Distinction Matter - Subscribed Feeds

Satan’s Chosen People at Work with the Help of Their American Puppets

https://chrishedges.substack.com/p/israel-is-about-to-empty-gaza?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=778851&post_id=161183182&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=10r3uc&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email 

 We’ve come a long way!

In November last year, I discussed the importance of yield spreads, historically the market's "early warning system." To wit:"

"Yield spreads are critical to understanding market sentiment and predicting potential stock market downturns. A credit spread refers to the difference in yield between two bonds of similar maturity but different credit quality. This comparison often involves Treasury bonds (considered risk-free) and corporate bonds (which carry default risk). By observing these spreads, investors can gauge risk appetite in financial markets. Such helps investors identify stress points that often precede stock market corrections."

In other words, the yield spreads reflect the perceived "risk" in the financial markets. The spread between risky corporate bonds and safer Treasury bonds remains narrow when the economy performs well. This is because investors are confident in corporate profitability and willing to accept lower yields despite higher risks. Conversely, during economic uncertainty or stress, investors demand higher yields for holding corporate debt, causing spreads to widen. This widening often signals investors are growing concerned about future corporate defaults, which could indicate broader economic trouble.

The two charts above show the importance of yield spreads, which tend to rise before financial turmoil in the stock market. When yield spreads began to widen, those increases often preceded liquidity events, reduced corporate earnings, economic contractions, and stock market downturns. In other words, the increase in yield spreads reflected increased investor risk aversion. Eventually, that risk aversion spilled over into the financial markets as investors realized the fundamental shift in the financial markets.

As we discussed in this past weekend's #BullBearReport, yield spreads reflect the recognition of a shift in three primary areas:

1. Corporate Financial Health: Credit spreads reflect investor views on corporate solvency. A rising spread suggests a growing concern over companies’ ability to service their debt. Particularly if the economy slows or interest rates rise.
2. Risk Sentiment Shift: Credit markets tend to be more sensitive to economic shocks than equity markets. When credit spreads widen, it typically indicates that the fixed-income market is pricing in higher risks. This is often a leading indicator of equity market stress.
3. Liquidity Events: As investors become more risk-averse, they shift capital from corporate bonds to safer assets like Treasuries. The flight to safety reduces liquidity in the corporate bond market. Less liquidity potentially leads to tighter credit conditions that affect businesses’ ability to invest and grow, weighing on stock prices.

The recent market disruption caused by Trump's trade war has undoubtedly widened spreads between "risk-free" treasury yields and corporate bonds. This is because those tariffs directly impact corporate financial health (reduced profitability), a shift in "risk sentiment" (valuations), and liquidity (potential increase in default risk). Regarding the last point, the lack of market liquidity is at levels not seen since the economic shutdown in 2020.

While yield spreads have widened, they remain well below the long-term averages. However, if recession risks increase due to tariffs, sentiment, or illiquidity, those yield spreads will widen further. The illiquidity issue is currently the most significant risk to the markets, as the sharp spike in yields this past week is warning of a more significant event brewing in the bond market. As we noted in our Daily Market Commentary this past week:

"On Monday, Treasury bonds had a sharp decline far beyond what the economic or tariff data suggested would be the case. We suspect that on Monday, there was forced liquidation through either margin calls or demand redemption of an institutional fund. The outsized selling and volume on a single day for bonds is highly unusual. The media excuses of “tariffs” or “economic concerns” are issues the bond market has known about for quite some time."

That type of sharp liquidation has historically been the issue of some liquidity events in the bond market. In this case, it appears to be the heavily leveraged arbitrage trade used by hedge funds called the "basis trade." That trade is a little complicated but critically important to understand. The link below is a brief explanation.

However, the increase in yield spreads and the disruption in the bond and equity markets certainly raise the risk profile for investors in the near term.

Economic Policy Uncertainty

We previously addressed the market's selloff, primarily due to the Trump administration's "tariff on, tariff off" policies.

“That catalyst turned out to be President Trump’s “on again, off again” tariff announcements, which created turmoil in earnings expectations. The flux in tariff policies makes it difficult for markets to predict future earnings and corporate profitability. With the “E” in forward valuation measures in flux, markets struggle to price in expected outcomes.”

As shown, those policies are creating a sharp increase in policy uncertainty. We suspect this isn’t going to change in the near term. However, it is notable that these periods are historically short-term, and such spikes are generally near market lows. In other words, the current policy uncertainty will pass, and markets can return to focusing on earnings and valuations. Until then, market rallies will likely be an opportunity to reduce risk.

