Jane’s Revenge, a violent Marxist revolutionary group already being investigated for terrorist activities and for their plans already being enacted for terrorist activities, has stated that it wants to make the insurance risk-retention companies of their victims tired of backing institutions which are pro-life, like those who peacefully and joyfully provide diapers and baby formula[!] to (expectant) mothers (and fathers!), as well as those who provide peaceful and joyful instruction on God’s desire that we respect life from natural conception to natural death. Wait… What…? Making risk retention and insurance companies give up on clients? That’s some very serious forethought.
The reaction of the Catholic bishops is to provide their own security programs of their own risk retention insurance self-funded companies.
Programs are extremely top heavy, with emphasis on the ongoing documentation of synod of synodality style blah-blah, with so many levels of admitted CYA paper-trail oversight of oversight of oversight (literally), that the stated outcome, security, is a goal to which one never arrives, for one has made an esoteric perfection of bureaucracy into the avowed, determined, archenemy of the good. The program could literally generate thousands of pages of CYA documentation every week. Every week.
For the sake of CYA, the security team is itself made to seem like the enemy, necessarily so inept that disallowance of the 2nd amendment in all cases is highly recommended. CYA must turn terrorist aggression into the fault of the security team. I’ve already written a critique on this aspect of this same program here: Church-security gun-policies that want us to throw Molotov cocktails at active shooters
It’s so bad that the only people who would sign up to effect church security under such conditions would be the same ones who would say that any security whatsoever is an unfair affront to the entitled feelings of mass shooters, which effrontery is only what ol’ meanies do.
The programs are seemingly so purposed in their malice that they read like a manual of a secular North-East Virginia school board on how to destroy education while shooting down concerns of parents by using Merrick Garland over at the Department of Justice to call parents terrorists, parents who only want that their children are not super-sexualized by aggressive pedophilic groomers as soon as the kids are signed up for Kindergarten. In other words, the security team will be made up of Marxists ready at any second to protect the activity of mass shooters as they wipe out everyone in church, you know, by asking the mass shooters if they would like to dialogue over coffee and donuts even before the Mass is over.
What these programs hold up as the most effective structuring of the conversation is Critical Race Theory, CRT social-engineering, which in and of itself helps to promote the creation of mass shooters, and this time with authority of a respected security team which has a divine mandate, coming from a church as it does.
It’s not that the bishops are stupid. This really seems to be cynical malice on steroids and cocaine. It’s like the (Cardinal) (arch)bishops giving Holy Communion to Joey Biden and Nancy Pelosi while they come up to receive Holy Communion even while busy picking their teeth with the ribs of aborted babies. We’re not supposed to judge the interior souls of others; I’m just judging what’s presented on the outside. What the pro-abortion politicians do necessitates that they be barred from Holy Communion. The (Cardinal) (arch)bishops say otherwise. That seems like full-on anti-Christ malice. Why should a church security program from these (Cardinal) (arch)bishops be devoid of such seeming malice from hell?
Let’s go through a list of hazards that is said might well indicate a level of concern regarding mass shooters, hazards which the security team is to use for their ongoing training and readiness and mind-set. Here’s a screen shot, which will be followed by my own analysis:
Sorry for technical terms, but this list is a perfect example of “values clarification”, a pedagogical technique meant to deceive those already self-subjected to media-induced availability bias. For example, people think that legal tools of self-defense legally acquired by citizens in good standing are the reason why criminals should not be penalized for criminal usage of the same tools illegally obtained for violent purposes. That’s how powerful availability bias and “values clarification” is.
Let’s analyze that list of the bishops’ fears. Risk retention insurance policies, by definition, are marketed by fear. Let’s get into this:
High crime area: I’d like to see real stats on that. Do purposed mass shooters come from high crime areas so that mass shooters are just your normal criminals doing up some recreational shooting above and beyond their day-to-day criminality? Have we ever seen that even once? Or is it that mass shooters, wherever they are from, can go to whatever place for which they have some kind of emotional connection, or the place that is the softest target, the most ideologic target for whatever sociopathy weirdness swirls in their heads? Was the Fort Hood guy living in a high crime area? Was the Las Vegas guy living in a high crime area? Some, of course, like the Uvalde shooter, do have difficult backgrounds and are deeply troubled individuals, highly conflicted. But are such people only to be found in high crime areas? This is misleading, a distraction and, just my opinion, it is an attempt NOT to solve the problem because of purposely analyzing the problem incorrectly. Fear is not rational, and the creators of the program know this, right? They do it for money, right? Try out this statement (which is the attitude which will come across):
- “We’re afraid that you’re a potential mass shooter because you live in a high crime area!”
