Saturday, June 20, 2015

Air plants

I've got a new interest: air plants, AKA Tillandsia .

Tillandsia are interesting little plants that don't require soil to grow. They get their nutrients from the air (they like it humid) and they can be mounted on pieces of wood, shells, stones, you name it. You mist them ever few days, and give them an occasional dunking in water to keep them hydrated, but they don't like sitting in water or on a wet surface - that will cause them to rot. You'll see them sometimes in little glass globes, lying on a bed or pebbles.

I was looking for a project for the autistic kids in Thomas's day program, and saw this post on Pinterest, on making air plant hangings. They looked really cute and easy, and then I spotted Tillandsia for sale at Rona Hardware for just $2.29 apiece, so I bought a bunch.

Unfortunately, we ran out of time to make the hangers, so I decided to try to use the plants myself. Dean has always liked to collect driftwood from the Rideau River; mostly hardwood (often gnawed by beavers!) which burns really well in the fireplace over the winter. But he also picks up any interesting shaped pieces and keeps them on the porch. Since Tillandsia can be mounted on wood, I decided to try to combine our interests, and put some of the plants on the wood.

Most of them are just wedged into crevices, but I wound some unobtrusive thin wire around the base of others and attached them to the back of the wood pieces. I think they turned out quite well, and I have several more I'm going to make in the future.

Here are some pictures; I put a ballpoint pen in front, to give a sense of scale. As you can see, they're small, but they have this dainty oriental feel about them, which I find quite attractive.

Monday, May 18, 2015

Braxton's Lear : Saint Bawlbaby, Pray For Us

I had intended to retire Braxton's Lear, but the trials and tribulations of Canada's own Michael Coren obliged me to resurrect it, at least for now.

Non-Canadians may not know Coren, but he is a well-known opinion writer here in the Great White North, until recently writing for the Sun newspapers, and hosting a program on the now-defunct Sun News Network. He wrote mostly on religious and moral issues, from the point of view of a conservative Catholic. I read him regularly for several years in the Ottawa Sun, and while I was not a great fan, I always considered him a reliably conservative voice, both in matters of faith and politics. I never got around to reading any of his books, but I always figured that eventually I would.

I began to feel something odd was going on with him as soon as Pope Jar-Jar was elected in 2013. I'd had an instantly dire sense of foreboding about this nobody from South America, a place of notoriously sloppy and half-assed thinking, as witness the Liberation Theology fad which easily sunk its poisonous roots into the soil. But a day or two after the election, there was Coren giddily cheering for Bergoglio, and calling him "a brilliant theologian and an orthodox but forward-thinking man, with a touch of saintliness but a will of steel." Yeah, right, I thought. He's so brilliant, nobody has ever heard of him before.

I went looking for books by this "brilliant theologian", and found the same sort of collected sermons and jottings that were the literary legacy of that equally brilliant theologian, the Madwoman of Second Avenue, Mrs. Schori. Obviously Coren knew nothing at all about Bergoglio, and was just spinning his own fantasies and passing them off as real.

From that day, his articles became increasingly bizarre, and it soon became evident that matters of sex, particularly homosexuality, were occupying an unusually large place in his mind. A year later, he published an essay on his "changing view" of homosexuality, entitled "I Was Wrong". (Same title as Jim Bakker's apologia, I couldn't help noticing.)

The obsession with homosexual stuff continued to pop up with grating frequency, so I began skipping Coren's columns, but sometime after the New Year, it struck me that I hadn't seen him published in the Sun for awhile.

Then on May 1 came the bombshell: Dean showed me a big article in the National Post announcing that Coren had converted to Anglicanism! I certainly wasn't expecting that, but a lot of pieces certainly fell into place afterwards. If you want a church that cossets homosexuals, the Anglican Church certainly is the right one to go to.

Unfortunately, this wasn't the end of the story, and since the beginning of May Coren has been tireless in his "woe-is-me" complaints about those beastly, awful, nasty, ugly conservative Catholics who just insist upon making a big deal of the fact that he treats changing his religion like changing a soiled T-shirt.

