Skip to content

What Do Sex Cults, Spirit Cooking, Cannibalism, and Will Ferrell Have to do With Each Other?

Would you agree to stand nude in front of a group of strangers while I, clad in black and masked, stood behind you and slingshotted a plateful of raw chicken hearts at you until they raised painful welts?

No? How about gizzards?

You philistine. You obviously have no appreciation for art.

Marina Abramovic appreciates art in ways you would never think of. It was her namesake foundation that thought up the chicken-heart art, about which more below.

Spirit Cooking Redux

Remember Abramovic? She became a brief household name during the election when it was revealed she invited Hillary campaign chairman John Podesta to a “spirit cooking” dinner. Spirit cooking is mealtime art. Recipes include mixtures of pain and bodily fluids.

The name of this avant-garde chef popped up again recently after the arrest of NXIVM sex-cult actress Allison Mack. Mack recruited, and attempted to recruit, famous women for the cult. Before her performance as prisoner, Mack without explanation intriguingly tweeted a headshot of Abramovic.

It’s Pronounced Nix-ee-um

So Abramovic who preaches pain is tied to Mack who is tied to NXIVM. The latest news about NXIVM is that its resident doctor, Brandon Porter, has been charged with conducting illegal human experiments.

One woman complained Porter made her “watch disturbing rape and dismemberment videos for a ‘fright study’.”

“He continued to film my reaction for at least 10 minutes as I just sat there, dry heaving like I was going to puke and crying very hard,” Kobelt, a Canadian actress, said in the complaint to the Health Department, adding that Porter began showing her the violent images without warning.

Porter reportedly did this to “as many as 100 people.”

He is accused of showing “human subjects an actual video of the horrific and brutal murders and dismemberment of four women by machetes; and violent film clips, including a male African American being viciously stomped by a Nazi; a conscious male being forced to eat a portion of his own brain matter; and a graphic gang rape.”

He is also charged with violating state law for improperly conducting studies on obsessive compulsive disorder, Tourette’s syndrome and one monitoring the brain waves of those who attended Nxivm programs.

Does This Taste Funny to You?

Cannibalism, as you can see, is another persistent theme. Of course, eating people can be very artistic. All the best people think so.

The singer Katy Perry does. In her popular video Bon Appétit the little-clothed Perry is peeled, peppered, powered and prepped by a team of chefs as a party of dinner guests watches in anticipation. The twist is that as the guests are about to dig in, the chefs release Perry and dismember the guests (blood flies everywhere) to serve to Perry!

If that’s not art, then you should click here to read the rest.

(I can’t take credit for last paragraph.)

62 thoughts on “What Do Sex Cults, Spirit Cooking, Cannibalism, and Will Ferrell Have to do With Each Other? Leave a comment

  1. Thanks for the article. It is hard to believe there are actually people like this in the world, but evidence suggests they do exist. You have to wonder what is really going behind closed doors with these people. I imagine this mack case is only the tip of the iceberg.

  2. The art evoked disgust in you, then perhaps, the artist has succeeded. The emotional and thought-provoking power of art! Whatever thought it elicited may depend on who you are. Just like the story about John Podesta, it did nothing for me, and I don’t care to think anything of it, either. I do wonder for a few seconds whether Briggs truly believes the story and what his source of the story is, hence I am writing this comment. What is he reading? If Briggs were my children, I would have taken away his internet privilege immediately.

  3. What’s weirder, the social outliers discussed so often, or, the recurring voyeuristic compulsion to pay so much attention such outliers?

  4. Well that’s the question you’ve begged there, Ken. Social outliers or avant garde—first of a host as it were?

  5. Like I said, boredom of the adolescent and intellectual alike!

    JH,
    The pair of you should have your heads banged together.

    Art is not there ‘to evoke emotion’. This is a cheap, commercial idea of art. It’s not true.
    Art that is valued and which depicts Values does not need a customer.
    The human experience, that is what art depicts.
    The common, popular appreciation and replication of art is it’s effect, not it’s only object or purpose.

    Communication and meaning is it’s ultimate purpose, which, if it is not based in something of ultimate value or good will just fall away and be forgotten.

    You see, entertaining as this might be, it is not high art! It’s not beautiful. Just slightly amusing. Far more so than Briggs’ selfie at the top.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pw08o6bA6ks

  6. Two cannibals are eating Will Ferrell. One turns to the other and asks “Does this taste funny to you?” The other responds “No.”

  7. Ken:

    Maybe it’s a distraction strategy.

    I know of a cult where the officials wear sinister robes and chant while swinging vessels of incense. They then perform what appears to be a form of ritual cannibalism, but that they themselves describe as actual cannibalism: they eat crackers that claim to be the actual flesh of a person, and drink wine that they describe as his blood. They encourage children to take part in this.

    This organization has raped thousands of children over centuries of organized abuse. They have spent hundreds of millions of dollars to cover this up, to escape punishment, and to ensure continued access to fresh victims.

    But their art is very fine.

  8. Ha, Lee. You’re almost right, except the part about “organized abuse”. Speaking as a bad Catholic myself, nothing that happens in the Church is really that “organized.”

  9. Lee:

    The mass is there to renew our baptismal vows.

    The priest wears the garb of a sacrificer, those of the priests of the old covenant. You only find them “sinister” as a reflection of yourself. They represent salvation and salvation scares you, or more accurately your refusal of it so long ago.

    The Eucharist is the Body and Blood of Christ. It is given to heal our souls of the damage incurred by sin. The devil worshippers know this, as do you, you would have no fear of it if it was meaningless.

    As for any abuse, that is because of sodomites. The Church rightly recognizes sodomy as the second worst sin of all. You cannot be a Catholic and a sodomite.

    What you are doing is called despair, which is when you project your own evil onto the innocent in the hopes it absolves you. It will not.

