Wednesday, July 31, AD 2013





I have not been among those who have had concerns about Pope Francis.  This, however, gives me pause:

The decree installs an apostolic commissioner – in the person of the Capuchin Fidenzio Volpi – at the head of all the communities of the congregation of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate.

And this in itself is cause for astonishment. Because the Franciscans of the Immaculate are one of the most flourishing religious communities born in the Catholic Church in recent decades, with male and female branches, with many young vocations, spread over several continents and with a mission in Argentina as well.

They want to be faithful to tradition, in full respect for the magisterium of the Church. So much so that in their communities they celebrate Masses both in the ancient rite and in the modern rite, as moreover do hundreds of religious communities around the world – the Benedictines of Norcia, to give just one example – applying the spirit and the letter of the motu proprio “Summorum Pontificum” of Benedict XVI.

But precisely this was contested by a core group of internal dissidents, who appealed to the Vatican authorities complaining of the excessive propensity of their congregation to celebrate the Mass in the ancient rite, with the effect of creating exclusion and opposition within the communities, of undermining internal unity and, worse, of weakening the more general “sentire cum Ecclesia.”

The Vatican authorities responded by sending an apostolic visitor one year ago. And now comes the appointment of the commissioner.

But what is most astonishing are the last five lines of the decree of July 11:

“In addition to the above, the Holy Father Francis has directed that every religious of the congregation of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate is required to celebrate the liturgy according to the ordinary rite and that, if the occasion should arise, the use of the extraordinary form (Vetus Ordo) must be explicitly authorized by the competent authorities, for every religious and/or community that makes the request.”

The astonishment stems from the fact that what is decreed contradicts the dispositions given by Benedict XVI, which for the celebration of the Mass in the ancient rite “sine populo” demand no previous request for authorization whatsoever:

Continue reading...

13 Responses to Troubling

  • I too was worried about this, but right after I got worried I stopped and said, I should know better when there is an implicit Good Pope Bad Pope narrative (in either direction).

    If it turns out you don’t like the proceedings, know that they were initiated under ++Benedict. Francis is just finishing the job. So whatever this is, it is bigger than a particular pontiff’s whims and fancies.

    A Franciscan Friend knows about this congregation, and although while not having read the visitation reports, tells me there were efforts being made to incorporate particular orders of Mass into the very charism of the order. He told me that was totally absurd and wrong, and was asking for deep trouble. So basically this was an intra congregational disciplinary issue.

    I know squat about religious order canon law et al, so I may have botched the paraphrasing of his explanation somewhat. But remember, ++Benedict apparently thought there a big enough concern to start this process.

  • The “core group” of dissidents (some reports say six, others nine) are a very small minority; all are from the United States and at least one has subsequently left the order. In dealing with what appears to be a local problem the Pope has seen fit to override article 2 of Summorum Pontificum in respect of all the friars world-wide. As a result, the priests of the FFI no longer have the same rights as all other priests, both regular and secular. The contemplative sisters at Lanherne in Cornwall, who decided when they set up their community that they would use only the older books, and learned to sing the entire Office from scratch, will need to find a priest from another order, or a secular priest, to celebrate Mass for them.

    This heavy-handedness with regard to those attached to the Usus Antiquior was a feature of the last decade of Paul VI’s reign, and it is why the SSPX is ‘outside’ the Church, and any number of de facto heretics are still ‘inside’ it, and likely to remain so.

  • I love the latin mass. Is it not possible that those who are so insistent on using any mass but the ordinary are acting out of ego and need to feel special or exclusionary and Pope Franceis seeing that it has become a source of friction and disunity has acted responsibly?

  • James, possible but improbable. Groups like the FSSP and ICKSP which use only the older books (including for their ordinations) are not seen as a threat since they keep the Usus Antiquior ‘corralled’. Parish priests and even bishops who mostly use the Novus Ordo but celebrate the Vetus Ordo occasionally similarly pose no real threat. But here we have a new and rapidly growing movement which celebrates in both forms but which is showing a marked tendency, as individuals and communities, to prefer the Mass and Office as it was in 1962 over the revised form, even though the latter can be done exclusively in Latin, thus preserving a lot of the traditional elements. If this is allowed to continue unchecked, and if the Old Rite is seen to be attracting young men to the priesthood (and there is growing evidence that it is) then it will over time undermine the Novus Ordo. I suspect that this might be the opening salvo in a long campaign. Pope Francis doesn’t want to further divide the Church or be a recruiting sergeant for the SSPX, but he has an authoritarian streak which was absent in Benedict, and which could be a good or a bad thing. Who is advising him? Is anyone? Merry del Val, thou shouldst be living at this hour!

  • “…undermine the Novus Ordo.” What does that mean? I’m asking with a very genuine tone. I am a member of a private facebook group of women, half of whom are not only devoted to the EF, but hate the OF. It does get tiring to listen to rants about those of us who consider ourselves faithful Catholics, and enjoy the OF. There are even a few SSPX people there that don’t believe they’re not in line with the Magisterium. That being said, I’ve never been to the EF, so I don’t know what I’m missing (apparently), but I don’t have an interest in it. I do see, however, a prevalent attitude that OF Catholics can’t be devout, and we all wear tank tops & short shorts to mass. Again, I’m not trying to be defensive. I’m just wondering what “…undermine the Novus Ordo” means. I don’t really understand the conspiracy theories about how the Vatican wants to oppress the EF.

  • Missy, I entirely agree with you. The Novus Ordo, Ordinary Form, whatever you want to call it, is the form of Mass most Catholics attend, and most priests celebrate. I have met people who would not attend an EF Mass celebrated by a priest who also celebrates the NO, or go to a church which has ever allowed a celebration of the NO, and as far as I am concerned they represent the lunatic fringe. Examined textually, the NO is obviously not the classic Roman Rite and in fact was never intended to be simply a revision of it; that does not render it invalid, nor even without certain merits.

    However, it admits a wide variety of languages, styles of celebration, and musical accompaniment that the classic Roman Rite quite simply does not (which is not to say that the latter is entirely uniform, particularly as far as music is concerned). What is more worrying is that it (the Novus Ordo) also seems to attract liturgical abuses, some of which were retrospectively authorized by the Vatican (Communion in the hand, women in the sanctuary) but some which continue despite having been formally reprobated (departure from the text, misuse of EMHC).

    The problem with the classic Roman Rite is that its continued existence challenges a lot of assumptions and prejudices. Since we now know it was never abrogated (and arguably never could have been) it stands as an objective standard against which a rite of recent manufacture must measure itself. It stands in fact as a contradiction, which is why many of the V2 generation in clerical positions oppose it so strongly.

  • Or maybe this is an example of this pope’s attempt to step in early and prevent any authoritative conflicts from building …. rather than seeing them go astray and trying to pull them back in later (as has happened to often). The fact it is an orthodox group may not be the issue ??

  • Missy – There’s a lot of confirmation bias in this. A lot of people when they hear the words “Novus Ordo” picture the three worst abuses they ever witnessed (or heard about indirectly).

    I currently attend an ordinary-form Mass. I attend it mostly for the convenience of the time and location, but also a little bit for the sacrifice. For myself, church-hopping leads to a bad way of thinking. There’s something to be said for obedience.

    If I were pope, I think I would have handled this Franciscan congregation differently. Perhaps that’s why the Holy Spirit aggressively campaigned against me becoming pope. Again, for me, it becomes an issue of obedience.

  • The last time I flat-out called something a papal mistake was when John Paul approved of altar girls. I still think I was right on that, but I feel less comfortable criticizing the Pope these days. Or maybe I’ve just gotten used to having a pope that I didn’t believe was wrong in practical matters. The next years may prove to be a real test for me. But always I think about the way dissidents have handled themselves lately and I want to make sure that I never scandalize anyone the way they have.

  • Pinky, I had the misfortune to live through the papacy of Paul VI and saw not only the collapse of the liturgy but in the years 1968-1978 a Church in free-fall. The Vatican’s treatment of such loyal sons of the Church as Cardinal Mindszenty and Archbishop Lefebvre was worse than shameful. Although the truth didn’t emerge until the early years of this century, those years saw the peak of clerical sex abuse. When Paul referred to the “fumo di Satana” in 1972 he must have been acutely aware that it happened on his watch, and was ultimately his responsibility. He was a truly tragic figure, a man of great ability who was the victim of his own indecisiveness. It just shows how difficult the top job is. Pope Francis needs our prayers.

  • 1. Thanks for the post Don and link to Father Z’s analysis.
    2. Thanks for raising some interesting points of discussion, Missy.
    3. Thanks for the excellent insights shared by John Nolan and Pinky.

  • The New Revised Edition of the New American Bible had to be revised because of the horrid translations. The Catechism of the Catholic Church had to be revised because of the horrid interpretation of the Doctrine of the Faith. It seems that although Pope Francis has the authentic authority over the Franciscans of the Immaculate to direct their progress, The Latin Mass was never banned, the faithful are entitled to the TRUTH, the Last Supper was said in Aramaic, the language Jesus spoke, and Latin is the most accurate translation of the Holy Scripture, Pope Francis will give liberal approval of the use of the Latin Mass. No more will the faithful suffer the insult of being referred to as “a thing” as in the use of the pronouns “that” and “which” and “it”. God created them male and female. God, the Supreme Sovereign Being is a person, Jesus is a person and God, the Holy Spirit, is a person. Persons are referred to as “Him” and “Her” and “WHO”, never “that” and “which” and “it”. It is correct to say: “He placed the child in their midst”. The most horrendous consequence of calling a person by the incorrect pronoun is that the rational, immortal soul of the human being is omitted. If the dignity of the human person, body and soul, is to be acknowledged, if the unalienable rights of the sovereign person are to be acknowledged, only “he”, “she” and “who” may be used, Otherwise, “that”, “which” and “it”, reduce the human person to collateral, chattel, and animal.

  • Pingback: More on the Crackdown on the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate | The American Catholic

Today Detroit, Tomorrow Chicago?

Wednesday, July 31, AD 2013





I view Detroit and its bankruptcy as a harbinger of things to come.  The blue state social model of ever higher taxes, ever expanding benefits for members of public employee unions and one party rule by the Democrat party is coming to an end.  The ending will be painful for people luckless enough to live in blue states, as I do, but this parasitical form of government ultimately destroys the private economy host it feeds on.  Walter Mead at Via Meadia has been prescient in seeing this:


It looks like Detroit may yet have competition for the distinction of America’s most poorly run city. The unprecedented triple-drop in Chicago’s bond rating and the city’s shiny new long-term debt figure—$29 billion—should have pols quaking in their boots. The Chicago Sun-Times has published some distressing numbers from Chicago’s recent audits:

In addition to the pension, law enforcement, and emergency response concerns that remind us of a certain bankrupt city across the lake, the report notes that three of Chicago’s four largest private employers (JP Morgan, Accenture LLP, and Northern Trust) are in finance. It seems like blue cities have a codependent relationship with the one percenters progressives claim to hate.

It hasn’t all hit the fan quite yet, but Chicago seems perilously close to real trouble. The city is all out of money, and with an imploding public education system and harrowing levels of violence, it is losing residents fast. Illinois, which itself lost more than 800,000 people to out-migration in the past two decades, is essentially Chicago on a larger scale, with hundreds of billions in unfunded pension liabilities and complete political sclerosis. The state cannot bail out Chicago, and judging by the feds’ reluctance to even lift a finger for Detroit, Chicago shouldn’t expect much more.

Continue reading...

7 Responses to Today Detroit, Tomorrow Chicago?

  • To be more precise, you have several problems in Detroit (in particular) and other cities.

    1. A deficit of institutions encompassing the whole of the metropolitan settlement.

    2. Suboptimal placement of service provision in the architecture of local government (e.g. police departments placed with municipal governments as opposed to county governments).

    3. Intra-metropolitan migration patterns which leave the slum neighborhoods (with their special problems and denuded tax base) concentrated in the core municipality. Detroit presents a special case of a municipality which is all slum.

    4. Public policy at all levels corrupted by the notion that the purpose of public agency is to sluice income to clients of the Democratic Party and (in general) to be convenient to the employees of said agency. (The Republican Party is amply supplied with otiose characters and sleazy careerists who are happy to be accommodating).

    5. The vested interests of suburban voters and the black political establishment which inhibit any attempts at salutary institutional adjustment.

  • Social Justice!!

    What about the children!!!

    From “Never Yet Melted” blog. Here’s how it works.

    “Three contractors are bidding to fix a broken fence at the White House. One is from Chicago, another is from Tennessee, and the third is from Minnesota. All three go with a White House official to examine the fence.

    “The Minnesota contractor takes out a tape measure and does some measuring, then works some figures with a pencil. ‘Well,’ he says, ‘I figure the job will run about $900. $400 for mater…ials, $400 for my crew, and $100 profit for me.’

