PopeWatch: National Suicide

Monday, April 24, AD 2017

The Pope recently made two observations about the mass Islamic migration to Italy that he has cheered on.  One observation is getting all the attention but the second is much more significant:

Speaking in Italian he said: ‘I don’t know if he was able to get out of that concentration camp because the refugee camps – many – are concentration (camps) because they are crowded with so many people.

The American Jewish Committee soon after urged the pontiff to ‘reconsider his regrettable choice of words,’ Reuters reported.

AJC CEO David Harris said: ‘The conditions in which migrants are currently living in some European countries may well be difficult and deserve still greater international attention, but concentration camps they certainly are not.

**************************

Pope Francis also urged northern Italy to take more migrants and hoped that the generosity of the south of the country could ‘infect the north a bit.’

He added that Italy had one of the world’s lowest birth rates and said: ‘If we close the doors to migrants, this is called suicide.’ 

Continue reading...

Leave a Reply

The Case for Christ: A Review

Monday, April 24, AD 2017

My bride and I went to see The Case for Christ last Saturday.  I must admit to some trepidation on my part.  I have seen quite a few “Christian” films that had their hearts in the right place but were also simply bad, even laughably bad, films.  I was fearful this film would be more of the same.  I am pleased to report that The Case for Christ is a very good film, and a profound one.  I heartily endorse it for anyone who wishes to see a well-acted and well-made film that asks profound questions about the human condition.  My review is below the fold and the usual caveat about spoilers is in full force:

Continue reading...

Leave a Reply

Quasimodo Sunday

Sunday, April 23, AD 2017

(This post by contributor Jake Tawney from 2012 is a perennial favorite and thus I am rerunning it today.)

In the new Roman Missal, the name of the Second Sunday of Easter has been recast as “Sunday of Divine Mercy,” promulgated by the now Blessed Pope John Paul II.  A great feast it is indeed, yet “Sunday of Divine Mercy” is not the first name to have replaced the generic “Second Sunday of Easter.”  Before John Paul II promulgated Divine Mercy, the Second Sunday of Easter was known as “Quasimodo Sunday.”
Why?  Quite simply: for the same reason that Gaudete Sunday and Latarae Sunday are called so during their respective seasons of Advent and Lent.  Gaudete (Rejoice!) is the first word of the Introit (Opening) Chant for the third Sunday of Lent:  Gaudete in Domino semper (Rejoice in the Lord always).  We find a similar occurrence in the Introit for the Fourth Sunday of Lent: Laetare Ierusalem (Rejoice, O Jerusalem).  In the days when these Introits were sung (or in the rare parish where they are still sung today), the very first word of the Mass heard by the faithful would have been a resounding “Gaudete” (or in the case of Lent, “Laetare”), and the “name” of the day would be immediately obvious.
These chants are part of what the Church calls the “Proper” texts of the day.  They are written specifically for each celebration of the year, much like the Collects and other prayers of the day.  It is a shame that these texts have been ignored by virtually every parish for the last several decades, replaced with generic hymns that have little or no resemblance to the designed chant.  Monsignor Andrew Wadsworth, executive director of ICEL, stated in a speech last year:

Maybe the greatest challenge that lies before us is the invitation once again to sing the Mass rather than merely to sing at Mass. This echoes the injunctions of the Council Fathers in the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy and reflects our deeply held instinct that the majority of the texts contained in the Missal can and in many cases should be sung. This means not only the congregational acclamations of the Order of Mass, but also the orations, the chants in response to the readings, the Eucharistic prayer and the antiphons which accompany the Entrance, the Offertory, and the Communion processions. These proper texts are usually replaced by hymns or songs that have little relationship to the texts proposed by the Missal or the Graduale Romanum and as such a whole element of the liturgy of the day is lost or consigned to oblivion. For the most part, they exist only as spoken texts. We are much the poorer for this, as these texts (which are often either Scriptural or a gloss on the Biblical text) represent the Church’s own reading and meditation on the Scriptures. As chants, they are a sort of musical lectio divina pointing us towards the riches expressed in that day’s liturgy.

For this reason, I believe that it is seriously deficient to consider that planning music for the liturgy ever begins with a blank sheet: there are texts given for every Mass in the Missal and these texts are intended for singing.

With that brief digression behind us, let’s returns to the to the topic at hand: Quasimodo Sunday.  The name of the day comes form the first words of the Mass, the Introit Chant:  
Quasimodo geniti infantes, alleluia: rationabiles, sine dolo lac concupiscite, alleluia, alleluia, alleluia.
Lest people think these chants a lost reality to the “old rite,” a form of the text appears in the Novus Ordo as well for the Second Sunday of Easter (Sunday of Divine Mercy):
Quasi modo géniti infántes, rationábile, sine dolo lac concupíscite, ut in eo crescátis in salútem, allelúia.
In its new English translation, it appears in the current Roman Missal :
Like newborn infants, you must long for the pure, spiritual milk, that in him you may grow to salvation, alleluia.
The word quasimodo is a compound of two Latin words (split in the Missale Romanum), quasi and modo, meaning “almost” and “the standard of measure.”  Thus, the combination means “almost the standard of measure,” which in the new translation is reduced to “like.”
The quotation takes its cue from 1 Peter 2:2, which in the RSV reads, “Like newborn infants, long for the pure, spiritual milk, so that by it you may grow into salvation.”  (Incidentally, the Latin in the Vulgate reads, “Sicut modo geniti infantes, rationale sine dolo lac concupiscite, ut in eo crescatis in salutem.”)
It is fitting for this time of year, as we have come to the joyous realization that our salvation has been won, but through an act of pure grace, not as something that we deserve.  We drink of this grace with the only posture fitting of a gift: that of humble and docile reception.  The imagery of a child’s dependent reception is reminiscent of Archbishop Schneider’s observation in his book/essay Dominus Est:
[T]he attitude of a child is the truest and most profound attitude of a Christian before his Savior, who nourishes him with his Body and Blood … The word of Christ, which invites us to receive the Kingdom of God like a child (see Luke 18:17), can find its illustration in that very beautiful and impressive manner of receiving the Eucharistic Bread directly into one’s mouth and on one’s knees. This ritual manifests in an opportune and felicitous way the interior attitude of a child who allows himself to be fed, united to the gesture of the centurion’s humility and to the gesture of ‘wonder and adoration’ (Schneider, 29).
Given the promulgation of the “Sunday of Divine Mercy,” the image of childlike reception becomes even more prominent.  Mercy can only be shown to him who is childlike enough to receive it.
However, when one hears the term quasimodo, I would imagine the first thing to come to mind is not the Second Sunday of Easter, but rather the Hunchback of Notre Dame, the 1831 novel by Vitor Hugo (or some later film variant).  The name Quasimodo is given to the abandoned and deformed baby found by Claude Frollo, the Archdeacon of Notre Dame, on the steps of the Cathedral.  Frollo bestows the name of the child because of the day on which he was found: the Second Sunday of Easter, none other than Quasimodo Sunday.
While a good literary reference is always appreciated, perhaps it is time to rescue the name quasimodo and restore to it its original liturgical significance: Quasimodo Sunday, Sunday of Divine Mercy.
To contribute but a small part to this effort, I give to you two versions of the Introit for today, the first using a male vocalization, and the second using a female one.

