8 Responses to Muppet Candidates Open Thread

  • “THEY ALL STINK – 2016!” – bumper sticker

  • Excellent use of Cruz’ defining physical feature– that nose!

    I prefer Prickly City’s version for Hillary, though– Hunny Bunny.
    http://www.gocomics.com/pricklycity/2016/04/25

  • That’s a horrible insult to Beaker!

  • Trump isn’t Beaker; he’s Animal!

  • The first is a murderous pathological liar.
    The second is a commie pinko geriatric imbecile.
    The third is a philandering adulterous foul-mouthed playboy gambler.
    So the fourth is the only acceptable candidate.

  • You have insulted all swine. Have you ever heard a pig tell a lie?

  • I see the resemblances, except for Mrs. Clinton. She doesn’t look a bit like Beverly Sills! Oscar the Grouch, though… but before he softened up and got a pet (Wormy).

    And I’m with Bob Tanaka, Trump is not Beaker! Yeah, they both have orange hair but Trump in a lab coat? C’mon. Jim Cole may have it, Trump is Animal! Or Big Bird–but the one from the Bearded Spock universe. He’s gaudy, loud, and tasteless; at nine feet tall he gets all the attention in the room; and he bites, pecks, insults, and poops on everyone else.

  • Hillary Clinton as Miss Piggy. The first thing that comes to mind is the saying of Judge Sol Wachtler about indicting a ham sandwich. We won’t over-analyze the applicability of my strange recollections but recommend the reading of “The Empty Pantsuit” in the May 9th Edition of the National Review. The gist of Kevin D. Williamson’s article is that Hillary’s campaign is that” Hillary Clinton doesn’t stand for anything—and that is her appeal.” The first thing that comes to mind is that her campaign is like an episode of Seinfeld, it’s about nothing.

PopeWatch: Invitation

Saturday, April 30, AD 2016

PopeWatch2-199x300-199x300

 

From the only reliable source of Catholic news on the net, Eye of the Tiber:

 

Just days after Catholic internet personality Michael Voris revealed that he had been actively involved in homosexuality before his reversion to the faith, sources tell EOTT that the founder of The Vortex has been inundated with emails by members of the Roman Curia inviting him to visit the Vatican.

“We thought it might do him some good to just get away for a while,” one official said. “Sometimes you just gotta get away, you know? You gotta get away with some buddies, drink some beer, shoot some pool…you know, guy stuff. Maybe toss a couple throw pillows on the floor and watch a little Guys and Dolls on DVD, Lemon Drop Martinis…”

After being asked about why the sudden interest in a man that many Church officials criticized in the past, the official said, “Criticized? Who, us? No, no, we never criticized him. He’s one of us, after all. I mean…one of us as in Catholic. He’s Catholic and we’re Catholic. One of us in that way. After all, there’s no other way for him to be one of us, but to be Catholic. And a man. We’re all straight here in the Curia is what I’m getting at. What’s that? Past life, you say? He mentioned that it was part of his past as in, no longer…Oh, I see.”

At press time, Members of the Roman Curia have withdrawn their invitations, claiming they were busy washing their hair that night.

Continue reading...

2 Responses to PopeWatch: Invitation

One Response to Simple Gifts

Faith Is Not Dead In Hollywood

Friday, April 29, AD 2016

Faith based films have seen a marked increase in Hollywood in the last several years. Critics were quick to dismiss the success of the Passion of the Christ some 12 years ago claiming its success was only caused by controversy, and the bankrolling of the picture by a celebrity like Mel Gibson. However, a few short years later came Fireproof and Courageous.  Both these films had an estimated budget of 1-2 million dollars and they grossed about $33,000,000. In 2011 a subtle pro-life film October Baby came out and moved the genre along to more success.

This set up the wildly successful 2014 which included films like God’s not Dead, Heaven is for Real, Mom’s Night Out etc.  The success continued in 2015 and 2016. Word is the big studios are now reaching out to small faith based companies to see if they forge partnerships, which while helpful also presents some serious concerns for faith based companies.

In full disclosure, the writers and producers of God’s not Dead are friends of mine who a few years ago came to a talk I gave at Family Theater in Hollywood, and then took my wife and me to dinner after reading one of screenplays. In a faith based world filled with Evangelicals, Cary Solomon and Chuck Konzelman, as well as the crew at Family Theater in Hollywood are Catholic.  For those interested in Family Theater, you might want to read my past article on the late Father Patrick Peyton , the Rosary priest who is on the road to canonization.

In secular 2016, it is hard to believe how well received Father Peyton was in Hollywood.  Family Theater is where James Dean and William Shatner got their starts. A trip inside Family Theater affords one an array of pictures from Hollywood’s Golden Era when Lucille Ball, Bob Hope, Ronald Reagan and Grace Kelly all starred in Family Theater production films. A side note, tucked away in closet at Family Theater is an old film splicer. Rumor has it a young film student from USC named George Lucas used it to edit a Family Theater production film featuring a recently arrived young Canadian actor named William Shatner.

Everyone has their own story on how they ended up in the faith based realm. Chuck and Cary worked with the likes of Sylvester Stallone and other action oriented films for years until they could no longer resist the call to do faith based films. While they like Stallone, too few other people had the heart or character of Rocky Balboa in Hollywood. The initial years were tough, especially when hardly anyone was doing faith based films, they literally went into the valley before they could get back up to see the Promised Land. Needless to say, many thought they had lost their minds saying goodbye to the mainstream and taking the road less traveled.

Some readers might recall my initial 2014 review of God’s not Dead. The film made on a budget of $1,000,000 that initially generated a US box office figure of $60,000,000 and when all the worldwide receipts were accounted including foreign box office, DVD, movie subscription services etc totaled over$100,000,000. Generally writers and producers don’t see the kind of big money on an out of the blue success story like God’s not Dead. It comes later. If one thinks politics can be dirty, one needs to understand how the movie and music industry works.

Some film critics, even those in the faith based community complain that some of the scripts can be predictable, and perhaps the faith based angle needs to be more subtle, grittier and more provocative. Most faith based writers have no qualms with this argument. They are often put in a Catch 22, they either write a film that would be approved by faith based film companies like Pure Flix or risk the big studios saying a more subtle faith based approach is still too “faithful” for them.

Some secular critics showed nothing but venom for God’s not Dead, ( a Variety review actually used the words “Nazi propaganda film” to describe a scene) and the just released God’s not Dead 2 claiming Christians aren’t persecuted by the secular world. Then stories emerged that literally came right out of the plot lines of both films. Yet, these militant secularists give no apology.

While the critics of faith based films will always be sharpening their pens and swords, there is reason to believe that some of the Big Studios are seeing the light–or at least the financial possibilities. As mentioned above, some of the big time Hollywood studios are beginning to reach out to smaller faith based studios. Also, more faith based film companies are emerging. In addition up and comers like Nathan Leon, a talented writer, producer  and director received some notice for his film/documentary Sidewalk Chronicles on Unplanned Pregnancies which led to adoptions that positively changed the lives of so many. He and many others like him are generating some buzz in Tinseltown.

Indeed I met Leon and many other young talented men and women, while I was out in Hollywood a few weeks ago. I had been invited invited by Chuck and Cary for their premier party for God’s not Dead 2, over dinner they shared with me their big plans. They are literally this week putting the fishing touches on God’s not Dead 3 which should start to film in a month or so and be out in theaters next March or April. Also, they have an ambitious blueprint for the future and are seeking investors for their own studio and several projects are already in the works. Who knows where there this will all lead, but there are shoots and blossoms being seen in Hollywood. In a town known for fully embracing the dark side, shoots and blossoms of faith are a very good thing.

Continue reading...

8 Responses to Faith Is Not Dead In Hollywood

  • It’s so typical that the true fascist call foul and use discriptions like; “Nazi,” when they feel threatened, yet the freewheeling extermination of babies is freedom.

    “Work is Freedom,” the sign above the entrance to Auschwitz.

    Freedom to Kill. The new sign put up by our soul-less liberal neighbors. Poor lot.

  • Hollywood….TV, movies, popular music, I would argue has not embraced the Dark Side, but is an agent of the Dark Side.
    Seth McFarlane is at the same trims a talented and disgusting man. His adult cartoons are wildly popular and sickening to anyone of faith. He mocks his Catholic upbringing and he is worth over $100 million.
    I rarely see movies. I wish the best for the Christian filmmakers.

  • … claiming Christians aren’t persecuted by the secular world. Then stories emerged that literally came right out of the plot lines of both films.

    Oh, but that doesn’t count, because it’s not persecution if the target is double plus ungood.

  • Faith based films have always been an excellent way to evangelize. Hollywood is finally waking up to the financial possibilities which bodes well for those of us who long for the high quality production values of a well financed film project. Hurrah for Cary Solomon and Chuck Konzelman as they tap into what is undoubtedly a deep well of spiritual story telling and a wealth of great subject matter. Truth sells, especially when it is done right. Let’s support these films and other projects like them by promulgating their use in our parish PSR, CCD, and social halls, as well as in our family homes!

  • It’s instructive that great Hollywood actors can portray all different characters in any scenario, but they stay away from portraying the true character of people involved in the abortion holocaust. Hollywood loves sex, violence and death, along with a good scandal and coverup story but they can’t muster up the means to put the truth about abortion on the silver screen even though abortion is all about sex, violence and death and the biggest scandal and coverup of all time.

  • It is clear that fanboys will dole out huge wads of cash to see their favorite franchise even when they know ahead of time it will be just pure garbage, which is why the built in target audience has been so successful.

    The biggest builtin target audience would be the Abrahamic Faiths, of course. I think the general God awfulness of the movies and their critical success proves that people are so starved for faithbased cinema, they will put up with anything.

    Imagine the profit margins if Hollywood really invested in faith based films and made something faithful and not crap. The huge crossover hit that would be.