    Joy:
    It is clear you are hurting. Seek help.

    acricketchirps:
    What I said to lee above applies to you as well. I will add that you should really check out the terms for self-excommunication.

    Like the above two, it is clear you are hurting and lashing out at goodness as a result. I have a feeling you have a bit more capability of understanding the gravitas of that hurt.

  10. I described a sinister cult that practices cannibalistic rituals and rapes children.

    Catholics came running to the defense, spurred on by the shock of recognition.

    What does it suggest about a faith community, if those few descriptors are all it takes to be definitive, in the eyes of its adherents?

  11. Lee:
    You described sodomy. Something you are trying to project onto the Church out of despair. Your self-intoxicated stare in your twitter profile says all I need to as to why you choose the mortal sin of despair along with the sin that cries to Heaven of blasphemy here.

    You also are using common and generic blasphemy against the Church. Dime a dozen trash. In what way did you think you were being vague or clever? Any Catholic has heard this evil daily from people who think attacking Christians will also make their shame over sin go away.

    I came to the defense of truth being attacked. Your argument that my correction of you justifies you solely on the merits that I am against you is called the “hegelian dialectic.”

    Though I will say it is funny that you claim a post totally dismantling your evil actually proved you right on the virtue of your trolling catching an actual reply. Poor man.

  12. Nigel just an ordinary teapot then…

    Lee,
    See what the pope says about sin, take no notice of the gangsters.
    |This is why I don’t blame you for you approach and that of many other atheists.
    It stands to reason. Even without the intellectual or even emotional question of God or no God.
    Intellectual dishonesty is a big problem.

  13. Nigel, teapots are camp!

    (I’ve just noticed your previous remark aimed at me!)
    You clearly know nothing! Think you’re fighting some esoteric spiritual battle with a nobleman!

    The Truth rarely hurts. The truth sets people free. Unless they’re criminals, in which case the truth gets them locked up.

  14. Joy:
    Adherence to marxist narratives and deflections despite all reality to the contrary is not “intellectual honesty.”

    Destroying marxist narratives and delfections for the sake of reality however is intellectual honesty.

    Adjust accordingly.

  15. NTeapot,
    You want me to respond by saying “I’m not a marxist!”
    but you haven’t actually provided me with a salient or reasoned answer. Not surprising, it’s the fashion. More intellectual dishonesty.
    You made a remark to me which, at a guess, is some sort of defence for my strong belief that Briggs is in fact wearing that costume above! I now wonder if you are standing left or right of him.
    …and I’m not a marxist!

  16. A person with a normal moral compass may be wondering, about now, whether child rape is considered a sin among Christians, or Catholics, or whether it’s just the “sodomy” thing that’s a problem.

  17. Lee:
    As you may be aware, it is intrinsic to sodomy. It is how they recruit.

    Also, who is the person of “normal moral compass” that you are consulting for help here?

  18. I wish I could recommend someone to help you, but, alas, as Gibbon famously said,

    “the power of instruction is seldom of much efficacy, except in those happy dispositions where it is almost superfluous.”

  19. Lee:
    The fallacious assumption behind all you do here is that your ego bends reality to your will.

    That does not work.

  20. Nigel:

    “What I said to lee above applies to you as well. I will add that you should really check out the terms for self-excommunication.”

    Why would one check out the term self-excommunication?

    If one understands the Catholic Church, one knows there are certain dogmatic beliefs that cannot be questioned; e.g., Transubstantiation.

    While just holding (not publicly espousing) a non-dogmatic belief would not get one excommunicated. But, why would one wish to remain with the Catholic Church if the Catholic Church says one’s beliefs put them outside of the Church, and why would one worry about HOW one “properly” leaves self-excommuunicates oneself from the Church.

    A majority of my family remain Catholic and I am fine with that. I do not worry about them. The only one I AM concerned with is my brother, a truly “Progressive” person, who privately rails against the actions by and stands held by “Catholic Authority” (his own diocese Bishops and Archbishops).

  21. John:
    Not only was I not talking to you, I clearly told cricket to check out what the terms for self-excommunication are. There is a guarantee he may see a surprise, as there usually is.

    Your ego is clearly bothering you desperately if you could not only read the excerpt of my post you directly quoted, but also the name of who it was directed to included directly above it.

    We are already off to a very bad start, not only due to the cowardly fisking but also the clearly hit nerves.

    A self-excommunication is when someone has done something so evil that they are automatically & officially kicked out.

  22. Nigel

    I’m sorry that your comment to Cricket applied to me, and that I responded instead of him. It had nothing to do with ego. Cricket and I go quite a way back on this forum, so I WOULD come to his defense if he NEEDed it. He didn’t need my defense; but I wanted “desperately” to understand what you meant by “self-excommunication”. Now I know (or maybe I don’t).

    Cricket is (self-described) a bad Catholic? I was a bad Catholic? Having been Catholic, I understand things that never-were Catholics don’t. I didn’t understand what you meant by self-excommunication. With your response, I still don’t. (I don’t know what fisking means, either – cowardly or otherwise.)

    Even growing up Catholic, I guess I never fully understood transubstantiation. Once I did, I realized that I couldn’t fully believe in the concept, but I fully understood the import that my disbelief meant for my continued standing in the Catholic Church, I no longer went to communion. I continued to drive my mother and attend Mass with her but respected that I could not take part in Communion.

    By failing the Dogma test, I guess I became so evil that I was automatically & officially kicked out?

  23. …and my comment was not to Nigelteapot either, and nor was JH’s to me, and nor was Briggs aiming his post at JH! The rule seems to be, if people like it, they don’t mind, if they don’t they hate it.
    As for the post itself? I think it attracts traffic to the site, that’s what those sick things have to do with each other. I nearly don’t even know who Katie Perry is. Couldn’t pick her out of a line up, unless she’s usually ‘little clothed.’ Also strange terminology….she was married to Russel Brand if I haven’t muddled her up.

