcript. The internet providers here block a lot of truthful videos from getting here. YMMV.

“Upon entering the Altar I felt as if I was dead.”

Sounds like a numbing of the connection, to be severed with later ones.

Pfizer said 11 total, spiritualists are saying up to 8, the demon said 7.

7 is the magickal number for summoning.

“I would read the Salutations (Χαιρετισμούς) to the Virgin Mary and I would feel as if my blood was burning in my veins. I felt a foreign presence within me and it was judging me.

I felt a horror as if someone was saying: “You belong to me now.” “

Sounds like demonic possession alright, possession requires consent too.

In an exorcism, another priest heard:

“In turn, this proves another experience of another Priest-Monk who was doing exorcisms. And the demon being pressed told the truth while having a monologue: “Why am I telling you this? I don’t want to tell you this, but I am being pressed.”

The Priest-monk replied, “I am not pressing you.” The demon replied, “I am being forced to tell you.”

God forces them to foretell, yes.

I warned about the Masons and their hunting lodges.

So the demon told him thus: “We did a ceremony at a Lodge in America for the vaccines.” The satanists performed a ceremony for the vaccines. Furthermore the demon said: “Those who take this vaccine will be unable to repent.” Now this may seem too harsh.

The Priest-monk then asked, “Why won’t they be able to repent?”

The demon responded, “Because I will be inside of them.”

I am zero percent shook. It’s a death cult.

They are no longer God’s child but adopted by Satan. I have predicted this, Jesus said he’d claim he never knew ye. Essentially different from human beings. I wonder if a certain number is required. As a Christian, I don’t fear death, it doesn’t exist. Hell does and that is Satan’s Great Lie, it has nothing to do with God. People want to believe God exists. How many people want a Hell?

A disconnect is cruel, very fitting the male fides (bad faith) to trust Man over God. Our soul is nourished by God you see, so cutting that will cause them to wither without the vine and shortly die anyway, a million ways. You can hear it in their fear, that’s a soul level fear. It’s a gripping fear. It can spur evil. That’s the Mark function I’ve previously suggested, like adoption papers. It could operate as a spiritual gateway, think like the Beast person in Ghostbusters. Masons love their keys and key masters. Keeping everyone like a puppet via these keys is a fitting evil for them. There is a litany of black magic literature on gateways and portals to Hell. I would suggest reading material but that would encourage it, I’ve posted about Satanism resources enough before. In dark times, I won’t be seen to encourage it at all. You never know who’s faltering. I don’t want to cause my brother to stumble.

I do find it odd someone like Trump permitted this to be given to anyone, let alone children. Also, did you know he loaned his penthouse suite for the filming of The Devil’s Advocate? True story. Watch that film.

The Priest-monk performing the exorcism, was having a dialogue with the demon. The demon was speaking through the demon-possessed person.

The demon told him: “Those who took the vaccine cannot repent because I am inside of them.” The Priest-monk asked, “How are you inside of them?”

The demon answered, “With the blood of the aborted fetuses.”

The blood is the Life. That would constitute a blood curse, the worst kind. It’s also passed down to children, via the host blood. The sins of the father unto …and such.

I AM is typical demonic phrasing. Huh. This passes the sniff test and I’ve known exorcists. Things can get weird.

I wonder if the abortions were post-birth infanticide to Satan, and then intentionally used after a ritual? That would be one way of doing it. I’d refuse anything from an abortion anyway, no priest story needed for me. I refuse to submit to any evil.

I’ve posted before how organ donation is legal murder, years ago. This section is medically true. All human organs and cells cannot be used if the person is deceased upon ‘retrieval’.

“They also remove the organs from a living fetus. If the fetus is dead, the organs and cells are useless. Therefore, they were not taking the fetuses from the waste bin. Which even if they were, does not make it morally right, as an abortion had taken place. However, in this case, these fetuses were specifically prepared for an abortion.”

That would be infanticide, they’re supposed to be dead when they come out. They are not. Kermit Gosnell is on the phone and wants his MO back.

They are granted legal personhood once they breathe independent of their mother’s bodies (outside of her, whatever is going on with the cord).

So the devil confesses, “I am already inside those who took it via the blood of the fetuses.”

To infuse the living and guilty (consenting to it) with the dead and innocent. It’s a ritual.

Sounds typical Satanism. I’ve read things on that level or possibly worse. Possibly. But that was reanimation. Does this count as necromancy? I’m unsure. Technically, in some ways. A liquid form, like Matrix talking of liquefying the dead.

I wonder if an unbaptised Christian (hey, it’s expensive) would belong to Christ on this or not?

Probably would since they’d believe, and avoid/shun the Mark, people aren’t responsible for what their parents can afford. The Bible is unclear. I wonder if people can baptise themselves. Churches will be closed. Must be possible. I asked prompted by:

“I felt as if I was dead, I was constantly rushing through the service, felt great anxiety, not a speck of joy, I felt as if I was not a priest or even a baptized Christian!”

I know many people who were never baptised for financial reasons, still believe and they feel the same thrill. Very arrogant of him to claim it’s impossible, God doesn’t hate the poor. They, in pureblooded glory, are not in that boat or pit of despair or they’d have told me so. Prideful, in fact. Probable acedia case. The spiritual bypassing is unwarranted. Bloody Pharisees.

As far as living dead, those angry zombie films are no longer funny.

As mentioned on the autopsy study and car accident post, violent psychosis can be caused by brain damage.

Father Savvas: “After 40 days he began to feel that he was baptized again. He came back with repentance.”

I fail to see what baptism has to do with an experimental modified RNA. They’re missing the wider point.

Plenty of people never baptised, including playboy atheists and bloody Muslims are avoiding the toxshot. So is the priest less Christian than they? Clearly baptism means jack in terms of the discernment the Bible speaks of.

And we’re supposed to trust his shitty opinions now? Does he need another baptism, since it worked so well before?

A ceremony of man is a false idol. Priests have no power except via God. You either know or you don’t, that Jesus is The Christ. That guy trusted Man. The Bible says not to place your faith in Men. It literally says.

“In my humble opinion, this vaccine by Pfizer that I took is a mark (seal), but not the final mark. Most likely a forerunner for the final mark of the beast (Book of Revelations).”

tres humble, it shows

Yeah plenty of films have seven seals on Hell. We know.

Some of us knew before doing the dumb thing. God says if it’s your time, you go. A priest should have more faith. Even tomorrow is not guaranteed, it’s decreed.

Father Savvas: “This last statement correlates with another remark made by a demon during another exorcism. A close friend of mine, a respectable Priest-monk had told me. He had a dialogue with a demon during an exorcism.

The demon told him, “Yes, this vaccine is not the final mark (stamp), but it is still a mark, a forerunner… And those who are like you, when they take the vaccine they lose their light.” The demon continued, “A short man had burned us with these exorcisms!” This short priest (Elder) is well known and performs exorcisms… The demon continued, “Now that he (the short Priest) took the vaccine, he has lost his strength. Now I am able to approach him and kiss his hand!”

Demons are cocky. So far, so true. I’ve read many accounts. He has a demon now.

You can’t cast out demons if you accepted a portal for one. Used or not.

The Bible warns about hiding your light, but extinguishing it would be a mortal sin against the Holy Spirit. Outer darkness for it. Not even Hell. That light is a spark of life borrowed from the Most High. It isn’t yours to destroy, your body is your Temple – for it.

