The Philosopher Millennial

Monday, March 21, AD 2016

Justin Bieber Church Christian Taco Bell Millennial Philosopher

Update Below

“You don’t need to go to church to be a Christian.

If you go to Taco Bell, that doesn’t make you a taco.”

– Justin Bieber

This is probably the quote of the year, from a Millennial no less.

(Hat Tip: Taylor Marshall at Maccabee Society)

Update: A few developments that have come up through reliable sources:

  1.  Justin Bieber does attend both Sunday service and Wednesday night Bible study weekly.
  2.  This may be an old Protestant meme with no relation to Justin Bieber.
  3.  If the graphics on the pic above are correct, I recognize the CNN Headline News logo and it may well be anti-Christian propaganda.
  4.  For the record, I do not dislike Justin Bieber, I just found the quote quite funny, but with these recent developments, please keep in mind that this could be another smear against professed Christians.
Continue reading...

17 Responses to The Philosopher Millennial

  • Justin Bieber, a Canadian migrant doing a job Americans just won’t do.

  • Meet the new press secretary for Pope Francis!

  • …wait a minute.
    Wasn’t it Justin Bieber who said?; “A mind is a terrible thing.”

    Mr. Bieber is one taco shy of a combo platter.

  • Justin Bieber is typical of today’s generation. There are intelligent, rational engineers in their late 20s or early 30s with whom I work who would say exactly what he said. This is the fruit of godless liberal progressive Academia.

  • Some day he might also be saying with the same authoritative voice, “If you go to Hell, that doesn’t make you a bad person”

  • O tempora o mores!

  • Deport him to Canada for gross stupidly!

  • Whoa! JB future Vatican star, you are so wrong with your food magisterium. Indeed, you are what you eat-so-enough tacos and you become a taco-just look around at so many on such a diet and you see immediately this is gospel truth. There are walking human Dunkin Donuts and living Whoppers. Same same-eat His flesh, drink His blood and become incorporated into the biggest fan club of all time-the MBOC. Mystical Body Of Christ. Guy McClung, San Antonio, Texas

  • Taking Tito Edwards’ title a step further, I find it fascinating to [attempt to] discuss history, politics and economics with millennial philosophers. Some are surprisingly thoughtful, and appear to realize, “Yeah, that’s right.” (i.e., about capital drives all economics, you cant increase pay if you don’t increase productivity, that communism has been the greatest murderer in history with greatest living murderers still around us like Fidel & Raul, and the little fat man in Pyongyang, or historically, the sociopath named Lenin, the goon named Stalin (they don’t know he started as a bank-robber in Pt. Baku), nor the late round-faced god with his little red book that murdered upwards of 40 MILLION.

    Mind you, most of these people bring up the questions to me in the course of my work—I don’t volunteer or practice “solemn-nonsense proselytism.” Heaven forbid.
    But with many others, you reach a THC-addled, drug-fused wall (at least out here in CA) melted into a dense mantle of 12 years of ecological Leninism. Hard to penetrate. This is the stronghold of the Bernie supporters—emotion welcome, reason an enemy, rage a virtue. One person got terribly red in the face and positively outraged as I ticked off the evidence once—he asked me now—that global-warming aka climate-change was a fraud. His mother and his religion had been insulted.
    That young man is now teaching in the public elementary schools in Madison, WI. PIty the poor children. In another decade, all the more, pity us.

  • Pingback: HOLY TUESDAY EDITION – Big Pulpit
  • He’s just paraphrasing a guy born in the 60s.
    The 1860s.
    “Going to church doesn’t make you a Christian any more than going to a garage makes you an automobile.”

  • Steve Phoenix-
    the kids are unlikely to be any worse than the guy you talked to; he’s just copying the 60s era teachers that he had, who were most likely the only ones who acted like it was good for him to share the same views.
    Those of us who did not and do not agree with those teachers learned to shut up about it, unless it’s really worth arguing.
    The guys on the opposite side will abuse you, and the guys who in theory agree with you tend to be nasty because you haven’t been on their side since before you were born. The philosophical evangelism on the right sucks. Some of us will agree anyways, because it’s right, but we’re sure as heck not going to speak up on the subject even when politely possible unless we think it’s important enough to risk the scolds.

  • Foxfire, Billy Sunday was a Protestant – a Protester against the Church in which He refused to believe. To be a Christian is to be baptized into the visible Church, the Body of Christ. How ironic that a man whose surname was Sunday could not understand this.

  • A guy that i once knew well, when we were discussing going to Church on Sunday, came out with that statement, claiming he was a “good” Presbyterian, but didn’t need to go the Church..

    A couple of years later, he started an affair with his best friend’s wife, which I think is ongoing.

    I guess he thinks being a good christian is “by sharing the lerv”- in a manner of speaking. 😉

  • LQC-
    I rather guessed. Just was *sure* I’d heard that “going to Church doesn’t make you a Christian any more than going to (place) makes you a (think usually found in that place)” line before. I was betting it was from the 60s, since it sounded like a usual hippy-dippy philosophy.
    I was only off by something like half a century……

  • @Don the Kiwi.

    The guy you once knew is everywhere these days. Clones? Maybe, but I’m sure it’s the taco sauce. Cheeky bastards.

  • I’ve heard the sort of remark attributed to pop-idol Bieber before from Protestants, especially ones who despise those they call “Churchians”. (I remind these separated brethren that Jesus did not leave us a book, he left us a Church–one that He promised the Gates of Hell cannot prevail against. I borrowed that from Steve Ray. It really messes with sola scriptura heads.)

The dilemma of choosing and the Syndrome of the Unwise Bride – The SUB

Sunday, March 13, AD 2016


The following is a guest post by Sammy.

The last episode of a popular foreign Sunday evening show that hooked Americans to the T.V. for so many hours took place last week. The fiction is over and we need to confront our own dramatic reality. To make it more appealing let’s present it this way.

The unwise bride is about to let go the good guy – her life happiness – for a fantasy. She is choosing a guy who, at his own choice, hasn’t been humbled and corrected by God and therefore has no fear of God, no inch of wisdom within him. She cannot see that because her five senses just perceive a future where she will enjoy her illusion.

Continue reading...

3 Responses to The dilemma of choosing and the Syndrome of the Unwise Bride – The SUB

  • This is an old, old story. It is recorded in 1st Samuel chapter 8.

  • After the last 8 years of a previous “marriage” it seems it would be prudent to have a prenuptial agreement of some kind– quick and clean to use when there is “no confidence” left. Impeachment is apparently difficult and unlikely
    Maybe we could just set upside kind of objective measurable standard that when so many requirements are not met, or so many laws are broken, the groom is automatically out- no vote necessary, he/she just went one too many country busting moves too far.
    Maybe we could have that kind of arrangement with court justices too.

  • Lucky,

    It’s an original, any coincidences are that.

8 Responses to Liberal Media Turning on Hillary Clinton, Accusing Her of ‘Lying’

  • “Madame Secretary needs to apologize sooner rather than later for this current scandal in order to mitigate the accusations of of a cover-up.”

    Do WHAT?!?!

    The low information voter may accept her apology–but I never will. She has plainly committed a felony & is disqualified from holding any office.

  • “He added that Clinton should get a criminal lawyer, as she has violated multiple statutes, including those relating to conflict of interest and obstruction of justice.”

    “This woman should be the subject of a criminal investigation. She should be in front of a grand jury.”

  • Isn’t Hillary the best thing Republicans have going for them right now what with all the Trump madness in the air?

