New Year and The Queen of Sheba

Ethiopians celebrate their New Year on September 16. I don't think that it is a coincidence it falls around the same date as the Jewish New Year, or Rosh Hashanah.

According to Ethiopian cultural accounts, the Ethiopian Queen of Sheba went to Israel to visit King Solomon to seek wisdom from the famous king.

Although this story is presented as a myth, I believe that the Queen of Sheba did exist. There is historical evidence, through written text, statues, carvings and burial sites, to indicate that such a queen did exist in the southern regions of what is now Yemen and northern Ethiopia, which would form the ancient kingdom of Ethiopia. At the time, Ethiopia was struggling with monotheism, and stories of a monotheistic country and king quite possibly reached the country and its queen, who then traveled to meet this legendary king.

Pre-Christian Ethiopians looked to Jerusalem when trying to understand their spiritual world, and as a way to get closer to this God. They were surrounded by pagan cultures, and isolated themselves, aided by the difficult mountainous terrain, to build their civilization based on this monotheistic premise. I believe the Queen of Sheba returned from Israel with many Jewish religious and spiritual insights, including the idea of this single God. She also brought with her the traditions of New Year as both a social and religious celebration.

In Christian Ethiopia, there is a special church service on New Year's day. The importance of the ram's horn in Rosh Hashanah, reflecting Abraham's sacrifice of the lamb, is observed in the social gathering of families. A ram is taken as a gift to the elder (often the grandfather) of the family, and slaughtered/sacrificed for the meal of the day.

A Most Ancient Spiral Galaxy

The "grand-design" spiral galaxy described as "the most ancient spiral galaxy...ever discovered" shouldn't exist because "Current wisdom holds that such 'grand-design' spiral galaxies simply didn’t exist at such an early time in the history of the universe," according to this website.

And commenting on the structure of this galaxy, UCLA astrophysicist Alice Shapley opines:

The vast majority of old galaxies look like train wrecks...Our first thought was, why is this one so different, and so beautiful?

And University of Toronto's David Law, who authored the study, comments:

The fact that this galaxy exists is astounding. Current wisdom holds that such ‘grand-design' spiral galaxies simply didn't exist at such an early time in the history of the universe.

At the View From the Right, the sentiments are different. Lawrence Auster writes:

What a dumb, vulgar thing to say [that vast majority of old galaxies look like train wrecks] about objects ten billion years old, a hundred thousand light-years across, and each containing hundreds of billions or even tens of trillions of stars. No scientist in 1950 or 1970 would have said it...

Far too often, scientists, like their fellow elites in contemporary liberated society who believe in nothing higher or truer than the disordered human self, seem to have no sense of appropriateness, no inherent respect for anything, for the isness of anything. They must drag everything down to the commonest level and make it appear to be as messy and meaningless as we ourselves—even objects that are infinitely vaster and older than anything we can conceive, and that express an order of which (notwithstanding scientific theories which claim to explain far more than than they really do explain) we have no idea.

I think that people, modern, liberal people (which is the majority of the West now) have no principles with which to guide their observations of the world around them.

The Good, the True and the Beautiful are no longer those solid principles with which we tried to understand the world around us. These principles were formed partly through religion (specifically Christianity) and partly through our cultural history and traditions. Society was thus constantly informed how to differentiate between good and evil, beautiful and the less beautiful, the true and the untruthful.

Now, since we have cast aside these traditions, and since religion is just something one harks back to on Christmas or a christening, we no longer have that to guide our understanding of the world.

So, the tremendous beauty, complexity, and mystery of the universe is smeared with the ugly words of a modern "scientist." Beauty, rather than bring things up to its level, is now dragged down to the putrid messes of the ugly. And this is just how modern people would have it, since bringing things down to the "equal" level of ugliness is much easier than bringing it up to the difficult hierarchical requirements of beauty.

If scientist are not in awe of what they're discovering, how can they enjoy their work? Why bother to spend hours, days and even years looking through a metal funnel if they are not impressed by what they see? Otherwise, they may as well spend their days looking at the crumbs on their desks, which is how the likes of David Law really do see their work, and hence their crass and crude comments on these celestial bodies.

I should add that pre-modern scientists had a much better sense of the mysterious, and were much more humble than their post-modern inheritors. As I've mentioned before, it was God who got discarded so that David Law and Alice Shapley can say (and believe) these things. Things are now measured in terms of man's limitations, rather than God's infinity.

Since my interest is beauty, I think what is going on is an elimination of beauty in our modern understanding of the world, which also leads to the elimination of the good and the true. I wrote here about beauty:

Ugliness rules. In clothing, in films, in art and even in our "representatives" of beauty. I don't think it is a lack of knowledge about beauty. We've developed standards and often unanimous agreement about what constitutes the beautiful. So I'm not going to into the beauty-hater's argument that beauty is relative; beauty can be objectively measured. What's going on is that people are hating beauty. It is a form of envy. If I cannot be beautiful, then why is she beautiful? It is like wealth, or intelligence, or a sense of entitlement to live anywhere one pleases. Spread the wealth, accept I.Q.ers of 91 into Harvard, let everyone from every corner of the world come into the prosperous West. Or youth. Why cannot I be as young (and attractive) as any fifteen-year-old, at my ripe old age of seventy? Such are the mantra of the equal-opportunity narcissists.