    The Coen Brothers made films like O, Brother Where Art Thou, and A Serious Man to critical and commerical success, and then of course, Jackson made millions and ade Oscar records with LOTR, so subtlety does well too.

    But i think the success a well done Biblical epic would have today.

  • Pingback: MONDAY EDITION – Big Pulpit
  • I find it very interesting that most of Hollywood will continue to produce trash in large amounts with the hope that, like spaghetti, some will hit the wall and make a profit when all evidence indicates that a relatively inexpensively made film with a traditional theme will almost always do quite well at the box office. Of course they will be ignored at the Oscars as not PC enough. Does anyone seriously think that any of today’s directors will be compared to John Ford or Alfred Hitchcock? Or that today’s actresses can stand up to Betty Davis or Olivia de Havilland? Today’s self absorbed entertainment industry turns out product geared precisely to its idea of itself, creating an endless circle in the process.

5 Responses to Quotes Suitable for Framing: Robert Conquest

  • Donald I found out that the word “cabal” is related to “Kabbalah “. I don’t have any implications about that but think it is interesting.. Maybe E. Morales and Pope Francis already know:
    cabal (n.)
    1520s, “mystical interpretation of the Old Testament,” later “society, small group meeting privately” (1660s), from French cabal, in both senses, from Medieval Latin cabbala (see cabbala). Popularized in English 1673 as an acronym for five intriguing ministers of Charles II (Clifford, Arlington, Buckingham, Ashley, and Lauderdale), which gave the word its sinister connotations. (From online etymological dictionary)

  • Dr. Jerry Pournelle’s Iron Law of Bureaucracy states that in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people: those who work to further the actual goals of the organization, and those who work for the organization itself. Examples in education would be teachers who work and sacrifice to teach children, vs. union representative who work to protect any teacher including the most incompetent. The Iron Law states that in all cases, the second type of person will always gain control of the organization, and will always write the rules under which the organization functions.

  • A couple (or more?) yeas ago, there was on some blog the question of what “would make you loose your faith in the Catholic Church.” At the time, it was contraception. If the Church gave the nod to contraception (frankly, I am not sure Her hierarchy doesn’t…), then I’d know that the Church was simply another in a long line of fake religions.
    .
    More recently, I just shake my head at the promotion of what I perceive to be socialism and the total lack of understanding (or so it seems to me) of free market economics.
    .
    Now, with the latest and greatest written missive (Amoris Laetitia), I’ve come to conclusion that for a lot of the hierarchy it’s about job security and keeping the gravy train flowing. Gotta keep the current customers happy and increase market share. Or at least stop the hemorrhaging of the less committed customers.
    .
    The Pope certainly seems to have downplayed the “intrinsically evil”-ness of contraception, and muddied the very clean words of Christ about marriage and adultery.
    .
    Yes, I know, there have been corrupt periods of time in the Church, and the Church yet survives. In fact, it is 2000 years old. So the Holy Spirit must be in there somewhere keeping the Barque of Peter afloat, right? But Judaism is older, and so is Hinduism and Buddhism.
    .
    It wasn’t the Catholic Church of the 20th Century that gave us the Bible; it was the Church of the 325AD in Nicea. Things do fall apart. And Jesus supposedly asked if there would be faith when he returned. So I do wonder if the current Catholic Church is really what Jesus intended. And I ask myself 1) do I really have to give monies to the Church–not just my parish, but any money that will definitely end up in Rome 2) Am I really in communion with these folks?

  • AS I, gracious ladies, have heard said, there was in Paris a great merchant, a very good man, who was called Gianotto di Chevigné, a man most loyal and just, who had a great business in stuffs, and who had a singular friendship with a rich Jew named Abraham, who also was a merchant and also an honest and loyal man. Gianotto, seeing his justice and loyalty, began to feel great sorrow that the soul of so worthy and good a man should go to perdition through want of religion, and on that account he began to beg in a friendly way that he would abandon the errors of the Jewish faith and become converted to Christian truth, in which he could see, being holy and good, that he would always prosper and enrich himself; while in his own faith, on the contrary, he might see that he would diminish and come to nothing. The Jew replied that he did not believe anything either holy or good outside of Judaism; that he in that was born and intended therein to live, and that nothing would ever move him out of it.

    Gianotto did not cease on this account to repeat after a few days similar exhortations, showing him in a coarse manner, which merchants know how to employ, for what reasons our faith was better than the Jewish; and though the Jew was a great master in the Jewish law, nevertheless either the great friendship which he had with Gianotto moved him, or perhaps the words which the Holy Spirit put on the tongue of the foolish man accomplished it, and the Jew began finally to consider earnestly the arguments of Gianotto; but still, tenacious in his own faith, he was unwilling to change. As he remained obstinate, so Gianotto never ceased urging him, so that finally the Jew by this continual persistence was conquered, and said:—“Since, Gianotto, it would please you that I should become a Christian and I am disposed to do so, I will first go to Rome and there see him whom you call the vicar of God on earth, and consider his manners and his customs, and similarly those of his brother cardinals; and if they seem to me such that I can, between your words and them, understand that your religion is better than mine, as you have undertaken to prove to me, I will do what I have said; but if this should not be so, I will remain a Jew as I am.” When Gianotto heard this he was very sorrowful, saying to himself: I have lost all my trouble which it seemed to me I had very well employed, believing that I had converted this man; because if he goes to the court at Rome and sees the wicked and dirty life of the priests, he not only, being a Jew, will not become a Christian, but if he had become a Christian he would infallibly return to Judaism.

    Therefore Gianotto said to Abraham:—“Alas, my friend, why do you desire to take this great trouble and expense of going from here to Rome? By land and by sea, even to a rich man as you are, it is full of trouble. Do you not believe that here we can find one who will baptize you? and if perchance you have still some doubts as to the religion which I show you, where are there better teachers and wiser men in this faith than there are here, to immediately tell you what you want to know or may ask? On which account my opinion is that this voyage is superfluous: the prelates whom you would see there are such as you can see here, and besides they are much better, as they are near to the chief Shepherd; and therefore this fatigue you will, by my counsel, save for another time,—for some indulgence in which I may perhaps be your companion.” To this the Jew replied:—“I believe, Gianotto, that it is as you say to me; but summing up the many words in one, I am altogether, if you wish that I should do what you have been constantly begging me to do, disposed to go there; otherwise I will do nothing.” Gianotto seeing his determination said, “Go, and good luck go with you;” but he thought to himself that Abraham never would become a Christian if he had once seen the court of Rome, but as he would lose nothing he said no more. 3

    The Jew mounted his horse, and as quickly as possible went to the court of Rome, where arriving, he was by his fellow Jews honorably received; and living there without saying to anybody why he came, began cautiously to study the manners of the Pope and the cardinals and the prelates and all the other courtesans; and he learned, being the honest man that he was, and being informed by other people, that from the greatest to the lowest they sinned most dishonestly, not only in natural but in unnatural ways, without any restraint or remorse to shame them; so much so that for the poor and the dissolute of both sexes to take part in any affair was no small thing. Besides this he saw that they were universally gluttons, wine-drinkers, and drunkards, and much devoted to their stomachs after the manner of brute animals; given up to luxury more than to anything else. And looking further, he saw that they were in the same manner all avaricious and desirous of money, so that human blood, even that of Christians, and sacred interests, whatever they might be, even pertaining to the ceremonies or to the benefices, were sold and bought with money; making a greater merchandise out of these things and having more shops for them than at Paris of stuffs or any other things, and to the most open simony giving the name and support of procuration, and to gluttony that of sustentation: as if God, apart from the signification of epithets, could not know the intentions of these wretched souls, but after the manner of men must permit himself to be deceived by the names of things. Which, together with many other things of which we will say nothing, so greatly displeased the Jew, that as he was a sober and modest man it appeared to him that he had seen enough, and proposed to return to Paris.

    Accordingly he did so; upon which Gianotto, seeing that he had returned, and hoping nothing less than that he should have become a Christian, came and rejoiced greatly at his return, and after some days of rest asked him what he thought of the Holy Father, the cardinals, and the other courtesans; to which the Jew promptly replied:—“It seems to me evil that God should have given anything to all those people, and I say to you that if I know how to draw conclusions, there was no holiness, no devotion, no good work or good example of life in any other way, in anybody who was a priest; but luxury, avarice, and gluttony,—such things and worse, if there could be worse things in anybody; and I saw rather liberty in devilish operations than in divine: on which account I conclude that with all possible study, with all their talent and with all their art, your Shepherd, and consequently all the rest, are working to reduce to nothing and to drive out of the world the Christian religion, there where they ought to be its foundation and support. But from what I see, what they are driving at does not happen, but your religion continually increases; and therefore it becomes clearer and more evident that the Holy Spirit must be its foundation and support, as a religion more true and holy than any other. On which account, where I was obstinate and immovable to your reasoning and did not care to become a Christian, now I say to you distinctly that on no account would I fail to become a Christian. Therefore let us go to church, and there according to the custom of your holy religion let me be baptized.”

    Gianotto, who had expected exactly the opposite conclusion to this, when he heard these things was more satisfied than ever a man was before, and with him he went to Notre Dame of Paris and requested the priest there to give Abraham baptism: who, hearing what he asked, immediately did so; and Gianotto was his sponsor and named him Giovanni, and immediately caused him by competent men to be completely instructed in our religion, which he at once learned and became a good and worthy man and of a holy life.

    Boccaccio, Decameron, 14th Century

  • “Now, with the latest and greatest written missive (Amoris Laetitia), I’ve come to conclusion that for a lot of the hierarchy it’s about job security and keeping the gravy train flowing.” – DJH

    WWDS. What would Dante Say. I think he said it. Inferno, Canto III: 35-42, about self-seeking church types, they, “the wretched souls of those, who lived
    Without praise or blame, ..”:

    [Dante, speaking to Virgil]:
    ..
    I then, with horror yet encompassed, cried:
    “O master! what is this I hear? what race
    Are these, who seem so overcome with woe?”