    “The Tennessee contractor also does some measuring and figuring, then says, ‘I can do this job for $700. $300 for materials, $300 for my crew, and $100 profit for me.’

    “The Chicago contractor doesn’t measure or figure, but leans over to the White House official and whispers, ‘$2,700.’

    “The official, incredulous, says, ‘You didn’t even measure like the other guys! How did you come up with such a high figure?’

    “The Chicago contractor whispers back, ‘$1000 for me, $1000 for you, and we hire the guy from Tennessee to fix the fence.’

    “’Done!’ replies the government official.

    “And that, my friends, is how Government works today.”

  • Cities seem to find their way into the state coffers. My hunch is the weight of Detroit became too much for Michigan’s declining population and industry. I’d guess that Illinois is stronger.

  • There is not much wrong with state revenue sharing per se. The problem you get is when you are financing all sorts of specialized projects and granting special favors. A formulaic distribution which took into account population and per capita income and expected the subsidiary government to manage within the limits of the sum of its revenue sources would be appropriate. A problem you have is that central cities are stuck with the task of policing the slums on their own account; a secondary problem is that you have fixed costs in the face of demographic decline. A driver of demographic decline is a deficit of public security and another might be property taxes. Addressing the one can exacerbate the other.

  • What is mildly amusing in a schadenfreude sort of way about these municipal/state fiscal crises is how little recourse the left has to its usual toolkit of solutions-cum-excuses that they apply at the federal level:
    – No national defense spending to cut to generate magical surpluses (although at the state level, correctional institution budgets sometimes serve as an analogous target of progressive ire)
    – “Tax the rich” is not a winning strategy when the rich and industry are fleeing in droves
    – No sovereign currency to inflate your way out

    And worst of all for the left, there’s usually no dastardly Republican political block to blame. It’s all on you, progressives – own it!

  • Pingback: I'm Not the Only One Who Cried -
  • Ironically, there is a story going around right now claiming that certain wealthy Chicago businessmen of fiscally conservative leanings engaged in a conscious strategy of trying to get Illinois’ bond rating lowered, in order to gin up public pressure for state employee pension reform:

    Upon closer examination it appears (if we take what Fahner says at face value) that what actually happened is that certain members of the group in question (Civic Committee of the Commercial Club of Chicago) encouraged bond rating agencies such as Moody’s and S&P to “go or get off the pot” with regard to their continual threats to lower Illinois’ bond rating. However, they later backed off in order to avoid any appearance of trying to manipulate the bond ratings, or pursue a “destroy the village in order to save it” strategy (which the questioner in the video phrases as “sometimes you have to be irresponsible to be responsible”).

July 31, 1943: Death of Private Petrarca

Wednesday, July 31, AD 2013


Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.

John 15:13

It is a trite but true observation that war brings out the very worst and the very best in men.  In the category of very best, sacrificial courage has to be high on the list.  Such was displayed by Private Frank J. Petrarca on three occasions in the bitter fighting on New Georgia in the Solomon Islands.  One of ten children he had attended parochial school before following in his father’s footsteps and becoming a carpenter.  In October 1940 he enlisted in the Army.  On July 27, 1943 he began displaying a courage that was rare even in the Pacific theater where, as Admiral Nimitz stated, valor was a common virtue.  Here is his Medal of Honor Citation:

Continue reading...

4 Responses to July 31, 1943: Death of Private Petrarca

The Left and Morality

Tuesday, July 30, AD 2013



Dennis Prager has an intriguing post about the interaction among liberals of morality as a laundry list of public political positions combined with wretched personal behavior:

I first thought about this when I saw how the left-wing students at my graduate school, Columbia University, behaved. Aside from their closing down classes, taking over office buildings, and ransacking professors’ offices, I saw the way in which many of them conducted themselves in their personal lives. Most of them had little sense of personal decency, and lived lives of narcissistic hedonism. Women who were involved with leftist groups have told of how poorly they were treated. And one suspects that they would have been treated far better by conservative, let alone religious, men on campus.

My sense was that the radicals’ commitment to “humanity,” to “peace,” and to “love” gave them license to feel good about themselves without having to lead a good life. Their vocal opposition to war and to racism provided them with all the moral self-esteem they wanted.

Consider the example of the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy. He had been expelled from college for paying someone to take his exams. His role in the death of a woman with whom he spent an evening would have sent almost anyone without his family name to prison — or would have at least resulted in prosecution for negligent homicide. And he spent decades using so many women in so public a way that stories about his sex life were routinely told in Washington. Read the 9,000-word 1990 article in GQ by Michael Kelly, who a few years later became the editor of the New Republic.

When this unimpressive man started espousing liberal positions, speaking passionately about the downtrodden in society, it recalled the unimpressive students who marched on behalf of civil rights, peace and love.

It is quite likely that Ted Kennedy came to believe in the positions that he took. But I also suspect that he found espousing those positions invaluable to his self-image and to his public image: “Look at what a moral man I am after all.” And liberal positions were all that mattered to the left and to the liberal media that largely ignored such lecherous behavior as the “waitress sandwich” he made in a Washington, D.C. restaurant with another prominent liberal, former Senator Chris Dodd.

In addition to knowing that liberal positions provide moral cover for immoral personal behavior, liberals know that their immoral behavior will be given more of pass than exactly the same behavior would if done by a conservative.

Continue reading...

21 Responses to The Left and Morality

  • I fear that there’s a strain of libertarianism that wants the same license, for the same reason. It hasn’t entered the political sphere yet – actually, I was going to say that, but how did Packwood hang on for so long? And wasn’t Schwarzenegger given a pass for a lot of things? Not that they were ideologically libertarian, but they were socially liberal and perceived as fiscally more conservative.

  • Religion and its moral guidelines, Ten in number plus a Book, give those, who progress from cheating, lying, and stealing during school years to supporting death of innocents and degradation of human life, an excuse to find fault with and scoff at others trying to follow what is good, not bad.

  • Pinky, that’s not libertarian. That’s libertine, and it’s the common thread they have with liberals. It’s why you haven’t seen it in ideological fom yet – it’s a personal trait. True libertarians know that liberty depends upon a moral, educated population that zealously guards its heritage. The left has little use for any of those.

  • “but how did Packwood hang on for so long?”

    Packwood was a pro-abort and got the same pass that Kennedy did until the very end of his career. Packwood had sponsored a bill in the Senate to legalize abortion two years prior to Roe. He was a pro-abort pioneer. By the time the scandals broke that ended his career the Democrat party was well on its way to becoming the party of abortion and Packwood was no longer needed by the pro-aborts.

    Schwarzenegger always had scandals dogging him. He was bullet proof due to his Kennedy connection and because he was a pro-abort. Once Maria got fed up with him it was time for Arnold to go and not to come back.

  • Schwarzenegger always had scandals dogging him. He was bullet proof due to his Kennedy connection and because he was a pro-abort.

    Arnold did, however, invest a lot of political capital backing a parental consent ballot initiative that, unfortunately, failed rather miserably. After that, he basically hid under his desk for the remainder of his time in office.

  • The only moral liberal I ever saw was dead.

  • Remember Arthur C. Brooks’ Syracuse University study from back in ’07? He
    compared the charitable giving of conservatives and liberals. While self-
    described liberal households reported an average of 6% more in annual income,
    the self-described conservative households claimed 30% more in charitable
    giving in their tax returns.

    The tax returns of some of our liberal elites are less than edifying. In the entire
    10 years combined before he became Vice President, Joe Biden and his wife
    gave a total of $3,690. To put that in perspective, that’s about 1/10th of the
    average charitable contributions of families in their tax bracket.

    In 1995, John Kerry– probably the richest man in the Senate today– reported
    $0 in charitable contributions. In ’93, he gave $175. In ’93 I was a broke
    college student and I still managed to give more than that!

    A comparison of the reported charitable contributions of the Obamas v. George
    W. Bush is also interesting. The Bushes have consistently reported charitable
    contributions of about 10%+ of their annual income. In the years 2000-2008,
    the Obamas averaged about 3.5%, on a combined annual income that was
    about 2 to 3 times more than Bush’s. In the years since becoming president,
    Obama has beefed up his contributions to slightly less than 6% of his annual
    reported income.

  • Ach. Just recalled that John Kerry is now our Secretary of State. Still, he’s
    a piker.

  • I think a better description of Packwood would be ‘capitol hill careerist’, and was known for warm relations with the folks from Gucci gulch. The sad business was, by the close of his time in Congress he had ruined his marriage (telling his wife he wanted a divorce on the birthday of one of his children), had only faint ties to people in Oregon (his voting address was a trailer on his uncle’s property, which I suppose improves on Richard Lugar’s voting address), and went into the lobbying business after leaving the Senate just ahead of the heave-ho posse.

  • Hegel, who is usually tediously wrong, has rare flashes of pure genius, and none better than his description of the Politics of Virtue:

    “Virtue is here a simple abstract principle and distinguishes the citizens into two classes only—those who are favourably disposed and those who are not. But disposition can only be recognized and judged of by disposition. Suspicion therefore is in the ascendant; but virtue, as soon as it becomes liable to suspicion, is already condemned . . . . Robespierre set up the principle of virtue as supreme, and it may be said that with this man virtue was an earnest matter. Virtue and Terror are the order of the day; for Subjective Virtue, whose sway is based on disposition only, brings with it the most fearful tyranny. It exercises its power without legal formalities, and the punishment it inflicts is equally simple—Death.”

    Thus, Robespierre, in a speech that reads like self-parody, “One wants [on veut] to make you fear abuses of power, of the national power you have exercised…One wants to make us fear that the people will fall victim to the Committees … One fears that the prisoners are being oppressed… I say that anyone who trembles at this moment is guilty; for innocence never fears public scrutiny.”

    What guarantee does the man of virtue, the republican citizen, have that he is really acting for the public good? What are the guarantees against self-delusion and hypocrisy? The only standard that the man of virtue can provide of his own moral goodness turned out ultimately to be his own self-certainty or sincerity.

  • PJ O’Rourke summed up the Kennedys with devastating accuracy:

    “Old Joseph P Kennedy was a liar and a greedy thief, an ignoramus, adulterer, vile anti-Semite, coward and pompous ass. His wife Rose was a frigid martinet, unashamed to suckle at the teat of shabby lucre, awash in pietism and tartuffery, filled with the letter of Catholicism and empty of its spirit. They raised their nine whelps in an atmosphere of brutal pride and stupid competition. When the hapless Rosemary turned out to be retarded they had her lobotomized and parked her with the nuns. The remaining eight turned out to be foolhardy, arrogant, unprincipled, and wholly lacking in sense of consequences. This last trait caused Joe Jr and Kathleen to die in airplane crashes and allowed Jack to get his PT boat T-boned by a Japanese destroyer. (A tale of heroism was manufactured from that incident. The family wasn’t so lucky with Teddy’s Chappaquiddick skin-diving efforts three decades later).

    The Kennedys, however, continued to wax. Elections, individuals and press adulation were purchased. One family member rose , briefly, to great political power and almost unlimited sexual excess. Some others nearly achieved the same results. Two were shot but under the most romantic circumstances and not, as might have been hoped, after due process of law.”

  • O’Rourke is generally engaging and insightful. In the interests of precision:

    1. Retrospective assessments of Rosemary Kennedy indicate her demonstrated skills in arithmetic were consistent with someone of subpar intelligence, not mental defect. Joseph Kennedy submitted her to the quackish care of Dr. Walter Freeman’s novel psychosurgery because of her erratic and temperamental behavior.

    2. As far as I am aware, no one in the Shriver clan (other than son-in-law Ahnold) has been implicated in any scandals. Patricia Lawford separated herself from her disspated husband in 1966, but I do not think she has ever been implicated in anything notably gross. Jean Smith’s son is repellant (and her late husband supposedly a flunky), but I do not think she has ever been implicated in anything either.

    3. About half of Robert Kennedy’s children have been scandalous, and one each of the Lawford, Smith, and Ted Kennedy broods. That would be 8 out of the 28 grandchildren have been the source of considerable embarrassment. Sad to say, that might be about average for families in this country.

  • I do not know whether Bobbie and Jack (a high-level US civilain official gave the OK) approved murders of the Diem brothers in Saigon. We know both met similar demises.

    And that propaganda regarding PT 109 . . . The worst calamity a naval officer can incur is to lose his ship: even in glorious action. Jack got his scow run over . . . Providentially, the Scotch went down with the boat . . .

  • I’m inclined to cut anyone slack in matters of psychiatry (and quackery) that took place a while ago. It’s an emerging field. Surgery 100 years ago, talking therapy 30 years ago, massive doses of chemicals today…I wonder how embarrassed by our current approach people will be in 50 years? (Of course, as Catholics, we understand the moral dimension of behaviour in a way that the secular field of psychiatry can’t, but that’s just an aside.)