Regarding earnings and valuations, Wall Street only expects a one-quarter impact from tariffs. As shown, earnings for Q1 are currently expected to come in at $217/share, down from $226.54 one year ago. But, interestingly, Q2 earnings are expected to rise to $223.86, roughly where Q1 estimates started a year ago.

However, in Q3, earnings are expected to drop sharply to just $179/share. If realized, that 20% drop in earnings will be pretty significant. This is particularly problematic for the equity market when assigning forward valuation multiples. For example, assuming the market trades at an 18x multiple of $179 in earnings would pin the market's fair value at 3,222. Such would be a nearly 40% decline from Friday's close.

Following that sharp drop in earnings, analysts at S&P Global expect Q4 earnings to rebound sharply to their previous estimates. That assumption suggests they believe the tariffs to be temporary, and the Trump administration will negotiate "no tariff" deals with our trading partners. While such could be the case, I am not so optimistic.

However, whatever outcome occurs will likely lead to reduced estimates heading into 2026, closer to the long-term linear growth trend. That is what the rise in yield spreads suggests as the economy slows and inflation falls. That is barring the expansion of the current bond market crisis into a more significant credit-related event that begins to impact the major banks.

This uncertainty, in both policy and markets, is why we are cutting risk for now.

We Cut Risk For Now

As discussed in last week's post, "Hope In The Fear," the weekly "sell signal" was triggered.

"The chart below is a long-term weekly analysis of the relative strength (RSI) and momentum (MACD) indicators. I have denoted when the indicators are trading in bullish and bearish trends. The primary signal is the crossover of the weekly moving averages, as noted by the vertical lines. While the MACD and RSI indicators provided early warning signals, the moving average crossover confirmed a market correction or consolidation. These indicators will not necessarily cause a risk reduction precisely at the top. However, they generally provide sufficient indications to reduce risk ahead of more significant market corrections and consolidations."

"Conversely, they also offered signals when investors should increase market equity risk. These signals were instrumental in avoiding the 2008 market crash and the 2022 correction. Currently, the RSI is crossing below 50, which may suggest a continued correction process with the MACD beginning to revert. However, the moving average crossover has not yet confirmed the RSI and MACD messages."

Currently, both the market and the increase in yield spreads warn investors of elevated market risk that could induce further market declines and increased volatility. While such does not preclude a significant counter-trend rally in the short term, the longer-term risks seem to be growing.

As investors, we could undoubtedly ignore the warning signs, and this could be a short-term corrective event like we saw during the 2020 pandemic or the Fed's "taper tantrum" in 2018. The market correction was brief in those instances, and the bull market resumed. However, it is worth noting that during those periods when the "sell signals" were short, the Federal Reserve intervened by cutting rates, increasing monetary accommodation, or both. Currently, as shown in the Fed Liquidity Index, that is not the case.

For these reasons, we began cutting risk on this week's rally. With the market still technically oversold, we will not be surprised to see a continuation of the rally this week. Such would be similar to the reflexive rally we saw immediately following the weekly "sell signal" in 2022. Today, like then, sellers emerged as market concerns remained elevated. I suspect that will be the case this time as market participants continue to reprice markets for slower economic growth and policy changes. Markets rarely bottom without retracing toward the previous lows or setting new lows. Given the technical damage to the market, we suspect we will see a pullback before this correction process is over.

From a more bullish point of view, the valuation reversion will eventually become complete. However, that is likely not in the coming weeks or even the next couple of months.

If the markets rally substantially from current levels, our risk reduction actions will drag on portfolio performance. I am okay with that until I am more confident that the corrective process is behind us and that the benefits of increased equity exposure outweigh the risks to invested capital. Given the warning signs from yield spreads, the weekly "sell signal," and slowing economic growth and inflation, market risk seems tilted against investors temporarily.

For now, we will continue to use rallies to rebalance risk, manage asset allocations, and hold increased cash levels.

Trade accordingly.

The post Yield Spreads Suggest The Risk Isn’t Over Yet appeared first on RIA.

At Augusta National, tradition reigns supreme—and that means leaving your phone behind. The Masters enforces a strict no-cellphone policy, creating a rare escape from the digital world for attendees. This rule encourages face-to-face interactions and full immersion in the event.   

Instead of selfies and live tweets, patrons experience the tournament through their own eyes, engaging more deeply with the game and fellow fans. As Swedish golfer Ludvig Åberg notes, the absence of mobile devices leads to more eye contact and attentiveness from fans, which he finds particularly rewarding.  

For those needing to make a call, Augusta National provides banks of public telephones—a nostalgic nod to simpler times. These phones allow patrons to connect with the outside world, often surprising recipients with a call from “Augusta National Golf Club.”  

