Rank Anti-Catholic Bigotry

Friday, June 2, AD 2017

A Catholic family is encountering anti-Catholic bigotry by a local government and as far as I know, none of our Bishops are saying bupkis about it:

 

A Catholic organic farmer is suing the city of East Lansing for booting his business from the farmers’ market over his belief that marriage is the union of one man and one woman.

Steve Tennes of Country Mill Farms has sold fruit and vegetables at the East Lansing Farmer’s Market for the past seven years. After city officials learned of his belief that marriage is a man-woman union, they bypassed jurisdictional limits under Michigan law to craft a policy to exclude him from being able to sell at the farmers’ market.

Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) is defending Tennes.

The trouble for Tennes began when he posted on the Country Mill Farms’ Facebook page about his belief that marriage is between a man and a woman. City officials reacted to the August 24, 2016 post by telling Tennes they didn’t want his farm at the next scheduled market the following Sunday. They said they’d received complaints over the Facebook post and there would be protests if Country Mill Farms was there selling produce.

Tennes didn’t back down, and participated in the market as he always had. No one showed up to protest.

Then, in December 2016, Tennes again posted about his beliefs on Facebook.

East Lansing’s Human Relations Ordinance makes “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” protected classes.

Country Mill Farms is in Charlotte, 22 miles outside of East Lansing. It’s not in East Lansing’s jurisdiction.

So, city officials created a new policy that all vendors must comply with East Lansing’s nondiscrimination laws not just while they are at the Farmer’s Market but in all of their general business practices.

Tennes sells fruit and vegetables to anyone. He says he employs people who identify as part of the “LGBT community.” But the city doesn’t want him participating in the farmers’ market unless he will agree to host same-sex “weddings” on his orchard.

East Lansing Mayor Mark Meadows told the Lansing State Journal that because the Tennes family won’t host same-sex “weddings” on their farm in a different jurisdiction, they’re ineligible to participate in the farmers’ market.

“This is about them operating a business that discriminates against LGBT individuals,” not the Facebook posts, he said, “and that’s a whole different issue.”

Country Mill Farms declined to host a same-sex ceremony in 2014, before the Supreme Court imposed same-sex “marriage” on all 50 states. It referred the two lesbians who sought to use its property to another venue without moral objections.

Continue reading...

8 Responses to Rank Anti-Catholic Bigotry

Hilarious: The New York Times Attacks Bannon for Being Too Catholic

Monday, January 2, AD 2017

Oh this is just too funny.  The New York Times on December 30, ran a story on Trump’s advisor Stephen K. Bannon, in which they attack him for being, gasp, a conservative Catholic:

A week after Stephen K. Bannon helped engineer the populist revolt that led to Donald J. Trump’s election, Buzzfeed unearthed a recording of him speaking to a Vatican conference of conservative Catholics in 2014.

In his presentation, Mr. Bannon, then the head of the hard-right website Breitbart News and now Mr. Trump’s chief strategist, called on the “church militant” to fight a global war against a “new barbarity” of “Islamic fascism” and international financial elites, with 2,500 years of Western civilization at risk.

While most listeners probably overlooked the term “church militant,” knowledgeable Catholics would have recognized it as a concept deeply embedded in the church’s teaching. Moreover, they would have noticed that Mr. Bannon had taken the term out of context, invoking it in a call for cultural and military conflict rather than for spiritual warfare, particularly within one’s soul, its longstanding connotation.

As the Trump administration prepares to take office, the use of Church Militant theology has gone well beyond its religious meaning and has taken on a political resonance. To fully grasp what “church militant” means in this highly politicized atmosphere, it helps to examine the broader movement and the role of a traditionalist Catholic website called — to no surprise — ChurchMilitant.com.

Continue reading...

34 Responses to Hilarious: The New York Times Attacks Bannon for Being Too Catholic

  • Great piece of writing. Of course the NYT has to be fervently anti-Catholic as it is the master of deceit, thus a mere tool in the hands of the diabolical–the “father of lies.”
    One side note–it appears that the diabolical left has no problem with their side of spiritual warfare entering and controlling both the cultural and military aspects of human civilization.

  • I’m trying to decide which is more blatant: the bigotry, the dishonesty or the stupidity.
    .
    More examples of the stupidity and why they lost. #Inaccurate #Pathetic #Lyingliberals #FakeNews
    .
    [ala Twain] If you don’t read the Times you are uninformed. If you read the Times, you are misinformed. The same is true for most of the lying, liberal (redundant) media.
    .
    The real tragedy is that the despicable, evil people (voted for Obama and Hillary) are too bloody stupid to realize that they are continually gulled.

  • Well they invoked Michael Voris, now. All hell is sure to break loose! 😉

  • Keeping the eye on the prize.

    http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jan/1/obama-could-still-force-merrick-garland-onto-supre/?

    While the non-news, Russians interfere with/ election and the above blow hard story, continues on, the lil’ king might try a last second placement.

    The libs are devious.
    Add that to your list T. Shaw.

  • Now, if the Times had written an article attacking Bannon for being an unkempt scrounge, that would have been beyond dispute.

  • Bannon comes from a Catholic background. He went to Benedictine High School here in Richmond, as did his brothers. And although he is deeply conservative in the best sense of the word, it is true that he is not on close personal terms with the Church, having been, as noted, thrice-divorced. He is still an advisor or on the alum board of Benedictine, so there are still ties.

    The article is utterly inane, and botches the significance and meaning of the Church militant; the term is a way of denoting the Church still on earth working towards salvation, as distinct from the Church Suffering, which are those in purgatory, and the Church Triumphant, which are those in heaven.

  • Good for Steve Bannon. The Catholic Church should be much more militant about the works of the devil. For example, I would like to see Pope Francis state that any Catholic who voted for a Democrat candidate for Federal office would be committing a mortal sin. If this were done it would not be long before the Democrat Party would stop supporting abortion. This should have been done years ago. It would have saved millions of babies.

  • Well, while we pay attention to, what seems to us as nonsense, someone should try to keep an eye on the “Flim Flam Man” who still occupies the White House. Which shell do you think it’s under ?
    Timothy R.

  • The problem I see with this is more aligned with trying to debunk Voris and his site … which unfortunately brings down with it the beautiful teaching behind the real meaning of Church Militant. No question the author cleverly intertwines fact with fiction to bash us all.

  • @ Dowd: Unfortunately I think you overestimate the seriousness with which the Catholic Democrat voter takes their faith. For example, Mex-Americans have voted Democrat, and thus pro-choice, for decades, rationalizing their choice with the thought that “We’re not pro-choice, we live our lives pro-life, and we need the material assistance / open borders that the Democrat endorse to survive.” Of course if a long-time pro-life volunteer like me votes for Trump and The Wall, while saying, “Of course I care for the poor, I contribute to St. Vincent de Paul” — I’m la diabla blanca. We all know that pro-life people don’t care about the poor.

  • Anybody remember when some poor reviewer decided to cheese actually watching the Lord of the Rings movies, and did a search for a review…and accidentally chose one of the parody summary to base their review on?

    Sounds like the guy did the same with “church militant” being interpreted with a word-exchange for “jihad.”
    *********

    Unrelated: lovely new theme!

  • re: in TX. Thanks for your comments. You are probably correct about the over-estimation of the Catholic faith by Democrats. The faith is mostly cultural to them–lots of Irish like this–with selfish economic interests trumping (banned word) Catholic doctrine.

  • Ok. I agree that the man is not a Saint. But, did not the Founder of the Church, Jesus Christ, say that,
    “whoever is not against us, is for us.” Remember how suspicious the Disciples were of Saul ?
    Timothy R.

  • Pingback: WEDNESDAY CHRISTMASTIDE EDITION | Big Pulpit
  • Remember how suspicious the Disciples were of Saul ?
    Which was not a bad thing, what with the hold “deadly threat” thing….
    All for someone throwing out demons in His name; not so much for being tossed out while demons get ignored.

  • Foxfier, Saul was the name Paul used, before he became “Paul”.
    Timothy R.

  • I read Michael Voris. I try to find my way in real life in real time in my real dioceses ( living on the borders of three) In my opinion, Michael is stable and determined to stick with what he knows and not countenance drifting. That helps me. I support parishes in all three dioceses because I teach bible studies in all three. The different approaches to Catholicism and the world in the three, despite the unity we used to expect (Iraneus)
    Just considering the holy day calendar is only one of the things that makes us so aware of the importance of the bishop, of structure and stability.
    I grew up in a town in this area populated by a handful of Catholics and many many Masons.
    I learned about anti-Catholicism early, the ornery type and also how it can sometimes have a velvet glove. As I grew up, there were people who freely claimed that the Catholic Church is aligned with the devil. Today those most consciously associated with the devil see the Church as their enemy.
    The small city that dominates this area has been estimated to be the most diverse in the country PER CAPITA. Probably there is a great overestimation of the faith of the Catholics trying to live in the world and the Church in this melting pot. But we are trying.
    I, like many others, sense a bit of a change in the air in these times. I think some of our priests sense it too, and are becoming , as Michael Dowd says, more militant about fighting the devil and association with him.
    On another note, I appreciate the tags given for the post entries I clicked on the anti-catholicism tag and read some older posts by Donald McClarey that were very interesting- I guess somehow I missed them the first time!

  • Timothy- I am aware of that.
    You do remember what he was doing before he converted, right?

  • “Saul” was helping the Romans by arresting Christians. According to his writings, he never forgave himself for his past. As “Paul” he tried to make up with Peter and the others;but, they much feared and mistrusted him at first.
    Timothy R.

  • The NYT surname is the “Hell’s bible”

  • Timothy –
    Kind of the point…. the guy was trying to kill them. He did repent and change, but that’s a radical difference between expelling demons in Jesus’ name without being a recognized follower, and killing the people who expelled demons in Jesus’ name. That people didn’t instantly believe him when he said “hey, I don’t do that anymore” is a sign they weren’t willing to throw their lives away stupidly.

  • Morning Fosfier- I read your last entry with great interest. And I agree with every thing you said. I think we are talking past each other. What I was trying to say, is that : Hey ! There is no need to panic. The Big Guy., who has everything under control, knows wnat’s happening. The Disciples panicked and ran to the Boss because they didn’t know the guy tossing out demons in Jesus’ name. But He knew !
    Timothy R.

  • Addendum : The Lord does not have to reveal to us everything He knows and what He is doing. Look at the trouble we get into with the little information He gives us. And I apologize for misspelling your title. It was a typo.
    Timothy R.

  • Oh, good… confusion is one thing, disagreement is a thing, but the point you seemed to be making was rather…well, deadly to anybody who isn’t in an already Christian society, with other folks protecting them. 😀
    No worries on the name, I was more interested in it being easy to find with a search engine than with it being easy to spell!