  • The heydey of pscyhosurgery was during the period between 1935 and 1955, not a century ago. It was unusual after the introduction of psychotropics in 1955 and I think may have disappeared entirely by about 1980. Walter Freeman completed his residency around about 1924 and he was a working psychiatrist for about a decade before he developed the lobotomy. There was not much in the way of controlled studies at that time and medical journals were filled with case reports (a phenomenon which aided the dissemination of largely useless talk therapies as well). By some accounts, professional courtesy at the time prevented one physician or surgeon from criticizing another bar behind closed doors, so Freeman was not receiving the resistance he should have. I am not sure why he was not chewed to pieces by personal injury lawyers.

  • Watching the video again of Ted Kennedy after Chappaquiddick, I wonder if it would have been less damaging had he told the truth, namely that he and Kopechne had left the party intending to park up and have sex, but on being spotted by an off-duty policeman he had panicked and told her to drive back alone, the only explanation that seems remotely plausible. He would not have had to perjure himself and two others, would not have faced criminal charges (which could have included manslaughter), and would have saved himself a lot of money in bribes and legal fees (not that money was in short supply). I hope he was able to make a full confession before he died.

  • “Watching the video again of Ted Kennedy after Chappaquiddick, I wonder if it would have been less damaging had he told the truth”

    He would still have had to have explained why he did not report the accident until the next morning. The reason he did not, I assume, is because he was worried about the impact on his career. That mattered far, far more than Kopechne’s life. Afterwards he would tell Chappaquiddick jokes:

    Ted Kennedy wasn’t worthy to be spat upon.

  • The position of Mary Jo Kopechne’s body in the car makes it unlikely she would have been in the passenger seat. The diver (who took only ten minutes to retrieve the body) also said she died from suffocation, not drowning as she found an air bubble which kept her alive for up to four hours. Kennedy would have gone back to the party assuming that she had driven back to the motel, and did not report the accident because he was unaware it had happened.

    Kennedy’s lawyers managed to get the inquest held in camera and (astoundingly) there was no autopsy.

  • “Kennedy would have gone back to the party assuming that she had driven back to the motel, and did not report the accident because he was unaware it had happened.”

    Which makes absolutely no sense. It would have been better then for him to simply tell what happened. People were going, and did, to suspect an affair no matter what happened. His making up a story about trying to rescue her and then mysteriously not telling the authorities about it until morning makes absolutely no sense unless that part of the story was true. It would make him look worse than he was if your theory was correct to make up his driving off the bridge and what followed.

    There was an attempt to exhume Kopechne’s body for examination but her parents successfully opposed the request.

  • On tax statement charity claims– just because something isn’t claimed doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen.

    I don’t think it’s PROBABLE that all these politicians are hiding their charity, but it’s possible. I’m rather glad that our income is low enough we take the default deduction….

  • Don, it all comes back to O’Rourke’s point about the Kennedys being “wholly lacking in sense of consequences”. Once you start constructing an edifice of lies, you’ve got to stick with it, even if coming clean might be less damaging. The argument that “it’s so implausible, it must be true” can be made to work in your favour. The fact that Mary Jo left her purse and room keys behind would lead any reasonable person to infer that she intended to return to the party after having had sex with Teddy in the Oldsmobile. With the Kennedys it would only have lasted five minutes at most.

    Bill Clinton would have nonchalantly admitted to it and taken the consequences, but the moral climate in 1969 was different.

He’d Rather Reign In Hell Than Serve In Heaven

Tuesday, July 30, AD 2013

The more “friendly” modern formulation of hell is that hell consists of eternal separation from God and that no one goes to hell except through his own choice: choosing to remain separate from God rather than embracing Him fully in the union of the beatific vision.

The objection I normally hear to this is: In that case, then obviously hell is empty, because no one would choose an eternity of isolation rather than union with God.

This always strikes me as showing a profound lack of understanding of human character. Within our temporal lives, we often choose unhappiness in order to get our own way, and it’s hard to see how this sort of pride would fail to play a part in people’s eternal decisions. Perhaps part of the problem is that people often think of the afterlife in cartoon terms: Would you rather spend eternity boiling in a lake of fire or reclining in a cloud with a harp?

But if heaven is full and complete union with God, then I think it’s pretty clear that for the person who would much rather define God for himself than mold himself to God’s will, heaven would seem like something worth rejecting. C. S. Lewis, I think, does a very good job of showing this in The Great Divorce.

‘You think that, because hitherto you have experienced truth only with the abstract intellect. I will bring you where you can taste it like honey and be embraced by it as by a bridegroom. Your thirst shall be quenched.’

‘Well, really, you know, I am not aware of a thirst for some ready-made truth which puts an end to intellectual activity in the way you seem to be describing. Will it leav me the free play of Mind, Dick? I must insist on that, you know.’ (from The Great Divorce, ch. 5)

In religious circles, this pride seems often played out in the desire to make a God after our own image. From the same chapter of The Great Divorce:

‘But you’ve never asked me about what my paper is about! I’m taking the text about growing up to the measure of Christ and working out an idea which I feel sure you’ll be interested in. I’m going to point out how people always forget that Jesus (here the Ghost bowed) was a comparatively young man when he died. he would have outgrown some of his earlier views, you know, if he’d lived. As he might have done, with a little more tact and patience. I am going to ask my audience to consider what his mature views would have been. A profoundly interesting question. What a different Christianity we might have had if only the Founder had reached his full stature! I shall end up by pointing out how this deepens the significance of the Crucifixion. One feels for the first time what a disaster it was: what a tragic waste… so much promise cut short. (from The Great Divorce, ch. 5)

A almost shockingly clear example of this made headlines last week, as Anglican archbishop Desmond Tutu made headlines by saying that he’d rather go to hell than be in heaven with a God who considered gay sex to be sinful.

South Africa’s iconic retired archbishop, Desmond Tutu, said on Friday that if he had his pick, he’d go to hell before heading to a heaven that condemned homosexuality as sin.

“I would not worship a God who is homophobic and that is how deeply I feel about this,” he said, by way of denouncing religions that discriminate against gays, in Agence France-Presse..

He added, AFP reported: “I would refuse to go to a homophobic heaven. No, I would say sorry, I mean I would much rather go to the other place.”

Or as Milton’s Lucifer put it: Better to reign in hell than serve in heaven.

If we must regret that Jesus died too young, before his views had had the chance to “evolve” enough to fit modern sensibilities, we may at least be happy that Desmond Tutu has lived long enough to provide us with a more enlightened savior.

Continue reading...

47 Responses to He’d Rather Reign In Hell Than Serve In Heaven

  • “When the creation of man was first mooted and when, even at that stage, the Enemy freely confessed that he foresaw a certain episode about a cross, Our Father very naturally sought an interview and asked for an explanation. The Enemy gave no reply except to produce the cock-and-bull story about disinterested love which He has been circulating ever since. This Our Father naturally could not accept. He implored the Enemy to lay His cards on the table, and gave Him every opportunity. He admitted that he felt a real anxiety to know the secret; the Enemy replied “I wish with all my heart that you did”. It was, I imagine, at this stage in the interview that Our Father’s disgust at such an unprovoked lack of confidence caused him to remove himself an infinite distance from the Presence with a suddenness which has given rise to the ridiculous enemy story that he was forcibly thrown out of Heaven.”

  • I reckon Desmond will get his wish, then.

  • Hmm… poses an interesting question. For what phobia am I willing to reject heaven?

  • When having a sensibility is distinguished from the practice of same by these “spokesmen” of religion, understanding will have a chance to replace emotional reaction in the masses. They seem to be playing to the self-indulgent more than teaching.

  • I profoundly agree with your post, Darwin. The reason pride has traditionally been understood to be the deadliest of sins is precisely because it is the sin most likely to permanently separate us from God. I can easily envision many smug and strident pro-aborts being unwilling to admit fault and ask for forgiveness even when facing God Himself.

  • Pingback: Francis in Favor of Homosexual and Women Priests? -
  • To quote Ronald Reagan, “Tutu? So so.”

  • According to some of the Fathers, such as St Isaac of Syria and St Maximus the Confessor, hell, like heaven consists in the presence of God.

    The “fire” that will consume sinners at the coming of the Kingdom of God is the same “fire” that will shine with splendour in the saints. It is the “fire” of God’s love; the “fire” of God Himself who is Love. “For our God is a consuming fire” (Hebrews 12:29) who “dwells in unapproachable light.” (I Timothy 6:16) For those who love God and who love all creation in Him, the “consuming fire” of God will be radiant bliss and unspeakable delight. For those who do not love God, and who do not love at all, this same consuming fire” will be the cause of their “weeping” and their “gnashing of teeth.”

    Some identify this “fire” with the uncreated light of Tabor, shining from the Risen Lord.

  • Donald R. McClarey reference to ” that Our Father’s disgust at such an unprovoked lack of confidence caused him to remove himself an infinite distance from the Presence with a suddenness which has given rise to the ridiculous enemy story that he was forcibly thrown out of Heaven.” is either Satanist, Gnostic or Masonic – for there the belief is that God had two sons, Jesus and Satanail and the later, satan, was cast out of heaven. the ‘Our Father’ refered to in Mc Clareys’s comment is Satan (or Lucifer as he was called before his fall and lost the brilliance of light he had before it). The ‘enemy’ is God. This reversal of divinely revealed truth reveals the true origin of the comments and vindicates the orginal view stated in the article: some people prefer Hell to heaven by preferring the Lie to the Truth.

  • It is from CS Lewis’ Screwtape Letters Jacquie. The speaker is Screwtape a senior demonic tempter in Hell.

  • Human nature never fails to perplex. I know my theology is flawed, but does that mean we cannot comment on others? My questions to the reverend tutu are these: Are you also telling us that gay sex should be without sin before gay marriage? Are you also telling us (and God) then that any premarital sex is good and righteous? Can an 18 year old lad have intercourse with a 17 year old lass, let the chips fall as they may, and this is all good? What have you learned from Job? Did not Our Lord say (paraphrase) “when you can account for all of the mysteries and explanations to life and the universe, then will I feel compelled to answer your demands?” Was God not saying be faithful, I have given all you need to know for salvation, your faith is now required to trust and believe me on all the rest? And why do you think those with gay tendencies are the only ones who struggle trying to remain chaste and faithful? We all have great crosses to bear.

  • Yeah, who wants to hang out with a homophobic, intolerant, anti-choice, opinionated God with unrealistic expectations about human behavior? With the “Other Guy” at least we can look forward to an eternity of him singing “I love you just the way you are!”

  • Michael PS, I really appreciated your comment which was a splendid explanation for hell. Without going into the details, I will say God the Father once made his presence tangibly known/felt by me during deep prayer. It was momentary, but it felt like a flood or rush passing all the way through my being. The first knowledge given to me of His presence was of His incredible creative love, which animated my soul to deep desire to participate – or better said – cooperate with him in creation. It was so powerful, there are no human words to describe it. Imagine then, when we see God face to face with the memory of how we resisted participation in the creation of a human being through birth control or abortion. This alone would be hell, I think, let alone all the other things we have done which were contrary to other aspects of God essence.

  • it always surpirises me when someone says that they would rather not be with a God that does not abide to ther view or belief! So instead of honoring the creator of us and all we love, we instead out of a rebelous state of mind, would throw it all away. Insanity! So we would rather be with haters, murderers, cheats, and the biggest liar who does not love but would rather torture us all for his amusement! Some believe that what all people love here that is sin, will be allowed there. Sinful pleasures. But that will not be the case, and the horror of finding out they will be condemed to terrifying suffering for ever, no relief, no stopping. Eternal. I feel so sorry for anyone who experiences it for the despair would be crushing. Even if they have done terrible things. Put yourself in their situation, too late to say you are sorry. In this life we want riches and imortality. God actually wants to give that to us, but we can’t bring sin and rebelion to heaven. It happened once and will not be allowed again, but with his mercy he allows it on earth and in our life. A testing period of time where we make our decison, while he tries to save us without compromising our free will. A man of God who would say that. How sad and he influences others, that makes his sin worse.

