StillSmallWind

The Rapture heresy causes trauma in children. Ask me how I know…

@TaraServatius Excuse me. Who started this? It wasn’t Iran.

All while JD Vance sits at home crying his eyes out for the regime, which killed 52,000 and put a $50 million bounty on Trump's head.

My message to the Chicken Hawks! If you’re a warmonger it’s time to sign up ✍️ and build the Greater Israel project Are you afraid to fight for your values?

@PapaEgoLeoni @PetriOP Are those prayers staying? I think a Dominican priest once told me they were written by some random religious sister?? (maybe it was a joke)

@PetriOP I cringe at some of the Psalm Prayers. I understand the sentiment, but one needs to be well versed in Catholic teaching to understand why the Psalm Prayer isn’t more suited for a Lutheran version.

I am really looking forward to the new translation of the Liturgy of the Hours. I’m counting down the volumes: “Well, this is the last time I’ll use this book.” A good seminary oral exam might ask students to identify and explain the theological imprecisions—and, in some cases, outright falsities—in the current approved English translation. I’d begin with the grossly inexplicable intercession in Evening Prayer II of the Common of Pastors.

@GinaminaFW @realKlemens @Younos2025 @metathomist Jesus started the church in Rome. Daniel prophesied it accurately. youtu.be/zj4wQQbpbVQ?is…

@realKlemens @Younos2025 @CatholicWarrio2 @metathomist Ken arrogates to himself the judgment of Christ in condemning us to hell already. Shake the dust off your feet and ignore him. Matthew 7:2.

When I was an evangelical Protestant, I went to a conference with my brother-in-law. They had a table with a lot of literature, and one of the prominent parts of the table had anti-Catholic literature, the chief of which was this book by Norm Geisler called "Is Rome the True Church?" I picked it up and tried to read some of it while standing against the wall, and showed my brother-in-law, thinking, "Oh, we should pick this up so that we can talk to our wives Catholic family." I never picked it up. I found my way back to the Catholic Church, never having read it, but I did discover that the person he wrote it with, Joshua Betancourt, ended up converting to Catholicism.

Fr. Ripperger: “Stop sinning. Because every time you sin, you wound yourself. Not only spiritually, but psychologically. Every single time you sin you’re messing up your psychological faculties. So you just have to stop it.”

@AttorneyF_ @JSargentRR there’s more! youtu.be/OtTawukqgiM?is…

@JSargentRR Because that tree was the only way they could express the choice of disobedience. Without the option to disobey and without a real opportunity for the dignity of an exit then love is coerced and coerced love is not genuine.

Genesis 3:15 is a masterclass in divine architecture. Before Adam and Eve can even offer an apology, while they are still standing over the ruins of their own failure, God declares war on their behalf. He looks at the serpent and pronounces the judgment: “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.” When you zoom in on this text, three realities emerge. First, God immediately shifts the battlefield. He does not erase humanity’s responsibility; He assumes responsibility for humanity’s rescue. We know this "offspring" is ultimately Jesus, but God’s language here is deliberately, brilliantly vague. He does not say I will descend from heaven to destroy you. He says her offspring will do it. By keeping His own identity hidden in the lineage of the woman, God amplifies humanity’s role in the triumph. He refuses to keep redemption distant or purely cosmic. Instead, He binds Himself to the very flesh of the species that failed Him, declaring, in essence, I will enter the arena through her womb to defeat you. He does not win the war for us from a safe distance; He wins it as one of us, turning the destruction of the serpent into a collective victory shared by the sons of men. Secondly, God deliberately waives the sovereign privilege of a spotless victory. As the supreme author of prophecy, God had the ultimate license to dictate an untouchable, effortless triumph. Instead, He refuses to pull rank. In the original Hebrew, the exact same verb, ‘shuph’, is used for both blows. Poetically, it reads: “He will shuph your head, and you will shuph his heel.” This is a staggering linguistic equalizer. God voluntarily steps into the dirt, binding Himself to the very same physical verb as His enemy. He allows the serpent to do its worst while He delivers His best. The scandal of the prophecy is not just that God wins, but that He sovereignly chooses to be wounded in the process when He had every right to remain untouched. Thirdly, there is a simple biological detail that changes how you look at this entire sequence. If you or I were writing this story, we would naturally start with the lesser blow and build up to the climax: You will strike his heel, and then he will crush your head. But God says it backward. He puts the head-crush first. Why? Because of how a snake actually dies. When you crush a serpent's head, it does not just go limp. Its nervous system keeps thrashing in a violent, blind spasm. Even a completely severed snake head can still snap its jaws and inject venom purely through muscle reflex. If we read this in light of the whole biblical story, this physical reality illuminates the true nature of spiritual warfare. The strike on the heel is not a parallel attack in an ongoing war; it is the blind, involuntary spasm of a defeated enemy. The devil is not a rival general. He is a crushed serpent fighting exclusively with his ruins. The battle is real, but the victory was announced before the strike even began.