  • I am a born, raised, and educated Catholic. My wife is Pentecostal. We take turns attending each other’s Church. I have never felt Catholic as much as when I had occasion to defend my Church from, well meaning, but probing questions. Such as, “Do you really worship statues ?’
    Foxfire, if you are Catholic, you belong to a GREAT Christian society. You are my brother.
    Timothy R.

  • While it’s a good thing to keep in mind, I was looking more towards the tangible results of cultures that are built on the idea that– as the US’ founders nicely put it– we’re created equal, with rights put there by God Himself which the state can only recognize, or fail to recognize.
    It needs to be seen, and protected, and– God willing– built up more.

  • The best we can do, and are supposed to do, is to try and ascertain His will for our life. And pray that He will help us stay the course.
    Timothy R.

  • We have to figure out what we’re supposed to do, and then do it. Like they say in mass– what we have done, and what we have failed to do.

    We destroy the Christian culture we’ve been granted? We stand by and let it be done? We’re at fault.
    Pray, but keep rowing for shore.

  • I don’t know who or what knocked the Hope right out of you. I’de like to put my size eleven in their rear parts ! I let a girl do that to me a long time ago. I was very young and seven thousand miles and an ocean from home. And I never thought I would ever recover from it. But I did. You can too.
    Timothy R.

  • *shakes head* It’s not a lack of hope, it’s a recognition that we’ve got to work.

    The danger in what you seem to find a hopeful stance is that it’s passive– if all we had to do was think and pray, we could avoid the real hard part of doing, and being accountable for our doing. I don’t think God will blame us for failing, but He will blame us for not doing our best.

    I’m not lacking in hope– to quote a delightful character from Fairy Tail, I’m all fired up. 😀

  • “I don’t think God will blame us for failing, but He will blame us for not doing our best.”

    Precisely!

  • I don’t read the NYT, listen to NPR or any other liberal propaganda outlet. If I did I would know less (in other words be more stupid) about the topic after reading or listening.

  • “It is like watching someone blind from birth attempting to describe the color green.”

    BBBAAAHHHAAA! ROFLMBO

  • I like to think of Life from the standpoint of Ecclesiastes 3: 1-8. There’s a time to confront and a time to listen. Timothy R.

Religious Freedom: The First Freedom

Friday, June 26, AD 2015

Fortnight For Freedom 2015

 

 

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.

George Washington, March 15, 1790

 

Catholics in this country have long enjoyed complete religious liberty.  The experience of that freedom in this country was one one of the factors that caused Popes to embrace the concept of religious liberty as enshrined in the documents of Vatican II.  Maryland, the Catholic colony, was the first colony to proclaim religious freedom in the New World.

Now that precious liberty that so many Americans have fought and died for down through the centuries is under siege by local and state governments and the Obama administration.  The Bishops of Maryland have spoken out against this evil trend.  Go here to read their 16 page statement from 2011.

Continue reading...

One Response to Religious Freedom: The First Freedom

The Left Begins to Notice That the Catholic Vote is Slipping Away

Tuesday, March 17, AD 2015

 

 

Over at Salon Patricia Miller sounds the alarm bell for her fellow leftists that the Catholic vote is taking a walk:

 

There’s no “Catholic vote” in terms of Catholics representing an electoral bloc that votes according to what their bishops tell them, or in lockstep with the tenets of their religion. Yet winning Catholic voters has been essential to almost every presidential victory in modern times. And the defection of Catholics voters has played a role in some of the most consequential congressional turnovers in recent history — from 1994 to 2014 — making Catholics the ultimate swing voters. And for Democrats, that could be bad news.

While Catholics have been swing voters since Richard Nixon’s second term, white Catholics are now identifying as Republican by historic margins. According to the most recent polling from the Pew Research Center, 53 percent of white Catholics now favor the GOP, versus 39 percent who favor the Democrats—the largest point spread in the history of the Pew poll. And for the first time, white Catholics are more Republican than the voting group usually considered the ultimate Republicans: white Protestants (a designation that includes both mainline and evangelical Protestants).

These are ominous signs for the Democrats, evincing a new and growing allegiance with the Republican Party that has long-term implications.

Since Miller is a pro-abort Catholic she really does not understand why this is happening as the rest of her post demonstrates.  Allow me to clue her in:

When the Tokugawa shogunate was stamping out Christianity in Japan, it made use of Fumi-e (stepping on pictures).  Regime officials would place pictures of Jesus or Mary before suspected Christians and order them to step on them.  Refusal to do so, if persisted in, would end in execution.  In our own country we are seeing the growth of a movement just as antithetical in theory to Catholicism and traditional Christianity as the Tokugawa shogunate, and it finds its home in the Democrat party.

What we have seen over the past few decades is the evolution of the Democrat party into an overtly anti-Catholic party.  The Obama administration is the culmination of this trend.  This of course is deeply ironic, because the Democrat party is a major party in this country with the help of the votes of tens of millions of purported Catholics.

Continue reading...

39 Responses to The Left Begins to Notice That the Catholic Vote is Slipping Away

  • Democrats Boo inclusion of God. I was going to write that but I feel better knowing that it is written and will be written.

  • Hmmm, we’ll see. Many bishops, clergy, religious, and the entire “social justice” establishment will work hard to keep the sheeple voting Dem.

  • Polls that try to describe the political leanings of Catholics first must define
    who is Catholic. Too many carelessly designed polls simply rely on subjects
    self-description** when many being polled might be nominally Catholic but
    haven’t been to Mass in years and simply claim the description of “Catholic”
    for want of a more accurate description. Studies that examine the relationship
    between the regularity of Mass attendance and political affiliation indicate
    that if one attends Mass at least once a week, one also tends to hold more
    ‘conservative’ political views. Greater participation in the sacramental life
    of the Church, on the whole, appears to go with a greater incidence of
    having one’s head screwed on the right way, at least for those of us in the
    pews. The crazy left-wing priests and Church professionals out there
    seem to be working under a different dynamic.
    .
    _____________
    ** I make no claim that such people are not, in fact, Catholic. If they were
    baptized into the Church, then there they remain, barring apostasy. We
    should all be grateful that we needn’t be perfect Catholics to be in the Church.

  • I have heard Father Frank Pavone of Priest for Life say that if a Catholic votes for a pro-abortion candidate they have renigged on the right to call themselves Catholic. He says no abortion for any reason is a non-negotiable truth of the Church and you can’t be a Catholic in good standing with the church and support a pro-abortion candidate. How many democrat-voting Catholics know that? I’ll bet not too many. I know many I go to Church with that vote democrat and would argue with you till the cows come home that they are “faithful Catholics” and that the Church tells them they can “vote their conscience”, so they pull the lever for Obama and his Catholic-hating democrats. It would help if priests occasionally gave a homily on the ills of abortion and what is required of Catholics in the voting booth, but most priests never mention abortion or homosexual “marriage”. They avoid it like the plague……and that is the reason so many Catholics vote for democrats.

  • I hope and pray that the walk away of Catholics from the Democratic Party is due to their taking a closer walk with Thee, Lord. We are in danger of losing our country and our souls otherwise. Mere politics will save neither.

  • Donald’s analysis proves that Patricia Miller should have shut her yap after the first sentence. That is, there’s no per se Catholic voting bloc. What we’re seeing in the example Miller provides has at least as much to do with the Democrat party’s war on white working men (and the women who marry them –married women vote Republican more than Democrat while single women do the opposite), and probably more.
    .
    The same thing is at play where commenter Clinton notes “Studies that examine the relationship
    between the regularity of Mass attendance and political affiliation indicate that if one attends Mass at least once a week, one also tends to hold more ‘conservative’ political views.” Studies show the correlation with Protestants who regularly attend church services and Republican voting patterns.
    .
    I’ll have to find the reference again, but the guy who broke the Catholic voting bloc was himself a Catholic –but an advisor to the McGovern campaign and good servant of the Democrat party first.

  • Well, if Fr. Pavone said that he is plainly in error. Voting for a pro-choice candidate is not objectively sinful as such, and certainly is not inimical to being a Catholic. One must distinguish between voting for a candidate because he is pro-choice (impermissible for a Catholic) versus voting for a candidate despite his being pro-choice (permissible). A vote is a prudential calculus, and it is certainly possible to reasonably conclude in good faith that a pro-choice candidate is superior to an opponent, even potentially a pro-life opponent. Now before folks a chime in with the boringly predictable reminders that such prudential decisions are often masks for impermissible abortion support or indifference, well of course.

  • The only thing I have to say is that I shall never ever vote for a sodomy-sanctifying, baby-murdering liberal progressive Democrat. Never. I may despise and hold in contempt RINOs. But I utterly loathe to the depth of my being the liberal progressive Democratic Party.

  • I’m voting with Paul Primavera!

    The C.C.C. #2322 – 2323 is enough for me. It is a very poor choice to continue to think it’s okay to vote for a candidate that has difficulties prioritizing the gravest injustices in our land. If the murder of the innocents is not at the top of the list, well then we will continue to see the destruction of an America not worthy of Gods grace. Our foundations are crumbling because of the blood of the innocents.

  • I never vote for any Democrat. Even if they are pro-life, how can they belong to an organization that is not? It’s like belonging to the Mafia being okay so long as you don’t whack anyone yourself.

  • Further to my previous comment:

    Some commentators [like Miller here] still identify Catholics as an important swing group, but the figures don’t quite show it. According to the Pew Forum, in 2000 Gore got 50 percent of the Catholic vote and Bush 47–while the total for all voters was Gore at 48.4 percent and Bush at 47.9. In 2004 Bush defeated Kerry 52 to 47 percent among Catholics, and 51 to 48 among all voters. In 2008 Obama beat McCain 54 to 45 percent among Catholics, and 53 to 46 in the general population. These differences are small, and they suggest, if anything, that Catholics weren’t swinging elections; they were being swung by elections–moving a fraction more than other groups toward the national choice [bold emphasis added, italics original]. But even that effect disappeared in the 2012 election, when 50 percent of Catholics voted for Obama and 48 percent for Romney, basically matching the nation’s popular vote
    .
    [….]
    .
    The major role–perhaps the only role– that Catholicism [as distinct from Catholic voters] genuinely played on the American stage is as a source of the vocabulary for phrasing moral issues. Sanctity of life, just war theory, natural law, dignity of the person: It became the single viable vocabulary for expressing moral concepts in a secular space. [….] [I]t was the genius of a handful of writers–laymen mostly, from Michael Novak to Robert George– to take what, circa 1959, was a liberal Catholic idea and turn it into a mainstay of contemporary coservatism. The horrifed fascination of, say, the New York Times with all things Catholic isn’t caused by worry about the religious authority of bishops or some monolithic Catholic voting bloc. It concerns the political Left’s desire to discredit Catholicism as an influence on secular thought[emph. added].
    .
    Catholic voters in 2012 broke the way the rest of the nation broke: Hispanic Catholics in one direction, white ethnic Catholics in another; churchgoing Catholics trending one way, non-churchgoing Catholics a different way. Just drop the word Catholic, and you have areasonable idea where their votes went [bold emph. added] But the vocabulary of Catholocism, that way of bringing religiously grounded moral claims into the public square, and doing so nonreligiously, still somehow remains a force in American public life–incomplete and, I argue, declining, but nonetheless real. (Joseph Bottum (2014) An Anxious Age: The Post-Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of America, 191-93.)