His self-pitying blubbering is on full display on his Facebook page, but now he's proudly parading it for everyone to see in Sunday's Toronto Star.
It’s been an interesting two weeks. I was fired from three regular columns in Catholic magazines, had a dozen speeches cancelled and was then subjected to a repugnant storm of tweets, Facebook comments, emails, newspaper articles and radio broadcasts where it was alleged that I am unfaithful to my wife, am willing to do anything for money, am a liar and a fraud, a “secret Jew,” that my eldest daughter is gay and I am going directly to hell. As I say, an interesting two weeks.

Imagine that! A writer who billed himself as a conservative Catholic and on that basis obtained employment with Catholic and conservative publications to write articles from a Catholic and conservative perspective reveals that he's nothing of the kind, and those hidebound grouches have the nerve to tell him they're no longer interested in publishing his opinion in their pages! And they don't want to hear his speeches either! Why on earth wouldn't Catholics want to listen to the author of "Why Catholics Are Right Nasty, Dirty, Judgmental, Homophobic Bigots"
The reason for all this probably seems disarmingly banal and for many people absurdly irrelevant. At the beginning of May it was made public that a year ago I left the Roman Catholic Church and began to worship as an Anglican. More specifically, from being a public and media champion of social conservatism I gradually came to embrace the cause of same-sex marriage, more liberal politics and a rejection of the conservative Christianity that had characterized my opinions and persona for more than a decade.

Oh, yes, totally banal and absurdly irrelevant. No different from an NDP MP quietly beginning to attend Tory caucus meetings, and failing to turn up for votes in the House of Commons. Really, who could possibly see anything to complain about there? Even though Coren himself states that this change of allegiance occurred a year ago, i.e., when he was writing in his "I Was Wrong" apology,
Thing is, I have evolved my position on this issue not in spite of but precisely because of my Catholicism. My belief in God, Christ, the Eucharist, and Christian moral teaching are stronger than ever. Goodness, I am even trying to forgive those “Christians” who are trying to have my speeches cancelled and have devoted pages on their websites and blogs to my apparent disgrace.
In other words, he was using his "Catholic" bona fides to add more weight to the hammer with which he was nailing up his 95 Theses. And some people have the nerve to be total soreheads about it! What people in particular, he's not slow to tell us:
But social media being what it is I was “outed” by some far-right bloggers
Hey, don't look at me! I never heard a word of this until I read it in that notoriously far-right rag the National Post, where Coren amiably assisted in outing himself to an obliging reporter.

More to the point, though, is Coren's sense of grievance at this exposure. What, was he intending to keep it a secret? Why? If indeed it's such a disarmingly banal and absurdly irrelevant matter, then why didn't he tell the world? He suggests that it's no more serious than an Ottawa Senators fan transferring his allegiance to the Montreal Canadiens once his home team has been knocked out of the Stanley Cup playoffs, and yet he was in effect leading a double life for a full year until May of 2015.
The change was to a large extent triggered by the gay issue. I couldn’t accept that homosexual relationships were, as the Roman Catholic Church insists on proclaiming, disordered and sinful. Once a single brick in the wall was removed the entire structure began to fall.
Of course, this is only half the story. The natural question to follow is "What made you change your mind?" and here he engages in some decidedly shifty evasions. He never does offer a real explanation of how he came to this decision. Last year, he said
In the past six months I have been parachuted into clouds of new realization and empathy regarding gay issues, largely and ironically because of the angry and hateful responses of some people to my defence of persecuted gay men and women in Africa and Russia

He also refers to "evolving" and in the Star he claims to have "gradually" changed his opinion, but with no precise explanation of what the process was, and what evidence prevailed upon him to turn against his former, very strenuously argued position. This is what led to the clouds of speculation he now complains of. In the absence of any real explanation, people speculate that he himself or some family member is homosexual (something that's turned out to be correct in other cases) and instead of telling the truth, he carries on a coy game of "I've Got A Secret" gleefully responding, "Wrong! Guess again!" His strategy seems to be to ignore any requests for an explanation, and then pretend that there's just nothing to discuss.

