Saturday, December 27, 2014

Anders Behring Breivik Precursor Of The Antichrist Had Over 200 Political Letters Confiscated By Prison Authorities

"A precursor of the Antichrist, with his troops drawn from many nations, will wage war against the true Christ, sole Savior of the world; he will shed much blood and will seek to annihilate the cult of God so as to be regarded as a god." Our Lady of La Salette 19 Sept. 1846 (Published by Mélanie 1879)

More than 200 letters written by mass murderer Anders Breivik have been seized to stop him setting up a far-right organisation from within his prison cell. Prison authorities have revealed they seized 220 of his letters because the correspondence showed he was attempting to establish himself as the 'frontman' of an organization prepared to use extreme violence. Breivik was responsible for the massacre of 77 people in 2011 after detonating a bomb in downtown Oslo and carrying out a mass shooting on Utoya Island. Yling Faeste, a spokesman for Norway's prison system, added: 'We have refused to send some letters from Breivik for reasons of security. We're talking about roughly 220 letters.' The right-wing, anti-muslim extremist was sentenced to 21 years' imprisonment with preventive detention in 2012. It the harshest possible prison sentence available under the Norwegian justice system and it is likely he will remain in prison for the rest of his life. Since his incarceration, Breivik has made increasingly desperate attempts to receive publicity, as well as issuing a number of bizarre demands. In February, he threatened to go on hunger strike unless prison authorities cave in to a list of demands for better conditions - including giving him a PlayStation 3. Daily Mail Read More>>>>>

Thursday, December 25, 2014

Merry Christmas!

LORENZO Monaco 
Nativity 
c. 1390

And it came to pass, that in those days there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that the whole world should be enrolled. This enrolling was first made by Cyrinus, the governor of Syria. And all went to be enrolled, every one into his own city. And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth into Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem: because he was of the house and family of David, To be enrolled with Mary his espoused wife, who was with child. And it came to pass, that when they were there, her days were accomplished, that she should be delivered. And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him up in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn. Lk.ii.

Saturday, December 6, 2014

Manifestation Of The Precursor To The Antichrist Brings Death And Destruction To Men! World Events During The Nine Months Leading Up To The Birth Of The Precursor To The Antichrist Anders Behring Breivik!


VIVARINI, Antonio
Adoration of the Magi
1445-47
.
The land that was desolate and impassable shall be glad, and the wilderness shall rejoice, and shall flourish like the lily.  It shall bud forth and blossom, and shall rejoice with joy and praise: the glory of Libanus is given to it: the beauty of Carmel, and Saron, they shall see the glory of the Lord, and the beauty of our God. Strengthen ye the feeble hands, and confirm the weak knees. Say to the fainthearted: Take courage, and fear not: behold your God will bring the revenge of recompense: God himself will come and will save you. Then shall the eyes of the blind be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped. Then shall the lame man leap as a hart, and the tongue of the dumb shall be free: for waters are broken out in the desert, and streams in the wilderness. And that which was dry land, shall become a pool, and the thirsty land springs of water. In the dens where dragons dwell before, shall rise up the verdure of the reed and the bulrush.  And a path and a way shall be there, and it shall be called the holy way: the unclean shall not pass over it, and this shall be unto you a straight way, so that fools shall not err therein.  No lion shall be there, nor shall any mischievous beast go up by it, nor be found there: but they shall walk there that shall be delivered. [And the redeemed of the Lord shall return, and shall come into Sion with praise, and everlasting joy shall be upon their heads: they shall obtain joy and gladness, and sorrow and mourning shall flee away. Isaias.xxxv.

Good things come to men at the Birth of Jesus Christ.

Evil things come to men at the birth of the precursor to the Antichrist.

Our Lady of La Salette has said that one day the world will witness the manifestation of the precursor to the Antichrist. Our Lady also gave a litany of horrible and terrifying events to come that will accompany the birth of the precursor to the Antichrist. Our Lady said in 1846 that:
"A precursor of the Antichrist, with his troops drawn from many nations, will wage war against the true Christ, sole Savior of the world; he will shed much blood and will seek to annihilate the cult of God so as to be regarded as a god." Our Lady of La Salette 19 Sept. 1846 (Published by Mélanie 1879)
No one has ever identified this precursor to the Antichrist, simply because the precursor to the Antichrist must first earn his title by killing a Pope. Our Lady gave a vision to Sr. Lucia of the terrible event, this is the vision of the killing of the Fatima Pope by the precursor to the Antichrist as is written down by Sr. Lucia:
“J.M.J.

The third part of the secret revealed at the Cova da Iria-Fatima, on 13 July 1917.

I write in obedience to you, my God, who command me to do so through his Excellency the Bishop of Leiria and through your Most Holy Mother and mine.

After the two parts which I have already explained, at the left of Our Lady and a little above, we saw an Angel with a flaming sword in his left hand; flashing, it gave out flames that looked as though they would set the world on fire; but they died out in contact with the splendour that Our Lady radiated towards him from her right hand: pointing to the earth with his right hand, the Angel cried out in a loud voice: ‘Penance, Penance, Penance!'. And we saw in an immense light that is God: ‘something similar to how people appear in a mirror when they pass in front of it' a Bishop dressed in White ‘we had the impression that it was the Holy Father'. Other Bishops, Priests, men and women Religious going up a steep mountain, at the top of which there was a big Cross of rough-hewn trunks as of a cork-tree with the bark; before reaching there the Holy Father passed through a big city half in ruins and half trembling with halting step, afflicted with pain and sorrow, he prayed for the souls of the corpses he met on his way; having reached the top of the mountain, on his knees at the foot of the big Cross he was killed by a group of soldiers who fired bullets and arrows at him, and in the same way there died one after another the other Bishops, Priests, men and women Religious, and various lay people of different ranks and positions. Beneath the two arms of the Cross there were two Angels each with a crystal aspersorium in his hand, in which they gathered up the blood of the Martyrs and with it sprinkled the souls that were making their way to God.

Tuy-3-1-1944”.
Is Pope Benedict XVI the Fatima Pope? No. According to Our Lady at La Salette the precursor to the Antichrist must first raise an army drawn from many nations. This has not been done yet. Why not? Because the potential precursor to the Antichrist is in prison, and will be in prison for approximately twenty more years - his name? The Norway monster - Anders Behring Breivik. ABB is the best candidate to take the title of precursor. Time will tell.

As for the horrible and terrifying events to visit the world during the manifestation of the precursor of the Antichrist - well, they are already here. Please read the words of Our Lady of La Salette and know that the time is now for our demise. Her words ring true.

Now as for the prophecy of Isaias that the world will be at peace and all will flourish when the manifestation of the Christ Child is born into this world has of course been fulfilled.

The opposite is to be expected when the Antichrist and his precursor makes his appearance. Death and destruction follow in the wake of the birth of the Antichrist and his precursor. This is a given. When the evil is manifested to the world all will be in fear and dread.  Do not the lot of you fear something? dread something? Our time is a little unsettling to say the least.

Here is a timeline of horrible and terrifying world events that took place during the nine months  prior to the birth of the Norway Monster Anders Behring Breivik on 13 February 1979 and 1 year after his birth.

Now of course you can say that ABB's birth coincided with the birth of millions upon millions of souls that day and there is obviously no correlation between the birth of ABB and the world events that transpired. Agreed. So take it or leave it. One thing is for certain is that one day Our Lady's words at Tuy and at La Salette will come true.

The only thing I can be accused of is bad interpretation of Her words.

World Events During The Nine Months Leading Up To The Birth Of The Precursor To The Antichrist ABB:

1978*

June 20 – A magnitude 6.5 earthquake hits Thessaloniki, Greece's second largest city, killing 45 people, injuring hundreds and damaging some of the city's Byzantine landmarks.


August 6 – Pope Paul VI dies in Castelgandolfo.

August 26 – Pope John Paul I succeeds Pope Paul VI as the 263rd Pope.

September 8 – Iranian Army troops open fire on rioters in Teheran, killing 122, wounding 4,000.