In an era dominated by screens, The Masters offers a refreshing return to presence and tradition. It’s not just about watching golf; it’s about experiencing it fully, without digital distractions.  

#TheMasters #TraditionUnplugged #AugustaNational #RatedRed

Modern politics is overburdened with rights. With a flawed understanding of human nature’s relationality, rights discourse turns us inward away from others. One’s relationship with other persons and communities is centered around an obsession with mine. Too many, according to Pope Benedict XVI, are “concerned only with their rights, and they often have great difficulty in taking responsibility for their own and other people’s integral development.” Ever deepening our concern with rights, the modern person “closes in on himself”—losing track of the fundamental relationality between self and other, between us and them. We need to recall that “rights presuppose duties, if they are not to become mere license.” We need the necessary grasp of their interrelationship—but also, as Christians, we need to sincerely prioritize what we, in justice, owe others. The name for what we owe is caritas. Caritas is shaped by the need of others and our capacity to give. It is only within this context that we can understand a Christian approach to immigration—one that requires getting the emphasis right between rights and duties, while understanding that giving the love that is owed to the stranger does not detract from our common good, but rather enriches it because it integrates the stranger into our community.

What Feser Gets Right

Edward Feser in his recent Public Discourse essay offers a robust account of the rights of a country to secure its borders and to have and enforce immigration laws. His essay is an important reminder of the need for balance in understanding the question of immigration. The political community is a real expression of the fundamental sociality of the human person. We ought to love the us that we are part of. We rightly prioritize our own communities, and we have a legitimate role in determining who can join this community and how. It is because of this reality that a nation has a right to its borders and “governments have the right to prevent illegal immigration.” 

To show this, Feser quotes several passages from the Church’s magisterium and places in boldface the parts that emphasize the right to territorial integrity. He is right to emphasize this right. Those who advocate “a virtually ‘open borders’ position in the name of Catholicism” should indeed read Feser’s article, because such positions are incompatible with a Catholic stance. Countries have a legitimate right to regulate the who, how, and how many of immigration. 

But quite a lot depends on what one emphasizes. Feser emphasizes that countries have the right to manage immigration, but forgoes much emphasis on the duty to welcome migrants. For him, balancing between these two realities is simply a matter of opinion. Immigration is something about which “Catholics of good will can reasonably disagree.” For Feser, the question of immigration is fundamentally a prudential matter; those arguing for the exclusion of the oppressed, suffering, and impoverished are merely reminding us that America has rights too. But this misses a great deal of the point of Catholic moral teaching and what ideas we should be putting in bold. Feser may be using boldface to remind those who have allegedly forgotten the Church’s moral teaching, yet this is still emblematic of a misreading of Catholic teaching that turns clear moral teaching into optional counsels.

Those who seek to turn away migrants consistently emphasize our rights such that what is mine shapes my relationship with others. All that seems to matter is our borders and our rights. Feser writes that “John Paul II, like Pope Francis and the Church’s bishops more generally, have nevertheless put special emphasis on welcoming migrants. But everybody already knows that.” Does everyone know this? Do we make it the special—dare I say preferential—emphasis of our approach to migrants and refugees? When we balance welcome for migrants and our rights to our borders, we need to get that special emphasis on our duty to the stranger right. The fundamental problem with Feser’s argument is that he acknowledges no special emphasis duty to the needy stranger, and instead especially emphasizes only our rights. 

Scriptural Emphasis 

The Church’s understanding of the treatment of the xenos, the stranger or foreigner, goes back to the Exodus understanding of the people of God. The alien who resides with you should be treated “no differently than the native born among you; have the same love for him as for yourself; for you too were once aliens in the land of Egypt” (Leviticus 19:34). Furthermore, we must store up our goods to share with “the foreigners, the fatherless and the widows in your towns so they may come and eat and be satisfied” (Deuteronomy 14:29). For Ezekiel, the promised Land is to be allotted among the Tribes of Israel “and for the foreigners residing among you,” who are to be treated “as native-born Israelites” (47:22). As a result, less money and land might be distributed to those in the nation as resources are distributed to others.

