Math is Racist: Bill and Melinda Gates bankroll the war on reality

When you read this, you are going to think it is parody, but it is not. Click through to the disgusting source material and see that it’s all true. You can start with browsing through the first 82 page module here:

This is where we are. The satanic war on reality is now going after math itself, because of course they did. They couldn’t help themselves. Note well, the Gates Foundation is the sole source of funding listed on the project’s website… it wouldn’t exist if not for Gates of Hell.

Wrong answers are white supremacy. If you believe right answers exist, you need to confront your racism.

I would comment further, but the following article trolls so well, I could hardly mock any mockier.

By Jason Rantz, February 19, 2021 

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is bankrolling a group of activists who believe math is racist.

A group of fringe educators have compiled a six-part toolkit offering an “integrated approach” to developing an “anti-racist math practice” viewed through a social justice lens. It chides the “concept of mathematics being purely objective” as “unequivocally false.” It argues focusing on the “right answer” to math equations is an example of white supremacy. The toolkit A Pathway to Equitable Math Instruction is meant to help educators in grades 6-8.

Math is racist. Wrong answers are white supremacy

The toolkit focuses on the 2021 progressive buzzword of “equity” and claims white supremacy and mathematics go hand in hand. The resources help educators rid their classrooms of the scourge of racist math by making their students dumber. For example, the lessons in Dismantling Racism in Mathematics Instruction warn educators that “white supremacy culture” shows up in the classroom when teachers “treat mistakes as problems by equating them with wrongness” because it “reinforces the ideas of perfectionism (that students shouldn’t make mistakes) and paternalism (teachers or other experts can and should correct mistakes).”

It doesn’t explain why this is white supremacist culture. It just says that it is. A quick way to dismantle the white supremacist culture, according to the text, is to eliminate order in the classroom. The text argues, “requiring students to raise their hand before speaking can reinforce paternalism and powerhoarding, in addition to breaking the process of thinking, learning, and communicating.” Instead, it recommends you teach math via “storytelling circles, incorporating dance, music, song, call and response, and other cultural ways of communicating.”

To be an anti-racist math teacher, admit your racism

The toolkit explains that if you truly want to be an anti-racist math teacher, you must embrace your identity. And you’re likely a virulent racist. But it’s OK. The resources will guide you through the “emotionally difficult work of coaching for math equity.”

Prior to engaging in any instruction session with students, educators must do some soul searching. They are told to address their “underlying inherently racist beliefs and biases, positionality, and personal power within that positionality.” Once completed, you’re on your way to challenging “the ways that math is used to uphold capitalist, imperialist, and racist views.”

“Often the emphasis is placed on learning math in the ‘real world,’ as if our classrooms are not a part of the real world,” the text reads. “This reinforces notions of either/or thinking because math is only seen as useful when it is in a particular context. However, this can result in using mathematics to uphold capitalist and imperialist ways of being and understandings of the world.”

The Pathway‘s website thanks the Gates Foundation for “their generous financial support of this project.” No other nonprofit is listed for donations and they do not list the amount donated. But they have been active in promoting similar principles on math. According to the Washington Free Beacon, the Gates Foundation gave nearly “$140 million to some of the groups behind Pathway, whose antiracist resources are the basis for a new teacher training course offered by the Oregon Department of Education.” The Gates Foundation also gave tens of millions to The Education Trust, a proponent of the Pathways toolkit.

Read the rest:

War on Reality: “Equality Act” means the end of equality for women and girls, and so much more

The “Equality Act” H.R 5 has passed the House and is headed for the Senate. This bill is, quite simply, a war on reality, and on its Creator, and on you. You will not get away with simply acknowledging or tolerating their anti-reality; you will 100% be made to participate in it, and so will your children. Whenever you see basic reality being challenged, it is always demonic. All of reality is God’s creation, so the demons naturally want to destroy it, and deceive as many as possible along the way. Demons have no ability to create, only to destroy.

For the demons and the demoniacs , forcing your participation is actually their favorite part.

“The language of the bill passed by the House specifically prohibits the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 from providing a claim, defense, or basis for challenging the protections granted for “gender identity” or “sexual orientation.” This would deny religious organizations any moral grounds for objecting to the enforcement of these protections and would make those organizations criminally liable if they did.