September 25 – PSA Flight 182, a Boeing 727, collides with a small private airplane and crashes in San Diego, California; 144 are killed.


September 28 – Pope John Paul I dies after only 33 days of papacy.


October 16 – Pope John Paul II succeeds Pope John Paul I as the 264th pope, resulting in the first Year of Three Popes since 1605. He is the first Polish pope in history, and the first non-Italian pope since Pope Adrian VI (1522-1523).


November 18 – Jonestown incident: In Guyana, Jim Jones leads his Peoples Temple cult in a mass murder-suicide that claims 918 lives in all, 909 of them at Jonestown itself, including over 270 children. Congressman Leo J. Ryan is assassinated by members of Peoples Temple shortly beforehand.

December 16 – Train 87 from Nanjing to Xining collides with train 368 from Xi'an to Xuzhou near Yangzhuang railway station in China, killing 106, injuring 218.

December 22 – Chicago serial killer John Wayne Gacy, who was subsequently convicted of the murder of 33 young men, is arrested.

Brenda Ann Spencer
1979

January 29 – Brenda Ann Spencer opens fire at a school in San Diego, California, killing 2 faculty members and wounding 8 students. Her response to the action, "I don't like Mondays," inspired the Boomtown Rats to make a song of the same name. For Christmas in 1978, her father, Wallace Spencer, gave her a Ruger 10/22 semi-automatic .22 caliber rifle with a telescopic sight and 500 rounds of ammunition.Before her parole board in 1999, she said: "I asked for a radio and he bought me a gun." To the question as to why he might have done that, she answered: "I felt like he wanted me to kill myself."

Precursor To The Antichrist
As 4 Years Old 

Anders Behring Breivik (ABB) born 13 February 1979

February 13 – The intense February 13, 1979 Windstorm strikes western Washington and sinks a 1/2-mile-long section of the Hood Canal Bridge.

February 14 – In Kabul, Muslim extremists kidnap the American ambassador to Afghanistan, Adolph Dubs, who is later killed during a gunfight between his kidnappers and police.


February 18 – The Sahara Desert experiences snow for 30 minutes.

March 14 – In China, a Hawker Siddeley Trident crashes into a factory near Beijing, killing at least 200.


March 29 – America's most serious nuclear power plant accident at Three Mile Island, Pennsylvania.

April 2 – Sverdlovsk Anthrax leak: A Soviet biowarfare laboratory at Sverdlovsk accidentally releases airborne anthrax spores, killing 66 plus an unknown amount of livestock.

April 10 – A tornado hits Wichita Falls, Texas, killing 42 people (the most notable of 26 that day).

April 15 – 1979 Montenegro Earthquake: A major earthquake (7.0 on the Richter scale) strikes Montenegro (then part of Yugoslavia) and parts of Albania, causing extensive damage to coastal areas and taking 136 lives; the old town of Budva is devastated.

May 9 – A Unabomber bomb injures Northwestern University graduate student John Harris.


May 25 – American Airlines Flight 191: In Chicago, a DC-10 crashes during takeoff at O'Hare International Airport, killing 271 on board and 2 people on the ground.

May 25 – John Spenkelink is executed in Florida, in the first use of the electric chair in America after the reintroduction of death penalty in 1976.


May 25 – Six-year-old Etan Patz disappears in New York City. The incident helps spark the missing children's movement.

July 8 – Los Angeles passes its gay and lesbian civil rights bill.

October 16 – A tsunami in Nice, France kills 23 people.

November 1 – Iran hostage crisis: Iranian Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini urges his people to demonstrate on November 4 and to expand attacks on United States and Israeli interests.


November 4 – Iran hostage crisis begins: 3,000 Iranian radicals, mostly students, invade the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and take 90 hostages (53 of whom are American). They demand that the United States send the former Shah of Iran back to stand trial.

November 20 – A group of 200 Juhayman al-Otaibi militants occupy Mecca's Grand Mosque. They are driven out by French commandos (allowed into the city under these special circumstances despite their being non-Muslims) after bloody fighting that leaves 250 people dead and 600 wounded.


December 3 – Eleven fans are killed during a stampede for seats before The Who concert at the Riverfront Coliseum in Cincinnati, Ohio.

December 12 A major earthquake and tsunami kills 259 people in Colombia

"I protest highly against a different text, which people may dare publish after my death. I protest once more against the very false statements of all those who dare say and write First that I embroidered the Secret; second, against those who state that the Queen Mother did not say to transmit the Secret to all her people." Mélanie


* All taken from Wikipedia

Sunday, November 16, 2014

A Treatise Of Antichrist: The Disputation Of Antichrist Is Propounded, And The First Argument From The Name It Self Discussed - M. Downams Answer Confuted II


FIRST CHAPTER

Wherein the Disputation of Antichrist is propounded.

M. Downams Answer confuted

II

Now whereas he affirmeth, that the conceits of the alder Papists who lived in the days of our forefathers, concerning Antichrist, were mere dotage, he only sayth it, and thereby discovered his spiteful spirit, which provoke him to rail without reason, and to slander against all truth.

For the Catholics of former days, held the very same, that we do now, though they explicated not themselves so fully, as Bellarmine and others do now.

In which respect only these may in some sort be truly called the reformers of Popery, that is, the explicates and conformers of Catholic doctrine against heretics.

But the reason of this difference betwixt the elder and the later writers is evident, for in their days Heretics were not so impudent as to urge so palpable and gross errors, as they are in our time: for otherwise, Bellarmine sufficiently declareth the antiquity of his doctrine, by proving whatsoever he sayth by the authority of the ancient Fathers.

Now whether many have contributed to Bellarmines books, or no, it is little to the purpose, though the truth is, as those know that are best acquainted with his studies, that they are all his own labors.

And that this may not seem strange, M.Downam may easily inform himself, that divers other of his order, that lived in the same time, and some in the same place, have in diers kinds written as large volumes, as Bellarmine hath in this. Whereof Salmeron, Tolet, Valentia, Molina, Suarez, Vasquez, and others amy serve for example.

Well to come to the M.Downam seemeth to allow of Bellarmine method and division,since that he objected nothing against it, but cometh presently to his first argument.

Saturday, November 15, 2014

A Treatise Of Antichrist: The Disputation Of Antichrist Is Propounded, And The First Argument From The Name It Self Discussed - M. Downams Answer Confuted I



FIRST CHAPTER

Wherein the Disputation of Antichrist is propounded.

M. Downams Answer confuted

I

First M. Downam telleth us of two great advantages that Bellarmine hath against him and all protestants in this point.

1. In respect of his great learning & much reading.
2. In that he is to prove the negative part, so that it is enough for him,if he can but show plainly and evidently,that any one several & essential mark ascribed unto Antichrist in the scriptures, doth not agree to the Pope.

All which we willingly acknowledge,and from hence do infer M. Downams ignorance and impudency, that whereas it had been enough for Bellarmine to have disproved him in one point, it is not enough for him that he is disproved in all, as the Reader will easily perceive in pursuing the particular arguments.

Likewise we acknowledge the controversy to be of that importance and consequence,that it manifestly convinceth them to be the limbs of Antichrist who are in error concerning this point: for this consequence doth not only touch us,if we were in the wrong, as M. Downam seeth to insinuate by only naming us, but it concerneth them also as fully,since that it is evident that none but heretics can charge any, and much less the chief Pastor of Christs Church,with so foul an imputation.

Now how true it is, that all heretics are limbs of Antichrist, I need not show, since that it is granted on both sides.

And therefore it behooveth M. Donam and his fellows to have as great a will to clear themselves in this behalf, as it doth us, and so much the more also, because we are but the defendants, and they are the slanderous calumniators; & likewise, for that some of their insolence and rash boldness in this assertion.

Friday, November 14, 2014

A Treatise Of Antichrist: The Disputation Of Antichrist Is Propounded, And The First Argument From The Name It Self Discussed ~ By Michael Christopherson (Walpole) Priest 1613 CHAPTER 1 BOOK XII



FIRST CHAPTER

Wherein the Disputation of Antichrist is propounded.