It’s obvious why all the ones who hear the song in Rev are virgins (including the men, linguistics previously covered). Temples, light. Read the literal words used again. Wasn’t it Greek?

As St. Chystostomos says, “The lukewarm Christians are living in comfort.” The lukewarm are those who want to combine everything; the world, Christ, hedonism (love of sexual pleasure), avarice (love of money), the external appearances (vanity)… to not be disenfranchised (segregated), go to Church, take Holy Communion, Holy Confession, etc. These lukewarm “Christians” cause the most damage to the church.

no participant in whoredom is a Christian, not one fornicator or the sexually immoral overall, the good book literally says there’s no place in God’s kingdom for them – there is no halfway, you’re on the path or not, the way is narrow because it’s rare

man/whores get rekt

getting a demonic sludge would be witchcraft, consenting to take in ritual blood of Molech baby sacrifice is becoming a servant of Molech yourself

IF we entertain this testimony despite its pride.

I believe the demon spake the truth, when forced. The priests are full of it – pride, that is.

“To a faithful person of God death does not exist, this is the reality. We have forgotten this and we presently fear death. Not only do we fear death, we also fear being fined, possible imprisonment, and prosecution. In NO case can a person call themselves a Christian if they fear death. When a person fears dying, they become an idolater or an atheist.”

fuqin duh

I wouldn’t trust any priest who got even one shot. Or advocated fornication, miscegenation etc. Any vice the Bible hates.
Did y’all even read the book? My Word. I don’t consider myself much a scholar (ironically) but it’s basic. Keep your soul and blood pure. Sixth Commandment? Right there, man. Right there.

The illusion of death is required to test our faith, seen in how we live. Sitting in a church is just a building with weak faith.

A well-respected Priest-monk who perform exorcisms, once told me what a demon said to him. The demon said to him, “How are you Christians fearful of death? I have seduced and deceived you into taking the vaccine with the fear of death!” A demon again confesses that the vaccines are his doing. In fact, he says, “We did a ceremony at a Lodge in America for the vaccines.”

See what the demon confesses! The demon continues: “What did you fear? For you (Christians), death does not exist.” For Christians, death does not exist. Do you understand, fellow brothers and sisters, where we’ve come to?

Which isn’t really a vaccine, but rather a gene therapy/technology, with the aim of oppressing humans. This is the aim, which is why there will be more dosages. In fact, there are many people who say there will be 7 dosages. The demons also state that there will be 7 dosages.

Hacking the Software of life – Moderna

I say hacking FOR? …

RNA is genomic therapy.

Didn’t Pfizer say 11?

Different software downloads. At least 7, the Satanist’s favourite number. Same used in the Harry Potter series for that reason. 7 parts of the soul, supposedly. Rowling used real occult sigils and a Satanic summoning circle for the Deathly Hallows symbol.

The devil wants to take as many souls as possible, this is his final goal. If all these things (vaccines) were good why would they make them mandatory? Something that is good is not forced. You see Christ, whenever He went to heal someone, He would ask, “Do you want to become well?”

Satan uses coercion, like most rapists. They weaken their prey first. He doesn’t fight fair.

But you do still need to consent, or they’d have skipped straight to force and holding everyone down in public.

These rulers nowadays are trying to force us to be well. That’s what they think. However, they don’t want to make us healthy, quite the opposite is occurring actually. Because we know these vaccines cause sterility and thousands of other adverse reactions. Over 2 million adverse reactions were recorded in Europe. And over 600,000 adverse reactions in America. Over 21,000 deaths in Europe, and 14,000 deaths in America. These are all mainstream statistics that you can find online.

Considering most of the people who got it in this country are the native whites, this doesn’t bode well. Demographically. Go long IVF, I guess? Thanks lefty Boomers, hope the extra five years was worth it.

IF there is a proof of biological connection to God (say, in our genome?) then hiding this spiritual signature from People for the Reveal afterward (experiment rules) would provoke ….. well, something. They’d need to establish a link and prove it to scientifically sever it. I’ve related how a Godly signature is mathematically possible using Zipf’s Law. Nobody else has made this connection to date. I checked before posting.

As they quote

“19 We know that we are of God, and the whole world lies under the sway of the wicked one.”

OF God. To take something by choice that binds you to This World is the true death, to become OF the Other.

Think of it like clipping God-given wings. You wouldn’t be coerced to do it, unless they knew there was something to clip. Why would a lot of people imminently wish to repent? All at once? Omens. Scary ones.

“And despite the “demon” saying that those who have taken the vaccines will be unable to be forgiven or to gain back their spirituality, as we can see from the Priest-monk’s account, he was indeed able to reconnect with that light source and begin to heal from his guilt and torment. It was his sincere repentance and prayers that reached out to God that allowed him to come out from that darkness.”

I don’t trust that Priest. He’d have every reason to lie, especially since he admitted he was possessed and nothing was ever cast out, was it? The demon spoke the truth (by force majeure). It didn’t specify a number, but they were too dumb to ask. Or they’re hiding it. How would he know? He admitted he can never be as before. You can’t be half-connected to God. One foot in is not an option. Yuck.

They grow a brain:

UPDATED TO ADD: Please be aware that yes, demons DO lie. As well as tell some truths. While the demon in this testimony says that the vaccine is not the mark, but only a precursor to it, be aware that it could be lying and that the vaccine very well could be the mark. Please be aware of all types of deception. I cannot tell you what God has in store for those that take the mark who have been deceived into it or had it actually forced upon them (not as in “I was forced to do it to keep my job”) or forced onto innocent children, verses those who have taken it willingly. I do not know God’s master plan to address this.

Firmware is still A mark, just not the one written of. Seals on Hell metaphor again. Which one counts? ALL. First and last.

Being held down and raped with a needle is totally different from coercion, from greed or pride or wrath (you’ll be sorry! rhetoric). Don’t you dare equate them. Karen getting it to post on social media and shame others and the helpless kids being frog-marched with zero choice by Australian soldiers are not the same.

possibly related

“A mysterious disease condition known as “anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis” that exhibits symptoms similar to demonic possession is increasingly striking young women in the United States of America. Anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis is described as a definitively neurological condition with an external cause.

DS: not just women

In a review on Anti-NMDA Receptor Encephalitis, Teresa Conrick from explains how a 2010 study published in the Journal of Neurology identified a link between the condition and vaccines. Not surprisingly, symptoms of anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis were observed to appear not long after children received routine vaccinations and booster shots, suggesting a likely connection.”

[ ] 

“Anti-NMDA Receptor Encephalitis and Vaccination”

Wow, that study is real.

Pubmed and everything.

Anti-N-methyl-d-aspartate (Anti-NMDA) receptor encephalitis is an acute autoimmune neurological disorder. The cause of this disease is often unknown, and previous studies revealed that it might be caused by a virus, vaccine or tumor. It occurs more often in females than in males. Several cases were reported to be related to vaccination such as the H1N1 vaccine and tetanus/diphtheria/pertussis and polio vaccines. In this study, we reported an anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis case that may be caused by Japanese encephalitis vaccination. To investigate the association between anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis and vaccination, we analyzed the phylogenetic relationship of the microRNAs, which significantly regulate these vaccine viruses or bacteria, and the phylogenetic relationship of these viruses and bacteria.

