(0935) When I’m away longer than average in the mornings, it usually meaning I’m gathering, which is the case this morning. Part of that is the next post.

ddddd

7.

6. Time for Sunday’s religious component

… and I’ve two topics … here’s the first:

This can be quite misunderstood … it’s not directed at the non-believer per se … the Hitchens C, the Dawkins and others of limited brain encompassment … it’s more for the already at least nominally believing, those who’ve crossed the first line to seeing things historically, back to ancient times, not hamstrung by illuminati or fabian modernism … those who’ve managed already to reject the Rothschild/Sabbatean thing, understanding why the west has been hoodwinked.

It’s actually at the next barrier the quote rings especially true and was precisely what the gospel accounts were about … why was JofN so down on the Pharisees and other cults? Answer … they were into externals, not internals. In a similar way, Agatha Christie had a character, Mr. Satterthwaite, who was not fond of young people in packs … always so concerned with externals … stunts, showmanship, postulating, looking the part … not yet complete humans, still searching to find themselves.

Which brings me to South Park and the Brand Management of Ginge and Whinge … the whole thing was about playacting like a Farage. Also, remember Hyacinth Bucket? It’s also the difference between Alphas and Sigmas.

So that quote above is for those whose faith is still expressed in much loud speaking, in applying human foibles, in chanting en masse, not unlike at a Nuremberg rally, in strict hierarchy at Official Festivities, with those of simple faith versus the pointy hatters making big shows in full regalia, into full ritual, full of graven images. Externals.

There was a youtube about Mary. Mary has been abused by at least one large sect and the YT pointed out that she was never any more than humble, never in grotesque statues people are worshipping, whilst vehemently denying that that’s what they are doing.

The two examples pointed to in the video were when JofN was on the cross, gazing down, saw Mary. The word to address her was not mother but “woman”. The original language it was expressed in was a compliment, as in woman, mother of nations … not a blunt rebuff, as in modern English. She was handed to John to now look after, to take into his home. Why not the brothers? They were still lip service believers, externalists, could not be trusted. Yet. To everything, there is a season.

The other example was the last time Mary was mentioned in the bible … at the last feast, where she was just one of the crowd. Does a grandmother wish to be the star of the show, doing her song and dance routine, showing off? No, she just delights in the family all being there, surrounding her, showing some reverence.

That’s how Mary needs to be revered, not in some heroine worship, in loud chanting.

Countless believers have explained over two millennia that the payoff is protection, guidance, comfort and courage. However, the quid pro quo is danger and many times the awful consequences of taking that ticket, that stance.

Watch how many click out of this post now in disgust, offput by its tone … that’s one of the consequences.