So, in order to fit in with their lowered standards, beauty magazines are (actually they have been, for decades now) publicizing ugliness in their fashion shoots, their models, and even with the "celebrities" and film actors they promote. There was a time when actresses like Elizabeth Taylor, Ingrid Bergman, Grace Kelly and many more appeared in immaculate clothing, looking ethereally beautiful, at any age. And we admired them.

Anti-Semitism Is Evil Intentions Towards Jews

A group of Jews, including a small boy, is escorted from
the Warsaw Ghetto by German soldiers in this April 19, 1943 photo.
The picture formed part of a report from SS Gen. Stroop
to his Commanding Officer, and was introduced as evidence
to the War Crimes trials in Nuremberg in 1945. (AP Photo)
[Source: The Atlantic, Oct 16, 2011]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

GalliaWatch writes:

Here's a must-read article posted in English at Front Page Magazine, and in French at Riposte Laïque. The author, Giulio Meotti describes the end of European Jewry, as Islam slowly but surely takes over. Whatever happens to the Jews, you can be sure, will happen to all of us.

I agree with the overall warning in her article, but I think we should look at anti-Semitism and its evil intentions towards Jews as something that happens to Jews. Of course, all evil eventually destroys what is before it. But, the intention of anti-Semitism is the destruction of Jews. I think we should be able to understand that without transferring it to us.

I do agree, though, that Islam has a more thorough system of elimination, and a wider span. Its strongest hatred is directed at Jews, but all other infidels follow. In terms of combating Islam, it is important to understand this method of elimination, because, yes, as Giulio Meotti writes, next are all the other infidels.

Resurrecting Ishtar

Reconstruction of The Ishtar Gate
Pergamon Museum, Berlin

It may seem trivial to write about pop stars, and many are innocuous enough, but Madonna takes everything up a notch, as I wrote here. Her gyrating through our culture affects everybody. The blogger The Vigilante Citizen also seems to think so.

He compares her appearance at the Superbowl half time show last February to a Babylonian goddess. Yes, Madonna did come decked out as some kind of exotic ancient priestess, so this may not have been a difficult analogy to make. But TVC explains the significance of her "costume":

Madonna herself is dressed in a way that highly resembles an Ancient Sumerian/Babylonian goddess, Inanna-Ishtar.

Ishtar was a powerful and assertive goddess whose areas of control and influence included warfare, love, sexuality, prosperity, fertility and prostitution. She sought the same existence as men, enjoying the glory of battle and seeking sexual experiences. Madonna’s portrayal as Ishtar is therefore quite interesting as one can argue that the pop singer has embodied, throughout her career, the same assertive yet highly sexual qualities of Ishtar, even achieving a state of power in the music industry that is usually reserved to men. On an esoteric level, Ishtar is associated with the planet Venus, known as the Morning Star or the Evening Star.

I also compare Madonna, and her highly sexualized performances, to an ancient goddess. I wrote:

Madonna's homosexual men [in her video Girl Gone Wild] are like the castrated dancers of the Greek goddess Cybele, who danced around their goddess into sexual frenzy.

We have reached a new level of Godlessness in our culture. But this doesn't result with an empty, atheistic, world, but with a world full of gods. People still need figures to worship. Rejecting God only leaves an empty space to fill up with other gods. Leading cultural icons are re-inventing and re-introducing ancient gods and goddesses into our culture. Popular culture, through powerful venues and mass gatherings such as television, giant pop concerts and spectacular sports arenas, displays these rites and rituals with grandeur, hypnotizing even the most jaded of viewers. It won't be long before those empty souls are filled with such offerings. Madonna is not merely re-enacting some forgotten ritual, but is resurrecting an ancient, pagan religion and its goddess.

"Qualitatively Different"

Madonna before the alter of the cross

The above image is from Madonna's 2012 MDNA tour. Notice how Madonna uses MDNA to reference INRI. She is gyrating on the embers of Hell, reaching out to the blood-red cross. One thing one can say about MDNA is her creative energy, and image-producing capacity.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Laura Wood at The Thinking Housewife writes about Madonna's latest "artistic" foray:

Madonna has always produced trash but this is qualitatively different. It is much worse.

I fully agree with her. A couple of months ago I wrote two posts on Madonna. In one, which I titled Madonna and Her Mirror, I review her new perfume Truth or Dare, and I write:

The official ad for the perfume (see image above) has Madonna, Narcissus-like, contemplating her reflection. Except, unlike Narcissus, it is not her beauty that she is entranced with, but has made her reflection into a Freudian, self-sexual-gratification...

Her creative ability has spiraled in recent years. All that anti-Catholicism, homosexual advocacy, sexual perversion, etc. has spiraled into nihilism, resulting with her ugly and perverted new video. (Full review at the blog post here.)

In another, which I titled Madonna: Modern Day Cybele, I describe the transgendered, homosexual dancers that perform in her latest horror show for her video Girl Gone Wild. This video, and its song, are a far cry from her relatively innocent boppy tune Like a Virgin, which propelled her to her strange fame. But don't get me wrong, Like a Virgin was simply the beginning of the spiral. I wrote about her earlier tunes in a post titled Madonna and Her Mirror:

I used to like the early Madonna. Even her very first Like a Virgin was cute and innocent [I have to qualify that now, since as I write above, it is simply the beginning of the spiral downward]. She does have talent, which she showed in her Latin-beat inspired Papa Don't Preach and with (the well-photographed black-and-white video) Vogue.