This reveals that anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis may be caused by Japanese encephalitis vaccination, as well as H1N1 vaccination or tetanus/diphtheria/pertussis and polio vaccinations, from the phylogenetic viewpoint.


“It’s OK to have an ego, to have basic desires, fears and emotions. There’s no need to dress it up in yoga pants, sprinkle it with glitter, and call it Moonbeam. Just be real.”

Stoics are not narcissistic psychopaths who don’t feel empathy and will screw over everyone else. The internet is playing edgelord.
Christians don’t deny the darkness in the Bible, including the order from God to hate what is evil and flee it, if needed.
Freud was wrong about most things but repression really doesn’t work. Even MGTOW avoiding most women IRL still miss them enough (feminine company or energy) to troll them and verbally abuse them online (separate things). Satan says indulging makes it go away, instead of feeding desire. Wood fuels the fire, so does giving in. Desire is not evil, God made lust after all, but it has a proper context. It’s more about why and when you don’t do the things. Saving a life with violence does not make violence evil. Most people are reprobates who miss these basic points. You cannot deny emotion, it’s being human. You must process them and act better, act above them. It’s called emotional intelligence and all masculine leaders like CEOs excel at this. Emotions are far from girly, FFS. The fool cannot process his feelings and so is foolish, led by repressed emotion. Blind leading the blind.
Emotions don’t make you evil nor stupid, using them as excuses for evil actions does. How many abusers say she made me hit her? He made me kill him? She made me rape her, didn’t you see the skirt? Excuses are Satanic.

“You can use Stoicism, in this instance, as a means to shut down your own difficult emotions, dismiss them as ‘not rational’, dismiss even your own physical sensations, and retreat to the citadel of your intellect. Good luck with that.”

So many would-be Dexter types who think their narcissism and monologging makes them superior. Men are not muh superior rational humans. No human is rational, Jesus never said that either. He spoke fluently and elegantly on emotion as a power, especially love. Stop embarrassing yourselves. Delusions of grandeur are not logic. It’s like the self-proclaimed alpha bullshit. Please stop. It’s like Season One of You.

“Or you may encounter ‘Stoic bullshitting’, when a person cloaks their own selfish desires in Stoic language, and don’t admit that they’re angry or horny or offended or vengeful or whatever. They pretend they’re a perfectly rational computer while their emotions seethe beneath the surface.”

Fake MGTOW: I don’t hate women, I just think we should hurt them.

Think? Bitter revenge on a largely innocent group is not a thought, it’s a very much strong feeling of wrath.

or the common favourite: I’m not a misogynist, I just don’t like or trust any woman.

(Literally the definition). Also: that is nobody’s problem but yours, chief. Go be petty alone, then. Plenty of people get bitten by dogs, they don’t wanna genocide all canines out of petty spite. The cheerleader at high school can’t have been that mean, shame is not a trauma and you’re not entitled to royal treatment, Harry. Also don’t be shocked by petulant brat behaviour when you seek out emotional children/teens as sexual conquests. It goes with the territory, like prison. If you want a woman, just date one. Who cares what the cooties club think? They’re all afraid of being alone or wouldn’t need a support group to rationalise going against the primary biological drive: paternity. Like SJW plant ladies.

“Be honest. Be honest that you have an ego, desires, fears, pride, genitals. Be honest that you are trying to make money, there’s nothing dirty about that. Be honest that sometimes you’re horny, nothing shameful about that either. Be honest that you’re sometimes angry, afraid, bitter, resentful, jealous, competitive, even petty. In other words, you’re a fallible human being, not a gold statue of the Buddha.”

A logical human being wouldn’t deny being human. The fool treats emotion as stupid. He’s too stupid to process it.

this ending oof

PS if you’re neither reading this and you’re neither spiritual, Christian or Stoic, don’t worry! There are plenty of other ways to bypass your emotions. Have you tried workaholism? Or gadgets and gaming? Or over-intellectualism? Junk food? Or porn? One of these is bound to work.

Over-intellectualism is clearly mine, no shame.

Aghori cannibals and Satanic siddhi searching

This is why we colonised India, by the way. Same reason as Africa, to civilise cannibals. This is also why the biggest diaspora in England, Indians, are so inherently dangerous. Both financially and spiritually. They don’t just want to be GPs and taxi drivers and shop owners. There are dark things.
Things fellow Indians curse them for.
They befriend demons for the purposes of necromancy and other things. They need fresh bodies because dark things are attracted to them, and theoretically they can also ride into other dimensions like a spiritual taxi.
Jesus performed miracles. He had siddhis. When they speak of Ascended Masters, they are trying to claim other people, usually Satanists, were on this equal footing.
It’s a trick. All demons know to do is trickery. That’s why no Satanist, not one, has come back from the dead. It’s also why they seek immortality. To evade payment to the Devil. They only need repay their soul at the point of death, prior to that it’s held in escrow, in a contract with a serving demon.
Spirit guides are almost always demons. However, rarely the messenger is an angel or an ancestor but demons often take their forms for that reason, to deceive. A demon, however disguised, cannot recognise Jesus as Christ without great pain, as the Son of God without feeling tortured. To acknowledge him is painful to them. People who went New Age (multicultural brotherhood New World Order religion) then turned away found their spirit guides were evil by testing them like this.
A war against principalities is still a war.
Note the postmodernism involved in ‘dividing existence’ section. This denies good and evil. This is why religions like Buddhism are not religions. Yes, he’s Hindu but Buddhists are better known from there. Buddhism isn’t a religion technically because it worships no deity. It worships the Self and becoming as a God (“Enlightenment”, Luciferean light). They claim to have no ego yet parade around in fine ironed silks. Come on. Pull the other one.
Satanists or those following similar ideas claim so because if there is no evil, they cannot go to Hell. That is why they deny evil so confidently, they believe they are blocking the karma in doing so, where they would go. God sees the heart and deeds. It won’t work. They may concede the dimension could exist for others, in rare cases. But they refute it applies to them. Delusion. Even in religions that hate arrogance, as Hindu claims to be. It’s Satan-type pride.
Embracing the world is to embrace the Prince of this world.
The Prince is not the King.
King of Kings, Jesus.
They follow the servant. Satan is a servant of God, and permitted to act and tempt here as such. The role is important but he promises only trickery. He tests us. God punishes yes, but Satan has limited punishments all his own (like killing his own flock) that make him seem like a God to them.

From CNN:

They are also viewed as ones who DO NOT DISCRIMINATE.

“Out of the various sects found in India, the most extreme and most feared of all are the Aghoris. The word Aghori in Sanskrit directly translates to “non terrifying”. The term Aghori is derived from the Sanskrit word Aghor which has various meanings. Aghor means “not difficult” or “non terrible” in one perspective and on the other it means absence of darkness. Aghor implies a simple and natural state of consciousness, in which there is no fear or disgust but on the contrary, the Aghoris have rituals that are seen as being disgusting and are feared by common people. As per the Aghori sect, the true meaning of the term Aghori is one ‘who is fearless and who does not discriminate‘.”

Multicultural Brotherhood bullshit.

All the wandering cults of bachelors, a death cult (no sons, a Biblical curse of reprobate mind). A man who has found a wife has found a good thing.

How is this relevant to the West?
“• An Aghori must find a human skull known as a ‘Kapala’ and use only this as his food bowl before initiation.”
Remember Byron’s skull cup?