  • Jmtalk

    “… those who find themselves in hell will be chastised by the scourge of love. How cruel and bitter this torment of love will be! For those who understand that they have sinned against love, undergo no greater suffering than those produced by the most fearful tortures. The sorrow which takes hold of the heart, which has sinned against love, is more piercing than any other pain. It is not right to say that the sinners in hell are deprived of the love of God … But love acts in two ways, as suffering of the reproved, and as joy in the blessed!” (St. Isaac of Syria, Mystic Treatises)

  • People are so ill informed when it comes to hell and it’s reality. When people go there they have full knowledge of why these sins, gay sex, etc… offend Our Lord so much. Gay sex goes against our very nature as procreative beings created in the image and likeness of God. We are all tested in life in order to be given the opportunity to either grow in holiness or fall deeper into sin, to move more closer to God and become more who we truly are created in His image and likeness or move further away from Him becoming more and more the image of the evil one whom we have chosen as our father, (The father of lies that is). What devastation and despair the soul will be plunged into when it realises all the missed opportunities it was given to grow in holiness and be it’s true self but because of pride and stubbornness of spirit persevered in sin, that which is in opposition to The Holy One in Heaven. When satan realises his victory in capturing your eternal lost soul, he will hurl you into hell like a piece of rubbish where he will torment you forever. How deeply hurt God becomes at the sight of each soul the evil one succeeds in bringing to ruination especially when He has always been ready and willing to offer forgiveness to the soul at every instant of its earthly existence, but cant interfere with its free will. God cant force a soul to ask for forgiveness because He wants us to choose life with Him forever or else our love wouldn’t be real. Free will makes our love for God pure, genuine and real. Free will can also make disposition toward God impure, false and self centred . It’s our choice, and He is who He is. God is love. He isn’t a homophobic as people would suggest, that is just pure and utter narrow mindedness, and misunderstanding of God. He loves us so much and only wants the best for us but wont force it on us. If we choose to be obedient to God, and His laws, there will be eternal bliss for those. If we choose to spend our lives in stubborn opposition to His laws through pride and narrow mindedness, then eternal pain is what awaits us, it is not God’s choice, its our. May God bless you all and especially Cardinal Desmond Tutu, may the lord remove the scales from his eyes to be able to see the truth of what human sexuality truly is as ordained and created by God, and be obedient to that. In Jesus through Mary our Mother. Liam

  • It becomes more and more obvious that there is only one Church.

  • In my all-too-limited study of the Our Father, I see that early texts had the last line something more like “And do not put us to the final test, but deliver us from
    the evil one.”

    Would that “final test” be the choice between eternity with God or not? Asking to be able to skip that part and be ushered into Heaven without exposure to Satan would certrainly be something a faithful person would want.

  • Our Church has always taught the primary good of the ‘marriage (sexual intercourse) act’, was for the procuration of Children, the secondary good was the communion or unity of the couple (the pleasurable aspect). in this way the secondary is the servant of the primary. in this light Pope Paul VI’s ‘Humane Vitae’ made perfect sense. In our Time, the 2 ‘goods’ have been reversed, and the result is utter confusion, and misunderstanding.

  • Agreed, Father. Another way to understand the phenomenon is —
    For centuries the Christian world has understood that marriage, sex, and children were interdependent — i.e., one really could not and should not try to separate them. Since the sexual revolution we now understand each to be an independent “choice.” The social costs this astonishingly quick transformation has wrought have been and will continue to be staggering.

  • This saying is trustworthy:

    If we have died with him

    we shall also live with him;i
    if we persevere

    we shall also reign with him.

    But if we deny him

    he will deny us.j
    If we are unfaithful

    he remains faithful,

    for he cannot deny himself.
    (2 Tim: 11-13)

  • “By their fruits ye shall know them.” Sad and delusional, and ultimately, eternally tragic for Tutu

  • Tutu has long played the clown. That having been said, I would be willing to wager he was quoted in a manner that made what he did say unrecognizable.

  • …tells me all i need to know about the Anglican church!…..


    Africa’s Anglican episcopacy has long been resistant to what was being peddled by the affluent Anglosphere. There is at least one exception. The Catholic Church in South Africa got saddled with the foul Reginald Cawcutt. Cry, the beloved country.

  • Something tells me TuTu is gonna get his wish! What a STUPID, STUPID man! I mean I knew he was a HERETIC, but to actually prefer Hell to Heaven, WOW, mere words DO NOT DESCRIBE the INSANITY of this man!

  • We haven’t been calling him Desmond “Tooty Frooty” for nothing! While he is an embarrassment to all religion, I’m so glad he isn’t Catholic.

  • Did I misunderstand what Tutu really meant? I want to go to heaven. I want everyone to go to heaven. God doesn’t hate a homosexual or lesbian. What he hates is the actions, the sins they commit. I am sure he will welcome everyone who wants to live with Him, whether or not they are “straight” or “gay.” But if one flaunts the fact that he or she is gay, then that’s another story.

  • I agree with you Anne Erdle. Thanks. God Bless.

  • Response to Anne Erdle, I agree with you. But ‘what Tutu really meant?’ The article said, “He added, AFP reported: “I would refuse to go to a homophobic heaven. No, I would say sorry, I mean I would much rather go to the other place.” This word ‘homophobic’ describes a psychiactic condition using Latin and Greek respectively. ‘Homo’ in Latin is man as mankind, all men; ‘vir’ in Latin is the male gender. The application of this word homophobic by the leaders in society is saying what they arrogantly think of all not in agreement with them re homosexual activities or gay-marriage (sin) – that we all have a psychiatric condition. The lie of this accusation is revealed by the fact we do not act as those who have this phychiatric ‘phobic’ condition which is manifested by running away in fear and terror at the sight of men in the street. If we used the same languageof atheists ‘Fidephobia’ (fear of faith) or ‘Fidephobes’ imagine Richard Dawkins response. (By the way the Russians used such psychiatric jargon for putting Christians in psychiatric hospitals for drug testing. As Pope Francis said, “America will wake up one day and find itself communist”)

  • Jaquie

    I think you will find that “Homophobic” is formed, not from Latin “homo” but from Greek ὁμός = Same. It is found in such words as “homogeneous,” “homogenized” (as of milk) and “homologation” (if one is a Scots lawyer)

    “Homosexual” was first used in English in in C.G. Chaddock’s 1892 translation of Krafft-Ebing’s “Psychopathia Sexualis” He borrowed it from German, where it was first used a decade or so earlier.

    It was part of the medicalising of sexual inversion, rather drolly described by Michel Foucault, “Sodomy, that of the old civil or canon laws, was a category of forbidden acts. Their perpetrator was nothing more than the juridical subject of them. The nineteenth-century homosexual became a personage: a past, a case history, and a childhood, in addition to being a character, a life-style and a morphology, with an over-inquisitive anatomy and, possibly, a mysterious physiology. Nothing that he was, escaped his sexuality… It was consubstantial with him, less as a habitual sin than as a singular nature…. The sodomite had been a lapse; the homosexual was now a species.” [My translation]

  • Revelation 20:15
    Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.

    Mark 9:48 (NKJV)
    48 where‘Their worm does not die And the fire is not quenched.’

    Ezekiel 28:18 (NET) 18 By the multitude of your iniquities, through the sinfulness of your trade,you desecrated your sanctuaries.So I drew fire out from within you;
    it consumed you,and I turned you to ashes on the earth before the eyes of all who saw you.


    This lake of fire that those who rebel against God are thrown into seems to be all the Godless kept in one place. The fire comes from within them.

    All who say their sins are good and normal and come out in the defence of their sins or other peoples sins thoroughly have the fires of hell burning within them.

    Romans 1:26-32
    New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)
    26 For this reason God gave them up to degrading passions. Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error.

    28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind and to things that should not be done. 29 They were filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, covetousness, malice. Full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, craftiness, they are gossips, 30 slanderers, God-haters,[a] insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, rebellious toward parents, 31 foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32 They know God’s decree, that those who practice such things deserve to die—yet they not only do them but even applaud others who practice them.

  • Pray for this mans soul. Satan comes to LIE AND DESTROY>He has bought the LIE, My people parish for lack of knowledge. In the Last days(end of an era/not world) people will not listen to sound doctorine and will go (Paraphrasing and you can pic it a part if you want) GO WITH THEIR FEELINGS. AND EMOTIONS AND WHAT TICKLES THE EAR! /wow is that our world today. The Warning and the Illumination of conscious is so close. St., Faustina’s Diary. Prophcies of Garabandal. Bishop is now looking into it. It was prophecied it would be when it was close to happening. I was there on good friday 12 noon staning at the pines. Seen many a miricle with my owng eyes as many did that day! God Bless. Pray for those who will stand before God soon in the WARNING. Many will die of fright. but the Lord will correct what is broken. If we do not respond to the Warning. Then very shortly after. The three days of darkness. Confession. Prayer and the Triumph of Our Lady is nigh. Who do you think the women is clothed with the sun. Hint. LOOK at the Tilma and see latest scientific evedince. I met Joey Lamengino. The Blind man who will be healed after the warning and the Great Mirircle soon to follow. It will be in March April or May. Following the WARNING. Joey Lamingino is now about 87 as best I can tell. I have been following Garabandal since I was about 12 yrs old. Im 51. I belive we will soon see the the warning with in a year two or three. then the rise of the antichrist. Its a war. It is allowed by God becouse of our sin. A deception is
    allowed upon the people becaouse of their sin. Isn’t it interesting to that in 2014 starts a tetrad of blood red moons and sackcloth moons that fall on God the Fathers Feastdays. Look what happenened on previous Tetrads. Lord was crucified on a elicipse. ETC. Just SAYING. Is the first one the breaking of the sixth seal, And the earth will shake like never before in time. Then the WARNING ETC. Just saying. God Bless.

  • It’s that Tutu, and the rest, worship the creature not the Creator.

    “Jesus turned and said to Peter, ‘Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men.’” Matthew 16: 23

  • Perhaps what Archbishop Tutu understands is that there is a clear difference between Homosexuality and Homosexual Acts. There are homosexual people who choose to remain chaste so as Not to sin against God. You must educate your use on the use of the English language. Therefore, Homosexuality is “The state of being attracted to the same sex”. Homosexual Acts is “Engaging in sexual acts with those of the same sex”. Does anyone understand this??

  • G. K. Chesterton – “Take away the supernatural and what remains is the unnatural.”

  • Tom,
    Pretty much everyone who visits this blog understands that rather elementary point, and you are correct that Tutu’s comment could technically be interpreted in that way; but if TAC is misinterpreting Tutu, then it is in good company. I’ve only heard of one person who has offered such an extraordinarily charitable interpetation — you.

  • Only God is good. We are all sinners. We sin because we are sinners, not vice versa.

    Hate the sin. Love the sinner.

    The Spiritual Works of Mercy. Charity and moral courage.

    Admonish the sinner.

    Bear all wrongs patiently. Carry your crosses without complaining.

    Counsel the doubtful.

    Forgive all injuries.

    Instruct the ignorant.

    Pray for the living and the dead.

  • JMJ Acts of homosexuality are the Sin not the Tendency. When ever we use the word gay, we are Condoning homosexual acts. The word Gay does not mean Homosexual acts are good, people who support homosexuals use the word (gay) in order to to get God and us to think they are not Sinful, their Problem is God Condems homosexual acts. No homosexual is gay, They Unhappily (sexual feelings are God given, out side of Marriage they are Evil, by the way so called same sex marriage is still Sodomy) are Sinful. When you call someone Gay who is Actively sinning than you support them in their Sin, they Are Sinful(Sodomites) not gay. Changing homosexual acts to gay acts doesn’t change the acts to gayness the acts are still EVIL! Homosexual acts are Evil not Gay! Not to good in trying to Explain the Sodomite groups changing Homosexual to gay. The Catholic churches Error (Sin ?) is accepting what is being done!

  • That God of ours—such a scandal.

  • And Jesus said, “Let them alone: they are blind, and leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both will fall into the pit.” Matthew 14:15

  • Pingback: He’d Rather Reign In Hell Than Serve In Heaven | Accessories
  • I am sure God will grant him his ridiculous wish and then he will have wished he had never had said that statement.

  • “The Lord never tires of forgiving,”Pope Francis said March 17, before leading his listeners in praying the midday Angelus. “It is we who tire of asking for forgiveness. “The Lord, our God is merciful, compassionate and forgiving, even though we have rebelled against him. It appears that South Africa Anglican archbishop Tutu doesn’t know nor fully understand God. Hell, purgatory and Heaven are real. The retired Anglican archbishop would be a different man, if he would visit Medjugorje, Croatia where Mother of Jesus (Virgin Mary) appeared daily since 1981.

  • Michael
    Thank you for the correction on source of homo. ‘Homo’ was from greek somewhere along the line of transmission and into latin but homo in the Latin dictionary means “Human Being, man” plural people”. hence homocide, Pilate’s famous “Ecce Homo” singular, – behold the man, or, human being. The new Psychiatrics Diagnostic Manual V no longer uses the word ‘homosexual’ but G.I.D. Gids are those with a Gender Identity Disorder and the Manual adds to its description, in brackets, ‘some homosexuals have this’. However ‘homophobia’ is still a psychological condition wrongly attributed by society or governments to those who hold Judeo-Christian morals.

  • Jaquie

    Greek ὁμός (homos) comes from an Indo-European word somos (cf. Sanskrit “samah” = “even”) The Latin form is “similis,” whence English “similar.”

    The Latin word “homo” comes from “humus,” meaning “earth” or “soil.” It has nothing to do with the Greek word ὁμός.