Madonna takes her two children with her in her decent to perversion. Lourdes, her illegitimate daughter, recently started a clothing brand called Material Girl, after Madonna's early tune of the same name. This is a clever take on material, as in textile, as well as a reference to Madonna to capitalize on her name. The clothes, as the name (and dynasty) suggest, are the cut-out, skin-revealing items that Madonna made famous in her heyday.

Lourdes' Material Girl fashion line

Madonna with Lourdes. Ripped stockings complete the look.

Madonna has a weird, sexualized interaction, with her children. In the photo above with Lourdes, Madonna looks like the girlfriend being led by her, well, younger girlfriend. But Lourdes also has the hard glint of a narcissist, and plays willingly into the "leader" role that Madonna has given her (or is forced to give her).

Madonna also has strange, competitive relations with much younger female pop stars. Remember the Britney Kiss (and later on the one with Christina Aguilera)? Lourdes is now her young competition, and there is no reason why she should treat her different.

Rocco, Madonna's legitimate son with British film director Guy Ritchie, whom Madonna married him briefly, is now going on stage with her quite possibly to work his way into pop stardom. He prefers the art-bereft rap.

Madonna is "dating" a much younger boyfriend (he is twenty-four to her fifty-three), and adds "much younger man" to her list of exoticisms which so far include Muslim and Arab (or simply non-white). He looks like a slightly older, and darker, version of her own son Rocco.

Madonna's dancing boyfriend from her troop

In the photo below, Madonna brings on Rocco during her MDNA tour in costumes representing her various sexualized songs and videos. She has him dressed as a monk for her gospel choir version of her infamous Like a Prayer video in which she frolicked around trying to seduce a black Jesus (burning crosses are also - not so gratuitously - thrown into the melee). And she reverts to some adolescent stage to partner with her rapping son.

Rocco on stage with Madonna during her recent MDNA tour

Her MDNA tour is garnering the usual controversy (actually, juxtaposing Madonna with Controversy is boring, and twenty years too late). In Israel, she showed up in jackboots and a machine gun, of course "protesting" the "Occupation."

Jackboots and machine guns in Israel to kick-off her MDNA tour

In Abu Dhabi, she gyrates on a pedestal of fire, in front of a red-hot cross (see top image). Burning in Hell? Expiating her sins? I've written before that the current popularity of the cross has nothing to do with Christianity, but fulfills people's innate need for spirituality. Of course, spirituality without God simply ends up being idol worship, and the cross without God is not exempt from that. Here's what I wrote about Madonna and the cross:

Madonna cannot separate herself from the cross. This is of course, her own version of the cross (and religion - I cannot call it Christianity). As I've written before, people cannot do without religion, and have to create their own, joining together what they already know, with what they desire. Why throw out such a powerful symbol as the cross?

Madonna just took this one step further, and made the cross an emblem for Hell, with her burning at its pyre like some she-devil. I expect she expects to be resurrected once she's fulfilled her rites.

The Existential Terror of Non-Christians

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, who forgave
his Russian Communist torturers

Two Indian commentators at the View From the Right, Indian Living in the West (ILW) and Aditya B., wrote scathing, even vicious, posts on Indians and India.

ILW writes:

I don’t know if Aditya B. has ever mentioned this to you, but Indians are very vain and think they are smart.

He later writes:

Indians, even when very bright, cannot seem to think outside set formulas.

Aditya B. writes:

I don’t know enough about Freudianism to analyze this, but a few group traits of these miserable people [Indians] could be illuminating...

He then proceeds to write quite a list.

Later on, Gintas, another commentator at VFR writes:

Solzhenitsyn told the truth, it was clear he loved his people and his land even as they wallowed in the depths of Soviet depravity. Also, he always pointed the way back to good health. Perhaps I make Solzhenitsyn out to be a saint; but he was a Christian, and he knew Russia had once been Christian and could become that again. Aditya’s comments about India are rancorous, whatever their truth.

Aditya B.'s torrent caused me to reflect on why, and how, people turn on their own people. I came to the same conclusion as Gintas. I can never turn against the people I originate from, the Amhara people, although I have no direct physical or psychological link with them anymore. I admire their history and, most specifically, the fact that they embraced Christianity when it was hard and dangerous (the Amharas were a northern African Island of Christians surrounded by Islam or pagan Africans), with very little support to convince them of the rightness of their ways other than their unquestioning belief in God - true Christians, in short.

So perhaps it is this Christian element (mine and the Amharas) that allows me to see them in this light, as does Solzhenitsyn his Russian people, despite the suffering he went through under these same Russians. But, his breed of torturers had thrown out Christianity, which made them the monsters they were. And Solzhenitsyn remembers the originals, and believes that his Russia will return to what it once was.

Aditya B. and ILW do not have this historic and religious ideal to turn to. Theirs is a civilization with no Christianity, with no forgiveness (as we know it), and with no hope of salvation, unless they accept the ever-embracing, and forgiving Christian God. No wonder they are so vicious. They react through existential terror.

Madonna: Modern Day Cybele

Group Orgy with Madonna and her Homosexuals

I wrote about Madonna's homosexual stilettoed dancers and her new music video Girl Gone Wild here. The dance troupe is from the Ukraine and calls itself Kazaky or Boys in Heels. Wikipedia describes them thus:

Kazaky (also known as The Boys In Heels) is an all-male Ukrainian dance group. Assembled by choreographer Oleg Zhezhel, the group has released several songs which have garnered popularity on YouTube. The group confronts gender norms by fusing masculine and feminine attributes together, most notably by regularly wearing stiletto heels.

