Distinction Matter - Subscribed Feeds

OBEDIENS USQUE AD MORTEM

Meditation on Good Friday
in Passione et Morte Domini

Christus factus est pro nobis
obediens usque ad mortem, mortem autem crucis:
propter quod et Deus exaltavit illum,
et dedit illi nomen, quod est super omne nomen;
ut in nomine Jesu omne genu flectatur
cœlestium, terrestrium et infernorum,
et omnis lingua confiteatur,
quia Dominus Jesus Christus
in gloria est Dei Patris.

Phil 2: 8-11

Ecce lignum Crucis, in quo salus mundi pependit. An ancient melody, in three ascending tones, accompanies the unveiling of the Holy Cross during the rites of Good Friday. It is a cry, a warning, an invitation to conversion and penance: Behold the wood of the Cross, on which hung the salvation of the world. But the world does not want salvation from Christ. It does not want the Cross. It does not want to recognize itself as a sinner, in its mad pride of being able to do without God and His Holy Law. For the world there is no sin, except in doing good; there is no vice, except in practicing virtue; there is no paradise, except on earth and for sale to those who can afford it; there is no hell, except for the rigid and backward. In this upside-down world, where the infernal Masonic tyranny reigns supreme, sovereignty does not belong to God or to His temporal and spiritual vicars, because the hated symbol of Redemption, the Cross on which Jesus Christ, King and High Priest, has recapitulated all things in Himself, stands out on the crowns of Kings and Popes. 

The splendid antiphon that we sing during the Triduum at the end of the Canonical Hours reminds us with Saint Paul that this Redemption was accomplished in obedience: in obedience unto death, death on the Cross. But it also admonishes us that the obedience of the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity to the Eternal Father merits the Son to be exalted, so that at His Name every knee should bend, in heaven, on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that the Lord Jesus Christ is in the glory of God the Father (Phil 2:10-11).

We preach Christ crucified, a scandal to the Jews, foolishness to the pagans (1 Cor 1:23). Because it is in self-humiliation and in obedience to the Divine Will that we obtain the crown of victory. And there is no Resurrection without the Passion, no reward without trial, no prize without competition. Let us not forget that the Cross is the destiny of each of us and of the Church as a whole. She, as the Mystical Body, must follow Her Master in the passio Ecclesiæ. We, as living members of the Church, must do the same in daily self-denial and in the sequela Christi.

Alter alterius onera portate (Gal 6:2), Saint Paul exhorts us: carry each other’s burdens, and so you will fulfill the law of Christ. And it is precisely Our Lord who gives us the example: in having carried the Cross that each of us would have deserved a thousand times; and in carrying our cross with us, when we would like to be the ones to choose it. If we ever deluded ourselves into thinking we could decide with which cross we should have to merit Heaven, we would soon realize that we are not capable, with our miserable strength, of facing even the most insignificant annoyance, and certainly not the trials that could await us in these troubled times. On the contrary, the cross that the Lord has chosen for us, however burdensome and difficult to carry, will always see the Divine Cyrenean at our side to help us with His Grace.

May the hour of darkness that is approaching spur us to consider the tribulations and trials that we will have to face as a crucible, from which the gold of our sanctity will emerge purified and in which the stains of our misery will be consumed. Let us therefore embrace this Holy Cross, so that it may be our sole point of reference, while the world sinks under the rubble of its deceptions. Stat Crux, dum volvitur orbis. And so may it be.

+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop

April 18, 2025
Feria VI in Parasceve

EU states are “hesitant to admit” failure in Ukraine, while the US is in a better position due to Donald Trump’s policies, the Hungarian PM has said

The West has waged a “proxy war” against Russia via Ukraine and lost it, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has said.

Hungary, a member of the EU, has repeatedly criticized the bloc’s policies on the Ukraine conflict, particularly its sanctions on Moscow and weapons deliveries to Kiev.

In an interview with OT YouTube channel published on Thursday, Orban said the whole “Western world” has thrown its weight behind Ukraine in its conflict with Russia, which he described as a “proxy war.”

His assessment echoed that of Moscow, which has long characterized the hostilities as a de facto conflict with the West.

According to the Hungarian prime minister, the West has lost but “European leaders are hesitant to admit” failure. He argued that this outcome will have a big impact on the entire West, as “losing a war is a serious thing.”

Orban went on to say that European leaders are “offering Ukraine to continue the war and in return receive European Union membership.” He argued that this would be problematic as Ukraine is no longer sovereign and cannot support itself.

Regarding the US, the Hungarian prime minister said Washington is in a better position thanks to President Donald Trump’s approach, having broken with the Ukraine policies pursued by his predecessor, Joe Biden.

According to Orban, Trump “saved the US from a serious defeat.”

Speaking to Hungary’s Kossuth Radio last month, Orban described the EU’s policies on Ukraine as “rudderless.” He warned that Brussels, with its hardline position, risks becoming irrelevant as Trump actively works toward securing a peaceful resolution to the conflict.

Earlier in March, Orban told the YouTube channel Patriota that the EU was feeding Kiev “empty promises” as it “doesn’t have a single penny left… [to] continue arming Ukraine, maintaining the Ukrainian army, and funding the functioning of the Ukrainian state.”

His comments came after Budapest refused to endorse a joint EU communique calling for an increase in military aid to Kiev.

 On April 18, 1995, Bishop J. Kevin Boland was consecrated and installed as the thirteenth Bishop of the Diocese of Savannah. He served as bishop until his retirement in 2011. Happy anniversary, Bishop Boland!

Jesus was arrested late Thursday evening. The Scriptures recount,

They took Jesus to the high priest, and all the chief priests, the elders and the teachers of the law came together (Mark 14:53).

According to Mark’s chronology there was a sham of a trial, based on false evidence and distortions of Jesus’ teachings.

Now the chief priests and the whole Sanhedrin were seeking testimony against Jesus to put Him to death, but they did not find any. For many bore false witness against Jesus, but their testimony was inconsistent. Then some men stood up and testified falsely against Him: “We heard Him say, ‘I will destroy this man-made temple, and in three days I will build another that is made without hands.’” But even their testimony was inconsistent.

So the high priest stood up before them and questioned Jesus, “Have You no answer? What is it these men are testifying against You?” But Jesus remained silent and made no reply. Again the high priest questioned Him, “Are You the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?”

“I am,” said Jesus, “and you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming with the clouds of heaven.”

At this, the high priest tore his clothes and declared, “Why do we need any more witnesses? You have heard the blasphemy. What is your verdict?” And they all condemned Him as deserving of death. Then some of them began to spit on Him. They blindfolded Him, struck Him with their fists, and said to Him, “Prophesy!” And the officers received Him with slaps in His face (Mark 14:53-65).

According to tradition, Jesus spent the rest of the night in the dungeon under the House of Caiaphas. It had doubled as a kind of cistern for holding rainwater.

The events of this early Friday morning are tightly packed. In the space of three or four hours, Jesus is sent to Pilate, then to Herod, then back to Pilate, questioned, condemned to die, and led out to be crucified by 9:00 AM.

The events begin around 6:00 AM:

Early in the morning, the chief priests, elders, scribes, and the whole Sanhedrin devised a plan. They bound Jesus, led Him away, and handed Him over to Pilate (Mark 15:1).

Pilate is less than enthusiastic to be saddled with this interrogation, but fearing a riot if he does not, he enters into the fray. Pilate’s behavior is a portrait in vacillation. According to Luke, he first seeks to transfer the case to Herod, who is nearby in Jerusalem (See Luke 23:6-12). However, Jesus says not a word to Herod. So after making sport of Jesus, Herod sends Him right back to Pilate. In another attempt to placate the crowd and evade making a decision, Pilate presents to them what amounts to a fake Messiah, aptly named “Barabbas” (which means “son of the father”). Can Barabbas save the day? He cannot, for he is not the true “Son of the Father.” Only Jesus can deliver Pilate—or any of us, for that matter.