  • Dittos PWP

  • but the guy who broke the Catholic voting bloc was himself a Catholic –but an advisor to the McGovern campaign and good servant of the Democrat party first.

    There was no such person. What would have broken any voting bloc was the loss of a sense of distinction between the elements thereof and the rest of the population. You have the abolition of customary devotions (e.g. Friday abstention), the Novus Ordo, Marty Haugen, the priestly rebellion over celibacy and Humanae Vitae, and the implosion of the religious orders (and the knock-on effects of same) to thank for that.

  • And, of course, the teaching authority of bishops has been ruined because those bishops are, taken collectively, no longer trustworthy. Individual bishops may be conscientious, but it is difficult for the layman to see that as anything other than a personal predilection. Also, the better bishops often do little to clean up er the lousy bishops. Manifest investment by Bp. Robert Cunningham in liturgical renewal during his first 40 months in his see = nil.

  • There was no such person

    Then Fred Dutton is a non-Person (article behind a pay-wall, alas).

    link to amazon download if you really want to read the article but don’t want to subscribe to Commonweal

  • Catholic voters are the only reason Obama was elected twice. Catholic Democrats are the only reason Democrats get elected. They will have to answer to Jesus when he returns. The unfortunate thing is those Catholic Democrats don’t realize they are the only reason the murder of unborn babies remains the law of the land after 42 years, contrary to those Catholics saying they believe God is the giver of life. They give the Democratic Party the electoral power to attack God in this life. They will tell Jesus they were helping to care for the poor with their votes, but Jesus never directed his disciples to get Julius Caesar, i.e., government, to care for the poor, he directed them to care for the poor themselves. So, those Catholics who line up with the left in life will find themselves ordered to line up on Jesus’ left side with all the other goats when he returns to “judge the nations’ and they will hear those fateful words, “Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.” (Mt 25; 41)

    They have time to make amends by leaving the Democratic Party and not vote for it again until the party repents and seeks forgiveness, which it will never do. They don’t have to join the opposing party which they detest, just stop endorsing and supporting the Democratic Party which proved its opposition to God in this famous voice vote in the 2012 National Democratic Party convention. It is a classic!

  • Voting for a pro-choice candidate under the belief that you are “voting” for something else may somehow make you feel like you did’nt vote for abortion, but the end result is still the same..you voted to kill Our Lords children.

  • Couldn’t agree more. You either vote for the candidate from the Holocaust promoting party or you vote for someone else. Now, if you can justify a vote for the former on a prudential basis, perhaps your conscience needs to be better formed.

  • Catholic voters are the only reason Obama was elected twice.

    Blacks and unmarried women might disagree with you.

  • It’s interesting to note that many Catholic’s are switching to voting Republican. While the Democrats are often blamed for allowing abortion and homosexuality into the United, it’s worth noting that many Republican politicians have been pro choice. The Republican party are often seen as the party of God and the family, but many Democrat politicians have spoken with the same vision. Perhaps an example of a Christian vision in politics was the setting up of the National Health Service in Britain and was supported by King George.

  • “Perhaps an example of a Christian vision in politics was the setting up of the National Health Service in Britain and was supported by King George.”
    .
    It is NOT the job of govt to dispense health care from the teat of the public treasury. The command to feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, care for the sick, visit the imprisoned and welcome the alien is given to us Christians. Every time we evade our responsibility and abdicate our accountability to care for the sick onto Caesar, we sacrifice on the godless altar of political expediency our citizenship in the Kingdom of Heaven and our adoption as children of God.
    .
    “…it’s worth noting that many Republican politicians have been pro choice.”
    .
    Some Republicans are pro-choice. Some Republicans are pro-gay marriage. They are called RINOs – Republicans In Name Only. The platform of the GOP is different. Here is what that platform says about marriage:
    .
    “Preserving and Protecting Traditional Marriage: The institution of marriage is the foundation of civil society. Its success as an institution will determine our success as a nation. It has been proven by both experience and endless social science studies that traditional marriage is best for children. Children raised in intact married families are more likely to attend college, are physically and emotionally healthier, are less likely to use drugs or alcohol, engage in crime, or get pregnant outside of marriage. The success of marriage directly impacts the economic well-being of individuals. Furthermore, the future of marriage affects freedom. The lack of family formation not only leads to more government costs, but also to more government control over the lives of its citizens in all aspects. We recognize and honor the courageous efforts of those who bear the many burdens of parenting alone, even as we believe that marriage, the union of one man and one woman must be upheld as the national standard, a goal to stand for, encourage, and promote through laws governing marriage. We embrace the principle that all Americans should be treated with respect and dignity.”
    .
    And here is what that platform says about protecting individual conscience opposed to abortion:
    .
    “Protecting Individual Conscience in Healthcare: No healthcare professional or organization should ever be required to perform, provide for, withhold, or refer for a medical service against their conscience. This is especially true of the religious organizations which deliver a major portion of America’s healthcare, a service rooted in the charity of faith communities. We do not believe, however, that healthcare providers should be allowed to withhold services because the healthcare provider believes the patient’s life is not worth living. We support the ability of all organizations to provide, purchase, or enroll in healthcare coverage consistent with their religious, moral or ethical convictions without discrimination or penalty. We likewise support the right of parents to consent to medical treatment for their children, including mental health treatment, drug treatment, and treatment involving pregnancy, contraceptives and abortion. We urge enactment of pending legislation that would require parental consent to transport girls across state lines for abortions.”
    .
    The Democratic Party on the other hand is utterly and completely evil, openly supporting the foul of sexual perversions as marriage, and openly advocating the murder of innocent unborn babies right up to the moment of birth. To be or support the Democrats is to willingly cooperate with grave evil. To support Republicans may involve holding one’s nose against the stench, but at least one’s conscience will be clear.

  • “The Democratic Party on the other hand is utterly and completely evil, openly supporting the foul of sexual perversions as marriage, and openly advocating the murder of innocent unborn babies right up to the moment of birth. To be or support the Democrats is to willingly cooperate with grave evil. To support Republicans may involve holding one’s nose against the stench, but at least one’s conscience will be clear”.

    My good friend you have made a number of valid points and I thank you for the clarity you have written them. The only thing is I feel calling the Democrat’s evil is a little judgmental and I am not a supporter of the Democrat’s. As for the murder of innocent unborn babies right up to the moment of birth, is something I have always had a problem with even when I once considered myself an Anarchist. As someone who has Autism and worked many years caring for individuals with Intellectual Disabilities, I believe all individuals have a right to live on this world. Discovering I was Autistic recently has made my pro life views stronger.
    God bless

  • Then Fred Dutton is a non-Person

    Sorry, Fred Dutton did not and does not move eight-digit populations of voters. No one does.

  • “The only thing is I feel calling the Democrat’s evil is a little judgmental…”
    .
    Correct. 1 Corinthians 6:2-3 states:
    .
    Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world is to be judged by you, are you incompetent to try trivial cases? Do you not know that we are to judge angels? How much more, matters pertaining to this life!”
    .
    Then just a little later verses 9 and 10 state:
    .
    “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither the immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God.”
    .
    And Jesus said in Matthew 7:16-17:
    .
    “You will know them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thorns, or figs from thistles? So, every sound tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears evil fruit.”
    .
    Everyone always seems to remember Matthew 7:1-4 about not judging lest we be judged, but then promptly ignores the rest.

  • James and Paul, you have taken the conversation around an interesting corner, that intersection of Who am I to Judge & Know them by their Works. I find it difficult to pontificate on a matter with which I somewhat struggle to fully understand but here’s my tentative take on it. If I love my neighbor, I place a kind interpretation on the state of the person’s conscience and leave that judgment to Christ. I won’t be called to judge anyone until that last great day in the “hereafter”. Concerning the “here-for” is another matter. Here we need to discern the works and fruits of people and human organizations. We need to be both gentle as doves and wise as serpents.
    So after many years of observing the Democratic Party, I may conclude that it is “effectively” the most evil organization in the country. The Communist Party is effectively less evil due to the miniscule influence it has.
    The Democrats often carry a majority of the electorate down the wide road to destruction. By the same token, I may conclude that the Republican Party is merely mediocre.

  • Voting for a pro -abort republican is just as bad as voting for a pro-abort democrat. I don’t know how remote guilt by remote participation can be, but giving any assent to someone far enough off their nut to be pro abortion is just not prudential.
    But the depths! How low can people go! of both parties. The idea that you can be conservative about economics and that is all. Making the Lie true- “It’s the economy, stupid”
    Common sense is not common enough to form a bloc.

  • Anzlyne,
    .
    You are correct. However, many Katholycks use what you indicated – that there are pro-abortion Republicans – as justification to vote for Democrats under the pretext that Republicans are no better. However, the fact of the matter is that most Republicans are pro-life and pro-sanctity of marriage whereas most Democrats are anti-life and anti-sanctity of marriage. Furthermore, the Platform of the Republican Party is superior to the Platform of the Democratic Party. Yes, far too many Republicans are hypocrites and traitors to the cause of Republicanism. But the overwhelming majority of Democrats are purely evil.
    .
    As for me, I defer to what the Psalmist wrote so long ago:
    .
    “Put not your trust in princes, in a son of man, in whom there is no help.” Psalm 146:3

  • Paul Primavera: ditto and ditto and ditto. The word is getting out-difficult as it is to spread-that it is a mortal sin for a Catholic with a wellformed conscience to vote for any Democrat at any level. This Party Of Death [a la Card. Burke] has not only promoted abortion and tax money payment for abortion, but it is the main purveyor or RETA – racial eugenic targeted abortion. Since Roe, tens of millions dead, but over 55% are minority babies – and it is the Democrats/Deathocrats who have made this national policy. Over 17,000,000 less Black voters; over 12,000,000 less Hispanic voters – this kind of holocaust numbers are no accident. at site: http://www.sinvotedemocrat.com, Check out my Virtuous Citizenship 2014. And this destruction of the family is not lost on Hispanic Americans who love family. The Democrat may be able to hold a goodly number of priests and bishiops in lock step, but the sensus fidelium is beginning to relfect the truth. Guy McClung, San Antonio

  • I agree with you both. I was just warning about pro-abort republicans. We have to be careful of individuals as well as party. Especially at primary time.