Christianity continues this tradition, especially in Christ’s teaching that “I was a foreigner [xenos] and you invited me in” (Matthew 25:34). For Pope Pius XII, Christ’s self-identity as a foreigner is grounded in his family’s having been refugees. The Holy Family is “the archetype of every refugee family;” they are “protectors of every migrant, alien, and refugee of whatever kind.” Considering our refugee God, St. Paul tells the faithful to live out philoxenia—a brotherly love, for foreigners to whom we owe hospitality (Romans 12:13). Augustine—in the context of his understanding of the Church as a city of foreigners or migrants (civitate peregrinus)—explains why the Apostles did not recognize the Resurrected Christ on the road to Emmaus: “He became a foreigner (hospes).” For Augustine, the lesson to be taken from Christ’s identification with the foreigner is the obligation to welcome them in from the outside. “Learn to welcome foreigners (hospites), and there you can recognize Christ.” Our hospitality to the stranger is our hospitality to Christ. 

The whole emphasis is on welcoming and giving to the foreigner. These passages lack bold-able words that say that we should welcome the stranger only if we are able, or that we should only distribute to the foreigner if it does not decrease what is owed to our own, or that philoxenia should be less than our love for our fellow citizens. Instead, these central texts only highlight gift, duty, and caritas to the stranger. 

The Emphasis in Catholic Social Thought 

We should also turn to Catholic Social Thought to see how it structures its emphasis. For Pius XII, we are to welcome migrants, aliens, and refugees of any kind who come to our country “whether compelled by fear of persecution [refugees] or by want [immigrants].” Because of this, he wrote to the American bishops about U.S. regulation of migration (just as Pope Francis did). Pius told them that “the natural law itself, no less than devotion to humanity, urges that ways of migration be opened to these people.” Considering this, we must understand that “the sovereignty of the State, although it must be respected, cannot be exaggerated to the point that access to the land is denied to needy and decent people.” Pius XII admonished Americans that the right of the nation must not be exaggerated in the face of outsiders’ needs. Thus he told American senators that they should “administer as liberally as possible” the American immigration laws that he thought were “overly restrictive.” 

Pius XII does hold that there is a limiting principle to this, in that “the public wealth, considered very carefully, does not forbid” aiding the foreigner. But the burden of proof lies on those who would restrict, because the emphasis is the need of the stranger. The fundamental aim must be helping the needy whose way of migration should not be restricted unless a very careful consideration identifies harm in that migration for the public good. There is a right to territorial integrity, to determining the process for managing immigration, and to an order of love that prioritizes our citizens. But more importantly, there is a duty to refugees fleeing oppression and to migrants suffering from want. This duty corresponds, for Pius XII, with the “natural rights of people to migrate.” If grounded in sincere need, this right mitigates—sometimes completely—the wrongdoing of illegally immigrating just as such need can mean that it is lawful to take “the property of another.” 

Our personal and political lives should center on caritas “given and received,” as duty and right. This is the problem with Feser’s reading of Catholic Social Thought. We get truth in his essay, but what is needed is “caritas in veritate in re sociali.” To write about how we ought to treat migrants and emphasize our rights while neglecting the emphasis of Scripture, and deemphasizing what Catholic Social Thought emphasizes, is to lose that intimate connection of love in truth. When one speaks of the truth of one’s rights and speaks less, or not at all, of the truth that we owe our caritas to the needy migrant as an act of justice, one forgets caritas and thus does not fully get to the veritas. Neglecting caritas transforms the ordo amoris from a principle that expands our loves and broadens our duties to those outside our order to a principle that reminds us only of our own rights and prioritizes borders over persons. 

More than Just Rights and Prudence

For Pope Leo the Great—known for his welcome of refugees into Rome—since God is love, “charity should know no limit, for God cannot be confined.” Our caritas cannot be limited to what is our own; while it must include that, it must also extend beyond it. Importantly, love of others and prioritization of the common good is not a zero-sum game. Solidarity with others and the common good itself constitute expansive principles. The common good grows in our sharing it. As Pope St. Leo teaches, “In all this activity, there is present the hand of Him who multiplies the bread by breaking it, and increases it by giving it away.” This is a claim grounded not only in metaphysics and theology, but also in the way economics works—especially in a market economy. When we welcome strangers, we not only benefit them, but we also benefit ourselves. This is the whole history of the United States. Our country’s greatness and public wealth have always been elevated and expanded by the arrival of migrants. 

I am the grandchild of immigrants, the husband of a daughter of immigrants, the neighbor of immigrants, in a nation of immigrants. Patriotism welcomes others into the good that is this nation because we love that good. Such love does not only insist on its rights, but also insists on sharing this good. John Paul II writes (quoted by Feser) that “patriotism is a love for everything to do with our native land.” One of those things that has to do with any native land, but especially this native land, is philoxenia toward those here and at our borders. Real love communicates itself and so welcomes others into our native land in a way that benefits our common good. For those who fear that an expansive welcome to migrants will hurt our country, they can be assured by both economic research and by America’s history of integrating immigrants from every country.