 

Continue reading...

7 Responses to Quasimodo Sunday

  • Wow. Fantastic piece. Thanks again Mr. McClarey and J.T.

  • I’m going to ask permission and plea for a dear friend of mine.

    Would all of you please say a prayer for her.
    She, a former colleague, is having the fight of her lifetime and is in deep need of mercy.
    We can call her Jane for the sake of confidentiality. I have introduced her to Divine Mercy. She is not Catholic.
    She is suffering.

    Thanks in advance for one Hail Mary.Thank you and God bless you.

  • Thank you Donald McClarey.
    She is a seasoned professional, quality practitioner and has devoted her life to serving and healing others. Now is her time of need for healing.
    Thank you so much.

  • We recite the “Entrance Antiphon” at each 7:30AM Sunday Mass. Another early-Mass benefit – we don’t sing protestant songs.

    Of course, the emphasis should be on DIVINE mercy, a.k.a. The Forgiveness of Sins (last night my Holy Rosary Intention/intercession) and The Salvation Of Souls.

    In addition to “suffer the little children,” we must be like children craving and needing the “Spiritual milk,” and like helpless infants only God/The Risen Jesus and His disciples/priests can forgive our sins.

    Prayers for Philip’s colleague.

    Finally, that is a good literary reference with religious overtones.

  • Thanks T.Shaw.
    Blessings to you.

  • Another name for the first Sunday after Easter is Low Sunday perhaps so named in contrast to the high days of Holy Week and Easter.

Leave a Reply

Chelsea Clinton: A Pro-Abort at Age Six

Saturday, April 22, AD 2017

 

I missed this story last year.  The country really dodged a bullet when it kept the mother of this nutcase out of the White House last year:

 

In a new interview, Chelsea Clinton, the daughter of pro-abortion presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, says she left the Baptist Church at the age of 6 because it has a strongly pro-life position opposing abortions.

Clinton made the comment at a recent fundraiser for Hillary Clinton in an attempt to address evangelicals who question her mother’s faith in God. She said she was upset when teachers in a Sunday School class talked about the wrongness of abortion.

“I find it quite insulting sometimes when people say to my mom, my dad or me . . . that they question our faith,’ said Chelsea. “I was raised in a Methodist church and I left the Baptist church before my dad did, because I didn’t know why they were talking to me about abortion when I was 6 in Sunday school — that’s a true story.”

 

Go here to read the rest.  And to think that self-proclaimed pro-lifers like Mark Shea were supporting abortion-uber-alles Clinton in preference to Trump.

Continue reading...

12 Responses to Chelsea Clinton: A Pro-Abort at Age Six

  • Leftists–they demand protection for evil criminals in sanctuary cities, while slaughtering innocent humans in the sanctuary of their “mother’s” wombs, all the while shouting, “We care!” And, then they diabolically claim to be…the intelligentsia.

  • Chelsea Clinton left the Baptist church at age six because the Baptist church was pro-life. The age of reason is seven years of age. Chelsea Clinton never reached the age of reason and is a case of arrested development. So are Bill and Hillary and all pro-aborts.

  • Seen on Instapundit: “The Clintons are the political equivalent of herpes. They keep coming back, whether people like it or not.”

    Thank God that only a small minority of America-hating invertebrates and Soros funded agents provocateurs listen to their constant streams of lies and evils.

  • The Clinton’s.
    The “poster family” of scourging America. Worse than a tool of destruction, they are the first family of Hell on Earth.

  • Roe v. Wade never bore the burden of proof that the newly begotten innocent person was NOT a sovereign person

  • Uh, hold on. What she seems to be saying is she left the church because the talk about abortion bothered her. She seemed to realize it was not appropriate in some way, to talk to a 6 year old about abortion. I am not reading that she, at 6, decided she was leaving because the church was pro-life.
    We have to be really careful with reading comprehension. Read carefully.
    For the record, I have no respect for any of the Clintons.

  • I am second to nobody in my loathing of the Clinton family, but I think Chelsea’s remarks may be being misconstrued. She said, “I didn’t know why they were talking to me about abortion when I was 6 in Sunday school.” I would totally agree with this. To bring up such a horrible, gruesome subject to children that young is to destroy their God-given innocence. Thanks to our sick, oversexualized, pervasive consumer-media culture, children are losing their innocence at ever younger ages. I was fortunate enough to grow up in a time when I didn’t even hear the word “abortion” until I was 13 or 14 years old — and I was horrified when I found out what it was. I can’t even imagine what the effect on a tender 6-year-old psyche would be.

    I obviously am disgusted with Chelsea Clinton’s pro-abortion stance as an adult, but I think what she was talking about in the quote given above was something I could agree with her on: Little children should not be hearing about abortion. It is evil and grotesque and horrifying. Would we take our 6-year-old to an R-rated slasher movie? Of course not. Well, then, let’s not be planting images in their young minds of babies being slashed to pieces.