Book XII


Lastly so also expoundeth it in his Thesaurus linguna Graca Henricus Stephanus, who notwithstanding is one of the heretics of Geneva.

Hence we have our first arguement against our adversaries.

For since the name of Antichrsit signifieth the enmey and emulous of Christ, and subject to Christ in all things, and in no sort saith, that he is Christ, nor maketh himself equal to him, it is manifest, that he is not Antichrist.

Thursday, November 13, 2014

A Treatise Of Antichrist: The Disputation Of Antichrist Is Propounded, And The First Argument From The Name It Self Discussed ~ By Michael Christopherson (Walpole) Priest 1613 CHAPTER 1 BOOK XI


FIRST CHAPTER

Wherein the Disputation of Antichrist is propounded.

Book XI

Thirdly out of all the Authors who have written of Antichrist, and out of the common sense of all Christians, who by Antichrist understand a certain notable false Christ.

In which sort expoundeth also this word of the ancient Greeks St. Damascen lib.4.de fide cap.28.and after the same manner doth St. Jerome expond it of the Latins, who notwithstanding was also most skiful in the Greek tongue, quest.11. ad Algasiam.

Wednesday, November 12, 2014

A Treatise Of Antichrist: The Disputation Of Antichrist Is Propounded, And The First Argument From The Name It Self Discussed ~ By Michael Christopherson (Walpole) Priest 1613 CHAPTER 1 BOOK X



FIRST CHAPTER

Wherein the Disputation of Antichrist is propounded.

Book X

Secondly the same is proved out of the Scripture:for although this name were of itself ambiguous,yet as it is taken in Scripture It is not doubtful: and our question must not be of the word****** absolutely,but as it is taken in the Scriptures.

Now in the Scriptures, Antichrist is said to be him who is extolled above all that is called god, 2.Thess.2. which certainly is not to be the Vicar,but the enemy of Christ. And 1. Joan.2. Antichrist is said tobe him, who denieth Jesus to be Christ,that he may sell himself for Christ.

And Matth.24. Antichrist is said to affirm himself to be Christ, which certainly is not the part of a Vicar, but of an Emulous.

Tuesday, November 11, 2014

A Treatise Of Antichrist: The Disputation Of Antichrist Is Propounded, And The First Argument From The Name It Self Discussed ~ By Michael Christopherson (Walpole) Priest 1613 CHAPTER 1 BOOK IX


FIRST CHAPTER

Wherein the Disputation of Antichrist is propounded.

BOOK IX

Now that doth αντίχρατηγος not signify the Captains Vicar, but ordinarily a contrary Captain, as αυτιξζατηγδζ is to make war, and sometimes him that is in the Captains place, not subject to him, but as equal, as among the Latins, Propraetor or Proconsul doth not signify the Vicar of the Pretor or Consul, but him that is in some Province, that which the Pretor or Consul is in the City:and in this Musculus was deceived; for because he read in Budacus that doth signify a Propretor, he thought that it doth signify the Vicar of the Pretor, which is false.

Monday, November 10, 2014

A Treatise Of Antichrist: The Disputation Of Antichrist Is Propounded, And The First Argument From The Name It Self Discussed ~ By Michael Christopherson (Walpole) Priest 1613 CHAPTER 1 BOOK VIII


FIRST CHAPTER

Wherein the Disputation of Antichrist is propounded.

BOOK VIII

That this is the signification of this name, it is proved three ways.

First because among the Grecians the word αντι doth properly signify opposition, and because not only those things are said to be opposed,which are repugnant one to the other, but also those, which are of equal value, from thence it proceeds, that αντι in composition, sometime signify contrarietie, sometime equivalence,as is manifest in the examples of all such names, αντιπαλος signify an emulous in a combat, αντίθετος a contrary remedy, αντίΦρασξ  a contrary speech, αντιξτ Φοξ equivalent, αντίθεΦ equal to God, αντίΧειξ is the sum, because it is opposed against, and is equivalent to all the rest at hand, and so of the rest.

But a Vicar doth not signify opposition, but subordination to another, and therefore it cannot be expressed by the word αντι


Sunday, November 9, 2014

Nationalist Dr.Michael Savage On Nationalist Anders Behring Breivik

Dr. Michael Savage
"A forerunner of the Antichrist, with his troops drawn from many nations, will wage war against the true Christ, sole Savior of the world; he will shed much blood and will seek to annihilate the cult of God so as to be regarded as a god." Our Lady of La Salette 19 Sept. 1846 (Published by Mélanie 1879)
“J.M.J.

The third part of the secret revealed at the Cova da Iria-Fatima, on 13 July 1917.

I write in obedience to you, my God, who command me to do so through his Excellency the Bishop of Leiria and through your Most Holy Mother and mine.

After the two parts which I have already explained, at the left of Our Lady and a little above, we saw an Angel with a flaming sword in his left hand; flashing, it gave out flames that looked as though they would set the world on fire; but they died out in contact with the splendour that Our Lady radiated towards him from her right hand: pointing to the earth with his right hand, the Angel cried out in a loud voice: ‘Penance, Penance, Penance!'. And we saw in an immense light that is God: ‘something similar to how people appear in a mirror when they pass in front of it' a Bishop dressed in White ‘we had the impression that it was the Holy Father'. Other Bishops, Priests, men and women Religious going up a steep mountain, at the top of which there was a big Cross of rough-hewn trunks as of a cork-tree with the bark; before reaching there the Holy Father passed through a big city half in ruins and half trembling with halting step, afflicted with pain and sorrow, he prayed for the souls of the corpses he met on his way; having reached the top of the mountain, on his knees at the foot of the big Cross he was killed by a group of soldiers who fired bullets and arrows at him, and in the same way there died one after another the other Bishops, Priests, men and women Religious, and various lay people of different ranks and positions. Beneath the two arms of the Cross there were two Angels each with a crystal aspersorium in his hand, in which they gathered up the blood of the Martyrs and with it sprinkled the souls that were making their way to God.

Tuy-3-1-1944”.
Hey if I like listening to Dr Savage on the radio then you do too. That's the lesson. Nationalists like Dr. Savage are very convincing and say all the right things. Most Catholics should feel at ease listening to him. His morals are somewhat conservative and his politics as well.

Dr. Savage is no friend to the Muslims even though he himself is a SEMITE just like his Muslim cousins.

However there is a danger in this man. He is a Nationalist. Nationalist just like the Nazis back in the day and just like the Neo-Nazis today. The problem with his Nationalism is that Dr. Savage is a JEW.

You figure a loud mouth JEW would stay away from Nationalism - but he won't!

He loves Nationalism so much that he would even defend Nationalist Anders Behring Breivik and claim that ABB could not have blown up a building and driven to an Island to murder 77 souls - all in a very short time.Now granted this is 2014 and the killing took place on 22 July 2011.Maybe Savage changed his mind by now.

I know he hasn't changed his mind on Nationalism. And there in lies the danger in listening to the man.

For you see Nationalism is the political philosophy of the Forerunner to the Antichrist.

Our Lady of La Salette is warning the lot of you to stay away from Nationalism. Our Lady at La Salette and at Fatima tells you that the Forerunner to the Antichrist will be a Nationalist and who will raise any army made up of Nationalists from allover the world and will one day kill the Fatima Pope and Faithful who are making their way up a steep mountain.

So please to the Mother of God and not to JEW Savage.

Thing is, is that Savage will never see the bad fruit of his Nationalism in the killing of the Fatima Pope and Faithful, but Savage has seen the Forerunner to the Antichrist in the person of Anders Behring Breivik.

Here is Savage's defense of ABB:
The Islamic news angle, Savage said, has faded from the press since Breivik was fingered, even though the lone Norwegian committing both crimes seems to Savage a suspect possibility"The official story makes no sense," Savage told WND. "This looks like a classic conspiracy."

"This has all the appearances of a cover-up," Savage told WND. "They created their Reichstag fire. They found their Timothy McVeigh. They created their Jack Ruby. How could one man have blown up the downtown and then raced to the island to kill the teens?