Their parties are dinner parties. Like the one Audrey Hepburn was pictured at, wearing the bird cage ‘hat’. Cannibal centrepieces… as a ‘joke’. Totally not the Aghori ritual previously described.

As Satanic they are most deluded so projection is natural.
“Many of the Aghoris roam around naked, representing the true human form and their detachment from this world of mortals who according to them live in a world of illusion or “Maya”. These Aghoris eat things like rotten food, leftover food from garbage dumps, and more… The more they blur the line between clean and unclean, holy and unholy, good and bad, the more powers they obtain.”
This world is illusion, tempting you to destroy. Destroying is buying into the illusion.

Tattoos are against the Bible because either it’s harmless ancestor worship (the West) or invocations of demons (the East, including Phoenician, Canaan type stuff and Hollywood tattoos.)* Tattoos mutilate God’s design, his chosen vessel. It denies God, it’s an abomination. Aghori celebrate abomination.

BUT WAIT, THERE’S MORE! Y’know how they celebrate ugliness? What’s the most morally ugly thing you can think of?

Mentions siddhis. Wonder why Satanic mouse companies wanna push superpower films so hard? Wonder what the horcrux ‘ritual’ is in Harry Potter?

“Today’s special The Ranveer Show episode features Kiran Khalap who discusses The Aghoris – an ancient religion of Sadhus which dwell in post – mortem rituals. The Aghoris are believed to take this insane yet dangerous way of living for reaching Enlightenment. In this conversation, we talk about examples of how yogis and aghoris seek enlightenment, but in their own ways. A lot of what these rituals include are almost mythical and seem to shock Modern day society. Enjoy our podcast with an open mind, you never know where it might lead you.”

The Enlightenment hated Christianity because it was the true light. False light cannot compete.

Pushing meditation in schools is literally a Satanist practice. Meditation is prayer, but not to God. To entities. Emptying the mind for possession. That’s why aghori do it.
As mentioned, one ‘ritual’ involves raping a girl’s corpse. So tell me again how meditation is harmless. Calming your mind is one thing. Meditation is a specific transcendental practice, pushed on tik tok as witchtok. You can watch videos about it on youtube. This is pushed on children now. All partial aghori rituals. Glamourised.
The fact he calls that sex is disgusting. A child cannot consent, age of consent is 18 in India. A dead person also cannot consent. It’s rape. It’s also a branch of Tantric ‘sex’, that’s why he calls it sex. A ‘tool’.
They still burn wives alive with their husbands. There is no historical basis for this. They lie and claim there is. So who’s the rape culture here?
Like all Satanic ritual (including the invented Wicca in the 1920s with the help of Crowley) it involves orgies. Satanic worship is an orgy. So Tantra says women NEED to participate in orgies or sleep with their ‘guru’ (who’s supposed to be like a father figure?!) to progress spiritually. As in, a virgin woman would be useless and dead spiritually. That kind of gaslighting. But raping a little girl’s corpse is supposedly fine. Soooo spiritual. Boomer’s overall love of Eastern ‘mysticism’ is so damning.
You can kinda see why Christianity won out over this brand of paganism. Letting some ‘holy guy’ rape your dead or alive kids is something the fake Catholics like to think they have a monopoly on. Bachelor Central in the West is the Vatican City. No women allowed. Death cult. No heirs. Bible said go forth and multiply.
They mention Left Hand path at the end, in omission. That’s what Satanism is called. The Left Hand path. Using evil to attain power. It’s the short path not because it’s a distraction. It’s illusion and usually leads to early death. Because every time someone astral travels, say to commune with demons, they use up their own ‘prana’ (since it doesn’t enrich the body during sleep**) needing to steal it from others (including rape and cannibalism). Less prana, shortened lifespan. They astral travel so much (again, pushed on Witchtok to KIDS) that nothing can actually lengthen their lifespan. No matter what they do, (they try all the disgusting things in panic) they find it’s always shortened. A curse from God. That’s why we shouldn’t commune with the dead by choice, but if they’re sent to us they can be tested, to see if they’re of the Lord. The Bible literally tells us this. Test spirits who approach you, don’t seek them out. It’s the ‘short path’ because he KNOWS astral travel shortens the lifespan. He KNOWS. That’s why prana is lifeforce. It’s finite. You use it up. It’s used up most in sex. Sex addicts like Vivien Leigh died early. Unmarried women live longer and nuns the longest of all. Statistical fact. That’s why all real religions ban fornication (and adultery, for spiritual ties more). False ones like Islam and Judaism celebrate rape of children and outsiders, because that’s Satanic worship. Satan hates us and wishes to shorten our lives, to cause chaos, giving us all less time to find God. They target virgins, from innocent/pure religious adults and nowadays, those are most likely to be guaranteed as small children, to steal the most ‘pranafrom the body, dead or alive.

Make sense, now?


Paedophilia is Satanic worship. So is cannibalism and necrophilia. It’s deviant bingo. As soon as we stopped throwing them in asylums, they took to normalising this shit. Including eating it. How many Hollywood jokes about eating shit? Aghori practice. It all fits. Check on it.

Why do you think I hate specifically a strange blend of child abusers, multiculturalists and the wandering bachelor ‘sex tourist’ shit? People like Henry Cavill, child raping weebs. Satanists. Wake up, it is not a lifestyle choice, it’s a fucking religion. Literally. It is not new and rebellious, it is ancient and AGHORI.

A Christian cannot approve of any of those things. It is anti-Christ.

We don’t choose what is evil, we simply hate it. Freemasons used to do a Grand Tour, to better get away with raping kids in far-off locales. It didn’t diminish their marital value at home, spread various STDs into their home country once they returned and married and was an Aghori practice (leaving one’s homeland, a love of the foreign is Aghori, xenophilia is Aghori because it rejects the commandment to honour one’s parents’ culture).

Otherwise, why is Stefan removed from Youtube, but all the weeb low age of consent ‘tourist’ channels still up? They want blackmail on the men of the West, especially those who later join the military. Cavill for example has military brothers. That’s useful to them. Classic honeypot.

*Johnny Depp’s tattoos also make me highly suspicious, especially in light of South America underage teen girl brothel rumours. They look like Jolie’s.

Political videos get taken down but this is still up.

Pushing alcoholism on the West is an entry point into the orgy thing (Bacchanalia). Dionysian orgy stuff.
Alcoholism is NOT part of Western culture, recently they increased the proofs greatly. It was difficult in ancient times to get drunk. Things were like 1-2% proof, perhaps less. You had to really TRY.
Again, reject alcoholism as part of Western culture. It’s Asian, as they admit aghori celebrate alcohol. The Arabic root is same as the one for demons. I’ll leave you to dwell on this.

**sleep paralysis is when your prana (soul energy feeding your body and giving it life from God) isn’t done feeding your body but your mind wakes up first (ba, according to the Egyptians, ego or personality to us). Imagine a trickling down of energy where the life-force of your soul flows to your toes like a river. You wake up. No demons. There, I just trounced half of reddit. Also, Christ’s name repels demons. They also corrupt and numb their connection to God with aghori ‘rituals’, meaning their prana is thinner with time and sin (to sin against one’s body/Temple is the worst, the Bible decrees***). Supposedly the Mark is a total rejection (aghori) of God and severs this connection completely, the walking dead spiritually. The body cannot last long without prana infusion during sleep, and coincidentally, the Bible describes panic shortly after jubilation (burning through their residual prana) before terror and prompt death. It’s right there! God, someone tell x/ board.