I think we can call this a self-fulfilling prophesy, a license to kill by proxy, and getting paid for it, because with a program like this you’re creating fear, which is, again, always the most successful marketing strategy for risk-retention programs. They gotta love the death and destruction. $$$
But here’s the truth: by far the vast majority of people in high crime areas are super-decent people, kind and caring, real believers, who are suffering in their circumstances, sick of the aggression created by lenient district attorneys and liberal mayors. Most people in high crime areas simply want those in the church to be in solidarity with them. If some thug’s mom is going to church it’s not likely that he’s going to be shooting up the church. If the priest is giving Last Rites to some gangbanger’s mom at his own house, do you think he’s going to go and shoot up the church. No. But some idiots at church saying that all those living in high crime areas are potential mass shooters because of living in a high crime area is counterproductive. More programs are sold, more $$$ pocketed.
Demographics: Seriously? This is left generalized so that the security team has to read into “demographics” whatever they want. But whatever they read into “demographics” its going to be wrong. Demographics include consideration of age, gender, race, marital status, number of children, occupation, annual income, education level, homeowner or renter or homeless, political affiliation, religious affiliation, nationality, disability status, etc. We’ll get to poverty in just a bit, as it’s specifically named further down on the list. But I guess it has to be said: making a risk assessment about relative dangers of any of these or other categories that the security team has pulled out of it’s own prejudice is the kind of attitude that is going to create active shooters in the first place:
- “You have been put on the most-possibly-a-mass-shooter-list because you’re black!”
This is, by definition, absolutely unapologetically in-your-face racist, Marxist CRT on steroids, and with a divine mandate, and with the adjunct authority of a security group. Outside of abortion especially targeting one particular race, this is about the most racist and disruptive thing one can do:
- “We have a lot of black people in this neighborhood, so we have to be extra cautious. We need a one-to-one ratio of spotters for those dangerous black people.”
That this attitude would issue from a church, with a security team led by the pastor is either insane or very cynical, and greedy, creating fear and racism for money in selling the program. $$$
Also, just to say, we know that so very many of the heavy hitting terrorists are well educated, perhaps have families, and are likely at the top of their game in whatever it is they do, like gambling, or as university professors. Remember that guy in Las Vegas? Remember the September 11, 2001 terrorists? Sociopaths are not suffering from low IQs. They are quite consistently very high on quotient scales of intelligence. It’s just that there are currents which run deep regardless of demographics. The “demographics” thing is missing the point. After all these years, blaming demographics seems to be about as malicious as it gets in purposely missing just who it is that is going to commit a mass shooting. As it is, and just to state what is ironic and should be obvious: the guy most likely to do a mass shooting is the guy who judges that because of certain demographics it’s gotta be those other people who are a danger to existence, surely – it’s them! not me! – you know, like the Buffalo mass shooter. It makes any buyer of this risk retention program feel good about being the hero and pointing the finger at others. Then there are more mass shooters and “we haven’t been able to figure out any motive.” That’s social-engineering demographics for you. Murder by the proxy you created.
Let’s just say it: this isn’t about demographics; this is about behavior.
- It’s about stopping the threat of the guy walking up to the church with a stick of dynamite lit up and wildly sparking and smoking in the one hand, and is already shooting at you with his gun in the other hand.
- It’s about keeping an eye on the guy in the massive winter coat looking like he’s hiding a rifle while it’s 110 degrees outside and there’s a Biden-caused power outage that has shut down the air-conditioning on the inside. Forget the demographics.
Events after normal hours of operation: Just about every important event at church is accomplished “after normal hours of operation.” That’s how churches operate. Thus, the logic here inescapably equates office hours with “normal hours of operation,” you know, “bank hours”, nine to five, minus lunch breaks. We are therefore to assume that safety is all good on campus when the secretary is working on say, budgeting risk retention insurance company payments. Just a little overconfidence there, methinks.
- Are we to risk assess late evening or super-early hours of Adoration because those are not held within “normal hours of operation”? Those are supererogatory, right? How many liberal pastors are there who even have Holy Hours at all? None? Let’s risk-assess those Holy Hours unto “normal hours of operation.” And then they won’t exist at all. No risk there.
