News and Notes

for the Globally Challenged

I would like to highlight for DBC readers four items worthy of their attention.

First, this excellent essay by David McGrogan, published last month on Substack, touching on an event that has just wrapped up and the movement it represents: Global Government is No Conspiracy Theory.

Second, a consideration of non-negotiables for Christians and Christian churches, under just such conditions as McGrogan describes, posted yesterday on A Biblical Frame. This episode, which includes Aaron Kheriaty, I think important. If you find it helpful, share it with others.

Third, an editorial in the November issue of Touchstone, which is not yet published but soon will be, together with a feature essay by yours truly on the subject of civil disobedience in the face of false claims to authority. This essay, “When Kings Take Counsel Together,” also treats key biblical texts on the subject of authority. Touchstone, by the way, is just about to hold its annual conference, which is always good value.

Fourth, the Canadian Christian Declaration on AntiSemitism. I have not myself signed it, for reasons I will explain another time and have indeed already explained in the eighth chapter of Theological Negotiations, but I entirely support it in principle. Thanks to Andrew Bennett and those who undertook this important initiative.   

---

While I’m at it, I’ll add a discursive postscript.

I was one of many recipients the other day of a missive from a colleague over in Medicine who poked fun at those who posit a dangerous globalist agenda. Perhaps he isn’t attending to the UN’s "Pact for the Future” and the Prime Minister’s enthusiastic support for it, or perhaps he finds it congenial. Like some others I know over there, and in the Law Faculty, his pact with the past seems not to exceed the last four years, which may serve as a blueprint for the future. Anyway, he argued that the globally challenged (my expression, not his) should perform a little thought experiment:

Imagine that you, [as a] grandparent, are called to the intensive care unit of your local hospital to see your grandchild intubated and suffering from a new severe viral infection.  You might be told that the new virus came from a foreign country and that, because of privacy issues and fear of “globalists,” there had been no coordination with that foreign country to take precautions; nor enough time to develop a suitable vaccine. Of course, infected Canadians who were innocently transmitting the virus were not traced because freedom to cough a dangerous virus in public is more important than your grandchild’s health.

If a new Polio-like virus or a new Spanish flu or a new Covid comes along, as it surely will, I want my grandchildren to be protected. You might ask yourself why you haven’t been paralyzed by Polio or killed by cholera, diphtheria or “mad cow” disease. The answer is good public health and vaccines.

I wonder if he knows of the effects of spike protein on the brain, for example, or other marvels of the world of “vaccines” (a word that must now be used with scare quotes, no pun intended). Or why he thinks we have good public health, an opinion not shared by many of the scientists and doctors with whom I consult. But let’s stick with his argument. “World-wide surveillance of animal health,” he opines, “is not only desirable but essential.”

That includes, presumably, the human animal, which (via vax passports and other such means for tracking and tracing) will also have to be closely scrutinized on a world-wide basis. Which, of course, is where the interests of public health bureaucracies and those of our intelligence and security agencies coincide, to say nothing of the interests of global corporations. We know, now, which side of this alliance is really in charge. We know why covid was treated as if it were polio or Spanish flu, when manifestly it was not. And we know who profits from it when the decision is made to treat humans like animals. (Perhaps we’ll soon be recycling human brains, as well; “mad man” disease, anyone?) We even know something, or at least glimpse something, of what happens when we are clobbered by reality.

My colleague, however, considers none of this in the missive mentioned. He seems blissfully unaware of it, though it is unclear to me how that is still possible. He devotes himself largely to redeeming Bill C-293 from those who allege that it is a globalist betrayal of national sovereignty and a threat to individual liberty. I could happily wish him success in that, had I the slightest confidence in the regime backing the bill. My own hope is that it will die with this parliament.

But I come now to a curious feature of his musings, which conclude on a theological note. Tongue in cheek, he declares a possible conflict of interest, beneath which is a serious point:

I belong to a “globalist” Church. Catholic means universal, which sounds a lot like global. Our leader (JC) proposes Charity in the face of disease; and Truth as essential to Freedom.