Strange cultural and artistic phenomena often have ancient and mythic precedences. Madonna's homosexual men are like the castrated dancers of the Greek goddess Cybele, who danced around their goddess into sexual frenzy. Here is more on the cult of Cybele:

The cult of Cybele was directed by eunuch priests called Corybantes, who led the faithful in orgiastic rites accompanied by wild cries and the frenzied music of flutes, drums, and cymbals. Her annual spring festival celebrated the death and resurrection of her beloved Attis.

And more on the word "eunuch":

[T]he word ‘eunuch’ has many meanings to modern scholars. It may...refer to transgendered individuals, and it has been used to refer to gay individuals... When a Galli, transgendered priestess of the Magna Mater, Cybele, was unearthed in York a few years ago, the skeleton was said to be of a eunuch; it was found surrounded by female accoutrements and clothing samples.

This site provides interesting and comprehensive information on Cybele and her followers, including the transgendered, sado-masochistic nature of the male eunuchs/homosexuals, and their frenzied, orgiastic rituals.


Fashion designer Anna Osmekhina designed Kazaky's "costumes." Her dress above (not used in Kazaky's performances) has ancient Greco-Roman goddess references, and it is snips and cuts suggest a sado-masochistic style, thus fitting well with her costume creations for the Kazakys.

Kasaky Fashion, by designer Anna Osmekhina
 
The stilettoed fashion of the blatantly homosexual Kazakys
 
The stilettoes of Madonna's dance troupe have multiple meanings. One obvious meaning is their evocation of penetration (through both the female sexual organs and the anus). Since this group of dancers is openly gay, penetration would clearly not be of the female anatomy.

Anal penetration, usually a homosexual sexual act, is a violent act. Here is what could/can happen:

Since the rectum doesn't produce natural lubrication like the vagina does, anal sex risks tearing the rectal walls or the sphincter...that presents a real chance of potentially lethal peritonitis due to leakage of fecal bacteria into the abdomen...A 2004 study by the American Cancer Association showed that women practicing anal sex had more than twice the risk of developing anal cancer...

Stilettoes also evoke sharp and dangerous weapons like knives. As I wrote here, one of the definitions for stiletto is "a small dagger with a slender, tapered blade," implying a covert and dangerous weapon. The homosexual movement is still, to a large extent, a hidden world (camouflaged as, say, fun pop dancers, or fashion-savvy commentators) but it is serious about changing, and destroying, our heterosexual society. However much homosexuals may praise females (or the female way of life), their ultimate purpose is to destroy the feminine and the female.

Christian history also figures in homosexual imagery. There is a clear analogy between Saint Sebastian and the convoluted body of one of Madonna's dancers (see image below). The dancer's body looks like it has been pierced with arrows, like the saint's body.

Left: Saint Sebastian
By: Il Sodoma (Giovanni Antonio Bazzi), 1525  
Right: A dancer from 
Madonna's 2012 video 
Girl Gone Wild
 
Perhaps the earliest, least ambiguous, homoerotic associations of St. Sebastian with homoeroticism occurred in the early sixteenth century:

In about 1525, Bronzino painted an unconventional Saint Sebastian with unmistakable homoerotic appeal...The arrows, moreover, are not abstracted symbols of his ordeal...but erotic emblems: one penetrated his body, the other is casually, but suggestively, held against the pink drapery, the saint's index curved around and almost touching the arrowhead...These characteristics...suggest that (the painting) may have been intended to have an ambiguous meaning - an image on the one hand religious, and on the other, homoerotic...

Bronzino (Agnolo di Cosimo) 
Saint Sebastian ca. 1533

Later on,

From the Renaissance on, Sebastian is most often depicted tied to a tree, sometimes by one arm, gazing heavenward as his flesh is pierced by arrows, which may number from just a couple to a dozen, depending on the artist's enthusiasm; his body is made porous and "feminized" by the experience. His reception to this penetration has obvious associations with male homosexuality.

In our gender-bending, brave new world, Madonna is the gay icon. Homoeroticsm has made it into the mainstream (or, better yet, the mainstream has homoerotisized itself). If there is any advancement in the homosexual, socio-cultural history of man, it is that woman (big girl gone wild) is now the icon of the gay male. And she needn't prove her sainthood either, since nothing can be more highly esteemed and more saint-like in our modern, feminist, world than woman.

Kazaky is making its pop culture rounds these days. Sean O'Pry, a male model described as "American" (some websites describe him as White/Caucasian) but who has Asiatic features (Russian/Ukrainian?) stars in the video advertizement for the new cologne Spicebomb by Viktor and Rolf. The cologne bottle is shaped like a grenade. The slick black and white video shows the grenade/bottle exploding orgasmically to Kazaky's song Love as O'Pry struts in homoerotic half-nudity to the pulsing beat. O'Pry is also featured in Madonna's Girl Gone Wild video.

It is a small, gay world after all.

Sean O'Pry, an "American" model, also 
described as White/Caucasian, with
Asiatic (Russian/Ukrainian?) features

At the end of the Spicebomb video, we are left with a blank, white screen, cleared of all signs of life.