Integration involves all kinds of prudential approaches to this question, including robust foreign aid to make it easier for people to stay in their native land, comprehensive immigration reform, and a due process approach to deporting criminals. Feser’s reminder of the validity of immigration laws is a service to making this possible. But we need more than just rights, and more than just prudence. Rights must be united to duties, prudence must be at the service of caritas in veritate, and caritas must be at the service of both the native citizen and the needy stranger if we are going to get the emphasis right.

Image by sherryvsmith and licensed via Adobe Stock.

Pope Francis and those who enabled this gesture of a stripped down pontiff had not anticipated that such rumors and gossip would circulate worldwide especially through the internet and blogs. 

Thus on Saturday, the Holy Father visited his favorite basilica in Rome, St. Mary Major, where he intends to be entombed wearing his papal cassock. St. Mary’s is my favorite too.

And today, Palm Sunday, the Holy Father made a surprise visit to St. Peter’s Square following the Palm Sunday Mass there, again wearing the papal cassock. He spoke briefly but with a somewhat improved voice.

Are the rumors of renunciation, created by the Pope himself, now put to rest? Time will tell. 

Can Trump and America Survive the Whore Media and the Corrupt Judiciary?

Paul Craig Roberts

The Associated Press, like the rest of the presstitutes who are anti-Trump, report all news falsely in order to undermine Trump.  According to the AP presstitutes Bernard Condon and Stan Choe, Trump is causing the US to lose its reputation as a “safe haven.”  Their evidence is a “freak sell-off of ‘safe haven’ US bonds that raises fear that confidence in America is fading.”

The AP message is clear:  Trump is destroying the world’s confidence in America, and Americans will not be able to get a loan.

The reason for the Bond sell-off is that the stock market was down several thousand points, and people waiting for a buy opportunity sold bonds and bought equities.  So far they have gained 3,000 points on their transaction.  The alleged “freak sell-off” of US Treasuries was nothing but the decisions of people to take advantage of a buying opportunity by shifting from bonds to stocks.

I believe in holding Trump accountable.  That is the responsibility of American citizens.  If the Trump administration has deported mistakenly a father of American children, the error should be corrected.  But I do not believe in permitting the media to lie and misrepresent in order to attack a president of the United States or the government of any other country.  But that is what biased and ideologically-motivated media do in America and throughout the Western world.

There is no Western media, just a propaganda ministry that is against anything that is normal.

Prior to Trump’s reelection, I warned that he would be faced with a corrupt Western media and a corrupt American judiciary. He could break up the media by enforcing the Sherman Anti-trust Act.  But he hasn’t.  

The DEI Democrat judges appointed for the sole purpose of advancing liberal/left agendas are a different kind of problem.  The majority of them are unqualified and should never have been approved.  The question for Trump and his intent to renew America is how is this achieved when Democrat and RINO members of the judiciary are opposed to America?  President Trump is faced with Democrat judges who are ideologues who are enemies of America.

Trump is faced with a judicial system that is willing to violate the 14th Amendment’s requirement of equality under the law by giving legal preferences not only to DEI but also to sexual perverts and to illegal alien immigrant-invader criminal gangs, even trying to stop their deportation.  

The question Trump and American citizens face is:  WHAT CAN A PRESIDENT DO WHEN THE JUDICIARY IS AGAINST THE COUNTRY?

James Howard Kunstler Says It Is Time To Bring Criminal Charges Against the Democrat Criminals

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2025/04/james-howard-kunstler/the-wicked-flee/ 

Russia designates former Foreign minister Andrey Kozyrev as a foreign agent

Russia has other weak-minded people brainwashed by US propaganda who are traitors to their country.

In America there are an abundance of weak-minded people. They vote Democrat for open borders, for normalizing sexual perversity, for teaching white kids they are racist and need sex change operations.

https://www.rt.com/russia/615669-kozyrev-minister-foreign-agent/ 

The Passion, which we read in the liturgy for Palm Sunday, is too long to comment on in detail, so we will only examine a portion of it here.

It may be of some value to examine the problems associated with the more moderate range of personalities involved. The usual villains (the Temple leaders, Judas, and the recruited crowd shouting, “Crucify him!”) are unambiguously wicked and display their sinfulness openly. But there are others involved whose struggles and neglectfulness are more subtle, yet no less real. It is in examining these figures that we can learn a great deal about ourselves, who, though we may not openly shout, “Crucify him,” are often not as unambiguously holy and heroic as Jesus’ persecutors are wicked and bold.

As we read the Passion we must understand that this is not merely an account of the behavior of people long gone, they are portraits of you and me; we do these things.