    See this for what the Catholic Church is really saying to other Christians.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZ9Ssvs5cgY

  24. Nigel

    Nigel, no idea what language you’re talking:

    self excommunicate, fisking, alt?

    By the way the New Advent Encyclopedia has no mention self excommunicating.

    http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05678a.htm

    They DO say who can excommunicate; I can’t, your Parish Priest can’t, … who do I contact to get my official “excommunication” papers from.

    Nigel, you make a Scientologist seem reasonable and coherent.

  25. I really don’t understand. Why would I want to self-excommunicate?

    For the record here, on the matter of sexual abuse of minors by sodomites and pedophiles, I think we can all agree in point of fact its incidence among the Catholic hierarchy is now certainly and always has been (in the long view) lower, ceteris paribus, than that among the general population. It’s just that so much better is rightly expected of the Catholic priesthood.

  26. acricketchirps:

    No we can not “all agree” that the incidence of child rape by Catholic clergy is lower than that among the general population. While estimates vary widely, there is no good reason to believe that the incidence is much different from the general population or from clergy of other faiths, and most studies estimate all the population rates as similar. Priests are humans, and realistic people will expect them to have similar rates of pathologies. What distinguishes the Catholic Church is the pattern of expending vast resources to conceal this criminality, and, in particular, knowingly placing children in the way of harm by, for example, paying hush money and moving a priest to a new territory. The pattern is clear: officials of the church are placing a higher priority on hiding priestly wrongdoing than on protecting children.

  27. John:
    The official term is “latae sententiae.” I am not the only one who refers to it as a self-excommunication as that is what it roughly translates to.

    Your inesecurity is absurd, only followed by the angry ignorance you are showing here.

    acricketchirps:
    Want to? Look out what the conditions for one are, it doesn’t matter if you want to.

    Lee:
    There is no “child rape” AT ALL in the Church. The scandal was about SODOMITES dating young young men as all sodomites do. Not only that, they aren’t pedophiles as the ones being affected are in their teens

    There is nothing Catholic about a single one of them.

    Why?

    1) sodomy is so evil that it is the second worst sin that cries to Heaven for vengeance. So evil, in fact that demons are disgusted by it and incurs an exponentially worse punishment in hell.

    2) It is totally rejected by the Church because of how evil it is.

    3) You excommunicate yourself by practicing or supporting it BECAUSE it is a sin that cries to Heaven for vengeance.

    4) There is nothing intrinsic to Catholicism that would make someone commit a sin that cries to Heaven.

    5) The incidence of sodomy among the clergy is the LOWEST of any group in society, by far.

    In the 1950’s Bella Dodd (the former president of the American comminist party) confessed that she (at the behest of the soviets) inserted soviet assets into the seminaries in the hopes of destroying the Church from within. Not only were these assets communist, but they were also sodomites. You realize that your soviet ploy didn’t work, but you are attempting to salvage it by making it worse than it actually was.

    Now why are you trying to do that, I wonder. Is it political evil or personal evil that drives you here? Where is your condemnation of sodomy and sodomites? Where do you once name the actual culprit or the actual crime?

    And since you cannot name the actual culprit or crime, what is your direct connection to the actual culprit and the actual crime?

  28. ‘There is no “child rape” AT ALL in the Church’

    The courts in several countries, and officials of the church, have admitted as fact the existence of child rape by Catholic priests and monks.

    A sexual act with someone under the age of consent is rape.

    Aside from this, there are cases of forcible penetration of both girls and boys, both adolescent and prepubescent, entrusted to the care of Catholic priests and monks.

    Read the report of Ireland’s commission into child abuse, released in 2009. “The report found that molestation and rape were “endemic” in boys’ facilities” (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/may/20/irish-catholic-schools-child-abuse-claims). The report contains horrific scenes, such as a young boy anally raped by a monk until blood ran down his legs. Is this what you refer to as “dating young young men”? I think most morally normal people would describe this as rape. Does Catholic teaching train you to think of it in some other way?

  29. Lee:
    A claim is just that, a claim. Your “gnosis” delusion leads you to think that because you want it to be true so bad, that it is. It is not.

    On top of being a demonic troll you have persistently used the term “morally normal people.” I asked you who you are referring to when you speak of a “morally normal person,” namely which friend you are reading in to fill that place for you. You are not that person, nor do you have the faintest justification for what “moral” or “normal” or even “person” could mean.

    You did not answer me, you instead fell back on the old communist tactic of accusing your enemy of insanity via your accusation that I needed help. Back in your soviet “utopia” this meant being taken to a political prison posing as a mental hospital, being lobotomized, tortured, and then executed. Something you clearly fanticize doing to all Catholics. You do this, because – as Venerable Fulton Sheen said – because you realize you cannot drive God from Heaven to hide your shame, you think driving men of God from the earth will make your shame go away.

    Clearly I hit enough of a nerve that you defaulted to some marxist grooming. The more shame you have, the more you attack. You are only blaspheming now, but what is next? You are a sick, violent man; though clearly only in the planning stages of whatever evil you plan to enact. I can only pray that you are apprehended if it ever gets to the point you do decide to act on this shame-based hatred of yours.

    Moving on, you do seem to not only have a problem answering me, you also have an utter incapability of even addressing me. Your vile post above has nothing to do with what I said. It is clear you got to halfway through my second sentence before your ego shut your brain off and you went into rhetoric-regurgitation mode to preserve your delusion. Worse so, you ignored what was said so hard that my post itself is the perfect answer to your reply.

    Let me do just that:
    “1) sodomy is so evil that it is the second worst sin that cries to Heaven for vengeance. So evil, in fact that demons are disgusted by it and incurs an exponentially worse punishment in hell.

    2) It is totally rejected by the Church because of how evil it is.