  • Agreed that a 6 year old shouldn’t be presented with such graphic visualizations of Hell on Earth. But either she wildly exaggerating like her FBI certified lying mother, or whats worse that as 6 year old she thought it was horrifying that some would suggest mothers do NOT have a right to slaughter their own offspring.

  • “What she seems to be saying is she left the church because the talk about abortion bothered her.”

    Assuming this isn’t simply a routine Clinton lie by Chelsea, they do seem to lie as a matter of course about matters great and small, why would a talk about abortion at age 6 have bothered her? How would she have known what abortion was, and if she knew why would the pro-life position have upset her? How would she even recall this at age 36? If anyone was offended, assuming the incident even occurred, I suspect it was her mother.

  • Question: did Mark Shea become more pro-life at the age of six or less? I’d like to know!

  • It’s a lie, without a doubt. Fawn Brodie published posthumously a work in which slicing up Richard Nixon for this sort of thing featured prominently. George Bush the Elder was a great one for goofy cocktail party mendacity (“You look wonderful”). Liberal culture is such nowadays that the comedy people like Michael Kinsley saw in Nixon and Bush the Elder never seems to adhere to the Clintons or anyone else who serves their ilk.

    The thing is, the story makes Chelsea and (implicitly) her mother look seriously creepazoid. Has Cheslea been so encased in protective bubbles that she doesn’t see this, or does she figure she’s speaking to people so bent they’d think a six-year-old contemplating abortion to be amusingly precocious?

    Stop and think about Chelsea’s life. Rude remarks from Rush Limbaugh notwithstanding (which must have stung because they were from an adult but which likely were mild compared to what the cut-ups and mean girls were saying to her at school), she was treated delicately by the media – much more so than Amy Carter (though less so than the Obama girls). Gary Aldrich, and FBI agent assigned to the White House during the period running from 1993-95 said in his observation and that of security personnel with whom he traded stories, Chelsea was an ordinary teenager and episodically quite rude to her security detail (taking her cues from mama, no doubt); the newspapers who presented her as a lovely girl manufactured a fictional character. She has manifest talents, but evidently no one to counsel her on how to deploy them and all to many people willing to hand her plum jobs (why do broadcast networks hire politicians’ kids so readily?). Her mother was best described by Joseph Sobran: “like egalitarians from Joseph Stalin to Bella Abzug, a terror to work for”. Her maternal side grandmother was described by a nephew thus: ‘always pissed at someone; held grudges’. Her paternal side grandmother was an amiable vulgarian with a gambling problem (and something of a lush to boot, by some accounts). She had no sisters, her only aunt has never been part of the family circle, and her uncle’s childless rank-and-file-lawyer wife lived in south Florida. It’s not surprising she’s kinda messed up.

  • Thank goodness that this Clinton seems to be a bimbo.

Leave a Reply

4 Responses to In Observance of Earth Day 2017

  • Delores – a woman in a sad situation!

  • We have six days of creation and one day of rest. So, EARTH DAY is one of seven or about 14%. Not much to celebrate or hang one’s hat on.

  • She didn’t, but it says something not-too-agreeable about Chelsea and her audience that she thought it advantageous to strike that pose at that particular moment in time.

    I’d be pleased if Chelsea would settle on a career and stay the heck away from her parents’ grift and out of the public eye. Her mother and father have given her terrible counsel. Her mother-in-law appears to be a decent person and her uncle Hugh’s wife at least a normal range person. She ought to try taking her cues from them.

  • 2 Peter 3:10

    But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a loud noise, and the elements will be dissolved with fire, and the earth and the works that are upon it will be burned up.

Leave a Reply

PopeWatch: Hopeful Shack Up

Saturday, April 22, AD 2017

 

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

 

 

Local Catholic Becky Donaldson confirmed this week that she is absolutely confident that her live-in boyfriend of eight years, Kevin Reynolds,  will soon be proposing.

“I’m just so excited,” a teary-eyed Donaldson told some of her girlfriends gathered at a local restaurant last night. “We’ve been waiting until we’re in a financially comfortable situation. I mean, we were financially comfortable a few years ago, and then he bought the jet skis, so we’ve been working on getting financially comfortable again since then.”

Donaldson went on to say that after eight years of living with Kevin, not counting the other four years they were dating while living separately, she couldn’t wait for the wedding so that their life could finally begin.

“I imagine our lives are going to be totally different after we’re married. I mean, we’ve been living together for eight years and dating for four, and we bought this house together five years ago. We’re pretty much done having fun and I think we’re ready to settle down and start having children. I guess that’s why it’s been taking him so long to propose, you know? We just needed to live our lives before we had kids.”

Donaldson was heard later in the evening advising her younger, single friends to not get married and have children until they had done all their travelling and fun activities since “once you have children all fun stops and you die inside.”

“Not saying that living with him has all been fun and games, of course. He has annoying little quirks, but those will obviously be transformed by the magical powers of the sacrament. We don’t go to church, but I’ve heard about all the magic that the sacrament of matrimony does for a relationship, so I expect his snoring and his leaving the toilet seat up to stop soon after the wedding. Not to mention him leaving dirty dishes and empty beer bottles on the coffee table, putting his dirty clothes on the floor next to the hamper instead of inside the hamper, putting the toilet paper roll on the holder backwards, so that the tail end is against the wall and so on.”

At press time Kevin has been spotted sneaking out of the house to go shopping for jet ski trailers.

Continue reading...

7 Responses to PopeWatch: Hopeful Shack Up

  • Lol. The same is said for contraception, “oh we’ll think about having a child of another someday, right after______.”
    Hence this problem.

    No ones thinking about having children, their thinking about not having children.

  • Sorry about my miss spelling, my phone screen is small, and Siri has a mind of her own.

  • That’s right, Dolores. He’ll change after he marries you. One wonders how the divorce rate doesn’t approximate 100%.