I. The Perception that is Partial – Near the beginning of today’s Passion account, the apostles, who are at the Last Supper with Jesus, are reminded of what the next days will hold. Jesus says,

This night all of you will have your faith in me shaken, for it is written, “I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock will be dispersed.” But after I have been raised up, I shall go before you to Galilee.

Note that the apostles are not being told these things for the first time; Jesus has spoken them before on numerous occasions:

From that time on Jesus began to explain to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life (Matt 16:21).

When they came together in Galilee, he said to them, “The Son of Man is going to be betrayed into the hands of men. They will kill him, and on the third day he will be raised to life.” And the disciples were filled with grief (Matt 17:22-23).

We are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be betrayed to the chief priests and the teachers of the law. They will condemn him to death and will turn him over to the Gentiles to be mocked and flogged and crucified. On the third day he will be raised to life” (Matt 20:18-19).

Thus we see that the Lord has consistently tried to teach and prepare them for the difficulties ahead. He has told them exactly what is going to happen and how it will end: not in death, but rising to new life. But even though He has told them over and over again, they still do not understand. Therefore He predicts that their faith in Him will be shaken.

Their perception is partial. They will see only the negative, forgetting that Jesus has promised to rise. Because they cannot see beyond the apparent defeat of the moment they will retreat into fear rather than boldly and confidently accompanying Him to His passion and glorification (for His passion is a lifting up; it is His glorification). Instead they will flee. He has shown the “what the end shall be,” but they can neither see nor accept it. Thus fear overwhelms them and they withdraw into a sinful fear, dissociating themselves from Jesus. Only a few (Mary, His Mother; John; Mary Magdalene; and a few other women) would see Him through to the end.

As for the rest, they see only what is gory and awful, missing what is glory and awesome. Their perception is quite partial. Paradoxically, their blindness comes from not hearing or listening to what Jesus has been telling them all along.

We, too, can easily suffer from a blindness caused by poor listening. The Lord has often told us that if we trust in Him, then our struggles will end in glory and new life. But, blind and forgetful, we give in to our fears and fail to walk the way of Christ’s passion boldly. We draw back and dissociate ourselves from Jesus, exhibiting some of the same tendencies we will observe in the people of that day.

Next, let’s examine some of the problems that emerge from this partial perception and forgetful fear.

II. The Problems Presented – There are at least five problems that emerge. They are unhealthy and sinful patterns that spring from the fear generated by not trusting Jesus’ vision. Please understand that the word “we” used here is shorthand and does not mean that every single person does this. Rather, it means that collectively we have these tendencies. There’s no need to take everything here personally.

1. They become drowsy – A common human technique for dealing with stress and the hardships of life is to become numb and drowsy; we can just drift off into a sort of moral slumber. Being vigilant against the threat posed to our souls by sin or the harm caused by injustice (whether to ourselves or to others) is just too stressful, so we just “tune out.” We stop noticing or really even caring about critically important matters. We anesthetize ourselves with things like alcohol, drugs, creature comforts, and meaningless distractions. Prayer and spirituality pose too many uncomfortable questions, so we just daydream about meaningless things like what a certain Hollywood star is doing or how the latest sporting event is going.

In the Passion accounts, the Lord asks Peter, James, and John to pray with Him. But they doze off. Perhaps it is the wine. Surely it is the flesh (for the Lord speaks of it). Unwilling or unable to deal with the stress of the situation, they get drowsy and doze off. Grave evil is at the very door, but they sleep. The Lord warns them to stay awake, lest they give way to temptation, but still they sleep. Someone they know and love is in grave danger, but it is too much for them to handle. They tune out, much as we do in the face of the overwhelming suffering of Christ visible in the poor and needy. We just stop noticing; it’s too painful, so we tune out.

The Lord had often warned them to be vigilant, sober, and alert (Mk 13:34, Matt 25:13, Mk 13:37; Matt 24:42; Luke 21:36, inter al). Other Scriptures would later pick up the theme (Romans 13:11; 1 Peter 5:8; 1 Thess 5:6, inter al). Yes, drowsiness is a serious spiritual problem.

Sadly, God described us well when He remarked to Isaiah, Israel’s watchmen are blind, they all lack knowledge; they are all mute dogs, they cannot bark; they lie around and dream, they love to sleep (Is 56:10).

We do this not only out of laziness, but also out of fear. One strategy is to try to ignore it, to go numb, to tune out. But despite the sleepiness of the disciples, the wicked are still awake; the threat does not go away by a drowsy inattentiveness to it. Thus we ought to be confident and sober. Life’s challenges are nothing to fear. The Lord has told us that we have already won if we will just trust in Him. The disciples have forgotten Jesus’ promise to rise after three days; we often do the same. So they, and we, just give in to the stress and tune out.