  • “Religions beliefs must change for sake of abortion.” Madame Secretary-

    Let the shipwreck be swallowed into the dark abyss.

    If she repents, may her soul be salvaged.

  • There’s a meme going around on Facebook that shows pictures of Snowden & Hillary next to each other. Each picture says that same thing at the top: (something like) gave up classified information. then at the bottom of Snowden’s pic, it says, “wanted for Treason” and at the bottom of Hillary’s it says, “wanted for President.” There’s another one comparing Nixon’s lies to her lies. Why is his worse? only because he happened to have an (R) after his name. I really pray that people will wake up. It’s bizarro world.

  • In the clip the commentator mentioned the Clinton camp “plays by a different set of rules,” and it is finally about time the rope that has been taken out one inch at a time, (lies), is making the noose that hopefully will end her political career.

  • I recall that some time ago, Hillary uttered the phrase, “That requires the willing suspension of disbelief”. I don’t recall the context of it but it seems that is exactly what one needs to do to believe what she is saying in regard to this scandal. Another phrase comes to mind. “Loose Lips Sink Ships”. I won’t judge the state of her soul but I will question the state of any person’s mind still willing to vote for her.

  • I think it was Joseph Sobran who coined the tern “The Hive” to describe the behavior of various elements which made up the nexus of which the Democratic Party is the incorporated electoral vehicle. They’re getting the idea that the Hillary project is a losing proposition so now they’re working in their self-organizing way on plan B. Being bruited about is the idea that the Administration is trying to grease the wheels for Joseph Biden, who seems amply qualified to be the President of an Idiocracy.

Keep Up the Bad Work Seth Rogen

Friday, December 19, AD 2014

Seth RogenSo comedic actor Seth Rogen doesn’t hesitate to call Christians the A-word for supporting Hobby Lobby. Knowing that Christians don’t retaliate, maybe at worst start a picket line.

But when Seth Rogen makes a film, “The Interview”, satirizing the “Great Successor”, Kim Jong-un, he turned and ran, hired body guards, and is too scared to even offer a quote.

Seth Rogen is so fortunate to live in a country built upon Christian values. If he were in an Islamic or Communist nation, he wouldn’t be alive today.

Keep up the bad work Seth Rogen.

Continue reading...

9 Responses to Keep Up the Bad Work Seth Rogen

  • Great observation, Tito. It shows once again that left-wingers going back to Joseph Kennedy, Sr.,always cower before murderous dictatorships.

  • Rogen is a particular brand of Canadian that I’ve seen a lot lately: scream at people bigger than you and then tuck tail and run when they come at you. Ever read stuff about American/Canadian dynamics? Seriously its like those people have nothing to do other than complain about American politics and then get offended if America doesn’t have time to worry over Canada. Must be nice only having one boarder that you share largely unguarded with an ally. Must be nice to only have one home grown terrorist (Ottawa); Americans deal with that all the time. And in Rogen’s case: must be nice having an easier time entering the States and enjoying all that it has to offer including making tons of money off Americans. The Mexicans have to wait (or cross a desert wasteland and hope they don’t die). Must be nice.

  • “…he turned and ran, hired body guards, and is too scared to even offer a quote.”
    Like all liberal progressive Democrats, Seth is a coward. He knows that what he supports as a liberal is intrinsically evil, and he knows what evil deserves, and he is afraid of receiving that which he does deserve.


  • Though Rogen is not admirable, do keep your facts straight. This week’s Village Voice has a featured cover-page interview with him by noted film critic Amy Nicholson.

  • What facts are those, Misty J?

  • I just wonder why anyone would think it was funny or smart to make low class movie about assassinating the leader of a foreign country who has demonstrated his aggressive and abusive mental Illness. How smart can Seth be?
    A dimwit … juvenile sense of humor that taunts and pokes until the sleeping bear wakes up. No thought of what the consequences might be, beyond hoping to get rich and a moment of fame.

  • Actually, Anzlyne, according to a senior defense analyst with the Rand Corporation, Bruce Bennett, though this is a crude film at some parts, Bennett says that this film would have seriously destabilized Kim ‘ s political leadership with certain NK elites. That is the pity: Sony and Rogen folded…predictably. Bennett makes the point that tens of thousands in NK death camps deserve more.

After 31 Years, Finally

Sunday, November 30, AD 2014

The sequel to Return of the Jedi will be released in December of 2015, titled Star Wars: The Force Awakens.

What makes this different from the previous three Star Wars prequels?  George Lucas had almost nothing to do with the making of the film.  Yes, no more Ewoks or Jar Jar Binks, or any other poor attempts at young children product placements that ultimately killed each prequel and Return of the Jedi.

Yes, Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back are in my opinion the best of the bunch.  Great special effects, storyline, and action.  Only to stumble with Return of the Jedi and the three prequels being prevented from being timeless classics.

The first trailer was produced for American audiences, the second trailer was made for the rest of the world.

What to look for?  Storm Troopers have a slightly redesigned appearance, the light saber now has two ‘light handle bars’, a Darth Sith “may” have survived from Return of the Jedi, and a few more minor tweaks to let you figure out.



Continue reading...

3 Responses to After 31 Years, Finally

  • Jar-Jar Binks, the fictional character I would most like to ask to put his hand in a wood chipper to clear a blockage.

  • I hold a minority opinion in rather liking Return of the Jedi, though perhaps that is because it is the one I actually saw in the theater in its original release when I was six. The prequels also did improve in quality with each installment, even if the bar was low. All in all, I am looking forward to Episode Seven, and being able to watch it why my (then) six-year old daughter.

  • I want to laugh, but I saw it happen. Haven’t seen the Star Wars yet to discuss its morality or usefulness in indoctrinating our people.

16 Responses to What Do Don and Paul Actually Do?

Crux with John L. Allen Jr., A New Catholic Website Published by The Boston Globe

Tuesday, September 2, AD 2014

John L Allen Associate Editor of Crux MagazineJohn L. Allen Jr.’s name came up during an introductory meeting between the new owner of The Boston Globe, John W. Henry, and the editor of the same daily, Brian McGrory.  It was an auspicious meeting because it was taking place one day after the Boston Red Sox winning the 2013 World Series, which Henry also owns.

Taking note of the popularity of the new Pope and wanting to capitalize on it, Allen’s name was floated to anchor this new online Catholic magazine named Crux.  Crux would be an addition to the online publishing niches that the Globe operates.  Considering the large Catholic population of the Boston area and the appeal of Pope Francis, it was a natural fit.

Henry was a self made man in financial trading and also successful in breaking the ‘Curse of the Bambino‘ by winning the 2004 World Series.  Looking back at Henry’s track record, it can be said that he took bold ventures in unfamiliar territory and did well.

Continue reading...

8 Responses to Crux with John L. Allen Jr., A New Catholic Website Published by The Boston Globe

End of Summer, Feed Is Working Again, and The French Revolution

Monday, September 1, AD 2014

It’s the unofficial end of Summer and it’s my annual gratuitous post of myself day.  The pic below was taken in mid-July, but I waited to fix the feed to The American Catholic in order celebrate the Summer.  Needless to say, it’s fixed and the Summer is almost over.

During the Summer I asked my fellow blogger Don for some book recommendations for the French Revolution.  Of the few he did mentioned, I picked up Simon Schama’s ‘Citizen’.  The reading is in-depth, interesting, and balanced.  I’m a bit over halfway finished of the 948 pages and am so far impressed.  Considering that we are in the post-Cold War era, I wanted to know a bit more on the French Revolution since their errors have already engulfed Europe and has almost metastasizing here in the United States.  The book is good and if there is any criticism of Simon Schama’s work it’s that he views Christianity, in particular the Catholic Church, through a materialistic lens.