    Wonderful! Shifting gears from recreation to procreation makes it all OK? So much for 12 years of fornication . . .

    Face it, ladies. Many men just are not that “into” you. No pun intended. Feminism (abortion, contraception, PP, my-body-my-self, etc.) is great for men on the make.

    PS: I put my empty beer can (a shot and a beer a night whether or not I need it) in the sink. And, I still get the “fish-eyes.”

    Now, I am sneaking out to buy lotto tix, er, milk.

  • Sad but true…The upside down culture.
    Take Planned Parenthood. Should be Planned Genocide.

    Today it’s sex before marriage. No one except Godly children would even consider getting married before having sex. On a positive note many good parents are actively schooling their children in chaste realities leading​ to the culture of Life.
    Thanks be to God.

  • “Today it’s sex before marriage. No one except Godly children would even consider getting married before having sex.” Is it possible that the poor wretches will ever know the joy of love?

  • Mary De Voe.

    How could they know?
    The culture has hijacked true love.
    Abortion is a proof of this false love that excludes God and replaces Him for self gratification. True Love? Only in Christ.

Leave a Reply

One Response to The Girls Would Cry Shame and They’d Volunteer

Leave a Reply

Quotes Suitable for Framing: Edmund Burke

Friday, April 21, AD 2017

 

 

“The temper and character which prevail in our Colonies are, I am afraid, unalterable by any human art. We can not, I fear, falsify the pedigree of this fierce people, and persuade them that they are not sprung from a nation in whose veins the blood of freedom circulates. The language in which they would hear you tell them this tale would detect the imposition. Your speech would betray you. An Englishman is the unfittest person on earth to argue another Englishman into slavery.”

Edmund Burke, On Conciliation With America, March 22, 1775

 

Continue reading...

One Response to Quotes Suitable for Framing: Edmund Burke

Leave a Reply

PopeWatch: The Meeting

Friday, April 21, AD 2017

 

 

 

It’s on:

 

 

Contrary to earlier reports, President Donald Trump will meet with Pope Francis when he travels to Italy next month for meetings with the G7 leaders, U.S. and Vatican officials said Wednesday.

When asked about a possible meeting, White House press spokesman Sean Spicer told reporters that officials would be contacting the Vatican to arrange a meeting between Trump and the Pope during the latter’s visit to Italy at the end of May

“Obviously, we’d be honored to have an audience with His Holiness,” he said.

 For his part, Archbishop Angelo Becciu, the Vatican equivalent of a deputy prime minister, confirmed to the Italian news agency ANSA that “Pope Francis is always ready to receive heads of state who request an audience.”

Continue reading...

5 Responses to PopeWatch: The Meeting

  • That started my day off with a good laugh. Thank you, Mr. McClarey.

  • When I wasn’t hearing Mass on Sundays, I would tell my sainted Mother that I feared that the church’s chimney would fall in if I went in. The Vatican’s chimneys won’t fall in, either.

  • Trump: “Nice wall you have here, Holy Father.”
    Pope: “You should not be so against Immigration Mr President.”
    Trump: “I’m not and unlike many countries the USA is in favor of immigration. There seems to be some kind of misunderstanding.”

  • A contributor from TAC was dead on when he/she said; “Immagration? A wall exists in heaven. A gate. And an extremely important vetting process too. Did we forget that?”
    Quoting from memory here so it isn’t exact. Question is how can you be certain that the vetting process will be fair? At the very least we will keep some dangerous elements out. If this tactic saves one life..one..It is justified.

  • Pingback: Canon212 Update: Pope, Faithful Mere Pets and Curiosities in FrancisChurch? – The Stumbling Block

Leave a Reply

Quotes Suitable for Framing: William Tecumseh Sherman

Thursday, April 20, AD 2017

I will have the matter of Sturgis critically examined, and, if he be at fault, he shall have no mercy at my hands. I cannot but believe he had troops enough. I know I would have been willing to attempt the same task with that force; but Forrest is the very devil, and I think he has got some of our troops under cower. I have two officers at Memphis that will fight all the time—A. J. Smith and Mower. The latter is a young brigadier of fine promise, aud I commend him to your notice. I will order them to make up a force and go out and follow Forrest to the death, if it cost 10,000 lives and breaks the Treasury. There never will be peace in Tennessee till Forrest is dead.

William Tecumseh Sherman, telegram to Secretary of War Stanton-June15, 1864

Unbelievably, after the War Sherman and Forrest became friends, Sherman concluding that Forrest was the most remarkable man to arise on either side in the War.  Ironic but fitting that two of the most controversial figures of the War enjoyed personal amity after the greatest War in our history.

Continue reading...

3 Responses to Quotes Suitable for Framing: William Tecumseh Sherman

  • Forrest reminds me of Oliver Cromwell. Who would have expected men with their histories to become military geniuses.

  • Genius always needs opportunity. Imagine how many geniuses live their lives completely unaware of their latent abilities due to lack of opportunity.

  • Reminds me of our aircraft designers at the end of WWII going to Japan to praise the designer of the “Zero” for creating a masterpiece of a fighting machine.
    It reminds us that truth even surpasses, in greatness, man’s wars.

Leave a Reply

Bear Growls: Predictions

Thursday, April 20, AD 2017

 

 

Our bruin friend at Saint Corbinian’s Bear gazes into his ursine crystal ball:

 

The Vatican may be a rhumba of rattlesnakes, but too few of them are motivated by aberrant ideology to risk a repeat of Sampson’s after-dinner show for the Philistines.

Bear predicts there will be the usual polite language when Bergoglio go-goes, but inside, most prelates are going to be saying, “Boy, did we elect the wrong guy. How could we have been so stupid? Let’s get back to normal ASAP before the Bear hops a tramp salmon freighter and cleans house, but good.”

The Bear does not think the institutional Church enjoys turmoil. Nor does it wish to court schism, however small the risk. And, who knows? Perhaps there are 10 righteous men in Sodom-on-the-Tiber.