I will not be treating the whole trial before Pilate in today’s post. (I’ve written about it in more detail here: The Trial Before Pilate.) In the end, though Pilate concludes that Jesus is innocent of the charges, he hands Him over to be crucified. In so doing, he is likely trying to save his own career. He will not take a stand for Jesus. Rather, he sits upon the judgment seat, violates his own conscience, and condemns Jesus to death. It is about the third hour (9:00 AM).

There is some debate about the specific time of day in the various biblical accounts. Mark 15:25 says that Jesus is crucified at the third hour (9:00 AM). In John 19:14 the crucifixion is set at the sixth hour (Noon). Both Matthew 27:45 and Luke 23:44 hint at a time closer to noon in their reference to a darkness coming over the land from noon until 3:00 PM.

In considering these “issues” of the exact time of day, we ought to remember that the people of Jesus’ era did not have clocks and watches. They did not speak or think of time in the precise ways that we modern Westerners do. Time was spoken of in general ways; the mention of the third hour, or the sixth hour, or the ninth hour could include a broader swath of time relatively near that declared hour. It is a little bit like our terms “mid-morning” or “mid-afternoon,” which can refer to a period of several hours. Mark does not necessarily mean precisely at 9:00 AM nor does John mean precisely at noon.

There is a lot of overlap in references to the third hour, the sixth hour, and the ninth hour, softening the possible conflict between the accounts. The need to nail down the exact times of day of the various events says more about our modern obsession with time than it does about accounts that are close, even if not precise, descriptions of the events.

Comparing all the texts leads to a general time frame. Thus, it would seem that Jesus undergoes trials before Pilate and Herod in the early morning (somewhere between 6:00 and 9:00 AM). He is sentenced by Pilate to crucifixion somewhere in mid-morning. He is mocked and led out to be crucified in the late morning. Near noon, He is stripped of His outer garments and hung on the cross. From about noon through the early afternoon a darkness comes over the land and Jesus hangs on the cross. He dies in the midafternoon, at around 3:00 PM.

What of this darkness of some three hours? In Luke 23:44, we read, It was now about the sixth hour, and there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour (i.e., from noon until 3:00 PM).

Although this seems to describe a solar eclipse, it isn’t appropriate to insist that it was an eclipse (at least as we define the term today). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all speak to the darkness of that day using the Greek term σκότος (skotos), meaning simply “darkness.” Only Luke went on to state the reason for the darkness: the sun was darkened (Luke 23:45). He even used the Greek word ἐκλιπόντος (eklipontos), from which the word “eclipse” was derived. In Greek, however, the word eklipontos simply means “darkened,” whereas our word “eclipse” refers to a darkening as a result of the moon blocking the light of the sun. However, that is not necessarily (or even likely) what Luke meant here.

As a general rule, one should avoid applying a scientific explanation to a text when that may not have been the author’s intention. That there was darkness over the land from about noon until three is certainly attested to in the sacred texts, but the cause of that darkness is not definitively stated to be an eclipse, at least not as we use the term today. Perhaps God made use of other natural causes, such as very heavy clouds, to cause the light of the sun to dim. It is also possible that the darkness was of purely supernatural origin and was experienced only by some of those present.

Trying to explain the darkness in terms of the laws of science risks doing a disservice to the text by missing its deeper meaning: that the darkness of sin had reached its zenith. Whatever the physical mechanism of the darkness, its deepest cause was sin and evil.

Jesus said elsewhere, “This is the judgment: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil” (Jn 3:19). Referring to His passion, He also said, “Night is coming, when no one can work” (Jn 9:4). When Judas left the Last Supper to betray Jesus, John observed simply and profoundly, And it was night (Jn 13:30). Yes, a deep darkness had come upon the world.

It is simply not possible here to fully comment on all the details of the crucifixion. While they are historical incidents, they are also of deep spiritual significance. I leave the consideration of most of those details to other posts and to your reflection. Jesus speaks seven times while on the cross: He asks the Father to forgive us. He bestows mercy on the repentant thief. He gives us His mother and asks us to take her into the home of our hearts. He expresses his feelings of abandonment. He voices his thirst. He announces the completion of His mission. He commends His spirit to the Father and gives up His spirit.

The earth shakes. While earthquakes were common in the region, interpreting the quake merely in scientific terms misses its theological significance. Christ has rent the earth and descended to Sheol, there to preach to the dead. The veil in the Temple has been torn from top to bottom, giving us access to the Father. He has rent our hearts and laid bare our thoughts. This also prefigures the Last Judgment:

Death is struck, and nature quaking,
all creation is awaking,
to its judge and answer making (from the Dies Irae).

It is three o’clock in the afternoon; a great silence is upon the earth. The Word of God has died in the flesh. He has gone among the dead to awaken them.

The post What Happened With The Lord on Good Friday? appeared first on Community in Mission.

According to the Synoptic Gospels, sundown of Holy Thursday ushered in the Passover. Later on this evening, the Lord will celebrate the Passover meal with His disciples. We ought to be mindful that the unleavened bread Jesus will take in His hands is called “the bread of affliction.” Scripture says, You shall eat [the Passover] with unleavened bread, the bread of affliction—for you came out of the land of Egypt in haste—that all the days of your life you may remember the day when you came out of the land of Egypt (Dt 16:3).

Indeed, this is an evening of affliction for Jesus. Much transpires at the Last Supper that is emblematic of our human foibles and sinful tendencies, but thanks be to God, He takes this “bread of affliction” we dish out to Him and lifts it to the glory of the Sacrament of His Body and Blood.

Before being too critical of the Twelve, remember that we can be like them in many ways. Keep that in mind as you read through the commentary below; A large part of what I’ve written about the apostles applies to us as well. Indeed, they are we and we are they; and the Lord loved all of us to the end.

So on Holy Thursday let’s examine the sequence of events. It illustrates pretty well why the Lord had to die for us. We will see how earnest the Lord is about this Last Supper, how He enters it with an intense love for His disciples and a desire that they heed what He is trying to teach them. We shall also see, however, that they show forth a disastrous inattentiveness and a terrible lack of concern for the Lord.

COMING CLOUDS – Jesus knows that His hour has come; this will be His last meal. Judas has already conspired and been paid to hand Him over. Scripture says, Before the feast of Passover, Jesus knew that his hour had come. He always loved those who were his own, and now he would show them the depths of his love. The devil had already induced Judas, son of Simon the Iscariot, to hand him over (John 13:1). Thus, in the gathering storm Jesus plans His last meal, which will also be the first Holy Mass. He sent two of His disciples and said to them, “Go into the city, and a man carrying a jar of water will meet you; follow him, and wherever he enters, say to the householder, ‘The Teacher says, “Where is my guest room, where I am to eat the Passover with my disciples?”’ And he will show you a large upper room furnished and ready; there prepare for us” (Mark 14:13-15).

CARING CONCERN – This last supper is obviously important to Jesus. Luke records these heartfelt words: And he said to them, “I have earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer; for I tell you I shall not eat again until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God” (Luke 22:15-16). Yes, this will be a very special moment for Jesus. 

COLLABORATIVE CONDESCENSION – During the meal Jesus rises and then stoops to wash the disciples’ feet. He instructs them to see in this action a model for those who would collaborate with Him in any future ministry. John records it this way: He rose from the supper and took off his outer garments. He took a towel and tied it around his waist. Then he poured water into a basin, and began to wash the disciples’ feet, and to wipe them with the towel with which he was girded (John 13:5).

Jesus then teaches the disciples: Do you know what I have done for you? You call me Teacher and Lord; and you are right, for so I am. If I then, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another’s feet. For I have given you an example, that you also should do as I have done to you (John 13:12-15). Just moments from now, we will see them demonstrate a complete disregard for what Jesus has just tried to teach them.

