The litmus tests arrive thick and fast with accelerating speed; for the simple reason that this Western world is controlled by those who follow a demonic agenda; and They will use all the weapons at their disposal - which include nearly-all the power, wealth, status and fame in the public arena.
The litmus tests have long since divided Western Christians from the rest; and now are functioning to divide among Christians.
Those who fail litmus tests have chosen to ally with one or other of the major agenda items by which the totalitarian globalists have chosen to corrupt the world, and to invert our values. This is, quite simply, choosing the side of Satan in the spiritual war against God and creation.
Unless repented, such a person has de facto ceased to be Christian; however he may self-identify.
This self-separation happens naturally, as our culture and society - our civilization - becomes further advanced in corruption.
All major institutions, including those that were net-good, are now net-bad (i.e. overall affiliated with the demonic powers of purposive evil); and the residual good that was in them is being driven out incrementally.
The death of Queen Elizabeth II is a case in point. The whole process of 'national mourning' leading up to the funeral was a top-down dictated operation; controlled by exactly the same powers and principalities who have devised, administered and propagandized the birdemic-peck, climate emergency suicide, Fire Nation hating/ WWIII-driving/ self-annihilation, antiracism-driven national destruction by mass immigration, and the world-historic evils of the transagenda and its sexual revolution origins.
The Exact Same People who do all that stuff, have been managing the 'national mourning' process for the past dozen days.
This, therefore, should be just another easy-peasy test of our discernment; and yet it is a test that vast swathes of self-styled traditionalists and 'conservative' Christians have failed spectacularly; sometimes under the lying pretense that the world of 2022 is fundamentally the same as it was forty, fifty, sixty years ago - often in the grip of a nostalgia that has been manipulated to serve the strategy of Satan.
Evil can only enter where it is invited; and the fact that we have a situation of top-down global totalitarian evil has only arisen and can only progress because hundreds of millions of people have invited this evil into their hearts - in defiance of the simple and obvious dictates of conscience.
We must therefore discern and identify and reject evil - which we can identify by its provenance, and by the tenacity and vigor with which it is pursued.
This really is not difficult; therefore failure to do it, is commensurately lethal.
100% true. It's hard to be forced to mourn a collapsed empire's titular head who helped exacerbate the collapse and the head of a dead expression of church who did nothing to head off its dying.
Same people same rush to death.
I'm surprised by your take on this, Dr. Charlton. I've found that many traditional Catholics, who would otherwise pass the other litmus tests, have "failed" this one.
I have focused less on the shortcomings of Queen Elizabeth II than I have on the unsuitability of King Charles III. As you know (even if you disagree), I have reckoned the murder of Charles I as a spiritual point of no return for England and the English. Charles III's devotion to System talking points show how far England has fallen.
Yes, agreed. I have not followed any aspect of the state funeral simply because it is all a giant show as part of the same overall lies. I did not even comment on her death on my own blog. I did not see the point in stating the damn bleeding obvious.
And may I also add that the religion that her family fronts is a protestant heresy put in place after the destruction of the Catholic Church in Britain by a perverted monarch who wanted yet another divorce.
@Ing - Just think. When the (global) mass media and institutional leadership takes a solid and coordinated line, with saturation coverage, for 12 days straight; what is the chance that this strategic endeavor will be on the side of God and creation, or for the good of Christians?
@Adam - Para One. Indeed.
Para Two - You will need to do some more thinking about 'heresy' if you hope to survive what is coming; because you yourself are certainly a (disobedient) heretic by the here-and-now standards of your church!
I would go so far as to say that heresy is an obsolete concept in these End Times: there are simply Christians, or not-Christians; and the Christians are spread across many denominations and churches and outwith them.
That aside; the origins of the Church of England, hence Anglican communion, are certainly as you say - and the institution has, overall, fallen very low by now.
Nonetheless, presumably by the guidance of the Holy Ghost and the choices of Men, great good came from the Church of England at several times and places.