The next pope will be a reliable Italian. This whole darts-at-a-map thing has not worked out very well. His job will be to settle the hens down after that fox Bergoglio is gone. The era of the magisterium of the sound byte will be over. Everybody has seen what a disaster it has been.

Nobody likes to be made fun of incessantly.

There will be the usual suspects agitating, but the Bear repeats, institutions do not enjoy chaos. The mainstream plus the faithful will out-vote the cardinals of questionable orthodoxy.

The Bear does not think Bergoglio was voted in over a desire to extend Holy Communion to divorced and remarried persons. The Bear thinks he was elected to be the outsider that would fix things. Perhaps he even ran for pope on that platform. “I’m from Argentina. And if there’s one thing that Argentina is known for it is fixing problems with institutions.”

Continue reading...

3 Responses to Bear Growls: Predictions

  • “The next pope will be a reliable Italian. This whole darts-at-a-map thing has not worked out very well.”

    Well Cardinal Raymond Burke of the United States, or Bishop Athanasius Schneider of Kazakhstan, or Cardinal Robert Sarah of Guinea would each make a great Pope. But my vote doesn’t count.

  • “Argentina is known for fixing it’s problems. ” Oh, that is funny!
    Argentine churrasco is proof God loves man and wants him to be happy.
    There is the tango, too. After that, Argentina is chaos.

  • Agreed Lucius – all those would be great popes, but I don’t have a vote either, and I fear perhaps another liberal – Schoenborn perhaps?

Leave a Reply

This is Alabama!

Thursday, April 20, AD 2017

 

The Soros supported Red Fascist Anarchists ran into a little problem when they showed up in Auburn.  They forgot that Auburn is in the Sovereign State of Alabama.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The police rigorously enforced the anti-mask laws of the State.  Anti-mask statutes are common in this country and were originally passed to combat the Ku Klux Klan, the home grown role model for all American terrorist groups.

Continue reading...

4 Responses to This is Alabama!

Leave a Reply

PopeWatch: O’Reilly

Thursday, April 20, AD 2017

 

 

 

 

An interesting tidbit:

 

Embattled Fox News host Bill O’Reilly briefly met with Pope Francis at the Vatican on Wednesday, according to a New York Times report.

The report says O’Reilly, who was in a VIP section in St. Peter’s Square during the pontiff’s weekly general audience, shook hands with the religious leader as a Vatican newspaper photographer snapped a photo. 

The Times noted the “special section beside the stage holding the papal throne, where Mr. O’Reilly sat, is exclusive and entered only with special tickets distributed by the prefecture of the papal household, according to the Vatican press office.”

Tens of thousands of worshipers fill the square for the weekly event.

The Vatican had stated last week that no official audience with O’Reilly was scheduled.

Continue reading...

12 Responses to PopeWatch: O’Reilly

  • I suppose Bill was caught in the no spin zone just too long. Being all wet, he needed time to be hung out to dry.
    Another book on the horizon I’m certain.

    Pope Francis?

    All I’m asked to do for him is pray.
    So I pray.
    Conversion and clarity, for the final no spin zone is inevitable.

  • O’Reilly was at his best 17 years ago during the Elian Gonzalez controversy… was that the last time a Democrat deported anyone? Funny how Clinton let the Mexicans stay in California.

    Dennis Miller was the only watchable segment of O’Reilly’s show in later years. Miller is from Pittsburgh. Early in his broadcasting career, he interviewed my best friend on Evening Magazine about his comic book collection. I lost track of how many times I helped him move those damned comic books. Manassas, Virginia to Plum Boro, Pennsylvania… that was as much fun as a root canal.
    Sorry for going off topic.

  • In accordance with feminist/liberal “standards” for such behavior, O’R could be the Democrat POTUS candidate in 2020. It worked for William Jefferson Clinton.

    If it was not for double standards, they’d have no standards at all.

  • “If it were not for double standards, they’d have no standards at all.” Love it.

  • Perhaps I am the only person here who likes Bill O’Reilly, for which I am certain to be condemned. Now I disagreed with him on some issues, and I thought he often unfairly interrupted others on his show who gave responses to his commentary. However, I do not for one minute believe these allegations of sexual misconduct. I may be deceived and if that is the case, then I shall promptly apologize. But I think that feminists simply couldn’t stand his style, being so effeminately delicate. So they conspired with trumped up changes of misconduct in an era where a person is guilty until proven innocent.

    Again, if I am wrong, then it won’t be the first time.

  • Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus.

    I hope your right.
    Trumped up charges in this culture by feminist who resemble the compassion of Isis, abortion loving scallywags, and would love to take out a talking head O’Reilly. A prize to hang above their condom dispenser.

  • Dunno. Some of the dirt he’s collected over the years is supposedly buttressed with recordings injurious to his reputation. The production values on Fox are designed to appeal to some set of demographics I’m not in, so I seldom watch any of their commentary programs (do they do any reporting at all?). Unlike Messrs. Trump and Cosby, his accusers have been women who were well acquainted with him.

  • I lost all interest in O’reilly when he referred to Jesus as just a philosopher. Another lame catholic.

  • I agree with you Philip. We need to pray for the ‘Pope’ but no need to follow his anti Catholicism.

  • TLM.
    Agreed.

  • I haven’t seen O’Reilly in quite a while. I will say this for Bill O’Reilly and also Megyn Kelly, both of them were not afraid to defend the unborn on the air.

  • I have no idea if the allegations of sexual harassment by FOX employees are true or not but, isn’t it strange that the other so-called news networks never seem to have any sexual harassment scandals? Or the NY Times with many homosexual employees? It’s like the priest scandals in the Roman Catholic church, everyone knows about that, but you never or rarely hear about molestation by ministers/priests of the Protestant denominations or non Christian religions. It goes on, but never seems to be front page.

Leave a Reply

April 19, 1775: Lexington and Concord-Why They Fought

Wednesday, April 19, AD 2017

 

 

In 1843 twenty two year old Mellen Chamberlain, who would later be a legislator, a judge and chief librarian of Boston, interviewed 86 year old Captain Levi Preston, last surviving veteran of the battle of Concord:

Question:  “Captain Preston, what made you go  to the Concord fight?