But on a serious note, why? Why would the religious and political change of what is at best a mid-level Canadian journalist and broadcaster cause such visceral anger and aggression in so many people?
But the shifty evasiveness and bitter resentment would look too bald if not set off by a leafy green background of bewildered innocence. So here Coren strikes a new attitude, of startled bewilderment at the wave of criticism he's encountered.
Over the years I have been attacked by various people in various camps, but I have never witnessed such an organized, personal and unkind campaign
And now that you've joined the homo lobby, you never will again, because you're safe from criticism by the totalitarian left which is bankrupting and beggaring nonconformist Christians who refuse to bend the knee to the current fascist pieties.
What has developed within the church, however, is a syndrome where people who are frightened of and angry with the world, who reject change and progress and look to a fantasy and apocryphal past age based on drunken nostalgia and personal insecurity, see a home in the conservative corridors of the house that is Roman Catholic. The Church of Nasty is thriving inside Catholicism, made all the more aggressive by a Pope who terrifies and disappoints them because he has broken through the intransigency of his two predecessors. I actually don’t believe he is quite as liberal as some people claim but the perception, at least, is that he is a reformer and to those who see change as heresy that is a terrifying prospect.

Gee, for a guy who claims to be baffled and in the dark about other people's motivations, he certainly has a lot of explanations handy. Maybe he should try taking them seriously when they tell him that they think he's an accomplished liar and probably something of a con artist.

Monday, September 01, 2014

Look who's back!

Yesterday I saw the first Monarch Butterflies of the year!  Two yesterday, and one today.

This one was a bit shy, but I got a few pictures.  It's better than last year, when we got NO Monarchs at all.  The year before there were one or two, but I think it's been about 4 years since we had that great summer with a whole flock of them.

They're coming to the Joe Pye Weed, which is one of their favourite flowers.  I have the regular plant and also a half-size one; they like both.

Wednesday, August 27, 2014

In Canada, a cat can look at a king

Mark Steyn has written quite a bit about the Imperial Presidency, and especially the Pretorian Guard-style security that's growing like a crust of armour plating over the current occupant.

 His last essay on the subject was on August 14. Two days later, we had a little bit of security theatre here in Ottawa: it was reported that someone had broken into the home of Justin Trudeau, leader of the Liberal Party, while he was away on a trip, and his wife and children were asleep in the house. Nothing was taken, but a note was left behind on a pile of knives, advising the family to lock their doors in the future.

Today we got the rest of the story. It turns out the intruder was a drunken 19-year old, who was trying to find the house of a friend who lived nearby. He didn't know whose house he was in, but when he realized he'd made a mistake, he decided to write a note of apology to the householders before leaving!

The Trudeaus left the decision of whether or not any further action should be taken up to the police, and they decided that no charges would be laid against the young man.

Although there's a certain amount of the tiresome Trudeaumania hype about this story, I thought to myself that it reflects nicely on the rather homely small-town quality of political life in Canada.

Can you imagine if the same thing had happened in Washington, DC? I'm not sure who would be the equivalent of Justin Trudeau, but maybe Hilary Clinton would do; she's sort of a "leader in waiting".

First of all, the mere idea that some boozy teenager could featherstitch his way to the back door and just walk in in the middle of the night is absurd. Of course there would be security present, who would stop him long before he got inside, very possibly killing him in the process.

And if by some miracle the drunk DID get in and then depart unmolested, the discovery of the security breach would result in armoured cars on the streets several blocks around Clinton's home, intimidating every resident or passerby.

Finally, if the culprit did as this guy did, and turned himself in after recognizing himself on video taken at the time, I'm not too sure the police wouldn't just shoot him in the interview room, to make up for not doing it at the time of the break-in. At any rate, he would swiftly find himself in the hands of the FBI and the Secret Service, and there would be no nonsense about "no further charges" or penalty other than writing a letter of apology. No, it would all be grim-faced men with guns and scowling judges, and he'd be looking at spending the next 10 years of his life in jail.