  • You’re warning is well said, Anzlyne. People should review the stance of candidates on the issues. Here is a list of Presidential candidates and their position on abortion. Again, most Democrats are pro-death and most Republicans are pro-life:
    .
    http://www.ontheissues.org/abortion.htm

  • We, a small group at the nursing home, recite the Holy Rosary on Tuesdays.
    Our intention was for St. Patrick to drive the snakes out of those who seek public service positions in 2016.

    Then this reading came to light.

    John xiv 16,17 ; “And I shall ask the Father, and he shall give you another Paraclete, that he may abide with you forever. The Spirit of truth, whom ( the world cannot receive,) because it seeth him not, nor knoweth him: but you shall know him: because he shall abide with you: and shall be in you.”

    So it’s the complete blindness of the world that knows not the truth, hence the disrespect for human life. You, the ones that abide in truth, must continue to pray fast and offer yourselves as examples of truth so the blind may come to see the truth for themselves.

    Pray for the great conversion. Vote as sons and daughters of God. Lead the blind.

  • Describing Democrat-voting Catholics is a complicated issue.
    Catholic immigrants in the late 19th and early 20th centuries became faithful Democrats. They lived on the East Coast between Boston and Baltimore and in a “belt” that stretched from Buffalo to Cleveland, Detroit, Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Louis, Cincinnati and Pittsburgh. They were Irish, Italians, Germans and from Slavic parts of Europe that were carved up among Lutheran Prussia, the Austro-Hungarian Empire and Russia.

    As the Republican Party of the day enacted Blaine Amendments in state after state and wanted immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe shut off, the immigrants of the day saw the GOP as someone who hated them.

    This Democrat Party loyalty passed from generation to generation. Today there are countless lapsed East Coast and Rust Belt Catholics in name only who rarely or never go to Mass but hold that inherited Democrat Party loyalty as if it were their religion. I can’t tell my 74 year old mother anything about politics as she reverts to what she learned in the Monongahela Valley in the 1940s and 1950s.

    Ted Kennedy, more than any other Democrat, was responsible for the Democrats being the abortionist party and he found clergy in Massachusetts who gave him cover for it. You can look it up.

    The USCCB has NEVER taken up the battle to end abortion with the Democrat PARTY. The Dems throw them a few bucks to fund Catholic Charities and this keeps the USCCB quiet.

    Latino Catholics do what most immigrant groups do – gravitate to the Donkey Party. They are usually poor and the Donkeys are right there to give ’em what they want in exchange for votes. The same principle works for the Donkeys and blacks.

    Both American parties have had their disgraceful bunch but the Donkeys have had far more of them. The Donkeys can take their abortion, their homosexuality, their atheism, their class warfare and their suck-up attitudes to Islamic terrorism, Communists and human rights abusers and shove it. I consider the Donkeys not to be a political party in this day and age but organized crime. They rig elections. Their judges overturn elections and make their own laws. Their presidents (as of late) have no regard for the Constitution or middle class taxpayers. Going back 70+ years, FDR was a liar, a habitual adulterer and he sold Poland down the river to placate Stalin. JFK was another who couldn’t keep it in his pants and allowed Castro to consolidate power in Cuba.

    I don’t like Republicans but the Donkeys make me sick.

  • Clinton- I much agree about defining terms being a very important first step. When they say “Catholic,” most people hear it as “people who are observant and practicing,” but when someone is asked, it’s more often “well, my parents are Catholic and when we visited grandma when I was a kid we ate tuna casserole on Friday.”
    When even the observant are offered such sadly lacking teaching– have I complained lately about total strangers in Church asking me when I’ll get sterilized? And not when the kids have been obnoxious?– it’s hardly surprising that those who are more of the world put more focus on the world.
    The Dem’s problem is, they keep picking an smaller and smaller area, and alienating their whole “nice” specialization. (Which means that if they attack someone, they make sure to attack their reputation, too.)

  • @Eric; “Blacks and unmarried women might disagree with you. ”

    Catholics are the largest single group in the Democratic Party. Their votes for Obama were twice his margin of victory. “Blacks and unmarried woman” are not on record as saying they believe God is the giver of life; nor are they praying the Our Father standing in front of Jesus in the Holy Eucharist during Mass, praying the only prayer Jesus ever taught us in which we pray for “God’s will be done on earth….” Is it God’s will that he creates life for it to be aborted? Catholic Democrats are the only group in the Democratic Party that professes to believe in God as the creator of life and prays for his “will to be done on earth” in contradiction to what the Democratic party believes and acts on keeping abortion-on-demand the law-of-the-land.” Therefore, Catholics give the Democratic Party the power to keep abortion legal. Those Catholics, including the clergy will find themselves being told to stand on the left side of Jesus along with all the other “goats” when he returns to judge “the nations.”

  • Catholics do not equal “Catholic Democrats” Obama’s margin among Catholics in ’08 was +9%, 2 points greater than amongst the general population. In ’12 it was +2%, 2 points less than amongst the general population, according to Wikipedia

    According to the same source, Obama’s margin over Romney among unmarried women was 36 points, and among blacks, 87 points. Women were 53% of the electorate, blacks 13%, Catholics 25%.

    I’m still going to agree with Bottum conclusion that there is no longer a voting block that is per se Catholic.

    I’d love to be able to drill down into those exit polls, and find out how the Catholic vote breaks down along racial/ethinic lines, as well as by income and geographic region, but I haven’t done any work along those lines since the Clinton administration (first term).

  • from another comment — >”Catholic voters are the only reason Obama was elected twice.” —

    My comment –> Remember it was Non-White Catholic voters who voted for him. You’ve got to wonder why the hierarchy and the gov’t. is so anti-white Catholic. For some both groups believe the illegal alien is the future of the church and the nation. However the Non-White Catholic voting patterns seem to indicate that the Non-White Catholics may be voting to abort and gay- marriage themselves [and the Church] out of existence in the USA. That being said, and having been a pro-life voter since I was first eligible to vote in 1980, I’m pretty fed and up disgusted with the Republicans’ lack of performance on moral issues. They seem to do just enough to keep the pro-life vote, while hanging onto their country-club pro-choice membership.

  • Pingback: We Are Synthetic Children & Agree with Dolce & Gabbana
  • supporting legal abortion was the first democrat decision that began to alienate catholics from the party. more recently, the democrat party’s decision to use the federal government and some state governments’ monopoly on the use of force against catholics has caused the alienation to grow.

    the democrat party using secular governments’ monopoly on force to condemn and punish catholics who only want to exercise their freedom of religion is becoming more widely known all the time. it is obvious to those who pay attention, but many Americans, catholic and non-Catholic do not take time to stay aware of societal issues and our governments’ responses to those issues.

    for example, the democrat party’s use of the federal government to try to force its faith, there is no evidence, that artificial contraception is good on catholics is becoming more widely known among catholics. the democrat party’s belief in the goodness of sexual perversion and the use of governmental force to punish catholics who do not have that democratic party belief is becoming more widely known.

    the democrat party’s belief that a child’s right to both a mother and a father is another belief that many catholics reject once they learn of it and how real the democrat’s attempt to attack innocent children is.

    finally, the democrat party’s belief that the unique relationship between men and women is prohibited by the law from being recognized by secular government’s will add to the exodus from the democrat party of everyone who is rational and strong.

  • The Left has no substance or Truth upon which to base one’s life and civil rights.

Franky Schaeffer: The Catholics Are Coming! The Catholics Are Coming!

Wednesday, July 2, AD 2014

 

 

You can always tell when the left loses a big one in this country because the more loosely wired of their cadre unleash the most amusing rants.  In the wake of  the Hobby Lobby decision, Franky Schaeffer knows who to blame for the 5-4 win for religion:  Catholics!

 

 

Pope Francis must have vomited when he heard the Hobby Lobby news. Nothing could undo the good he has recently done the Church’s image more than yet another case of anti-woman lashing out by a cabal or far right Roman Catholic activists– this time in the Supreme Court.

Alarmed by the Supreme Court pandering to the extreme religious right in the Hobby Lobby case, the new pope might ask “Who is responsible for this?” The answer is: Many people. However two people are the real instigators: the late evangelical far right activist, Charles Colson, and Roman Catholic far right ideologue and anti-gay activist, Princeton Professor Robert George. Their tool has been Justice Antonin Scalia the other Roman Catholic members of the Court.

George is a close friend and co-conspirator with fellow ultra-conservative far right Roman Catholic ideologues including with Scalia who became the ringleader of the GOP’s Court-driven Hobby Lobby lunge into theocratic politics. George is the de facto father of the twinned war against gays and war against women. Scalia is his follower and close friend. And George has the support of the U.S. Roman Catholic bishops, the Mormon leadership and the most conservative of the evangelical leaders. Charles Colson was George’s close confident. Together they hatched the plan that in the end (and after Colson died) became the Hobby Lobby case.

Way back when, the late Charles “Chuck” Colson teamed up with George of to launch the dirty tricks campaign to brand President Obama as “anti-religious.” They decided to use the issue of contraception as the hinge to turn people against him.

Continue reading...

15 Responses to Franky Schaeffer: The Catholics Are Coming! The Catholics Are Coming!

  • I do find the description of Kennedy J as a “far-right Roman Catholic activist” rather amusing.

  • What does he call the planet on which he steals oxygen?

  • I have a question. Was Frank(y) abused as a child? I have to wonder about this, because I’ve know a few people who were abused as children, and most of them sounded just like this man. If he was abused, he ought to seek therapy, instead of venting his anger and hate in the public square.

  • Actually I believe the opposite was the problem and he is the classic example of the spoiled, attention seeking brat who never grows up. The best man at his wedding, Os Guiness has some interesting observations regarding him:

    http://www.booksandculture.com/articles/2008/marapr/1.32.html

    “But neglect and guilt are not the deepest explanation. The real truth is that Franky, as he then called himself, was spoiled. He was more like a poster child for Benjamin Spock than the son of “fundamentalist missionaries.” Having been born well after his sisters, and having survived polio as a child, he was rarely challenged, disciplined, or denied. As a result, he grew up a “little Napoleon,” as some of the L’Abri students called him. He would boast that he could twist his parents around his little finger, and time and again he proved it.”

  • I have a question. Was Frank(y) abused as a child?