    They are accidental homophones (another example of the Greek prefix homo-, meaning “same sound”) like “down,” meaning a hill (which is Celtic) and “down,” meaning feathers (which is Old Norse) They are quite unconnected.

Too American

Monday, July 29, AD 2013

20 Responses to Too American

  • What was that line about being lukewarm?



    One of the main problems in the country today is that too many people in positions of authority really do not have an ounce of patriotism and simply do not like America.

    The curator in question is an issue of Harvard University (class of 1970 or thereabouts).

  • As a Canadian I have always LOVED the way Americans have expressed their love and patriotism,for and of their country.

    Something awful has happened to your country. Your politicians and Administrators consider themselves Patricians-so far above the plerbians or the hoi polli.

    Patriotism is outre because it is TOO COMMON and these effete Liberals want to dictate the conversation and the agenda.As Catholics and Americans it is time to take your country back from the dark diabolically influenced coven or cabal and return it to it’s former exceptional status.

    Canadians by nature are quiet about our Patriotism BUT not our current Conservative Government.The leftist institutional poo-bahs like the CBC elite-Communist Broadcasting Commission or the publishers of the Toronto “Red” Star are keeping a much lower profile because while Canadians are slow to anger once angry,stand back-just ask the SS survivors from WWII.

    Please take your country back and save it from the effete “elite”,the pornifiers,the vulgarizers and DOMESTIC ENEMIES that are like a viper at America’s heart.

    Best wishes and prayers from your Canadian Brother in Christ.

  • I love my country. I was born here, even though my grandparents were immigrants, it has never ever run through my mind to bad mouth this USA. Disagree with, yes, protest about policies, yes, but to dislike or hate where I live would be like some of the animals who foul their nests and then build new ones somewhere else. One of Author Taylor Caldwell once put some words in the mouth of her character: ” If we think this country is going down the wrong way, we had better roll up our sleeves and get it back!” Not a precise citation, but we have a job in this America, we, the ones who live here, to get America back to what it was made to be. A bastion of freedom, not license, somewhere that people, ordinary people, can live without fear of being arrested for being your religion. God please help us to live the life that you want us to , and to do the one job that You have put us here to do, show the world Your life.

  • They need to write history to advance their agenda.

    I bet he displays not one picture of the scores (if not hundreds) that jumped rather than be incinerated.

    Shulan and all self-hating, elitist spucatum, with their deep-rooted disgust with the uses most Americans make of our freedoms, can go to hell.

  • Pingback: Who Am I To Judge? -
  • “As a Canadian”
    Thank you Gordon! A song I learned growing up courtesy of my “Newfie” Mom:

  • @Gordon Campbell: St. Joseph, patron of Canada, pray for us!

  • I recall a monument in front of a Catholic school in New Jersey that said simply,
    “God – Family – Country”. Patriotism is a virtue and a manifestation of the love of our neighbor.

  • Reading this I kept hearing the Marseillaise (with cannon booming). That song brings a full feeling in my chest and behind my eyes because it calls to the true hearted people of the countryside, who knew their patrimony; and I apply it to us. Gordon’s note also seems to be calling those of us who are like the people referenced in the opening lines of that anthem.
    I pity the poor ones among us who have not recognized how they have been blessed by being Americans. It seems they are distracted by a kind of false worldliness, with savoir faire to beat the band– but sans the simple knowledge that everything of any value is at home.

  • “America is unique, but we should not make too much of its uniqueness. In the long run we love our country for the same reasons any man loves his country–not for things that can be bragged about, but for things that can hardly be communicated, and are understood by outsiders mostly by analogy with their own patriotic affections. You communicate your love for your mother not by expatiating on your mother’s singular virtues, still less by calling her the Great Mother, but simply by using the word ‘mother.’ Every man born of woman will understand. Well, almost every man. There is always the occasional misfit who is alienated from his mother, or who thinks that motherhood is outmoded. But it is wisest to direct the conversation to the others.”

    -Joseph Sobran

  • Educate me, J. Christian. What does Sobran’s commentary have to do with a museum curator who cannot abide a photograph of firefighters raising a flag?

  • The curator is the misfit, using Sobran’s formulation.

  • Gordon, you are not the first Gordon to offer Americans an encouraging word. This journalist did so around the time our misguided curator was completing his indoctrination at Harvard:

  • Eh- Mike Petrik! Wonderful link I will pass it on to our family

  • The curator is the misfit, using Sobran’s formulation.

    Unfortunately, the misfit is in a gatekeeper position which distorts and disfigures public memorial.

  • My best memory of 9-11 wasn’t the day it occurred (I didn’t watch TV at the time; still don’t), but a couple of days later, when all the planes, etc were still grounded. That week-end was the “balloon fest” in our town. Dozens of balloons from all over the country come one week-end in September to go ballooning and engage in some kind of balloon completion. (The balloonists also visit various schools, have a food drive, etc. And because of the attacks, they too were grounded.

    Nevertheless, the pilots were allowed to inflate their balloons at dusk to float them up just a few feet while tethered to the ground. They would turn the burners up on “high” and the balloons would really illuminate. Beautiful sight. They do that every year, but that year it just seemed very impressive. And I remember thinking how great the US was and how we would never be defeated. If you could have put that feeling down on paper, I’m pretty sure the museum director would have labelled it “kitschy” and “rah-rah American.”

  • @Donald R. McClarey-Newfies ROCK !

    Ask your Mom what the pun is.

    Thanks for the song Bro.We are ALL in this together.

  • @WK Aiken-AMEN.Patron Saint of the Church and my 18 year old son.Thanks for your blessing.

    Mary,Immaculate Conception,patroness of the United States of America,pray for us.

    Our Lady of Guadeloupe,patroness of the Americas,pray for us.

    St.Katerina(she belongs to BOTH of us) pray for us.

    Sacred Heart of Jesus have mercy on us.

  • @Mike Petrik.Mike I’m old enough to remember when Gordon Sinclair made the original broadcast on CFRB and even though I was a kid,I knew he had said something quite important.I was very proud of him and the solace it provided to our brothers and sisters who were under siege,within and without-not unlike today.

    America will NEVER be down for long-the Free World NEEDS you back in the saddle-CANADA needs you. You’ve survived tougher times than this-you’ll survive this horrific Administration and the dying corrupt Vichy Main Stream Media.

    God Bless President Reagan and God Bless America.

George Zimmerman, the Media and the Search for the Great White Racist

Monday, July 29, AD 2013

Coverage of the George Zimmerman trial gives ample demonstration that most of our agenda driven media today makes the facts fit the story and not the other way around.  Cathy Young at Reason examines how the media has constantly attempted to falsely portray George Zimmerman as a white racist:



This narrative has transformed Zimmerman, a man of racially mixed heritage that included white, Hispanic and black roots (a grandmother who helped raise him had an Afro-Peruvian father), into an honorary white male steeped in white privilege. It has cast him as a virulent racist even though he once had a black business partner, mentored African-American kids, lived in a neighborhood about 20 percent black, and participated in complaints about a white police lieutenant’s son getting away with beating a homeless black man.

This narrative has perpetuated the lie that Zimmerman’s history of calls to the police indicates obsessive racial paranoia. Thus, discussing the verdict on the PBS NewsHour, University of Connecticut professor and New Yorker contributor Jelani Cobb asserted that “Zimmerman had called the police 46 times in previous six years, only for African-Americans, only for African-American men.” Actually, prior to the call about Martin, only four of Zimmerman’s calls had to do with African-American men or teenage boys (and two of them were about individuals who Zimmerman thought matched the specific description of burglary suspects). Five involved complaints about whites, and one about two Hispanics and a white male; others were about such issues as a fire alarm going off, a reckless driver of unknown race, or an aggressive dog.

In this narrative, even Zimmerman’s concern for a black child—a 2011 call to report a young African-American boy walking unsupervised on a busy street, on which the police record notes, “compl[ainant] concerned for well-being”—has been twisted into crazed racism. Writing on the website of The New Republic, Stanford University law professor Richard Thompson Ford describes Zimmerman as “an edgy basket case” who called 911 about “the suspicious activities of a seven year old black boy.” This slander turns up in other left-of-center sources, such as

Continue reading...

6 Responses to George Zimmerman, the Media and the Search for the Great White Racist

  • Pingback: The Magnanimity and Humility of St. Ignatius Loyola -
  • Recently, the NYT invented a new racist category: “White Hispanic.”

    The media (except, on occasion, FOXNEWS) are co-conspirators in one massive fraud after another.

    Lenin set up Pravda (Russian for truth). The commissar running Pravda was asked, “What is truth?’ His answer, “That which serves the revolution.” Same same with America’s contemporary, useless idiots.

  • To be fair, members of la gauche who have done criminal defense work (e.g. Alan Dershowitz and Jeralyn Merritt) have been steadfast defenders of due process and the grounding of evaluations in discrete facts. The case has also smoked out certain starboard opinion journalists. National opinion magazines are not obligated to make too much of local crime stories. The editors of the American Spectator published two articles on this case that were so stupid they should have been rejected for publication without a second thought. It emerged after Zimmerman was acquitted that among those who did not wish to be confused with the facts was Richard Lowry’s deputy at National Review (Harvard, ’03, natch). The regime class has its berths not only at the Republican National Committee and the House Appropriations Committee, but in and among putatively independent observers.

  • Mr. Zimmerman has been framed as a racist the same way the Tea Party has
    been, and by the same decadent media.

    It’s always baffled me that the meme “the Tea Party is racist” ever got traction
    when so many of stars of the party have been Black, Hispanic or other minorities.
    Mia Love, Allen West, Herman Cain, Nikki Haley, Marco Rubio, Susana Martinez,
    Tim Scott, Ted Cruz, etc.. If the Tea Party is racist, they’re sure doing it wrong.
    Yet our so-called journalists of today repeat their libels, in spite of all evidence
    to the contrary. Like the charges of racism against Mr. Zimmerman, the
    attacks are manufactured from thin air, and in spite of evidence to the contrary.

    Whatever one chooses to call what’s being practiced by most major news outlets
    today, it’s not journalism.

  • Another example of the party line from the lapdog media follows.

    THE MEDIA CALLS THEM “TEENS”: Black Thugs Brutally Beat Another Man

    By Clash Daily / 29 July 2013 / 130 Comments

    * ClashDaily- If you were listening to this via satellite radio you’d have no idea that the attackers were black. The also don’t mention the color of the victim. No word from Obama or Sharpton regarding this incident…

    BALTIMORE (WJZ) — A man is brutally attacked by a group of teens in Little Italy. Police say four of the attackers are in custody. Three of them are juveniles.

    The victim was walking home from work when he was attacked near Bank and Exeter Streets. Police say the brutality of the crime is why three juveniles arrested are being charged as adults.

    A brutal attack in the heart of Little Italy. Police say a man walking home from work at an area restaurant is attacked and severely beaten near Bank and Exeter Streets by a mob of at least ten teens.

    Four of the alleged attackers, three of them minors, have been arrested and charged.

    “It’s very upsetting because you feel suspect now. Now you see a group of kids, children, and you have to worry if they’re not going to pounce on you,” said Giovanna Blattermann, neighbor.

    The assault happened in front of Giovanna Blattermann’s house. She’s also watched video of the attack–captured by her neighbors surveillance camera.

    While the suspects took the man’s phone, Blattermann says that’s not what they were after.

    “They beat this boy. He got up, he’d run, they beat him. He got up, he’d run, they beat him. He got up, he’d run, they beat him,” said Blattermann.

    The suspects range in age from 16 to 19, but police say because of the brutality of the crime, the minors aren’t being charged lightly.


    Read more:

  • On KOMO news, they’re starting to treat the random beatings seriously. Mostly ‘cus of Tuba Man.

The Real Message From Pope Francis During World Youth Day Rio

Sunday, July 28, AD 2013

I suspect in the coming days, weeks, months and years much will be written about World Youth Day Rio and the message of Pope Francis. Perhaps, the crux of the message can be found streaming on the Vatican’s website late Saturday night, Bring the Gospel to the world. It hardly sounds radical and yet the Gospel message is radical; a message that rejected the decadent Roman Empire’s culture; and here we are nearly 2,000 years later and western culture is doing its best to emulate what was done in Rome circa the time of Caligula, Nero and Trajan.

In our hyperbolic media age many on the Christian right, the Christian left and the secular media in general has been spinning the message to tilt to their objective. The nature of the Secular Left is to make others think their views will inevitably conquer the world due to their intellect. The Right (both religious and non-religious) seems to think we are ever closer to completely buying into the Left’s ultimate goals. Both views are wrong. Salvation history is full of ebbs and flows.

Pope Francis in his address told the faithful, particularly sisters, priests and bishops to get out and preach the gospel. He lamented that too many of them are busy with things of the world. In a way the Holy Father was calling them out for being a bunch of “Marthas” when we really need a bunch of “Marys.”