"This is likely a fabrication of the Labour Party, who needs to hold onto power to enforce their multi-culturalist, Muslim-favoring, anti-nationalist views," he continued, "especially in light of the earlier 'credit' for this atrocity claimed by the radical Muslim group whose leader they were threatening to deport.

"The official story defies logic in the following sense as well," he continued, "if this lone right-winger hated Muslims, as the New York Times is reporting, then why did he slaughter his own people and not Muslims?"

… Savage said "Norway's 9/11" could have been stopped, "but it grew far too long, nourished by the bile of Eurosocialism." "I hoped that incidents like this," he said, "will lead Europeans to come to the defense of their own civilizations and clamp down on the hate and intolerance that takes perverse advantage of European tolerance and openness." Right Wing Watch>>>>>
Just a word on how everything is turned up side down you know this and I know this. We are living in the times of the ANTI-GOSPEL where everything is the opposite of whats found in the Gospel.

For instance Jew Dr. Micheal Savage claims to be from a long line of Prophets (which is reality he is not) but lets humor him and take note of a Prophet found in the Gospel - Simeon who was waiting for the Messiahs to manifest himself before Simeon died:
And he had received an answer from the Holy Ghost, that he should not see death, before he had seen the Christ of the Lord. And he came by the Spirit into the temple. And when his parents brought in the child Jesus, to do for him according to the custom of the law, He also took him into his arms, and blessed God, and said:Now thou dost dismiss thy servant, O Lord, according to thy word in peace; Because my eyes have seen thy salvation, Which thou hast prepared before the face of all peoples: A light to the revelation of the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel.
Same will happen today with Savage playing the part of Simeon and the Forerunner to the Antichrist played by Anders Behring Breivik (ABB) - Again everything is turned on its head.

Bad news for Savage he will never see the triumph of his Nationalism as carried out by ABB.


Forerunner To The Antichrist: Sick Killer Anders Breivik Claims He's Working '70 Hours A Week' As He Preaches Hate From Prison Cell

"A forerunner of the Antichrist, with his troops drawn from many nations, will wage war against the true Christ, sole Savior of the world; he will shed much blood and will seek to annihilate the cult of God so as to be regarded as a god." Our Lady of La Salette 19 Sept. 1846 (Published by Mélanie 1879)

Potential candidate for Forerunner to the Antichrist is Anders Behring Breivik or ABB even though he is not a Roman Catholic - yet.

(Mirror) Oct 18, 2014 19:52

By Tom Parry

The mass murderer, serving 21 years for the 2011 slaughter of 77 people in Norway, has written to his dad, claiming he is on contact with fellow fascists

Mass killer Anders Breivik says he is working “70 hours a week” to spread his ideology of hate from prison, reports Tom Parry in the Sunday People.

The psychopath , serving 21 years for the 2011 slaughter of 77 people in Norway, boasted that he has regular chats with fellow fascists.

Breivik, 35, has previously said he went on his murder spree because of his hatred for multi-culturalism.

In a rambling letter to dad Jens, a retired diplomat, he ranted: “I am proud I have been able to contribute to the salvation of my people.

“I continue to work 70-hour weeks to that end.

“My campaign was, as is commonly known, the most significant by a nationalist in the whole of post-war European history.

“History will always repeat itself and in a few years the fascist will yet again rule northern Europe.

"I have many ideological brothers and sisters in France with whom I correspond.”

He called his father a “coward” for not backing his views and said he has “renounced” his family.

A Treatise Of Antichrist: The Disputation Of Antichrist Is Propounded, And The First Argument From The Name It Self Discussed ~ By Michael Christopherson (Walpole) Priest 1613 CHAPTER 1 BOOK VII



FIRST CHAPTER

Wherein the Disputation of Antichrist is propounded.

BOOK VII

But without doubt they are deceived,or endeavor to deceive, for the name of Antichrist cannot in any sort, signify the Vicar of Christ, but only some that is contrary to Christ: and contrary not howsoever,but is such sort, that he strive with him for the seat & dignity of Christ, that is, who is amulas Christi, at emulation with Christ,and would be accounted Christ,having cast him down who is truly Christ.


Saturday, November 8, 2014

A Treatise Of Antichrist: The Disputation Of Antichrist Is Propounded, And The First Argument From The Name It Self Discussed ~ By Michael Christopherson (Walpole) Priest 1613 CHAPTER 1 BOOK VI



FIRST CHAPTER

Wherein the Disputation of Antichrist is propounded.

BOOK VI

For the first,some of our adversaries teach, that the name of Antichrist doth properly signify the Vicar of Christ, and therefore that the Pope, who affirmeth himself to be Christs Vicar is Antichrist.

So teacheth Wolfgangus Musculus in locis cap. de potest. Ministroru, and he prove it, because that word ανtι signify vice, whence ανtιζανtηγδς signify him who obtrudeth himself for Captain,that is, who will be accompted the Captains Vicar.

The Magdeburgenses cent.I.lib.2.cap.4.colum.435. do teach, that the Pope is therefore the true Antichrist because he maketh himself the vicar of Christ.








Friday, November 7, 2014

A Treatise Of Antichrist: The Disputation Of Antichrist Is Propounded, And The First Argument From The Name It Self Discussed ~ By Michael Christopherson (Walpole) Priest 1613 CHAPTER 1 BOOK V


FIRST CHAPTER 

Wherein the Disputation of Antichrist is propounded.

BOOK V

Wherefore that this question may be diligently explicated, nine heads are to be treated of.

First of the name it self of Antichrist.

2. Whether Antichrist be one man or a kind of men.

3. Of the time of his coming and death.

4. Of his proper name.

5. Of what nation he shall be born, & by whom he shall chiefly be received.

6. Where he shall fix his seat.

7. Of his doctrine and manners.

8. Of his miracles.

9. Of his kingdom and wars.

For out of all these, it will most clearly appear, with what impudence the heretics make the Pope Antichrist: to which we will add a Chapter,wherein we will prove, that the Pope is not only not Antichrist, but that he hath in no sort left to be the Bishop and pastor of the whole Church, that nothing may remain not solved of Calvin's objections.




Thursday, November 6, 2014

A Treatise Of Antichrist: The Disputation Of Antichrist Is Propounded, And The First Argument From The Name It Self Discussed ~ By Michael Christopherson (Walpole) Priest 1613 CHAPTER 1 BOOK IV


First Chapter 

Wherein the Disputation of Antichrist is propounded.

BOOK IV

The like teach all the heretics of this time, & chiefly Luther in supput. temporum, & in assert.art.28. & 36.and often in other places.

Likewise the Magdeburgenses Centur.i.lib.2.cap.4.colum.434. & sequent. and in all the following Centuries cap.4.7.10. Illyricus in lib. de primat.

David Chyreus in cap. 9.&13. Apoc.

Likewise Wolfgangus Musculus in loc.commun.tit. de Ecclesia.

Theodor. Beza in Com.2.Thessal.2.

Theodor.Bibliander in Chron.tabul.10.11.12.&14.

Henricus Pantaleon in Chron.Henricus Bullinger praesat.in sauas homil.ad Apocal.

And before all these John Wickliffe art.30. amongst those which are condemned in Council.Constanstiensi sess, 8. pronounced the Pope to be Antichrist.





Wednesday, November 5, 2014

First Argument From The Name It Self Discussed ~ By Michael Christopherson (Walpole) Priest 1613 Chapter I. Bk.iii


First Chapter 

Wherein the Disputation of Antichrist is propounded.

III

Now Calvin Lib.4.cap.7.&23. "Let (saith he) all those things be true,which notwithstanding we have now wrested from them, that Peter was by the voice of Christ, appointed Head of the universal Church, & that he left the honor given unto him in the Roman Sea, that thus was established by the authority of the ancient Church, & confirmed by long use, that the chiefest authority was always due from all to the Bishop of Rome,and that he was the judge of all causes and men, that he was subject to the judgment of none; let them have more also if they will:Yet I answer in one word, that nothing of this standeth in force, except the Church and Bishop be at Rome.