*** explaining why sexual sleep demons are even a thing. In addition, demons can see your thoughts, especially when you’re asleep and not fully IN your body. So incubi and succubi often take the form of a celebrity. Sleep well.

Ancient Africans sacrificed their babies

Some things never change.

Carthage: The OG Planned Parenthood, always putting the ‘hood in Planned Parenthood.

At least they hate their own kids as much as ours. That’s what they mean by equality. Now Tunisia is Muslim, which has a far superior track record with child mutilation and torture. (please, hold your sides)

Why, oh why, does God hate them so? It doesn’t make sense.

Didn’t one of the Biblical plagues turn everything black for a while?

Since Sicily partook in this Molech cult too, is that why the Muslims were allowed to invade them?

For any PC buffoons pretending the Bible loved foreigners and wanted to hold them to lower standards of humanity:

Anyone who speaks against the LORD must be put to death; all the people must kill him by throwing stones at him. Foreigners must be punished just like the people born in Israel; if they speak against the LORD, they must be put to death.

Exodus 12:49;

49 The same law applies both to the native-born and to the foreigner residing among you.

We all know the millstone line but James 1:27….

27 Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.

Leviticus opposes the treasonous double court system in this country (Lev 24:22) a legally Christian country:

22 You are to have the same law for the foreigner and the native-born. I am the LORD your God.

Just one rape in Genesis 34 (Dinah) led to the God-provoked slaughter of MANY men in Canaan. How much rape has the West ‘tolerated’? And calls itself Christian? When was the last time you lynched one rapist? Child rapist? Repeat rapist? Any rapist? Women only respect men who protect them – and their offspring. Pacifism is not protection. It is an endorsement. Ask not whom is the race traitor, for it is thee.

Then we have 1 Kings 1-3 on mixing socially and sexually;

Solomon’s love for foreign women led his heart away from the Lord.

If God wanted you together, he’d have placed you on the same continent. If you were ever part of the same continent, your organs would be compatible. If your very blood is incompatible, should you be mating with it?

Note: admixed Africans have worse health than pureblooded Africans. So there is additional punishment going on here.

They’re not all wrong.

Ironically it wasn’t white supremacists who raped the great-grandmothers of all the angry octoroons in America. It was the beta male, male feminist, race-mixing type. And they still despise them at a genetic level, which is fair. Everyone else does. By all means, take our fake Prince Gingers. Keep ’em!

Didn’t they own slaves? Prince Andrew made regular use of them.

We’ve all seen the cuck TIME cover by now. Yes, that one. This is hardly something a race has a monopoly on.

Asian waifus are undertaking a similar genetic gamma humiliation campaign and will be henceforth called Doing a Markle (culturally conquered by his ‘exotic’ wife). See here: JUST LOOK AT THE STATE OF IT

They look like such cunts. The fetishists largely moved onto Asians since dressing up in African garb is too verboten now. You just wait, that’ll change, they turn everything to shit, even dog-munchers.

The cringe is off the chart with weebs. They wouldn’t dare describe their own culture in such glowing terms.

Is it too late to uncancel the war? We could stand to lose some chaff. And if you think that cucking was the mens’ choice… I refer you to the TIME cover. It is never the white guy’s choice. Wifey-poo rules the roost.

I’m hardly surprised an out of touch, fat Boomer would raise a mixer. I’m also not shocked the tune at the end was to Pokemon. Anime was a psyop. I would fully expect them on a survey to agree with the following cuck statement “my wife/DIL is just as British as I am”. I do not fear the foreigner, I fear the traitor within our gate. Race mixers fucked over Africa, Asia and also now, Europe. Learn from Solomon’s offence to the Lord. The Based foreigner stays away.

But enough from Vox Day.

modRNA worse than nothing + Albert Pike

Modified organisms are always weaker than the pureblood, it’s chapter 1 of Origin of the Species? Animal husbandry rules known for centuries?

In every age group from 20-79, the percentage of the confirmed Covid cases are “fully vaccinated” exceeds the percentage of the population that is “fully vaccinated”.

This means the fake vaccines are literally worse than nothing. And remember, the Antibody Dependent Enhancement that is created by the “vaccines” don’t merely enhance Covid-19, they will enhance all similar viruses, including the common cold virus.

Does this mean it’ll kill off the herpetic sluts? Yay or nay? I say yay. Please God yay.

This isn’t just logic applied to scientific data anymore. This isn’t just theory. This is now the published medical reality from a sample size of 18,678 confirmed Covid cases. The fake vaccines will not protect you, and contrary to the government and media propaganda, they will render you more susceptible to infection, hospitalization, and possibly, death, than simply doing nothing.

Possibly? Death rate is HIGHER in 2020 than 2021, the only difference being the “Jabs”.

Living IQ test.

Smart people: this thing will kill you. We have decades of animal data.

Stupid people: no it won’t! I’ll show you! It’ll kill you instead… somehow. Imma inject myself again and again and again! I’ll show you! IQ isn’t even real! I hope you die because I injected myself! You’ll be sorry!

Smart people: …..k?

Feature not a bug. I do not see the self-murder of stupid people as a problem (sorry? not), it’s the lemmings pulling everyone else off the cliff I have a problem with. Yuri’s useful idiots.

Onto the occult portion of this segment.

from The Inherent Evil of Inclusivity


At this point, it is necessary to clarify what is meant by the “New World Order,” or rather what its creators mean, regardless of what they say publicly.

It is one thing to impose the “Green Pass” with the excuse of the pandemic; but it is quite another to recognize that the purpose of the passport is to accustom us to being tracked; and still another to say that this total control is the “mark of the Beast” of which the Book of the Apocalypse speaks (Rev 13:16-18).

Why do I keep being right? I am astonished at the accuracy rate, at this point.

In order to understand the esoteric roots of the thought that lies at the foundation of the United Nations, once longed for by [19th-century Italian political activist] Giuseppe Mazzini, we cannot fail to consider characters such as Albert Pike, Eliphas Levi, Helena Blavatsky, Alice Ann Bailey, or other disciples of Luciferian sects.

Pike, Mason.


Albert Pike, a friend of Mazzini and a fellow Freemason, gave an address in 1889 in France to the highest levels of Freemasonry, which was then reprinted on 19 January 1935 by the English journal The Freemason. Pike declared:

Let’s see if this dovetails with my many posts going back years on Satanism, shall we?

    That which we must say to the crowd is, we worship a god, but it is the god one adores without superstition […]. The Masonic religion ought to be maintained in the purity of Luciferian doctrine by all of us who are initiates of the highest degrees. If Lucifer were not God, would Adonay [sic] [the God of the Christians] whose deeds prove his cruelty, perfidy and hatred of man, barbarism and repulsion of science, would Adonay and his priest calumniate him?