This really resonated for me because I returned home late Saturday night after attending a Defending the Faith Conference at Franciscan University in Steubenville. The eminent Dr. Peter Kreeft gave a talk on how to lose and win “The Culture War.” In a nutshell, Dr Kreeft said too many orthodox minded faithful are putting their hopes in political movements and candidates when they should be confronting what the culture is doing to our faith and society at large.

Continue reading...

8 Responses to The Real Message From Pope Francis During World Youth Day Rio

  • Just a minor point, but New York and L.A. aren’t unhappy by many measures (such as suicide rates), and the number of therapists is simply a reflection of there being a lot of money in those cities combined with therapy not being considered shameful or “weak”. Many of the poor have need but not the money for therapists.

  • Anon, on the surface your point sound valid, but with increased government assistance the poor certainly have more access to therapy than in years past. However, I will relate to you something a Catholic bookstore owner once told me. She said the older clientele she has rarely bought religious oriented self help books so she learned not to stock too many. She related to me that even though they were by and large particularly well off, they spent their time in prayer rather than in therapy. They had particular prayers, saints and of course the Trinity to which they prayed. They learned this in their youth and kept with the practice. It was a particularly revealing conversation.

  • Good on you David. A great article. I am a bit concerned that Pope Francis’ messages seem to keep requiring interpretation in order to point out their orthodox core. Perhaps, this is reflective of just how much pressure there is now days to not say anything too contrary to popular and secular opinion. Maybe that’s why Jesus spoke in parables too. I guess I just wish there were more spiritually extreme Catholics out there making obviously orthodox comments like we read in the lives of the Saints and apparitions of Our Lady. Messages about the power of the Sacraments, our eternal destiny, the value of sacrifice… Maybe that’s my challenge.

  • Pingback: WYD Special Edition -
  • “Perhaps, this is reflective of just how much pressure there is now days to not say anything too contrary to popular and secular opinion.”

    I would submit he said many things that are as unpopular and anti-secular as can be. You just won’t get them through the LSM.

  • Callan Leach, you said, “I guess I just wish there were more spiritually extreme Catholics out there making obviously orthodox comments like we read in the lives of the Saints and apparitions of Our Lady. Messages about the power of the Sacraments, our eternal destiny, the value of sacrifice”

    In addition to this excellent magazine, you might consider subscribing to “Crisis Magazine, A Voice for the Catholic Laity.”

    You will discover many orthodox Catholics engaging their liberal interlocutors on a myriad of issues.

  • I’m from the Philippines and maybe the description you gave is from a decade ago. However, even if there are no malls that I know of that plays the Angelus on the loud speakers, there are masses on Sundays inside the malls and probably she heard it there, which is quite loud and may reach a few meters away. The culture of materialism is basically creeping in year on year, more people continue to become lapse Catholics. I hope that the reverence won’t be choked by the weeds or the voices of malicious rabble rousers in media and the legislature which take their cue from their foreign western counterparts.

  • Thank you so much for sharing this Dave! It was a wonderful read! It’s a very good analysis of Pope’s message. It was clear and easy to understand.

Uncle Ralph, the Rosary and the Korean War

Sunday, July 28, AD 2013


I love praying the Rosary.  It always has given me peace whenever I have recited it, and my family prays the Sorrowful Mysteries together each Lent.  However, the person who had the greatest devotion to the Rosary in my family was my Protestant Uncle Ralph.

When I was growing up my family lived next door to Uncle Ralph and his family.  Uncle Ralph was my favorite uncle.  He always had a sense of fun, loved to shoot the breeze with kids and did a hilarious Donald Duck imitation.  My Dad’s family were all Protestant;   my brother and I were Catholic because my Dad had married my Catholic Mom, so I was surprised one day during my teen years when Uncle Ralph pulled out his rosary and told me how he came to always carry it.


Ralph was a homesick 19 year old in 1951.  His Army National Guard unit had been called up for duty in the Korean War.  He was stationed in California waiting to be shipped out, when, one Sunday, he had dinner with a Catholic family under an Army sponsored program to give troops some home-cooked meals.  Ralph enjoyed himself immensely.  The family treated him like a long lost son and brother, and the meal was superb.  Ralph was relaxing after the meal when the father of the family, a WWI vet, handed him a Rosary.  “Here son, this got me safe back from France and I hope it does the same for you in Korea.”  Ralph wasn’t sure what a Rosary was, but he was touched by the gesture and he took the Rosary.

Continue reading...

14 Responses to Uncle Ralph, the Rosary and the Korean War

  • I served in Korea in the US Air Force. I was stationed in Suwon at the 51st Figther Interceptor Wing. Somewhere in September 1953, My replacement showed up with orders to take over the communications radio maintenance responsibility. So I had no more duties, I then offered myself to the Wing Chaplain, Fr. Daniel Campbell. A Jesuit, he was a hoot. every morning he would go on the flight line and bless the pilots, and when they came back he would get loaded with them at the officers club. He was a dynamite man, I happy I knew and worked with him

  • Beautiful story and beautiful tribute to your Uncle. Thank you for sharing it and him with your readers.

  • “I served in Korea in the US Air Force.”

    Thank you for your service to our country.

    My Dad was in the Air Force during the Korean War. He was a supply sergeant stationed at Pepperrell in Newfoundland. He was never assigned to Korea which is just as well for me, since he met my Mom as a result who was a resident of Saint John’s.

    The 51st named a plane after Father Dan!

  • “Thank you for sharing it and him with your readers.”

    Thank you for your kind words Tina. Uncle Ralph was a very special man, and I smile every time I remember him, which is a very good legacy for anyone.

  • My Father in Law served in the 2nd Inf. Div. as a driver for a Catholic chaplain. One day as his newly married Son in law I innocently asked about his experiences in Korea. He talked for 3 or 4 hours about what happened and what he saw, and the heroic efforts his chaplain went through to provide the sacraments to the dead and dying. I later found out that he hadn’t even told his wife or family any of those stories. I was honored to have been able to hear them.

  • To show the perfidy of those in power one need only look at the Soldiers in Ponchos.. they were chosen because the original memorial design showed to vividly why they were there. Weapons in hand.. Since the Armistice (not end of the Korean War) some 1500 more American Servicemen have lost their lives on the Pennesula.. No doubt 10s of thousands more have been seriously injured or permantly disabled..

    Worth it? Yes

    Take a look at the North.. a cesspool of misery and sadness.

    Take a look at South Korea.. Beautiful, Vibrant Alive….they are really one of the few peoples we have ever fought beside who have kept faith with US as a Nation and in spite of media hype continue to demonstrate profound respect for Americans and the American GIs who served there in the past and continue to do so today.

    Well worth it..


  • “I was honored to have been able to hear them.”


  • The Korean War was a good war, but the Vietnam War fought for similar ends and against similar enemies, by similar and sometimes even the same men was a bad war. This is the kind of disconnect one has endure when listening to leftwing pundits.

  • Take a look at South Korea.. Beautiful, Vibrant Alive…

    Making really nice minivans and selling our guys really nice leather jackets at dirt-cheap prices…. (for two examples from our household!)

    I liked Rep. of Korea, when our ship would pull in. We even had ROKers on the ship for some exercises! (Security was crazy– not because South Korea was suspect, but because who wouldn’t spy if North Korea had your family?)

  • Don beautiful story, could you send me a copy of this story about my dad.Thank you!

  • I sure will Linda. I miss your Dad quite a bit and think about him frequently.

  • I miss him every day, I
    was so lucky to have had him as my father,I think of the times us kids were growing up with you and Larry, good memories.

  • Indeed Linda. You and Christie and me and Larry, we were more like brothers and sisters than cousins! Those were good days.

  • Wonderful story Don about Uncle Ralph and the rosary. Thank you for sharing.

Patrick J. Byrne, Bishop and Martyr

Sunday, July 28, AD 2013

Yesterday was the 60th anniversary of the armistice ending the Korean War.  That War produced many Christian martyrs as the Communist powers actively persecuted and murdered Christians luckless enough to fall into their hands.  One martyr that has never received the recognition that I believe he deserves is Bishop Patrick J. Byrne.

Born on October 26, 1888 in Washington DC, he was ordained in 1915 and joined the newly formed  The Catholic Foreign Mission Society of America, better known today as Maryknoll.  In 1923 he was chosen to begin the mission in Korea.  Named Prefect Apostolic of Pyongyang.  By the time he returned to the States in 1929 the Catholic population of Korea had increased by 25,000 and there were numerous Korean priests and sisters.

In 1935 he was assigned to open a mission in Kyoto, Japan and in 1937 was named Prefect Apostolic of Kyoto.  Kept under house arrest during the War, he broadcast calming messages to the Japanese people, at the request of the Japanese government following the surrender of Japan.  During the occupation of Japan, Supreme Allied Commander General Douglas MacArthur praised Monsignor Byrne for his assistance in helping bring peace to Japan.

In 1947 he was named Apostolic Visitor to Korea.  Two years later he was named the first Apostolic Delegate to Korea and titular Bishop of Gazera.

On July 11, 1950 he was seized by the Communists after the fall of Seoul and put on trial.  Bishop Byrne refused to be docile at the show trial and a second trial was held with similar results in Pyongyang.  He was then marched to the Yalu, a journey that took four months in appalling weather with almost no food or water.  He became ill with pneumonia and died on November 25, 1950.  The night before he died he told his companions:

Continue reading...

One Response to Patrick J. Byrne, Bishop and Martyr

  • Good info (again). Maryknoll priests continue in Korea today. Some of their efforts are documented at Catholic American Eyes in Korea blog.

Ho Chi Minh, Obama and History

Saturday, July 27, AD 2013

That President Obama praised dead Communist dictator Ho Chi Minh will come as a surprise only to Americans who haven’t been paying attention, which, alas, is a large segment of the population.  For the benefit of those people, historian Ronald Radosh in The Wall Street Journal gives some background to Ho:


During World War II, Vietnam—a French colony—was taken over by Japan, and toward the end of the conflict, with Japan in retreat, a power vacuum developed. Ho Chi Minh, leading the Viet Minh communist guerrilla group, saw a chance to seize power before the French could restore colonial rule. He needed allies and knew that the American president, Franklin Roosevelt, had a reputation for being anti-French and anti-colonial. Thus began Ho’s courtship of the U.S. by citing the Declaration of Independence and appealing to the American ideal of liberty.

His aim, according to Ho’s biographer, William Duiker, was to “induce the United States to support the legitimacy of his government, rather than a return of the French.”

In reality, Ho was a “disciplined Communist, who had “proved time and again his profound loyalty to Communism,” according to the ex-communist German revolutionary Ruth Fischer, writing in Foreign Affairs in 1954. She had known him in Moscow in the 1920s when he was receiving his training.

Ho didn’t get the U.S. support he sought, but he still succeeded in his national takeover, proclaiming himself president of a provisional government in what he called the Vietnam Democratic Republic. In October 1945, just how democratic the republic would be became clear: Ho ordered the slaughter of his political opponents, including 50,000 of the then-powerful Trotskyist communists. During a trip to Paris in late 1945, Ho told the French Socialist leader Daniel Guerin, “All those who do not follow the line which I have laid down will be broken.”

In his own writings during the war, Ho Chi Minh stressed that the revolutionaries had to have a “tactical, flexible attitude towards the national bourgeoisie,” but as for the Trotskyists, “there can be no compromise, no concession.”

Ho’s posturing as a Jefferson-inspired lover of independence failed to dupe the U.S. in the 1940s. Let’s be generous and assume that antiwar protesters in the 1960s and early 1970s didn’t know any better when they bought into his fiction. Let’s give President Obama the same benefit of the doubt. But let’s also retire the idea that Ho Chi Minh had the slightest interest in the Declaration of Independence except as a tool he once deployed hoping to achieve his communist goals.

Continue reading...

5 Responses to Ho Chi Minh, Obama and History

  • Pingback: Pres. Obama praises Communist dictator, mass murderer Ho Chi Minh | Fr. Z's Blog
  • Unless my memory is playing nasty tricks with me, if you find the 1st edition of Gloria Steinem’s Outrageous Acts and Everyday Rebellions you will find therein the sentence fragment “Ho Chih Minh was the George Washington of Asia”, an attitude she says she picked up on a fellowship in India during the years running from 1956 to 1958. The phrase is not present in the second edition, published in 1995. (The first hit the presses in 1984).

    Keep in mind, Gloria Steinem was a personal friend of John Kenneth Galbraith from about 1962 forward (he blurbed an early collection of writings) and certainly congenial with George McGovern and Allard Loewenstein. An agreeable opinion of her was not universal in those circles (Abraham Ribicoff did not want her around), but she was well-connected and not a rebel or an outcast. She was too old for hippie subcultures ca. 1966 (and, in any case, had to earn a living) and not a member of an explicitly and constitutionally pro-Communist organization of the sort that David Dellinger and Tom Hayden ran; she was active in electoral politics, but with Loewenstein’s nexus.