My opinion on the subject is that the French Revolution is the confluence of anti-Christian ideas emanating from the so-called era of enlightenment.  These very same ideas unleashed the short-term devastation of the rape of nuns, the execution of priests, and the degradation of houses of worship.  The long-term affects have furthered the cause of eliminating God from all aspects of life blossoming further in the Communist Revolution in Russia and continued to bear the fruit of death in World Wars I & II.  From this compost grew what we now call modern liberalism & democratic socialism.

End of Summer Tito Edwards Simon Schama Citizens 500x625Happy Labor Day!


Continue reading...

36 Responses to End of Summer, Feed Is Working Again, and The French Revolution

  • The best histories of the French Revolution probably remains those of two Catholic historians, Hilaire Belloc and Lord Acton.
    Belloc brings out the central rôle of Carnot, the War Minister and effective head of the Committee of Public Safety and gives full credit to the “generation of genius,” Kléber, Moreau, Reynier, Marceau, and Ney commanding the army of Sambre et Meuse, Hoche, Desaix, and St. Cyr on the Rhine and, above all, Bonaparte and Masséna in the Appenine campaign.
    Acton rightly divined the underlying political motive. “The hatred of royalty was less than the hatred of aristocracy; privileges were more detested than tyranny; and the king perished because of the origin of his authority rather than because of its abuse. Monarchy unconnected with aristocracy became popular in France, even when most uncontrolled; whilst the attempt to reconstitute the throne, and to limit and fence it with its peers, broke down, because the old Teutonic elements on which it relied – hereditary nobility, primogeniture, and privilege — were no longer tolerated. The substance of the ideas of 1789 is not the limitation of the sovereign power, but the abrogation of intermediate powers.”
    The love of equality, the hatred of nobility and the tolerance of despotism naturally go together, for, If the central power is weak, the secondary powers will run riot and oppress The Empire was the consummation of the Revolution, not its reversal and Napoléon’s armies gave a code of laws and the principle of equal citizenship to a continent.

  • Thanks Michael!

    Those recommendations are going on my Reading List for next Summer, awesome!

  • Simon Schama’s ‘Citizens’ was published for the bicentenary of the French Revolution. It is regarded as the best work on the subject in the 20th century. The French hated it, calling it ‘Thatcherite history’. Its main thesis, that the violence of the Revolution was inherent, particularly upset them.

    In particular, Schama makes the point that pre-Revolutionary France was not an ossified feudal society but one that was obsessed with modernity. He also stresses that when the revolutionaries destroyed the Church they destroyed the social welfare system with drastic results in the 1790s.

    People tend to mythologize their revolutions. Englishmen did so regarding 1688; Americans still do over theirs (even though many of the mythologizers are well-educated) and the French are no exception.

  • Odd that Michael Peterson-Seymour (who sounds as if his ancestors fought at Waterloo) should be an unreconstructed Bonapartist. All the more so since one assumes that he is a Catholic.

  • I find a 948 page book to be daunting.

    I am eagerly awaiting the shortest book in history: subject what Obama did right.

  • I want to clarify that the criticism of Simon Schama’s book, Citizen, is my own. He refers to nuns and monks and unfulfilled citizens, it, not meeting any of their potential because they are cloistered. I am not sure if he was be sarcastic, which would be fine, or serious, which would explain my criticism.

  • Pingback: Why Secular Humanists Can't Cope With Islam -
  • My complete recommendations to Tito:

    “In regard to the French Revolution a good starting point is Citizens by Simon Schama:

    Burke’s Reflections on the Revolution in France still cannot be beat as an analysis of the early Revolution and is eerily prophetic. Carlyle’s History of the French Revolution is quite dated, and written in his usual odd style, but has valuable insights overlooked by many modern commenters.

    The late Henri Lefebvre, although a Marxist, did valuable work on both the French Revolution and Napoleon and I recommend his tomes. His style is dry as dust, but his research is impeccable.”

  • Um, what beach was that?

  • Tito Edwards: I expected you would look more like Padre Pio. You look happy.

  • Tamsin,

    An undisclosed location on the gulf coast of Florida.

    Mary De Voe,

    LOL. Very happy, my wife was there with me, but she had to take the picture. 🙂

  • My brother Mike lives on the Gulf Coast of Florida. Say “Hi” to him for me.

  • Thank you for fixing the feed!

  • Tito, I share your view of the French Revolution. It lives on in the Social Radicalism that permeates so much of our politics. Social Radicalism is a phenomenon that bears close scrutiny. It transcends the individual with a mindset all its own. If not scrutinized and moderated the mindset morphs into moral chaos. This can happen in slow creeping fashion or with the rapidity of revolution. The French Revolution is a signal example. It started with the whole nation seeking to justly address a financial crisis but rapidly resolved into open rebellion and uncontrollable rage. Carlyle describes it thus: “On a sudden, the Earth yawns asunder, and amid Tartarean smoke, and glare of fierce brightness, rises SANSCULOTTISM, many-headed, fire-breathing, and asks; What think ye of me?” Do I engage in hyperbole when I compare the presentable, well-clothed and well-intended modern social radical with the maddened mob of Paris? Yes but to make a point. I cross a Robespierre and risk the guillotine, the loss of my life. The modern well-dressed social-radical only asks that I risk my soul. Who does me less violence?

  • John Nolan wrote, “Odd that Michael Peterson-Seymour (who sounds as if his ancestors fought at Waterloo) should be an unreconstructed Bonapartist. All the more so since one assumes that he is a Catholic.”
    Another Catholic, G K Chesterton described the tragedy of England:
    “A war that we understood not came over the world and woke
    Americans, Frenchmen, Irish; but we knew not the things they spoke.
    They talked about rights and nature and peace and the people’s reign:
    And the squires, our masters, bade us fight; and scorned us never again.
    Weak if we be for ever, could none condemn us then;
    Men called us serfs and drudges; men knew that we were men.
    In foam and flame at Trafalgar, on Albuera plains,
    We did and died like lions, to keep ourselves in chains,
    We lay in living ruins; firing and fearing not
    The strange fierce face of the Frenchmen who knew for what they fought,
    And the man who seemed to be more than a man we strained against and broke;
    And we broke our own rights with him. And still we never spoke.”
    Hilaire Belloc, too, another Catholic, whose grandfather served in the armies of Napoléon, declared, “Those who ask how it was that a group of men sustaining all the weight of civil conflict within and of universal war without, yet made time enough in twenty years to frame the codes which govern modern Europe, to lay down the foundations of universal education, of a strictly impersonal scheme of administration, and even in detail to remodel the material face of society—in a word, to make modern Europe—must be content for their reply to learn that the Republican Energy had for its flame and excitant this vision: a sense almost physical of the equality of man.”

  • William P Walsh wrote, “It started with the whole nation seeking to justly address a financial crisis but rapidly resolved into open rebellion and uncontrollable rage.”
    Certainly, it did start with a bankrupt government, but here is the curiosity: this bankrupt nation found itself able to sustain twenty years of war against the whole of Europe and to raise and maintain an army to fight it. For most of that period it had 700,000 men in the field. As for “open rebellion,” it crushed it wherever it showed itself, in Brittany, in Lyons, in the Vendée. It takes something rather more than “uncontrollable rage” to do that.