And after &.24. Let the Romanists untie me this knot: I deny that their Pope is the Prince of Bishops, since that he is not a Bishop.

And after. Let Rome in times past have been the Mother of all Churches:but since she began to become the seat of Antichrist, she left to be that which she was.

And after &.25.We seem to some, backbiters and slanderers,when we call the Bishop of Rome Antichrist, but they which think so, understand not that they accuse Paul of immodesty, after whom we speak, yea out of whose mouth we speak so.

And least any object, that we wrongfully wrest Paul'swords against the Pope which pertain to another purpose,I will briefly show, that they cannot  be understood otherwie, then of the Popedome." So he.


Tuesday, November 4, 2014

A Treatise Of Antichrist: The Disputation Of Antichrist Is Propounded, And The First Argument From The Name It Self Discussed ~ By Michael Christopherson (Walpole) Priest 1613 Chapter I. Bk.ii



First Chapter

Wherein the Disputation of Antichrist is propounded.

II

But he should have showed, into what  errors the Bishops of Rome are fallen,and when,and by whome they were condemned.

For we know,that in the General Lateran Council under Innocentius the third, and of Lyons under Gregory the tenth, and of Florence under Eugenius the fourth, the Greeks being convicted of error, returned to the Faith of the Latins, and afterward always returned to their vomit again, and were therefore most grievously punished by God; but we never read that the Latins came to the Faith of the Greeks.

Neither can there any Ecclesiastical judgment be produced against the Latins,as we bring many against the Greeks.

Monday, November 3, 2014

A Treatise Of Antichrist: The Disputation Of Antichrist Is Propounded, And The First Argument From The Name It Self Discussed ~ By Michael Christopherson (Walpole) Priest 1613 Chapter I. Bk.i.

Pope Francis Verano Cemetery
2 November 2014
First Chapter

Wherein the Disputation of Antichrist is propounded.

I

We have demonstrated hitherto (saith Bellarmine) that the Pope succedeth S. Peter in the chiefest Princedom of the whole Church.

It remaineth that we see, whether at any time the Pope hath fallen from this degree, for that our adversaries contend, that he is not at this time a true Bishop of Rome, whatsoever he was before.

And Nilus in the end of his book against the Primacy of the Bishop of Rome, speaketh thus: But let that be the sum and head of my speech, that while the Pope keepeth in the Church a convenient, heavenly, and of ancient time appointed order, while he holdeth and defendeth the heavenly truth, & while he cleaveth to Christ, the chief and true Lord and head of the Church, I will easily suffer him to be both the head of the Church, & the chiefest Priest, & the successor of Peter, or else if he will, of all the Apostles, that all obey him, and that whatsoever belongeth to his honour, be in nothing dimmished: but if he be departed from the truth, & will not return to it, he ought deservedly to be accounted of, as one that is condemned and rejected.


Saturday, April 19, 2014

Praise ye Him According To The Multitude Of His Greatness

VERONESE, Paolo 
The Resurrection of Christ 
c. 1570



Solemn Lauds of Easter Day
PSALM 150 (from the Vulgate Psalter)

Praise ye the Lord in His holy places: * praise ye Him in the firmament of His power. Praise ye Him for His mighty acts: * praise ye Him according to the multitude of His greatness. Praise Him with sound of trumpets: * praise Him with psaltery and harp. Praise Him with timbrel and choir: * praise Him with strings and organs. Praise Him on high sounding cymbals: praise Him on cymbals of joy. * Let every spirit praise the Lord. Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, * and to the Holy Ghost. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, * world without end. Amen. 

Ant. Alleluia, alleluia, alleluia.


Friday, April 18, 2014

I Gave Thee The Water Of Salvation From The Rock To Drink: And Thou Hast Given Me Gall And Vinegar

MASTER FRANCKE Vir 
Dolorum (Man of Sorrows) 
c. 1420


V. I gave thee the water of salvation from the rock to drink: and thou hast given Me gall and vinegar. R. O my people, what have I done to thee? or wherein have I afflicted thee? Answer me


The Right Hand Of The Lord Hath Wrought Strength. The Right Hand Of The Lord Hath Exulted Me: I Shall Not Die, But Live: And Shall Declare The Works Of The Lord

GOSSART, Jan 
Christ Carrying the Cross 
1520-25


The right hand of the Lord hath wrought strength: the right hand of the Lord hath exulted me: the right hand of the Lord hath wrought strength. I shall not die, but live: and shall declare the works of the Lord.OFFERTORY Ps.117 MASS FOR MAUNDY THURSDAY

Tuesday, March 25, 2014

As He Spoke To Our Fathers, To Abraham And To His Seed For Ever

ALBANI, Francesco 
The Annunciation

My soul doth magnify the Lord.
And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.
Because he hath regarded the humility of his handmaid; for behold from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.
Because he that is mighty, hath done great things to me; and holy is his name.
And his mercy is from generation unto generations, to them that fear him.
He hath shewed might in his arm: he hath scattered the proud in the conceit of their heart.
He hath put down the mighty from their seat, and hath exalted the humble.
He hath filled the hungry with good things; and the rich he hath sent empty away.
He hath received Israel his servant, being mindful of his mercy:
As he spoke to our fathers, to Abraham and to his seed for ever.

Wednesday, March 5, 2014

Lord Rayel THE MESSIAH HAS ARRIVED?



There will first be a forerunner to the Antichrist before the manifestation of the actual Antichrist as foretold by the Mother of God the Blessed Virgin Mary at La Salette:
"A forerunner of the Antichrist, with his troops drawn from many nations, will wage war against the true Christ, sole Savior of the world; he will shed much blood and will seek to annihilate the cult of God so as to be regarded as a god." Our Lady of La Salette 19 Sept. 1846 (Published by Mélanie 1879)
Lord Rayel is not the Anti-Christ, he is not even the forerunner to the Anti-Christ, he is an idiot.

Questionable if he is a real person. This is a scam.

Notice that Rayel's image of the red cross is lifted from Anders Behring Breivik's manifesto:



If you have received a Knighthood (Templar, Malta, Hospitaller, etc.), or are a recipient of Holy Orders, then you have taken a sacred oath to serve the Sovereign Lord, and he expects you to fulfill the duties of your obligation. You are being called to active service. Most of you will not serve in a military capacity, unless that is part of your professional training. The majority of you will be expected to serve our Lord in the capacity of your present vocation. You will immediately contact The Apostolate Office via email, with the word "ORDERS" in the subject line. Your email should include your full name, contact information, and a list of the areas you believe you could be of greatest service to the Sovereign. By Order of: Directorate of Ecumenical Relations Apostolic and Ecclesiastical Affairs Division Lord Rayel 
Lord Rayel has a twitter account as well - with 23 tweets & over 6000 followers - all bought and paid for for a couple of bucks!

Boring joke.....

Blessed Be The Lord My God, Who Teacheth My Hands To Fight, And My Fingers To War ~ Ash Wednesday 2014

GRÜNEWALD, Matthias
The Crucifixion (detail)
c. 1515

Blessed be the Lord my God, who teacheth my hands to fight, and my fingers to war Ps.cxliii.i.


Sunday, February 2, 2014

Now Hillary Clinton Is The Antichrist! Montana House Candidate & Former Navy Seal Ryan Zinke Calls Clinton The Antichrist!


Montana House candidate Ryan Zinke, the early Republican front-runner for Montana's open House seat, called former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton the "Antichrist" in a recent campaign appearance, according to a local newspaper. "We need to focus on the real enemy," he said referring to Clinton, according to the Big Fork Eagle, before calling her the Antichrist. The Hill Read More>>>>>>

Tuesday, January 21, 2014

Political Philosophy Of The Forerunner To The Antichrist - Where Will He Get His Ideas? From Mr. Mencius Moldbug! On The Subject Of Building A New Ideology

Mr. Mencius Moldbug

 He that useth many words shall hurt his own soul: and he that taketh authority to himself unjustly shall be hated. Ecclesiasticus xx
Mr. Moldbug already knew back in 2007 that his many many words would hurt him - his ill formed conscience even made him post this:
The people cry out for shorter, more controversial posts! 
Yes indeed! Who has time to read all the verbiage. Well Mr. Mencius Moldbug (sounds like a name of a demon) is an intellectual, therefore he is at a disadvantage - meaning - he is stupid beyond measure and will cause great harm to his soul (which he dare not mention on his blog) and to society.