- How about risk assessing varying hours of funerals and weddings and baptisms, usually on Saturdays, not during normal hours of operation? Should we just refuse to do such things unless done during “normal hours of operation”?
- How about risk assessing the always dangerous fish fry? All those non-Catholics fellowshipping with Catholics during non-office hours. DANGEROUS!
- How about risk assessing the Saturday Vigil Mass, which happens to be the “Spanish Mass” filled with Mexicans. Oooo! Mexicans! Be afraid! Be very afraid! And, in the Winter, it’s night! Ooo! Night! Let’s reschedule that Mass to normal hours of operation, say, Monday at 10:00 AM, when most of our Spanish speakers, men and women, are hard at work. Mass shooter probability is therefore lowered to non-existent, right? No risk in that risk retention. Problem solved. Money raked in. $$$
- And how about that early “English Mass” up across the mountain at Prince of Peace, on a Sunday morning, when all good risk retention insurance company desk-jockeys are sound asleep, not office hours? It’s Graham County. That’s already too dangerous even during normal hours of operation. We don’t even have an office on campus. Guess we’ll have to get rid of that.
- And how about that ever so Traditional Mass at Holy Redeemer on a Sunday Morning? Same thing, right? All good risk retention vendors are still asleep, because it’s safest just not to get out of bed ever, except to do risk retention manipulations during banking hours, right? $$$
To be scared is to be without love. And that’s the attitude that creates active shooters. If anyone knew that events were being cancelled so as to avoid mass shooters, that’s precisely what will create a mass shooter who’s upset that the entire church and parish wasn’t cancelled from the get-go. He knows, because of this, that such a church is the softest target ever.
I’m trying to think how a pastor paying for a program that actually makes people more afraid could actually be a selling point of the program… think… think… think… I know. This is about pastors who are scared to get out from behind their office-hours desks, those who are surrounded by a series of offices with other people in the way of any shooter first, you know, so that they can hide under their desks.
Shutting down everything outside of office hours will make them feel like they’ve “done something.” This is the shut-it-all-down-because-of-Covid mentality that so many congratulate themselves for having. They are tough. They are the heroes.
Food pantries and homeless shelters: Here we go: the poor. So, the poor are singled out apart from the demographics as having to be assessed for especially being a danger as mass shooters just because they are poor? Really? Who are the freakoid monsters who wrote such things for church security? This is hateful. This has to be some elite, filthy rich, entitled Marxist college kid writing this for a church risk retention group with full satire directed against the church. Does some (arch)diocese actually use this execration? For shame. This is exactly the kind of attitude which very directly and very immediately right now creates mass shooters on behalf of, say, the Marxist Jane’s Revenge in the first place:
- “You have to be dangerous as a probable mass shooter and we have proof because, like, you’re poor! We have a whole sub-team watching you! We’re scared of you! Really scared! You’re like bad and evil. You know it! We know it! STOP MAKING US AFRAID!”
What kind of person, what kind of priest, what kind of (Cardinal) (arch)bishop would take this statement on board without even blinking? And anyway, just because someone is hungry or needs a place to stay doesn’t mean that they are likely to be mass shooters; it just means they are hungry or need a place to stay. Jesus, Mary and Joseph, anyone? This is about the risk retention crowd thinking that their customers are filled with fear of people who are hungry and who need a place to stay, poor people, so that their instruction is: “Those who are hungry and need a place to stay are likely mass shooters.”
I’ll tell you what, the guy in the parish whom I most trust with my life is the most dirt poor guy in the parish. This is literally true. But the risk retention crowd capitalize on fear devoid of love. What does that say about the state of our (Cardinal) (arch)bishops and priests and those effecting this type of program?
Large amounts of cash or offerings: That‘s clever to slip in a push for having electronic collections, that is, people giving by a credit card app. No cash at all. But we have visitors. Lots of them. None of them will be signed up for any credit card app. Some want to be anonymous. Cash only. And anyway, money, I don’t care how much, is not the draw of any mass shooter. That’s the last thing they are concerned about. They figure they are going to die anyway. So why is money brought up for this program? It’s about not naming the real problem, which is the attitude with which the rest of these assessment of danger categories are presented. It’s that lying fear mongering attitude which creates active shooters in the first place. I mean, if it were actually the case that mass shooters were interested in money (never), you’d meet them at the door with a bucket of money and they would go away. But no. They’re going shoot you, then throw your money to the winds, and then they’re going to go in and shoot up the rest of the church. And then they’re going to get shot or shoot themselves. They don’t care about money. Why’s that? Because you’ve also just proven to them that they are worth nothing themselves, just a bucket of money, and that God doesn’t want them at all. They are trash, for eternity. They are only good for buying their own removal from the property.