  • “It takes something rather more than “uncontrollable rage” to do that.”

    1. Mass murder against opponents.
    2. Mass repudiation of the debts of the Old Regime.
    3. The military genius of Napoleon and some of the other generals and marshals that rose to the fore as a result of the Revolution.
    4. Total War-no longer was war the sport of kings but rather the preocupation of peoples.

  • Donald R McClarey

    “3. The military genius of Napoleon and some of the other generals and marshals”

    I would certainly agree with that. There is a sense in which Napoléon, Dumoriez (despite his later defection), Kellerman, Hoche and Kléber were the French Revolution – It is their legacy.

    “4. Total War-no longer was war the sport of kings but rather the preoccupation of peoples.”

    The levée en masse and all that it entailed was the achievement of Carnot, but we sometimes forget what an astonishing achievement it was. The army was increased from 645,000 in mid-1793 to 1,500,000 in September 1794. The unbroken succession of victories, from Fleurus in June 1794 to Marengo in June 1800 were all, in a sense, his. He was ably seconded by Lindet, in effect, minister of food, munitions and manufacture.

    The political will and administrative skills needed to raise, equip, train, discipline and provision armies on that scale was enormous and quite without precedent. Much of the credit must go to the Committee of Public Safety, which was, in effect, the War Cabinet and to the brilliant innovation of seconding the “Deputies on Mission” from the National Assembly, as political commissioners to the armies.

  • Michael points out my inattention to the economic situation in France. I admit to a lack of formal study of that dismal science. I have yet in mind the diabolical ingredient of revolution. The first revolution starts with Lucifer’s “Non Serviam” and every revolution carries that sentiment in its bloodstream. The laws of economics are swept away when everything can be stolen from rightful owners. The State can be most efficient when it can murder the opposition. “If God does not exist, all things are permitted”. The Social Radical who looks so benign in his well-tailored clothing can do great injustice with a pen-stroke. If the end justifies the employment of any means, we are living in a state of moral chaos. We are then lunatics pulling down our house upon us. But I sing to the choir, as I sort out my thoughts.

  • I can assure Tito that Schama when referring to cloistered religious is not giving us his own opinion, but that of the revolutionaries whose construct of what constitutes a ‘citizen’ is an important theme of the book.

    I am an admirer of Belloc but he was fundamentally wrong on two counts – all his life he believed a) that the French Revolution was a ‘good thing’ and b) Dreyfus was guilty.

  • John Nolan
    I think both Belloc (and Chesterton, too) wrote a great deal in reaction to the way the Revolution and Napoléon were portrayed in England.

    There is a print, which can still be seen in the bar parlours of some country inns, of the handshake of Wellington and Blucher after Waterloo. They must have been produced by the million

    Chesterton summed up the whole business pretty well.

    “Our middle classes did well to adorn their parlours with the picture of the “Meeting of Wellington and Blucher.” They should have hung up a companion piece of Pilate and Herod shaking hands. Then, after that meeting amid the ashes of Hougomont, where they dreamed they had trodden out the embers of all democracy, the Prussians rode on before, doing after their kind. After them went that ironical aristocrat out of embittered Ireland, with what thoughts we know; and Blucher, with what thoughts we care not; and his soldiers entered Paris, and stole the sword of Joan of Arc.”

    To both Belloc and Chesterton, the fall of Paris to the Allies could only be compared to the sack of Rome by the Goths.

  • An interesting summary of an enormous matter,re. the French Revolution: “It started with the whole nation seeking to justly address a financial crisis but rapidly resolved into open rebellion and uncontrollable rage.” – William P. Walsh
    However, from whence came the bitterly murderous hatred of the Catholic Faith and its individual servants, only the abyss could cough up that demon.

  • Michael Paterson-Seymour

    Chesterton wrote ‘The Crimes of England’ in 1916. It’s a polemic, brilliant in parts, but it ain’t history. The author’s unreasoning ‘Teutonophobia’, his withering scorn for Pitt, Castlereagh and Peel (in contrast with his hero-worship of Charles James Fox) and his take on the French Revolution and Bonaparte simply parade his prejudices. Comparing the Allied occupation of Paris in 1814 with the sack of Rome by the Goths takes hyperbole to new heights, especially since French armies had looted and plundered their way across Europe for the previous twenty years. Historical method requires conclusions to be based on evidence. Both Belloc and Chesterton were counter-historical, if not positively anti-historical. They rightly challenged the consensus of the Whig historians, but what they put in its place was too intuitive and subjective. Since it did not rely on evidence it could be sometimes right, but more often wrong.

    Simon Schama’s book is revisionist, not least in that he uses the narrative approach which was unfashionable in 1989 (Orlando Figes does the same in his study of the Russian Revolution ‘A People’s Tragedy’). But both men are historians; Belloc and Chesterton, for all their brilliance, were not.

  • The errors of the french revolution came from somewhere!
    The protestant reformation shaped Europe and the world in ways we are still discerning. That “reformation” preceded the Enlightenment, which came to the “spirit” of revoltion of the 18 and 19 centuries everything from the very un- “reason”able reign of terror to marx to the culture kampf– and what follows in russia and mexico and china and on and on and on

  • John Nolan wrote, “Comparing the Allied occupation of Paris in 1814 with the sack of Rome by the Goths takes hyperbole to new heights…”
    Hardly. In both cases, the capital of civilisation fell to the barbarians from beyond the Rhine.
    Belloc’s evaluation of the Revolution is not all that different from the great French historian of the Revolution, Louis Blanc. Blanc, one recalls, during his exile in London (he had fought on the barricades during les journées de juin 1848), had access to Croker’s unrivalled collection of manuscripts and pamphlets.
    Acton summarises Blanc’s principle: ”He desires government to be so constituted that it may do everything for the people, not so restricted that it can do no injury to minorities. The masses have more to suffer from abuse of wealth than from abuse of power, and need protection by the State, not against it. Power, in the proper hands, acting for the whole, must not be restrained in the interest of a part.” That was also the view of the great Dominican, Lacordaire, “Between the weak and the strong, between the rich and the poor, between the master and the servant, it is freedom which oppresses and the law which sets free.”
    This was a principle Belloc and Chesterton would have heartily endorsed. It is the negation of Liberalism and its doctrine of laissez-faire.

  • “In both cases, the capital of civilisation fell to the barbarians from beyond the Rhine.”

    Please. Even as hyperbole that is over the circus top. The French Revolution was a complex historical event, but by the time Napoleon fell it had devolved into one of the first military dictatorships in modern times, one with delusions of grandeur. It was a very good thing for the peace of Europe that Napoleon fell in 1814 and that he was soundly thrashed in 1815 at Waterloo which brought an end to his “Golden Oldies” attempt at a Bonaparte revival.

  • Donald R McClarey wrote, “[B]y the time Napoleon fell it had devolved into one of the first military dictatorships in modern times.”
    That is to misunderstand the nature, both of the Republic and the Empire. Napoléon was no more a military dictator than Augustus or Charlemagne. As Chesterton said, “French democracy became more democratic, not less, when it turned all France into one constituency which elected one member.”
    Elizabeth Barrett Browning (Swinburn’s “Sea-Eagle of English feather”) understood:
    “And kings crept out again to feel the sun.
    The kings crept out — the peoples sat at home.
    And finding the long-invocated peace
    (A pall embroidered with worn images
    Of rights divine) too scant to cover doom
    Such as they suffered, cursed the corn that grew
    Rankly, to bitter bread, on Waterloo.”