While there is technically more than one God most people aren’t supposed to know that. It’s mentioned in the Bible (I forget where) that there was a meeting of discussion where many god-tier beings were present. Satanists note Satan was one of these, correctly, but over-claim, falsely, because while present, technically, he was not OF these. He’s an order down, a mere Prince of this world, of this realm, NOT a god. It was like inviting the secretary. Instead, pre-Jesus we had Holy Spirit on Earth and in Heaven, Adonai, Elohim, and Yahweh, all technically different entities with distinct names blurred into English as LORD, the One true Lord (to counter Satan’s permitted false Lord). There’s also the Jewish Tetragrammaton, intended to refer to the highest of the Gods. The supreme God. The Kaballah types might interpret this as a name of Satan. Satan is not a god, but his princely status of this realm permits illusions, leading to his title Father of Lies. Lies are illusion. Hindu call this concept Rahu and refer to this whole world as illusion, admitting this Satanic realm is based on a lie (materialism, deviant and perverse sexualities and no soul consequences for actions).

Explaining this next passage:

    Yes, Lucifer is God, and unfortunately Adonay is also God. For the eternal law is that there is no light without shade, no beauty without ugliness, no white without black, for the absolute can only exist as two gods: darkness being necessary to light to serve as its foil as the pedestal is necessary to the statue, and the brake to the locomotive… the doctrine of Satanism is a heresy; and the true and pure philosophical religion is the belief in Lucifer, the equal of Adonay; but Lucifer, God of Light and God of Good, is struggling for humanity against Adonay, the God of Darkness and Evil.

Shadow does not exist. Darkness is not real. It is an illusion, banished by light. Evil is an illusion of the mortal realm permitted to test the souls of men. Beauty certainly exists without ugliness, if you live in the nice parts of Europe. Nature kills what is ugly, if you don’t interfere. Satanists are social engineers and meddlesome in God’s order. Because their ‘god’ did not create this world, merely rules it for a time. Black does not actually exist, in physics. Perceiving an absence is not a presence. Darkness is not necessary, it is tolerated by the Most High and permitted – for a time. No True Satanist fallacy also makes more sense now, I’d wager. They think “Lucifer” (actually name for Venus, the planet, a feminine concept) is trying to save us, like Prometheus. It’s the Father of Lies. He hates you and wishes to destroy you. Look what he does to his subjects. He brings only destruction and chaos. Adonai/Elohim/Yahweh God/s (original Trinity) brings peace of the soul and life. Know them by their fruits. Satanists love to blame women for all evil because women are tempting (see Middle East abuses, against Bible) and Satanists know women are the weakness of men, and being very material in terms of fertility, in addition to vulnerability and weakness as the fairer sex, it’s an easy scapegoat. Scapegoats are by definition innocent. God shaped women, it is not evil. It increases chaos by turning the protectors against the weak, so fits well into their aims. This is why, as I noted, so many Satanists are men. Men cannot create, like Satan. It’s been called womb envy. The male speciality is to destroy, so Satan prefers male agents because he can turn the cannon intended for him back on its wholesome vulnerable scapegoats (the in-group, women, Christians). You’ll notice Satanic, psychopathic, sadistic cultures, tend to hate those three things – their own race, their own women and Christians. That is why. Any holy, orderly thing is of God. Satan promises them illusions of spoils, by destroying the Golden Goose producing them (especially women, in Darwinian terms). By the time they realise, it’s too late. They were tricked. This is why Judas was a traitor, instead of some random Roman general. This is why the women checked on Jesus. This is why a woman anointed his feet with perfume. This is undeniable.

This profession of faith in the divinity of Satan is not only an admission of who the real Great Architect that Freemasonry adores is, but also a blasphemous political project that passed through the ecumenism of Vatican II, whose first theorist was Freemasonry:

They worship Baphomet, actually, also Mammon and there are other names. Father of Lies, remember? Like a hall of mirrors.

    The Christian, the Jew, the Moslem, the Buddhist, the follower of Confucius and Zoroaster can unite as brothers and join together in prayer to the only god who is above all the other gods (cf. Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma, ed. Bastogi, Foggia 1984, vol. VI, p. 153).

^ Note: they must acknowledge the True God in all they do, despite claiming he is powerless compared to theirs. Occult science has rules. Brotherhood is multicultural and hence Satanic. It betrays your own people (blood traitors) especially abandoning the protective duty of men to their women. You had ONE job. Note: a multicultural Sisterhood has never existed, despite attempts to claim so from Jewess Marxists, because women of all other races have more blood loyalty due to birthing process.

Technically, they’re right. As in, Satan is above all others, but ONLY, only in this realm. Which is illusion. His position is thusly, illusory. Once you escape your body like an egg yolk cracking out of the shell, you see the mirage by passing through the veil. That is what the veil is. Death is permanent because who wants to return to an illusion?

    We will unleash the nihilists and atheists and provoke a formidable social cataclysm that will clearly demonstrate to the nations, in all its horror, the effect of absolute atheism, the origin of barbarism and bloody subversion. Then citizens everywhere, forced to defend themselves against a world minority of revolutionaries, […] will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer, finally revealed to the public’s view; a manifestation that will be followed by the destruction of Christianity and also of atheism, which will be conquered and crushed at the same time! (cf. Letter of 15 August 1871 to Giuseppe Mazzini, Library of the British Museum, London).

New Age often, but not always, celebrates false light.

The light of Satan’s illusion.

note: you needn’t crush something you already conquered but lies require more lies

It will not escape notice that the “great heresy of separativeness” sounds curiously in agreement with the ecumenism condemned by Pius XI in his Encyclical Mortalium Animos, an ecumenism that was adopted by the Declaration Dignitatis Humanae and recently merged into the doctrine of “inclusivity” formulated by those who allowed idolatrous worship to the pachamama to be offered in Saint Peter’s Basilica.

God made the races and cultures separately. That was his Will. It is a commandment not to adulterate your bloodline and mongrelise, if you look to the Sixth Commandment etymology. He split the languages too. It is undeniable. Mixing is Satanic aka anti-Christ. Do we see destruction in their offspring? I’ve included studies of the reprobate mind i.e. mental illness in them. The curse passed onto the son of the father unto the third generation is the seed of this abomination. Abominations are often of the blood. Impurities therein. This is not my opinion, nor a choice, it is proven Biblical command. You cannot be a Christian and deny God’s Law. You may break the law but the law will break you. This is justice. The ‘god of destruction and death’ they refer to, is just and RIGHTEOUS. Satan’s anger is false like his light.

The Bible says something on this to the effect of, what common ground does light have with darkness? i.e. THEY DO NOT MIX.

We see this in many parts of the natural world including oil and water. Multiculturalism killed noble Rome.

So we know it is evil. What is the appropriate response?

“Hate what is evil, cling to what is good”. So, spurn them. Reject all mongrel notions. It isn’t that hard. Any who quibble this, transpire to be mongrel themselves. It is no coincidence. It’s a crab pulling you into its bucket.

Inclusivity” opposes this distinction, allowing oneself to be deliberately contaminated by evil to adulterate the good, equating the true and the false in order to corrupt the former and give legitimacy to the latter.

Possession is a corruption of the soul and must be consented to, however coercively. You are under God’s yoke until you step under Satan’s umbrella. Satan cannot take you unless you consent like a vampire entering a home. They could’ve ordered in the military and held everyone down by now. They need your obedience. Not to the State. The demons in possession of these people (by their own choice) follow rules. They don’t want your body, they want your soul. Closing churches was unnecessary. If the possessed obtains enough souls, they may be relieved of their contract. Obviously, they never are. It’s just what they’re sold.


It was written in Biblical stone, that’s why the opposite faction are stone-masons. Straight outta Georgia. Fake stone.