COSTLY COMMUNION – Jesus, reclining at table, will now celebrate the Holy Eucharist for the first time—but it is to be a costly communion. He has already lost many disciples because of what He taught on the Eucharist (cf John 6:50ff). After the consecration at this Last Supper/first Mass, Jesus looks into the cup at His own blood, soon to be shed, and distributes His own body, soon to be handed over. This is no mere ritual for Him. Every priest before Jesus has offered a sacrifice distinct from himself (usually an animal, sometimes a libation), but Jesus the great High Priest will offer Himself.

CALLOUS CRIME – Back at table after having taught them that they must wash one another’s feet, Jesus suddenly becomes troubled in spirit and says, I tell you the truth, one of you is going to betray me (John 13:21). This causes a commotion among the apostles, who begin to ask, “Who can it be?” As the anxiety builds, Simon Peter motions to John and says, “Ask Him which one He means.” Leaning back against Jesus, John asks Him, “Lord, who is it?” Jesus responds, “It is the one to whom I will give this piece of bread when I have dipped it in the dish.” Then, dipping the piece of bread, he gave it to Judas Iscariot, son of Simon. As soon as Judas took the bread, Satan entered into him. “What you are about to do, do quickly” Jesus told him (John 13:24-30).

CONFOUNDING COMPETITION – As Judas takes the morsel of bread and heads out into the night, no one even tries to stop him! Despite the fact that Jesus has clearly identified His betrayer, no one rises to block the door or even utters a word of protest. Why not? Luke supplies the answer: A dispute arose among them as to which of them was to be regarded as the greatest (Luke 22:24). They should be concerned about Jesus’ welfare but instead they argue about which of them is the greatest.

How confounding! How awful! Yet is that not our history? Too often we are more concerned with our own welfare or status than with any suffering in the Body of Christ. So much that is critical remains unattended to because of this. Jesus has just finished teaching the apostles to wash one another’s feet, and the next thing you know, they’re arguing as to who among them is the greatest. Jesus patiently reminds them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and those in authority over them are called benefactors. But not so with you; rather let the greatest among you become as the youngest, and the leader as one who serves. For which is the greater, one who sits at table, or one who serves? Is it not the one who sits at table? But I am among you as one who serves (Luke 22:25-27). Meanwhile, due to their egotistical response, Judas has escaped into the night.

CAUSTIC CONTENTIOUSNESS – Jesus continues to teach at the Last Supper. He surely wants to impress upon them His final instruction. How He must long for them to listen carefully and to internalize what He is teaching! Instead, all He gets are arguments. Both Thomas and Phillip rebuke Him. John records this outrage:

Jesus said, “Do not let your hearts be troubled. Trust in God; trust also in me. In my Father’s house are many rooms; if it were not so, I would have told you. I am going there to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I am. You know the way to the place where I am going.” But Thomas said to him, “Lord, we do not know where you are going; how can we know the way?” Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me. If you had known me, you would have known my Father also; henceforth you know him and have seen him (Jn 14:1-8).

Thomas rebukes the Lord by saying, in effect, “We have no idea where you’re going; when will you show us the way?” Jesus answers, but Philip will have none of this promise to see the Father and boldly says, “Lord, show us the Father, and then we shall be satisfied.” Jesus, likely saddened by this, says to him, Have I been with you so long, and yet you do not know me, Philip? He who has seen me has seen the Father; how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? (John 14:8-9) Jesus’ own apostles are being argumentative and contentious. They are caustic and seem to rebuke Him.

COMICAL CREDIBILITY GAP – Undeterred, Jesus embarks on a lengthy discourse (recorded by John) that has come to be called the priestly prayer of Jesus. At the end of it, the apostles—perhaps ironically, perhaps with sincerity—remark, Now at last you are speaking plainly, not in any figure. Now we know that you know all things, and need none to question you; by this we believe that you came from God (John 16:29-30). However, Jesus knows that their praise is hollow and will not withstand the test.

There is a quite a lack of credibility in what the apostles say; it is almost comical. Jesus replies to them, Do you now believe? The hour is coming, indeed it has come, when you will be scattered, every man to his home, and will leave me alone (John 16:31-32). Peter protests, saying, Though they all fall away because of you, I will never fall away (Matthew 26:33). Here is another almost comic lack of credibility: [Jesus says to Peter,] Truly, I say to you, this very night, before the cock crows, you will deny me three times. [Still insistent, Peter replies,] “Even if I must die with you, I will not deny you.” And so said all the disciples (Matthew 26:34-35). Well, you know the story, and you know that only John made it to the cross.

CLUELESS CATNAP – They finally reach the garden and the foot of the Mount of Olives. Jesus says to Peter, James, and John: My soul is very sorrowful, even to death; remain here, and watch with me (Mat 26:38). They seem oblivious to His suffering, though, and doze off. Attempts to arouse them are unsuccessful; they sleep on.

Here we are at the pivotal moment of all human history and the first clergy of the Church are sound asleep. (Things have not changed, my friends.) Indeed, many are in a state of moral, spiritual, and emotional sleep as Christ still suffers throughout the world and is conspired against. Jesus says,

Are you still sleeping and resting? Look, the hour is near, and the Son of Man is betrayed into the hands of sinners. Rise, let us go. See, my betrayer is at hand” (Mat 26:45-46).

COMPASSIONATE CONSTANCY – Jesus went on and died for the likes of them and all of us. I wonder if He had this Last Supper in mind when He said to the Father, Forgive them, they know not what they do. It is almost as if He is saying, “They have absolutely no idea what they are doing or thinking, so have mercy on them, Father.”

What a grim picture the Last Supper paints of us! It’s a disaster, really, but the glory of the story and the saving grace is this: The Lord Jesus Christ went to the cross regardless. Seeing this terrible portrait, can we really doubt the Lord’s love for us?

May your Holy Thursday be blessed. Never forget what Jesus endured!

The post What was the Lord Doing on Thursday of Holy Week? appeared first on Community in Mission.

The US-led military bloc has reportedly adjusted wording related to gender and diversity, equity, and inclusion in new legislation, to appease US President Donald Trump

NATO staff are softening language related to climate, gender, and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) to avoid a potential backlash from the administration of US President Donald Trump, Politico has reported, citing sources familiar with the situation.

Phrases concerning climate, as well as gender diversity and security, have been reworded in new NATO legislation drafted by its committees and working groups, using language deemed more palatable to Washington, the outlet said on Thursday.

The Trump administration took sweeping action aimed at dismantling gender and DEI programs shortly after Trump assumed office in January. The new administration is working to cut funding for universities and dismantle federal programs that include DEI practices. It is also carrying out a purge within the Pentagon to eliminate these programs.

”Everyone sees on the news where the Trump admin stands; you don’t want to do anything that shoots yourself in the foot,” one NATO official told Politico.

”Green technologies” have reportedly been replaced with “innovative technologies,” while “climate” has been described as an “operational environment,” another official said.

NATO officials are steering clear of any language referencing “gender” or “women, peace, and security” in an effort to secure approval from all 32 member countries, including the US, the outlet said.

”Everyone knows that the worst thing you can do is present it as a diversity issue,” one of the officials said. “It’s not a woke agenda, it’s part of a military agenda, and now more people are pricking up their ears to make sure it is spoken about in military terms.”

The fight against “woke policies,” such as the promotion of gender reassignment treatment among minors, was a key part of Trump’s presidential campaign. He has signed multiple executive orders rolling back DEI initiatives since taking office.

Trump has also consistently criticized NATO countries, accusing them of “freeloading” on US military support. He has pushed for members to increase their defense spending target from the current 2% of GDP to 5%.

READ MORE: US takes state to court over transgender athletes

On Tuesday, the Trump administration unveiled a plan to slash the State Department’s budget by nearly 50%, a reduction that would deeply affect contributions to NATO’s internal operations, the UN, and roughly 20 other international bodies. The proposal, put forward by the White House’s Office of Management and Budget, seeks to reduce combined funding for the State Department and USAID from $54.4 billion to $28.4 billion for the next fiscal year.