    Stop that. Most distasteful and gratuitous insult to his father. There are rotten characters in this world. I could have introduced you to a ruin of a woman who spent most of her adult life fornicating with anything that did not have four legs and consuming large quantities of alcohol and street drugs. She was a child of the local patriciate with a pair of congenial (if less than assiduous) parents. There was no abuse, and she was so willful throughout the course of her abbreviated life that it’s doubtful that the deficit of parental discipline and supervision was all that decisive. That life was devoted to spitting on everything her mother valued, and a good deal of what her father did as well.

  • I did not infer from Mr. Dalton’s post that such speculative abuse was in any way associated with his father.

  • The conspiracy goes deeper than even Franky believes. How else do you explain tricking a Democrat controlled Congress and a Democrat President to enact the law the Hobby Lobby case would be decided on twenty years before government mandated “free” contraception was even an issue?

  • Donald, you wrote one word that sums this diatribe well: “demented”

  • Art, I’m sorry you took offense to my question about Frank(y). I wasn’t trying to denigrate his father. I only asked the question because, in my experience, nearly all the people that I’ve known who acted this way were abused as children. Until Don quoted from Os Guiness, I had no idea Franky was overindulged by his parents. Interestingly enough, Paul Johnson, in his book, “Intellectuals”, bring out the fact that several of the subjects of his book were either only child’s or only son’s in a family of sisters. Their parent’s, like Franky’s, made the mistake of letting them have their own way, because of their status of being the only one. BTW, I wonder how his sisters feel about his treatment of his parents?

  • Paul Johnson, in his book, “Intellectuals”, bring out the fact that several of the subjects of his book were either only child’s or only son’s in a family of sisters. Their parent’s, like Franky’s, made the mistake of letting them have their own way, because of their status of being the only one. BTW, I wonder how his sisters feel about his treatment of his parents?

    Willfull only child. Reminds me of Ann Dunham.

    These things are vectors, of course. There are always supplementary and counter-vailing vectors. (My uncle was the only boy in a family of girls and my grand-mother had a great deal invested in him, to her daughters’ occasional consternation. He’s an accomplished and disciplined man who creates well-being around him, rather like his mother).

    A great many of us carry with us baggage that we’d be better off without and the children of accomplished people have some challenges the rest of us do not (see Elliot Spitzer’s explanation of why he chose law and politics as a way of earning a living). There are so many options open to most of us in our time. Very few people make a career of trashing their parents; it’s a reasonable inference that F. Schaffer is one nasty piece of work.

  • Here’s an article with some interesting insights on Franky Schaeffer. http://pearceyreport.com/archives/2007/12/franky_plays_sc_1.php

  • Art Deco wrote, “the children of accomplished people have some challenges the rest of us do not”
    One recalls John Clark’s famous retort to the younger Lord Meadowbank, the son of a very distinguished judge.
    Clark (who once described a witness as “not worth his value in hemp”) was attempting to argue a point of construction and Lord Meadowbank rather peremptorily insisted that “also” and “likewise” were synonymous.
    “Your father was Lord Meadowbank,” reposted Clark, “and your Lordship is Lord Meadowbank;also, but not likewise.”

  • Over-indulgence and failure to discipline is detrimental and could be a form of abuse.

    thanks for the Colson video. I didn’t know anything at all about Frank Schaeffer and the history of the engagement of evangelicals and Catholics.
    We do know the good work of Colson came about as a direct result of his repentence for sinful and illegal behavior…still a hopeful sign that some of today’s social and political leaders could also someday apply their gifts in a positive and wholesome way.

  • “Franky Schaeffer has made a career out of his father. First by trying to follow in his footsteps and second by spitting on his grave.”

    Donald, you may remove this comment because of its crassness, however it is true. IMHO Franky has not only spit in his father’s grave–Franky has defecated on his father’s grave. :-/

Associated Press: Remember That Story About Nuns Stuffing Kids’ Bodies in a Septic Tank? Never Mind.

Saturday, June 21, AD 2014

AssociatedPressAbsolutePropaganda

 

Remember the cock and bull story about the bodies of kids being stuffed into a septic tank by nuns who ran a home for unwed mothers in Tuam, Ireland?  If you do, the Associated Press really wishes you would forget all about it.

 

 

DUBLIN (AP) — In stories published June 3 and June 8 about young children buried in unmarked graves after dying at a former Irish orphanage for the children of unwed mothers, The Associated Press incorrectly reported that the children had not received Roman Catholic baptisms; documents show that many children at the orphanage were baptized. The AP also incorrectly reported that Catholic teaching at the time was to deny baptism and Christian burial to the children of unwed mothers; although that may have occurred in practice at times it was not church teaching. In addition, in the June 3 story, the AP quoted a researcher who said she believed that most of the remains of children who died there were interred in a disused septic tank; the researcher has since clarified that without excavation and forensic analysis it is impossible to know how many sets of remains the tank contains, if any. The June 3 story also contained an incorrect reference to the year that the orphanage opened; it was 1925, not 1926.

Continue reading...

9 Responses to Associated Press: Remember That Story About Nuns Stuffing Kids’ Bodies in a Septic Tank? Never Mind.

  • To review: Ireland exists. Everything else stated in the article is unsubstantiated or proven incorrect. (Although, thinking about it, saying that “Ireland existed in the 1920’s” could be debated. So there were no confirmed facts in the article at all.)

  • A rather churlish correction that does not indicate how they managed to get so many factual matters, and others they neglected to mention, wrong.

    They hired okupiers.

  • No mention that locals knew there was a baby graveyard in a slightly different area, that at least one expert’s response was that it sounded exactly like a specific type of mass grave that was used for re-burial of plague victims found during construction, that they misrepresented what the gal who figured this out SAID…..

    *sigh*

    Not like I expect anything different, but oy.

  • Let us look at the bright side. At least the “reporter” did not suggest the possibility of the nuns first dining on the little babes.

  • At least the “reporter” did not suggest the possibility of the nuns first dining on the little babes.

    That’ll be next time this happens.

  • Does Ireland exist? It looks to me like just another place where atomized individuals are pursuing happiness by any means possible. They will end up as sad and lonely as people anywhere else. The only difference is they will have a brogue.

  • Pingback: Popes Should Resign More Often - BigPulpit.com
  • Is everything the Establishment Media says about the Catholic Church a lie?

    Maybe not, but it’s a good working theory.

  • “A lie gets half way around the world before the truth can get its shoes on.” Journalists are not interested in printing the truth, just sensationalism, who cares if it’s true or not. Them Catholics deserve it.

800 Dead Kids, Irish Catholic Bashing and the Truth

Monday, June 9, AD 2014

 

 

Catholic bashing has become the national sport of Ireland.  Blaming the Brits for every ill that has ever afflicted Ireland has become passé, and in the former land of saints and scholars the Church is the whipping boy du jour.  This of course suits the politicians who lead Ireland, eager to transform it into a carbon copy of every other European state with divorce, contraception and abortion ever available and with atheism as the de facto state religion.  Irish leftism, always of the most infantile variety, has eagerly joined in, along with academia and entertainment.  The attitude of the Church in Ireland has been, by and large, “Please sir, may I have another!” with most priests and prelates seeming to desire to become a Catholic Lite Church that will not utter a word troubling to their new lords and mistresses, the chattering classes in government and out.

Realizing this, I turned a jaundiced eye to endless stories about nuns supposedly casting the bodies of  some 800 children into a septic tank at a home for unwed mothers in Tuam, County Galway, between 1925-1961.

Go here to Salon to see a prime example of the Catholic bashing way the story was played.

Besides the anti-Catholic hysteria, the thing that struck me about the stories was the sheer ignorance displayed:  ignorance of the death rate of children in Ireland in pre-antibiotic days, ignorance that homes for unwed mothers run by religious orders were often used for caring for kids with mortal illnesses, ignorance as to the difficulties involved in  using a septic tank to hold even a small number of bodies, let alone 800.

Well, the truth is starting to come out.  Ironically it is from the local historian Catherine Corless, who was cited in all the stories for bringing this to light, but apparently wasn’t listened to very carefully by a media eager to hear what they wished to hear:

What has upset, confused and dismayed her in recent days is the speculative nature of much of the reporting around the story, particularly about what happened to the children after they died. “I never used that word ‘dumped’,” she says again, with distress. “I just wanted those children to be remembered and for their names to go up on a plaque. That was why I did this project, and now it has taken [on] a life of its own.”

In 2012 Corless published an article entitled “The Home” in the annual Journal of the Old Tuam Society. By then she had discovered that the 796 children had died while at St Mary’s, although she did not yet have all of their death certificates.

She also discovered that there were no burial records for the children and that they had not been interred in any of the local public cemeteries. In her article she concludes that many of the children were buried in an unofficial graveyard at the rear of the former home. This small grassy space has been attended for decades by local people, who have planted roses and other flowers there, and put up a grotto in one corner.

Continue reading...

41 Responses to 800 Dead Kids, Irish Catholic Bashing and the Truth

  • Kipling, “If”:
    “[…]
    If you can bear to hear the truth you’ve spoken
    Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
    […]”

    My people camne here before the CIvil War.

    Coincidence: My sister and I were discussing how Elizabethan England, immediately prior to the first Virginia colonization (1609?), tried to use Ireland as a colony. That set off wars led by The Fitzgeralds of Munster and Red Hugh O’Neal (the Red Hand) and the O’Dnnells (O’Donnell Abou!) of Ulster. The wars ended in utter defeat at Kinsale (the Saxons say an Irishman betrayed the plan for a bottle of booze), and the infamous “Flight of the Earls.” So, around 1600, through mass murders, rapine, and exile Ireland was bereft of many of its elites.

    Then, for centuries, especially at the time of the Famine, many of the best-and-brightest Irish emigrated to America, Australia (many forced), Canada, etc.

    It is no wonder Irish dolts outnumber . . .

  • The AP story on this insisted the babies had been ‘denied baptism’. What Glenn Reynolds says applies here: the layers of editors and fact checkers amount to squat.

  • Thank you for this, Donald McClarey.
    .
    “My mind is made up. Do not bother me with facts.”

  • Here is a quote from the Caroline Farrow blog: “Other interesting facts to have emerged are that the Mother Superior was a member of the NSPCC and that the ratepayers repeatedly talked about the unacceptable cost of the ‘misfortunates’. ‘I want the public to know what the illegitimate children are costing the ratepayers of Galway’ said one report in 1938.”

    Here again we see the same issue as we did in the native schools in Canada: the Church now has to pay for the sins of the state.

  • T Shaw

    An important element in the Ulster Plantations was King James VI & I’s desire to deal with the Scottish Border families.

    Until the union of the Crowns in 1603 with James’s accession, these had been allowed to levy mails and duties in the Border Counties of Berwick, Roxburgh and Dumfries as recompense for protecting the lieges against “the thieves and broken men of England.” His Majesty decided, now that their services were no longer required, to reward them for their past loyalty with grants of land in County Fermanagh.