    3) You excommunicate yourself by practicing or supporting it BECAUSE it is a sin that cries to Heaven for vengeance.

    4) There is nothing intrinsic to Catholicism that would make someone commit a sin that cries to Heaven.

    5) The incidence of sodomy among the clergy is the LOWEST of any group in society, by far.

    In the 1950’s Bella Dodd (the former president of the American comminist party) confessed that she (at the behest of the soviets) inserted soviet assets into the seminaries in the hopes of destroying the Church from within. Not only were these assets communist, but they were also sodomites. You realize that your soviet ploy didn’t work, but you are attempting to salvage it by making it worse than it actually was.

    Now why are you trying to do that, I wonder. Is it political evil or personal evil that drives you here? Where is your condemnation of sodomy and sodomites? Where do you once name the actual culprit or the actual crime?

    And since you cannot name the actual culprit or crime, what is your direct connection to the actual culprit and the actual crime?”

    I am well aware that you are interested in these reports. The question then becomes “in what way.” Your self-intoxicated state shows you could possibly be more than interested though.

    You not only refuse to name the actual evil (sodomy and sodomites), you are willing to commit mortal sins to cover for them: despair and calumny. despair is projecting your own sickness into the healthy to maintain your pride. calumny is deceiving others with the purpose of defaming someone or some thing. This doesn’t even mention the blasphemy, which is the third worst sin of all and incurs special punishment. That is a lot of blows you are willing to self-inflict just to push a horrific lie onto the Church.

    One wonders who or what exactly you are covering for if you are willing to go so far.

  30. Lee:
    It will be in a psych report of some criminal profiler if you do not clean up your act.

    You went from yelling “I know you are but what am I” to attack the Church to defend celebrities that are devil worshippers / cannibals to defending sodomites and pedophiles. You then decided to end by gleefully describing what sodomites do to distract for sodomites and project their evil onto the Church.

    Once more you read 1.5 sentences and then zoned-out.

  31. Lee:
    Thankfully my country has yet to open their equivalent of he serbsky institute for your kind to execute political enemies.

  32. Lee :

    Nigel is utilizing the No True Scotsman argument to prove that: ‘There is no “child rape” AT ALL in the Church’.

    Nigel :

    Lee is often called to task by Briggs for being an Atheistic amoral immoral demonic troll (although not in the amusing glowing tones that you’ve provided for him).

    I love how you like to show off your knowledge of “urban” vocabulary, e.g., Fisking, although I believe that it was improperly used.

    I am interested in how my understanding of running afoul of Catholic dogma and Catholic spiritual understanding was “lies” or “idiocies”. I basically described Latæ and Ferendæ Sententiæ excommunication in my comment of May 10, 2018 at 12:31 pm.

  33. John:
    Your desperation to justify your apostasy is tiresome.

    Being a Scotsman is an arbitrary thing of birth or ethnicity. There is nothing intrinsic to being a Scotsman.

    Being a Catholic is a rigorously defined thing, and there is 2000 years of qualifiers that determine if one is or is not a Catholic.

  34. There is only one Christianity. Was entirely my point, but Niegel, (now I know why you call yourself teapot) you miss the point spectacularly.

    I do believe that in certain really scummy circles, according to the urban dictionary, tea has gay connotations, having to do with gay gossip. I learned this useful fact fro reading this blog.

    “fisking” is mispelled.
    I am sorry to have known what this term means too, since I used to know a very normal, non religious, law abiding and fun bunch of people who’s members used to enjoy making each other cringe, just like teen aged boys. I do recall asking my friend Mark, begging him, to stop making ‘poo’ jokes while we were on the chairlift. I actually cried real tears. Jokes can actually bore you to tears.

    Your comments make my friend’s jokes look sensible.

    …and Nigel, nobody’s asked a demon for his opinion on anything. If you think they have, then you really do have a problem.

  35. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZRcYaAYWg4

    Nigel, tell the truth! Don’t deliberately split the difference, between the church in it’s metaphorical spiritual sense and its
    ACTUAL, EVIDENT, PHYSICAL and POLITICAL manifestation. The rather more earthly and subject to corruption, physical, entity, which is absolutely answerable to The Law and which no right thinking person would try to deny or pervert that justice.

    There is the church and there is the church. Forget the capitals.
    What your argument does is to ignore the reality and cling on to the metaphysical, separate meaning of the ‘church’, when discussing the realities of it’s members, excommunicated or not! Nobody except you and your type cares about this. The metaphysical may be the important crucial part but in physuical discussion it is irellevant.

    In the case of child rape and other sick crimes, everybody is under the same law. Thank God for that. Power is subject to the law and abuse of power is what we are discussing.
    It is irrelevant that there is a spiritual church in this important matter.

    That might be a topic of sermon for the clergy trying to heal the wounds and explain to its members how this can be reconciled. Nobody needs a catechism to sort this out.

  36. Joy:
    The Catholic Church is the One True Faith. heresies are of the devil have no validity whatsoever, just like apostates negate whatever rights or sacraments they gained because of their parents foresight.

    “fisking” refers to a cowardly tactic on the internet of taking a person’s argument, disregarding it, and then cherry picking half-sentences to respond to because ou cannot handle the argument as a whole. It is the realm of intellectual cowards and those who are absolutely evil, which are qualities that are intrinsic to the others.

    Take you for example, who exemplifies both. You do not have the eagerness of his despair, but you do have his marxism. Your heresy was created by the German government as a means to consolidate power and arch-heretic martin luther was the propaganda minister of this “first reich.” It was the second successful attempt at a totalitarian system after islam.

    hitler, stalin, lenin, mao, learned all they knew from marx and john locke. marx, locke, and feuerbach (marx’ mentor) stole every dirty, evil tactic and rhetoric they are famous for from luther. luther stole them from mohammed, who he desperately idolized as the world’s most successful tyrant. mohammed was inspired by the talmud, the ancient pagan customs of primitive meccans, and the devil himself.