    He thus to me: “This miserable fate
    Suffer the wretched souls of those, who lived
    Without praise or blame, with that ill band
    Of angels mix’d, who not rebellious proved,
    Nor yet were true to God, but for themselves
    Were only. From his bounds Heaven drove them forth
    Not to impair his luster; nor the depth
    Of Hell receives them, lest the accursed tribe
    Should glory thence with exultation vain.”

    I then: “Master! what doth aggrieve them thus,
    That they lament so loud?” He straight replied:
    “That will I tell thee briefly. These of death
    No hope may entertain: and their blind life
    So meanly passes, that all other lots
    They envy. Fame of them the world hath none,
    Nor suffers; Mercy and Justice scorn them both.
    Speak not of them, but look, and pass them by.”

PopeWatch: Kasper’s Victory Dance

Friday, April 29, AD 2016

PopeWatch2-199x300-199x300

 

 

Sandro Magister at his blog Chiesa explains how Cardinal Kasper has emerged victorious in his quest to give Communion to Catholics in adulterous marriages:

 

The German Option of the Argentine Pope

ROME, April 28, 2016 – The definitive confirmation of Pope Francis’s endorsement of the German solution to the crucial question of communion for the divorced and remarried has come from Germany’s most famous cardinal and theologian, Walter Kasper, in an interview published on April 22 in the Aachen newspaper “Aachener Zeitung”:

> Kardinal Kasper: Was Franziskus von der Kirche und Europa erwartet

An interview summarized in English here:

> Kasper: Pope Intends “Not to Preserve Everything as it has Been”

Thanks to the post-synodal exhortation “Amoris Lætitia” – Kasper said – the German bishops now have “a tail wind to help solve such situations in a humane way.”

And he recounted this revealing episode. Some time ago, a priest of his acquaintance had decided not to prohibit a remarried mother from receiving communion herself on the day of her daughter’s first communion. And he himself, Kasper, had helped that priest to make this decision, certain that he was “absolutely right.” The cardinal then reported the matter to the pope, who approved of the decision and said: “That is where the pastor has to make the decision.”

So “the door is open” for admission of the divorced and remarried to the sacraments, Kasper continued. “There is also some freedom for the individual bishops and bishops’ conferences. Not all Catholics think the way we Germans think. Here [in Germany] something can be permissible which is forbidden in Africa. Therefore, the pope gives freedom for different situations and future developments.”

*

Between Kasper and Jorge Mario Bergoglio there is much more than just the occasional contact.

In his last in-flight press conference, on the way back from the Greek island of Lesbos, Francis said he had felt “annoyance” and “sadness” over the importance given by the media to communion for the divorced and remarried.

And yet this has happened precisely on account of the pope’s decision to entrust to Kasper – for decades the leader of proponents of a decisive change in this matter – the opening talk at the consistory of cardinals in February of 2014.

That dramatic consistory was followed by two synods that laid bare the stark divisions within the Church hierarchy. But in Francis’s mind, the script was already written. And it is that which can now be read in “Amoris Lætitia,” the centerpiece of which is precisely the eighth chapter, composed in the typically vague and shifting form of Jorge Mario Bergoglio when he wants to open and not to close a “process,” but that now is leading Kasper and the Germans to say with absolute certainty that they have “the wind at their backs.”

Of course, not all the cardinals and bishops of Germany agree with Kasper. Fellow cardinal and theologian Gerhard L. Müller, prefect of the congregation for the doctrine of the faith, is also German, and has made it known repeatedly – most recently in a book issued a few days before the publication of “Amoris Lætitia” – that he is in radical disagreement with those who, by absolving the divorced and remarried and admitting them to communion, in point of fact undermine the foundations not of one but of three sacraments, marriage, penance, and the Eucharist.

But by now it is as clear as day that for Francis Cardinal Müller isn’t worth a thing, in spite of his role as guardian of doctrine and of the useless toil with which he sent the pope dozens of corrective notes for the draft of the exhortation, which had been given to him in advance merely by virtue of his office.

In fact, for the official presentation of “Amoris Lætitia” to the world on the day of its publication, the pope called not Müller but another cardinal and theologian of the German-speaking area, Christoph Schönborn, archbishop of Vienna.

And a few days later, during the flight from Lesbos to Rome, Francis once again proposed Schönborn as the main exegete of the post-synodal exhortation, he being a “great theologian [who] knows well the doctrine of the faith,” as the pope described him. To the question of whether for the divorced or remarried there now is or is not the possibility, formerly precluded, of receiving communion, the pope responded with a peremptory and for once unmistakable: “Yes. Period.” But he recommended that none other than Schönborn be consulted for a more detailed reply.

And not by accident. Because at the synod last October it was precisely the archbishop of Vienna, in agreement with Kasper, who thought up in the “Circulus germanicus” the formulas of apparent respect for the traditional magisterium of the Church but at the same time open to change – capable of getting around Müller’s objections –  which then went into the “Relatio finalis” of the synod and finally into “Amoris Lætitia,” always in that deliberately ambiguous form that however now allows Kasper’s party to chant victory and Müller and the others on his side to suffer a scorching defeat.

*

On opposing side of the victorious German solution there has been only one bishop so far who has reacted by going right to the heart of the question, not simply entrenching himself behind the “non-magisterial” nature – and therefore able to be interpreted only in the light of the previous magisterium of the Church – of “Amoris Lætitia,” as Cardinal Raymond L. Burke, for example, has instead decided to do.

This bishop is, curiously, also of German ancestry. He is the auxiliary of Astana in Kazakhstan, Athanasius Schneider.

The complete text of the remarks by Bishop Schneider came out in Italian on April 24, on the online agency Corrispondenza Romana” directed by Professor Roberto de Mattei:

> “Amoris lætitia”: chiarire per evitare una confusione generale

And in English the following day on the blog “Veri Catholici”:

> Bishop Athanasius Schneider speaks on “Amoris lætitia”

On the question of communion for the divorced and remarried, Schneider’s criticism of the “confusion” produced by “Amoris Lætitia” is very tough.

“The confusion reaches its apex,” he writes, “since all, whether the supporters of the admission of the divorced and remarried to Communion, or those who oppose them, sustain that the doctrine of the Church in this matter has not been modified.”

Schneider sets up a comparison with the spread of the Arian heresy in the 4th century. In 357, the confusion reached the extreme when Pope Liberius endorsed an ambiguous formula concerning the divinity of Jesus, which made Saint Jerome say, describing the state of disorientation at the time: “The world groaned and found itself, with shock, to have become Arian.”

At that juncture – Schneider notes – “St. Hilary of Poitiers was the only Bishop to undertake grave remonstrations with Pope Liberius for such ambiguous acts.”

But today as well – continues the auxiliary of Astana – the situation is such that some might exclaim like Saint Jerome: “The whole world groans and finds itself, with shock, to have accepted divorce in practice.”

So just as in the 4th century “St. Basil the Great made an urgent appeal to the Pope of Rome to indicate with his own words the clear direction to obtain finally a unity of thought in faith and charity,” so also today “one can consider legitimate an appeal to our dear pope, Francis, the Vicar of Christ and ‘sweet Christ upon earth’ (St. Catherine of Sienna), so that he order the publication of an authentic interpretation of ‘Amoris lætitia’, which should necessarily contain an explicit declaration of the disciplinary principle of the universal and infallible magisterium in regarding to the admission to the sacraments for the divorced and separated, as it has been formulated in n. 84 of ‘Familiaris consortio’.”

Which at no. 84, “incomprehensibly absent from ‘Amoris lætitia’”, says:

“Reconciliation in the sacrament of penance which would open the way to the Eucharist, can only be granted to those who… take on themselves the duty to live in complete continence, that is, by abstinence from the acts proper to married couples.”

*

Under the circumstances it nevertheless appears unlikely that Pope Francis would accept such an appeal.

Continue reading...

13 Responses to PopeWatch: Kasper’s Victory Dance

  • I have never understood this phenomenon of individuals needing to receive the Eucharist because everybody else is doing it. Is it similar to knowing the secret handshake to get into a club?

    This past Sunday I had to smile (not at the sin) when it came time for reception of the Eucharist. I stepped out of my row to allow my family to get in line. As I knelt back in our row I saw a 20ish young woman down the row kneel back down after her family joined the line. Then in the row behind me the same thing happened with another young woman. No big deal; no one publicly rebuked us for being sinners. I wish priests/ families/teachers would spend more time teaching about the profanation of the Eucharist.

    For years I have seen a couple in an illicit second marriage attend Mass and never receive communion. I have seen them at weekday Masses and other devotional activities. I marvel at their faith.

  • I agree with Ken: “For years I have seen a couple in an illicit second marriage attend Mass and never receive communion. I have seen them at weekday Masses and other devotional activities. I marvel at their faith.”
    .
    God judges whether someone goes to heaven or hell. Sometimes a couple in an illicit relationship cannot break it, so they do the next best thing without profaning the Eucharist. Let God judge.

  • Pope Francis’ theme song 😉

  • “Sometimes a couple in an illicit relationship cannot break it, so they do the next best thing without profaning the Eucharist. Let God judge.”

    They cannot break it? Why?

    How does this benefit the valid marriage and bring it closer to being healed?

    I am certain their are any number of heart wrenching situations which might seem to
    come into play here, BUT, how does this justify doing damage to a valid marriage?

    “I marvel at their faith”

    This cut me to the quick!

    No doubt there are those who have seen my wife and her lover and who think the same.

    How nice.

    How nice.

    Jorge is proud of you.

  • Really, what is the motivation for all of this? The German bishops get what they want– why do they ( and Francis) want this? Can my glasses be so heavily rose tinted that I can still believe this is good intentions unfortunately gone awry?
    No. They know well enough that it is a destruction.

  • “Not all Catholics think the way we Germans think…”

    Could have been said by Martin Luther with much the same ill-disguised smug superiority.