Fucking around is already covered in coveting prohibitions. Earlier in chain of causation to fornication and adultery (the bad sex outside of one’s own marriage).

To dissemble. To wrap lies in a truth. What they do. They all have Daddy Issues. Men role model to fathers, not women. Role modelling is always proven to be gendered. But Satan is a propagandist for himself so this psychological fact goes unmentioned. Satanic fuckers have ultimate FUCK YOU MOM daddy issue projection problems. Because, obviously, their Father (who art in Heaven) didn’t go out for a pack of smokes to abandon THEM, it MUST have been Mother (copium).

Daddy’s actions become Mother’s fault. And they speak of hypoagency. They DARE.
a free red pill:

Dear MGTOW: your father walked out on you, not your mother. He stayed with your mother until you showed up – fact. Truth hurts. Place the blame where it belongs. You became a deadbeat, just like your feckless father. Statistics show! Rationalising your bitter emotions doesn’t change the statistical inevitability. p.s. Fight Club was satire, you fecking numbnuts. Blaming women/mother figures for your temper tantrums is what toddlers do. If your life sucks, it’s your fault. If you punch anyone in the face, don’t let it be women or strangers, let it be your father. He deserves it.
Cold apathy,
The World.

Spangler: No one will be part of the New World Order unless he carries out an act of worship to Lucifer. No one will enter the New Age unless he receives Luciferian initiation.

Medical symbol – two snakes (human genome) around a dead tree (Eden serpent form*) called a magic wand. Magic wand for Satan. It’s on the side of buildings in America, I was shocked. It was built to face the Sun (Helios worship**). A Temple of Death (Egyptian: Set). Set was reptilian in form, like a crocodile or huge snake. Every culture has this.

I wonder if UK people with the injections have scanned themselves for QR codes. Do it live on TV, go on, debunk it!

*snakes are not bad, Satan just shapeshifted into that form, that one time

** that pedo French bloke calling himself Sun King? Yeah.

reconcile “HEAL the world” aka tikkun olam

Hiding in plain sight + the cult of Lam

Why does this work?


Curious I spy no crosses on the wall. Odds of that in rural America? Nil.
Nobody once tried to exorcise them or invoke Christ’s name? Globally? Not even in Rome? Did they enter churches? Nobody says.

I heard LAM might be an acronym, like Lucifer, Alpha Master but that could just be rumour and gossip, I believe the Lucifer part but the rest would likely be Latin I think. Something about Satan owning this earth (alpha force here) and claiming to be being of Light (lucifer is Venus or fire so no). Being of fire, not light. Lucifer, (our) Absolute Master? I forget all the interpretations. You get the gist. A lot of witchcraft involves acronyms so people don’t spot them, like a religious dogwhistle and it gets people to idolise a false deity without knowing (black magic is all about names and sigils) so bonus, Edit: yes. Crop circles are demonic sigils e.g.
“I found this both disturbing and inexplicable – for what reason would a UFO book be included in the curriculum of a satanic group, and why Ray’s book in particular? I emailed Ray and asked him if he had any insight into the situation, but he was as perplexed as I was. And there matters rested for a year or so until additional information came into my hands, information that may indicate – much as John Keel himself believed (Mothman Prophesies) – that occult activity may be an ingredient of the “grey alien” mystery.
The pictures below bear a resemblance and may hold the key. The first picture is a drawing made by occultist Alistair Crowley of an entity he had invoked repeatedly in 1918 and called “Lam.” The second picture is a composite drawing by Ann Direnger (Contact of the 5th Kind – Imbrogno) of an “alien” type reported throughout 1980’s in the Hudson Valley. Having noticed the similarity, I proceeded to investigate the connection.”

Click the link to see that picture, here’s just Lam:

“”The Cult [of Lam] has been founded because very strong intimations have been received by Aossic Aiwass, 718′.’ to the effect that the portrait of Lam (the original drawing of which was given by 666′.’ to 718′.’ under curious circumstances) is the present focus of an extra-terrestrial – and perhaps trans-plutonic – Energy which the O.T.O. is required to communicate at this critical period, for we have now entered the Eighties mentioned in The Book of the Law. It is Our aim to obtain some insight not only into the nature of Lam, but also into the possibilities of using the Egg as an astral space-capsule for travelling to Lam’s domain, or for exploring extra-terrestrial spaces in the sense in which O.T.O. Tantric Time-Travelers are exploring the Tunnels of Set in intra-cosmic and chthonian capsules.”

“Michael Bertiaux, a Lam contactee and invoker of note, viewed Lam as the “subterranean burgeoning of Lucifer-Gnosis.” Considering that Gnosis means an intuitive knowing, this would mean that knowing Lam is to know a welling-up from the unconscious of an inner knowing of Lucifer. (The Occult being the occult, it is important to bear in mind that occultists at least may not necessarily see Lucifer as the devil, but rather as a “light bringer” who fell to earth.)”

Great Awakening, anyone? Could have tried to warn us.

“Crowley termed the intentional cultivation of spiritual growth the “Great Work.” And the Great work for Crowley, “…involved precisely the establishment of contact with non-human intelligences.” Intelligences such as Lam. Using the language of Crowley’s time, certain non-human intelligences such as Lam were what we today would term “extraterrestrial.”

“It is generally agreed within occult circles that Crowley intentionally opened a portal of entry via magick ritual in the Amalantrah Workings which allowed the likes of Lam and other similar entities a passageway onto the earth-world. The rift “in-between the spaces of the stars,” created by the Amalantrah Working, created a gateway through which Lam and other extra-cosmic influences could enter the known universe, and most particularly, our earth-world. According to occultists involved in such things, the Portal has since widened.”

All those missing kids? Might wanna rewatch Ghostbusters. They were to open portals. Many points of ‘invasion’.

They disable our weapons so we can’t defend ourselves. Initially they’d seem like ghosts due to this.

“According to occult lore, the Portal was further enlarged by a Jet Propulsion Laboratory founder and rocket fuel scientist named Jack Parsons, and Scientology and Dianetics founder L. Ron Hubbard in 1946, facilitating – so it is said – a monumental paradigm shift in human consciousness. This Magickal working was called the Babylon Working, and like the Amalantrah Working on which its ritual was patterned, it was based on ceremonial sex magick.”

Orgies/fornication/whoredom are all Satanic forms of worship.

Hasn’t the world seemed to get increasingly evil since the end of ww2 and the ‘sexual revolution‘.

Spiritual ties and generational spirits.

“The gist of it was that Parsons desired to take the spirit of Babylon, the “Whore of Babylon,” and invest it in a human being. The idea was to create a child in the spiritual world, and then call down the spiritual baby and direct it into a human womb. When born, this child would incarnate the forces of Babylon, which they considered to be a good thing. (Although Crowley had previously written the somewhat hilarious book Moonchild – concerning a similar experiment – he wrote in a letter: “Apparently Parsons and Hubbard or somebody is producing a moonchild. I get fairly frantic when I contemplate the idiocy of these louts.”)”

Covered in the Constantine film as the plot with Mammon. General to an army (forces) of demons. Demons have rank.
Note the similarity of the aliens in Signs to Mammon in that film e.g.

Nothing to see here, clearly.

Soulless eyes.

You could show people those pictures and say it’s the same character and they’d believe you.