Part of Our Easter Story

Prophet, 1912
Emil Nolde

Below is a post I wrote last Easter. I have reproduced it below:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

There is a timely discussion going on at the View From the Right (VFR). The topic on Rand and conservatism weaves through race, Athena and Zeus, Christianity, American Protestantism, the nature of individuality, heroes, the objective good, God, and ends with this comment by Lawrence Auster quoting Nietzsche's madman from The Gay Science:

The madman jumped into their midst and pierced them with his eyes. "Whither is God?" he cried; "I will tell you. We have killed him--you and I. All of us are his murderers....

"How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us?... Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?"

Nietzsche's ambiguous, ambivalent relationship with the God he perceives as greater than anything he can conceive of, yet deigns to have him killed to supplant him, is surely part of our Easter story.

Madonna Lily

Madonna Lily (circa 1802)
Pierre-Joseph Redouté


I cannot find any Easter lilies by botanical artist Pierre-Joseph Redouté, but I have found instead his Madonna Lily.

Henry Horton: "Gay for 76 years"

Here's an email correspondence from some Henry Horton, who describes himself as: "Gay for 76 years." He was responding to my blog post "My Husband":

Hey Assrat ~ Thanks for letting the world know what a small minded nasty person you are. Does it make you feel good to know you've made some other person a 'child of god' as you might put it feel small and miserable. And since you don't talk to him you don't really know what he's feeling. I'm sure the baby Jesus is fashioning a star for your crown right now. And by the way do you ever casually mention your husband (assuming you have one) in conversation and isn't that rubbing your heterosexuality in peoples faces. You are a sad sad excuse for a human being especially one who obviously thinks she 'has found the truth'. Well at least you live in Ma. and have to live with the reality of our existence every day of your life. Sincerely: Gay for 76 years and not likely to change soon, I remain, Henry Horton Living in Paradise, Pahoa Hawai`i Come to Hilo and I'll buy you a Sarbucks coffee. PS How's this for aggressive?

I wrote back:

No, I don't have to "live the reality of your existence." You don't get it, do you? People will never accept your way of life, even in our modern, "progressive" world. You are outcasts, and of course, since I'm religious, I also say that you are sinners.

If you were happy with your life, you wouldn't be sending me this nasty little email, but would be trying to explain to me the goodness of your ways.

But, you cannot, because even you know what you're doing is not good.

I actually feel sorry for you. At 76, you could be my grandfather. I cannot imagine having a relationship of respect and admiration which granddaughters reserve for their grandfathers with you. I cannot imagine your own granddaughters (or grandnieces, whatever) doing that either. They will silently scorn you, and your ways.

Don't expect any sympathy from the rest of the world.

Nothing more from him.

St. Michael on Bond Street

Bond Street entrance of St. Michael's hospital
with a relief sculpture of the sword and shield
wielding saint.

Archway above the door with filigree lattice work

[Photos by KPA]

Here is a historical plaque on the hospital building:

St. Michael's Hospital opened on this site in 1892 in a Baptist church which had been converted into a women's boarding house by the Sisters of St. Joseph. The hospital opened with 26 beds, six doctors and five nurses. In 1893 the sisters opened the first Catholic nursing school in Canada and in 1910 the hospital became formally affiliated with the University of Toronto Faculty of Medicine. Many Canadian "Firsts" took place during the hospital's first century including the first blood transfusion (1917), the most successful Canadian heart transplant (1968), the first muscle transplant in North America (1973) and the world's first sciatic nerve transplant (1988). In addition, numerous medical procedures and technological innovations were developed at the hospital. By its centenary in 1992, St. Michael's Hospital, still owned by the Sisters of St. Joseph, had become a 500 bed tertiary care hospital.

Nearby, there's a brand new addition to St. Michael's hospital, designed by Canadian architect Jack Diamond and built with donations from Hong Kong billionaire La Ki Shing. This new building stands as a legacy of our contemporary society, where the transcendental glory of God that forms a concrete society has been replaced by a spiritless worship of money from disconnected global sources. La Ki Shing's money comes from across the oceans, from a man who has no personal or historical ties to Canada. His only motive for his grandiose donation is to expediently own a piece of Canada, and to enlarge his global acquisitions. It is not surprising, therefore, that Jack Diamond is the architect. Diamond designed the latest version of Toronto's Opera house. I compare his unimaginative atrocity to Le Corbusier's vertically stacked structures. And I link Le Corbusier's buildings with the highrises that surround the French suburbs, and in which foments the anger of disconnected immigrant youth, who started the famous "banlieue" riots a few years ago.

Facade or St. Michael's Choir School

[Photo by KPA]

The photos above show St. Michael's Choir School for boys and the back entrance to St. Michael's hospital, both on Bond Street. St. Michael's Cathedral is not far down from the school. Fine carvings and filigree lattice work adorn these buildings. But, neither these beautifying elements nor St. Michael's sword and shield were enough to ward off the ugliness of Jack Diamond's revolt-inciting glass panes, or the disconnected alien presence of a Chinese (war)lord.

Art is a testament of God. The new hospital addition discards God through the bland, expressionless, spiritless flat glass panes. Since God is not important, then man takes on a different dimension, whose importance is gauged not by his spirituality and his goodness, but by his acquisitions and his power. And money is rootless, so it can come from the highest bidder, from any corner of the world. Shing won this time around, but it could have been anyone. Anyone, that is, who could come up with extra zeros on the donation check.

Rihanna Sings to the Anti-Christ

Rihanna's crosses. I've circled the inverted cross in red

Rihanna, the pop star, was sporting some kind of leather jacket with crosses printed on it at a recent event. That's nothing unusual in pop fashion. Madonna made the cross into some kind of pop fashion statement, and many follow her example.