Because that's the message: "OF COURSE trespassing on the King's land is worth 10 years of your life! It's worth more, in fact; it's worth killing you for, and don't you forget it. Ever." A woman who got lost near the White House and panicked was executed in front of her baby, and the Great and the Good in Congress gave her killers a standing ovation. No action is too extreme to "send a message" about who counts and who doesn't.

So I'm glad in Canada a harmless numbskull can get loaded, blunder into a politician's house and not end up paying for it with his life.

Friday, July 18, 2014

Drying Lavender

I've got 2 lavender plants out front, and until now have never picked any of the flowers. But this year I decided to harvest some and dry the flowers because I saw an interesting recipe for Lavender Jelly.

The instructions for drying lavender are pretty simple: tie the flower stems into bunches, then hang in a warm, dry, airy, dark place. Unfortunately, finding that combination of characteristics in our house isn't that simple.

The kitchen is warm and airy and, away from the sink, dry, but it isn't dark. And the inside of a cupboard is dark, but not airy. The cellar is dark, but in the summer it's damp, cool and with little air circulation. So I came up with a compromise.

I hung the lavender bunches on a hook hanging from a shelf at the far side of the kitchen, away from the sun. To make it dark, I covered the hook with a large colander. Now it's dark, AND the air can circulate through the flowers!

I already tried it with one batch, and it worked fine:

That's 1/4 cup of flowers, about the same amount that the bunch I'm hanging now will produce. It takes about 2-3 weeks to thoroughly dry the flowers. When I have my full 1/2 cup, I'll try the recipe.

Sunday, May 04, 2014

Setting records wherever he goes

First openly homosexually partnered homosexual bishop in the Episcopal Church! First homosexually married bishop in the Episcopal Church! And now...

First homosexually divorced bishop in the Episcopal Church!

Yes, folks, it's himself, multiple winner of the Golden Hairshirt Award - Gene Robinson!!!

Recently, my partner and husband of 25-plus years and I decided to get divorced. While the details of our situation will remain appropriately private, I am seeking to be as open and honest in the midst of this decision as I have been in other dramatic moments of my life—coming out in 1986, falling in love, and accepting the challenge of becoming Christendom’s first openly gay priest to be elected a Bishop in the historic succession of bishops stretching back to the apostles.

I notice that neither his marriage nor his divorce to his female wife (the one he had several children with) made that hit parade, but he's a busy man. Those merely normal events don't typically result in headlines or your photo in the paper.

as I tell couples in pre-marital counseling, “Marriage is forever, and your relationship will endure—whether positively or negatively—even if the marriage formally ends.”

So marriage is forever... even when it ends. Oh, silly me... "formally ends." Which means what, exactly? That divorced people still have to live as though they're married, because the divorce isn't a "real" end of a marriage? Well, no, I don't think he means that. I'm pretty sure that once the divorce is final he's going to consider himself no longer married, or else what would be the point of doing it? That the marriage will still exist in the Next World, and when he gets there he'll find he's got multiple spouses stacked up? That seems a little primitive for an Episcopalian, though C.S. Lewis might have agreed. He actually thought that merely having sex with someone set up an eternal relationship between 2 people, which would have to be endured or enjoyed forever after death. I've never detected any such suggestion from Robinson, however.

Maybe after death we live in multiple dimensions, where every failed marriage exists as a success, completely separate from all the other marriages we may have contracted, and we can happily live in all these marriages simultaneously. If Robinson needs an occupation now that he's retired, perhaps he should try writing science fiction; that might be the basis of a darn good fantasy tale.

My newest, most favorite piece of bumper-sticker wisdom which I will hold onto in this in-between time is this: “In the end, all will be well. If all is not well, it is not yet the end.”

Actually, my current favourite is from 'King Lear': The worst is not, so long as we can say, "This is the worst."