  • Karl said,”This cut me to the quick!
    No doubt there are those who have seen my wife and her lover and who think the same.
    How nice.
    How nice.
    Jorge is proud of you.”

    I don’t think it takes much to cut him to the quick judging from his posts on this site. I will truly pray that he seeks mental health for his issues as he seems borderline dangerous.

    I also know a few Catholic individuals who were abandoned and divorced by their spouses and none of them has ever acted as unhinged as Karl.

    Karl, if you’ve read any of my posts (including the first on this thread), you would know that I’m not a supporter of this exhortation.

    The Church has proclaimed several habitual sinners as saints, but I’ll be sure to tsk,tsk this couple at Mass tomorrow.

  • I think (DANGER! DANGER! Will Robinson!!) that (similar to Easter Duty) one Sunday Mass each year each and every priest must give a sermon beginning with the sentence, “You never can tell, you may go to Heaven, and you may go to H . . .”

  • It is a sad day, when a faithful spouse is slandered for taking offense at adultery and the injustice that is never ending that goes along with it.

    Goodbye, Don.

    Karl

  • Karl, you have to move on. Your adulterous spouse is not going to repent. Get an annulment if possible.

  • I have never been in Karl’s position but I think I can understand. Its must be hard to see the love of your life abandon you. Hosea didn’t get over it until his spouse repented.

    But in the practical world, one must move on.

  • Karl appears to be consumed by his wife’s adultery. That’s not healthy, either emotionally or spiritually.
    .
    One of the graces for which I pray is to NOT be overcome by evil. Despair is a sin against Hope, one of the cardinal virtues.
    .
    The Spiritual Virtues include to willingly forgive all injuries. Think of the Crucifixion and the love that filled Our Lord’s Sacred Heart during the three hours agony on the Holy Cross; and ask Him for strength and for His presence with you at the hour of death.

Who Is the Buddy of the GOP Establishment?

Friday, April 29, AD 2016

 

cbs_lucifer_cruz

 

One of the frustrating thing about this campaign for sentient observers is the absurd claim of the crony capitalist Donald Trump to be an outsider running against the establishment.  John Boehner, former Speaker of the House, put paid to that notion yesterday:

A few months ago I asked a Washington insider for the scoop on Ted Cruz. His first words were, “No one likes Ted.” Well, John Boehner certainly doesn’t:

The longtime Ohio powerhouse had not been very outspoken on the race since retiring last year, but he held little back when asked about the Texas senator and underdog GOP presidential candidate during a forum at Stanford University.

“I have Democrat friends and Republican friends. I get along with almost everyone, but I have never worked with a more miserable son of a bitch in my life,” he said, according to The Stanford Daily.

Boehner also called Cruz “Lucifer in the flesh.” Trump, on the other hand, he described as a “texting buddy.”

Continue reading...

7 Responses to Who Is the Buddy of the GOP Establishment?

  • Darkly amusing, isn’t it?

  • Boehner – RINO and CINO.

  • After 40 years a registered Republican (that’s after being a South Chicago born 3rd son of Catholic Democrats whose older brother was the VP of Will County Young Democrats who introduced John Kennedy to the Joliet town center rally in 1960) I registered out of the Democrat Party as a “non partisan” because of the Democrats support of legal abortion. When the Republican Party adopted a Right to Life constitutional amendment, I registered Republican to support their principled position. last year, 40 years later, I registered out of the GOP because of disgust with the lose of principles the Congressional GOP leadership exhibited after we voters gave them the leadership positions in Congress to fight Obama and his dictatorial actions as President, which they said they would do if they won the majority. Well, we gave them the majority, first the House, second the Senate, but they never would fight for what they said they would when running for reelection. The only person who did fight Obama was Senator Cruz. I had to re-register as a Republican this year in order to vote for Cruz in the CA primary this June 7th because it is a closed election for Republicans, i.e., only registered Republicans can vote in the CA Republican Primary.

    John Boehner’s resent public comments about Cruz is the best evidence that Ted Cruz is the best and only man running who will change what is happening in Washington D.C. That is why the Republican leadership despises Ted Cruz. Cruz, given the power of President, will force the Republicans in Congress to fulfill their campaign pledges to their constituents or they will not get reelected. They will be replaced with men and women that Cruz endorses.

    We Catholics need to back Cruz to win back our freedom of religion rights and to have a very knowledgeable person in the White House to fill Scalia’s vacancy plus those of 2 or more Supreme Court vacancies in the next 4 years, to be sure our original Constitutional Rights will be protected for decades to come. He will also push and sign an anti-funding bill ending taxpayer support of Planned Parenthood saving the lives of hundreds of thousand of unborn babies we say we believe God created . A Democrat president, no matter who it is, would pack the court with more anti-constitutional judges, like the 4 on there now, and they will destroy our Constitution and the unborn will never get their rights back to be born.

  • Opps, a bit of confusion in what I just wrote concerning when I registered out of the Republican Party, and prior to the that, the Democratic Party I was “born into.” I left the D party in ’74, and was registered “non- partisan” while working in a grass-root pro-life political organization electing pro-life Congressmen all of whom were Republicans. I registered Republican because of their principled position in adding a RTL Constitutional Amendment to the GOP platform. I stayed registered Republican up until March of 2015 when they controlled both the House and the Senate but wouldn’t fight Obama and the Democrats on anything. I re-registered Republican last month when I was notified by the Register of Voters office in O.C. that not being in the GOP Party I won’t be allowed to vote for their Primary. The CA GOP Party has closed their primaries to only registered Republicans.

  • I do find it odd that a billionaire is not somehow part of the “elite,” that the GOP “dumps” Boner as speaker and replaces him with Ryan, who is just as bad, and thinks sentient people won’t notice, and Ted, while being vilified by fellow GOPeratives, still has a Goldman Sachs wife but is an “outsider.”

    Appears to me they are all insiders to some degree or another. Perhaps Ted is less of one, but there is no politician who can be trusTED.

  • A “Goldman Sachs wife”?
    Horrors, is she supposed to be a librarian? A model? A community organizer? Stay-at-homes aren’t allowed, we know, and likewise unmarried isn’t OK– but what, exactly, is the wife of a candidate allowed to do?
    Is Cruz supposed to have divorced her for being an investment banker?

  • @c matt “Perhaps Ted is less of one, but there is no politician who can be trusTED.”

    It there ever is a politician that can be trusted in our day and time, LION Ted Cruz is the one. If you can’t see that, that only goes to show how poorly informed you are. And that is what is wrong with our system, people have to inform themselves to defend against getting what we have been subjected to these past 8 years. Boehner’s disgusting attack of Cruz’s character is a testimonial Cruz is for real the guy who will return the power of government to the people; that is why he is hated so much by the establishment. For gosh sake, a number of them are saying they will vote for Hilary if Cruz gets the nomination. That means they care less about our country and more about keeping their establishment in tack. It is disheartening so many Americans don’t see that.

Danegeld

Friday, April 29, AD 2016

 

The thirtieth in my ongoing series examining the poetry of Rudyard Kipling. The other posts in the series may be read here, here , here , here, here , here, here, here, here, here, here, here , here, here, here , here, here, here , here, here, here , here, here , here , here , here , herehere and hereOne of the many reasons to read Kipling is due to how much of his writing stands the test of time.  A good example of this is Dane-geld written in 1911.  Danegeld was a tax levied by the Kings of Wessex to buy peace with the various invading warbands of Danes in the ninth through the eleventh century.  The Danegeld of course convinced the various Danes in Denmark that it was a good idea to invade England, be bought off in gold by a Saxon king and then to settle in England and repeat the process whenever money ran short.  One would think that the bad consequences of giving way to such extortion should be obvious, but it is amazing how often this simple lesson has been repeated down the centuries.  The Obama administration has paid Danegeld of a sort to various enemies, or would be enemies, of the US, including Iran, Russia, North Korea, thus having the US pay for trouble down the road.

Kipling is not merely to be read for amusement during an idle hour.  Read carefully he often has wisdom useful for today.  Here is the text of Dane-geld:

Continue reading...

4 Responses to Danegeld

  • The Obama/Hillary motives (hatred of American interests and abhorrence of popular/self-rule) may have been different from Wessex’ kings’ motives (buy peace).
    .
    Quoted at “The Daily Gouge”: Andrew Roberts, “Similarly, during the Arab Spring, the Libyan Uprising, the annexation of the Crimea, the Syrian civil war, and the Ukrainian insurgency, Hillary/Obama have in each case carefully identified the pro-democracy forces and then either denied them American support or actively undermined them…”
    .
    Early on, President Jefferson knew the lesson. I believe he said/wrote: “Million for war. But, not one penny for tribute.” Today, the World incentivizes Somali//Skinnies’ piracy.

  • I agree with T Shaw – again.

  • Pingback: The Widow at Windsor – The American Catholic
  • Pingback: The Widow at Windsor | Almost Chosen People

Catholics Who Support Bernie: You Are Idiots

Thursday, April 28, AD 2016

UD0X-DEB

 

 

Either that or you don’t give a damn about fighting abortion:

Sanders stated, “I think we should expand funding for Planned Parenthood. And it is no secret, that in states all over this country, in a dozen different ways, there are governors and legislatures who are trying to make it impossible for a woman to control her own body. I will use the Department of Justice to go after those states, in every way that I legally can.”

Continue reading...

12 Responses to Catholics Who Support Bernie: You Are Idiots

  • Stalin never tolerated dissent. Neither will the “pacifist” Bernie Sanders who has no qualms about using force when it suits him to do so.

  • But Bernie is the Pope’s man and that is the problem.

  • I would expect that Catholics who knowingly support the slaughter of God’s precious unborn might indeed, “feel the burn!”