Answer:  “What did I go for?”

Question:  “Yes, my histories tell me that you men of the Revolution took up arms against intolerable oppressions.  What were they?”

Answer:  “Oppressions?  I didn’t feel them.”

Question: “What, were you not oppressed by the Stamp Act?”

Answer:  No, I never saw one of those stamps, and always understood that Governor Bernard put them all in Castle William. I am certain I never paid a penny for one of them.

Question:  “Well, what about the tea tax?”

Answer: “Tea tax!  I never drank a drop of the stuff:   the boys threw it all overboard.”

Question: “I suppose you had been reading Harrington, Sidney, and Locke about the eternal principle of liberty?”

Answer:  “Never heard of ’em. The only books we had were the Bible, the Catechism, Watts’ Psalms, and Hymns and the Almanac.”

Question:  “Well, then, what was the matter?”

Answer:  “Young man, what we meant in going for those Redcoats was this: we always had governed ourselves, and we always meant to. They didn’t mean we should.”

Continue reading...

16 Responses to April 19, 1775: Lexington and Concord-Why They Fought

  • Interesting.

    Not oppressed. Not taxed “without representation”. Ignorant of any the philosophical schools.

    Just simply rebelling against authority.

    non serviam.

  • Cassandra: Our Fifth Amendment may be found in Isaiah 50: 9. Do read our Constitution. Self-governance is an innate human civil right that inheres in the sovereign personhood of the human being. Being “owned” by George III made subjects of us all. Abraham Lincoln said: “One man cannot own another man. FREEDOM

  • “Just simply rebelling against authority.”

    You flew right by that whole right to rule ourselves section.

    “But there is still behind a third consideration concerning this object, which serves to determine my opinion on the sort of policy which ought to be pursued in the management of America, even more than its population and its commerce—I mean its temper and character. In this character of the Americans a love of freedom is the predominating feature, which marks and distinguishes the whole; and, as an ardent is always a jealous affection, your Colonies become suspicious, restive, and untractable, whenever they see the least attempt to wrest from them by force, or shuffle from them by chicane, what they think the only advantage worth living for. This fierce spirit of liberty is stronger in the English Colonies, probably, than in any other people of the earth, and this from a variety of powerful causes, which, to understand the true temper of their minds, and the direction which this spirit takes, it will not be amiss to lay open somewhat more largely.
    First, the people of the Colonies are descendants of Englishmen. England, sir, is a nation which still, I hope, respects, and formerly adored her freedom. The Colonists emigrated from you when this part of your character was most predominant; and they took this bias and direction the moment they parted from your hands. They are, therefore, not only devoted to liberty, but to liberty according to English ideas and on English principles. Abstract liberty, like other mere abstractions, is not to be found. Liberty inheres in some sensible object; and every nation has formed to itself some favorite point which, by way of eminence, becomes the criterion of their happiness. It happened, you know, sir, that the great contests for freedom in this country were, from the earliest times chiefly upon the question of taxing.”

    Edmund Burke, On Conciliation With America, March 22, 1775

  • I’m with Cassandra on this one. The Colonies rebelled against their legal authority that supported them while they were gestating and very vulnerable to attacks from the native populations, the French, and the Spanish. They ginned-up an oppression narrative because the Crown had the gall to ask them to help defer the costs of defending them. It’s ironic that at the same time the British were incubating a revolution in the salons of France that their own would turn on them, but let’s be real: the American revolt was a further move away from Logos to a secular world of Obama’s, Trumps, and Bergoglios.

  • Laughable. The idea that the British Crown had a legitimate power to do away with colonial legislatures, close ports, transport defendants across the sea for trial in England, occupy American cities with garrisons of British troops, not for defense, but to impose autocratic rule, and other abuses flies in the face of any concept of traditional English liberty. The colonists had every right to rebel.

    “The temper and character which prevail in our Colonies are, I am afraid, unalterable by any human art. We can not, I fear, falsify the pedigree of this fierce people, and persuade them that they are not sprung from a nation in whose veins the blood of freedom circulates. The language in which they would hear you tell them this tale would detect the imposition. Your speech would betray you. An Englishman is the unfittest person on earth to argue another Englishman into slavery.”

    Edmund Burke, On Conciliation With America, March 22, 1775

  • One of the first things the American government did was murder its own war heroes who rightly saw the Whiskey Tax (to pay of bankers and swindlers) as the same damn-ed thing they had just fought against. If Britain was so harsh and unfair, why did 2/3 of Americans not want a revolution? If what you say is the case, then why did Canada not follow that lead? And lastly, I’m sure you know what all these wonderful American Revolutionary leaders thought of Catholics. Do you know what the Quebec Act of 1774 was about?

    “The Quebec Act angered the Virginia elite, since most of the western lands they claimed were now officially part of Quebec or in the Indian reserve. The act, which Parliament passed at the same time as legislation placing Massachusetts under crown control, also fueled resentment among Calvinist New Englanders, who saw in its autocratic, pro-Catholic provisions further evidence of an imperial conspiracy against colonial liberties.”

  • “One of the first things the American government did was murder its own war heroes who rightly saw the Whiskey Tax (to pay of bankers and swindlers) as the same damn-ed thing they had just fought against.”

    No, the Whiskey Rebellion demonstrated that bullets were no substitute for ballots. After the rebellion was put down, the tax was repealed by Congress during the Jefferson Administration.

    “Do you know what the Quebec Act of 1774 was about?”

    Yes. Do you know that during the Revolution the Brits attempted to use anti-Catholic propaganda, written by Benedict Arnold against the patriots following the French alliance, and that most of the Founding Fathers attended Mass on occasion during the Revolution to show their gratitude for the aid of Catholic France?

    https://almostchosenpeople.wordpress.com/2009/11/27/our-oldest-ally/

    As Washington noted to leading Catholics in a letter after he was elected President:

    “As mankind become more liberal they will be more apt to allow that all those who conduct themselves as worthy members of the community are equally entitled to the protection of civil government. I hope ever to see America among the foremost nations in examples of justice and liberality. And I presume that your fellow-citizens will not forget the patriotic part which you took in the accomplishment of their Revolution, and the establishment of their government; or the important assistance which they received from a nation in which the Roman Catholic faith is professed.”

