Welcome to The Blog of the Kurgan

So I just finished watching series 1 of The Last Kingdom, which was on Netflix, and I thought I’d write this before I venture any further into series 2 onwards, because I can’t believe they will not being into it some convergence, lesbianism, homosexuality or what have you.

There are a number of surprisingly positive elements in this series, which I think is good to list, without giving any detailed spoilers, though there are some generic overview potential semi-spoilers.

Most important of all

I think is the representation of the warrior mentality, best shown, obviously, by Uhtred and Leofric. Not just the interplay between them, but also individually with respect also to their individual views of God and how they move in the world as a result of it.

It is, I think, very well done in general too, not just for these two characters, but throughout the series, showing different types of men who are in that caste, although not necessarily by natural inclination but as a result of mere necessity.

The Danes represent a far more worldly aspect of the warrior class, while the Saxons are supposed to represent more of a God-inspired aspect, best exampled by King Alfred, who starts out overly pious before forging himself as a warrior, unlike instead one of the Danes that goes the other route before being baptised. Both paths are valid.

The overview of the Danes as being more materialistic in their day-to-day aims fits their aspect of warrior mentality, as the mass is always somewhat reduced to that of the lowest common denominator, but their culture is also not exclusively negative, with the aspect of what is normally referred to as the honour of the noble savage being the pinnacle of their embodiment of a great man.

The Saxons on the other had are en-masse represented as more docile, cowardly when it comes to their life being on the line and somewhat more intellectual. Once again, the overview of the general negatives is correct. In a nominally more pious society, the intellectual aspects will be highlighted, which, in negative expression lead to subterfuge, dishonesty, cowardice and general lack of honour. That said, the best among them who also embody the warrior aspect are indeed formidable men not just in practical terms, but of faith too. Once again, best represented by King Alfred.

The absolute crucial point of both though is that in their best expression, neither type of warrior is going to let an outrage stand. No matter the patience required. No matter the risk. No matter the consequences after, the primary supernatural aspect of a warrior soul is to ultimately serve Justice. Yes, of course, at its lowest expression warriors are thugs. Raiders, plunderers, murderers and rapists. But at its best, they are the only motive force on this Earth, cursed by the dominion of Satan, that can or ever does produce a measure of Earthly justice. The concerted effort that has been made over the last 100 years especially, to ensure that such men are wiped out has been terribly effective. I pray enough are left that at least some of the injustices we are seeing in our time can get righted, and soon. If for no other reason then, watch at least this season 1 to get a certain level of inspiration. Process the viewing of it as you would from the perspective of everyone, from a peasant farmer to a warrior, to a priest, to a leader or king. See what resonates with you most rather than just observe another programme while your vegetative state increases and your butt forms roots to your couch, sustained by the power of Doritos crumbs and cold pizza slices.

Their respective approaches to the Divine

The representation of the Church (which remember at this time there was only one Church, the One, True, Holy and Apostolic Catholic Church) is again very well done, with everything from the best, being pious, intellectual and courageous, like Beocca, to the obviously corrupt like the Bishop, or the cowardly or lukewarm. Again, a very fair representation of Catholic clergy as well as the attitudes of the lay people to it and faith. The best warriors, like Leofric, certainly do not deny God, nor are they unwilling to submit to His Will as required, even of they might rebel against supposedly Earthly representatives of it, and rightly so, since the Justice they serve, intrinsically, though of a worldly nature, is ultimately driven by a need to fulfil Divine Justice.

The Danes represent the Pagan aspect and is best embodied by the short speech Uhtred gives Alfred concerning his view of God, which is that the entirety of creation is his Church and so on. Again, both aspects are valid. I have lived as both and recall distinctly the truth aspects embodied in each, though, ultimately, the Catholic aspect is superior, as long as, and this is very important, you are free of the (paradoxically mostly Pagan) superstitious elements of it, worldly elements of it, and the usual human weaknesses. The kind of rigid superstitious and binary aspect of a poorly Catechised Catholic are embodied in the Queen, Alfred’s wife, at least for most of the series. The best aspects of it from a warrior perspective by Leofric, and from a leader perspective by King Alfred, certainly by the end of the season.

The Danes represent what is, certainly from a Catholic perspective, the embracing of the demonic aspects of the supernatural. Their Gods are brutal and very human in their “needs”. And as the shadow queen demonstrates, they do grant them certain powers… at the inevitable cost.