Imagine a church youth camp where teenage boys would normally be housed in separate sleeping quarters from teenage girls. Not under H.R.5. Any boy who “identifies as female” would be legally entitled to bunk with the girls. Or any girl who “identifies as male” would be legally entitled to bunk with the boys. According to the ‘Equality Act,’ any church that prohibits such action would be violating the individual’s civil rights and could face legal action.

“Imagine a Sunday School class where 8 year old “Paul” says he is really “Paula,” and wants to wear a dress to class or use the girls’ bathroom. If that made other children feel confused or their parents uncomfortable, too bad. Any attempt by the church to deny the child’s freedom to attend the class dressed as “he” or “she” chooses (pick your pronoun), to use the restroom of “his” or “her” choice, or any attempt to counsel the child to accept their God-given gender would be a violation of the child’s civil rights and the church could be legally liable.

Imagine that a homosexual man is not hired by a church on the grounds that his lifestyle is incompatible with the church’s Statement of Faith and Biblical beliefs. Under the Equality Act, that would be discrimination and the church could be sued and/or lose its tax-exempt status.”

In addition, it is a war specifically on women and girls. There can no longer be any segregated spaces for biological females under this law. No girls’ bathrooms, locker rooms, dressing rooms, etc. If a man wants to come in, he is allowed in, under federal law. Not to mention, girls sports are done, at least the individual ones… track, golf, tennis, etc.

But why stop there?

What if a pedophile identifies as an eight year old? Why can’t he participate in camps or activities for eight year olds?

What if a 15 year old identifies as 25 and wants to buy beer? Why can’t he?

What if a white man with blue eyes and blonde hair identifies as a black woman, brown hair brown eyes? Why can’t he fill out his passport application that way?

What if a woman identifies as suffering chronic acute back pain, chronically 8/10 on the pain scale? Why can’t she have all the Oxy she wants? Who are you to judge, Dr. Misogyny?

What if I am 5’5″ and 250 pounds, but I identify as 6’4″ and 200 pounds… Can I claim the latter on my driver’s license? Well, you might say no, because we can measure those things objectively (never mind that we can also measure biological sex, as a person’s DNA will always reveal their “birth gender”). But no, you say, grab a ruler and a scale, and we shall gather the empirical evidence showing us the objective reality of your height and weight in standardized imperial units… feet, inches, pounds… well, have I got a surprise for you:

Coming up next, and I am not making this up,

Math is Racist.

It’s a mystery

I have a nurse friend who works in a hospital back east. She explained to me how it works.

Everyone presenting at the hospital is “presumed Covid,” which counts exactly the same as “confirmed Covid” according to CDC rules. Community spread means the “presumed” label is automatic.

Testing for flu is forbidden. Since the patient has already been “diagnosed” with Covid, what good would a flu test do?

See how that works?

My nurse friend is not happy.

Black officer who murdered white unarmed Ashli Babbitt still not charged nor even identified

By PAUL SPERRY February 25, 2021

All told, seven people died in connection with the U.S. Capitol riot on Jan. 6. But only Ashli Babbitt’s death was directly caused by violence that day. She was a rioter killed by a Capitol Police officer, who fired the only shot by any person during the 4½-hour siege. Yet the story of who he is and why he opened fire remains shrouded in mystery.

More than six weeks after Babbitt succumbed to a single gunshot wound to the upper chest, authorities are keeping secret the identity of the officer who fired the fatal round. They won’t release his name, and the major news media aren’t clamoring for it, in stark contrast to other high-profile police shootings of unarmed civilians...

Drawing on interviews with informed sources and available documents, RealClearInvestigations has put together a portrait of the actual shooter and the shooting, which some describe as completely justified and others call murder.

The officer who opened fire on Babbitt holds the rank of lieutenant and is a longtime veteran of the force who worked protective detail in the Speaker’s Lobby, a highly restricted area behind the House chamber, sources say. An African-American, he was put on paid administrative leave pending the outcome of an internal investigation led by the Metropolitan Police of the District of Columbia, which shares jurisdiction with the Capitol Police. The Justice Department is also involved in the inquiry.

The Wall Street Journal reported earlier this month that the officer has been interviewed and cleared of criminal wrongdoing by a preliminary investigation, suggesting that the police killing may soon be ruled justifiable homicide. But D.C. Police spokeswoman Alaina Gertz told RCI, “This case remains under active investigation.”