    Those “carrion kings, unsheeted and unmasked,” described by Michelet, the great historian of the Revolution.

  • “That is to misunderstand the nature, both of the Republic and the Empire. Napoléon was no more a military dictator than Augustus or Charlemagne”

    Augustus was a military dictator, the last man standing of the ambitious warlords/politicians who murdered the dying Republic. Charlemagne was not a military dictator but the scion of a family that had been running the chief of the Frankish states for some time. Napoleon owed his position to his military brilliance and his willingness to use military force against civilian rule and nothing more.

    “French democracy became more democratic, not less, when it turned all France into one constituency which elected one member.”

    That quote always had my vote for the dumbest thing written by Chesterton.

  • M P-S, the ‘barbarians from beyond the Rhine’ produced Lessing, Schiller, Goethe, Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven, to name but a few. I’m sure those German citizens, living in their peaceful towns and villages, often in the shadow of old-established monasteries on which the local economy depended and which were soon to be destroyed, were overjoyed at the arrival of Revolutionary French armies with their portable guillotines. Germany in the eighteenth century was civilized in the real sense that the local ‘civitas’ enforced its own laws for the benefit of the citizens. It is telling that the incidence of capital punishment in the German states was far lower than in France or England.

    Michael, get off your hobby-horse and face facts. Bonaparte has a good record when it comes to establishing (or more correctly re-establishing, since the Revolution had destroyed much) institutions in France; but he also erected a police state. His hubristic lust for conquest led (as in the case of Hitler, with whom he has much in common) to eventual nemesis. And France only recovered its 1789 levels of foreign trade in the 1830s by which time Britain had far outstripped it.

  • “I can assure Tito that Schama when referring to cloistered religious is not giving us his own opinion, but that of the revolutionaries whose construct of what constitutes a ‘citizen’ is an important theme of the book.”
    The sovereign personhood of the newly begotten human being (His body and his soul) constitutes the nation from the very first moment of existence. His absolute moral and legal innocence are the standard of Justice and the compelling interest of the state in its duty to deliver Justice and in protecting the newly begotten human being. Francisco Suarez says that: “Human existence is the criterion for the objective ordering of human rights.”
    The newly begotten human being who constitutes the state from the very first moment of his existence and through his sovereign personhood endowed by “their Creator” is the citizen. At birth the new citizen is given documents to prove his citizenship and a tax bill.
    The French Revolution must have been dealing with the loss and denial of citizenship by the state as in “persona non grata”. Religious persons, priests and nuns, do not forfeit or surrender their God-given sovereign personhood and/or citizenship by answering their vocation. A higher calling, in fact, purifies their citizenship and brings “the Blessings of Liberty”.
    It is nothing less than communism, oppression, for another individual or the state to tell a person who is a citizen that he is not a citizen without indictment for a capital offense, treason. It appears that being a religious person in France during the French Revolution was treason, the absolute reversal of the truth.
    This same separation of citizenship and soul is happening here in America, where having a soul has become treason, treason in the land of atheism.

  • Donald R McCleary wrote, “’ French democracy became more democratic, not less, when it turned all France into one constituency which elected one member.’ – That quote always had my vote for the dumbest thing written by Chesterton.”

    And yet it was, in effect, endorsed by Walter Bagehot, a man politically poles apart from Chesterton. Writing of the nephew, that shrewd cynic observed, “The nature of a constitution, the action of an assembly, the play of parties, the unseen formation of a guiding opinion, are complex facts, difficult to know and easy to mistake. But the action of a single will, the fiat of a single mind, are easy ideas: anybody can make them out, and no one can ever forget them. When you put before the mass of mankind the question, ‘Will you be governed by a king, or will you be governed by a constitution?’ the inquiry comes out thus—’Will you be governed in a way you understand, or will you be governed in a way you do not understand?’ The issue was put to the French people; they were asked, ‘Will you be governed by Louis Napoleon, or will you be governed by an assembly?’ The French people said, ‘We will be governed by the one man we can imagine, and not by the many people we cannot imagine.'”

  • “The French people said, ‘We will be governed by the one man we can imagine, and not by the many people we cannot imagine.’”

    Preposterous. The plebiscite of 1851 was instituted only after wannabe Napoleon had instituted repression. It had as much validity as one of Stalin’s show trials in the thirties. Like his much greater uncle, wannabe Napoleon owed his imitation imperial title, eventually granted him officially through another plebiscite with an unimaginative 97% yes vote, to the bayonets he controlled rather than the ballots he manufactured in pretend plebiscites.

  • Donald R McClarey
    Louis Napoléon may not have been supported by a numerical majority of the nation, that’s as may be; but there is no doubt that he had the support of a determinant current of opinion—determinant in intensity and in weight, that is, as well as in numbers. That was true of his uncle also and it needed no plebiscite to establish this obvious truth.

  • “but there is no doubt that he had the support of a determinant current of opinion”

    Nope, like his uncle he had control of the military and crushed all opposition. Speculations about his “true” popularity among the people or the elite are meaningless when he made certain that his opposition had no voice.

  • Mary De Voe’s, “It is nothing less than communism, oppression, for another individual or the state to tell a person who is a citizen that he is not a citizen without indictment for a capital offense, treason. It appears that being a religious person in France during the French Revolution was treason, the absolute reversal of the truth. . This same separation of citizenship and soul is happening here in America, where having a soul has become treason, treason in the land of atheism.”, nails it.
    In America today, the newly begotten human being is no longer protected, the person who is religious, a veteran, a supporter of Constitutional rights is a potential domestic terrorist. Remember Andrew Cuomo’s saying that a supporter of the Second Amendment has no place in New York State. If he becomes President, that may apply to the whole country.

  • I started to watch Simon Schamas tv program about judiasm since i enjoyed his shows about England. I caught an episode in the middle and what amazed me was that the program seemed more of a rant against the injustices perpetrated upon the Jews by Christians than a true unbiased history of Judaism.
    I was a bit shocked but it may explain this “book is good and if there is any criticism of Simon Schama’s work it’s that he views Christianity, in particular the Catholic Church, through a materialistic lens “

A Latin Smackdown in Tombstone

Saturday, August 9, AD 2014

Tombstone Movie Poster

Tombstone is one of my favorite Western’s of all time.  The story line and plot is strong and engaging.  The actors chosen for their parts excelled in their characters, going so far as to even lose weight to represent the lean man of the wild west.  Attention to detail was of the up-most where filming was done in the actual Birdcage Theatre, saloons, and even Tombstone itself.

The film’s main scene is the infamous gunfight at the O. K. Corral, but it is the Ringo-Doc Holliday confrontation that is emblazoned in my memory.

Continue reading...

3 Responses to A Latin Smackdown in Tombstone

18 Responses to The Best Pro-Life Video Ever!

  • Thank you!

    The last 10 seconds are quite touching.

    The other major brand is out there on the life issue, has been for years.

    This is the reason I buy Coke.

  • Pingback: The Best Pro-Life Video Ever! -
  • Pingback: FRIDAY AFTERNOON EDITION | iwannabeasaint
  • PEPSICO is a Planned Parenthood contributor. Boycott these products: Pepsi, 7up, Lipton tea, Mountian Dew, Mug root beer, Slice, Kentucky Fried Chicken, Pizza Hut, Taco Bell, Baked Lays, Cheetos, Doritos, Fritos, Funyuns, Rold Gold, Ruffles, Sun chips, Tostitos, Hostess, and let them know why!!!