    Even today, names like, Armstrong, Beattie, Bell, Elliot, Heron, Hume, Rutledge, and Turnbull can be found all over the North of Ireland

    Neil Armstrong, by-the-by was descended from the Armstrongs of Langholm. Ballads are still sung of William Armstrong of Kinmont or Kinmont Willie. It is said that his wife once let him know she was in need of housekeeping by sending a covered dish to the table. When he raised the cover, he found it contained his spurs.

  • Donald, you’ve confirmed my suspicions about this story. My first thought was that back then child mortality rates were higher than today, with many children dying before adulthood. They likely found a graveyard and spun a sinister story around it. Being an insurance dude, I love actuarial tables. Several Irish mortality tables can be found here: https://web.actuaries.ie/sites/default/files/event/2011/08/111010%20Irish%20Mortality%20Trends%20in%2020th%20Century.pdf

    On page 9 there is a table for male mortality. If you add the infant rate and the 1-14 year old rate, it is an astounding 25% in 1901, and still at 20% in 1926. This is huge. When you look at the many years that these places were in operation, and the number of people they served, it would be surprising if you did NOT find this number of people buried there.

    I’ve seen other articles that try to extend the supposed conspiracy even further. But the same issues exist. Child mortality was huge back then.

  • As the 1995 film critic in Commonweal magazine put it, this is just another example of the revenge of the present against the past for not being the present.

  • Armstrong, Beattie, Bell, Elliot, Heron, Hume, Rutledge, and Turnbull can be found all over the North of Ireland

    You can find Armstrong and Rutledge all over East Tennessee as well. Being names “William Armstrong” in Tennessee ca. 1860 was rather like being named “Michael Smith” today. Makes genealogy a challenge.

  • I’m with Mary: thanks for posting this, Don. I haven’t read anything about the story because I could tell it would turn my stomach, but I’m glad I read this.

  • Good information. Thank you, Donald.

  • Pingback: Lift Ban on Eastern Catholic Married Priests -
  • Many thanks for this clarification which was indeed needed.

  • I spent a lot of time in Ireland back in the late 70’s and 80’s. I still have friends there and it what struck me most even as a 20 year old was the liberal mush most of them spewed out and a growing derision of the Church and their faith. Their politics followed suit, hate Reagan, love Clinton and we all know they quickly claimed O’bama as one of their own. They welcome the biggest Mosque in the world while ushering out Christian morality. Just another fallen nation in what was once called Christendom.

  • The canary in the Irish coal mine keeled over dead in 1990 when Mary Robinson was elected President of Ireland. That would be the rough equivalent of Sarah Weddington being elected to a high ceremonial office in this country.

  • “Make careful note of the names of the reporters who wrote these stories. Even the most minimal journalistic standards were not applied. Think about it. A local historian tells you that she thinks 800 kids were buried in a tiny plot. The plot is far too small for 800 kids. All the proof she has is that 800 death certificates. You would ask “how do you know they are all buried in this one tiny plot?” Answer: she does not know. She just thinks they must have been. For any serious journalist, red flags would go up immediately. So the most the story can say is is “800 children may be buried in tiny plot”. Yet virtually ever story said that “800 children were found buried in a sewerpit.
    This is not a simple overlook. Any reporter, any editor would have known full well that the stories that were published were not backed up by the facts.
    We are left with one incontrovertable conclusion: the media is waging a war against Catholics, and they will stop at nothing. They will accuse CAtholics, at the drop of a hat, of the most foul deeds they can think of.
    I keep thinking of similar attempts to drum up hate in the past – the thing that comes closest is Josef Goebbels and his attempt to demonize Jews in the 1930’s. It is the only thing that comes close – look at the foul nature of the media narrative in each of these cases – Tuam: “dead babies, nuns, bodies dumped in sewer”. Look at the Magdalen Laundries false narrative – “Nuns, poor girls, sexually abused them, worked them to death, beat them, etc, held as slaves” All of it completely false, as determined by the McAleese report. Look at Philomena – “forcing women to give up babies, stolen babies, sold for profit.”
    Look at the media’s attempt in the Tuam stories to say that Catholic doctrine was responsible – not just the nuns.
    All of it is not far from the Eternal Jew – showing Jews as rats, etc. The parallels are very close

  • Kevin

    In the West of Scotland, people of Irish descent, in describing themselves as “Catholic,” often enough do so to identify with a particular community, namely, the Republican community in the North of Ireland. They tend to use “Protestant” and “Orange” interchangeably, just as the opposing camp uses “Catholic” and “Fenian” as synonyms. It has little or nothing to do with belief or observance, in either case.

    I once heard a footballer, a Scottish Protestant, who had been signed by Celtic FC described as a “mercenary for the Free State.”

    I fancy that, in Ireland itself, “Catholic” and “Protestant” were often little more than labels or markers for Nationalist or Unionist.

  • To say that children’s bodies were found inside a septic tank, demonstrates an apparent lack of knowledge concerning the configuration of a septic tank. To say the nuns were guilty of gross abuse of children, demonstrates an apparent lack of knowledge concerning the configuration of the truth.

  • I am a Dubliner living in the US for the last 18 years .
    I attended these one of these so called schools for troubled kids ,dumped there by their parents .
    I received a great education and learned discipline and hard work .

    The Irish times article ,which I read over the weekend ,shows incredible light this hyped story .The historian heard of two wags in a Pub in Tuam who were playing a game on this so called burial fields in the 70’s and were recalling how they opened a cover of a sewage drain and saw skulls .When questioned they confirm there may have been a few ,and certainly not Hundreds .

    This plot of land was once a workhouse and I would ask anyone who is not familiar with the term to Google it .Simply put ,they were the Auschwitz’s of the 19 century and would therefore have had thousands of nearby graves and skulls …not caused by Nuns or Priests.

    Fair play to the Irish Times for running the facts and lets see if the other naysayers follow suit

  • The catholic church as a whole has an awful lot to answer for and we are only getting to the bottom of it now they ruled with an iron fist people to scared to speak out and now that we do we are all telling lies I remember growing up in the seventies in Dublin seeing this organization at its finest and the people they chose to have working for them some very weird disturbing and absolute dangerous characters some still alive today both male and female so when I see articles like this about catholic bashing in the media it compels me to speak I’m a catholic not practicing these days we are not afraid or will hide anymore so get used to it and I would venture to say this and many other stories are only the tip of the iceberg the evil that went on is hard to comprehend so people need to know the truth the catholic church is not clean and never will be but you are entitled to your opinion whether right or wrong

  • Two comments David: run on sentences are a poor way to communicate, and next time you comment try actually responding to the post.

  • david: Whatever you do, stay on your side of the pond! We have a large surplus of wrathful, misinformed people here.

  • Mr mc clarey I take yiur point about my convoluted sentences and running sentences, but my my point is about the catholic bashing you talk of in media. I have read the article and listened to your argument or point of misinformation and the media trumping up this story to sensationalize it’s headlines but on the other hand do we not deserve an explanation to these heinous acts? I might not be well educated but I know when something is very wrong and the catholic church and the religious orders have some explaining as for you. T Shaw what the hell are you on about this side of the pond if this is suppose to reference the fact I live in Ireland and you live in where? If it’s the states then how the hell csn you comment in something you know nothing about being hundreds of thousands of miles away and by the way our minister for children has announced today a full scale inquiry into the religious orders and institutions so I’d say most of your opinions are going to look good when the truth is outed right or wrong!!!!!!!

  • David, unless you are James Joyce punctuation is always a good idea. The whole point is that there were no heinous acts, merely heinous anti-Catholic bigotry that turned a nothing local story into a world wide episode of Catholic bashing.

  • One cannot dialog with people like David. I personally would like a full scale inquiry into every secularist liberal progressive organization throughout Ireland and in fact in all of Western Europe and North America. I would like it revealed for all the world to see that all the crimes of which David and his ilk accuse the Catholic Church are actually perpetrated by left wing liberal progressive organizations, and the Academia and news media which they control. I would like their Satanic evil exposed to the light of day, and see them running like the gutless, worthless cowards in iniquity that they are.

    It is the Church which held the light of civilization, and to the extent that that light is diminished is the extent of the fall of Western society. No other organization has done more to help children and their spouseless mothers than the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, and this has been true since Romans used to abandon their newly born on hill tops two millennia ago. It is a contemptible and despicable lie from the bowels of hell to assert otherwise. This latest fabricated scandal only serves to take the public’s eyes off the godless immoral filth perpetrated by the very ones who are accusing the Church of infanticide. Imagine that those accuse the Church in this fictional event are the very same people who believe that it is a woman’s right to murder her unborn baby! The irony of it all! The blatant hypocrisy is unfathomable!

    Sorry, folks, but I just had to vent my spleen. I despise all that people like David support. People in the Church have sinned – yes, that is true. And godless secularists murder unborn babies by the millions per year.

    Mors Democratiae Atheismoque! Vive Christe Rex! Vive Una Sacra Catholica et Apostolica Ecclessia!

  • I am again reminded that the Cloaca Maxima was found littered with the bones of infants. Infanticide was common in pagan Rome, banished in Christendom, and common again in a formerly civilized world. That, unlike the calumny of the Irish nuns, is a historical fact.

  • David …We have both been exposed to the good and the bad side of the Church .I went to a Christian Brothers boarding school in Dublin in the late 60’s where the discipline was harsh and meted out at an instant .Equally ,at least 80% of the brothers were decent men in a very harsh environment . To paint them all in the manner in which you have is most unfair and inaccurate .An entire institution cannot be judged by the actions of a few . The Church is a large target for unfair criticism and, as in the movie Philomena ,the factual and historical inaccuracies are never presented after the fact, so the already poisoned minds of ex-Catholics and Catholic detractors only wish to promulgate the lies .

    Finally ,David ,I would ask you to read the Irish Times article published on Sat ..it speaks volumes and make a mockery of the original hysterical hyberbole condemning the Nuns for the burial of the so called 800 little infants

  • With David appearing the comments I guess it’s time to bring out this old post.

    http://pjmedia.com/blog/tips-for-not-appearing-crazy-on-the-internet/

  • “…unless you are James Joyce punctuation is always a good idea.”

    Actually, it would have been a good idea for him also.

  • I am of complete Irish descent. One quarter of my ancestors came to America via New York in the 1840’s-I even have a member of the family who fought for the Union in the Civil War. The other three quarters came over a bit later, but all grandparents were American born. we had memories and traditions and stories passed down from generation to generation concerning how the English treated the Irish, taking our language away and trying to take our religion as well. We all had a certain image of Ireland.