@Younos2025 @metathomist I love your passion. Keep researching. You’ll see…

@metathomist Some people converted to the circumcision cult, too (Galatians 5:2-4). You’re headed for the Furnace where you belong, demonic snake.

@metathomist Amazing!

If you read Isaiah 22 before reading Matthew 16, the papacy stops looking like a medieval power grab and starts looking like a direct biblical appointment. Christ did not invent a random metaphor when He told Peter, "I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven." He was quoting a specific, pre-existing political office from the Davidic Kingdom. Isaiah 22:22 describes the master of the palace, the royal steward who held authority over the king's household: "I will place on his shoulder the key of the house of David; he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open." The identical language. Keys. Opening and shutting. Binding and loosing. But here is the critical detail most Protestant readings miss. The royal steward was not a temporary gift to a single individual. It was an ongoing office within the Davidic kingdom. Isaiah 22 shows the steward Shebna being removed from office and replaced by Eliakim, who receives the same key of the house of David and the same administrative authority. The office outlasted any single occupant. Christ, the eternal Davidic King, establishes His restored kingdom and appoints a steward to govern it. The early Church Fathers recognized this typological link, viewing the Petrine office as the continuation of this administrative authority over the household of God. The papacy is not a fourth-century power grab. It is the restored Davidic court, established by the King Himself. If Christ explicitly established a permanent office of visible headship for His Kingdom, why would that office cease after Peter's death?

@honorablesaint 2 likes. I am so sorry. This has got to be just awful!

It smells so ridiculously bad outside. The smell of Canadian forest fire smoke and Canadian Indian immigrant stench combined is chemical warfare on the US. How am I in IL having to deal with the patheticness of Canada.

@ginamilan_ @joshua__b You’re demonic.

@joshua__b She’s truly demonic.

Candace Owens is mocking a man divorcing his wife because her unhealthy obsession with CO has become toxic to their marriage and child. This is who she is. After attacking a widow for the past year, would you expect anything different? Nope. She’s this evil and doesn’t care who she hurts along the way.

Ben Shapiro is their enforcer. Question Israel, and he comes for you. Tucker Carlson questioned it. Shapiro called him a "super spreader." Candace Owens questioned it. He went to war on her. This week JD Vance touched the Epstein intelligence story on Rogan. Shapiro was attacking him inside 48 hours. Then there's Charlie Kirk. What started my entire follow the money on Shapiro and it's dark. In his final weeks, Kirk started questioning Israel. A pro-Israel billionaire named Robert Shillman reportedly pulled $2 million out of Turning Point to punish him. He routed it through a fund that erases his name, so the check can never be traced. That same Shillman built Ben Shapiro's career. In his own words: "With a pen and a checkbook, I provide ammunition." And it isn't just Shillman. The Wilks brothers, the fracking billionaires who funded Shapiro's Daily Wire, also funded Rob McCoy, Kirk's own pastor, whose son worked inside Kirk's operation. So, Charlie Kirk wavered from the pro-Israel cause, and weeks later he was assassinated. Ben Shapiro was then handed the opening slot at Kirk's own convention and used it to call Israel skeptics "frauds and grifters." Now the part he hides. Shapiro doesn't just take their money. He's invested in Israel himself. He is the largest shareholder of an Israeli company that makes Covid Vaccines in the pill form, and he is the founder of a fund pouring money into Israeli tech. But, he doesn't tell his audience this. Full follow the money article is up on my Substack now (link in bio).

@BlakeSNeff You got fired for INSANE racism! You really should be quiet, for your own good, ahahaha!

It’s really funny how Candace deliberately tells these stories that make her look like a catty, nasty woman, and which are a little unflattering for Charlie as well. They make it so obvious how Charlie grew into a better person once she left his orbit and he was influenced by better people (like Erika, for starters). Charlie would say that you’re the average of the five people you spend the most time around. I think he had his own very personal experience with how true that was.

The past is becoming a foreign language

@Sensus_Fidelium @BreeSolstad Some people come from fundamentalist Christian backgrounds, where they were made to veil. As converts, the veil carries baggage for them. It’s not mandatory. Mind ya business!

I'll never forget some lady coming in (I was handing out the red book at the TLM) and getting uppity saying "I thought this was a trad parish" .. I said "yes ma'am .. why?" she goes "there's a lady in there without a veil on". I calmly told her "please hold these" she asked "where are you going?" I said "I have a 9mm in the trunk. I'm going to go get it, you point her out and I'm gonna shot her in the head" her husband peed himself laughing so hard. yes, veiling is good. Not saying that.