Mr. Mencius Moldbug needs an audience and a man of action to carry out his political fantasy. Whoo will take up the views of Moldbug and put them into action?

The forerunner to the Antichrist.

Here is the story of the forerunner to the Antichrist:
“J.M.J. 
The third part of the secret revealed at the Cova da Iria-Fatima, on 13 July 1917. 
I write in obedience to you, my God, who command me to do so through his Excellency the Bishop of Leiria and through your Most Holy Mother and mine. 
After the two parts which I have already explained, at the left of Our Lady and a little above, we saw an Angel with a flaming sword in his left hand; flashing, it gave out flames that looked as though they would set the world on fire; but they died out in contact with the splendour that Our Lady radiated towards him from her right hand: pointing to the earth with his right hand, the Angel cried out in a loud voice: ‘Penance, Penance, Penance!'. And we saw in an immense light that is God: ‘something similar to how people appear in a mirror when they pass in front of it' a Bishop dressed in White ‘we had the impression that it was the Holy Father'. Other Bishops, Priests, men and women Religious going up a steep mountain, at the top of which there was a big Cross of rough-hewn trunks as of a cork-tree with the bark; before reaching there the Holy Father passed through a big city half in ruins and half trembling with halting step, afflicted with pain and sorrow, he prayed for the souls of the corpses he met on his way; having reached the top of the mountain, on his knees at the foot of the big Cross he was killed by a group of soldiers who fired bullets and arrows at him, and in the same way there died one after another the other Bishops, Priests, men and women Religious, and various lay people of different ranks and positions. Beneath the two arms of the Cross there were two Angels each with a crystal aspersorium in his hand, in which they gathered up the blood of the Martyrs and with it sprinkled the souls that were making their way to God.

Tuy-3-1-1944”.
The forerunner to the Antichrist is the one who heads the army of soldiers that kill the Fatima Pope and fairhful making their way up the steep mountain. Our Lady confirms this here:
"A forerunner of the Antichrist, with his troops drawn from many nations, will wage war against the true Christ, sole Savior of the world; he will shed much blood and will seek to annihilate the cult of God so as to be regarded as a god." Our Lady of La Salette 19 Sept. 1846 (Published by Mélanie 1879)
On top a steep mountain is where the "philosophy" of  Mr. Mencius Moldbug takes him. Call it the fruit of his "philosophy" killing the Fatima Pope and faithful.

Who is the forerunner to the Antichrist that will be influenced by the ravings of Moldbug?

This guy:

Anders Behring Breivik
ABB

Yes the best candidate for forerunner to the Antichrist is the man who started his public ministry by killing 77 on the feast of St Mary Magdalene 22 July 2011.

ABB is currently studying political philosophy from his jail cell through the University of Oslo. Now as Mr. Moldbug admits ABB is no intellectual - he is a man of action - a killer. These two will make a great pair someday.

Will Mr. Moldbug (I wish he would have chosen the name Moldburg instead - it would be fitting) be the mentor of ABB? It's a good possibility - Moldbug has unrestrained passions and posting YouTube videos isn't gonna cut it. Moldbug needs action. and uniforms and guns and a leader......

Now for Mr. Moldbug's manifesto:

MONDAY, APRIL 23, 2007 8 comments

A formalist manifesto

The other day I was tinkering around in my garage and I decided to build a new ideology.

What? I mean, am I crazy or something? First of all, you can't just build an ideology. They're handed down across the centuries, like lasagna recipes. They need to age, like bourbon. You can't just drink it straight out of the radiator.

And look what happens if you try. What causes all the problems of the world? Ideology, that's what. What do Bush and Osama have in common? They're both ideological nutcases. We're supposed to need more of this?

Furthermore, it's simply not possible to build a new ideology. People have been talking about ideology since Jesus was a little boy. At least! And I'm supposedly going to improve on this? Some random person on the Internet, who flunked out of grad school, who doesn't know Greek or Latin? Who do I think I am, Wallace Shawn?

All excellent objections. Let's answer them and then we'll talk about formalism.

First, of course, there are a couple of beautifully aged traditional ideologies which the Internet now brings us in glorious detail. They go by lots of names, but let's call them progressivism and conservatism.

My beef with progressivism is that for at least the last 100 years, the vast majority of writers and thinkers and smart people in general have been progressives. Therefore, any intellectual in 2007, which unless there has been some kind of Internet space warp and my words are being carried live on Fox News, is anyone reading this, is basically marinated in progressive ideology.

Perhaps this might slightly impair one's ability to see any problems that may exist in the progressive worldview.

As for conservatism, not all Muslims are terrorists, but most terrorists are Muslims. Similarly, not all conservatives are cretins, but most cretins are conservatives. The modern American conservative movement - which is paradoxically much younger than the progressive movement, if only because it had to be reinvented after the Roosevelt dictatorship - has been distinctly affected by this audience. It also suffers from the electoral coincidence that it has to despise everything that progressivism adores, a bizarre birth defect which does not appear to be treatable.

Most people who don't consider themselves "progressives" or "conservatives" are one of two things. Either they're "moderates," or they're "libertarians."

In my experience, most sensible people consider themselves "moderate," "centrist," "independent," "unideological," "pragmatic," "apolitical," etc. Considering the vast tragedies wrought by 20th-century politics, this attitude is quite understandable. It is also, in my opinion, responsible for most of the death and destruction in the world today.

Moderation is not an ideology. It is not an opinion. It is not a thought. It is an absence of thought. If you believe the status quo of 2007 is basically righteous, then you should believe the same thing if a time machine transported you to Vienna in 1907. But if you went around Vienna in 1907 saying that there should be a European Union, that Africans and Arabs should rule their own countries and even colonize Europe, that any form of government except parliamentary democracy is evil, that paper money is good for business, that all doctors should work for the State, etc, etc - well, you could probably find people who agreed with you. They wouldn't call themselves "moderates," and nor would anyone else.

No, if you were a moderate in Vienna in 1907, you thought Franz Josef I was the greatest thing since sliced bread. So which is it? Hapsburgs, or Eurocrats? Pretty hard to split the difference on that one.

In other words, the problem with moderation is that the "center" is not fixed. It moves. And since it moves, and people being people, people will try to move it. This creates an incentive for violence - something we formalists try to avoid. More on this in a bit.

That leaves libertarians. Now, I love libertarians to death. My CPU practically has a permanent open socket to the Mises Institute. In my opinion, anyone who has intentionally chosen to remain ignorant of libertarian (and, in particular, Misesian-Rothbardian) thought, in an era when a couple of mouse clicks will feed you enough high-test libertarianism to drown a moose, is not an intellectually serious person. Furthermore, I am a computer programmer who has read far too much science fiction - two major risk factors for libertarianism. So I could just say, "read Rothbard," and call it a day.

On the other hand, it is hard to avoid noticing two basic facts about the universe. One is that libertarianism is an extremely obvious idea. The other is that it has never been successfully implemented.

This does not prove anything. But what it suggests is that libertarianism is, as its detractors are always quick to claim, an essentially impractical ideology. I would love to live in a libertarian society. The question is: is there a path from here to there? And if we get there, will we stay there? If your answer to both questions is obviously "yes," perhaps your definition of "obvious" is not the same as mine.

So this is why I decided to build my own ideology - "formalism."

Of course, there is nothing new in formalism. Progressives, conservatives, moderates, and libertarians will all recognize large chunks of their own undigested realities. Even the word "formalism" is borrowed from legal formalism, which is basically the same idea in more modest attire.