    Then I went over to Ireland for an extended vacation. Of course, the Ireland of thatched roof houses etc had all but completely vanished. What I did find however was an extremely class structured society which not only did the Church fit into but seemed to promote at every turn. I found the diocesan clergy particularly arrogant to such an extent that the worst American clericalist could not hold a candle to what I witnessed. Because of the all but fusion between the state and church in Ireland, I was witnessing a seething cauldron about to boil over.

    Before going on I need to remind people that I believe in and uphold the Church’s teaching on life, marriage between man and woman that i indissoluble, the meaning of conjugal charity as love giving and life giving, to name a few foundational teachings which the West finds unacceptable. However, what I saw in Ireland in the 1970’s was unhealthy and ultimately harmful for the Church as well as the People of Ireland.

    This latest series of articles is, as you say, Donald, anti-Catholic. It is. That seething cauldron I witnessed in the 1970’s has boiled over and continues to boil over. There is a wild cultural revolution taking place in Ireland and in the Irish Church. Some of this change was/is necessary-such as the sexual abuse scandals have brought out both here and in Ireland. However, I don’t think we as Americans, and especially of Irish descent, can really grasp what is going on in Ireland as we speak. These forces are attempting to force a people totally class and hierarchically structured into a Western dysutopian society that has swept all that predates 2000 away. Further, certain forces have entered into the Irish Church which even question the Catechism as ‘outdated’ and pushed on to the Church by the Curia (neither being the case).

    As a son of Erin, I mourn the revolution taking place in the homeland of my ancestors.

  • What I did find however was an extremely class structured society which not only did the Church fit into but seemed to promote at every turn. I found the diocesan clergy particularly arrogant to such an extent that the worst American clericalist could not hold a candle to what I witnessed. Because of the all but fusion between the state and church in Ireland, I was witnessing a seething cauldron about to boil over.

    1. Was the frequency of inter-generational upward and downward mobility lower or higher than that in Britain or in the United States?

    2. Ever lived in a college town? If you have, did you know any ordinary resident who was in the circle of friends of a local faculty member? How often do you think this happens?

    3. Someone once said that snobbery is the inevitable byproduct of efforts to maintain standards. A deficit of snobbery can be a good thing – or indicative of a bad thing.

  • “2. Ever lived in a college town? If you have, did you know any ordinary resident who was in the circle of friends of a local faculty member? How often do you think this happens?” We couldn’t afford to live in the town but many years ago I commuted to my job at the college. I recall that non-faculty employees were known as emmets by their betters. Nothing is new under the sun.

  • I recall that non-faculty employees were known as emmets by their betters. Nothing is new under the sun.

    Never encountered anything that blatant, just a failure to connect beyond minor pleasantries. The boundaries between the faculty spouse and others on both sides was more porous, as it was between townie professionals and the faculty. Still, I think you’d find the local physicians did not have faculty friends either, by and large, and certainly the local merchants did not. You also remarked that faculty tended to behave according to status markers without regard to venue. There were always a few exceptions, of course, and general situational exceptions. You could always hitch a ride. If you’re riding, your the client and he’s the patron, so its all good.

    That’s the college town life. My experience is that faculty in metropolitan environments have a more variegated circle of friends and are less status driven.

  • I know of no country where the social divide between the upper and middle class is as sharp as in Ireland.

    I know of no country where the social divide between the upper and middle class is as sharp as in Ireland.

    The Irish upper class educates its children in English boarding schools, serves in English regiments (notably the Irish Guards and the Household Cavalry) practices at the English Bar (Gray’s Inn is full of Irish chambers) is baptised, married and buried by the Church of Ireland and provides, perhaps, half its clergy. They live, for the most part, in genteel poverty, but still manage to keep decent stables and to pay their country member’s subscriptions to their London clubs. One meets them on the hunting field, where they display a suicidal courage,
    http://www.berkeleystudio.co.uk/acatalog/info_MH004.html
    at point-to-points and country race-meetings. They drink claret.

  • I think you mean ‘cultural divide’, MPS, and I have a suspicion that when Botolph was referring to Catholic clergy promoting status hierarchies in Ireland he had in mind something different than the tastes of Ireland’s genteel Anglican minority.

  • Art Deco

    The Ascendency, albeit a small minority, has always had a quite disproportionate influence in the universities, publishing and the press and have long exercised an anti-clerical and secularising influence on the classes immediately below them, the wealthy and the higher bureaucracy, as well as on the Freemasons, with whom they are largely identified.

    Apart from the Ascendency, Ireland does not have an upper class.

  • Apart from the Ascendency, Ireland does not have an upper class.

    Rubbish. Any society more complicated than an agricultural village will have a stratum of people with contextually large assets and a stratum of influentials as well as many people in both categories. Sweden is noted for it’s fairly leveled-in income distribution but has immensely unequal asset distribution including one fabulously wealthy family which controls a double-digit share of Sweden’s private assets. There’s an Irish upper class. The different fractions of it may not talk to each other much, but it’s there.

  • Art Deco

    Sweden does indeed have an upper class, divided into the titled and untitled nobility, this last, the “obetitlad adel” corresponding to the Gentry (’squires, lairds and Chieftans) in the British Isles. The nobility is further divided into those families that were mambers of the House of Nobility (Riddarhuset) and the “unintroduced nobility,” or foreign noble families resident in Sweden. They are included in the “Kalender över Ointroducerad adels förening” published annually since 1935. Swedish law protects both names and arms from unauthorised assumption.

    In Scotland, the Lyon Court has matriculated the arms of several Swedish families, who have married Scots. (In Scotland, it is an offence to use arms without the holder registering (matriculating) them with Lord Lyon.)

    The Republic of Ireland, too, maintains an Office of the Chief Herald of Ireland and Northern Ireland comes under the jurisdiction of Norroy & Ulster King of Arms, a member of the English College of Arms.

  • MPS, I think you’re somewhat lost in the distinction between ‘order’ and ‘class’. We’ve no orders in my home town, just senior corporation executives, the top rasher at the local hospitals and colleges, the partners at the notable firms, a latent (or actual) rentier element (who are often on the board of this or that eleemosynary), and a few politicians (few of whom are patrician in spirit). There are sports clubs and social clubs which house the corporate types, the lawyers, and the old money (though I suspect their membership trends old now). At one time, the clubs and social circles were ethnically fissured, old stock and Irish Catholic over here, Jews and Italians over there. I suspect that’s less noticeable now, but people’s associations are still not random in that respect.

  • Cannot for get the real estate business. Developers and even brokers are often quite wealthy, and they keep in touch with the politicians.

  • Pingback: Associated Press: Remember That Story About Nuns Stuffing Kids’ Bodies in a Septic Tank? Never Mind. | The American Catholic

Andrew Cuomo, Father Barron and Alexis de Tocqueville

Wednesday, January 29, AD 2014

Statue of Bigotry

Hattip to cartoonist Michael Ramirez for his brilliant Statue of Bigotry cartoon.  A guest post by commenter John By Any Other Name:

 

 

Father Robert Barron, who no one could credibly call a firebrand, had a post at National Review Online that caught my attention:

“In the course of a radio interview, Governor Andrew Cuomo blithely declared that anyone who is pro-life on the issue of abortion or who is opposed to gay marriage is “not welcome” in his state of New York. Mind you, the governor did not simply say that such people are wrong-headed or misguided; he didn’t say that they should be opposed politically or that good arguments against their position should be mounted; he said they should be actively excluded from civil society!”

The good guv’ner somewhat walked back his comments, trying to spin it that it wasn’t that people who were pro-life, pro-“assault weapons” and “anti-gay” (these were the other two descriptors Cuomo used) weren’t welcome, just that they would have a hard time winning office in the state.  Yet, Father Barron properly captures the evil of this in his observation: “they should be actively excluded from civil society!”
This is precisely what Alexis de Tocqueville was discussing in the below quote.  I stumbled across this one while looking for another quote from Democracy in America.  I confess I haven’t actually read the book, though it’s on my reading list after I finish the Knox translation of the Bible and a few other important books.  Emphasis is mine.

Tyranny in democratic republics does not proceed in the same way, however. It ignores the body and goes straight for the soul. The master no longer says: You will think as I do or die. He says: You are free not to think as I do. You may keep your life, your property, and everything else.  But from this day forth you shall be as a stranger among us. You will retain your civic privileges, but they will be of no use to you. For if you seek the votes of your fellow citizens, they will withhold them, and if you seek only their esteem, they will feign to refuse even that. You will remain among men, but you will forfeit your rights to humanity. When you approach your fellow creatures, they will shun you as one who is impure. And even those who believe in your innocence will abandon you, lest they, too, be shunned in turn. Go in peace, I will not take your life, but the life I leave you with is worse than  death.

Continue reading...

25 Responses to Andrew Cuomo, Father Barron and Alexis de Tocqueville

  • Andy and his father Mario are Catholic – pro-infanticide, pro-sexual perversion Catholics in public! They brag about it! Why aren’t they publicly excommunicated as St. Paul did to the sex pervert in 1st Corinthians chapter 5? Or as Hymenaeus and Alexander were excommunicated in 1st Timothy chapter 1? What is wrong with Cardinal Dolan and Bishop Hubbard? It is one thing to have private sin even sexual, fail but try to do good again. It is another to brag about and extol one’s perversion.

  • Cuomo is a thug who needs to be held responsible.

    NYS is the worst-taxed state in the US, with NJ a close second worst.

    All the libs have are class hate/war, gender, race-baiting, and sexual orientation.

    Your so-called social justice is class war with a thin vaneer of pious-sounding claptrap. (N.B. I stifled myself from typing a more colorful metaphor.)

    First they came for the Jews, and I did nothing . . .

    Do something. That could be desultory, passive resistance or emigration to remnant America.

  • “”You may keep your life, your property, and everything else. But from this day forth you shall be as a stranger among us. You will retain your civic privileges, but they will be of no use to you. For if you seek the votes of your fellow citizens, they will withhold them, and if you seek only their esteem, they will feign to refuse even that. You will remain among men, but you will forfeit your rights to humanity. When you approach your fellow creatures, they will shun you as one who is impure. And even those who believe in your innocence will abandon you, lest they, too, be shunned in turn. Go in peace, I will not take your life, but the life I leave you with is worse than death.””

    This is called white martyrdom. It may be called segregation. It is called taxation without representation. How can Andrew Cuomo represent his constituency, when he refuses to acknowledge their existence and sovereign citizenship, even as they constitute the state?
    Ostracism, also known as exile, and shunning were intended to drive evil from your midst, as called for by Moses and his law. This was mandated to maintain purity, innocence and virginity in the tribes of Israel. Innocence and purity are necessary virtues to deliver Justice. It is the duty of the state to deliver Justice. Therefore, it is the duty of the state to protect and provide for innocence and virginity. Here, Andrew Cuomo drives innocence and virginity away from our midst, making of the people a thoroughly criminal class unable to deliver Justice.
    Andrew Cuomo is an indecent and unjust man who ought to be impeached for not representing his constituency.