(So who gets custody of the bulletproof jacket?)

(Thanks to Threadless for the great T-shirt design, which may be obtained at their website)

Monday, January 27, 2014

"I went to a funeral and all I got was this lousy Body and Blood of Christ!"

That seems to be the sentiment among Ottawa Catholics, as the Archdiocese implements new rules restricting eulogies at Catholic funerals.
The archdiocese of Ottawa will make it official next month — no more eulogies at funeral masses. A spokeswoman said the news was true, but no official comments would be made until February. A short explanation of the decision appears in the fall-winter Catholic Ottawa newsletter, written by Father Geoffrey Kerslake. He argued eulogies or words of remembrance are not an official part of Catholic funeral rites.
The reaction has been overwhelmingly negative, not to mention emotional.
Brad Lindahl contacted the Sun when he heard of the upcoming announcement. “I went to my grandfather’s funeral and there was no eulogy,” he said. “It was just basically a mass. It upsets me a bit. It’s supposed to be a celebration of life, but it just left me with an empty feeling.”

"It's supposed to be a celebration of life"? Where did that come from? It's a mass where a particular sacrament is given; it's not "supposed to be" anything other than what it is. But this is what nearly 50 years of woozy sentiment has bought the Catholic Church: a rock-hard certainty on the part of Catholics that they go to church for emotional goodies.

What isn't "a celebration of life" in the Catholic Church nowadays? Baptism, communion, wedding, RV-blessing: "Hurrah for us! We're alive!" Pope Jar-Jar has even forbidden us to be sad here in the Church of Happy-Happy-Joy-Joy!!! So I suppose it's no surprise that people are now convinced that a funeral is supposed to be some sort of performance with audience participation.

Oddly enough, people don't insist upon getting up and speaking at weddings or christenings. They know that the reception or dinner is the right place for all those reminiscences and speeches. But funerals have to allow audience participation.

The Citizen had a complete opinion piece on the subject today, and it nicely summed up the "pro-eulogy" argument.

It started off with a hagiography of the writer's late mother, just to shame anyone who might disagree with her position. If a person with these exemplary bona fides wants something, how can a mere archbishop contradict her?

Then, on to the business of the funeral eulogy itself:
My speech was not long. I didn’t cry. It was an incredibly therapeutic experience for me and my siblings, and a rare opportunity to pay real tribute to a woman of great faith who grew up in poverty and overcame it, doing much to make the world a better place.
Well, if we wait until a person's funeral to "pay real tribute" to him or her, I guess it will by its nature be "a rare opportunity". But in fact, there's no reason why appreciating a person has to be a rare occasion, and I'm sure it wasn't. I'm sure all this lady's children appreciated her very much and told her so throughout her life. What was rare was the chance to do it publicly in a church, and that's what the writer is determined to hang onto. Because it's "therapeutic". The other stuff that's supposed to be going on at a funeral, the solemn reflections on the person's journey to live with God in eternity, the things that ONLY the Church can provide, don't even appear on the radar.

The final ironic comment comes at the end:
Like many in this city who were baptized and married in the Catholic Church, I stopped attending Mass regularly years ago. I have many wonderful friends who are truly people of God — they’re the main reason I had not entirely ruled out going back to the Church. Now I have.

So although the Church did things "her way" for decades, it wasn't enough to get her to go to mass. Now that they're changing back to the way things used to be, it will effect whatever on her. She's going to keep doing what she's always been doing, only now she feels that she has an excuse.

Friday, January 10, 2014

Riding on the Humblemobile

Pope Jar-Jar gives friend a lift in the Humblemobile.
Coupled with this:
I'd say it's a good thing Father Fabian came to visit in January instead of April. It would be hard to fit two on the back of the donkey.

(Hat tip to Mundabor's Blog for Little Lambkins above)


Friday, December 27, 2013

Funny Metropolis thread

Last month, someone asked a question on the IMDb discussion board for 'Metropolis'. It didn't seem that funny, and it just sat there for over a month, until someone picked it up, and then it finally took off:

QUESTION:   Who saw this in theatres back in 27? What was your 3d experience like???