The ambiguity for the agnostic is preserved in all the “acts of God/the gods”, as is the skepticism and “superstition” (both real and assumed) for the atheist, and the validity of the Pagan supernatural is also pre-eminent for the Pagan, while the validity of the Catholic supernatural remains pre-eminent for the Catholic; and all this in the same scene or act. Which makes it quite a superb bit of film-making.

In this respect, a Protestant watching the series is possibly the least able to appreciate the nuances, since they are, in essence, the furthest removed from reality, be it Pagan or Catholic. A Protestant watching is liable to assume the Pagan and the Catholic positions are both “wrong” and “Pagan”, because they have been historically lobotomised and had logic and reason excised from any aspect of faith from birth, so, just as I explained in BELIEVE! The Churchian position is ultimately the hardest one to be in, as it’s the hardest one to come out of. It is one of the reasons why Catholic dogma states it is worse for a fake Christian to try to “Christianise” Pagans with their false Christianity than it is to leave them Pagan, for the inculcating of error at a baseline that is close but deviant from the Truth is worse than merely having to find your own path without any instruction at all, since ultimately, as the Bible states, all of creation ultimately demonstrates God; and logic and reason are divine aspects of God we are obviously meant to use, given we are built in his image.

That little aside for the benefit of the few Protestants which will be able to assimilate it (if any) notwithstanding, if you have had the experience of being an atheist, an agnostic and finally a real Catholic (sedevacantist), as I have, then the subtlety of the process and the ultimately superior position of the Catholic faith, as it expresses itself in both society as well as individual lives become visible; if you pay attention. In fact, there is even the opportunity to see how even the evil done by men, or the supernatural “benefits” that the Pagan ways provide at the usual cost exacted by demonic influences, can and are turned to an overall good by God. The expression of free will and resulting bad choices or descent into evil, intentional or unconscious, can still result in a greater good from other perspectives.

In essence, once again, the representation of all aspects of faith are eminently well done.

I have no idea what the remaining four seasons will be like, and I assume an inevitable descent into degeneracy, homosexuality and perversion of a modern nature are inevitable, because netflix. But the first season is very good.

There is also one last disturbing point and that is that some versions have cut out certain scenes, and I have no idea how to know which version you are watching. We discovered this only because in catching up with one episode (my wife invariably falls asleep) she had a scene I had not seen on the ipad when playing there instead of her laptop.

So you know, there is a scene with Alfred and Uhtred just before the duel, and another scene where the nun tells Leofric “He sent you.” Neither of these were on the ipad but both are on the laptop version. Similarly, in the ipad version the episodes have different end points. The right end point is that one of the episodes ends when Uhtred kills the wood thief. If an episode does not end there then you are seeing the version with the missing scenes. This happens around episode 5 to 8 or so.

I hope that you watch season 1.

And then I hope you seriously contemplate what men, actual men that still have warrior souls, would do in the current era. How they might go about it. What would be their aims. How would they form their kingdoms?

Worth copy and pasting into google translate, then pondering how complete the brainwashing is globally. Of your own family members, of your neighbours and friends. And ultimately, of you too if we are still here, docile and sheep-like, with chemtrails above us and laughter below.

“In Francia 3 milioni di persone in strada, città messe a ferro e fuoco, richieste di dimissioni di Macron, da settimane cariche scomposte della polizia, violenze e feriti .

Ecco, ora pensate per un momento se questo stesse accadendo in:

Russia o Bielorussia o Venezuela o Iran o Cina o Cuba, o uno qualunque dei paesi che non piacciono ai media europei (perché non piacciono agli USA).

Avremmo quartetti d’archi di pennivendoli che starebbero poetando sul grido di libertà represso del popolo, sull’incontenibile desiderio di affrancarsi da regimi antipopolari, sulla fatale spinta progressiva ad aderire alla civiltà liberaldemocratica.

Simultaneamente, per venire altruisticamente incontro alle sacrosante rivendicazioni emancipative di questi popoli, partirebbero mozioni su change.org, commoventi storie personali sulle vittime della repressione, e, fuori scena, finanziamenti segreti a sostegno dei rivoltosi, interpretati come naturale punta avanzata del processo di estensione dell’unica vera civiltà, la nostra.”

Andrea Zhok

Look at this silly cow.

Argentina, according to her is “in OUR hemisphere!” But Russia should be just fine with biolabs creating bioweapons and missiles just a few kilometres from the Russian border. And never mind all the NATO expansion that went completely against all the agreed treaties.

And just for reference, here are American military bases around the world.

And the NATO expansion against all the assurances and signed pacts and agreements.