    Your claim that the Church is a political body is born of luther and perfected by cromwell for henry viii’s apostasy. That rhetoric has sent billions to hell and billions to the mass graves as it seeks to justify actual political bodies as replacements for the Church (which is the Body of Christ Himself) which is not political at all.

    The reason you do this is because your masters do it. The meme of “blame your enemies off why you are guilty of” has been the ethos of the nazis and communists since their inception. They stole it from marx, who stole it from luther, who stole it from mohammed, etc. It is the cornerstone of all totalitarianism. john locke said that since the Church is based on absolute, immutable truth, those who wish to destroy the Church must be redefined by ego-driven relativity.

    The simple fact that you capitalize the arbitrary, political law of a nation as if a metaphysical replacement for God, and refuse to capitalize the Church because it is “political” makes my argument for me. You ending that no one needs the Catechism because you have alinsky’s rules for radicals and social justice is the single most diabolic thing I have ever heard. I have dealt with actual devil worshippers, actual communist operatives, and people who were possessed and you have given me the most evil thing I have heard right here. That is not a compliment nor something to be proud of.

    Continuing with your last bit of devilry, there is no “child rape.” As I have said many times the scandal was of sodomites dating young men, doing what all sodomites do. While lee may get his jollies describing sodomitic acts against children, his fantasies do not replace reality. Just because he likes hearing about it does not justify an accusation, you need evidence for that. The actual evidence supports my position, only the media supports yours.

    I don’t see you explicitly naming the evil of sodomy or rightfully rejecting the evil of sodomy. Least of all I do not see you reject the marxism that inserted the sodomites in the Church as a means to undermine it. No, you would otherwise celebrate both marxism and sodomy.

    So not only do you have a fake crime, you don’t even have Catholics committing it. A sodomite cannot be validly ordained, and if they are it is illicit (meaning invalid under false pretenses). In fact, as I told you, a sodomite cannot be a Catholic at all.

    So your dark master compelled soviets to insert sodomites into the Church to destroy it from within. Didn’t work.

    You then try to salvage the operation by making the crime different, sodomites grooming and recruiting teenagers to sodomy into “child rape.” Also doesn’t work once you know the facts.

    You then lose all sanity and say that the truth doesn’t matter because your “gnosis” feels good when you state these falsehoods against the Church. That will not end well for you. You realize that your own rhetoric backfires onto you because you have demonized your own side’s sodomy and marxism in an attempt to attack the Church.

    The only step you have left is to become like lee: violent. Considering you already say more evil things than lee, even though his descent is complete, that does not bode well for either you or humanity.

  37. Oh my goodness!
    Calm down and think properly.

    Stop pretending to be a mind reader and leave aside the psychobabble. (Don’t take up counselling any time or go near a clinic or a classroom!)

    Fisking is a rather unfortunate word for a man with your title to be using here. I’m wondering if you are a man, in fact, because of the length of your comments and their tendency to do like I do and drift about. It’s not clear how long you’ve been reading this blog but if it’s not long you might be well advised to take a little time, go back through the history and note that almost nothing is new here under the sun. People owe you nothing in explaining their position and it isn’t for you to insert your own motives just because you see an opportunity to throw some fire and brimstone and call somebody satan. You disobey Christ and you are lying through your teeth. It is you who speaks with a forked tongue.

    People on line must be bored and tired by now of making their views heard clearly and succinctly. Especially to people to whom they owe nothing and who can expect a diatribe like yours in return.
    Galloping off into the distance…like Yosemite Sam on his camel but not so funny.

    So what? You are hopping mad about nothing. Your comment is also rather generic and preparatory, wholly inappropriate from the point of view of your manner as well as your failure to link the point you make to the logic of the comment to which you reply. It’s easy to tell that you just do not care for the truth at all.

    Go back to the beginning and read my comment. Then read what you said and look at the slow deterioration of your argument. If I didn’t know better I’d think Briggs set you up here.

    Incidentally the Vatican in 2000, according to the video I linked disagrees with some of what you said about child abuse. The church has already apologised. Ireland’s government has also apologised for the Magdalene laundries. I don’t think the church has caught up yet, letting the Irish government carry the can for it. They were also involved.
    All you need do is admit that the church did carry responsibility for these crimes. Then you’ll be done! Instead you’re trying to make a case for some other distraction. It isn’t over either, a Catholic priest in Australia’s now being investigated or tried as we speak.

    I have more than the usual amount of patience and curiosity in finding out what and why people think what they do but no interest in people who think they know me by reading comments.
    I’m off to make real tea now because it’s late and if I let on to anybody that I was replying to a mad man at stupid o”clock on line about this topic or any other I’d be for the high jump!

  38. Joy:
    As I told lee, despair is the mortal sin in which you try to absolve yourself by projecting your evil onto the innocent. Your tactic of ignoring all I say and screaming “I know you are but what am I” shows that.

    You can easily do this through your gnosticism, where you believe your personal desires trump reality. Therefore it doesn’t matter what I actually say to you as you will always reply to whatever you wish I had said. You show this even more clearly by your last paragraph here which declares that I can only judge you by how you want to be seen, and cannot use your own words to know who you are. An absolutely evil (and dangerous) philosophy you have.

    The Catholic in Austrialia being tried is Cardinal Pell. An innocent man being used as the guinea pig to test out the Austrailian government’s newest “show trial” program. Pell doesn’t even know the charge or the accuser, nor do most priests accused of this crime. The idea is that this will be used in the future to ensure that all Catholics are persecuted and hunted to the ends of the earth by this stalinist farce. This is something you and lee both desperately want to happen, assuming that if Catholics are rounded up and arrested (then they will make way for the maoist mass-trials followed by mass-executions) your shame will go away. It will not.