  • As a Vietnam vet, obama’s remarks were offensive.

  • This president also said we have “57 states”. Whatever—these remarks were insensitive and demeaning to so many Vietnam vets and to so many Americans. But he doesn’t have a clue because he does not know anything about history.

  • “That Obama repeats the old bromides of the ‘anti-war’, actually pro-Communist, left of the Sixties that attempted to paint Ho as some sort of Jeffersonian Democrat either betrays immense ignorance or something far, far worse.”

    Something far, far worse.

What’s the Matter Stephen Foster?

Saturday, July 27, AD 2013

Something for the weekend.  That’s What’s the Matter by Stephen Foster.  The Civil War probably killed Stephen Foster.  The most notable American composer of his time, in a day when copyright enforcement was nil, Foster always just managed to scratch out a precarious living.  As the beginning of the song indicates with the coming of the War many of the songs he had written in peace were no longer in demand.

Broke and suffering from a persistent fever, deserted by his wife who had taken their daughter to live in Pittsburgh in 1861, Foster fell in his hotel room in New York City on January 10, 1864 and gashed his head on a wash basin.  He was admitted to Bellevue and died three days later, at age 37.  Ironically his most successful song, Beautiful Dreamer, was published a few months after his death:

Continue reading...

One Response to What’s the Matter Stephen Foster?

  • I love the music of Stephen Foster. I have a CD entitled Love Songs. The songstress is Arleen Auger. She had a beautiful soprano voice. She sings Why, no one to love, written by Foster. He was such a huge talent. Sorry he had such a sad ending to his life. God rest his soul and thank you for writing about him.

Quotes Suitable for Framing: Ronald Reagan

Friday, July 26, AD 2013



“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.”

Continue reading...

6 Responses to Quotes Suitable for Framing: Ronald Reagan

The Woman Beside Weiner

Friday, July 26, AD 2013




As Anthony Weiner demonstrates that being a sociopath is not always an advantage in politics, Andrew McCarthy, who was the lead prosecutor in the successful prosecution of  Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman and eleven others for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, explains at National Review Online why Weiner’s wife is much more interesting than her “stand by her worthless man” routine indicates:




Charlotte’s revulsion over Huma Abedin’s calculated “stand by your man” routine is surely right. Still, it is amazing, as we speculate about Ms. Abedin’s political future, that the elephant in the room goes unnoticed, or at least studiously unmentioned.

Sorry to interrupt the Best Enabler of a Sociopath Award ceremony but, to recap, Ms. Abedin worked for many years at a journal that promotes Islamic-supremacist ideology that was founded by a top al-Qaeda financier, Abdullah Omar Naseef. Naseef ran the Rabita Trust, a formally designated foreign terrorist organization under American law. Ms. Abedin and Naseef overlapped at the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs (JMMA) for at least seven years. Throughout that time (1996–2003), Ms. Abdein worked for Hillary Clinton in various capacities.

Ms. Abedin’s late father, Dr. Zyed Abedin, was recruited by Naseef to run the JMMA in Saudi Arabia. The journal was operated under the management of the World Assembly of Muslim Youth, a virulently anti-Semitic and sharia-supremacist organization. When Dr. Abedin died, editorial control of the journal passed to his wife, Dr. Saleha Mahmood Abedin — Huma’s mother.

Saleha Abedin is closely tied to the Muslim Brotherhood and to supporters of violent jihad. Among other things, she directs an organization – the International Islamic Committee for Woman and Child. The IICWC, through its parent entity (the International Islamic Council for Dawa and Relief), is a component of the Union for Good (also known as the Union of Good), another formally designated terrorist organization. The Union for Good is led by Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the notorious Muslim Brotherhood jurist who has issued fatwas calling for the killing of American military and support personnel in Iraq as well as suicide bombings in Israel. (As detailed here, the Obama White House recently hosted Qaradawi’s principal deputy, Sheikh Abdulla bin Bayyah, who also endorsed the fatwa calling for the killing of U.S. troops and personnel in Iraq.)

Like Sheikh Qaradawi, who helped write the charter for the IICWC, Saleha Abedin is an influential sharia activist who has, for example, published a book called Women in Islam that claims man-made laws enslave women. It reportedly provides sharia justifications for such practices as female-genital mutilation, the death penalty for apostates from Islam, the legal subordination of women, and the participation of women in violent jihad. Dr. Abedin has nevertheless been hailed in the progressive press as a “leading voice on women’s rights in the Muslim world” (to quote Foreign Policy). What they never quite get around to telling you is that this means “women’s rights” in the repressive sharia context.

Back to daughter Huma. In the late mid to late Nineties, while she was an intern at the Clinton White House and an assistant editor at JMMA, Ms. Abedin was a member of the executive board of the Muslim Students Association (MSA) at George Washington University, heading its “Social Committee.” The MSA, which has a vast network of chapters at universities across North America, is the foundation of the Muslim Brotherhood’s infrastructure in the United States. Obviously, not every Muslim student who joins the MSA graduates to the Brotherhood — many join for the same social and networking reasons that cause college students in general to join campus organizations. But the MSA does have an indoctrination program, which Sam Tadros describes as a lengthy process of study and service that leads to Brotherhood membership — a process “designed to ensure with absolute certainty that there is conformity to the movement’s ideology and a clear adherence to its leadership’s authority.” The MSA gave birth to the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), the largest Islamist organization in the U.S. Indeed the MSA and ISNA consider themselves the same organization. Because of its support for Hamas (a designated terrorist organization that is the Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestinian branch), ISNA was named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation case, in which several Hamas operatives were convicted of providing the terrorist organization with lavish financing.

Continue reading...

13 Responses to The Woman Beside Weiner

  • Thank you for this. I was upset by the “stand by her worthless man” routine, but I didn’t know about this. Wow.

  • You didn’t know about this because it runs counter to the agenda/narrative.

  • If Huma Abedin’s husband divorces her, she may be deported as an undesirable . Weiner is her cover. Huma is the elephant in the room.

  • “…she may be deported as an undesirable.”

    I see no realistic scenario in which a Hillary Clinton protégée at her level would ever be deported as an undesirable. If anything, her connections to Muslim power circles make such an outcome even less likely.

    Obviously, hitching her political aspiration to such a wayward pony seems at present a miscalculation, but if Carlos Danger’s sins had not become so public, imagine all the wonderful blackmail opportunities that could have been brought to bear by his wife’s associates to keep him in line. It’s a plotline worthy of Hitchcock — if only the notion of a Jewish politician serving as a Trojan horse for the Muslim Brotherhood were not so politically incorrect.

    Besides, Muslim-alert organizations (e.g. have been denouncing Mrs. Weiner for years now, with very little to show for it. It is ironic that the political marriage that was designed to legitimize both of these people is now helping to marginalize them. There’s at least some poetic justice in that.

    All that being said, I do feel genuinely sorry for the woman to have wound up with such a psychopath. Who would have guessed that an arranged marriage designed to advance the murderous designs of the Muslim Brotherhood could be so bereft of family values?

  • I hate to ask a stupid question, but if Huma believed in sharia law, why would she marry a Jewish man? Doesn’t the Muslim faith go through the father – so that if your father is Muslim you are automatically considered a Muslim? What if your father is Jewish? Or Christian?

  • You are correct Sharon that Islamic law forbids a Muslim woman from marrying a non-Muslim man. Weiner would have had to have converted to Islam. There is no evidence of that. Assuming that is the case, an alternative explanation is that the marriage is one of politics and a sham. Considering that the man who officiated at the marriage is that paragon of marital fidelity, Bill Clinton, I give some credence to that theory. Questions have been raised as to what legal authority Bill Clinton had to marry anyone:

    It is interesting that Huma, the most high profile Islamic woman in the country, has received no static from the Islamic community as far as I know, for this marriage that flies in the face of Islam. The closer you look at this, the more curious it becomes.

  • Mac,

    You’re 100% correct.

    This Weiner-Abedin political alliance (a.k.a. marriage) is exactly the same as Billary’s: meant to advance Whiner’s putrid, political aspirations and Abedin’s (likely not “sleeping with the enemy”) joyless jihad.

  • The disreputable Mr. Sailer has spoken of the “Idiocratization” of American public life ( You look at the trio running for Mayor of New York (or any three North American Episcopal bishops) and you realize he may be right.

  • Instapundit reports that NBC is planning a Hillary Clinton miniseries. “Prepare yourselves for the ‘all hail Hillary movies’.”

    The media reports nothing truthfully. They consistently spawn “news” that bears no relation to the truth, not even that inherent in a common calumny.

    The MSM advances the progressive agenda: no more no less.

    Go ask the widows of Benghazi.

  • With Islam its all about power. Someone in Abedin’s position would be expected to play along, if indeed the marriage is loveless. Muslims broke 90% for Obama in the elections, This shows that for all the calls of silly Christians for a moral front with Muslims against abortion and the homosexual agenda, the Muslims would rather take care of themselves first. The white Christians are about the only considerable bloc that votes on principles.

  • This shows that for all the calls of silly Christians for a moral front with Muslims against abortion and the homosexual agenda…

    I know I’ve pointed this out before, but contrary to widespread Catholic opinion, Islam is not particularly opposed abortion. A few Islamic scholars prohibit it, but the majority follow the “ensoulment” principle by which a baby is not a person until some later stage of the pregnancy. (And really, which of those scholars is a woman – or whoever has control of her – likely to heed once either of them decide that a baby would be an inconvenience?)

    There is also no particular prohibition against contraception within Islam (though of course numerous Muslims power brokers believe in restricting anything that many in the West == rightly or wrongly –regard as sexually liberating to women).

    To put it less charitably, the Vatican is now in a position where it is trying to make common cause with those who think gays should be stoned and women (not to mention Christians, Jews, etc.) should be repressed. Even those who understand that one cannot always choose one’s allies have to also realize that such an alliance is unlikely to end well.

  • HA, my impression is that Muslims follow a very strict line when it comes to abortion and contraception. They are very close to Catholics in this regard. Muslims are generally quite nice people – I grew up with countless Muslim friends. Its when the mullahs take charge that the problems begin.

  • If I were to generalize from my own “impressions”, I would say that it is wise to refrain from generalizing too much from one’s own impressions. The question ultimately is what Islamic teaching does and does not permit. Those who believe that life is sacred from the moment of its conception need to be realistic over how much support for their views they will find among Muslims.

    And that’s great that the Muslims you know are nice people, but the observation is likewise a non sequitir. Whatever one chooses to extrapolate from a rabble of supporters with “Hail, Satan” signs, in my experience most of the people who think a woman’s right to choose is the paramount issue when it comes to abortion are just as nice as the people on my side of the issue. Likewise, Muslims by and large tend to take marriage far more seriously than the typical Christian but there is only so much common ground I will be able to find with those who believe polygamy is an acceptable lifestyle choice, regardless of how nice they are.

Fourth Trimester Abortions?

Thursday, July 25, AD 2013

You can never underestimate low, low information voters.  It is a funny bit, but I wonder on campuses how many students would be willing to sign a petition allowing a mother to commit infanticide up to the age of one for the victim?  I guess infanticide would first have to be defined for many of the individuals approached.  If infanticide is too “harsh” a term I bet “retroactive abortion” would do the trick!

Continue reading...

7 Responses to Fourth Trimester Abortions?

  • You may think you’re kidding but the British Medical Journal ran an article advocating “post-natal abortion” which caused an uproar.
    Far from being ashamed the authors bemoaned the fact that the hoi polloi now have online access to their enlightened deliberations.

  • I think the video is extremely interesting because it displays a startling lack of scepticism and reasonableness by the signers.

    For example, one woman asks “does it harm the baby?” and, while signing the petition, briefly engages the petition seeker in conversation. She suspects something is wrong with his pitch but, because it isn’t immediatly evident, she signs anyway.

    This seems to me to be significant because it may hint that a general lack of scepticism is one of the core problems with polling reliability and the GOP’s message in elections.

    On reflection and anecdotally, I notice in new hires – ages 40 and under – that I have reflexively taken to probing their experience to determine if they already possess the requisite scepticism for the job. In most cases they do but I have, on a few occasions, had to convince them that 1. people lie, 2. what is true can be discovered, and 3. there is nothingrude about asking for clarification.

    We see this at play in the video: I am asked to sign a petition, you give me non-specific information or information I don’t readily grasp about the petition, I suspect there is something wrong but, rather than challenging you, I sign it so as to end the uncomfortable encounter.

    It really is extraordinary and the phenominon is worthy of further consideration and observation.

  • I saw a video wherein a faux-petition-maker told obama zombies that President Alinsky, er, Obama needs to repeal the Bill of Rights. He didn’t need to say, ” . . . in order to get it done.”

    Most of the imbeciles signed the petition to repeal Constitutional liberties without comment.