    Of course your argument is really with Pope Leo XIII who wrote:

    “Nor, perchance did the fact which We now recall take place without some design of divine Providence. Precisely at the epoch when the American colonies, having, with Catholic aid, achieved liberty and independence, coalesced into a constitutional Republic the ecclesiastical hierarchy was happily established amongst you; and at the very time when the popular suffrage placed the great Washington at the helm of the Republic, the first bishop was set by apostolic authority over the American Church. The well-known friendship and familiar intercourse which subsisted between these two men seems to be an evidence that the United States ought to be conjoined in concord and amity with the Catholic Church. And not without cause; for without morality the State cannot endure-a truth which that illustrious citizen of yours, whom We have just mentioned, with a keenness of insight worthy of his genius and statesmanship perceived and proclaimed. But the best and strongest support of morality is religion.”

  • Let me guess: You think America is a “shining city on a hill” don’t you?
    Anyway, I appreciate the forum to express my opinion. Thank you.

  • America in its best moments is a beacon of liberty for the rest of the world:

    “The Founding Fathers of the United States asserted their claim to freedom and independence on the basis of certain “self-evident” truths about the human person: truths which could be discerned in human nature, built into it by “nature’s God.” Thus they meant to bring into being, not just an independent territory, but a great experiment in what George Washington called “ordered liberty”: an experiment in which men and women would enjoy equality of rights and opportunities in the pursuit of happiness and in service to the common good. Reading the founding documents of the United States, one has to be impressed by the concept of freedom they enshrine: a freedom designed to enable people to fulfill their duties and responsibilities toward the family and toward the common good of the community. Their authors clearly understood that there could be no true freedom without moral responsibility and accountability, and no happiness without respect and support for the natural units or groupings through which people exist, develop, and seek the higher purposes of life in concert with others.

    The American democratic experiment has been successful in many ways. Millions of people around the world look to the United States as a model in their search for freedom, dignity, and prosperity. But the continuing success of American democracy depends on the degree to which each new generation, native-born and immigrant, makes its own the moral truths on which the Founding Fathers staked the future of your Republic. Their commitment to build a free society with liberty and justice for all must be constantly renewed if the United States is to fulfill the destiny to which the Founders pledged their “lives . . . fortunes . . . and sacred honor.”

    John Paul II

    “Anyway, I appreciate the forum to express my opinion. Thank you.”

    You are welcome! That is part of why we are here.

  • America as shining beacon. Let me paraphrase what a professor of mine (yeah, a professor) said when I was in college in the 80s: At its worst, America has never been worse than what you’ll find in other times and places throughout the world and throughout history. At its best, we have yet to see its equal.

  • Well said by your Professor and by you Dave!

  • You flew right by that whole right to rule ourselves section.
    Not at all. “Rule ourselves” and non serviam are in the practical sense equivalent.
    “Rule ourselves” led to the civil war. One cannot with consistency defend rebellion against Britain and condemn the succession of the Confederacy. It’s either “consent of the governed” or it’s not.
    “Rule ourselves” is the political application of protestant repudiation of the authority of the Church.

    and that most of the Founding Fathers attended Mass on occasion during the Revolution
    Politically expedient religious displays have never impressed me.

    Interesting that you would quote Leo XIII. You may be interpreting that to suggest that Leo thought the establishment of the secular government was providential to the Church rather than the opposite intention that the establishment of the American see was providential to bring Catholicism to the secular government. Further along you find:

    “6. ….For the Church amongst you, unopposed by the Constitution and government of your nation, fettered by no hostile legislation, protected against violence by the common laws and the impartiality of the tribunals, is free to live and act without hindrance. Yet, though all this is true, it would be very erroneous to draw the conclusion that in America is to be sought the type of the most desirable status of the Church, or that it would be universally lawful or expedient for State and Church to be, as in America, dissevered and divorced. The fact that Catholicity with you is in good condition, nay, is even enjoying a prosperous growth, is by all means to be attributed to the fecundity with which God has endowed His Church, in virtue of which unless men or circumstances interfere, she spontaneously expands and propagates herself; but she would bring forth more abundant fruits if, in addition to liberty, she enjoyed the favor of the laws and the patronage of the public authority.”

    The Church in America—such that it has prospered—did not do so because of the secularism of the government or its ideas about what legitimate liberty meant. It did so out of the Church’s fecundity.

    The problem with discussions like this is the emotion rapped up in criticism of the philosophical errors in the founding of this nation. It is very much like pointing out problems in the papacy. Pointing out problems in the pontificate of JPII or Benedict would bring howls from many of the conservative Catholics suffering from ultramontanism. As painful as it has been, Francis has helped solve that problem. Likewise, pointing out problems in the founding of America still brings howls from those raised in the American mythology. Those errors were arguably smaller than the subsequent errors that produced communism, but they were steps along the way. Of particular importance was the establishment of the first atheist government. Ideas have consequences.

    Let me present this from http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2017/03/de-mattei-shedding-light-on-todays.html

    “1517, 1717, 1917, then, are three symbolic dates, three events that are part of a single process. Pius XII, in his speech to the men of Catholic Action on October 12th 1952, summed it up like this: “Christ yes, Church no; (the Protestant Revolution against the Church); then: God yes, Christ no; (the Masonic Revolution against the central mysteries of Christianity); finally the impious cry: God is dead; rather: God has never existed (the atheistic Communist Revolution). And here – Pius XII concludes – is the attempt to build the structure of the world upon foundations that We do not hesitate in pointing out as, the principals responsible for the danger that threatens mankind”.

    Need I point out the prevalence of Masons and Deists amoung the founding fathers?

    I have no illusion of convincing you of anything.