The Capitol Police officer fired at her from the side of the barricade, where he had been hidden from view in a doorway. At least from what can be seen and heard from the video, he appears to issue no commands to stop nor any verbal warning that he would shoot.

“That was an execution,” said Jack Feeley, a fellow Air Force vet and friend of Babbitt, adding that it “breaks my heart to know millions of people watched my friend be executed on live television.” (It wasn’t on “live television,” it was filmed by the antifa/BLM thug who lead the charge to that location)

A former White House national security aide and Pentagon official agreed the officer appeared trigger happy. “It was an assassination. I’ve never seen a more clear case in all my years. I’ve seen EJKs that were cleaner than that,” said the former official, referring to an extrajudicial killing, or state-sponsored killing outside the formal legal system of a country. “He stepped into it [the shot] for [expletive deleted] sake.”

Much, much more here:

Capitol Police Chief admits, yet again, that the riot was pre-planned by extremist groups and the intel was provided in advance

So, again, why were all the LEOs told to stay home by Nancy? Why did Mayor Bowser insist there be ZERO help from federal agencies who normally provide security for this type of situation? What could have been their motive for issuing stand-down orders?

Former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund said that a pre-Jan. 6 intelligence assessment suggested that Antifa, Proud Boys, and extremist groups would partake in the Jan. 6 event in Washington.

“The assessment indicated that members of the Proud Boys, white supremacist groups, Antifa, and other extremist groups were expected to participate in the January 6th event and that they may be inclined to become violent,” Sund said in a written statement (pdf) to the Senate.

It added that an “intelligence assessment indicated that the January 6th protests/rallies were ‘expected to be similar to the previous Million MAGA March rallies in November and December 2020, which drew tens of thousands of participants,” adding that faulty intelligence was to blame for the outmanned Capitol defenders’ failure to anticipate the riots.

“Faulty intelligence” ??? You just stated that the intelligence was spot-on.

Accused Capitol rioter John Sullivan, a self-styled Antifa activist, was arrested and charged in connection with the breach. Sullivan previously told The Epoch Times that he’s apolitical but has told other news outlets that he is Antifa or anti-fascist. Antifa is a far-left, anarcho-communist network that has engaged in violence across the country in recent years. Sullivan has also been linked to the Black Lives Matter movement, though he’s been disavowed by the leader of Black Lives Matter Utah.

Sund and other officials attempted to blame various federal agencies—and each other—for their failure to defend the building as demonstrators overwhelmed security barriers, broke windows and doors, and sent lawmakers fleeing from the House and Senate chambers…

Systemic Racism… the more you know

Philly teen receives over $1 million in scholarships after applying to 20 schools

By Christie Ileto February 24, 2021 11:08PM

A 17-year-old from West Philadelphia has racked up over $1 million in scholarships after applying to more than a dozen schools.

Shanya Robinson-Owens applied to 20 colleges and universities. She’s gotten into 18, and almost all of them have awarded her a scholarship. In fact, she’s been awarded over $1 million of scholarship money.

“It was kind of a surprise. I was really shocked,” said Shanya Robinson-Owens. “I didn’t know what to do, if I would cry, laugh, I didn’t know what to do.”

“We’re not surprised she did get into all of the schools, we’re just surprised by the amount of financial award letters she’s been receiving,” said her aunt, Christine Owens. “I’ve just been keeping track of all of the acceptances and prizes she’s been giving and it’s just adding up day by day.”

Robinson-Owens has spent the last two years learning virtually because of the pandemic, something that’s been a challenge for many students, particularly those of color. While she’s overcome that hurdle, her next one involves making the biggest decision of her young adult life: picking a school from a stack of acceptance letters, which isn’t necessarily the worst problem to have.

Did Father Z. just endorse the Mazza Thesis of Pope Benedict cleaving the Vicarship of Christ from the Bishopric of Rome?

Yesterday, 22 February, was the Feast of the Chair of St. Peter. Father Z. used the occasion to set out some interesting observations regarding the Petrine See, and how it began at Antioch (or one could even say Jerusalem). Emphasis mine:

“…Peter spent about 7 years in Antioch, guiding the church as its bishop, before he pulled up stakes, and… I guess… cathedra… and went to Rome.  He wouldn’t have taken a literal chair, but he did take his office and authority, given to him by Christ.   He had this office and authority before he went to Antioch, while he was at Antioch, when he left Antioch, when he got to Rome and when he died in Rome.