Among the most significant changes is the proposed elimination of financial support for nearly all international organizations, including the UN and NATO headquarters.

Originally posted APRIL 19, 2019

The Agony of Jesus Christ at Gethsemane is noteworthy for its intensity. I’ve always believed that the intensity of the terror was not driven primarily by thoughts of His impending Passion and death, for He certainly was no coward, but rather by the knowledge that His sacrifice would be wasted by a multitude through hatred and indifference. His desire for reciprocation of the deep personal love He has for each of us was/is so intense, that the sense of loss over His beloved but damned sons and daughters caused his earthly physical body to sweat blood (Luke 22:44). His spoken desire of “let this chalice pass” in Matt 26:39,42 could be referring to the Crucifixion, as tradition holds, but it seems to me there is something more. After all, God willed for the world to be reconciled to himself through this very sacrifice, and Jesus IS God. The will of Jesus, in both His divine nature and His human nature, united in the Hypostatic Union, were never at odds with God the Father: For He and His Father are of the same Essence.

Just prior to this, upon entering the garden, He said, “My soul is sorrowful even unto death.” (Matt 26:38) Is He sorrowful because He is about to ransom humanity through His Cross and Resurrection? Or is He sorrowful because so many would choose to ignore it? His terror and pain, it seems to me, is out of His love for those who would be lost; lost loves, so to speak, in spite of His own unyielding love and sacrifice. I’m not a scripture scholar, but it seems worth meditating on, for the sake of our own souls.

A great exercise on Good Friday is to pick a Gospel and read it all the way through. It really doesn’t take that long. I am going to leave you with the seventh chapter of Matthew, the third part of the Sermon on the Mount.

Remember that the Sermon on the Mount takes place at the very beginning of Jesus’ public ministry. After the infancy narrative ends with chapter two, the introduction of John the Baptist and the baptism of the Lord in chapter three, and the temptation in the desert at the beginning of chapter four, He gets right down to business. Upon hearing of John’s death, Jesus immediately withdrew to Capernaum to begin the Galilean Ministry, as foretold in Isaiah. Preaching His message of repentance (4:17), He chose his first disciples (4:18-22), and then began drawing large crowds (4:23-25), primarily through working miracles.

Now that He had everyone’s attention, it was time for the big reveal. The Sermon on the Mount begins with chapters five and six forming a sort of catechism, and the central theme is something like, “You all think you know what’s what? Well, I’m here to take it up a notch.” He goes on to explain a litany of sinful behavior, and how we’re so much more wretched then we even knew. But then we get to chapter seven, where He offers hope, through repentance, prayer, obedience, and love. He wants to be loved.

Enter ye in at the narrow gate, my friends. Blessed Pascal Triduum to all.

The Holy Gospel of St. Matthew, Chapter 7: The third part of the Sermon on the Mount:

[1] Judge not, that you may not be judged, [2] For with what judgment you judge, you shall be judged: and with what measure you mete, it shall be measured to you again. [3] And why seest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye; and seest not the beam that is in thy own eye? [4] Or how sayest thou to thy brother: Let me cast the mote out of thy eye; and behold a beam is in thy own eye? [5] Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam in thy own eye, and then shalt thou see to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.

[6] Give not that which is holy to dogs; neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest perhaps they trample them under their feet, and turning upon you, they tear you. [7] Ask, and it shall be given you: seek, and you shall find: knock, and it shall be opened to you. [8] For every one that asketh, receiveth: and he that seeketh, findeth: and to him that knocketh, it shall be opened. [9]Or what man is there among you, of whom if his son shall ask bread, will he reach him a stone? [10] Or if he shall ask him a fish, will he reach him a serpent?

[11] If you then being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children: how much more will your Father who is in heaven, give good things to them that ask him? [12] All things therefore whatsoever you would that men should do to you, do you also to them. For this is the law and the prophets. [13] Enter ye in at the narrow gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there are who go in thereat. [14] How narrow is the gate, and strait is the way that leadeth to life: and few there are that find it! [15] Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

[16] By their fruits you shall know them. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? [17] Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit, and the evil tree bringeth forth evil fruit. [18] A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can an evil tree bring forth good fruit. [19] Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit, shall be cut down, and shall be cast into the fire. [20] Wherefore by their fruits you shall know them.

[21] Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: but he that doth the will of my Father who is in heaven, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven. [22] Many will say to me in that day: Lord, Lord, have not we prophesied in thy name, and cast out devils in thy name, and done many miracles in thy name? [23] And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, you that work iniquity. [24] Every one therefore that heareth these my words, and doth them, shall be likened to a wise man that built his house upon a rock, [25] And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and they beat upon that house, and it fell not, for it was founded on a rock.

[26] And every one that heareth these my words, and doth them not, shall be like a foolish man that built his house upon the sand, [27] And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and they beat upon that house, and it fell, and great was the fall thereof. [28] And it came to pass when Jesus had fully ended these words, the people were in admiration at his doctrine.[29] For he was teaching them as one having power, and not as the scribes and Pharisees.

Washington’s offer also reportedly envisions easing sanctions on Moscow and ending Kiev’s NATO aspirations

The US has presented its allies with details of its peace plan to bring the conflict between Russia and Ukraine to an end, Bloomberg reported on Friday, citing European officials familiar with the matter.

The proposal, outlined during a meeting in Paris on Thursday, reportedly includes easing sanctions on Russia, as well as terminating Ukraine’s aspirations to join NATO. The roadmap would effectively freeze the conflict and leave former Ukrainian territories that are part of Russia under Moscow’s control, the sources suggested.

One of the officials told Bloomberg that the proposal still had to be discussed with Kiev, adding that the plan would not actually amount to a definitive conflict settlement. Kiev’s European backers would not recognize the territories as Russian, the source suggested.

The US delegation at the Paris meetings, which involved senior officials from several countries, was led by Secretary of State Marco Rubio and White House special envoy Steve Witkoff. They met with French President Emmanuel Macron and also held discussions with top officials from France, Germany, the UK, and Ukraine.

Earlier on Friday, Rubio signaled Washington was ready to “move on” if a way to end the hostilities between Moscow and Kiev could not be found “within days.”

“We need to figure out here now, within a matter of days, whether this is doable in the short term. Because if it’s not, then I think we’re just going to move on,” Rubio told reporters before departing from France.

Moscow has signaled a full ceasefire with Ukraine was highly unlikely, citing Kiev’s violations of previous deals. Speaking to reporters at the UN headquarters on Thursday, Russian envoy Vassily Nebenzia said there are “big issues with the comprehensive ceasefire,” recalling the fate of the now-defunct Minsk agreements, which were “misused and abused to prepare Ukraine for the confrontation.”

The diplomat also cited repeated Ukrainian violations of a US-brokered 30-day moratorium on energy infrastructure strikes, implemented on March 18.

“How close we are to the ceasefire is a big question to me personally, because, as I said, we had an attempt at a limited ceasefire on energy infrastructure, which was not observed by the Ukrainian side. So, in these circumstances, to speak about a ceasefire is simply unrealistic at this stage,” Nebenzia said.

The militant group says it wants a comprehensive peace deal and will not accept any “partial” agreements

Hamas is seeking a comprehensive agreement to end the war in Gaza and exchange all Israeli hostages for Palestinians imprisoned in Israel, a senior official of the organization has said, rejecting West Jerusalem’s proposal for another temporary truce.  

Khalil Al-Hayya, Hamas’ Gaza chief negotiator, said in a video statement on Friday that the Palestinian group would no longer accept interim agreements. Israel’s latest proposal involved a 45-day ceasefire and the release of ten hostages held by Hamas. In return, Israel would release 120 Palestinian prisoners serving life sentences and over 1,000 detainees held since October 7, 2023. The offer would require Hamas to disarm as a condition for a complete end to the war – a demand the group firmly rejects.  

“The partial agreements are exploited by “[Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu and his government as a cover for their political agenda, which is founded on perpetuating the genocidal war and siege; even if the price is sacrificing all of their own prisoners [hostages],” Hayya said.   