But Rihanna's cross is a new evolution. I can only see two imprinted on her jacket. One is right-side-up, the other is upside-down.

I recently posted on Charlize Theron's Christian Dior perfume ad where her video is accompanied by singer Beth Ditto from the group Gossip. Other than her freakish appearance, there's nothing worth commenting on Ditto. But, as I looked for the song, it turns out that it is called "Heavy Cross" and the album cover has a cross turned on its head, about which I write,

[the album cover] cover features a cross turned on its head, some heavy cross for those who turn to the devil to alleviate its powers (or so they think).

This, as I said, is a new development, at least in the mainstream pop world. It is one thing to "ironically" wear an exaggerated cross as part of a fashion statement. That still leaves some room for true belief. But it is another to unashamedly display an inverted cross, because its meaning is nothing but demonic.

The original meaning of the inverted cross is related to St. Peter's humility. But, it has been appropriated by Satanists. Here is a brief explanation:

An inverted cross is the cross of St. Peter, who, according to tradition, was crucified upside down because he felt unworthy to die the same way as Christ. As Catholics believe the pope to be a successor of St. Peter, the inverted cross is frequently used in connection with the papacy, such as on the papal throne and in papal tombs [photo]. It also symbolizes humility because of the story of Peter. The inverted cross has more recently been appropriated by Satanists as a symbol meant to oppose or invert Christianity. [Source]

I doubt the freakish Ditto and the perverse Rihanna are thinking of their salvation when they sport this symbol. Their intentions are much more nefarious.


Once again, it is my belief that the world is turning more and more toward evil. I'm not sure what that signifies (the Apocalypse?), but it is incumbent on us to call out these anti-Christ figures and events, to distance ourselves from them, and to prepare ourselves to fight them for a deserved place by God.

Heardening of the Heart

Bruce Charlton over at Bruce Charlton's Miscellany has a post up titled: "Hard and Soft Hearts - and Toughness". He writes:

We must make tough decisions - that is decisions that are right but which lead to upfront, immediate costs.

For those with a soft, warm heart - these decisions are a cause of pain; but we must not harden our hearts to make tough decisions.

At some level, it sounds a little like a sanctimonious "love thy neighbor" type of advice. I think that must be one of the most difficult of the New Testament's messages to understand, and possibly one of the most misunderstood and misinterpreted.

Since I don't have the theological capacity to untangle the meaning of this message, other than how it might affect my ordinary days, I think it means that one should aim for good (love) rather than evil (hate) as much as one can. But I don't think this message explain what to do in extraordinary times.

I think we are now in a time of spiritual war, in extraordinary times. Different "neighbors" are around us, with different agendas, and often with non-Christian, or anti-love intentions. Are we to love those neighbors, or more precisely, those false neighbors?

I think the Christian way, to avoid the evil of hate, is to distance oneself from such pseudo-neighbors, and to try hard to find like-minded neighbors, however much geographically distant they may be. I think we should prepare for the battle by strengthening (Charleton might call this hardening) our spiritual heart. With conflicting "neighborly" love that is constantly undermining and weakening this spiritual heart, we have to remove ourselves (psychologically, geographically, spiritually) from such false neighbors, and find our true neighbors who will go on the battlefield by our side. Thus can we strengthen our spiritual heart, without hardening it. And be ready for the battle when the time comes.

Flinging Dirt at Beauty

Crew's Jenna Lyons (left) and Courtney Crangi

That's what J. Crew's president and artistic director Jenna Lyons, 1/2 of a "lesbian chic" couple, is doing.

Below is what the Daily Mail reports on her interview about her debut presentation at New York Fashion Week:

Speaking during her label's debut presentation at New York Fashion Week in September, she described how important it was to have a degree of imperfection in an outfit.

She told PopSugar TV: 'I think to me there's always got to be something that sort of turns it off - meaning, if everything's shiny, there has to be something that feels a little casual, or something has to be a little messy.

'Things can't always be perfect, not everything can be buttoned, you know, there's got to be something that turns it on its head.'

Well if one hates beauty (which I think really means one fears beauty, and hence God) then everything has to be smeared with the non-beautiful, the ugly, the tainted, in order not to have Beauty (and God) be privy to our rebellion against him, and to cover (can we really do that?) the eyes that would judge us, for eternity.

This is why I think that even the most belligerent of non-believers actually believe, at least in their judgment day. Lyons flings dirt at beauty (and at God). If beauty were not so powerful, why not let it stay, and have its place in her surroundings? What personification did she have to conjure up in order to throw this dirt at it?

Looking at her sorry examples of "something that turns [Beauty] on its head," I can only say: Really? A dirty jean jacket with a polyester skirt and plastic shoes? Can't she even come up with Rei Kawakubo's^* designer level ugliness, and thus earn the label anti-fashion (anti-Christ) designer, instead of carefully messing around with "a little messy"?

-------------------------------------
^*Camera Lucida post mentioning Rei Kawakubo

Sacredness of Art?

Many times, it is during these holy days that we contemplate the images that depict our sacred Biblical characters.

There is a discussion going on at Larry Auster's View From the Right about the recent image of Mary holding a pregnancy test which was cut to shreds by Catholic traditionalists in New Zealand.

A VFR reader writes, "I'm surprised by the fact that you cherished what can only be considered an act of barbarism."

Auster succinctly replies: "...you are sure that people who properly take action against intolerable things are morally backward."