A century ago, women covering their heads in Church was normal. Then feminism recast a biblical sign of reverence, humility, and sexual distinction as oppression. Canon law no longer requires it. Scripture and tradition still commend it. Start veiling! It is proper & just.

Conversion to Christ is not the end of suffering. It’s the beginning of suffering with extraordinary meaning and purpose. You don’t go from the first picture (Before Christ) to the second picture (After Christ) without suffering. In some ways the suffering has become even more challenging at times… that’s sort of just how healing works. Healing is a complete reordering of the human person back to Christ. Reordering is painful. Christ’s mercy is a dismantling of the false self. It can be extremely painful at times. Thats the Christian life though. It can be brutal, but it is also devastatingly beautiful. The difference now is not that I dont suffer anymore; it’s that suffering becomes purposeful because it’s ordered towards the highest Good. We still suffer, and sometimes even a great deal. But it’s nothing like suffering apart from Him. He’s everything. I used to claim my identity through a million different “I ams.” “I am trans.” “I am gay.” “I am….” All of these identity claims were, for me, actually just deep attempts to escape suffering. Attempts that actually led to significantly more suffering in the long run, because whenever our identity continues to fracture away from God, disorder multiplies. The difference now is that I am a daughter of the Most High. That’s the shift. Living in the truth of who I am as God made me. That’s the dismantling. That’s the work. Tearing down the altars of self. The heaviness and darkness of this world is too much to carry on our own. Without Christ, it warps us and the soul continues to turn in on itself as a desperate attempt to find meaning and purpose. That was one of the things I didn’t understand when I was living out in the world and apart from Christ. The whole problem of the world is a constant turning towards the self for the answers. I couldn’t understand why it always felt as though the very gates of hell were pressing in on me. I didn’t know who Christ was. Thus I didn’t know who I was. It’s painful to not know who you are, yes… but that pain, when managed by a soul that turns in on itself, becomes something that spiritually disfigures us. It wasn’t until I looked to Christ that I finally found the truth about myself. And that’s a painful process too, but it’s a pain that restores not destroys. The suffering is not the problem. The problem is when you reject the only person who is actually capable of helping you carry that suffering well. Jesus Christ. You stop thinking that to be loved by Christ means to not suffer, and instead you begin to willingly accept suffering for the sake of finding Him continuously in it. That’s what my life has ultimately become since my conversion…. A response to being divinely loved. 🙏🏻✝️❤️‍🔥

@EricRSammons With all the wars and genocides in the world, I think it’s okay for the pope to say, at this time, that “we need to stop thinking that the solution to every problem is war, killing, abortions, deaths…” He has the authority. The Bible doesn’t “teach” the death penalty, anyway.

"The Pope decided this in papal encyclical" does not—can not—override Scripture and Tradition. In Catholic theology, Scripture, Tradition, and the Magisterium work together, but the Magisterium is *subordinate* to Scripture and Tradition, as it not part of Revelation, but instead interprets it. Authentic magisterial teachings serve Scripture and Tradition, and cannot contradict them. And for those who think this is just some antiquated pre-Vatican II theology, it's straight from the Council itself: "This teaching office is not above the word of God, but serves it, teaching only what has been handed on, listening to it devoutly, guarding it scrupulously and explaining it faithfully in accord with a divine commission and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it draws from this one deposit of faith everything which it presents for belief as divinely revealed." (Dei Verbum 10) So, when a papal encyclical clearly contradicts Scripture and Tradition, as Francis's teaching on the death penalty did, Catholics can safely dismiss it as "inadmissible" due to that contradiction.

The Faith of Abraham looked forward to Christ. Christ came. Christ revealed the Catholic Faith and established the Catholic Church. The Catholic Faith is therefore the only Abrahamic faith. Others can claim what they want. What ultimately matters is what God has claimed.

Fundamentalists: "Mary is dead! She's in the grave [or Sheol]! She cannot hear you! You Catholics are such idolatrous fools!" Also Fundamentalists: "My Uncle Bob [or Aunt Susie] died last week. Praise God, he was a born-again believer, and he is now in heaven, rejoicing in the presence of his Savior, Jesus!!" Sigh. I left Fundamentalism and eventually became Catholic, at age 28, for many reasons. One of those was the often bizarre and certainly unbiblical disdain shown for Mary. Of course, we insisted that disdain was aimed at the false Mary of Catholicism, but the Mary of Fundamentalism is routinely ignored, disparaged, and even despised. Thirty years later, I see that same incoherent nastiness in many Fundamentalist posts here on X. It's sad and revolting on many counts, not least because such folks go on and on about how much they love Jesus. But if you love Jesus, you must know that speaking ill of his mother is reprehensible.