For instance, the Authorized Version of the Bible ('King James') has been a great gift for all English speaking Christians; and the Book of Common Prayer has sustained a high Christian life for great numbers in many nations. The spiritual writings of Thomas Traherne, Thomas Browne, ST Coleridge, or CS Lewis (to mention some of my favourites), have also been tremendous positives - I could go on, but it seems silly to quibble about such obvious truths.
The test is all the subtler (not really but it seems so) because the Queen herself seemed was morally upright. But she had allowed both herself and her institution to be taken over by the anti-God agenda. People need to realise that even apparently good people can be co-opted by evil unless they actively and consciously resist it.
Regarding heresy, the stamp of spiritual authenticity has moved from formal belief to heart discernment. There will be people from different religious backgrounds on the same side of inner truth and people from the same religious background on different sides now.
@William "Queen herself seemed morally upright. But she had allowed both herself and her institution to be taken over by the anti-God agenda. "
Yes, she seemed morally upright, but so did celebrities such as Rolf Harris, Clement Freud or Stuart Hall. I no longer trust my evaluation of public figures when they seem to be decent. Certainly she spent her time, far more than the average person, in the company of exceptionally perverted and evil people such as Jimmy Savile, Prince Andrew, Lord Mountbatten.
The Queen operated not as a leader but much more as a middle manager - a typically female role. This entails passively looking elsewhere for strategy, and being concerned only with implementation. The Queen passively took her lead from wherever the political-institutional-media Establishment currently wanted to go.
I have been really grateful that I don't have a TV during this time because for the most part I didn't even know it was happening but every now and then, I'd see a meme or someone in real life would mention it to me and it was like my soul cringed away from the intrusion. I really had nothing to say about it I just needed to get away from it and you did clarify why. It was because it's the same evil people putting on a show.
I thought QEII was an acronym for some version of quantitative easing! And I feel I should complain that you picked a more boring subject!
Joking aside I did have to read to the point where you mentioned the not so good bess to figure out what event you were thinking of.
General note - It will be interesting to see how many of the same people who praised QEII for decades of 'dignified' inactivity in face of the steamrollering globalist-leftist totalitarian agenda; will soon be praising CIII for his 'inspiring' public interventions... in active support of the globalist-leftist totalitarian agenda.
I once heard it said that Dante Alighieri honored the pope not as an individual man, but he honored the position itself. Whatever vile man happened to sit there was almost incidental. I have a similar attitude toward monarchies everywhere. I think monarchy is the most normal and healthy form of government that exists, and it saddens me to witness its degeneration. I envy that the English still have it in any form.
I don't have the image handy, but there's a side by side image somebody put together of QEII sitting on a bench in front of a cabin somewhere (I believe it belonged to her). Next to it is an image of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell sitting on that same bench in exactly the same place. We are ruled by demons, and this ruler was no exception.
Perhaps the System is desperate to control the QEII proceedings out of terror for what thoughts the many millions might at last entertain. One has thoughts at funerals that cannot be had anywhere or anytime else. And the solemn pageantry of royalty has a shocking signifying power even now. It is so much more powerful to swear fealty and love to a living person and family rather than ideologies and constitutions.
By the way, Dr. Charlton, I've been meaning to ask you what you thought of Denis Villeneuve's Dune? The depiction of a far-future aristocracy exercised a powerful effect on me. The film also had a noticeably warm - almost intense - portrayal of the fraternal love between the men, boys, and servants of the Atreides clan. I'm looking forward to Part 2.
I recall reading from a second-hand source that Harry had told an interviewer all the royals hated their jobs. Harry obviously prefers being a celebrity instead. I fear Luke and Bruce are right: the royals will hang on to their relevance by using this burst of sympathy and affection and government-orchestrated pomp to align with the globalist-totalitarian NWO. The reward is even more wealth than they already have, and assurances that so long as they go along with the agenda there will be no effort to republican-ize Great Britain. I expect the NWO will keep the Commonwealth patched up as well as they can also.