The serious point can hardly be the blending of globalism and Catholicism, as if opposition to the one implies opposition to the other; or support of the one, support of the other. For that is a proposition most globalists would hold in derision, despite the fact that the wealthiest among them are currently floating the debt-ridden Vatican on a sea of donations designed to encourage just such fantasies. I too hold it in derision, and not only because there are many globalisms, too many to try to parse here. Catholic does not mean anything so vague or banal, or for that matter so ambitious, as global. The Church is “catholic” because it alone is entrusted by God with all the goods necessary for the healing of body and soul, in every manner of man.

No, the serious point is that charity, truth, and freedom are inextricably entwined. They are indeed three strands of a single rope. When one strand breaks, so do the others.

Charity requires me to point out to my Catholic brother that his own rope is about to break. For, if I understand him rightly, the freedom strand has already snapped. The biomedical security bureaucracy he admires has been spreading a net to catch him as he falls, yes, and his grandson too. But what will become of those who are enmeshed in that net? There are ample signs that they are being reduced to a viral threat or a carbon threat or a political threat, even a “terrorist” threat, and must be treated as such. Many meanings can be given, and many punishments meted, to those who “cough a dangerous virus in public.”

What a world to pass on to our grandchildren! A world in which “truth” is trademarked and the free search for truth is censored, sued, or otherwise suppressed. A world in which “charity” means submission to the irrational fear of neighbours who have succumbed to the lavishly funded campaigns of those who wish precisely to prevent charity, because they know that fear is of great use in the pursuit of power and that love casts out fear. A world in which “freedom” means access to power, and to the benefits of power, which can only be enjoyed by trading our birthright for a mess of pottage. Sell all you have, they advise us, even the rights and liberties you inherited, and purchase security, their pearl of great price. And how they do carry on when in receipt of the proceeds!

Perhaps I will be thought irreverent or unserious if I also poke a little fun. Yet I am quite serious, in my way, for I see that others are quite serious in their way. And it is the seriousness of their irreverence that most concerns me. After that, yes, our children and grandchildren concern me, and the welfare of the Catholic Church. So with apologies to St John, and to my colleague as well, I offer, in place of the gospel of “JC,” the gospel according to the globalists and their pharma partners, who (as you may recall) set the stage in Rio.

---

photo source

On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, the doors being shut where the disciples were, for fear of the virus, their leader came and stood among them and said to them, “Peace be with you.” 

When he had said this, he showed them his arm and shoulder. Then the disciples were glad when they saw that he had been vaxxed. He said to them, “Vaccine saves. As Pfizer has sent me, even so I send you.”  Then he breathed on them, and comforted them, saying, “Fear not; for, as you can see, I am wearing a mask.”

But one of them asked, “Sir, what shall we do with those doubting Thomases who question the efficacy of our countermeasures, and who keep publishing studies on SAEs and excess death statistics?” He replied: “Do unto them as they are doing unto you. Accuse them of killing Granny—and little Johnny. Then let the lawyers and money-changers deal with them. Their papers will soon be retracted.”

Another asked: “But what about parents or grandparents who question our authority over the immune systems of their children, over the food they eat, over the places and times at which they assemble for training in righteousness, over their very numbers?”

Fixing him with a stern look, the leader declared: “Truly I tell you, all authority has been given us. He who does not vax one of these little ones with every vax on the schedule shall never enter the kingdom. Its doors shall be barred against him and his coughing brood. Permission to reproduce will be denied him, and even such children as he has will be taken from him, for he is unworthy of OneHealth and has broken our Pact for the Future.”

Then they knelt down and gave thanks to Our Lady of Public Health for the new Catholicism they had received.

---

But I see, just now, that David McGrogan has a new piece, entitled “The Global Effort to Control the Future is Doomed to Fail.” Indeed it is! So l’ll send you to that for a little encouragement.

---

Essays alluded to above:

Our Lady of Public Health

A New Catholicism