That is just it. Non-Christians love to quote, or allude to, the "turn the other cheek" line in the the New Testament:

But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. [Matthew 5:39]

I think they do this so that they can get away with their ultimate purpose, which is to destroy Christianity, and to have no retaliation in the process, having turned these "devout" Christians into inert bystanders.

When someone (or some people, or a whole society) starts the systematic destruction of our religion, standing by passively (and "piously") is actually sinful. We are allowing the message and word of God to go to ruin, destroyed by forces that hate it.

The other part of this story is of course that cultural items like paintings are more sacred than or equal to God. Therefore destroying them becomes worse than upholding God's name.

The poster itself is more than a poster. The artist has clearly spent time trying to make a pretty good painting of the Virgin Mary, using classic drawing and painting techniques. He isn't merely using a "poster" as a propaganda tool, but a work of art that mocks all other religious art which depict Mary in a true, holy manner. This ugly (not aesthetically, but morally) painting of Mary fools people into thinking it is the erudite, well-thought out, submission of an artist, when in fact it is mocking everything Mary, and God, stand for.

Therefore, the right reaction for this ugly work is to cut it to shreds with scissors, just as the Christians in New Zealand instinctively and confidently did.

The "reason" given for putting up this poster by the Anglican church St. Matthew-in-the-City is the usual "Christianity as a vehicle for social change" where:

Mary was unmarried, young, and poor. This pregnancy would shape her future. She was certainly not the first woman in this situation or the last.

As in the past it is our intention to avoid the sentimental, trite and expected to spark thought and conversation in the community. This year we hope to do so with an image and no words. We invite you to wonder what your caption might be.

Although the make-believe of Christmas is enjoyable - with tinsel, Santa, reindeer, and carols - there are also some realities. Many in our society are suffering: some through the lack of money, some through poor health, some through violence, and some through other hardships. The joy of Christmas is muted by anxiety.

In this season we encourage one another to be generous to those who suffer, to give to strangers, and to care for all – especially those who have the least. Like the first Santa, St Nicholas did. [From the St. Matthew-in-the-City website]

Christmas Tree at the Metropolitan Museum of Art

Christmas Tree with Neapolitan Baroque Crèche
at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York

(Detail) Neapolitan Baroque Crèche at the base of Christmas Tree

Infant Jesus by Guiseppe Sammartino (1720-1793)
From the Crèche

[All images from the Met website]

Each of the figurines under the tree is apparently created by a different artist. The baby Jesus above is by Giuseppe Sammartino (1720–1793). He is with Mary, who is under the pillars (with the cherub flying in between). Joseph is standing behind Mary.

The Metropolitan Museum website has images of 233 artworks of the tree and the crèche, which includes the figurines and some of the designs that went in their creations. The very first page has descriptions of the figurines of the holy family.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is the Christmas season, and Christmas trees are everywhere, so I cannot help but comment on them.

Despite their name change (Eaton Centre calls theirs a "Wish Tree") and odd shapes (Dundas Square - across from the Eaton Centre - has mounds of snow made of wire that make a tree), they still give a festive air to these days.

Above is a tree I saw at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, which seems to be a long-standing tradition at the museum.

It is hard to see all the pieces from the images above, but in front of the pillars are Joseph and Mary with the infant Jesus, and the various wise men (on horseback, camel, and elephant) are on either side of the family. Shepherds are there too, as well as angels. And many "ordinary folk" including "a man with bagpipes" and "girl carrying a basket of onions" amongst many others.

Here is more on the tree and the crèche from the Met's website:

The annual Christmas display is the result of the generosity, enthusiasm, and dedication of the late Loretta Hines Howard, who began collecting crèche figures in 1925 and soon after conceived the idea of combining the Roman Catholic custom of elaborate Nativity scenes with the tradition of decorated Christmas trees that had developed among the largely Protestant people of northern Europe. This unusual combination first was presented to the public in 1957, when the Metropolitan Museum initially exhibited Mrs. Howard's collection. More than two hundred eighteenth-century Neapolitan crèche figures were given to the Museum by Loretta Hines Howard starting in 1964, and they have been displayed each holiday season for nearly forty years. Linn Howard, Mrs. Howard's daughter, worked with her mother for many years on the annual installation. Since her mother's death in 1982, she has continued to create new settings for the Museum's ensemble and additional figures that she has been lending to the collection. In keeping with family tradition, Linn Howard's daughter, artist Andrea Selby Rossi, now joins her mother each year in creating the display.

Calling Out Evil

Celestial Light?
[Photo by KPA]

I've noticed something.

People who indicate that they don't believe in evil (and hence, who fundamentally don't believe in the good - and in God) cannot say the word is evil. They just cannot say it. They even hate the word (said aloud, at least).

When pressed to explain evil, or find a word that describes/replaces it, they will search for synonyms like: poverty, bad luck, difficult childhood, lack of education/knowledge, oppressive society, [place your favorite version here].

Yet whatever good they see, or whatever good anyone tries to do, they attribute to some nefarious intent. A good or kind deed is to curry favors. A beautiful work of art is the result of oppression. Nature is destructive all its floods and earthquakes. People are not to be trusted.

So they do believe in evil! Actually, for them, evil is the only force in town. Their whole world is one big evil, to be carefully and studiously picked at, either to be outwitted, or to serve their own purposes.

But, if they believe in evil, they must also believe in (or at least acknowledge) good. So, good (God) is a force that has to be destroyed, or contained, since it is the only force which is capable of destroying their evil, their world.