I have argued in the past that the inherently monarchist and imperial Catholic Church did the same thing, nimbly substituting the secular democracies for all the extinct Catholic monarchs that formerly supported the Church and were as bound up with her as the hierarchs themselves. And with no more Catholic-ordained royalty exercising the State power (the other head of the double-headed eagle, the duopoly so completely part of Belloc's Europe/Faith/Christendom), this means, I am preaching to the choir, the Catholic Church is no longer really the Catholic Church. It's a church, even a Christian church, but there is no way it can be the Church qua Church any more than the Greek Orthodox bishop in that ghetto in Istanbul is the Ecumenical Patriarch; there's no more Byzantium. Modernity has wrecked Catholic and Orthodox ecclesiology.
And it really pains me to realize all this in my late 50s when I thought I had it figured out. But life never stops, does it?
The live stream yesterday morning was good for some sublime landscaping; colorful costumes, flags, and draperies; the architecture of Westminster Abbey. (What a short service.)
Lord Mountbatten--- and Clement Freud ??!! I didn't know about those two until your comment. My late oldest sister was such a fan of Freud from his appearances out here on The Dick Cavett Show. She died two years ago, but I don't think she heard about the 2016 revelations. Interesting that his widow does not deny the allegations and expressed sympathies to the victims.
And I read that the FBI had unflattering material on Mountbatten's wife as well as on him. Brrr...
@j - "the worst king is better than the best queen simply due to male headship."
You can only mean 'better by definition', because there are some rare but clear counter examples such as QEI.
The idea of 'restoring male headship' (and all the rest) seems to me part of a traditionalist mindset that - having observed the decline and corruption of The West - aims to revert back to an earlier type of society and human consciousness.
This I regard as (in the first place) impossible - nobody ever makes any progress towards restoring traditionalism, although the idea has been around for more than a century - e.g GK Chesterton).
And it would be the wrong aim even if it were possible, because humans have changed (innerly, in our consciousness, and by divine destiny), such that modern Men *cannot* live in traditionalist ways any more.
Hence Romantic Christianity.
@MB - I find it astonishing to see how much effort is put into discussing whether monarchies or republics are bets, when the most strikingly obvious things is how they are all-but identical nowadays!
e.g. Canada and the USA are *far, FAR* more similar than they are different (most Europeans could not tell them apart), and the same applies all over the West.
(In passing, I am amazed that the US so often assert that the war of independence was about 'freedom'; when it has always seems clear that Canadians have lived just as free lives - and were Not crushed by tyranny - despite remaining under British rule! Quantitative differences merely.)
We have all converged upon great evil and corruption, and no differences in political system have made any qualitative difference.
@Epi - "Perhaps the System is desperate to control the QEII proceedings out of terror for what thoughts the many millions might at last entertain."
That's a good idea. And another good reason for holding back from absorption in the officially-mandated celebrations.
"ask what you thought of Denis Villeneuve's Dune?"
While I was watching it, I thought the movie was very good; but it did not leave anything behind - I forgot it almost immediately. So, apparently, it did not affect me deeply.
@A-G - I agree. Fr Seraphim Rose said explicitly that the fullness of Orthodox Christianity ended *irrevocably* (because the tradition was broken) in 1917 - and this changes everything. It also indicates that we have entered the End Times. (For example, this breaks the desirability of real spiritual obedience to church authority, that used to be the ideal; since none are now ex officio worthy of obedience. Personal discernment has become essential.)
But there are not many of the Eastern Catholics who will explicitly swallow this bitter pill, despite how obvious it is that there is no Orthodox nation, no ordained Tsar or equivalent, anywhere.
Roman Catholics situation is no so clear cut, but very much analogous - as you say. i.e. In the Western Catholic church the break with tradition was less clear-cut than the Russian Revolution, but just as complete - or more so. The Roman Catholic 'system' had a division of church and secular power that was much greater than the Orthodox ideal; yet it was rooted in mutual respect and cooperation.
That has completely gone, yet Catholic intellectuals grossly neglect this difference (often asserting that the church become regarded as-if the state) - and the difference this does and *ought to* make to such matters as 'obedience'.
When the system of church and state has collapsed, then there can be no harmony of Christian life and no un-conscious, un-chosen Christianity - thus individual discernment is literally unavoidable, everywhere and for everybody.