  39. There’s only one Person around here who’s screaming and that’s you. There has been a pattern of three individuals where I’ve seen this done. All of those were females without a good grasp of politics or the Christian faith. All mouth and trousers!

    You have still failed to answer the point I made to the post at the top. I start to think you don’t understand what I said and if you do, you’re too cowardly to admit and face the music.

    My Faith is true and sure. You can do nothing to take that or shake it. The reasons for that have to do with things which are unreachable or knowable to you and your like.

    You can, however tell a lot of lies and pontificate in sectarian gangster bully mode and simply exhaust yourself in the process. There is no reason for me or Lee, or another atheist to defend themselves either, as they are not answerable to you. As you judge, so you will be judged.

    What did you think about Alexander Armstrong’s rendition of the chicken song?
    What do you think about the shoddy post above?
    How many hearts were extracted in the writing of the blog and how many chickens were harmed in the making of it? Isn’t that an outrage?

    What do you think about people who send photos of their genitalia to women?
    Straight question, if you can’t answer it straight don’t make an attempt at a side swipe. I would like to hear where your moral compass is on that in particular, since we’re on the subject of sexual deviance and there appears to be a lot of it about!

  40. Joy:
    You have yet to say a single thing addressing what I have said.

    As far as your faith, your religion is gnosticism. You have a seething hatred for God by way of your immense shame, meaning it is self-hatred projected through despair. This is what appeals to you about your proto-marxist protestant heresy as it centers around the absurdity that God bends himself to your will. When you say your faith won’t be shaken, you are refering to my mentions of absolute truth. You mean that your belief that you change reality through wishful thinking will not be shaken by pests like actual reality.

    Like lee, you have committed two grave acts. Repeatedly. In fact, you seem to think that doing them enough will somehow negate the consequences. That is not how anything works. Those two acts are, again, calumny and despair.

    First is calumny, telling lies to defame the innocent. Second is despair, which is projecting your own evils onto the innocent. lee did this against the Church, you try this against me. The only difference is that lee got a little too excited and started graphically describing his fantasy out in the open.

    Now, the article is about literal devil worshippers who pretend to cannibalize human flesh in public. You & Lee heard this, your impulse was to then say “well, in my fanfiction, the Church is the evil one.” Let me repeat that. You are defending devil worshippers and cannibalism in the hopes of attacking the Church.

    Truly, you exemplify Chesterton’s statement that “Men who begin to fight the Church for the sake of freedom and humanity end by flinging away freedom and humanity if only they may fight the Church.”

    You then decide that the shark has not been jumped enough, and are now asking about men sending pictures of their penises to women. What?

    Here is a video for you:
    https://youtu.be/kCT-CmBz0J8

  41. No, Madam, You’re lying, since you’ve been informed otherwise and you are still insisting on your version of events and actual facts.

    You’re also asking me to answer other people’s comments and display more outrage which is as mad as King Lear to his daughters. How do you cope with all the people who read and don’t comment at all? What’s wrong with them varmints?

    Have you heard of key word stuffing?

    Check my comment at the top to which you first introduced yourself?
    My first comment to you was in response to what you said in diatribe to several others.

    My faith is Christian. I don’t think you gave a thought to answer what I wrote and just wanted to defend an imagined enemy. How convenient for you.
    It’s weird to make some alternative claim about someone’s faith when you know nothing. Typical internet nonsense. Then you insist upon it! Enough!

    I am an Anglican and a confirmed Christian. Nothing you can do about that.

    “Now, the article is about literal devil worshippers who pretend to cannibalize human flesh in public.”…and you then say the following truthiness:

    “You & Lee heard this, ” ( didn’t watch the video or click a link),

    (Lee objects, rightly, to the covering up of child abuse by the institution of the church and so should any normal functioning thinking adult. He triggered your reaction and now you want blood for it. Ken’s comment was spot on. )

    “…your impulse was to then say”…( impulses!) followed by this:
    “well, in my fanfiction, the Church is the evil one.” ”

    I never said any such thing, you said it and claim it.

    See what I actually said about the ‘post.’ My comment was about art and Xander’s amusing chicken song. I think it’s a better alternative to Briggs’ costume. What I DID say about the institution of the Church is true, however, sad and very true. Those points stand…
    And I won’t be watching your video even if for all the tea in China.

  42. Joy:
    You believe that reality requires your consent. Similarly to what lee insisted, what you do or what you are doesn’t matter because I am supposed to submit to your personal ego and desires. No, you may lie to yourself desperately about who you are, but I will not partake.

    I am asking you to address a single thing that I have said. You have yet to do this, despite vomiting so many words.

    So far I have learned this about you:
    – You reject all truth to protect your ego from long-earned shame.
    – You -in turn- hate truth and hate God to the point you submit to demoniacs and cannibals in order to attack His Church.
    – You believe reality is subservient to you, to the point you believe a declaration of how you view yourself trumps it.

    I am well aware you are an anglican heretic as I said before that your totalitarianism and gnosticism reeked of cromwell specifically. You are not a Christian as that would mean you are a part of the Church. A political body created to give henry viii absolute power over England is not the Church, it is totalitarianism that St Thomas More jokes about in this book “Utopia.”

    As far as being “confirmed,” no. There are no sacraments in the anglican heresy. You may play-act them, but that does not mean they are real. I wonder if that is where you got your gnosticism from. Anyways, the anglicans do have freemasonry, which devil worship that involves cannibalism, so that must be why you spend so much time defending devil worshippers and cannibals.

    I cannot fault you on not being consistent to your heresy, but it is still pure evil that you partake in and defend. lee was at least smart enough to bolt when I picked up on how giddy he gets around a certain topic.

    As far as the scandal and the comments on the Church, I will give you this quote:
    “They cannot hate the Church any more than they can hate Christ; they hate only that which they mistakenly believe to be the Catholic Church, and their hate is but their vain attempt to ignore.”