  • I remember Mark excoriating Paul Ryan for being willing to vote for legislation that limited abortion to all circumstances except rape. No amount of reasoned arguments could dissuade him from his diatribes against conservative Catholics. It didn’t help pointing out that even JP II allowed Catholic politicians to vote for such legislation that limited abortion even if not completely outlawing it. Here’s some commentary on this episode:

    http://the-american-catholic.com/2012/08/23/has-ryan-softened-his-pro-life-views/

    Now he’s willing to make excuses for an aged hippie who promotes a radical pro-abortion agenda. Goes to show what a blind, “social justice” ideologue he is.

  • Every Pope since Pius IX to Benedict XVI taught that socialism was evil. It is an ideology which proclaims government as god, robs the person of his individuality and dignity, and deprives humanity of God’s wondrous gift of free will. As such there can be no surprise that abortion is a virtue under this treacherous and perverse world order. I agree with those Popes.

  • Don L.

    No kidding Don.
    For how many years have the innocents felt the saline, the forceps the burn of being ripped apart. How freaking many more will feel it?
    If we have a cataclysmic eruption of the Yellow stone caldera, which I hope never happens, it will be divine intervention as far as I’m concerned.

    Blood spilt cries to Heaven. The innocent blood is the loudest and most violent of screams that pierces the clouds.

    Sanders is sick. An sick man with a sick agenda. Sick meaning mentality ill!

  • In addition to their willful ignorance of millions of murdered unborn “least of my brothers,” the imbeciles are completely absent-minded regarding the global crimes liberals have caused.

    Seen at “The Daily Gouge.

    And, D/G regarding the deadly effects of liberal superstitions,

    “Costing thousands, if not tens or hundreds of thousands of lives in the process. Deaths directly attributable to the hopelessly misguided policies of modern Liberalism over the last hundred years, from malaria in the Third World resulting from the totally unnecessary ban on DDT to support for Communist “liberation” movements around the world, total not in the millions, but the hundreds of millions!

    “Hey, at least Progressives can sleep at night; but only because ignorance is bliss!”

  • He is proud of his 100% support of the blood sacrifice of unborn children to satan. Nuff said.

  • Bernie’s Pope. John Cornwell, call your office!

  • “Catholics Who Support Bernie” is the pope one of those?

  • Yes, Anzlyne, he is.

  • Whether it is Bernie or Hillary it doesn’t matter. Both are doing the work of the evil one.

    Liberalism is the political philosophy of the devil. It is built on lies and self delusion. It is a form of mass suicide. See James Burnham’s ‘Suicide of the West: An Essay on the Meaning and Destiny of Liberalism’

    This is why the great Mundabor recommends Donald.
    “I think Trump will still be the by far better choice. And I think it will be far easier to bend him to the will of the Republican majority than to force Hillary to appoint the right judge at the Supreme Court.”

PopeWatch: Bishop Athanasius Schneider

Thursday, April 28, AD 2016

PopeWatch2-199x300-199x300

 

Voice of the Family is hosting the English translation of Bishop Athanasius Schneider’s reflections on Amoris Laetitia.  Go here to view the translation  They indicate that the Bishop has given permission for the text to be shared widely, so I have taken the liberty of setting it forth below.  Here are his reflections:

 

 

 

 

The recently published Apostolic Exhortation “Amoris laetitia” (AL), which contains a plethora of spiritual and pastoral riches with regard to life within marriage and the Christian family in our times, has unfortunately, within a very short time, led to very contradictory interpretations even among the episcopate.

There are bishops and priests who publicly and openly declare that AL represents a very clear opening-up to communion for the divorced and remarried, without requiring them to practice continence. In their opinion, it is this aspect of sacramental practice, which, according to them, is now to undergo a significant change that gives AL its truly revolutionary character. Interpreting AL with reference to irregular couples, a president of a Bishops’ Conference has stated, in a text published on the website of the same Bishops’ Conference: “This is a disposition of mercy, an openness of heart and of spirit that needs no law, awaits no guideline, nor bides on prompting.  It can and should happen immediately”.

This opinion was further confirmed by the recent declarations of Father Antonio Spadaro S.J., after the Synod of Bishops in 2015, that the Synod had established the “foundations” for the access of divorced and remarried couples to communion by “opening a door” that had still been closed during the previous Synod in 2014. Now, as Father Spadaro alleges in his commentary on AL, his prediction has been confirmed. There are rumours that Father Spadaro was a member of the editorial group behind AL.

The way to abusive interpretations appears to have been paved by Cardinal Christoph Schönborn himself, who said, during the official presentation of AL in Rome, with regard to irregular unions, that: “My great joy as a result of this document resides in the fact that it coherently overcomes that artificial, superficial, clear division between ‘regular’ and ‘irregular’”. Such a statement suggests that there is no clear difference between a valid, sacramental marriage and an irregular union, between venial and mortal sin.

Continue reading...

6 Responses to PopeWatch: Bishop Athanasius Schneider

  • This good bishop would be an amazing Pope. He’s to my knowledge the most traditionally-minded Catholic bishop in the world, yes, even more than Card. Burke.

    I hope they don’t silence him.

  • I hope the Pope is embarrassed by this.

  • Schneider seems to be a good man. His forthrightness will be his undoing. One cannot reason with a thug.

    “I hope the Pope is embarrassed by this.”

    Thugs do not embarrass. Introspection that is honest/efficacious is a quality they lack. They worship the person in their mirror and fail to see the face of Satan, in disguise.

    Karl

  • “Bless me Father, for I have sinned; and I have read every word of Bergoglio’s Amor Laetitia. I have been rejoicing in love. Eleven months ago I had an abortion and I have been receiving Holy Communion almost daily since that day. Father, I am now again pregnant and I am scheduled for an abortion tomorrow. I fully intend after this Confession to have the abortion and to then proceed again to receive Holy Communion every day. By the way, I was married when I had the last abortion, but I civilly divorced that jerk, and now I am living with another guy who impregnated me with this latest baby, and I will continue to live with him after I kill it and love him after you give me absolution. God willing I will not get pregnant again, but if I do I will again have an abortion because my boyfriend says a child would seriously injure our love. For these and all my sins I am truly sorry.”
    “My beautiful child, truly God’s mercy knows no limits and your faith is admirable. I must say what a good thing for someone like you to read the wise words of the Holy Father and then to go forth and live in love. I absolve you from your sins, if such acts of love as yours can even be called “sins,” in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. For your penance . . . “
    “Whoa, padre, who said anything about “penance”? There is nothing in Amor Laetitia about me having to do any penance.”
    “My loving child, I was simply going to commend you for the love you have for your partner and have you continue to show your love for him.”
    “Got it. See you next time. By the way, you sure were good telling my friends who voluntarily engage in homosexual sex activities that the principles of Amor Laetitia make it possible for them to celebrate their love and to come regularly to Holy Communion. Is this church now great, or what? I can’t remember when I put so much in the collection basket, ever.”

    “Oh yes, my wise child; of course Amor Laetitia’s goodness is not limited – God’s mercy is boundless and now there really is no sin”

    Guy McClung, San Antonio, Texas

  • Does anyone still doubt the serous and dangerous crisis we face in the church.

  • Have any of you seen this?

    http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2016/04/archbishop-bans-cardinal-muller-from.html

    Do any of you really think that this was not known to Jorge Bergoglio and approved by him, beforehand?

    Do you not understand that thugs often operate though proxies?

    When in any of our lifetimes have we seen something this openly scandalous?

    Maybe I have missed it, being just a kid at pushing 62.

Ted Cruz Names Carly Fiorina as Veep Running Mate

Wednesday, April 27, AD 2016

 

Taking a tip from Ronald Reagan’s playbook, Ted Cruz names Carly Fiorina as his running mate.  Back in 1976 Reagan was behind Ford.  Prior to the Republican convention he named Senator Richard Schweiker (R.Pa) as his running mate.  Schweiker was a moderate Republican, although a strong pro-lifer.  Reagan came close to taking the nomination away from Ford at the convention.  Interestingly, Schweiker’s voting record became much more conservative thereafter.  In 1981 President Reagan appointed him as Secretary of HHS.

So, will this work?  Quien sabe?  It will get Cruz a lot of publicity going into the crucial Indiana primary.  Fiorina is an articulate and tough campaigner, and she should be getting intensive coverage for the next few weeks.  Trump, in the truly classless manner that he normally displays, will probably go over the top in his attacks against Fiorina.  All in all, I like the move.  It is unusual, but when you are behind doing the usual is a recipe for slow defeat.   Better to be bold and do the unexpected.

Continue reading...

19 Responses to Ted Cruz Names Carly Fiorina as Veep Running Mate

  • I like the move to and for the reasons you give, but it’s still a hail mary pass.

  • Ted certainly has nothing to lose here. It looks about certain that DaDonald is gonna get the nomination. Perhaps Carly can bait Trump into a classless rant. But that hasn’t hurt DaDonald yet. I don’t know what worries me more, a Trump nomination or a Trump presidency.

  • One major network pointed out that Trump won in an affluent county of Maryland where Republican leaders live and in Bucks county PA which is affluent…meaning he won in areas that were not angry middleclass this week and he won at percents above those predicted by polls in many cases…and in a week wherein he reached 50% favorability for the first time. Strangest election ever. Convention leaders will have no leverage to deal with him if he goes above the 1237. ISIS staging an attack in September or October in Europe might put him in the white house easily. Pope Francis in the Vatican…Trump in the white house…Kim Jong-un in North Korea. The young have a shaky world before them…..but it all proves that God alone is one’s real security….so it is a very religious time in which to live.

  • I was pro Carly early, and thrilled at how pro life she was. I was also pro cruz. I’m thrilled that Cruz will have another engaging, pleasanr, smart person on his team able to genuinely articulate what’s wrong with Trump’s position on abortion, on trans identity in elementary school, tariffs, national security, etc.

    It may be a Hail Mary pass. But I’m saying a whole lot of prayers to Our Lady for our nation. Trump v Hillary is too terrible to contemplate.

  • Let us hope that Ted will be as gracious in defeat as he is tenacious in battle.