He stated that Hamas was “ready to immediately negotiate a deal to swap all hostages” in exchange for an end to the Gaza war, the release of Palestinians held in Israeli prisons, and the reconstruction of Gaza.

The Israeli authorities have reported that 59 hostages remain in the enclave, with 24 believed to be alive. Dozens of others were previously released through ceasefire agreements or separate deals.   

Israeli forces have taken control of more than half of Gaza in a renewed offensive following the collapse of a ceasefire and the stalling of hostage negotiations last month. The IDF has resumed air strikes in Gaza to increase pressure on Hamas to release the remaining captives.

The latest round of talks on Monday in Cairo to revive the January ceasefire and free Israeli hostages ended with no apparent breakthrough, Reuters said, citing Palestinian and Egyptian sources.  

Israel has declared that its primary goal is the total disarmament and elimination of Hamas.   

Meanwhile, air strikes continue to claim dozens of lives in Gaza. According to the enclave’s Hamas-run civil defense agency, on Thursday, Israeli strikes killed at least 37 people, most of whom were displaced civilians sheltering in a tent camp.  

The Israeli military stated it had carried out strikes on more than 100 “terror targets” over the past two days, including what it described as “terrorist cells, military structures, and infrastructure sites.”  

While West Jerusalem claimed there was no shortage of aid and defended the blockade imposed on the enclave in March, the UN warned on Monday that Gaza is facing its most severe humanitarian crisis since the outbreak of the hostilities.

What was Jesus’ greatest suffering?

The Passion and Death of Jesus Christ are central to the Christian faith because it is the means of our salvation, and we are called to imitate Him in it.

As a result, Christians have developed (or mystically received) all sorts of ways to meditate on those incredible events. There’s the Stations of the Cross, the Rosary, and of course, the crucifixes we hang everywhere.

One interesting but little-known devotion is the Shoulder Wound of Jesus.

According to the annals of Clairvaux, in the 12th century, Saint Bernard of Clairvaux prayed and asked Jesus to reveal the greatest unrecorded suffering of His passion.

And Jesus answered! Here’s what he told Saint Bernard:

Then, with this knowledge, Saint Bernard supposedly composed the following prayer:

Note: I say “supposedly” because the prayer has also been attributed to a few other saints. Either way, it’s a great prayer, fully approved by the Church!

Champagne flowed in Hell this day,
Corks flew, confetti sifted,
Satan triumphant pumped his fist
And was on shoulders lifted.

Oh happy day!  Oh happy day!
The cheering fiends exulted,
Oh happy day! We him did slay!
Scorned, mocked, rebuked, insulted!

With the smoke of Hell this night
Cigar smoke was combined,
For no more wall nor fortress stood
Twixt Satan and mankind.

And on the earth sagacious men
Were likewise pleased and merry,
Rid now they were, and evermore,
Of that bothersome adversary.

The means employed were not,
Alas, full fit for public boasting,
But the great end of that pest dead
Called for applause and toasting.

So as in Hell champagne this day
In temple and palace flowed,
Hands were shaken, backs were slapped,
And once grave faces glowed.

Oh happy day!  Oh happy day!
The cheering great exulted,
Oh happy day! We him did slay!
Scorned, mocked, rebuked, insulted!

Recumbent on a stony slab,
The corpse sagged, stiffened, cooled
Its wet blood blackened into scabs,
Spit caked where it had drooled.

The tomb was black, the tomb was still,
It was by all forsaken,
And from the few who felt no joy,
This tomb had all hope taken.

I wrote this poem three or four years ago and have posted it each Good Friday since.

The military-themed confections have been denounced as a symbol of the country’s ‘unhealthy’ political climate

A German bakery has dusted off Nazi-era molds to produce Easter sugar bunnies crafted in military-themed shapes. Critics argue that this incident underscores the country’s troubling departure from its pacifist ideals.

The once popular ‘Zuckerhasen’ (sugar bunnies) are a traditional confection in Germany dating back to the 18th century.

For this Easter season, Cafe Lieb in Tubingen, Baden-Wurttemberg decided to showcase long-forgotten versions during a two-day sale, according to media reports this week. The molds feature bunnies operating military hardware such as tanks and cannons – shapes deemed inappropriate since World War II.

Owner Hermann Leimgruber dismissed concerns over the controversial nature of selling military-themed Easter symbols, telling SWR, “My God, it’s part of our history. Back then, children received a bunny in a tank for Easter.” Master confectioner Ulrich Buob noted that older generations recall receiving these treats as children and now purchase them as souvenirs.

pic.twitter.com/BTqUKhcrm3

Critics find the candies troubling, arguing that they trivialize militarism and the tragic legacy of Nazism. A column published by Berliner Zeitung on Wednesday condemned what it called “Panzerhasen” (armored bunnies) as indicative of the current political climate in Germany and the broader EU.

”Now, there is even open discussion about the reintroduction of conscription, which for decades was considered a relic of the Cold War” in Germany, it stated. It added that dissenters are branded as “lumpen pacifists” or sympathizers of Russian President Vladimir Putin, saying this is “precisely the problem.”

READ MORE: Russia threatens response if Ukraine uses German Taurus missiles

The EU plans to invest hundreds of billions of euros to expand the militaries and weapons production of member states, justifying the measures as preparation for a likely conflict with Russia. Moscow denies that it has any aggressive intentions and views the plans – backed by incoming German Chancellor Friedrich Merz – as a continuation of the policies that ignited the Ukraine conflict, which Russia views as a NATO proxy war currently fueled by the EU and UK.

The US secretary of state has suggested that the White House could abandon efforts to settle the conflict if it doesn’t see progress in the coming days

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has suggested that Washington could abandon efforts to find a peaceful resolution to the Ukraine conflict if it believes Moscow and Kiev are incapable of negotiating.

Speaking to reporters on Friday, Rubio commented on a meeting with representatives from Ukraine, France, Britain, and Germany in Paris the day before. He stated that while the talks on the Ukraine conflict were “constructive and helpful,” the White House is still waiting to see if a peace deal is “doable.”

Asked to comment on the ongoing negotiations, the secretary of state refused to comment on what is being discussed, but called it a “broad framework.”

He acknowledged that there will inevitably be differences between Russia and Ukraine, and that “no one is saying that this is going to get done in 12 hours.”

He explained that the US wants to see “whether those differences can even be narrowed and if it’s even possible to get movement within the period of time we have in mind.”

“We need to figure out here, now, within a matter of days, whether this is doable in the short term, because if it’s not, then I think we’re just going to move on,” Rubio said, adding that “this isn’t going to go on forever.”

Russian officials have expressed skepticism about the feasibility of a ceasefire with Ukraine, claiming that Kiev and its backers in Europe are actively undermining US peace efforts.

Moscow’s UN representative, Vassily Nebenzia, recently said that Kiev has repeatedly failed to adhere to a US-mediated moratorium on strikes against energy infrastructure.

He added that the West’s record of using purported peace deals to build up the Ukrainian military means that expectations for a full ceasefire are “simply unrealistic at this stage.”

Moscow’s UN envoy has called anticipation of an imminent truce “unrealistic”

Senior US officials have told European backers of Kiev that Washington anticipates a comprehensive ceasefire in the Ukraine conflict within weeks, Bloomberg has reported.

US presidential envoy Steve Witkoff and Secretary of State Marco Rubio outlined the timeline during a series of meetings in Paris on Thursday, hosted by French President Emmanuel Macron, according to the outlet, citing anonymous sources.

The European side reportedly sought to persuade the Americans that President Donald Trump should “harden its position toward Moscow,” describing the discussions as “the latest attempt by Europe to influence the outcome” of US talks with Russia.

Last week, Witkoff traveled to St. Petersburg for talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin, which he has characterized as “compelling.” Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky criticized Trump’s envoy, accusing him of echoing “Russian narratives.”