“Based on face value of the evidence, a theory could be constructed that not only are the Lams “grey aliens,” but that the arrival of the “grey aliens” in American UFO culture was facilitated solely by the magical workings of Aleister Crowley and later disciples working in his footsteps. There are official O.T.O. groups today, such as the Cult of Lam, that are dedicated to invoking the Lam entities into the earth-world. According to their literature, not only is contact with non-human entities an integral component of spiritual growth, but the “Lam Consciousness” of Lucifer-Gnosis is the “natural mode of human evolution in the present Aeon.” Thus these grey-alien/Lam entities are deemed worthy of invocation into the earth-world on behalf of the interests of humanity’s evolution.”

Transhumanism, if only people altered their genome with modRNA to communicate with them (and later, be enslaved).

They hate God’s work and God’s children and wish to corrupt this. Thou shalt not adulterate (thy blood).

“Of course, Kenneth Grant’s statement noted above (“Lam is a Great Old One whose archetype is recognizable in accounts of UFO occupants”) is the final proof that the Crowleyian occultists fully believe that they are indeed invoking “grey aliens” into the earth-world.”

I had a vox day post where I was very salty drafted and didn’t upload it due to high salt content but since my explanations fill in some gaps I’ll upload it. Could be important, wouldn’t wish to hold back info for my ego. But it’s very salty and I was bitterly disappointed to get ripped off again. I wonder how long until he rips off this stuff.

I DON’T believe

There’s been whispers of ‘revelations’. As Theoria Apophasis has said, it would be a red herring.

Much like the Third Wave government paper, however, replicate THIS information far and wide.

thankfully, I can add to this

This website is an excellent resource generally, here is a HIGHLY salient article for your perusal:

They’re not from another planet as they claim, but from another DIMENSION. Namely, Hades, Tartarus, the Hell of Biblical fame because, hey, fire is technically a light too! How else would you (or a prophet) visualise it? So to say they’re creatures of light is technically correct! Distrust most New Age people about this. The New Age has been explained to me as The Age of Blood, a ‘great’ slaughter to earn the next stage or level or ‘peace’…. like fucking for virginity, as Carlin said.

I think it would be used as a Chinese EMP cover. Buying them time to invade Taiwan, secure the South Sea etc.

The ancient civilizations of the EgyptiansBabyloniansAztecs, Mayans, and Incas shared several intriguing characteristics:

They were extremely advanced scientifically and technologically.

Animal and human sacrifices were performed at an alarming rate, preceding their demise.

They believed they had acquired metaphysical knowledge from the “gods”, whom they perceived as coming from the stars and also the subterranean level of the earth.

These cultures disintegrated or became abruptly extinct while at the pinnacle of their existance.

This is why idolatry and human sacrifice is a sin.

“The purpose of the series of ceremonies performed by Parsons and Hubbard was to unseal an interdimensional gateway, that had been sealed in antiquity thereby allowing other dimensional entities known as the ‘Old Ones‘ access to our space/time continuum. The culmination of the ceremonies was reported to have been successful, having resulted in the establishment of ‘extra-terrestrial contact’…”


Seriously, just rewatch Ghostbusters. Predictive programming.
Contains: Plasma science, Sexy Satan and a Beast mating with a Whore. Turns out, not a kid’s film.

There is no space, it’s just dimensions, but k. Be that way.

ET means not-here, not-terra, not-Earthly, it doesn’t stipulate another planet, because it is NOT another planet, but correctly, another dimension. This is important.

Here’s where it gets really twisted. Why us? Well, what if we’re a farm? Why else deliberately overpopulate certain parts of the world that cannot sustain it? What if they are parasitic, as all ‘alien’ models make them hostile to survive?

“Several abductees, psychics (through out-of-body experiences) and former employees of the Dulce facility reported seeing large vats, full of blood and body parts; essentially, a human stew . Their understanding is particular varieties of aliens, mostly “Greys” bathe in these vats to absorb nutrients through their skin.

One of the secretions these aliens crave is adrenaline, which is generated in great quantity when the victim is tortured or traumatized at the moment of death. This glandular hormone is most potent in children.”

All those missing kids are real.

Meaning ‘to be as a God’ (Satanism) means to feed on humans: cannibalism.

Another taboo since Biblical times. See how it all fits together?

Egypt, destroyed by God’s wrath for

“Behold ye then god this great slaughter, mighty of terror, he washeth in your blood, he batheth in your gore.”

similar to the Hindu Kali

The human sacrifice was offering them dinner. Favour of the ‘Gods’ required ‘feeding them’

As sci-fi plants, to Serve Man. That and NBC Hannibal, which is littered with imagery.

totally normal but at least he’s a hunk

Read signs and symptoms of a cult online. It may be useful if a relative goes off the deep end.

Still, all alien films show they take especial interest in the children, including ET made by Spielberg himself.

If we’re a farm, they’ve been fattening us like a calf for… slaughter.

“It was explained to her that the universe is rhythmic and presently at a peak cycle; what appears to be chaos is actually the birthing of a “new order” (ordo ab chaos?). To enter into the next evolutionary level, new bodies will be needed to re-seed the planet. This hybrid body will be a combination of human and alien (remember the Nephilim?).”

Transhumanism cough cough. Coof coof. Vey.

“Such an insight is coherently expounded upon in the book, Space Aliens from the Pentagon, by Bill Lyne, former Air Force Intelligence Officer. I believe all the above explanations can exist simultaneously and need not be exclusive from one another.”

There’s an appeal to authority.


“A few so-called experts in the field of UFOlogy are excited about the possibility that someday soon, these seemingly benevolent and misunderstood inter-galactic beings will openly reveal themselves to the Earth’s human populace and bring about universal bliss.”

Bliss to a demon is torment to us. They bring Hell.

“From my perspective, these extra-terrestrials are nothing less than demons in alien’s clothing.”

If they come, they bring Hell.

That was dark so here’s some memes. Post over.

Damage control

They couldn’t keep the lid on the “Jewish” connection, huh?

While eventually anyone of high IQ was targeted for having weird books and there was a tragic genocide of innocent people based on IQ weirdness or plain envy, I have no doubt there were actual Satanists also hanged for abusing, corrupting or attempting to steal children, which obviously goes unmentioned here. Witches are Pagan, Satanists are monotheist, worshipping Satan as their One god. A woman who likes her herbal tea isn’t a problem, they provided our medicine for millennia. The evil use and concept of witch only arrived in medieval Europe with so-called Jews… Lilith in the Jewish theology (NOT Christian because it violates Genesis) was said to steal children (to eat them) and blood libel has been suspected in many cases of Jewish serial killers, from that recent creepy comic book guy who kosher slaughtered his ‘girlfriend’ to drain her blood (it’s a ritual sacrifice) back to Jack the Ripper and the first immigrant case covered up (wall erasure) to prevent riots by the PC.

Canaanites are not real Jews in my opinion but I could be wrong, Revelations is vague. The witch trials sought Canaanites (what we’d now call pedophiles), NOT people minding their own business (although con artists did accuse innocent people, inc. men).

The hats are 1. phallic 2. sinister 3. connected to a religion that mutilates babies 4. similar to obelisk, an occult symbol relating to Masons 5. wizards were said to hide things, like Mary Poppins’ bag. This is why magicians pull things out of hats and a reason top hats fell out of favour, suggesting Satanism due to use by Satanists like Houdini (it’s in the eyes).