But personally, I’d like to know why the fuck Italy needs 44 American bases on its soil. In fact I’d like to know why it should have a single one in the while of Europe.

Yankee, go home. And stay there.

Hahahhahahaha

See this chart below?

It’a about criminality in Sweden.

It shows that out of 15 sexual assaults, 5 are committed by foreigners born outside of Sweden, 5 from people born in Sweden to parents that came to Sweden as foreigners, and 3 are from people born in Sweden who have one parent that was a foreigner.

So only 2 out of 15 are committed by actual Swedish people born in Sweden from Swedish parents.

Isn’t diversity grand?

First, let me give credit where it is due, the Dimond brothers, at their website produce for the most part, outstanding works of proper Catholic teaching and correct Canon Law. I have directed many people to their websites and various of their articles on many topics, for they tend to be exhaustive in their research and details. So, let me not pretend otherwise.

Unfortunately, and it is very unfortunate, they commit a grave error, which is the (absurd) position of claiming that baptism of desire and baptism of blood are not valid concepts in Catholic Dogma.

They have written at length on the topic and it is quite astonishing to see their usually very logical and precise thinking on so many other topics, take the absurdist and intentionally contrarian position with respect to BOD and BOB, going so far as to literally misrepresent the written word of various encyclicals and so on.

But as I said repeatedly to Jay Dyer and many others, there is no need to go trolling through almost 2000 years of church documents to try and find one that if you squint just right, and you quote out of context, and ignore hundreds of other documents that clarify the situation unambiguously, might allow one to pretend that your absurd position is correct.

All we need is Canon Law. Specifically the one of 1917 because Canon Law is how you apply Church dogma, since it embodies ALL the Church documents and Papal encyclicals ever written prior to 1917. And if we do that we note that wit respect to baptism of desire we find the following canons (reproduced here in full – bold emphasis added).

TITLE 1

On baptism

Canon 737

§ 1. Baptism, the gateway and foundation of the Sacraments, actually or at least in desire is necessary for all for salvation and is not validly conferred except by washing with true and natural water along with the prescribed formula of words.

§ 2. When it is administered in accord with all of the rites and ceremonies that are prescribed in the ritual books, it is called solemn; otherwise, [it is called] non-solemn or private.

Canon 1239

§ 1. Those who die without baptism are not to be accorded ecclesiastical burial.

§ 2. Catechumens who through no fault of their own die without baptism are to be reckoned as baptized.

§ 3. All baptized are to be given ecclesiastical burial unless they are expressly deprived of same by law.

So that’s it. It’s pretty conclusive. Similarly, there exist dozens of documents from various eras and Popes supporting fully the concept of baptism of desire and of blood. But perhaps even more damning for the Dimond brothers are two last pieces of information:

Firstly, there are a number of Saints, recognised as Saints by the Catholic Church who decided there and then to become Catholic and did not have the chance to be baptised before they were put to death. Perhaps the most well knows in the very Saint whose Name I took at Baptism, Saint Adrian’s of Nicomedia.

Ss. Adrian and Natalia lived in Nicomedia during the time of Emperor Maximian in the early fourth century. The twenty-eight-year-old Adrian was head of the praetorium.It is said that while presiding over the torture of a band of Christians, he asked them what reward they expected to receive from God. They replied, “Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him” (1 Corinthians 2:9). He was so amazed at their courage that he publicly confessed his faith, though he had not himself yet been baptised. He was then immediately imprisoned himself. He was forbidden visitors, but accounts state that his wife Natalia came to visit him dressed as a boy to ask for his prayers when he entered Heaven. The executioners wanted to burn the bodies of the dead, but a storm arose and quenched the fire. Natalia recovered one of Adrian’s hands.

So unless the Dimond brothers also want to refute some of the earliest Saints of the Church, it clearly points out that they are in error.

Secondly, I wrote to them years ago and while I am told they reply to most people who write to them, I never received a reply, and as per Roman law: Silence is equivalent to assent. So I presume they know they are in error.

This was my email to them, sent on the 28th June 2020:

Dear Br. Dimond,

I have made very fruitful use of your very detailed writings in my own research and elucidation of the original Catholic doctrines. I have also verified for myself even before I was aware of your own clashes with them, the mendacity and lies spread by people such as John Salza and John Pontrello, Jay Dyer, etcetera.

I have, to date, not found error in the things on your site I have read so far, I do however have a question on baptism of desire. Although I have read what you have written on the subject I am unclear on a rather specific detail of this point of doctrine. I hope if you have the time you will indulge me with a short and direct reply. In order to save time I will also ask my question in the most direct and to the point way, and I hope you understand this is not to be disrespectful but merely to be clear.