Russian officials have expressed skepticism about the feasibility of a ceasefire with Ukraine, asserting that Kiev’s backers in Europe are undermining US efforts.

Speaking to journalists on Thursday, Moscow’s UN representative, Vassily Nebenzia, highlighted that Kiev has failed to adhere to a US-mediated moratorium on strikes against energy infrastructure. The diplomat said that the West’s record of using purported peace deals to build up the Ukrainian military means that expectations for a full ceasefire are “simply unrealistic at this stage.”

“I cannot speak on behalf of President Trump,” Nebenzia said. “Perhaps, he knows better what I don't know.”

The 30-day energy ceasefire announced on March 18 is set to expire this week. When asked on Wednesday whether Russia would alter its military strategy, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov stated that Putin had issued no new directives on the matter.

The site was used to fund the rebel group’s “terrorist effort,” the United States Central Command has said

The US has carried out strikes on the Ras Isa fuel port in a Houthi-controlled area of Yemen. The operation is part of US President Donald Trump’s efforts to prevent the rebel group from targeting tankers and other merchant vessels sailing through the Suez Canal and the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait.

“The Iran-backed Houthis use fuel to sustain their military operations, as a weapon of control, and to benefit economically from embezzling the profits from the import,” the US Central Command (CENTCOM) said in a statement on Thursday. It added that ships continued supplying fuel through the port after the militant group’s terrorist designation took effect on April 5.

“Profits from these illegal sales are directly funding and sustaining Houthi terrorist efforts,” CENTCOM said. “The objective of these strikes was to degrade the economic source of power of the Houthis.”

The Houthi authorities said 38 civilians were killed, including five paramedics, and 102 more were injured. The majority of the victims were reportedly port workers.

“We affirm Yemen’s legal right to defend itself, and this crime will not go unpunished,” the Houthi authorities stated, according to Al-Masirah TV.

Hours after the strikes, the Israel Defense Forces said they intercepted a ballistic missile launched from Yemen on Friday morning.

The Houthis control the western part of Yemen, including the capital, Sanaa, and the port of Hodeidah. Since 2023, the group has been firing kamikaze drones and missiles at commercial ships in support of the Palestinians in Gaza. The Houthis also launched ballistic missiles at Israel, saying they would stop the attacks once Israel ends its campaign against Hamas in Gaza.

Last month, Trump instructed the Pentagon to step up strikes in Yemen, warning that the Houthis would be “completely annihilated” unless they cease targeting shipping. The group, however, vowed not to bow to pressure. The Houthis have since claimed attacks on US warships patrolling the Red Sea area. On April 1, the militants reported shooting down an American MQ-9 Reaper drone.

NATO’s target for members to spend 2% of GDP on defense is insufficient, the US president has said

Italy needs to spend more on defense because NATO’s target of 2% of GDP is no longer enough, US President Donald Trump has told Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni.

Trump has long insisted that European member states must boost their own defense. The debate over burden-sharing between the allies has further complicated the Trump administration’s strained relations with Europe.

At a joint press conference in Washington on Thursday, Meloni stated that “Italy is going to the next summit of NATO, announcing that it will raise [defense spending] to 2%, and that’s also progressed.”

“It will go up,” Trump interjected. Asked by a reporter if the 2% target is enough, the US president replied, “It’s never enough.”

Last year, Italy’s defense budget stood at 1.49% of GDP – one of the lowest in NATO. Meloni has been advocating for some time to reclassify expenditure on border patrols and coast guards as military spending.

In January, Trump accused European countries of taking advantage of the US and argued that NATO members should spend at least 5% of their GDP on defense. Last year, 23 of the 32 members hit the 2% target set by NATO in 2014, according to the bloc’s own estimates cited by the BBC. The US spends around 3.5% of GDP on defense and is NATO’s biggest overall contributor.

Italian Defense Minister Guido Crosetto told the newspaper La Stampa this week that it is “unthinkable” to assume that all European nations would slash social programs to fulfill Trump’s 5% demand. “European countries can’t touch welfare and social achievements,” he said.

Last week, Trump said he would not rule out withdrawing some or all of the 84,000 US troops currently stationed in Europe. “We pay for the military in Europe. We don’t get reimbursed by much,” Trump told reporters at the White House.

The New York Times reported on Monday that the US could slash “almost all funding” for international organizations, including the UN and NATO.

The top US and Russian diplomats have discussed efforts to settle the Ukraine conflict, the Foreign Ministry in Moscow has said

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and US Secretary of State Marco Rubio held a phone conversation on Thursday.

The two top diplomats focused on the Ukraine conflict and ongoing multilateral contacts on a potential settlement, the Russian Foreign Ministry has stated.

Rubio briefed Lavrov on the meetings between the American delegation and representatives of Ukraine, France, and other European nations held earlier in the day in Paris, the ministry said.

“Lavrov reiterated Moscow’s readiness to continue working together with American colleagues to reliably resolve the root causes of the Ukrainian crisis,” it added.

The US State Department said Rubio conveyed to Lavrov the “same message” he delivered to the Ukrainian and European delegations: That US President Donald Trump and Washington “want this war to end, and have now presented to all parties the outlines of a durable and lasting peace.” 

“The encouraging reception in Paris to the US framework shows that peace is possible if all parties commit to reaching an agreement,” the statement added, without providing further details.

The Paris meetings involved top dignitaries from all sides, with the US delegation led by Rubio and Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, a key official in the talks on resolving the Ukraine conflict. Kiev was represented by Vladimir Zelensky’s head of office, Andrey Yermak, as well as Defense Minister Rustem Umerov.

Zelensky launched a new personal attack on Witkoff, accusing him of spreading “Russian narratives” and effectively siding with Moscow. Speaking at a televised press conference on Thursday, the Ukrainian leader invoked Witkoff’s recent remarks that a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine revolves around “five territories,” the formerly Ukrainian Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, Zaporozhye and Kherson Regions, and Crimea.

“I believe that Mr. Witkoff has adopted the Russian side’s strategy for himself... He is consciously or unconsciously spreading Russian narratives... I do not see him having a mandate to discuss Ukrainian territories,” Zelensky stated.

READ MORE: Zelensky lashes out at Trump envoy

Last week, Witkoff met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in St. Petersburg in their third round of direct talks since February. The recognition of the “five territories” is a key to any peace deal, Witkoff told Fox News in an interview earlier this week.

Crimea voted to rejoin Russia in 2014, shortly after it broke away from Ukraine in the aftermath of the Maidan coup. The four other regions became part of Russia in autumn 2022 following referendums.

Moscow has undertaken diplomatic efforts to secure the release of people being held captive in Gaza

Russian President Vladimir Putin has thanked the political wing of Hamas for the release of Russian-Israeli citizen Aleksandr Trufanov, during a meeting with the freed hostage in Moscow on Wednesday.

The Palestinian group freed Trufanov in February as part of a Gaza ceasefire agreement with Israel and following diplomatic efforts by Moscow. Two other hostages were also released at the time.

“Here we have to offer a word of gratitude to the leadership and to the political wing of Hamas for having met us halfway and carried out this humanitarian act,” Putin said as he welcomed Trufanov and the surviving members of his family at the Kremlin.

Trufanov was taken hostage on October 7, 2023 along with his grandmother Irena Tati, mother Elena, and fiancée Sapir Cohen. His father Vitaly Trufanov was killed in the attack. The women were released as part of the Hamas-Israel truce in November 2023. Aleksandr spent 498 days in captivity.

“The fact that you are now free is a result of Russia’s many years of stable relations with the Palestinian people, with the representatives of different organizations,” Putin said, adding that Russia will do whatever is necessary to ensure those still in captivity are freed.

A Hamas delegation visited Moscow in early February, less than two weeks before Trufanov’s release. The group, led by senior official Mousa Abu Marzouk, met with Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov to discuss the ongoing ceasefire in Gaza and related humanitarian issues.

This visit was part of Russia’s ongoing engagement with various parties involved in the Middle East conflict.