  43. Teabagger dude:

    You slipped up and spelled my name one time with an uppercase letter. In the future I expect more attention to detail. One more lapse and we’re going to take away your crayons.

    Also, any recent Pope would, and has, disowned your kind of talk. The current and recent Popes have also admitted to the child rape that you claim does not exist. So go argue with them.

  44. Lee:
    My browser has spellcheck and I wasn’t paying enough attention to care.

    And I am very aware that popes after Pius XII are not Catholic. Pius XII was too much of a man for any marxist skullduggery to survive for long, so they had to push in weak heretics one after the other.

    Francis was a communist as a boy. No clue if he ever sought a formal pardon for that, because that is grounds for self-excommunication.

    There was not a single sacred doctrine of the Church that Benedict XVI did not deny to seem trendy between 1960 and 1980.

    John Paul II once worshipped a statue of buddha on an altar in the name of ecumenism, and then tried to redefine marriage into sex.

    John Paul I lasted about a month or two. Probably was not the choice of certain powers and principalities in the world.

    Paul VI, the source of this mess, was so scatterbrained that he would sign any document that came across his desk without reading it. The “new mass” and vernacular mass was the result of one such document that he signed without reading.

    There was not a single evil that John XXIII didn’t wasn’t willing to allow in the name of seeming “modern.”

    Now, exorcists have confirmed that John Paul II is a saint because he is often invoked during exorcisms. St John Paul II’s destruction of communism counted for a lot, but what is mentioned above did not help.

  45. “popes after Pius XII are not Catholic”

    But that would mean that we can’t use the expression “Is the pope Catholic?”. That leaves us with just the “Does a bear….” expression. Do you have the inside dope on the bears, Teabagger? Do they still….you know, in the woods?

  46. Nigel

    One of the things that Catholic apologists hold up is the idea of “Apostolic Succession”. They equivocate saying that “yes, there have been some bad/heretical ‘self-excommunicated’ Popes but God quickly (or eventually) sorted those out”.

    You’re telling us that there have been SIXTY YEARS (how many popes) of apostasy? That’s a long time even in God’s terms. (Look what He accomplished in thirty years!) The rot (or bear stuff) had to have flowed down to many diocese. Do you keep an eye out for yours? Or have you joined a Mel Gibson like community where you practice Catholicism as it should be practiced. (You actually remind me of Joseph Smith who preached that the Church went into Apostasy in his day! He claimed Apostolic Succession for himself and those that followed.)

    Without papal authority, where do you or your community get its authority?

    You are in my prayers, my man.

  47. Lee:
    Your fixation on feces is not shocking.

    John:
    You may try to pass yourself off as more virtuous than the other two demoniacs, but I know full well you are just a slightly different flavor of the same evil.

    Apostolic succession refers to how every priest is related to the apostles. When one becomes a priest, they give up their family and accept their parish or city as their family. Their genealogy then becomes what bishop that ordained them and who ordained them and so on.

    The pope is the umpire for the faith. In any other age, the pope was rightfully seen as a minor figure. In fact, they were rarely seen at all as they spent their days giving mass and audience, only speaking up when there was a crisis in the world or clarification was needed.

    As a freebie to help further slay your total, malicious ignorance, the term “papal infallibility” refers to when the pope speaks the eternal truth. Meaning that the pope acts as umpire and tells people how everything always is. Your pseudo-marxism apparently leads you to give men authority they are not due (which is called “arrogance,” another freebie). This time your… uh… “quirk”… has condensed so much wishful thinking to the point you actually thought the pope controls God. You think this because YOU want to do that, and need to establish precedent.

    As for the Church. The Church is the Bride of Christ, the New Covenant, the One True Faith. The authority of the Church is given by God. Of course, there are three Churches: Militant (on Earth), Suffering (in Purgatory), and Triumphant (in Heaven). When you speak of all three at once, that is called the Communion of Saints. So when I refer to the Church, I mean not only every Catholic still alive, but every single Angel and Saint.

    You sneer at the Church as a “community” because you want to set precedent for disregarding it as a “community,” then usurping as one. Your demonic appetite for evil is showing, even going so far as to confuse apostolic succession as having anything to do with the office of the Pope. Your eagerness to do harm to your own soul has made you mess up your “gotcha” rhetoric terribly.

    Now to clarify, I said there were sixty years of bad popes who would have been excommunicated in any other age. You are projecting your own apostasy out of despair again.

    joseph smith was a freemason who bought the copyright to the book of mormon to start a new sect of freemasonry as he found his lodge unsuitable. The book of mormon originally was just an undersold novel of gnostic science-fiction before smith bought it.

    You may have freemason sympathies because of your self-imposed situation, but don’t be ridiculous.

    PS. Cease your attempted curses at once. You have already harmed yourself enough for lifetime already.

  48. Teapottery:

    God here. I’m using this method to talk to you because it obviously has your attention. Lee showed me how to use the computer, and I’m borrowing his account. But this is totally God. Listen up.

    The catholic church is an abomination. Sorry – the truth hurts sometimes. You don’t know my Will and are mixed up about Right and Wrong. Mend your ways before it is too late.

    At the end of times, I’m going to have a eternal party with Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens (he’s here already), everyone from Monty Python — all those guys. You’re not invited. (I mean really. Eternity with the Teabaggery guy? Shudder. How do you send the comment….)

  49. N:
    I know for real what damage your kind of talk can do to a person. It is wicked and ignorant of Jesus Christ.

    Your Catholic ideals describe a spiritually immature, small but vociferous, sectarian and breakaway group, to which I do believe Mel Gibson is also a member. (Recently acquired some reactionaries in light of some of the western domestic political situations, as people panic and cling to nurse…
    It is politics at it’s core.
    The group will fail, you can be sure of it.