  • Carly was best candidate but was treated shabbily when it came to the debates. It may not work but it was a classy move.

  • Like the move. She is an articulate, smart woman who achieved her way to the top. She is an example of the American story. She is a classy, solid person who could fill the Office well. She has articulate answers to current problems. She seems prepared to meet the pressures, anger and violence of our day and lead in such times, as well as anyone.

  • Good ticket but it won’t help.

  • Well said Brian. You captured my thoughts exactly.

  • I like the ticket – 2 people with principles. People who can’t stand Cruz, like John Boehner, don’t have principles.

  • Brian likes Carly. Bad move Brian. Carly only makes Ted look desperate and weak. The classy thing for Ted to do now is pull out and try to heal all the wounds. Since he has no chance this would do the honorable thing to do.

  • The honorable thing Michael would be for Trump to realize he would be a disaster as President and for him to withdraw as an act of patriotism.

  • “The honorable thing Michael would be for Trump to realize he would be a disaster as President and for him to withdraw as an act of patriotism.”

    Good luck with that!

  • Trump might realize he shouldn’t have been so loose with his lips during this a campaign and he might have been able to have such a great running mate.

  • Donald’s right, Michael.

    What professional team do you know that walks off the court or the field with nine more games in the season left to play, and a chance to make the playoffs? This presidential delegate nomination system has been in existence for well over 150 years, with each state party having control over how they want it to occur. According to your “reasoning” in this 2016 Republican presidential nominee contest, if it were followed 156 years ago, as you suggest Cruz do, Abraham Lincoln would never have become President. He won a contested nomination contest because nobody won the minimum number of votes to necessary to win it outright. Lincoln, who was way behind the leader in 2nd or 3 place in delegate votes, won the nomination on the 3rd ballot in a contested election.

    Lets let the process work its way out, instead of caving into a spoiled brats demanding to be given the nomination even though he has not obtained the minimum number of votes required to win it outright.

  • Stillbelieve:

    If the choice is between two idiots pick the one that makes you laugh.

  • Michael, I don’t think a guy who has won 9 U.S. Supreme Court cases out of 9 is an “idiot.” However, I do think people who don’t recognize the seriousness of this election and are falling for Trump’s antics are idiots. If Hillary Clinton gets elected she will have 3 picks for the U.S. Supreme Court and that will destroy the Supreme Court, and our Constitution forever. Polls indicated Trump will lose 48 or more states if he is the Republican nominee. Trump’s “pattern” in his life is “buying influence.” He is the epitome of “inside Washington D.C. crony capitalism.” Furthermore, Trump has said “Hillary Clinton is a great Secretary of State” and has contributed to her campaigns. How will he ever be able challenge her effectively? And now, John Boehner’s saddling up to Trump as a “texting and golfing buddy” confirms Trump is the “establishment” in the flesh. And speaking of “flesh.” Boehner (the former GOP Speaker of the House run out of his job by conservatives the people elected) saying Cruz is “Lucifer in the flesh” and a “son of a bitch” is all Cruz has to run on TV ads as proof of who the real anti-establishment conservative is who will honestly fight for the peoples’ well being both in jobs and safety of the nation.

  • Stilbelieve:
    Excuse please. Just trying for a little humor to lighten things up what with all this ideological madness and all. No slur on Ted’s intelligence intended.

PopeWatch: Peronist Pope

Wednesday, April 27, AD 2016

 

PopeWatch2-199x300-199x300

 

Sandro Magister at his blog Chiesa reprints an extract from an  interesting article on the Peronist vision of the Pope:

The chosen people

by Loris Zanatta

Bergoglio is Peronist? Absolutely he is. But not because he took to it in his youth. He is so in the sense that Peronism is the movement that sanctioned the triumph of Catholic Argentina over its liberal counterpart, that saved the Christian values of the people from the cosmopolitanism of the élite. Peronism therefore embodies for Bergoglio the healthy conjunction between people and nation in defense of a temporal order based on Christian values and immune from that [. . .] Protestant liberalism whose ethos projects itself as a colonial shadow over the Catholic identity of Latin America.

But then Bergoglio is populist? Absolutely he is, provided that this concept is properly understood. [. . .] On his great journeys of 2015 – Ecuador, Bolivia, Paraguay; Cuba and United States; Kenya, Uganda, Central Africa – Francis used the word “pueblo” 356 times. The pope’s populism is already present in his words. But Bergoglio is less familiar with another lexicon: he said “democracy” only 10 times, “individual” 14 times, mostly with a negative connotation. [. . .] Are these  numbers meaningless? Not so much. They confirm for us what could already be guessed: that the notion of “pueblo” is the keystone of his social consciousness. [. . .]

His people is good, virtuous, and poverty confers an innate moral superiority upon it. It is in the popular neighborhoods, the pope says, that wisdom, solidarity, values of the Gospel are preserved. It is there that Christian society is found, the deposit of faith.

Moreover, that “pueblo” is not for him a sum of individuals, but a community that transcends them, a living organism animated by an ancient, natural faith, where the individual is dissolved in the whole. As such, that “pueblo” is the chosen people that safeguards an identity in peril. It is no coincidence that identity is the other pillar of Bergoglio’s populism; an eternal identity impervious to the unfolding of history, on which the “pueblo” has a monopoly; an identity to which every human institution or constitution must bend in order not to lose the legitimacy conferred on it by the “pueblo.”

It goes without saying that this romantic notion of “pueblo” is debatable, just as the moral superiority of the poor is. It doesn’t take an anthropologist to understand that popular communities have, like every community, vices and virtues. And the pontiff himself acknowledges this, contradicting himself, when he establishes a cause-and-effect relationship between poverty and fundamentalist terrorism; a relationship that moreover is improbable.

But idealizing the “pueblo” helps to simplify the complexity of the world, something in which the forms of populism have no rivals. The border between good and evil will then appear so diaphanous as to unleash the enormous power inherent in every Manichaean cosmology. This is how the pope contrasts the good “people” with a predatory and egotistical oligarchy. A transfigured oligarchy, devoid of face and name, the essence of evil as the pagan devotee of the God money: consumption is consumerism, the individual is selfish, attention to money is soulless worship. [. . .]

What is the greatest harm caused by this oligarchy? The corruption of the “pueblo.” The oligarchy undermines its virtues, homogeneity, religious spontaneity, like a tempter devil. Seen in this way, Bergoglio’s crusades against it, inasmuch as they emulate the language of postcolonial criticism, are heirs of the anti-liberal crusade that hardliner Catholics conducted a couple of centuries ago. Something that is not strange at all: the Catholic anti-liberalism that on the secular level sympathized with the anti-liberal ideology of the moment, fascism and communism first of all, naturally embraces with ardor today the anti-globalization lingo.

Of course, there is in the history of Catholicism a robust Catholic-liberal tradition, devoted to political secularism, to the rights of the individual, to economic and civil liberty. But such is not the family that saw Francis grow up. If the sacred college had elected a Chilean pope, who knows, perhaps he would have fished around in that cultural universe. But the Argentine Church is the tomb of the liberal Catholics, killed by the wave of national populism. [. . .]

In the background, meanwhile, many things are happening and raising enormous questions on the foundation of Francis’s vision of the world and on the notion of “pueblo” that inspires it; and therefore on its efficacy in restoring to the Church its lost stature.

Modern societies, including those of the southern hemisphere, are ever more articulated and pluralistic. Speaking of a “pueblo” that preserves its pure and religiously imbued identity is often a myth that does not correspond to any reality.

Continuing to consider the middle classes, growing by the millions and anxious for more consumption and better opportunities, colonial classes that are enemies of the “pueblo,” makes no sense. So many poor of yesterday are in the middle class today. [. . .]

Also on the political level, the forms of populism with which the pope shares such affinity have suffered severe blows, especially in Latin America, so much so as to prompt the suspicion that they are being orphaned by the “pueblo” that they invoke.

It is no accident that Bergoglio appeared to be disoriented when a journalist asked him for his view on the election of Mauricio Macri in Argentina and on the new anti-populist course that some think is beginning in Latin America. “I have heard a few opinions” – the pope stammered – “but on this geopolitics, at this moment I don’t know what to say. There are a number of Latin American countries in this somewhat changing situation, it is true, but I cannot explain it.”

At first glance he is not an enthusiast of this, considering the rather more secular and cosmopolitan profile of the forces that are coming forward to replace the forms of populism in crisis. But it is with these that the Holy Father will have to come to grips. Adored by the faithful, but he too an orphan, at least a bit, of the “pueblo.”

Continue reading...

5 Responses to PopeWatch: Peronist Pope

  • This jumped out at me. “It goes without saying that this romantic notion of “pueblo” is debatable, just as the moral superiority of the poor is.”

    Well now I’m confused; poverty, according to our left, is not at all a source of moral wealth , but is, in itself, the cause of crime–it’s the 1%’s fault.

  • This pope is far from being humble. He refuses to acknowledge reality. It’s why I don’t believe he sees Jesus as the only way. At the end of the day, it is really all about him.

  • This Pope needs to read what 1st Samuel chapter 8 says about what the pueblo want.

  • Mexico is 83% Catholic…60% of the general population (most Catholics) offers food, drink, flowers etc. to spirits.

    Nov.13, 2014. Pew Research….”Religion in Latin America”….

    ” a majority of Mexicans (60%) and more than a third of Bolivians (39%) say they make offerings of food, drinks, candles or flowers to spirits, but just one-in-ten Uruguayans (9%) do so. Overall, the survey finds the highest levels of indigenous or Afro-Caribbean religious practice in Panama, where most people (58%) – including 66% of Panamanian Catholics and 46% of Protestants – engage in at least three out of the eight indigenous beliefs and practices mentioned in the survey.”