  • Victor makes a great point. It is amazing that a company will support the killing of their future customers. Contraception and abortion will take many years to work it’s way into the economy, it is beginning to be felt a bit. China is experiencing the failure of the one child rule. Who will be there to take care of the elders. Who will be there to pay for all of the atheistic progressive programs.
    Something we could learn from Holy Scripture is that God’s plan of creation will not be stopped. His love endures forever.

  • VERY cool!! Wasn’t there some issue about Pepsico using embryonic kidney tissue in their research ?

  • “In a statement to LifeNews, Mr. Dahncke also denied speculation that sweeteners developed by Senomyx had been used in the recipe for Pepsi NEXT, a low-calorie cola with 60 percent less sugar than a standard Pepsi. The drink is being launched this week.
    Ms. Vinnedge called the PepsiCo denial “pure deception.”
    She said she found HEK-293, a “human embryo kidney” cell line produced from an aborted fetus in the 1970s, in more than 70 Senomyx patents, all related to flavor enhancers.
    “What Pepsi is doing is saying that they’re not taking the cells directly from a fetus. Well, that’s true, they’re taking them from a lab,” Ms. Vinnedge said. “They’re doing this with semantics to get around what they’re really doing.””

  • Thanks, Mary De Voe.

  • I’d say it’s a pro-child rearing or a ‘joy of family’ message. The abortion issue is really about what women do when they have an unwanted pregnancy: 1) “fix the problem” by killing (not a solution anyone endorses except with the unborn), 2) keep the baby and adapt your plans for the future to motherhood, 3) have the baby and give it to a couple who want to raise it in a loving home.

    The video is very nice, but as to being pro-life or ‘pro-choice,’ it’s not on topic because it doesn’t portray an unwanted pregnancy.

  • I disagree…this is pro life…I can see the father is unhappy about the second pregnancy…but he makes a decision to love…a decision for life for the new baby, and then for his whole family. I can see the change come over his face gradually. I wish this would be shown in th USA.

  • Beautiful video!!! And thank you Victor and Anthony! There are other anti-life companies out there that need to be boycotted and TOLD WHY! General Mills, the HUGE food producer, gives AT LEAST ONE MILLION DOLLARS per year to the Planned Parenthood supporter and donor, Susan G. Komen Foundation, while enticing our Catholic schools to put profits in their coffers through the Box Tops For Education program. Walgreens is another $12M + Komen supporter, and several other corporations. A complete list can be obtained at A list of corporations and other “charities” who give directly to PP can be found at

  • This beautiful video is a statement on life, love, families and willingly accepting the results of our actions. Love isn’t love without sacrifice!

  • Coca-Cola’s pro-life commercial is absolutely WONDERFUL! It is so jubilant, so celebrative of the family, so touching, so entirely moving and so filled with love I almost wept with joy.

  • Thank you Coca Cola. It’s beautiful. We need more defense of life messages.

  • Loved it!! Please bring this ad to the U.S.

  • It is ironic that Coca Cola made this commercial, as Cocoa Cola IS owned by Bershire Hathaway, Warren Buffet’s company. Warren Buffet is a HUGE supporter (and indirect) contributer to Planned Parenthood as well as a BIG friend to Bill and Melinda Gates, also BIG population control advocates…Wonder how this ad “slipped by” the company…

  • This is so much like us, how I wish I could give everyone this joy.

3 Responses to How Many Countries Are There?

  • Brilliant!

    Ben Franklin to James Wilson in the musical 1776 during the vote on independence:

    “Every mapmaker in the world is waiting for your decision.”

    In the same musical the comment about revolutions put into the mouth of Ben Franklin usually equally applies to new nations:

    “Revolutions come into this world like bastard children, Mr. Dickinson – half improvised and half compromised.”

  • Good one Don!

    I had to post this video. It succinctly explains what is difficult to say without offending someone.

    As for Communist China, they could easily break up and form five or six nations and return strips of land back to nations they took it from such as Korea and Mongolia.

    What are these nations? Well there is East Turkestan, the brewing rebellious Muslim province that has no connection ethnically nor linguistically to the Han Chinese.

    There is of course Tibet.

    Then after returning lands to Korea, the border area around North Korea (Most likely North Korea, but I’d prefer it to return to South Korea) and Mongolia, what the Communist call “Inner Mongolia”.

    Then there is ‘China’ itself which could be broken up in many pieces because of of linguistic and ethnic differences, ie, Szechuan, Yunnan, Hun an, etc. But to keep it simple lets say Manchuria and Taiwan right off the bat are free. Then the Mandarin speaking north separates from the Cantonese speaking south and leave it at that.

    Nothing like a bit of geopolitics to start off the morning.

  • As for Communist China, they could easily break up and form five or six nations and return strips of land back to nations they took it from such as Korea and Mongolia.

    What are these nations? Well there is East Turkestan, the brewing rebellious Muslim province that has no connection ethnically nor linguistically to the Han Chinese.

    There is of course Tibet.

    Tibet and Sinkiang are exceedingly low density territories. The slice of Sinkiang which is either predominantly Uighur or predominantly Kazakh has about 6 or 7 million people living in it. IIRC, Tibet has about three million inhabitants. There actually is no supralocal area where Mongols or Koreans constitute a majority. Less than 1% of the population of China lives in these ethnic minority zones.

    About a third of the population does live outside the Mandarin language zone. Not sure whether the various dialects are coterminous with identity formations. Decentralization would certainly be a necessity there given the massive population, but not so sure the people on the ground would aspire to political fragmentation along the lines of Germany prior to 1870 (or 1806).

CatholicTV Interviews Dave Hartline of The Catholic Tide Continues to Turn

Monday, February 4, AD 2013

Our very own Dave Hartline talks to CatholicTV on their ClearVoice™ program concerning his new book, The Catholic Tide Continues to Turn.

CatholicTV is the oldest Catholic TV network in the United States having been launched on January 1, 1955 by the Archdiocese of Boston.  58 years later they are still in operation, available on cable and via the Internet; in HDTV as well!  They are called America’s Catholic Television Network with their studios and offices located in Watertown, Massachusetts.

Continue reading...

6 Responses to CatholicTV Interviews Dave Hartline of The Catholic Tide Continues to Turn

Vive la France!

Tuesday, January 15, AD 2013

A million Frenchmen marched on the capital of France, Paris, in defense of Marriage this past weekend.  Catholics, Muslims, Jews, Homosexuals, Heterosexuals, Men and Women all marched to protest François Hollande’s attempt at completing the destruction of the Family and the Church which began in the French Revolution and continued with the May 68ers, has been stalled at the moment.

Continue reading...

23 Responses to Vive la France!

  • It is worth noting that the attempt, in the celebrated Bègles case, to get SSM introduced by the courts on equality grounds was an utter failure. It was rejected by the TGI (court of first instance), by the Court of Appeal in Bordeaux, by the Court of Cassation and by the Constitutional Council.

    The constitutional Council found, “Considering, on the other hand, that Article 6 of the Declaration of 1789 provides that the law “must be the same for all, whether it protects or punishes”; that the principle of equality does not prevent the legislator from settling different situations in different ways, or from derogating from equality for the general interest, provided that in either case the difference in treatment that results is in direct relationship with the subject of the law established thereby; that by maintaining the principle according to which marriage is the union of a man and a woman, the legislator has, in exercising its competence under Article 34 of the Constitution [power to legislate], deemed that the difference of situation between couples of the same sex and those composed of a man and a woman can justify a difference in treatment with regard to the rules regarding the right to a family; that it is not for the Constitutional Council to substitute its judgment for that of the legislator regarding the consideration of this difference of situation…” [Décision n° 2010-92 QPC du 28 janvier 2011],

    Every court dealing with the case found “This was differential legal treatment because their situation was not analogous.”