But this necessity of personal discernment (rather than obedience) should also be acknowledged and embraced - as the basis and root of Christianity here and now.
@a_p - Yes, it is all terribly disappointing, but it is apparently real and we need to learn from it.
Aside, did you know that Clement Freud's wife Jill (nee) Flewett was an evacuee lodged with CS Lewis and his brother during WWII? The brothers like Jill very much, and regarded her as one of the few genuinely good people they knew; and gave her financial support at drama school. They kept in touch for many years - Warnie Lewis went to her wedding, as recorded in his diary.
What is chilling to me is that such an apparently very good, almost saintly, girl - ended in the situation she did, apparently adjusted to (maybe facilitating?) a very corrupt and depraved life. It's a warning.
I could not avoid the Queen's funeral because I was staying in a hotel in a room above the bar, on which it was shown on a wide-screen television. As everything in the town was closed, I stayed in my room and read the Coronation Service 1953 (an appendix in the late L L Blake's The Royal Law), paying particular attention to the wording of the oath. This is not an oath that, if I were in that position, I should be happy to look back on having sworn: but maybe that's just me. Everything that Blake said in his legal commentary, about the powers of the courts and ultimately the sovereign, under our great Common Law, to protect the people and to hold an over-mighty executive in check, has proven to be about as much protection as a wet cardboard box.
Normally I have a great respect for traditional symbols of authority and the rituals through which they are disclosed, but the only people I know with any interest in distinguishing between the constitutional role of the sovereign, and HMQ's personal status as a state-sponsored "national treasure" celebrity, are republicans !
@wa - Good comment!
My own position about QEII is partly derived from just such an analysis (the Vicar of a church I attended for several years was an expert on the Monarch's constitutional role in the Church of England, and he would often teach about this). And then my - utterly blighted - hope that *eventually* the Queen would deploy some of these powers in support of exactly that Coronation oath and constitutional role.
'Conservative' and traditionalist Christians are taking a very long time to wake up to the fact that the framework and system upon which they have pinned all their hopes, has "has proven to be about as much protection as a wet cardboard box".
We will see this yet again when King Charles III makes solemn public oaths which he does not believe, and has no intention of keeping. And of course the Archbishop of Canterbury has done exactly the same - Indeed, if a CofE priest actually adheres to all of 'the thirty-nine articles' he swore on ordination, he will be sacked.
Such is our world.
And we should act accordingly.
A lot of Americans ( like myself) still cherish the ideas behind the monarchy even though, as you pointed out, the institution is not even trying to live up to these ideals anymore. Despite being an American, monarchy comes naturally to children. Look how many American girls love to dress up as Disney princesses. Monarchy is a longing for the kingdom of heaven linked by families, not bureaucracies. There is a spirituality that underlies the "pomp and circumstance" that still resonates even though Queen Elizabeth II presided over an unprecedented political, moral, and spiritual decline.
There are many monarchists who naively hope, as you once did, that when things get bad enough the monarch will step in to right the ship. Others on the right simply support the monarchy as the alternative is worse, particularly if you live in Scotland ruled by the SNP. Of course, as William Wildblood pointed out, that is a sad statement about today's affairs if the only reason to support something is that the alternative is worse.
I tend to take Michael Baron's attitude towards organizations like organized churches and modern monarchies. Support the ideas, not necessarily the individual person's actions. For example, I love the Book of Common Prayer and gain a lot of insight from C.S. Lewis's writings despite the fact the American Episcopal Church and its mother Church of England are in apostasy. As it has been repeatedly stated, discernment is crucial more than ever.
@LM - I think monarchy is one of those things that *nowadays* will not lead anyone to the truth - but into conformity to evil; but if the truth is already known to someone, then he can "look back" upon monarchy (or many other corrupted things, like the Church of England) *from* the truth, and gain a good deal from it.
Thus, we need not 'agree with' something as-it-is (overall or by intent) to benefit.
Bruce, you’ve already coined the term “head girl” to describe the type of female leader we had in QEII.
Thank you for your blog. You’ve advanced my understanding of many important matters.
Thanks for the comment, Laura.
Post a Comment