    I’m sure Pope Francis can connect this failure of the poor to Smith and Wesson or air conditioning marketers. I love the man but not as Pope and with each personal addition to Catholic doctrine starting with his two predecessors and the death penalty farce, the expanded ordinary papal magisterium puts off millions of educated potential converts. China for example does not want the adult murder rate of non death penalty Brazil 24 per 100,000 or Mexico 20 per 100,000. China is 1.1 per 100,000 with a billion poor. We are not only preaching Catholicism now…we are preaching add ons from the personal histories of Popes. What a bad precedent. And it could be another reason for few wanting to become missionaries.

  • What we have here is a Pope of alienation, of division, of falsehood, of contradiction.
    He seems to love the losers (victims to him) while despising the achievers( cause of the victims). This thinking pervades both his political and religious thinking. In his mind the poor are morally superior to those who discipline themselves for achievement and unrepentant sinners are much more deserving of God’s love than the morally upright who follow the rules.

    Pope Francis is a cultural Marxist out to destroy Capitalism and the Catholic Church with nothing to replace them. Following him will only lead to chaos and misery. Only the devil would appreciate what he does.

Monmouth College

Wednesday, April 27, AD 2016

 

My bride and I took yesterday off from the law mines to attend the Honors Awards ceremonies at Monmouth College in Monmouth, Illinois, in which our twenty-one year old “baby girl” was participating.  (Fortunately our daughter inherited both her looks and her brains from her mother rather than me.)  The ceremony was wonderful.  You haven’t lived until you have seen an academic procession, led by a student clad in a plaid mortarboard and a white gown carrying the American flag, conducted as bagpipers play Scotland the Brave.

Founded in 1853 by Scottish Presbyterians, Monmouth was co-ed from the first.  During the Civil War its student body was almost entirely female when male students, and many of the faculty, enlisted as a body in the Union Army.  Two of them would earn Medals of Honor during the conflict.

It is a fine school offering degrees in most areas for undergraduates.  Its tuition is a scary 35K a year.  However, Monmouth works hard at making the college affordable.  I have never paid more than 8000 a year out of pocket at Monmouth.  That contrasts to the approximately 21000 a year I was paying out each year for the undergraduate education of my son at my alma mater, the University of Illinois.  This comes about due to the mixture of scholarship and grants awarded to our daughter.   In that she was by no means exceptional, as some 95% of the student body receives assistance to make Monmouth one of the better academic choices for families on a budget.  Our daughter will graduate almost entirely debt free.

More important than the cost is the quality of education which is quite superior.  Our daughter loves Monmouth and if I had known about it back in 2010, our son probably would have attended there also.

The campus is lovely and there is a good alum support system after college for Monmouth grads.  The total student body is about one thousand, perfect for students who do not want to be lost in the crowd.  Our daughter reports good one on one interaction with her professors.

I heartily recommend Monmouth to any parent looking for a good college for their offspring at a reasonable cost.

Continue reading...

3 Responses to Monmouth College

  • The ceremony you described sounded so beautiful. Congratulations to your daughter and her parents. A mighty fine pick, Monmouth.

    The bagpipes. I haven’t thought of them since my mother’s funeral Mass last November. When Father ended Mass with the great commission, a lone bagpipe artison clad in his kilt, started his rendition of Amazing Grace. The whole Taylor clan, invisible to us, accompanied the living as we said our so-long to a great Saint, our Joan, our mom.

    Not a dry eye in the chapel.

    I imagine that a tear or two was shed by the McClarey clan as they witnessed their daughter being honored for her commitment to excellence.

    A remarkable instrument, the bagpipes. Able to stir and sooth the soul instantaneously.
    Thanks for sharing your experience.

  • Thank you, Philip. I knew I could count on you to say the right thing. Thank you, Donald McClarey. Congratulations to you daughter for a job well done.

  • I took a glance at the website, but from your description, it sounds like Alma College in Alma, MI, where our oldest is going. His ACT was not stellar, but he received a nice scholarship anyway. Perhaps Monmouth is a place for the middle child. I’ll have to bookmark this for later use.

Five State Sweep for Trump

Tuesday, April 26, AD 2016

 

 

This surreal election year continues with Trump victorious in the primaries of Connecticut, Rhode Island, Maryland, Pennsylvania and Delaware.  After tonight Trump has about 950 delegates pledged to support him on the first ballot.  He needs 1237 to get a first ballot win.  There are 622 delegates left to be awarded.

In other news Trump apparently has rejected attempts by his new advisor, Paul Manafort, to make him appear “more presidential”.  Trump the ego-maniac of course only wants yes-men and yes-women around him, and it was predictable that he would reject any attempts to have his campaign strategy be anything other than the next fool thing he wishes to utter.  In almost any other election year such a “strategy” would be disastrous, but Trump is riding a wave of voter discontent and the normal rules of politics appear not to apply to him, at least not yet.

Continue reading...

9 Responses to Five State Sweep for Trump

  • Let us pray that Donald, if elected, will be a good President. On this we should be able to agree.

  • And I vowed I would never again vote for the “lesser of two evils”.
    Let’s see now; rattler or cobra? Pick your poison.

  • No more and no less than we deserve. Jesus help us.

  • Things I learned from listening to Rush Limbaugh (which is not to say that I learned them from Rush himself)
    .
    Trump is winning with lo-info voters
    .
    Trump dominates states that Republicans won’t carry in November
    .
    Trump is not only Obama in white face, he’s Holly Golightly in drag (stag?) By which I mean he’s a real phony
    .
    It’s starting to look like everybody in the Republican party is going to get what they want, and everybody is going to be very unhappy about it.
    .
    A near majority, if not an actual one, of the people of this country want to be ruled, because self rule, like math for Barbie, is hard.
    .
    (cross-commented at Protein Wisdom (language advisory))

  • “A near majority, if not an actual one, of the people of this country want to be ruled, because self rule, like math for Barbie, is hard.”

    Just want to point out that my nickname is “Barbie,” and that I have multiple degrees & certifications including a bachelors degree in Mathematics that includes physics, chemistry, & biology. 😉

  • “And I vowed I would never again vote for the “lesser of two evils”.
    Let’s see now; rattler or cobra? Pick your poison.”

    I FULLY understand the sentiment & have been tempted to behave this way myself. However, the truth of the matter is that since Ronald Reagan (1984) I have voted for the lesser of 2 evils. Unless Cruz wins the nomination, I am likely to never have a chance to vote for someone who is not the lesser of 2 evils for the rest my life time. I am very happy about the evil that was prevented by my selecting the lesser of 2 evils–when they were elected prez. If we wait around for a perfect candidate, we will have no voice and the maximum amount of evil will be done.

  • .Ernst:
    “A near majority, if not an actual one, of the people of this country want to be ruled, because self rule, like math for Barbie, is hard.”

    Right on. Most folks want someone (else) to be in charge and really don’t care who is elected. My guess is no more that 20% have strong feeling about the issues and most of these feelings are emotional or ideological. Each presidential candidate seeks to fulfill the needs of the times. Obama assuaged liberal guilt, Trump our sense of failure and loss of power, and Hillary generalized victim-hood where ever it can be promoted.

  • Let us pray that Donald, if elected, will be a good President.

    Donald would make a fantastic president. Oh, you’re referring to Trump, not McClarey.

    Is anyone else concerned by Chris Christie sharing the spotlight next to Trump – is he positioning (figuratively and literally) for a VP spot?

  • “Donald would make a fantastic president. Oh, you’re referring to Trump, not McClarey.”

    🙂

Ignorance as Brave New World

Tuesday, April 26, AD 2016

quote-there-is-no-slight-danger-from-general-ignorance-and-the-only-choice-which-providence-samuel-taylor-coleridge-115-35-99

 

 

Much of leftist politics today consists of leftists stating that what is manifestly not true must be believed with a religious fervor that would put to shame most Trappist monks.  Dave Griffey at his blog Daffey Thoughts reminds us of the essential element in all this:

Thinly disguised as offended PC sensitivity warriors.  John C. Wright does the take down here.  Yep.  I’ve said already that much of the modern Left is about convincing us that 2+2=4 is hate speech, must be punished, and those who insist on resisting the new math are the baddies.

Why?  Because if you want to follow the basic trend of most Enlightenment and post-Enlightenment era revolutions by setting up a Despotic government where liberty and Utopia were promised, and furthermore want to do so in a nation that was the capstone of 2500 years of a long, agonizing march toward freedom and liberty, you have to make the population stupid enough to declare that 2+2=4 is the most evil, hateful thing imaginable and it’s good that we finally have laws that will punish those who insist on saying 2+2=4.

Much of what Mr. Wright says is, of course, spot on.  The idea that PC Warriors demand courtesy when they provide none, they demand respect when the provide the polar opposite to the traditions and beliefs they hate, and demand tolerance for their eradication of tolerance and diverse opinions, should be the neon warning signs for a generation.

It’s a testimony to our education systems, our entertainment industry and our media that so many Americans are ready to rewrite the First Amendment, the Second Amendment, and even the entire notion of a Bill of Rights because we’ve been told it could be hateful to say men can’t have babies.  It takes one stupid nation for that to happen.  Or it takes a nation that is the product of the last 50 years of concerted effort on the part of those same educational, entertainment and media industries to be that stupid.

Continue reading...

6 Responses to Ignorance as Brave New World

  • Truth is so bothersome…..

  • Ignorance is all they have. They cultivate in the public schools and universities. Only ignorance can explain (they stink he did well) eight years of Obama, and then Hillary or Trump. Welcome to the Idiocracy.

    .
    The latest lunacy: 0.01% of the US male population is so freaking sick as want to pee in the Women’s Room, and you are a bigot, and your city/state will be boycotted, if you oppose it. I have a granddaughter and I don’t need to worry about her going in a latrine with one of 750,000 registered sexual predators.

  • I agree with this post. Not only is liberalism ignorant and stupid, but it is sinful as well. Sin makes one stupid.