  • I hate to be this guy, but -Vive- la France.

  • Tito,

    Thanks for the clips.
    Hope springs eternal.
    Nice job.

  • Pinky,

    I was so focused on writing “la” instead of “le”, I inadvertantly wrote it incorrcetly, thanks for catching that!

    In Jesus, Mary, & Joseph,


  • Tito,

    I’m afraid Bonapartism equals Jacobinism.

    Try this one instead:

  • Jon,

    That’s a nice tune.

    When the French government is changed to a Catholic state again, that would be a nice alternative. Though the words for La Marseillaise could be changed to more accurately represent the French.

  • This will always be my favorite rendition of La Marseillaise:

  • Tito,

    Have to admit I can’t agree. There’s that old saw about a silk purse and a sow’s ear.

    The Germans in Don’s Casablanca clip are singing Die Wacht am Rhine. It actually wasn’t a Nazi song. The Germans in the scene are singing it to antagonize the French as it originated in the Franco-Prussian War in 1870, after the German victory. It became very popular in Germany during WWI, and the French certainly had reason to hate it.

    Even so, word change or not, La Marseillaise isn’t a hymn of freedom. It’s drenched in blood – primarily Catholic blood. It was used as the revolutionary anthem right alongside The Internationale, which can be pretty snappy itself, in 1917 Russia.

    Lazlo and Ilse can belt it all they want. Afraid I would’ve sat behind Sam and hummed The Star-Spangled Banner.

  • “I’m afraid Bonapartism equals Jacobinism.”

    Actually it was more of Bonapartism equals Sun King. Louis XIV and Napoleon had a great deal in common, from their wars of conquest, their desire to control Spain, their centralization of government and their treatment of the Church.

    “L’Etat, c’est moi” could have equally applied to both men.

  • Napoleon : King is ok… But emperor’s better.

    Louis XIV : No, king’s better. See, here’s the Emperor… And here’s the King!

    Napoleon : No way! You must be joking… Emperor’s here and king is around here.

    Louis XIV : Not a chance!

    Louis XIV : Hey you, what are you? A prince? A king?

    Man : No at all. I’m the guy who cut down the price of the Golf by €4,500.

    It’s historical.

    €4,500 saving on the Golf BlueMotion.

  • Pingback: Priest Who Turned a Dilapidated Old Pub Into a Seminary | Big Pulpit
  • What’s truly amazing, to me, about the pro-marriage movement in France is that there are actually well-known entertainers, artists, gays and even gay atheists leading the charge…. with the slogan “The right OF children (to have both a mother and a father) trumps the right (of adults) TO children”. Gays and lesbians already have plenty of individual legal rights in France — they’ve had civil unions for almost 20 years — but even some of them draw the line at letting gay couples claim to be married or to raise children. In the US or the UK, public figures who spoke out this strongly would be branded as bigots and, if they were in the entertainment business, their careers would be ruined.

  • Pingback: Tito Edwards : « Vive la France ! » | Riposte-catholique
  • Elaine Krewer

    You are right that civil unions [Le pacte civil de solidarité (PACS)], introduced in 2000, have proved very popular in France. In 2010, there were approximately 250,000 weddings and 200,000 PACSs in Metropolitan France, as against 300,000 weddings in the year before their introduction. About 93% of PACSs are between opposite-sex couples, so they have definitely not been seen as “marriage-lite for gays.”

    Thus, marriage is seen as child-centred, for the principle difference between marriage on the one hand and PACSs and unregulated cohabitation on the other is Art 312 of the Code Civil, “The child conceived or born in marriage has the husband for father.” By the same token, joint adoption is limited to married couples, assisted fertility is available only to treat a pathological conditions and so is not available to same-sex couples and surrogate gestation is disallowed under Art 1128 of the Code Civil, “Only things in commerce can be the subject of an agreement.” A child cannot be the subject-matter of a contract.

    In 2006, both the National Assembly and large sections of the secular press welcomed Archbishop of Paris André Vingt-Trois’s statement, “Even though it has not taken the modern form familiar in our civil legislation, there has always been a means of handing things down from generation to generation, which is the very basis of continuity and stability in a society. This transmission between generations is primarily effected by the family. It is the legal framework of family life that structures the transmission of life and shapes the future of society.”

  • Elaine Krewer, Michael Paterson-Seymour: The rationale used by the French courts: NO. It is not the same. It is not the same. Gay- unions cannot be equal because they are not the same.

  • Yes. Vive la France!

  • The actor playing the French officer is Gerard Depardieu, tax refugee from the Socialist government of France.

  • Hate to correct you Donald, but that’s Tcheky Karyo, not Depardieu.

  • “Homer nods.” You are correct Dale! I will use Dr. Johnson’s explanation:

    “Pastern: The knee of a horse. (This is wrong. When Johnson was once asked how he came to make such a mistake, Boswell tells us he replied, “Ignorance, Madam, pure ignorance.”)”

Vote on a Design for Religious Freedom

Monday, July 16, AD 2012

My wife and I are creating decals to defend religious freedom.  The decals can be placed on bumpers or the rear windows of cars.  These decals will show Catholics our resolve to defend religious freedom.

The designs were done by a friend of ours who is entering the seminary and we would like to have your input on them. The design is that of the sign, the Chi Rho, that Constantine saw right before the battle at Milvian Bridge with the words right above this sign that said, “In Hoc Signo Vinces”.

We will be offering them for sale at a date to be determined.  These designs fall under creative commons.

The deadline to vote on them is on July 25 at midnight.

Continue reading...

19 Responses to Vote on a Design for Religious Freedom

  • I like them and have a suggestion: make the words “Religious Freedom” more readable from a bit of a distance or a quick look.. probably a nice sans serif font, fairly blocky

    or maybe just the same font as Christ the King

  • I agree. The words ‘Religious Freedom’ should stand out more. I like the design with the shield but if I saw it on the back of a car I would assume that it was the name of a school and I wouldn’t look at it more carefully. In fact, the first three designs which feature the words ‘Christ the King’ at the top all strike me that way. I’d go with the fourth design and put the words ‘RELIGIOUS FREEDOM’ above the Chi Rho. Maybe see how that design would look with the Chi Rho within a shield.



    Thank you..GOD BLESS YOU….

  • I concur with the above recommendations–have “Religious Freedom” in the same font as “Christ the King.”

  • Overall, I like #3 the best. It has a good balance and simpler look.

  • what I think when I see that on a bumper – “Oh, someone’s child goes to Christ the King Academy.”

    what the average Christian thinks when he sees that on a bumper – “King? Crown? Definitely a theocrat. Some lunatic who wants to do away with government.”

    what the average Christian would think when he sees that sticker with Religious Freedom in larger, more readable font – “Is this some kind of joke? You know that the driver of that car would want Billy Graham or the Pope or someone to run the government, and then they say ‘religious freedom’? Any freak with a royal crown on his bumper sticker would be the first one to lock you in prison for heresy if he took over. ‘Religious freedom’ my keister.”

  • “Pinky” is a very apt name for someone with your atheist leanings! I agree with all of the other comments – MUCH larger “Religious Freedom, and #3 design!