    But then, Of course your argument is really with Pope Leo XIII, and not with me.

  • “Not at all. “Rule ourselves” and non serviam are in the practical sense equivalent.”

    No they are not.

    “One cannot with consistency defend rebellion against Britain and condemn the succession of the Confederacy. It’s either “consent of the governed” or it’s not.”

    Certainly one can. In the case of the American Revolution the colonists had suffered the long train of abuses set forth magnificently in Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence. The South had suffered no such abuses and rebelled purely to safeguard the right to hold other human beings as chattel. There was no right of secession created by the Constitution.

    ““Rule ourselves” is the political application of protestant repudiation of the authority of the Church.”

    You are comparing apples to rock salt. Caesar and Christ are not the same and rebellion in the civil realm is not the same as heresy or schism in the realm of religion.

    “The Church in America—such that it has prospered—did not do so because of the secularism of the government or its ideas about what legitimate liberty meant. It did so out of the Church’s fecundity.”

    You draw from Leo XIII what he did not say. What he was saying is that different conditions of time and place prevent any form of government to be the best in all times and places and history demonstrates that this is manifestly true.

    “Likewise, pointing out problems in the founding of America still brings howls from those raised in the American mythology.”

    This is not a discussion about myths but rather about historical facts, at least on my part.

    “Need I point out the prevalence of Masons and Deists amoung the founding fathers?”

    No, since I know the history of that period well. Are you aware of the differences between American masonry and Continental masonry, the masonry that the fulminations of Pius XII and many of his predecessors were directed against? American masonry never had the anti-Christian rage and tendency to atheism that infected Continental masonry. In America, in the time of Washington, the masons were as subversive and atheist as the Rotary Club is in America today.

    “I have no illusion of convincing you of anything.”

    At last, something we can agree on.

  • “I have no illusion of convincing you of anything.”

    At last, something we can agree on.

    Your other responses are likewise not the least surprising, and not the least convincing.
    Time will ultimately demonstrate the correct position.

  • “Time will ultimately demonstrate the correct position.”

    Time will not ultimately determine the correct position, insofar as any of the matters under discussion can be deemed correct or incorrect, but rather the facts will. I know the historical facts and you obviously do not.

Leave a Reply

PopeWatch: Global Tolerance Initiative

Wednesday, April 19, AD 2017

 

 

 

One aspect of this Pontificate is how many odd events have occurred during it.  A recent example:

 

 Just two months after Pope Francis faced intense backlash for his reforms when critical posters were plastered around Rome, a new set went up around the city over Easter, this time praising the pope for his commitment to mercy and inclusion.

“Thank you Pope Francis! For your true Christian engagement with love and mercy, as demanded by Jesus so often in our Holy Bible.”

This was the phrase written on some 300 posters that were hung April 14 around Rome’s city center and near the Vatican, which will remain until April 22.

RELATED: Rome wakes up to find city full of anti-Pope Francis posters

Sponsored by The Global Tolerance Initiative, the posters referred to a website called “Love is Tolerance,” which explained that Francis had been named by the organization as their “Global Champion of Tolerance Easter 2017.”

Written in both Italian and English, the posters call on all cardinals, priests and bishops to follow with love the “wise advice” of the pope, and to “read our Holy Bible with open eyes, hearts and minds.”

The posters conclude with an appeal for everyone to “pray for you and the Church with a ‘thinking heart and loving mind.’”

Continue reading...

10 Responses to PopeWatch: Global Tolerance Initiative

Leave a Reply

April 18, 1942: The Doolittle Raid

Tuesday, April 18, AD 2017

 

Seventy-five years ago 80 very brave Americans, led by Army Air Corps Lieutenant Colonel James H. Doolittle, brought the nation a badly needed morale boost.  The War in the Pacific was going badly as defeat followed defeat.  Navy Captain Francis Low hit upon a plan to send a message, not only to the American public, but also to Japan, that the United States was not beaten and that it would strike back and prevail.

16 Mitchell B-25B bombers were placed on the carrier USS Hornet.  In great secrecy the Hornet and its escorts steamed to within 650 nautical miles of Japan when the force was discovered by a Japanese picket boat which was sunk by gunfire from the USS Nashville.  Fearing discovery the Doolittle force launched immediately, some 10 hours earlier than planned, and 170 nautical miles further from Japan.

The raiders reached the Japanese Home Islands at around noon.  They had split up into groups ranging from two to four planes and struck targets in Tokyo, Yokohama, Yokosuka, Nagoya, Kobe and Osaka.  The raiders then planned to fly their planes into Nationalist controlled China and make their way back to the US.  Miraculously 69 of the raiders did just that.  Three of the raiders died and eight were captured.

Of the captured raiders, three were executed by the Japanese on October 15, 1942 following a show trial.

The remaining five POWs were placed on starvation rations, with one of them dying prior to liberation by the Allied forces at the end of the War.  Jacob DeShazer, one of the POWs, came back to Japan as a missionary in 1948 and worked there for 30 years spreading the Gospel.

Continue reading...

One Response to April 18, 1942: The Doolittle Raid

Leave a Reply

2 Responses to Publicans and Other Sinners

  • Taxes are too high, indeed. Medieval serfs handed over less of their product than the typical (about 51% of us) American taxpayer.

    It’s not only federal income taxes. There are state and local income taxes, real estate taxes, sales taxes, excise taxes, etc. The cruelest excise taxes of all are on liquor.

    Due to a minor miscalculation in estimated taxes, fro 2016 we had a refund and filed in early February. Early onset Alzheimer?

    Regarding publicani, St. John the Baptist advised them to collect no more than authorized.

  • Medieval serfs handed over less of their product than the typical (about 51% of us) American taxpayer.
    Tax receipts in total amount to 30% of gross domestic product. A subset of that would be direct taxes (or ‘personal’ taxes), which amount to about 12% of personal income. IIRC, Jerome Blum had it that early modern serfs in the Hapsburg dominions were under quite a range of assessments (which varied locally), and could here and there be notionally liable for 70% of their crop.

Leave a Reply