    Matthew: 5 
    And seeing the multitudes, He went up on a mountain, and when He was seated His disciples came to Him. 2 Then He opened His mouth and taught them, saying:

    “Blessed are the poor in spirit,?    For theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

    Blessed are those who mourn,?    For they shall be comforted.

    Blessed are the meek,?    For they shall inherit the earth.

    Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness,?    For they shall be filled.

    Blessed are the merciful,?    For they shall obtain mercy.

    Blessed are the pure in heart,?    For they shall see God.

  50. Lee:
    despair is the mortal sin where you project your own sickness onto the healthy. I went over that already, but you did it again.

    calumny is the mortal sin where you tell lies about another to defame them. Again, went over this already, but you did it again.

    blasphemy is the third worst sin of all, a sin that cries to Heaven for vengeance. Like all sins that cry to Heaven for vengeance, it can only be forgiven by a bishop and earns special punishment in hell exponentially worse than sins that don’t cry to Heaven. The only two sins worse than it are abortion and sodomy.

    The vile evil you are doing here is the perfect example of blasphemy. This is when you mock God and His Church in a vain attempt to try to pretend you are superior. Of course that is absurd as wishful thinking is less than worthless; reality will not bend to your ego no matter how hard you sneer. What made you think it will?

    I can only assume it is the demon inside of you speaking there. I would tell you to seek exorcism and repentance, but will you? Some people are so evil that demons don’t need to possess them as they are so malleable and open to suggestion that it wouldn’t be necessary. It was said by exorcists that hitler, stalin, et al were not possessed because they were like this. Like a puppet.

    I would suggest you do go seek repentance, and then really seek exorcism.

    John:
    As I said, you already are in lee’s camp (let’s hope not into his “hobbies” though). Just look at how excited you got when you felt you would get a “gotcha” in to self-justify your apostasy. That weapons-grade level of shame you have means you have already gone reprobate. To define another term you don’t know, that means your evil has caused God to remove his protection from you. The result on both the mind and the soul is well documented by both Scripture and exorcists.

    The fact that you attempt to claim that lee (who if I divulged what he is would get me banned) is in God’s camp is worrisome. How far gone are you? I can only hope that I am misreading your intent there, because if you are claiming a vile demoniac like that is on God’s side, then that can only mean that your transformation into seeing God as a replacement for your ego is about to be complete. Just look how you have carried yourself just because of a little exposure to truth: first an ex-Catholic, then apostate, then stranger, now desiring to be one of lee. That is what happens when the truth strips away your defenses and reveals what you are, and it is clear you didn’t know what you already are until now.

    I would tell you to repent, but will you? I suggest you do, but if you don’t that is your loss alone.

    As far as morality in atheism, no such thing. atheism (feuerbach’s rebranding of gnosticism) has no possibility of morality as that needs absolute truth. gnosticism is all about how you feel you can change absolute truth because you honestly believe you can usurp God if you think about it enough. LOL

    You have no foundation for Good and therefore no foundation for a will. Your plan is like lee’s, claim the devil is divine and then claim that up is down and down is up. lee is what a terminal case of a reprobate mind is like. You have just admitted that you actively want that.

    God help you.

    Joy:
    You know “for real” what kind of damage the truth can do to error? I do too, truth destroys error completely, that is why the truth must be proclaimed as loudly as possible in the ugly face of the devil.

    You projecting your own ego onto God is the capital sin of pride going on blasphemy. This is a very dangerous game you are playing just because you are too arrogant to admit your evil. arrogance is taking for yourself undue authority, the capital sin of pride is trying to take God’s authority.

    And then with the second paragraph you jump right into blasphemy. You certainly are serious about removing that mask of yours.

    Joy, let’s be frank here. I know you want attention. You saw you weren’t the center of attention for 4 whole hours and worried you. Your attempt to get that attention back by trying to present yourself as a bigger demoniac than the other two certainly is an odd tactic, though I see it all the time. You three are in a desperate race in free-fall.

    Your persistent claim that the Church is a political body is the same impulse as your claim that the Church is spiritually immature, you are practicing the ancient marxist technique of “accuse your enemies of what you are guilty of.” This is called the mortal sin of despair, but the pagans called it “sacred violence.”

    The pagans believed that if they killed an innocent man, then the guilty would be absolved by their blood sacrifice. The pagans especially believed that killing witnesses to their crimes would absolve them.

    This impulse is the devil’s only weapon. René Girard called it “the scapegoating mechanism.” The Cross was what destroyed the devil’s only weapon for good. By way of your dark masters, you try to use it, but it has long been broken by God Himself.

    This is what I meant when I said that you thought attacking Christians would make your shame go away. This is also what I means when I said it doesn’t work. The only reason why you three have resorted to sins that cry to Heaven, is because you have no ability to martyr me. This is why I call you three violent repeatedly throughout all of this.

    As far as the corporal works of mercy that you quote here, they are the lesser of the spiritual works of mercy. communist philosopher gramsci said that removing transcendent language from the world would make weak people into communists. Guess whose lives prove his theory?

    You are so far gone that you cannot even post the greater spiritual works of mercy. If you were to do that, you would have noticed that #1 is admonish the sinner and #2 is instruct the ignorant. Doing that would get in the way of your ego so – to you, by your “gnosis”- they don’t exist.

    I always relish these opportunities to purify my soul, I just am never prepared for how painful the process is.

  51. You’re right, Teagirl, I do despair. I despair of you making any sense, or of getting any of my jokes. In fact, the ancien…………………….what’s happening.//$%^//w3#%TT$#TOJTWF:FNVrvlefvlenve%^

    Well, hello, Teasack. Lee’s demon here. I’m getting weary of this vessel. You’re next.

  52. Let me give you some advice.

    Digging graves for others only leads to you falling in.

    To Briggs:
    You can delete the one that fell into the queue as I misspelled my email.