My question is as follows:

1. I accept and believe that there is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church. This is dogmatic and I have no issue with it.

2. What I have also seen however is that in a very specific case (detailed below) although in foro externo the baptism has not taken place physically, if it has taken place in foro interno then, although no human being can know this for certain, and as such it is a somewhat moot point from an external, objective perspective, it is Church doctrine that in such a case the church believes the person can still be saved.

3. What is meant by this “baptism” by foro interno is very rare and unlikely but as I understand it would be as follows:

A person who has (relatively suddenly I suppose) become aware that the Catholic Church is the only one true Church and thus become truly desirous of being baptised in its name and doing his or her utmost to get this baptism done as immediately as possible, who however dies before it is factually completed physically, may, in God’s mercy, be accepted into purgatory and eventually heaven. The occurrence would necessarily be extremely rare given that even an atheist can validly baptise in an emergency as long as the correct formula and intent are present, however, this is my current understanding of the situation.
I would very much welcome your comments on this point and/or your view/corrections you feel are necessary to this perspective.
My current view on it is that the above seems congruent with God’s and the Church’s statement that no one goes to Hell through no fault of their own. So even the deceived have had ample opportunity to educate themselves and have not chosen it. However, in the instance of one suddenly awakened to the truth, who does not delay, but who dies prior to the actual baptism, they may in fact be saved. As I hope I explained this would be extremely rare and for all practical purposes unlikely to happen at all, but it seems to me to be in alignment with God’s mercy.
Thank you for your time and I look forward to your eventual response.

Giuseppe

I think that puts the matter to bed once and for all.

It is an important point, because as a result of this error, the Dimond brothers do not recognise ANY priests or Bishops as being valid. Meaning, they are not even Sedevacantists, truly, if there are no valid priests or Bishops left on Earth then the Catholic Church would have ceased to exist and Jesus’s promise would have been a lie. This, is ultimately the real crux of the matter and makes their position schismatic and heretical. I truly hope they repent and return to the fold, for their other work is otherwise excellent.

But it is necessary to ensure people are not deceived into believing this dangerous and absurd position, lest they lose their faith.

I have posted a few other canons concerning baptism below, as they may be of interest.

We also learn that in emergencies literally almost anyone can administer a baptism too.

Canon 742

§ 1. Non-solemn baptism, discussed in Canon 759, § 1, can be administered by anyone, preserving the required matter, form, and intention; when it can be done this way, two witnesses, or at least one, should be used, by which the conferral of the baptism can be proved.

§ 2. If there is a priest present, he is preferred to a deacon, a deacon to a subdeacon, a cleric to layman, and a man to a woman, unless for the sake of modesty it is more becoming that a woman baptize instead of a man, or unless a woman knows the form and manner of baptism better than does a man.

§ 3. It is not permitted that the father or mother baptize their own child, except in danger of death, when there is no one else who can baptize.

And in danger of a miscarriage, even a foetus in the womb can be baptised. This does give me some comfort as I did this when my wife was beginning to have what turned out to be a miscarriage.

Canon 746

§ 1. No one should be baptized in the mother’s womb so long as there is a hope that he can be baptized correctly outside of it.

§ 2. If the head of an infant is exposed and there is imminent danger of death, let him be baptized on the head; later, if he is delivered alive, he should be baptized again under condition.

§ 3. If another part of the body is exposed, and if danger [of death] is imminent, let him be baptized under condition thereupon, and then, if he survives birth, he should be once again baptized under condition.

§ 4. If a pregnant mother dies, and if the fetus is delivered by those who do such things, and if he is certainly alive, he should be baptized absolutely; if there is doubt, [he should be baptized] under condition.

§ 5. A fetus baptized in the womb should be baptized again under condition after [being born].

Canon 759 is reproduced here as it is mentioned in Canon 742, just to give a more complete picture.

Canon 759

§ 1. In case of danger of death, baptism is licitly conferred privately; and if it is conferred by a minister who is neither a priest nor a deacon, he should do only those things necessary for the validity of baptism; if a priest or deacon is available, they should apply, if time allows, the baptismal norms that follow.

§ 2. Outside of danger of death, the local Ordinary should not permit private baptism, unless it is a case of heretics who are being baptized under condition at an adult age.

§ 3. The ceremonies that were omitted in the conferral of the baptism, for whatever reason, should be supplied in a church as soon as possible, except in cases described in § 2.