Settler11:   I still have the headache from that 3D. I think it's just a fad.

paulgray_461:   Those mahogany 3D specs weighed a lot, my friend opted for the 3D monocle which of course proved utterly pointless.

Rosabel:   Well, I wasn't there, but my friend told me that Fritz Lang himself invented the 3D effect by mounting the entire auditorium on a hydraulic platform and zooming the audience forward and backward while the action played on the screen. It's why UFA practically went bankrupt.

Spirit_Of_The_Drum:   There was a guy sitting next to me and he was using a telegraph machine, sending and receiving messages throughout most of the movie. I mean how rude! I hope he won't start some kind of ugly trend...

Wednesday, December 25, 2013

Liberal women and their unworthy families

Stuart Schneiderman at "Had Enough Therapy?" writes about the latest affront among indignant feminists:
A woman wrote to Carolyn Hax at the Washington Post with this problem:
I was at a wedding recently where family members kept coming up to me and asking me why I wasn’t married and if I had a boyfriend. I’m a 34-year-old single woman and these relatives hadn’t seen me in a few years. I was really uncomfortable with the incessant questioning. What is a good response when people ask intrusive questions regarding your relationship status? I am really still angry at how rude and insensitive the relatives were and I don’t really plan to go to another family wedding because of this. Am I being too sensitive/overreacting? I see no excuse — I have never gone up to a married couple and asked them why they didn’t have children or something similar, so I don’t see how this behavior is excusable and why I should have to put up with it.
Here, a number of this woman’s relations, people she never sees outside of weddings, ask her why she is attending the event unaccompanied. The woman in question believes that the questions are intrusive. She is so angry and offended that she plans to boycott all future family weddings.
As the doctor points out, the "Am I overreacting?" suggestion is just a rhetorical feint, to establish the writer's bona fides as a thoughtful type who's willing to look at things from all sides and give the benefit of the doubt. It certainly doesn't extend to disturbing the satisfying halo of aggrieved resentment hovering over her head.
One hates to mention it, but these relatives—I suspect that they are female relatives—are asking these questions at a wedding. At a wedding one’s thoughts often fly ahead to the next wedding. It is not abnormal or insulting.
That was my first thought. "Spread the wealth!" Instead of demanding an explanation for her singleness, they're trying to stretch the good-luck mantle to cover her too. "One wedding leads to another" is an old saying. She's assuming that they know the truth already, when they really might not (she doesn't see them very often). They might be expecting to hear her say that she DOES have a boyfriend, and then they can happily start speculating on when the next family wedding might happen. Once all that enthusiasm has been revved up, people want to keep the party going. Of course, instead of boycotting family events altogether, she might decide to just restrict herself to funerals. That gives rise to a different set of assumptions and trains of thought, and she might be spared her relatives' impudent wishes for her happiness.
Her relatives are not intending to pry. They are expressing concern about her singlehood and would prefer to hear some good news about her. To their minds that means hearing that she has a boyfriend, or a reasonable facsimile. Within a certain culture a woman’s being single is a sign of independence and autonomy, something to be celebrated. Within most cultures it elicits expressions of concern.
I remember the leadup to my sister's 25th highschool class reunion. She was telling a coworker - a lady from the Philippines - that she was a bit nervous about going back and meeting all the people she'd known in high school. She was wondering how her life would compare to that of the people she'd known as a kid. "Ah, yes," her friend sympathized. "You nervous. You no married, no children..." My sister was stunned into silence. "At least you not fat," added the lady comfortingly.

Tuesday, December 24, 2013

It's Decembertime!

My sister sent me this link to a very funny CBC radio satire on politically correct people who are always offended at this time of the year (5:08 mins):

I was thinking that this COULD be a jab at a current campaign to bring back the "Merry Christmas" expression instead of the insipid "Happy Holidays" that's replaced it. But let's face it, we all know who the people are who are ALWAYS finding something to feel offended by at Christmas, and it's not people who like to say 'Merry Christmas'.