Because the Petrine Ministry is necessary for the Church, Christ made it obviously a “hereditary” office, just as the Davidic stewards enjoyed with the conferral of keys.  After Peter, another man held the Petrine Ministry and so on down to our day.   That would have happened whether Peter had stayed in Jerusalem, stayed in Antioch, or had gone to Luoyang in China of the Han Dynasty.

Based on Peter’s move from Antioch to Rome, there are those who say that there is nothing which absolutely connects being the Successor of Peter with being Bishop of Rome.  He was, after all, The Rock, when he was in Antioch.  For all practical purposes Petrine Ministry and office of Bishop of Rome now seem to be fused together.  Most authors think they are inseparable.  But… they weren’t, unless one thinks that Christ gave Peter His authority in view of Peter’s future in Rome.   Possible, but there’s no Biblical evidence for that.  On the surface, it looks like one could be Successor of Peter (who can be anywhere) and someone else Bishop of Rome (who should be in Rome).

One supposes that, in time of need, some Successor of Peter could move his see to, say, Texas.

Or, perhaps to the Vatican Gardens remaining with us always in the enclosure of St. Peter?

The idea that Pope Benedict may have split the Romanitas from the Vicarship was first raised as a possibility by our friend Dr. Ed Mazza: the so-called “Leave the Bishopric, Take the Vicarship” scenario. Along with the Substantial Error theory, where Benedict’s resignation was invalid due to it’s violation of any number of Canons, particularly #188, we also have the possibility of Benedict severing the See of Rome from the Vicarship. Since Benedict never resigned the Vicarship, nor his Office, the possibility arises that he could have resigned as Bishop of Rome, while yet remaining the one true Vicar of Christ, with Bergoglio being elected only as bishop of the diocese. In either scenario, Pope Benedict retains the keys.

If you think this sounds far-fetched or desperate, think again. This scenario has a lot of evidence in support, including, in their own words, Pope Benedict, Archbishop Ganswein, and even Bergoglio.

Following are the concluding paragraphs from the section of Dr. Mazza’s thesis dealing with this question:

Benedict just might have separated the Primacy of Peter from the See of Rome: “The papal ministry is therefore no longer what it was before. It is and remains the foundation of the Catholic Church; and yet it is a foundation which Benedict XVI has profoundly and permanently transformed…” (+Ganswein) In such a scenario, Benedict still retains Peter’s Primacy—but is former bishop of Rome, ceding the sede to Francis.

“Though it is admittedly a minority position in the history of theology, we know from the official documents of Vatican I that it is not against the teaching of the Church to argue that a pope has the power to remove the Petrine Primacy from the See of Rome, especially in a situation of grave and unprecedented danger to the Faith. Gänswein used the German word “Ausnahmezustandes” or “state of exception” to describe Benedict’s novel and ongoing munus of Peter/Petrine ministry. A state of exception is defined by Wikipedia as “a concept in the legal theory of Carl Schmitt, similar to a state of emergency (martial law) but based in the sovereign’s ability to transcend the rule of law in the name of the public good. This concept is developed in Giorgio Agamben’s book State of Exception…” (Agamben also wrote a book on the resignation of Benedict!)Or as Archbishop Gänswein (quoting Scotus on Mary’s Immaculate Conception) said: “Decuit, potuit, fecit.” It was fitting…God could do it, therefore he did it. In this case, so did Pope Benedict. If he truly separated the Vicarship of Christ from the Roman See, then Gänswein’s gushings over Benedict’s maneuver, at last, appear apt: “profoundly transformed,” “extraordinary courage,” “daring,” “spectacular,” “unexpected,” “a new phase,” “turning point,” “historic,” “entirely different,” “never been a step like it,” “unprecedented,” terms that fall flat describing simply a bishop’s retirement—even the bishop of Rome.

Dr. Mazza highlights that Benedict himself, in several interviews with Peter Seewald, insists he did not plainly step down:

…in Last Testament: In His Own Words, Seewald pointedly asked Benedict: “Is a slowdown in the ability to perform, reason enough to climb down from the chair of Peter?”

Pope Benedict: “One can of course make that accusation, but it would be a functional misunderstanding. The follower of Peter is not merely bound to a function; the office enters into your very being. In this regard, fulfilling a function is not the only criterion.”