Counseling that could be confrontational: This is surely a comment about the risk retention group thinking that priests are bad and evil, say, in the Confessional, if they do not accept as repentant those who say that they know better than God and they fully intend to keep “sinning” so as to lead the church into the niceness of continuous “sin.” If the priest doesn’t acquiesce, he’s being confrontational, and such controversy needs to be assessed. In other words, the Church is not to be a sign of contradiction with Jesus’ Cross, and the Church is instead to dumb-down doctrine and morality and instruction on the spiritual life and the Liturgy because dumbing down all that is good and holy will somehow cut down on mass shootings…. um… I’ll tell you what, it is when the church does not take people deadly seriously as Christ took us all deadly seriously that creates mass shooters in the first place. People actually want to hear “Repent and do not sin again.” If the Church were to say, “Go ahead and sin and then go to hell because I don’t care and you shouldn’t care either,” that’s when mass shooters are created in the first place.
Again, this church security team program was sent out to pastors everywhere after a spate of mass shootings and right when the FBI and then DHS upped the threat assessment for terrorism in churches and right before the cause of that threat assessment, which is reaction to the SCOTUS decision on abortion. No time to analyze the program. Just put it into action, doing something! But the program causes the problem, which sells more programs. RICO, anyone?
Television or web-based ministry where a person is frequently monitoring your safety/security teams’ position and activities:
There’s no talk of monitoring the congregants. This sounds likes it’s a public broadcast so common after idiot Covid-lockdowns of churches. Everyone is proud to be able to continue to use their tech savvy salvation beyond Covid era lockdowns. Pastors who locked everyone out of the sacraments can congratulate themselves that were right to do this from the beginning.
If it is public, that means that the position and activities of safety/security teams are also being monitored by mass shooters, who are thus being provided with up-to-the-second tactical information right up until the moment of catastrophe.
If this is closed circuit, and envisioned, as stated, to be utilized with merely frequent monitoring, this seems to refer not to anyone on any security team actively directing team members concerning possible threats, but rather to a secretary in the office with a wall monitor with a dozen camera shots opened on screen, overlapping each other, and who is busy with other things in the office, like googling cartoons to put in the next parish bulletin. That secretary will look up every hour or two, after going to the bathroom, getting another cup of coffee, maybe a donut.
Everything in this program favors the viability of mass shooters being successful in killing as many as possible. I mean, think of it. Cameras for, say, televising a Mass are going to give a good view of the altar, a good view of the pulpit. That’s it, except for the occasional panning of the congregation by Cathedral sized media operations, but not of any place in the church where security personnel would be, such as under a choir loft, or merely next to a camera in the choir loft, or behind a corner to the far sides of the sanctuary, manning the side-doors.
Just to say, if it’s on the internet, it’s wide open to the ubiquitous hackers. Easy peasy. Really. The security cameras of our own police station were hacked and being controlled from off campus, including the saved files being looped, even as officers, surprised, watched the monitor. What is it that’s being watched? Is it real time or a loop?
When it comes to actual real-time security, know this: complex=death; simple=life.
But this isn’t about saving peoples’ lives. This is about proving in court by saved footage that security teams were doing their best to be at the ready. Such proof means that it will be extremely unlikely that those suing the church for lack of care because a loved-one got shot up will be successful. The risk retention company is saved, meaning $$$ have been saved.
The reality is that risk retention groups are rarely going to pay one thin dime to anyone.
The reality is that the family of anyone getting shot up by some mass shooter is instantaneously going to get all the help they need on all levels from everyone in the parish and far beyond.
The reality is that we have the second amendment, and people need to use it. That’s the duty of care: respect and use the second amendment.
Do we have a security team? Yes. Do we instruct the congregation how things are likely to go down and what they are to do in our little tiny church, in our own unrepeatable circumstances? Frequently. Do we consult with law enforcement and have guys on hand who know what they are doing. Yep.
But the massive program of the bishops? No.
Again, no one who is competent will want anything whatsoever to do with such a program. It is made for bureaucrats who are scared of themselves, who want to congratulate themselves with more bureaucracy, that they’ve “done something.”
Doing something also includes prayer, the Rosary, the Guardian Angel prayer, a Saint Joseph prayer…