Sunday, October 13, 2013


Emma came into our room today to tell me about a phone conversation she'd just had with her friend Oliver.  They'd been discussing feminism, and she was assuring him that she was NOT one of those women who see men as the enemy.  Why, some of her best friends were guys! 

"And then there's my dad..."  She was trying for a word between "definition" and "illustration" and came out with "... who's the ideal defecation of a decent human being!"

After I'd laughed long and hard, she said to me, red as a peony, "You're going to tell Dad about this, aren't you?" 

"Of course I have to tell him," I answered.  "He'll probably want to use it himself!"

Sunday, August 25, 2013

Damson plums again

We finished picking the damson plums today.  I'd picked about half the plums on the tree during the past week, and just kept them in the fridge.  Today we got out the ladder and climbed up to get the rest.

It came to 10 lbs altogether, which is much better than I expected.  Last year, the tree was badly afflicted with canker and plum cucurlios, so I pruned it back HARD, by about 1/3 at least.  I wasn't really expecting much of anything from the tree this year, thinking it needed to recuperate.  But considering that last year we got 18 lbs., this is a pretty good yield.  And best of all, the tree is pretty healthy this year, with just a few small growths here and there, and not much fruit drop.

It's supposed to rain tonight and tomorrow, so I think I'll make the jam then; might get about 2 dozen jars.  If we ever have to go survivalist, we'll have lots of plum jam and marmalade to survive on!

Saturday, August 24, 2013

The Age of Miracles and Wonders

I read this story a day or two ago, and am not sure just what to make of it.

"God told me" to step down, the pope emeritus was quoted as saying by a visitor who met him recently, Zenit said in a report in Italian media on Wednesday.

The 86-year-old Benedict XVI, who has retained his papal name, now lives in a former monastery inside the Vatican walls and has made no public appearances.
He only very rarely meets with visitors, Zenit said.

But Benedict was quoted by Zenit as saying he had a "mystical experience" in which he received a divine message that fostered the "absolute desire" to be with God in private prayer.

Read more:
I've never approved of Benedict's resignation, and the idiocy of his successor has done nothing to reconcile me to it.

But I can't outright dismiss this story; there must be some basis for it, as I don't think any reporter would fabricate such a claim. 

So Benedict may have made such a claim.  Did it really happen?  I don't know.  He really wanted to resign, and people can convince themselves that what they want is what ought to be.  A Pope should be able to distinguish his own wishes from God's will, but humans are fallible and he may have talked himself into thinking that God was telling him to resign.

On the other hand, he might have received a vision of some kind; it's happened before.  However, I don't trust this report's interpretation of the matter, as it is clearly proposing a cause and effect situation:  "God told me to quit.  I did.  Francis is such a dazzling success that it proves that my resignation was God's will.  Hurrah!"

God could have told him to quit, but it doesn't follow that it was to shower the Catholic Church with even greater blessings.

I think the mystical message from God was "Time's up."  We've squandered our last chance, and now we're going to suffer.  It starts with the election of Francis, the Gutter Pope, and it will end with the collapse of the Church and its return to the catacombs.

And Benedict will have to suffer too, for his shrinking and dilatoriness.  He was made Pope to do a job, to conquer the evil that started with Vatican II, and he flinched.  He wanted things to be done pleasantly and politely, with gentle suggestions and loving hints.  The Enemy just laughed at him and refused to play along.  Now time has run out.

This is why God didn't do what he usually does when it's time for a new pope: end the life of the incumbent.  No, Benedict has to pay for his failure, and it's already started: he's seeing the destruction of even his rare success, Summorum Pontificum and his attempt to restore the liturgy.  Typically, it was done in a cautious, tentative manner, in the vain hope that softly murmuring instead of forcefully commanding would reconcile the modernist maniacs to losing.  Nope.  They waited him out, and now they've got the pope they want, who'll give them back everything Benedict tried to take away, and more.