The October 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel left approximately 1,200 people dead, with around 250 taken hostage. In the past 18 months, over 51,000 Palestinians in Gaza have been killed amid Israel’s military operation, according to the enclave’s health authorities.

READ MORE: Israeli Army to remain indefinitely in Gaza – defense minister

On Wednesday, Israel proposed a 45-day truce in Gaza to allow hostage releases and potentially begin indirect talks to end the war. Hamas has said it is studying the plan.

The country’s top court has removed the group from the terrorist list

Russia’s Supreme Court on Thursday lifted the Taliban’s designation as a “terrorist organization,” effectively legalizing the group’s activities in the country.

The Islamist movement, which took power in Afghanistan four years ago, had been listed as a terrorist entity since 2003, making any contact with its members a criminal offense under Russian law.

The decision follows calls from Russian officials to engage with the Taliban to help stabilize Afghanistan. The group returned to power in August 2021 following the withdrawal of US and NATO forces after their two-decade presence in the Central Asian country.

Since that time, Moscow has resumed diplomatic contacts with Taliban officials. Last year, President Vladimir Putin said it was “necessary to build relations with the current government somehow,” as they are now in control of Afghanistan.

In May 2024, the Russian Foreign Ministry and Ministry of Justice formally proposed lifting the ban. Earlier this month, the Prosecutor General’s Office submitted the motion to the Supreme Court, leading to Thursday’s ruling.

Previously, Russian law had no mechanism for removing organizations from the terrorist list. However, amendments passed in 2023 to the federal law on countering terrorism now allow the courts to suspend the designation if the group in question has ceased activities involving propaganda, justification, or support of terrorism, and no longer violates the Criminal Code.

Although the Taliban government is not officially recognized by the international community, several Central Asian countries have recently renewed ties with Kabul. Kazakhstan removed the group from its terrorist list in June 2024, followed by Kyrgyzstan in September. Turkmenistan has resumed cooperation through the TAPI gas pipeline project, and Uzbekistan signed several joint agreements with Kabul in August 2024.

Mohammad Suhail Shaheen, the Taliban’s envoy to Qatar and its de facto international spokesman, told RT earlier this month that Kabul welcomed Russia’s move, saying the ban had stood “in the way of cooperation” between the two countries.

Experts say Thursday’s ruling does not constitute formal recognition of the Taliban government, but will facilitate diplomatic engagement.

American troops have been deployed in the Middle Eastern country since 2014

US President Donald Trump’s administration is considering a significant reduction of American troops in Syria, the Washington Post reported on Thursday, citing officials familiar with military planning.

American forces have been illegally stationed in Syria since 2014. Washington insisted they were deployed to counter ISIS, though they have remained in the years since Syria’s war ended.

A US official focused on the region told the WaPo there’s an expectation that troop numbers would be cut “to a bare minimum,” adding “I think we’re going to go down to one very small place in the northeast.”

A defense official confirmed ongoing plans to “reduce” and “consolidate” Washington’s troop presence but insisted a full withdrawal is not currently under discussion.

“Stuff is already moving, although they likely won’t announce anything before the Iran talks,” referring to US-Iran nuclear negotiations that began last week, with a second round set for this weekend in Rome.

Any withdrawal plans could be derailed by Islamic State’s increased attacks in eastern Syria, according to the WaPo.

In December 2024, shortly after Syrian President Bashar Assad was ousted, the Pentagon acknowledged having 2,000 troops in Syria – more than double the previously reported 900. Later that month, several media outlets reported that US military convoys carrying weapons and equipment had crossed into Syria from Iraq.

Both the former Assad government and Russia have repeatedly condemned the US presence as an illegal occupation, arguing that Washington was never granted permission to station troops in Syria. Damascus has also accused Washington of stealing Syrian natural resources, given that the US bases are located in the country’s oil-rich northeastern regions.

During his first term, Trump had ordered a partial withdrawal from Syria, though it was never completed. Since returning to office, he has largely avoided the topic, stating only that Syria is a “mess” and doesn’t need American involvement.

Last month, Washington handed Damascus a list of conditions for partial relief from Assad-era sanctions. The list, a copy of which was seen by the WaPo, included demands to allow US counter-terror operations on Syrian soil and a formal declaration of support for Operation Inherent Resolve – a US-led campaign against terrorism in Syria and Iraq.

Moscow is now being accused of orchestrating Islamist terrorism, among a litany of other ridiculous claims

Like people almost everywhere in NATO-EU Europe, Germans are currently being subjected to a relentless barrage of shameless, often astonishingly crude propaganda. That’s because their political elites and mainstream media are desperately trying to prepare them for war against Russia. And this time, not by proxy, that is, by way of a devastated Ukraine and dead Ukrainians, but directly.

As a former, very evil but in his prime all-too-popular German master of mass manipulation – who also happened to love war with Russia more than was good for him (or Germany) – explained a century ago, effective propaganda keeps the world very, very simple. Or, to add a little detail, propaganda’s sometimes literally stunning success is built on two primitive yet powerful – and very old – tricks: the broken-record principle and the litany effect.

Their meaning, too, is elementary: In essence, if your image of reality is delusional, you don’t have sound arguments, and your case is absurd, do not despair. Instead, ceaselessly drum in a few very basic and bogus ideas until the audience is dizzy with repetition (the broken-record principle), while also eliciting frequent consent from it (the litany effect). In short: Keep shouting the same nonsense at them and make them bleat back “yes” regularly. You know, like a ritual, really.

In the case of the manufacturing of the current iteration of traditional German the-Russians-are-coming hysteria as well, it is easy to identify its handful of specious, daft, and childishly simplistic key motifs: Russia and Russia alone is to blame for the war in Ukraine; Russia intends to attack Europe (if not the world) – and soon; and Russia is incredibly devious and scheming, so you cannot find a reasonable compromise with it.

Yet what about the nuts and bolts of this propaganda campaign? Even a simple story needs detail, and, if told and retold almost without letup, that detail at least needs to vary: Same old story but different flavor. That’s where things get tricky.

For one thing, if you pick the wrong flavor, your propaganda may start looking as silly as it actually is. A current example in Germany – as well as the EU parliament – would be the recent hysteria over the global hit Sigma Boy from Russia. Its brilliantly catchy tune is a piece of art, like it or not. But its lyrics are about as profound as a margarine commercial.

Yet that won’t stop Germany’s radical-Centrist elite from exploring the song’s ominous depths as a weapon of nefarious Russian cultural warfare. Because Sigma Boy, one EU parliamentarian from Hamburg has noticed – with a little help from Ukraine – is really “a viral Russian trope used on social media that communicates patriarchal and pro-Russian worldviews” as well as “only one example of Russian infiltration of popular discourse through social media.” Also, you see, Sigma Boy is really just code for – scary sound effect – PUTIN!

Silly? So ridiculous it gives you that cringey feeling you get when someone else is making a total fool of themselves and all you want to do is tell them to shut up already and save whatever maybe left of their credibility? Yes, obviously.

Indeed, in the case of the Great Sigma Boy Panic Attack, even Spiegel – a usually reliably Russophobic and NATO-militarist publication now – has mildly demurred. Dedicating a whole podcast to the phenomenon, it had an editor and journalist deliberate on the Sigma Boy case in all earnestness and with proverbial German thoroughness and faces serious enough for Kant and Hegel hashing out the nature of TikTok. The result: Maybe, just maybe, it’s really simply a pop song.

Now you could say “Great. At least someone is not completely falling for the mass hysteria.” But that would be too optimistic. In reality, the real question is how could things get so absurd in the first place? What is the Zeitgeist environment in which an EU parliamentarian is not ashamed to display so much provincial paranoia and Germany’s major news magazine needs intensive research and a long discussion to find out that, perhaps, she does not have a point?

In that regard, another recent propaganda fiasco is instructive. Its essence is simple: Some may know the ZDF, one of Germany’s most popular and influential public – that is, de facto state – TV channels most of all as a rock-solid mouthpiece of Israeli propaganda, especially during the ongoing Gaza genocide.