I am not Vizzini. I am just some dude who buys a lot of obscure used books, and is not afraid to grind them down, add flavor, and rebrand the result as a kind of political surimi. Most everything I have to say is available, with better writing, more detail and much more erudition, in JouvenelKuehnelt-LeddihnLeoni,BurnhamNock, etc, etc.

If you've never heard of any of these people, neither had I until I started the procedure. If that scares you, it should. Replacing your own ideology is a lot like do-it-yourself brain surgery. It requires patience, tolerance, a high pain threshold, and very steady hands. Whoever you are, you already have an ideology in there, and if it wanted to come out it would have done so on its own.

There is no point in starting this messy experiment only to install some other ideology that's the way it is just because someone said so. Formalism, as we'll see, is an ideology designed by geeks for other geeks. It's not a kit. It doesn't come with batteries. You can't just pop it in. At best, it's a rough starting point to help you build your own DIY ideology. If you're not comfortable working with a table saw, an oscilloscope and an autoclave, formalism is not for you.

That said:

The basic idea of formalism is just that the main problem in human affairs is violence. The goal is to design a way for humans to interact, on a planet of remarkably limited size, without violence.

Especially organized violence. Next to organized human-on-human violence, a good formalist believes, all other problems - Poverty, Global Warming, Moral Decay, etc, etc, etc - are basically insignificant. Perhaps once we get rid of violence we can worry a little about Moral Decay, but given that organized violence killed a couple of hundred million people in the last century, whereas Moral Decay gave us "American Idol," I think the priorities are pretty clear.

The key is to look at this not as a moral problem, but as an engineering problem. Any solution that solves the problem is acceptable. Any solution that does not solve the problem is not acceptable.

For example, there is an existing idea called pacifism, part of the general progressive suite, which claims to be a solution for violence. As I understand it, the idea of pacifism is that if you and I can not be violent, everyone else will not be violent, too.

There's no doubt in my mind that pacifism is effective in some cases. In Northern Ireland, for example, it seems to be just the thing. But there is a kind of "hundredth-monkey" logic to it that consistently eludes my linear, Western mind. It strikes me that if everyone is a pacifist and then one person decides not to be a pacifist, he will wind up ruling the world. Hmm.

A further difficulty is that the definition of "violence" isn't so obvious. If I gently relieve you of your wallet, and you chase after me with your Glock and make me beg to be allowed to give it back, which of us is being violent? Suppose I say, well, it was your wallet - but it's my wallet now?

This suggests, at the very least, that we need a rule that tells us whose wallet is whose. Violence, then, is anything that breaks the rule, or replaces it with a different rule. If the rule is clear and everyone follows it, there is no violence.

In other words, violence equals conflict plus uncertainty. While there are wallets in the world, conflict will exist. But if we can eliminate uncertainty - if there is an unambiguous, unbreakable rule that tells us, in advance, who gets the wallet - I have no reason to sneak my hand into your pocket, and you have no reason to run after me shooting wildly into the air. Neither of our actions, by definition, can affect the outcome of the conflict.

Violence of any size makes no sense without uncertainty. Consider a war. If one army knows it will lose the war, perhaps on the advice of some infallible oracle, it has no reason to fight. Why not surrender and get it over with?

But this has only multiplied our difficulties. Where do all these rules come from? Who makes them unbreakable? Who gets to be the oracle? Why is the wallet "yours," rather than "mine"? What happens if we disagree on this? If there's one rule for every wallet, how can everyone remember them all? And suppose it's not you, but me, who's got the Glock?

Fortunately, great philosophers have spent many long hours pondering these details. The answers I give you are theirs, not mine.

First, one sensible way to make rules is that you're bound by a rule if, and only if, you agree to it. We don't have rules that are made by the gods somewhere. What we have is actually not rules at all, but agreements. Surely, agreeing to something and then, at your own convenience, un-agreeing to it, is the act of a cad. In fact, when you make an agreement, the agreement itself may well include the consequences of this kind of irresponsible behavior.

If you're a wild man and you agree to nothing - not even that you won't just kill people randomly on the street - this is fine. Go and live in the jungle, or something. Don't expect anyone to let you walk around on their street, any more than they would tolerate, say, a polar bear. There is no absolute moral principle that says that polar bears are evil, but their presence is just not compatible with modern urban living.

We are starting to see two kinds of agreements here. There are agreements made with other specific individuals - I agree to paint your house, you agree to pay me. And there are agreements like, "I won't kill anyone on the street." But are these agreements really different? I don't think so. I think the second kind of agreement is just your agreement with whoever owns the street.

If wallets have owners, why shouldn't streets have owners? Wallets have to have owners, obviously, because ultimately someone has to decide what happens with the wallet. Does it ride off in your pocket, or mine? Streets stay put, but there are still a lot of decisions that have to be taken - who paves the street? When and why? Are people allowed to kill people on the street, or is it one of those special no-killing streets? What about street vendors? And so on.

Obviously, if I own 44th Street and you own 45th and 43rd, the possibility of a complex relationship between us becomes nontrivial. And complexity is next to ambiguity, which is next to uncertainty, and the Glocks come out again. So, realistically, we are probably talking more about owning not streets, but larger, more clearly-defined units - blocks, maybe, or even cities.

Owning a city! Now that would be pretty cool. But it gets us back to an issue that we've completely skipped, which is who owns what. How do we decide? Do I deserve to own a city? Am I so meritorious? I think I am. Maybe you could keep your wallet, and I could get, say, Baltimore.

There is this idea called social justice that a lot of people believe in. The notion is, in fact, fairly universal as of this writing. What it tells us is that Earth is small and has a limited set of resources, such as cities, which we all want as much of as possible. But we can't all have a city, or even a street, so we should share equally. Because all of us people are equal and no one is more equal than anyone else.

Social justice sounds very nice. But there are three problems with it.

One is that many of these nice things are not directly comparable. If I get an apple and you get an orange, are we equal? One could debate the subject - with Glocks, perhaps.

Two is that even if everyone starts with equal everything, people being different, having different needs and skills and so on, and the concept of ownership implying that if you own something you can give it to someone else, all is not likely to stay equal. In fact, it's basically impossible to combine a system in which agreements stay agreed with one in which equality stays equal.

This tells us that if we try to enforce permanent equality, we can probably expect permanent violence. I am not a big fan of "empirical evidence," but I think this prediction corresponds pretty well to reality.

But three, which is the real killer - so to speak - is that we are not, in fact, designing an abstract utopia here. We are trying to fix the real world, which in case you hadn't noticed, is extremely screwed up. In many cases, there is no clear agreement on who owns what (Palestine, anyone?), but most of the good things in the world do seem to have a rather definite chain of control.

If we have to start by equalizing the distribution of goods, or in fact by changing this distribution at all, we are putting ourselves quite unnecessarily behind the 8-ball. We are saying, we come in peace, we believe all should be free and equal, let us embrace. Put your arms around me. Feel that lump in my back pocket? Yup, that's what you think it is. And it's loaded. Now hand over your city / wallet / apple / orange, because I know someone who needs it more than you.

The goal of formalism is to avoid this unpleasant little detour. Formalism says: let's figure out exactly who has what, now, and give them a little fancy certificate. Let's not get into who should have what. Because, like it or not, this is simply a recipe for more violence. It is very hard to come up with a rule that explains why the Palestinians should get Haifa back, and doesn't explain why the Welsh should get London back.

So far this probably sounds a lot like libertarianism. But there's a big difference.

Libertarians may think the Welsh should get London back. Or not. I am still not sure I can interpret Rothbard on this one - which is, as we've seen, in itself a problem.

But if there is one thing all libertarians do believe, it's that the Americans should get America back. In other words, libertarians (at least, real libertarians) believe the US is basically an illegitimate and usurping authority, that taxation is theft, that they are essentially being treated as fur-bearing animals by this weird, officious armed mafia, which has somehow convinced everyone else in the country to worship it like it was the Church of God or something, not just a bunch of guys with fancy badges and big guns.

A good formalist will have none of this.