    Liberalism is a fiasco. And, the surplus of resentful, uninformed people continually expands.

    Each day, the president’s professional liars and the MSM (accomplices in national fraud) mass-produce propaganda that bears no relation to the truth/facts, not even the minimal germ of veracity that exists in the common lie.

  • Peter Singer of Princeton’s DeCamp Chair of Bioethics no less, has publicly advocated post natal abortion until six years of age, in case the parents find that they do not want to be parents. Singer is still at Princeton teaching the next generation that they have a right to destroy the human being, our constitutional posterity, George Washington’s constitutional posterity, endowed with an unalienable right to Life, as though it was normal, without a shred of shame or moral outrage. Indoctrination into genocide.
    T. Shaw: “Most of the imbeciles signed the petition to repeal Constitutional liberties without comment”…without informed consent, this maneuver is a swindle and unconstitutional.

  • Peter Singer’s 1994 book, “Rethinking Life and Death: The Collapse of Our Traditional Ethics” is valuable for the way in which he exposes the fallacies of most pro-abortion arguments.

    “[The argument that a fetus is not alive] is a resort to a convenient fiction that turns an evidently living being into one that legally is not alive. Instead of accepting such fictions, we should recognise that the fact that a being is human, and alive, does not in itself tell us whether it is wrong to take that being’s life”

    As a utilitarian, Singer argues that only beings that have preferences, such as the desire to go on living, can experience pleasure from their satisfaction or pain from their frustration. His support for animal rights is a corollary of this.

    Of course, Singer’s own argument is a trick of perspective; what it does is to take the ceaseless, living flow of which the universe is composed and to make cuts across it, inserting artificial stops or gaps in what is really a continuous and indivisible process. The effect of these stops or gaps is to produce the impression of a world of apparently solid objects. These have no existence as separate objects in reality. It is rather like taking stills from a motion picture. It was this insight of Henri Bergson that produced so great an effect on the Catholic philosopher, Maurice Blondel.

  • LOL at the “Carlos Danger” line!

National Public Radio’s “fair and balanced” coverage of the papal peregrinage…

Thursday, July 25, AD 2013


It’s always fun to take a peek into how government funded radio (National Public Radio, or “NPR”) covers news concerning the Catholic Church.  With the papal peregrinage to Brazil underway, NPR doesn’t disappoint in it’s fair-and-balanced coverage of events…yet once again.

In its “Parallels…Many Stories, One World” blog for July 24, 2013, there’s not one story about the papal peregrinage.  But, there is a story about a radical Brazilian priest who was excommunicated.

Padre Beto

Padre Beto, aka Roberto Francisco Daniel

“Padre Beto”—aka Roberto Francisco Daniel—become a Catholic priest after going to college, working, and having sex.  Which, along with what he’s been told by penitents in the confessional, the Padre says, informs his “different way of looking at church doctrine.”

What’s that include?

Premarital sex, gay marriage, divorce, and open marriages where either party can have an extramarital affair as long as both spouses agree.

According to Padre Beto:

The Catholic Church has to change. We know now because of scientific discovery a great deal about human sexuality, for example.

After this, “Parallels” devotes one paragraph to the papal peregrinage and immediately returns to Padre Beto’s “surprise” excommunication after he was “repeatedly warned by the church to stop making his views public, to recant and repent.”  But, in April 2013, and without warning following an ecclesiastical hearing, Padre Beto was informed that he was excommunicated.

“It never even crossed my mind that they would excommunicate me,” Padre Beto says.

What’s next for Padre Beto?

He hopes soon to be able to preside over a so-called “homosexual marriage.”  He says:

I will do it with a great sense of peace because where there is love, God is present.

This is how government funded radio (National Public Radio, or “NPR”) covers news concerning the Catholic Church.  With all of the events surrounding the papal peregrinage, NPR first focuses upon the loss of the Catholics in Brazil to evangelical denominations and second excommunicated priests.

How’s that for “fair and balanced”?



To read the NPR “Parallel” blog, click on the following link:

To read about Padre Beto, click on the following link:

Continue reading...

16 Responses to National Public Radio’s “fair and balanced” coverage of the papal peregrinage…

  • I really don’t see the problem with NPR’s coverage of this. After all, here in the U.S. we have a robust Catholic media, nearly all of whom are covering the Pope in Brazil with practically breath-by-breath accounts. Why should they duplicate efforts? Instead, they’ve chosen to cover an angle which is probably NOT being covered by any other Catholic media source. Hence, they ARE, in fact, providing a balance to the other sources.

  • Complete distortions, exaggerations, fabrications, misrepresentations, omissions, and outright lies – 24/7.

    Instapundit: “Accomplices to fraud.”

  • “Hence, they ARE, in fact, providing a balance to the other sources.”

    That would be akin to stating that the National Catholic Reporter is “fair and balanced” in its reportage of matters Catholic.

    Sorry, but not accurate. The term “fair and balanced” concerns the reportage, not the balance across media outlets.

  • Typical for NPR (our tax $$ at work)

  • I suspect the sort of bourgeois who works for NPR sees no anomaly at all. George Will once described the public broadcasting formula this way: “seven parts propaganda, one part ‘balance'”. Also, they will select for ‘balance’ a figure most of their audience would dismiss out of hand (e.g. a press agent employed by a lobbying group).

  • Cynthia, when news organizations are other directed they are usually in a pack chasing the same story.

  • One other thing, Cynthia. The National Catholic Register has a niche audience. Someone outside the niche might just benefit from who-what-where reporting.

  • I think this actually qualifies as the “kid glove” treatment. Were Pope Francis not the great-Red-hope of the Catholic progressive wing, we’d instead be treated to a slew of stories about Brazilian pedophile-priests and the ossified Vatican that shelters them, book-ended by interviews with Gary Wills and Dominic Crossan

    Then again, the news cycle is still in spin, so we’ll see what the next few days bring.

  • Art,
    I love Will’s description. From now on I will call my 7 parts gin and one part vermouth martini an “NPR”.

  • On the BBC television news this evening: Pope Francis was at ease with people, “unlike his predecessor”. (Funny, when the Beeb covered the Sept 2010 papal visit they were saying how much at ease Benedict looked surrounded by crowds). Shots of young people celebrating (sic) Mass “in the Brazilian way” (they were acting as if they were at a football match). Shots of poor areas with a reminder about Francis’s concern for the poor. An interview with a gay Catholic activist. The reporter then warns “The new Pope is said to be doctrinally conservative” (a remark which may have been legitimate when he was still Abp of BA) so only time will tell if he is prepared to meet demands for change.

    Par for the course. As for BBC Radio, all its Catholic pundits are left-liberal, like the Corporation itself.

  • “The National Catholic Register has a niche audience.”

    Like NPR.

  • Greg – As I am sure many others will point out, The National Catholic Register is not kept afloat by our tax dollars, and does not have an obligation to be non-partisan. But in a culture where our tax dollars are forcing Catholics and other pro-lifers to support murder of the unborn, by way of federal support of Planned Parenthood in particular,your attitude is not surprising, only disgusting.

  • Edie:

    What I was talking about was that both have niche audience. Although NPR does get federal money, it makes up a small part of its budget. It is mainly self-supporting. Yes, NPR should stop receiving government funding.

  • As per John Nolan’s comment, the tone of the coverage of Francis is going to change the day Benedict passes away. For the time being, Francis is a foil. The press can tar Benedict by complimenting Francis’s decency, care for the poor, et cetera. Once Benedict dies, the press will discover Francis’s ultraconservative side.

  • IIRC, Our Sunday Visitor had a paper circulation of around 60,000 around the time electronic publishing took off and was the most extensively distributed Catholic publication. NPR claims an audience of 26 million. There is niche and then there is niche.

  • Both have their niches. One just has a much larger one.

Fake Pope Francis Quote Takes Internet By Storm

Thursday, July 25, AD 2013

If you move in Catholic circles on Facebook, you’ve probably seen the following quote, allegedly spoken by Pope Francis at World Youth Day this week, being passed around:

“We need saints without cassocks, without veils – we need saints with jeans and tennis shoes. We need saints that go to the movies that listen to music, that hang out with their friends. We need saints that place God in first place ahead of succeeding in any career. We need saints that look for time to pray every day and who know how to be in love with purity, chastity and all good things. We need saints – saints for the 21st century with a spirituality appropriate to our new time. We need saints that have a commitment to helping the poor and to make the needed social change.

We need saints to live in the world, to sanctify the world and to not be afraid of living in the world by their presence in it. We need saints that drink Coca-Cola, that eat hot dogs, that surf the internet and that listen to their iPods. We need saints that love the Eucharist, that are not afraid or embarrassed to eat a pizza or drink a beer with their friends. We need saints who love the movies, dance, sports, theater. We need saints that are open sociable normal happy companions. we need saints who are in this world and who know how to enjoy the best in this world without being callous or mundane. We need saints.”

– Pope Francis (World Youth Day 2013)

The thing is, it’s a totally fake quote. There’s no evidence that Pope Francis ever said it.

Google around a bit, and you’ll find versions (some written as verse, many with slight variations) dating back to 2010. Some are attributed to Pope John Paul II, some to Pope Benedict XVI, some say that it is Pope Francis quoting John Paul II or Benedict XVI. One thing you will absolutely not find, however, is any quote of the text on the Vatican website or a reputable Catholic news source, because none of these popes ever said this.

If one gives it an extra moment’s thought, it seems particularly unlikely that Pope Francis would choose World Youth Day to give a shout out to global brands such as Coca-Cola and Apple, in saying that we need saints who use their products.

Of course, one of the problems with a faux Francis getting so much attention is that it draws things away from the things that Pope Francis really has been saying at World Youth Day this week, such as:

“It is true that nowadays, to some extent, everyone, including our young people, feels attracted by the many idols which take the place of God and appear to offer hope: money, success, power, pleasure. Often a growing sense of loneliness and emptiness in the hearts of many people leads them to seek satisfaction in these ephemeral idols. Dear brothers and sisters, let us be lights of hope! Let us maintain a positive outlook on reality.” [source]


Jesus has shown us that the face of God is that of a loving Father. Sin and death have been defeated. Christians cannot be pessimists! They do not look like someone in constant mourning. If we are truly in love with Christ and if we sense how much he loves us, our heart will “light up” with a joy that spreads to everyone around us. As Benedict XVI said here, in this Shrine: “the disciple knows that without Christ, there is no light, no hope, no love, no future” [source]

You can access all of Pope Francis’s addresses from World Youth Day on the Vatican website.

Continue reading...

8 Responses to Fake Pope Francis Quote Takes Internet By Storm

  • “The problem with internet quotes is that you can’t always depend on their accuracy” -Abraham Lincoln, 1864

  • I thought I recalled you had a really good post on fake quotes, which I was going to link to, but I couldn’t find it at the moment.

  • Quotes falsely attributed to Mother Teresa are so numerous that the nuns set up an internet page just to correct folks’ erroneous assumptions.

  • “I thought I recalled you had a really good post on fake quotes, which I was going to link to, but I couldn’t find it at the moment.”

    I have been meaning to do one for years although I have yet to get around to it. I have railed against fake quotes in the comboxes:

    “preach the Gospel always, if necessary, use words.”

    A good story G-Veg, but I wish to point out that Saint Francis never said that. That is a modern formulation from the 1990s.

    This popped up in the 1990s and you now see it repeated endlessly throughout Saint Blogs.

    Fake quotes are abhorrent to me since they lend authority to a phrase to which it is not entitled. With the advent of the internet fake quotes gain credence because so many people repeat them. Three examples: “We sleep safely in our beds at night because rough men stand ready to do violence on our behalf.” attributed to George Orwell is a fake quote that is repeated endlessly. “Government is not reason, it is not eloquence — it is force! Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action.” is a favorite George Washington quote that he never uttered. “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” was never said by Edmund Burke. – See more at:

  • ““The problem with internet quotes is that you can’t always depend on their accuracy” -Abraham Lincoln, 1864.” ” First good laugh I have had today.

  • “We sleep safely in our beds at night because rough men stand ready to do violence on our behalf.” attributed to George Orwell is a fake quote that is repeated endlessly. “We sleep safely in our beds at night because generous souls stand ready to protect and defend peace. “edited.

    “Government is not reason, it is not eloquence — it is force! Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action.” is a favorite George Washington quote that he never uttered. “Government is the will of the people for the common good” edited
    “We are all called to be great saints. Don’t miss the opportunity.” Mother Angelica of EWTN.
    The quote refers to people as “that”. Persons must be referred to as “who”, because of the Holy Spirit in their souls. God is “I AM WHO I AM”. In days past, people were counted by their soul: 200 souls were aboard the boat.

  • This is a different question but related to possible false quotes. I heard on my local radio station this morning that Pope Francis was quoted on his flight back to Rome something in to the fact that he will not judge gay priests. Is this true?