2. They seek to destroy – When Peter finally awaken, he lashes out with a sword and wounds Malchus, the servant of the high priest. The Lord rebukes Peter and reminds him of the vision: Put your sword away! Shall I not drink the cup the Father has given me? (John 18:11) Jesus then heals Malchus, who tradition says later became a follower.

In our fear, we, too, can often lash out and even seek to destroy our opponents. But if we are already certain of our victory, as the Lord has promised, why do we fear? Why do we need to suppress our opponents and enemies ruthlessly? It is one thing to speak the truth in love, boldly and confidently. But it is quite another to lash out aggressively and seek to win a debate. In so doing, we may lose a soul. The Lord healed Malchus, seeing in Him a future disciple. The Lord saw what the end would be. Peter did not. In fear, he lashed out with an aggression that did not bespeak a confidence in final victory.

It is true that we are required to confront evil, resist injustice, and speak with clarity to a confused world. But above all, we are called to love those whom we address. There is little place for fear in our conversations with the world. The truth will out; it will prevail. We may not win every encounter, but we do not have to; all we must do is plant seeds. God will water them and others may well harvest them. In Christ, we have already won. This confidence should give us serenity.

Peter has forgotten Jesus’ promise to rise after three days; we often do the same. So Peter, and we, give in to fear and lash out, driven by a desire to win when in fact we have already won.

3. They deny – Confronted with the fearful prospect of being condemned along with Jesus, Peter denies being one of His followers or even knowing Him at all. He dissociates himself from Christ. And we, confronted with the possibility of far milder things such as ridicule, often deny a connection with the Lord or the Church.

Regarding one of the more controversial Scripture teachings (e.g., the command to tithe; the prohibition against divorce, fornication, and homosexual activity) some might ask, “You don’t really believe that, do you?” It’s very easy to give in to fear and to respond, “No,” or to qualify our belief. Why suffer ridicule, endure further questioning, or be drawn into an unpleasant debate? So we just dissociate from, compromise, or qualify our faith to avoid the stress. We even congratulate ourselves for being tolerant when we do it!

Jesus says, If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his Father’s glory with the holy angels (Mk 8:38). But too easily we are ashamed. And so, like Peter, we engage in some form of denial. Peter is afraid because he has forgotten to “see what the end shall be.” He has forgotten Jesus’ promise to rise after three days; we often do the same. We lack confidence and give in to fear; we deny in order to avoid suffering with Jesus.

4. They dodge – When Jesus is arrested, all the disciples except John “split.” They “get the heck out of Dodge.” They are nowhere to be found. After Jesus’ arrest, it is said that Peter (prior to his denials) followed the Lord at a distance (Mk 14:54). But as soon as trouble arose, he “scrammed.”

We, too, can run away. Sometimes it’s because of persecution by the world. But sometimes it’s our fear that following the Lord is too hard and involves sacrifices that we are just not willing to make. Maybe it will endanger our money (the Lord insists that we tithe and be generous to the poor). Maybe it will endanger our playboy lifestyle (the Lord insists on chastity and respect). Maybe we don’t want to stop doing something that we have no business doing, something that is unjust, excessive, or sinful. But rather than face our fears, whether they come from within or without, we just hightail it out.

The disciples have forgotten that Jesus has shown them “what the end shall be.” In three days, he will win the victory. But, this forgotten, their fears emerge and they run. We too, must see “what the end shall be” in order to confront and resist our many fears.

5. They deflect – In this case our example is Pontius Pilate, not one of the disciples. Pilate was summoned to faith just like anyone else. “Are you a king?” he asks Jesus. Jesus responds by putting Pilate on trial: “Are you saying this on your own or have others been telling you about me?” Pilate has a choice to make: accept that what Jesus is saying as true, or give in to fear and commit a terrible sin of injustice. The various accounts in Scripture all make it clear that Pilate knew Jesus was innocent. But because he feared the crowds he handed Jesus over.

Note that Pilate did this. The crowds tempted him through fear, but he did the condemning. Yet notice that he tries to deflect his choice. The text says, he took water and washed his hands in front of the crowd. “I am innocent of this man’s blood,” he said. “It is your responsibility” (Mat 27:24). Well actually, Pilate, it is also your responsibility. You had a choice and you made it. Your own career and your own hide were more important to you than justice was. And though you wanted to do what was right and were sympathetic with Jesus, merely wanting to do what is right is not enough.