But the ZDF also has a substantial line in Russophobia. And for once, it went a little too far in its never-slackening eagerness to stick it to the big bad Russians: In its main news show and a long, sensationalist pseudo-documentary in its Terra X History program – under the title “Spying, Sabotage, Fake News. Putin’s war against us” – the broadcaster claimed, in effect if with some cheap pro forma hedging, that Russia was behind, among other nefarious schemes, an Islamist terror attack in the city of Mannheim in May 2024.

This was, obviously, an extremely serious allegation, in principle as well as in detail: the attack, carried out by a man from Afghanistan who had lived in Germany for ten years, left five victims injured and one, a policeman, dead. Moreover, in the consciousness of the German public, this particular terror attack is only part of a whole series of unrelated yet similar violent assaults that have taken place over the last year, including another one in Magdeburg as well as in the cities of Solingen and Aschaffenburg.

Hence, pointing a finger at Russia over one of these traumatizing onslaughts inevitably implied that Moscow may have had a hand in the others as well. Et voila! A new and particularly horrifying accusation against Russia had been manufactured: Moscow, so the essence of this wildest of many wild tales, was using migrants to instigate bloody Islamist terror in Germany.

And this big fat lie started working quickly: Various major mainstream media in Germany and abroad began to uncritically repeat the story, such as Britain’s Telegraph and The Sun, the German Merkur, and the French Sud-Ouest.

Yet the “research” on which ZDF had based this specific propaganda strike against Moscow was so breathtakingly sloppy that, this time, even Germany’s BND foreign intelligence service had to object.

Shortly after the ZDF had made its splash, the BND publicly contradicted it, pointing out that the method – basically a childish misreading of Google Trend data – used to produce these allegations against Russia is, in essence, ridiculously unreliable. Indeed, it turned out that several German intelligence agencies had warned the ZDF already before the Terra X pseudo-documentary was broadcast. Even Germany’s highly conservative Welt newspaper called the ZDF’s handiwork – with massive understatement – “negligent.”

So far, so bad. Just another case of propaganda becoming self-defeating by going too far. Let’s move on. And that is, of course, what is happening now. While the very worst lie about Russia has been discredited, there are virtually no consequences.

Yet, in reality, this is where the whole daft affair is only beginning to get interesting. For one thing, the Terra X feature, almost 45 minutes long, was packed with other, equally unfounded accusations against Russia. Indeed, it consisted of a long sequence of one hearsay after another speculation, all based on profound evidence of the “Western-intelligence-services-believe” type.

At Terra X, have they ever heard of those Iraqi weapons of mass destruction? The babies torn from incubators in Kuwait? Or Gaddafi handing out Viagra to his troops to promote rape? All of them, of course, lies; all, in their time, spread by those famously reliable Western intelligence agencies and mass media functioning as their servile propaganda arms. And all of these lies, these actual cases of “hybrid warfare” – by Western elites on their own populations – have always had the same purpose: prepare and justify Western military aggression.

Yet, in the Terra X case as well, the fact that the single most egregious anti-Russian allegation of many has been, for once, exposed quickly as at best reckless nonsense if not a deliberate lie, makes no dent in the story as a whole.

On the contrary, all that happens is that one scapegoat is singled out and sacrificed: Steven Broschart, the discredited “data profiler” and self-appointed “digital behavioral analytic.” It was all him, is the message now. But that is clearly untrue. Long stretches of the Terra X tale consisted of various, often much more prominent talking-heads lending their authority to a long list of equally unsubstantiated allegations of Russian crimes and, in general, helping beat the war drums against Moscow.

There was, for instance, an official of Germany’s domestic intelligence service – the Verfassungsschutz – who first conveniently confirmed that the internet is a “treasure chest” of information revealing sabotage and attack plans and then informed viewers that they are already at war with Russia, even if they haven’t noticed yet. No biggie in Germany now: at war, not yet at war with Russia… Who cares once we all know where we are supposed to be going anyhow, and so soon, too.

To be fair, the man from the Verfassungsschutz had his entertaining side: You don’t need tanks to bring down a country, he enlightened us, because you can also strike at its vital infrastructure. Really? You don’t say! You mean the way that Germany’s “allies” in Washington and its spongers in Kiev struck at the Nord Stream pipelines? No, just kidding. Of course, he did not mean that. Because that would be reality, and his job clearly is the opposite, propaganda.

Quintessential German professor Martin Schulze Wessel added platitudes about Putin, who, we learn, thinks in categories of East and West and antagonism. Wow! Aren’t we lucky that no one does so in Garden Value Europe and a Germany that has decided to quite literally define itself, again, via antagonism toward Russia.

In addition, the professor confirmed that Russia is a “direct” threat to Germany – clearly unlike, again, Ukraine and the US, obviously, even if they have actually committed the largest act of infrastructure sabotage in German peacetime history. And the German public must be made aware of that non-fact, the professor lectured. Thank you for summarizing the essence of propaganda so selflessly: making the people aware of what isn’t there. And, if we may add, the opposite is also important: that that same public is made unaware of what does, actually, exist, for instance that Nord Stream attack that must go forever unmentioned.

My only caveat regarding Schulze Wessel’s amusing contribution is that, as a matter of transparency, he could have let viewers know that he is heavily networked with Ukraine and in particular the rather nationalist city of Lviv. Again, no biggie: On the big crusade against bad Russia, minor sins are forgivable.

The cast of Terra X was rich and not everyone can be mentioned here. But we would be amiss to omit Anton Shekhovtsov. Ironically now based at some “Center for Democratic Integrity,” he is the commentator who publicly celebrated the Odessa Trade Union House fire, while comparing its victims to vermin, literally. Dehumanizing? A little on the fascist side psychologically, perhaps? Oh, come on! Once again, on the grand campaign against Moscow, a little excess of eagerness is more than welcome.

On Terra X his function was unspoken yet clumsily clear: He served as the “expert” explaining that everything alleged in the show is “hard to prove.” But, of course, not as in not likely to be true, but as in: absolutely true even without any evidence. Thank you, too, Anton, for demonstrating a basic yet always popular trick of gutter propaganda: “You can’t see them,” as it were, “but that’s only because they are so well hidden. Which proves again how dangerous they are.”

The single worst irony about this piece of weaponized “journalism” from one of Germany’s biggest broadcasters is its flatfooted hypocrisy. For, in the context of the Ukraine War, provoked and fought via proxy by the West, there are real sabotage and terrorism, namely by Ukraine and the West: The attack on the Crocus City venue in Moscow, the assassination of General Igor Kirillov, the heinous murder of Darya Dugina, the Ukrainian attacks on the Kerch Bridge and on Nord Stream, of course – and this list could be prolonged – are all clear examples of Ukraine using terrorism. And we have known for years now, from Western mainstream media, that behind these activities, there has been hands-on and proud support from Western intelligence services.

Is it possible that, in a conflict where the West and Ukraine have liberally deployed “hybrid war” tactics, Russia is sometimes paying them back in the same coin? Yes, in principle. You could even make a plausible argument that it has to do so to remain credible.

Accusations of promoting Islamist terrorism, from which Russia has suffered greatly, in any case, should be off-limits to anyone with half a brain and some elementary decency. And the West would do very well to mind the beam in its own eye.

For Western media that would mean that, even apart from the straightforward lying, against this background, it is not just dishonest but ridiculous to produce “journalism” that focuses on Russia alone. The very least a serious investigation would have to do is look at all sides and treat information from all sides critically.

But then, that would be a piece of practical enlightenment, intellectually and politically empowering viewers and citizens, and it would not be effective war-in-sight propaganda anymore. It might even end up – oh horror! – promoting compromise and peace.

As it is now, in Germany and elsewhere in Western Europe, journalists, security service officers, experts, and academics – all are perfectly fine with lending their name to propaganda of the basest form. What a shame.