  • Pinky: Jesus Christ was crucified for blasphemy in a theocracy. The First Amendment still applies to atheists, although the atheist does not know what that freedom means. Separation of church and state means that what belongs to the freedom of conscience of the individual extends to all people, who in their immortal soul constitute government. Without the acknowledgement of God, the Supreme Sovereing Being, “their Creator” there is no government, only chaos.

  • Religious Freedom is the reign of Christ the King. The peace sign is a corruption of the Chi Rho. Take away the sovereignty of God and settle for man’s fallible blessings. The infallible TRUTH will set you free. The US. Contitution is the only state document outside of the Roman Catholic Church that guarantees FREEDOM of conscience, FREEDOM from tyranny, FREEDOM to be who man is created to be. What state of man can guarantee spiritual maturity in a relationship with God, with Jesus Christ, our brother? I like the crown for visual expression. The crown and Christ’s name and the Chi-Rho for RELIGIOUS FREEDOM

  • Pinky: Have you ever seen the Seagram’s Seven crown or the Royal Crown
    cola crown. The crown is a symbol for sovereignty, the sovereignty of each individual over himself, a sovereignty with which every person constitutes government. Without the crown, no sovereignty, no government. If you believe that there is freedom without the crown, a freedom to practice sovereignty in the virtues of Faith, Hope and Charity, plaese know that Obama gained office of President of the USA by hanging onto the virtue of HOPE which he fails to appreciate. The crown of the monarchs rule by the sovereignty of the people. Without a people, a man is still his own sovereign, a nation of one, a majority of one, and gives his voice as you do.

  • Anzlyne says:
    “I like them and have a suggestion: make the words “Religious Freedom” more readable from a bit of a distance or a quick look.. probably a nice sans serif font, fairly blocky
    or maybe just the same font as Christ the King”
    “Religious Freedom” the same font as “Christ the King”

  • Mary and Edie – I understand the sentiment behind the designs, and I don’t much care for having my faith questioned. Communication requires sending a message in such a way that the recipient can understand it, and with all due respect to Tito, his wife, and their future seminarian friend, these designs won’t be effective. I want to see religious freedom protected, and Christ is my king. The thinking required to reconcile those two statements may be too involved for a bumper sticker. A bumper sticker that reads “Christ the King” with “religious freedom” in small print doesn’t promote religious freedom. A bumper sticker that reads “Christ the King” with “religious freedom” in equal-sized print will be too difficult for the person unfamiliar with the contraception debate to understand. If it is possible to create a design that would promote religious freedom, this isn’t it. May this analysis help steer Tito to a better path.

  • Hi Pinky, thanks for the clarifications.
    I think there could undoubted;y be a whole variety of reactions item #3 with RELIGIOUS FREEDOM’ But I do think people will get it. We seems to always be dumbing down and making smaller and smaller sound-bites until they are truncated right out of existence.
    If the best teacher in the world were to give a coherent and thorough explanation of some things, some people would still not get it or react badly to it… there is nothing we can do about it. We just keep trying in lots of different ways to get a message across.

  • I’d like to see one like #4, but with a crown above the chi-rho.

  • I totally agree with Anzlyne. Make Religious Freedom more readable.

  • Maybe number 4, with Religious Freedom in the spot of Christ the King.

  • All four are good. The Idea to have a bumper sticker that sticks up (pun intended) for each and every single person every created, and Jesus Christ begotten, is excellent. Like a procession that cannot be denied in the public square because the sign is on a private vehicle. Excellent.

  • Would you consider making a shirt too with the design placed on the front chest area where a person might wear a badge? Just a thought.

  • Late, but another echo for “use a bigger Religious Freedom.”

12 Responses to Küüünnng!

  • One of the last things that the text at the link above says is this: “Instead of reconciling with the ultra-conservative, anti-democratic, and anti-Semitic SSPX, the Pope should rather care about the majority of reform-minded Catholics and reconcile with the churches of the Reformation and the entire ecumenical movement. Thus he would unite, and not divide.”

    Well, the Pope is reconciling with both. He’s bridging the gap with SSPX, and he’s welcoming orthodox Anglicans into the Church. He’s also done a lot with reconciling with the Lutherans and the Eastern Orthodox. Even at the local diocesan level, lots has been done. For example, about 2 years ago Bishop Burbidge of the Diocese of Raleigh met with the Superintendent of the Assemblies of God to discuss the gifts of the Holy Spirit. I am sure many other things like that are being done.

    So what exactly is the Pope doing EXCEPT uniting? Geez, I must come from a planet different than what Hans Kung comes from. Or maybe he wants uniting to be done with the pro-aborts, pro-gays of Bishopress Schori of the ECUSA, the commie pinkoes of the Unitarian Universalist Church, and other liberal monstrosities.


  • Oh, man, he is so envious of his old theology classmate getting elected Pope that it just oozes out. Is it really that hard, to figure out that he should submit to the will of God and stop acting like such a maroon?

    And what a maroon. He got offered a deal already; the poor pope gave him a nice lunch right after his election. He could probably pick up the phone today and get a deal within a few hours. But he doesn’t want to repent and come to terms; he wants to be both pope and a feted dissenter.

  • Hans, I’m laughing at the “superior” intellect.

  • What, exactly, has Kuuuuuung done for unity?

    (I really don’t want to see Kuuuuuung in that Ricardo Montalban outfit – something tells me he couldn’t pull it off).

  • No, he’s just tweeting his location and current activity: “From hell’s heart, I spit at thee.”

  • Pope Benedict: [Calling Kung] This is Pope Benedict. We tried it once your way, Kung, are you game for a rematch? Kung, I’m laughing at the “superior intellect.”
    Kung: Full publication of my unpublished manuscripts!
    Kung Minion: No, sir! You have “Infallible? An Inquiry”. Your work will endure…
    Kung: [grabs Minion in anger] FULL PUBLICATION! DAMN YOU!

  • Hans who? Does anyone outside of his own small club even know Kung is still alive and kicking? Back in the 70s his thick “On Being A Christian” was the toast of mainline Protestants, but since then, I am unaware of anything he has written making a splash. I don’t see why he his carping now should gain him any notice. Beter to do his embarrassed former dissertation advisor Louis Bouyer a favor and just ignore him.

  • Is that the caddish Catlick, HMV Tone Blair?

  • Thank you, Donald McClarey for your clarification of Kung. He demands an IMPRIMATUR for his writing which may or may not deserve an IMPRIMATUR. It is good to see Kung’s humility. Thanks again.

  • Paul W. Primavera: “Or maybe he wants uniting to be done with the pro-aborts, pro-gays of Bishopress Schori of the ECUSA, the commie pinkoes of the Unitarian Universalist Church, and other liberal monstrosities.” and other liberal monstrosities. bears repeating.

New Pastor for Houston’s Our Lady of Walsingham Parish of the Anglican Ordinariate

Wednesday, May 2, AD 2012

The following is an informal press release from Deacon James Barnett, the Parish Administrator for Our Lady of Walsingham:

Charles Hough, IV, who has received the necessary permission from the Holy See to be ordained as a Catholic priest, will assume this office on July 1, after his ordination. He and his wife, Lindsay, together with their two sons, will move from Fort Worth to Houston in June.

“Chuck Hough comes from a family with a very distinguished record of ministry, and he has himself demonstrated significant leadership gifts while serving in the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth,” said Msgr. Jeffrey Steenson. “His father served for many years as canon to the ordinary in Fort Worth, one of the best mentors for ministry there can be.”

Continue reading...

3 Responses to I Don’t Normally Watch Television, But When I Do, I Prefer. . .