“What “accusation”? What “misunderstanding”? A simple “yes,” would do. 

“But Benedict does not give a “yes” or “no” answer to this straightforward question. All the more bizarre, since his answer, in fact, must be a “yes,” or otherwise he is contradicting the very reason he gave for stepping down in his official resignation speech:

Pope Benedict: “I have come to the certainty that my strengths, due to an advanced age, are no longer suited to an adequate exercise of the Petrine office… strength…has deteriorated in me to the extent that I have had to recognize my incapacity to adequately fulfill the ministry entrusted to me. For this reason…I declare that I renounce the ministry [ministerio] of Bishop of Rome, Successor of Saint Peter… “

“But in his answer to Seewald, Benedict explains that a physical “slow-down” only affects the “functions” or “ministry” of a pope, his day-to-day tasks like any other official. But being Pope, Benedict insists, is not fundamentally about doing this or that, it’s about being. His answer is an ontological one: “the office enters into your very being,” not the “function” or “ministry,” but the office [munus]. Or as Benedict tells Seewald in 2020, the “spiritual dimension…is alone still my mandate.””

Dr. Mazza wields the sword of inductive reasoning to now explain what Benedict means by all this:

“His Holiness admits that a see cannot have two bishops. Neither is the Petrine munus divisible into one active and one contemplative member. So perhaps the solution to the “emeritus enigma” is not to conclude that Benedict has divided the Petrine munus—but that he has divided the Petrine munus from the episcopal See of Rome?

“It is of Faith that Christ conferred on St. Peter the Keys of the Primacy—but nowhere is it recorded in Scripture that Christ made him bishop of Rome. As a matter of fact, Peter first made himself bishop of Antioch before Peter made Peter bishop of Rome. As Fr. Thomas Livius wrote in his 1888 work St. Peter, Bishop of Rome: Or, The Roman Episcopate of the Prince of the Apostles:

“To say, then, that the Popes are St. Peter’s true successors, and have the Primacy by Divine Right, is to assert a Catholic truth that has been defined by the Church and belongs to her faith. But…[Christ] did not determine what were to be the conditions in concreto of such [Peter’s] true succession, but left all this to the determination of St. Peter and his successors…Even granting that the union of the Primacy with the Roman See is jure divino, the particular question may still be raised: whether a Pope, in some evidently most grave and urgent necessity, could validly separate the Primacy from the See of Rome. The solution here is not an easy one, and grave theologians may be cited on either side…”

Lastly, let us not forget Bergoglio’s own insistence of repeatedly calling himself merely Bishop of Rome, from the very beginning, on the Loggia, 13 March 2013:

“You know that it was the duty of the Conclave to give Rome a Bishop. It seems that my brother Cardinals have gone to the ends of the earth to get one… but here we are… The diocesan community of Rome now has its Bishop. Thank you! And first of all, I would like to offer a prayer for our Bishop Emeritus, Benedict XVI. Let us pray together for him, that the Lord may bless him and that Our Lady may keep him.

And now, we take up this journey: Bishop and People. This journey of the Church of Rome which presides in charity over all the churches. A journey of fraternity, of love, of trust among us. Let us always pray for one another. Let us pray for the whole world, that there may be a great spirit of fraternity. It is my hope for you that this journey of the Church, which we start today, and in which my Cardinal Vicar, here present, will assist me, will be fruitful for the evangelization of this most beautiful city.

And now I would like to give the blessing, but first – first I ask a favour of you: before the Bishop blesses his people, I ask you to pray to the Lord that he will bless me: the prayer of the people asking the blessing for their Bishop…”

Dozens of Capitol rioters say law enforcement ‘let us in’ to building, and there is plenty of video

Well yes, that’s exactly what happened. It is all on video.

As authorities continue to pursue individuals who participated in the Jan. 6 insurrection (sic) at the United States Capitol, a growing number of those charged are employing a new defense: blaming the police for letting them in.

At least 29 people arrested for their role in the Jan. 6 events have claimed they thought they were free to enter the Capitol because law enforcement authorities either didn’t stop them from coming in or never told them they were not allowed to be there, according to affidavits and court filings reviewed by ABC News.

“He was not at the front of the lines, he didn’t see barricades being knocked down…” Thomas Mayr, the lawyer for Christopher Grider, one of the people accused of participating in the riot, told ABC News. “He went through an open door.”