Because to a formalist, the fact that the US can determine what happens on the North American continent between the 49th parallel and the Rio Grande, AK and HI, etc, means that it is the entity which owns that territory. And the fact that the US extracts regular payments from the aforementioned fur-bearing critters means no more than that it owns that right. The various maneuvers and pseudo-legalities by which it acquired these properties are all just history. What matters is that it has them now and it doesn't want to give them over, any more than you want to give me your wallet.

So if the responsibility to fork over some cut of your paycheck makes you a serf(a reasonable reuse of the word, surely, for our less agricultural age), that's what Americans are - serfs.

Corporate serfs, to be exact, because the US is nothing but a corporation. That is, it is a formal structure by which a group of individuals agree to act collectively to achieve some result.

So what? So I'm a corporate serf. Is this so horrible? I seem to be pretty used to it. Two days out of the week I work for Lord Snooty-Snoot. Or Faceless Global Products. Or whoever. Does it matter who the check is written to?

The modern distinction between "private" corporations and "governments" is actually a rather recent development. The US is certainly different from, say, Microsoft, in that the US handles its own security. On the other hand, just as Microsoft depends on the US for most of its security, the US depends on Microsoft for most of its software. It's not clear why this should make one of these corporations special, and the other not-special.

Of course, the purpose of Microsoft is not to write software, but to make money for its shareholders. The American Cancer Society is a corporation, too, and it has a purpose as well - to cure cancer. I have lost a lot of work on account of Microsoft's so-called "software," and its stock, frankly, is going nowhere. And cancer still seems to be around.

In case the CEO of either MSFT or the ACS is reading this, though, I don't really have a message for you guys. You know what you're trying to do and your people are probably doing as good a job of it as they can. And if not, fire the bastards.

But I have no idea what the purpose of the US is.

I have heard that there's someone who supposedly runs it. But he doesn't appear to even be able to fire his own employees, which is probably good, because I hear he's not exactly Jack Welch, if you know what I mean. In fact, if anyone can identify one significant event that has occurred in North America because Bush and not Kerry was elected in 2004, I'd be delighted to hear of it. Because my impression is that basically the President has about as much effect on the actions of the US as the Heavenly Sovereign Emperor, the Divine Mikado, has on the actions of Japan. Which is pretty much none.

Obviously, the US exists. Obviously, it does stuff. But the way in which it decides what stuff it's going to do is so opaque that, as far as anyone outside the Beltway is concerned, it might as well be consulting ox entrails.

So this is the formalist manifesto: that the US is just a corporation. It is not a mystic trust consigned to us by the generations. It is not the repository of our hopes and fears, the voice of conscience and the avenging sword of justice. It is just an big old company that holds a huge pile of assets, has no clear idea of what it's trying to do with them, and is thrashing around like a ten-gallon shark in a five-gallon bucket, red ink spouting from each of its bazillion gills.

To a formalist, the way to fix the US is to dispense with the ancient mystical horseradish, the corporate prayers and war chants, figure out who owns this monstrosity, and let them decide what in the heck they are going to do with it. I don't think it's too crazy to say that all options - including restructuring and liquidation - should be on the table.

Whether we're talking about the US, Baltimore, or your wallet, a formalist is only happy when ownership and control are one and the same. To reformalize, therefore, we need to figure out who has actual power in the US, and assign shares in such a way as to reproduce this distribution as closely as possible.

Of course, if you believe in the mystical horseradish, you'll probably say that every citizen should get one share. But this is a rather starry-eyed view of the US's actual power structure. Remember, our goal is not to figure out who shouldhave what, but to figure out who does have what.

For example, if the New York Times was to endorse our reformalization plan, it would be much more likely to happen. This suggests that the New York Times has quite a bit of power, and therefore that it should get quite a few shares.

But wait. We haven't answered the question. What is the purpose of the US? Suppose, solely for illustration, we give all the shares to the New York Times. What will "Punch" Sulzberger do with his shiny new country?

Many people, probably including Mr. Sulzberger, seem to think of the US as a charitable venture. Like the American Cancer Society, just with a broader mission. Perhaps the purpose of the US is simply to do good in the world.

This is a very understandable perspective. Surely, if anything ungood remains in the world, it can be vanquished by a gigantic, heavily armed mega-charity, with H-bombs, a flag, and 250 million serfs. In fact, it's actually rather astounding that, considering the prodigious endowments of this great philanthropic institution, it seems to do so little good.

Perhaps this has something to do with the fact that it's run so efficiently that it hasn't balanced its budget since the 1830s. Perhaps, if you reformalized the US, ran it like an actual business, and distributed its shares among a large set of separate charities, each presumably with some specific charter for some actual specific purpose, more good might occur.

Of course, the US doesn't just have assets. Sadly, it also has debts. Some of these debts, such as T-bills, are already very well-formalized. Others, such as Social Security and Medicare, are informal and subject to political uncertainties. If these obligations were reformalized, their recipients could only benefit. Of course, they would thus become negotiable instruments and could be, for example, sold. Perhaps in exchange for crack. Reformalization thus requires us to distinguish between property and charity, a hard problem but an important one.

All this fails to answer the question: are nation-states, such as the US, even useful? If you reformalized the US, the question would be left to its shareholders. Perhaps cities work the best when they're independently owned and operated. If so, they should probably be spun off as separate corporations.

The existence of successful city-states such as Singapore, Hong Kong and Dubai certainly suggests an answer to this question. Whatever we call them, these places are remarkable for their prosperity and their relative absence of politics. In fact, perhaps the only way to make them more stable and secure would be to transform them from effectively family-owned (Singapore and Dubai) or subsidiary (Hong Kong) corporations, to anonymous public ownership, thus eliminating the long-term risk that political violence might develop.

Certainly, the absence of democracy in these city-states has not made them comparable in any way to Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union. Any restrictions on personal freedom that they do maintain seem primarily aimed at preventing the development of democracy - an understandable concern given the history of rule by the People. In fact, both the Third Reich and the Communist world often claimed to represent the true spirit of democracy.

As Dubai in particular shows, a government (like any corporation) can deliver excellent customer service without either owning or being owned by its customers. Most of Dubai's residents are not even citizens. If Sheik al-Maktoum has a cunning plan to seize them all, chain them and make them work in the salt mines, he's doing it in a very devious way.

Dubai, as a place, has almost nothing to recommend it. The weather is horrible, the sights are nonexistent, and the neighborhood is atrocious. It's tiny, in the the middle of nowhere, and surrounded by Allah-crazed maniacs with a suspicious affinity for high-speed centrifuges. Nonetheless it has a quarter of the world's cranes and is growing like a weed. If we let the Maktoums run, say, Baltimore, what would happen?

One conclusion of formalism is that democracy is - as most writers before the 19th century agreed - an ineffective and destructive system of government. The concept of democracy without politics makes no sense at all, and as we've seen, politics and war are a continuum. Democratic politics is best understood as a sort of symbolic violence, like deciding who wins the battle by how many troops they brought.

Formalists attribute the success of Europe, Japan and the US after World War II not to democracy, but its absence. While retaining the symbolic structures of democracy, much as the Roman Principate retained the Senate, the postwar Western system has assigned almost all actual decision-making power to its civil servants and judges, who are "apolitical" and "nonpartisan," ie, nondemocratic.

Because in the absence of effective external control, these civil services more or less manage themselves, like any unmanaged enterprise they often seem to exist and expand for the sake of existing and expanding. But they avoid the spoils system which invariably develops when the tribunes of the people have actual power. And they do a reasonable, if hardly stellar, job of maintaining some semblance of law.

In other words, "democracy" appears to work because it is not in fact democracy, but a mediocre implementation of formalism. This relationship between symbolism and reality has received an educational if depressing test in the form of Iraq, where there is no law at all, but which we have endowed with the purest and most elegant form of democracy (proportional representation), and ministers who actually seem to run their ministries. While history does no controlled experiments, surely the comparison of Iraq to Dubai makes a fine case for formalism over democracy.

(originally posted at over at 2Blowhards - thanks, Michael! If you have comments, there's already a thread there...)