  • The Law Of Merited Impossibility is an epistemological construct governing the paradoxical way overclass opinion makers frame the discourse about the clash between religious liberty and LGBT civil rights. It is best summed up by the phrase, “It’s a complete absurdity to believe that traditional Christians and other conservatives will suffer a single thing from the expansion of LGBT rights, and boy, do they deserve what they’re going to get.”

  • Thanks Don. Right on. I experience this everyday with some of my kids, e.g., speaking the truth is to be a hater.

    Good book on this subject which I’m now reading is: ‘The Snapping of the American Mind’ by David Kupelian. And, of course, one you recommended before: “The Devil’s Pleasure Palace” by Michael Walsh.

  • It isn’t just the problem of ignorance but also OUR widespread acceptance of ignorance. Sometimes we might think we can ignore the idiocy and find some respite from the tumult . But, no. We can already judge by its fruits – ignorance is not bliss, and the idea of going along with the unwise… for the sake of short/order peace is just an early surrender

PopeWatch: Amoris Laetitia-Overall Thoughts

Tuesday, April 26, AD 2016

 

 

 

PopeWatch2-199x300-199x300

There is no way to mince words in regard to Amoris Laetitia:   it is a disaster for the Church.  In the Exhortation, the Pope and his ghost writers engage in a lengthy exercise to find excuses to disregard the clear command of Christ in regard to divorce and remarriage.  That much of this is done with a wink and a nod merely adds mendacity to the charges that could be brought against this document.  The reasoning, to use a charitable term for the arguments made by the Pope and his ghost writers, could be used in reference to any sin imaginable.  The Catholic Church has always taught that both confession and a firm intention at amendment of life were necessary for the forgiveness of sins.  Pope Francis seems to do away with amendment, and although it is not completely clear from this turgid, twisted document, he seems to be arguing that, depending upon the peculiar situation of a particular individual, what is clearly sin may not be sin, at least not mortal sin, in regard to them.  Thus even the confessional may not be necessary in many cases, since confession is in reference to sin, and who are we to judge?  This stands the teaching of the Church on its head.

Some people are content to focus on the true parts of the Exhortation and do their very best to ignore the rest.  This is understandable for people who find it heartbreaking that a Pope put his name to this dangerous mess, but it is ultimately mistaken.  The only reason why the Exhortation was written is because the Pope regards the position of Catholics in adulterous marriages to be a crisis for the Church.  That on his way to addressing that question he dispenses some truisms and bromides is of no consequence.  Rather than calling upon Catholics in adulterous marriages to repentance and amendment he changes the teaching of the Church.  That sad fact is all one needs to know about Amoris Laetitia.

 

Here in one post is PopeWatch’s stripped down version of Amoris Laetitia with the commentary of PopeWatch:

Continue reading...

15 Responses to PopeWatch: Amoris Laetitia-Overall Thoughts

  • May God have mercy on those who are led astray by this document.

  • May God have even more, true mercy on those who are leading others astray through this.

  • I’m still most bothered by the cunning use of truth and Christian words of faith to replace doctrine with…well, relativism. The call to “accompany” when referring to sinners, flies directly in the face of leaving that house and shaking the dust from our sandals if they refuse to believe…and woe be to them.
    Yet, in spite of it all, I have learned far more about our beautiful Church than I would have had this synodic travesty not occurred.
    Truth, will set (the faithful) free.

  • I am thoroughly disgusted with Amoris Laetitia – I so miss the engineering precision of Benedict XVI when explaining difficult theological matters, and the exalted philosophy of John Paul II. After decades of greatest (most of my adult life as a matter of fact), we now have Latin American Marxist Peronism, and it is like muddy, fetid, stale water in the mouth.

  • 311? Right back atcha.
    Donald McClarey, thank you for wading through this swamp, because I could not face it without your commentary. A little humor alleviates a lot of pain.

  • 311. People who don’t buy into this are probably heretics….

    Among the MANY disturbing, heretical, and idiotic things in this missive, the pontiff chose to double down on this recently and say those who cling to the old ways (truths of the Church taught by Christ) are idolators! The commit the sin of idolatry! The are diviners! They do not adhere to the new surprised of ‘the spirit’….

    I beg the Lord to help us.

  • I’m coming away from this as a wake up call for all of us.

    The Church will be chastised first.
    Then expect the homeland you live in.
    I heard this from a Father of Mercy, Fr. Bill Casey, at a Marian Conference years ago. I have the C.D.’S from his talk.

    He quoted Venerable Bishop Fulton J. Sheen.

    I believe this to be true. The overblown paedophile problem… the Bishops not owning it and dealing with it…..and now a misguided pontiff whom I must…we must pray for.

    This is the, please pardon my abrasiveness… this is the shit we have to pray through folks.
    It just is what it is Right Now…
    Not forever, but right now. Today is all we have. Tomorrow isn’t ours. Pray for conversion of All Sinners.

    St. Gertrude prayer; Eternal Father. I offer thee thy most precious blood of thy divine Son Jesus, in union with the masses being said through out the world today, for all the Holy Souls in Purgatory, for sinners everywhere, for sinners in the Universal Church, those who are within my home and family. Amen.”

    This is it.

    Sinners in the universal Church.
    Our own homes.
    Our own families.

    Pray for this Francis.
    Today I plead with you to pray for him.
    Pray.
    It’s what we CAN do that will help.
    Let’s not loose today to disappoint.
    Let’s pray through this…together.. please.

    PS. Excuse the profanity.
    I too am disappointed.

  • Something for the pontiff to consider.
    Our fight is with principalities and dominions… or did I get it wrong.

    He, Pope Francis, might be having a hard time seeing the forest through the trees….just saying. Yes. Keep praying. God will work through trust and perseverance.

    Homeland security is a funny thing.
    Murderers with perpetual Halloween masks are not going to win the day…just the fleeting moment.

    Keep up the prayers.
    Our support is from above…..not below.

    http://www.lifenews.com/2016/04/26/watch-satanists-mock-killing-of-unborn-children-in-bizarre-and-grotesque-protest/

  • I said earlier that this document is a pile of crap. I will not read it or heed it because the Church already possesses sufficient teaching and this document adds nothing.

    It is a power play put in effect by Kasper and Marx. They have this Pontiff wrapped around their fingers and he doesn’t even realize it. Kasper and Marx disgust me. The other prelates the Pontiff has surrounded himself with – Daneels, Maradiaga, Wuerl….they are no better.

    I’m just going to soldier on, go to Sunday Mass, educate my sons, go to Confession (more often than I recently have) and treat the corrupt prelates with the same contempt I have for our politicians in Washington. The Church does not belong to Bergoglio, even if he thinks it does. It belongs to Christ.

  • Thanks Donald for all the pain this exercise must have cost you and for reducing it to something understandable and accordingly deplorable. Unfortunate for all of us that it conflicts in so many places with our understanding of Catholic teaching. A.L is a major extension of Vatican II liberalism whose intent was to Protestantize the Church. For all practical purposes we are now Lutherans. (Time magazine cover to follow.) Accordingly, we should not be surprised if there was some sort of divine intervention soon that would at least assure of Remnant of Catholics when Christ comes again.

  • Death fixes our relationship with God. The saints and martyrs in heaven will not, cannot and do not change on the Catholic Faith. The Church Triumphant, militant and suffering are the Church. If any Pope can change the mind of a saint, let him try.

  • Come again Philip ? What was the quote from archbishop Sheen?

  • Anzlyne.

    Here’s my reference; Fr. Bill Casey from Oct. 14-16, 2011. Marian Confrence XX held in Boyne Falls Michigan at the Boyne Mountian Resort. The title of the talk: The Priest is a Marked Man.

    Father quoted Sheen; “The Church will experience the chastisement prior to the world.”

    I’ve searched for this quote, however I haven’t been successful.

    I hope this helps. Fr. Casey is a dynamic speaker and obedient to Holy Church. A orthodox priest if ever there was one.

  • Thank you Philip- I love both of those two priests too- wish I could have been there for the retreat.
    and I believe Archbishop Sheen’s prophecy too- “The Church will experience the chastisement prior to the world.” I wonder if we are first so that we can be an object lesson and warning to the world and maybe help them come to Jesus.

  • Anzlyne.

    Your welcome.
    In the talk, Fr. Casey speaks of the “Church Nice.” It is remarkable. The Church Militant has become the Church Mush, Tolerant, Door Mat…and on. He quotes from Fr. John Hardon as well, who btw..foresaw this era we live in.
    Hardon spoke of the fate of First century Christians and how the faithful will be forced to celebrate Mass underground if not enough Catholics wake up from the deep sleep of indifference. The coma many are experiencing is going to be fatal. Fatal for their souls.

    I won’t ramble on. The Clinton statement about how religions must change their views on abortion, is to me a clarion call.
    She, Hillary, is one of many of minions Lucifer has in his control. Overwhelming? No.
    They will not win.
    We must be there for our neighbors and family that are not ready for the chaos when it breaks upon us. They will see our calm, our peace. They will want it. They will ask you how come you have it. You will lead them to Truth.

April 26, 1777: Sybil Ludington’s Ride

Tuesday, April 26, AD 2016

5f12285744cef466884f114032cb42ce

The eldest of twelve children, Sybil Ludington grew up in a household of ardent patriots, her father being the commander of the local militia in Duchess County New York.  On April 26, 1777 she became, at age 16, a heroine of the Revolution when she rode forty miles to her father’s militia encampment at night on her horse Star to spread the alarm that the British were moving on Danbury Connecticut.  During her ride she successfully defended herself against a highwayman using a long stick.  She used the same stick to bang on the door of houses along the way to let the occupants know that the British were on the march,  Thanks to her, her father Colonel Henry Ludington chased after the British with 400 of his militia.  They were unable to intercept the British before their attack on Danbury, but they, along with other militia units, harassed the British as they retreated to New York.  The campaign is considered a turning point that helped ensure firm patriot control in Connecticut.  Sybil received the personal thanks of George Washington.

Continue reading...

2 Responses to April 26, 1777: Sybil Ludington’s Ride