So, too, for us. We also often favor our career or our hide over doing what is right. And in so doing, we often blame others for what we have freely chosen. “I’m not responsible because my mother dropped me on my head when I was two.”

We are often willing to say, in effect,

“Look, Jesus, I love you. You get my Sundays, and my tithe, and I obey you (generally, anyway). But you have to understand that I have a career; I need to make money for my family. If I really stand up for what’s right, I might not make it in this world. You understand, don’t you? I know the company I work for is doing some things that are unjust. I know the world needs a clearer witness from me. I’ll do all that—after I retire. But for now, well, you know… Besides, it’s really my boss who’s to blame. It’s this old hell-bound, sin-soaked world that’s to blame, not me!”

We try to wash our hands of responsibility. We excuse our silence and inaction in the face of injustice and sin.

And all this is done out of fear. We forget “what the end shall be” and focus on the fearful present. We lack the vision that Jesus is trying to give us: that we will rise with Him. We stay blind to that and only see the threat of the here and now.

III. The Path that is Prescribed – By now you ought to know the path that is prescribed: see what the end shall be. In three days we rise! Why are we afraid? Jesus has already won the victory. It is true that we get there through the cross, but never forget what the end shall be! Today we read the Gospel of Friday, but wait till Sunday morning! I’ll rise!

We end where we began with this Gospel: This night all of you will have your faith in me shaken, for it is written: ‘I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock will be dispersed;’ but after I have been raised up, I shall go before you to Galilee.

Yes, after He has been raised He goes before us into Galilee. And for us, Galilee is Heaven. Whatever our sorrows, if we are faithful we will see Jesus in the Galilee of Heaven. Never forget this vision. After three days, we will rise with Him and be reunited with Him in the Galilee of Heaven.

So take courage; see what the end shall be! The end for those who are faithful is total victory. We don’t need to drowse, destroy, deny, dodge, or deflect; we’ve already won. All we need to do is to hold out.

I have it on the best of authority that Mother Mary was singing the following gospel song with St. John for a brief time while at the foot of the cross, as they looked past that Friday to the Sunday that was coming:

It’s all right, it’s all right.
My Jesus said he’ll fix it and it’s all right.

Sometimes I’m up sometimes I’m down.
But Jesus he’ll fix it and it’s all right.

Sometimes I’m almost on the ground.
My Jesus said he’ll fix it and it’s all right.

The post See What the End Shall Be – A Homily for Palm Sunday appeared first on Community in Mission.

Since his first term, we have grown used to President Donald Trump badgering governments of fellow NATO countries to increase their “defense” spending to five percent of their respective GDPs. Quote marks are used in the preceding sentence because such spending by these governments, or the US, will largely be used for offense, feeding the military-industrial complex, and other purposes far removed from defense.

So far, fellow NATO members have steered clear of achieving this spending goal. Their residents should be happy that is the case as the money can instead be left in their pockets or at least be hoped to be spent by government on something that may provide them with some benefit instead of furthering death and destruction — butter, not guns.

Interestingly, the US government, despite all its hectoring, has also refrained from reaching that five percent of GDP figure for its spending on the Department of Defense. The targeted spending level would come in at nearly double current spending on what is already a top area of government spending. That increase would drop down some if various spending beyond the Defense Department spending is included as “defense” spending.

Comments made last week by US Secretary of Defense Marco Rubio indicated the goal is for the US to also reach this spending level. Rubio declared ahead of a NATO meeting that “we do want to leave here with an understanding that we are on a pathway, a realistic pathway, to every single one of the [NATO] members committing and fulfilling a promise to reach up to five percent of spending; that includes the United States will have to increase its percentage.”

Hopefully, this is just talk. To follow through on this course would be to invite disaster.

With a huge and growing debt, the US cannot afford the increase. Such an increase will help bring the nation more quickly toward financial disaster. It will likely even help ensure increased spending in other areas as was experienced during the Ronald Reagan administration when the executive branch bargained with legislators for more military spending by agreeing to increased spending in other areas too.

More war can be expected as a result as well. The temptation for politicians to use a “new and improved” military brought into being by the increased spending would be immense.

More debt and more war is a literally killer combination for America.

Stairway To Heaven
April 11 2025

___________________________________
More Vids!
+BN Vids Archive! HERE!
___________________________________
Support The Brother Nathanael Foundation!
Br Nathanael Fnd Is Tax Exempt/EIN 27-2983459

Or Send Your Contribution To:
The Brother Nathanael Foundation, POB 547, Priest River, ID 83856
E-mail: brothernathanaelfoundation([at])yahoo[dot]com
Scroll Down For Comments