Grider, of Texas, is one of dozens of suspected rioters who claimed to be unaware they were not allowed inside — some of whom argued that they were actually ushered in by officers. He now faces multiple charges including violent entry and disorderly conduct on Capitol grounds.

Jacob Lewis of California told investigators he was never told that he could not enter the Capitol, and that he was “escorted” by police into the building. When reached by ABC News, Lewis said he would be releasing video footage to “back up his story.” He declined to share the video with ABC News. Lewis was indicted on four misdemeanor charges, including disorderly and disruptive conduct in a restricted building.

Even as scrutiny of Capitol police continues to build, experts say it is unlikely such a defense will work in most situations.

As has been extensively documented in this space, the entire faux insurrection was pre-planned and executed with the assistance of elected officials, Capitol and DC Metro Police, and federal agencies. This included holding doors open and providing directions. Hundreds of Antifa/BLM troops were in place at the outer perimeter hours before the Trump speech even began. After they did the dirty work, the unarmed MAGA throng followed. Following are all the links with numerous videos:

Capitol Police Chief admits riot was pre-planned with “high level of coordination”

Originally posted on

Yeah, no kidding. In fact the high level of coordination included the Capitol Police themselves. It was all a set-up, and it is all on video. Remember how they so kindly held the doors open?

Remember how DC Mayor Bowser ordered Federal law enforcement to stand down the day before?

Remember how, that very same day, the FBI had issued warning of an impending “war” at the Capitol, based on intel they had gathered?

Remember how the first defenses were breached TWENTY MINUTES before the end of Trump’s speech, and how the speech took place at a distance of 1.6 miles away from the Capitol, a thirty minute walk?

But muh impeachment for inciting a false flag insurrection that was staged and started before the speech.

In a detailed letter addressed to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, former U.S. Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund said the department “did not fail” on Jan. 6, arguing that Capitol Police did everything it could with the intelligence available beforehand, but still did not expect a group of “thousands of well-coordinated, well-equipped violent criminals” to attack law enforcement at the Capitol building.

Sund, who resigned after the insurrection, revealed that a number of those in the crowd, “were wearing radio earpieces indicating a high level of coordination,” and many also carried, “weapons, chemical munitions, protective equipment, explosives and climbing gear.”


The letter addressed to Pelosi on Feb. 1 claimed that the first 150 members of the National Guard were not sworn in on Capitol grounds on Jan. 6 until about four and half hours after Sund’s request for their support was approved by the Capitol Police Board. 

“What occurred on January 6th cannot be considered under any circumstances a protest, rally of civil disobedience. This was a well-planned, coordinated insurrection at the United States Capitol,” Sund wrote. “The USCP does not have the manpower, the training of the capabilities to handle an armed insurrection involving thousands of individuals bent on violence and destruction at all costs. Nevertheless, because of their bravery and professionalism in the face of this attack, USCP did not fail.”

“Wherein you shalt greatly rejoice:” Temptations and the Trial of Your Faith

Today is the Feast of the Chair of Saint Peter. Normally in these not normal times, we would speak of Peter as the Rock, and the critical importance of the Petrine Promises. “Thou art Rock and upon this rock I will build my Church,” Matthew 16:18; we hear this three times today, at the Gospel, Offertory, and Communion.

But today let’s focus on the Epistle from 1 Peter 1, which draws back exactly to yesterday’s lesson, on the necessity and the benefits of temptation.

Epistle I Peter 1:1-7 “Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers dispersed through Pontus, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia, elect, according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, unto the sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ. Grace unto you and peace be multiplied. Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to his great mercy hath regenerated us unto a lively hope, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead: Unto an inheritance, incorruptible, and undefiled and that cannot fade, reserved in heaven for you, Who, by the power of God, are kept by faith unto salvation, ready to be revealed in the last time. Wherein you shalt greatly rejoice, if now you must be for a little time made sorrowful in divers temptations: That the trial of your faith (much more precious than gold which is tried by the fire) may be found unto praise and glory and honour at the appearing of Jesus Christ.

Your faith is precious, and must be tried more so than gold. Spend your time free of temptation in preparation for temptation. Fight the battle that was meant for you. Apply your suffering to the Cross, and unite yourself with the grace being poured forth to you.

You were born for this!

“Blessed art thou, Simon BarJona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.” Matt 16:17-19