They may genuflect, chant and purport to kneel before God, but they are only biding their time until they gain a sure upper had and can unleash their apocalyptic evil onto the world. Their bleak and terrible world of evil cannot (will not) be accepted by ordinary people, so they have to cajole and lie, to them until the moment is right, and ripe, for a full-on assault.

Our modern world is replete with these quasi-invisible, hypocritical, non-believers. It is disarming to see them rear their satanic heads when they are unable to contain their terrible secret. Sometimes it is with an unusually violent reaction (often with exaggerated words and tone) to an innocuous (good) statement or observation. Other times it is with a deafening silence with "NO COMMENT" emanating from their very pores, again at seemingly innocuous (and good) words. Yet other times, it is with insidious deceits, trying to pull in bystanders in this war against the good, and against God himself.

But most of all, these haters of the Good and of God hate hearing the word evil, and especially being called evil, because evil is embedded in their hearts and something which they secretly and shamefully harbor, which they know in moments of clarity (one can see stunned expression in their eyes when this realization takes place) is a nefarious force that will throw them down a never-ending abyss. Therefore, the biggest insult they can receive, the biggest fuss they make, is when someone calls them evil.

We need to call out evil, to get it out of the woodwork and into plain sight, where we can fight it.

Women of the Cross

I've had two interactions with women bearing (wearing) large and distinct crosses. The first one was on a manager at Laura's, who told me she was wearing it as a fashion statement.

The other one was on a manager at the Art Gallery of Ontario, who made my simple refusal to give out personal information (name and address) at the purchase of a ticket into some gargantuan problem.

I wonder what this means, in my small world, and, if I may pompously add, in the bigger picture of crosses, religion and Christianity?

I wrote a few weeks ago about a family wedding to which I was invited, and which I declined, where the wedding was to take place with no Christian religious ceremony. Yet, the couple chose an important (quasi-religious) holiday - the Canadian Thanksgiving - to "celebrate" their day.

I think people cannot do without some form of higher, transcendental order. Some will wear the only religious symbols they know, but give them different, or non-Christian significance. Others will be enticed by religious rituals and ceremonies, but restructure them to suit their requirements.

As with the "Wish Tree" which resplendently sits in the Eaton Centre, Christian symbols are around, but they are not used in their true sense.

I think it a sign, which we have to pay attention to. Idolatry is an integral part of our culture now.

We have to stay strong, and faithful. I think the Armageddon is not far ahead.

Yevarechecha

Boris Savchuk
"Yevarechecha"

"Yevarechecha HaShem veyishmerecha" ("May God bless you and keep you").

"Out of our selves and into Christ we must go"

C. S. Lewis
By Lawrence Reid Bechtel
Bronze mounted on polished stone base

My co-bloggers What's Wrong With the World from James Kalb's "Other Trads" site discuss a speech by C. S. Lewis. They've also provided a link to the speech.

At the final third of the speech, Lewis articulates many of the things I've been clumsily trying to write about in the past few days:

"Social service ends in red tape of officialdom"
"Good intentions going wrong"
" People trying to do good things, but somehow something goes wrong."

(These are not my words, by quotes from Lewis's speech I've partly transcribed below.)

Near the end of the excerpt, Lewis says:

...the real cure lies far deeper. Out of our selves and into Christ we must go.

Here is the transcript of the latter part of the speech, which you can also listen to here:

The Christian life is simply a process of having your natural self change into a Christ self, and that this process goes on very far inside. One's most private wishes, one's point of view, are the things that have to be changed. That's why unbelievers complain that Christianity is a very selfish religion. "Isn't it very selfish, even morbid," they say "to be always bothering about the inside of your own soul, instead of thinking about humanity?"

Now what would an NCO say to a soldier who had a dirty rifle, and when told to clean it, reply "But Sergeant, isn't it very selfish, even morbid, to be always bothering about the inside of your own rifle, instead of thinking of the United Nations?" Well, we needn't bother about what the NCO would actually say. You see the point. The man isn't going to be much use to the United Nations if his rifle isn't fit to shoot with.

In the same way, people who are still acting from their old natural selves wont do much real permanent good to other people. Let me explain that. History isn't just the story of bad people doing bad things. It's quite as much a story of people trying to do good things, but somehow something goes wrong. Think the common expression "cold as charity." How did we come to say that? From experience. We've learned how unsympathetic and patronizing and conceited charitable people often are. And yet, hundreds and thousands of the started out really anxious to do good. And when they'd done it, somehow, it just wasn't as good as it ought to have been. The old story. What you are comes out in what you do. A crab apple tree can't produce eating apple. As long as the old self is there, its taint will be over all we do. We try to be religious, and become Pharisees. We try to be kind, and become patronizing. Social service ends in red tape of officialdom. Unselfishness becomes a form of showing off.

I don't mean of course to put a stop trying to be good. We've got to do the best we can. If the soldier is fool enough to go into battle with a dirty rifle, he mustn't run away. But I do mean that the real cure lies far deeper. Out of our selves and into Christ we must go. The change wont for most of us happen suddenly. And I must admit, that for most Christians it will on be beginning to the very end of our present lives. But there are some in whom it goes further, even before then. Far enough for you to see it. Their very faces and voices are different. When you meet them, you know you're up against something which, so to speak, begins where you leave off. Something stronger, quieter, happier, more alive than ordinary humanity.