  • Paul W Primavera: “Andy and his father Mario are Catholic – pro-infanticide, pro-sexual perversion Catholics in public! They brag about it!”
    Andy and Mario Cuomo are wannabe pro-abortionists, wannabe homosexual sodomists. These are campaigning for the pro-abortion and pro homosexual sodomy vote and disenfranchising, disengaging and discarding their constituents. Pro-abortionists and pro-sodomists have already exiled themselves from the halls of Justice because vice and lust can never be changed into virtue and love. They have self-excommunicated themselves and probably do not receive Holy Communion. It is up to the Catholic parishioners to make sure that they do not.
    This is the end fruit of embracing: “I am personally opposed to abortion but I cannot impose my morality (or lack thereof) on anyone.” Read: “I do not do abortions and I do not commit sodomy but so, I must impose my vacuum on all of my constituents for the abortion and gay vote” Immorality imposed, constituents disavowed, bigotry enacted.

  • These are campaigning for the pro-abortion and pro homosexual sodomy vote and disenfranchising, disengaging and discarding their constituents.

    Well, if they keep winning elections, then it would seem they are not disenfranchising, disengaging and discarding their constituents, or at least not enough of them to lose office. Cesspools like NY, NJ and the Left Coast will remain what they are until those who feel marginalized “vote with their feet.” Although I would think that, politicians being what they are, the average Joe gets shafted while muckety mucks (who you would think would like to avoid such high-tax places) get back room deals to make it worth their while to stay.

  • There are the motives for the left’s long-running campaigns to control education and chuild-rearing (latest is all day pre-school); seize your guns; tax your income; and confiscate/regulate (how you use) your property.

    Gibbon “Decline and Fall . . . “ paraphrased: “An educated, well-informed populous, possessed of arms, tenacious of property, and collected into constitutional assemblies form the only balance capable of preserving a free constitution against enterprises of an aspiring prince (despotism).”

  • T Shaw is correct. Democracy is the despotism of a simple majority ignorant of principle and intent on voting themselves bread and circuses, thus are Democrats like Mario and Andy Cuomo despots. Only in a Republic does T. Shaw’s educated, well-informed populous, possessed of arms, tenacious of property, and collected into constitutional assemblies exist. Today’s populous of Facebook, reality TV and gay sex promoting Grammy Awards is NOT that populous, but rather a people with whom the likes of Caligula would be most at home.

    I hate Democracy – two wolves and one sheep voting on what is for dinner. I love liberty – a well armed, well educated sheep contesting the vote.

    Democracy – the tail side of the coin whose head is Socialism.

    Liberty – freedom – is always contrary to both Democracy (dictatorship by the majority) and autocracy (dictatorship by an autocrat).

    Democracy – 1st Samuel chapter 8 in action.

  • My father had the great misfortune to work for Mario Cuomo, He thought Mario was an egomaniacal gas-bag, who shamelessly unleashed the powers of his office on anyone (and there were several of these people) who Mario did not like. Mario personally saw to the destruction of an industry that employed thousands of people. It was an industry for which New York State was famous. Mario did not like the people running the industry. So he wrecked it, and put thousands of people out of work, and left huge, rusting, unused buildings on the horizon.
    My father said he had exposure to Andrew the evil spawn. Andrew, “man of the people” that he is, yelled and screamed at a parking lot attendant at a NYS facility, for not recognizing the then 20-something lawyer as the “Governor’s son”. My father said Andrew did this in order to impress the senior NYS officials who were with him at the time. My father was not favorably impressed.
    The Cuomo’s are a bunch of filthy, oppressive, elitist scumbags, on both a political and personal level. I moved out of New York State a long time ago. Although I am generally regarded as “the stupid one” of all my parent’s children, the fact that I got out of New York before that greasy, loudmouthed slimeball Andrew took over gives me an automatic win when I am with my siblings. So I am grateful to the Cuomo clan for that, I suppose.
    Andrew Cuomo is certifiably insane. I have no doubt that he is going to take care of himself, and as he goes down the political toilet to dwell with the Eliot Spitzers and Anthony Wieners of this world, we will all simply pray for a second flush, to somewhat alleviate the stink he left behind.

  • Not that I want to pile on . . .

    But, you won’t see this anywhere in the media.

    A. Cuomo was head of US HUD late in the Clinton maladminsitration.

    I don’t know if he has had all the copies burned, but he misspent tax money to publish a big, glossy magazine type publication touting his vast achievements as US Housing Cappo di Cappi (spelling?).

    He controlled FNMA/FHLMC/GNMA/FHA. He dictated that the mortgage agencies (government sponsored entirprises) that 50% of their trillions of $$$ home loan purchases had to be to “low-to-moderate” income borrowers.

    The rest is history.

    A. Cuomo mightily helped inflate the housing bubble, crash, and the great recession.

  • The majority voting idiots of New York State elected the imbecilic Cuomo, just as the elected his father three times.

    I invite the good, observant Catholic New Yorkers and other pro life New Yorkers of any Christian belief to pack up and get the hell out of Cuomo’s empire. Policies enacted by the NYC majority have made the most of the rest of New York State an economic disaster.

    I dread the day when Philadelphia and its suburbs lord it over the rest of Pennsylvania as NYC and its burbs do to the rest of New York State. Ed $pendell was elected twice as Pennsylvania governor with his power base in Southeastern Pennsylvania and God help us if another Filthy-delphian pol takes the Governor’s Mansion.

  • Andrew Cuomo swore an oath to uphold the Constitution on inauguration day. For Andrew Cuomo to turn around and refuse to represent some of his constituents after swearing an oath to represent all of his constituents and after taking in the citizens’ tax money is more than bigotry, it is malfeasance in office, subject to impeachment.

  • Meanwhile, back in the Land of Lincoln, we have someone who appears to be a lakefront Chicago liberal Democrat in GOP clothing — gazillionaire Bruce Rauner — going all out to buy, I mean win, the Republican primary for governor by flooding the airwaves with campaign commercials and raking in huge campaign donations.

    For reasons that would take all day to explain, I really, REALLY don’t trust this guy and if the general election ends up being Rauner vs. incompetent, bumbling Democratic incumbent Pat Quinn, I refuse to vote for either. His signature issue is reining in state employee unions and abolishing (not just reforming, but abolishing) their pensions (which is a serious issue); never mind the fact that he made a substantial chunk of his fortune off of investing… wait for it… state employee pension funds!

    By the way, Rauner contributed LOTS of money to Ed “Spendell” just a few years ago and he’s a close enough buddy of Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel that their families have taken vacations together. Why he’s running as a Republican, I don’t know, unless he’s trying to make sure that the more socially conservative candidates (there are 3 others, at least 2 of whom are pro-life and pro-2nd Amendment) never get past the primary.

  • “we have someone who appears to be a lakefront Chicago liberal Democrat in GOP clothing — gazillionaire Bruce Rauner”

    You said it Elaine! His wife is a big time pro-abort. Each year she contributes $5,000.00 to Personal Pac, the pro-abort lobbying group in our state led by the fanatically anti-Catholic bigot Terry Cosgrove. Rauner’s ads manage to say precisely nothing. He is a perfect example of the one party, the Combine in John Kass’ immortal phrase, that dominate our state and use it as their personal piggy bank.

  • Meanwhile, back in the Land of Lincoln, we have someone who appears to be a lakefront Chicago liberal Democrat in GOP clothing — gazillionaire Bruce Rauner

    One gets the impression that if you all had Carol Mostly Fraud in the governor’s chair you wouldn’t have worse policy but the conduct of public business might be more amusing. Did her fiancee ever turn up or is he still on the lam?

  • Penguin’s Fan: the Mohawk Valley, the Southern Tier, and Western New York have some abiding problems but otherwise the state is in passable condition. Cuomo was returned to office in 1990 because of the state GOP’s self-destructive stupidity, which is an abiding feature of political life in New York. The electorate was so fed up with him by 1994 that they put goodfella George Pataki in office.

    And Cuomo is not an imbecile, the voters are. They could not tolerate David Patterson, who is the only normal human being who has occupied the governor’s chair in the last 30 odd years; he retired in part because his poll numbers were wretched. They’ve spurned a number of class acts over three decades (Jacob Javits, Harry Wilson, and Herbert London to name three) in order to put the likes of Alphonse d’Amato, Charles Schumer, and George Pataki in office.

    As for Cuomo, ‘borderline psychopath’ might come closer to the mark.

  • Believe it or not Art she ran for mayor of Chicago in 2010 coming in fourth. She was evicted from her home in 2012. Mostly Fraud is the living embodiment of contemporary Illinois politics.
    As far as I known Kgosie Matthews is still in the never never realm where so many people who embarrass Democrat pols seem to end up.

    http://www.rollcall.com/issues/49_45/-3374-1.html

  • She was evicted from her home in 2012.

    Well, then, she needs the work.

  • Haven’t we been hearing for years from ‘pro-abortion Catholic politicians’ that they have to represent all of their constituents? Governor Cuomo shows that ‘politically pious dribble’ to be an outright lie

  • In the interests of accuracy, Gov. Cuomo NEVER said that pro-lifers, etc. were “not welcome” or “should be excluded from civil society.” He said, in the context of a discussion of GOP politics in the state of New York, that they “had no place” there, and that “that’s not who New Yorkers are”. These statements are open to different interpretations, the most likely (and the one later confirmed by the governor himself) being that social conservatives “have no place” in the NYGOP because voters won’t vote for them. Which is, as I’ve said before, a sobering enough statement as it is. However, Fr. Barron doesn’t help his credibility by misquoting the guy.

  • (and the one later confirmed by the governor himself)

    Yeah, after he was caught. Cuomo, who is a very nasty piece of work, would put a bounty on the head of pro-lifers if he could.

  • Sorry Elaine, but the logical conclusion of Cuomo’s comments is that pro-lifers are not welcome in New York. Yes, technically the statement was about elected Republicans (or those who hope to be elected Republicans), but if pro-life Republicans are not welcome in the New York state GOP, then logically pro-lifers are without a representative voice, ergo they would be unwelcome in their own state.

  • ‘Tyranny in democratic republics … It ignores the body and goes straight for the soul.’
    Once the souls of ‘Christians’ are overcome, such as that of the lost governor, contagion rages, spreading deadly and insane symptoms of weak and mean character throughout society. The debates over what comprised the so called platform of the D party in the last ‘election’, for example, revealed the weak spot for such as the overcome heads of state to eliminate. Capitulation, apathy, ignorance, and fear keep the diseased overpaid and actively contagious, urging more to sell their souls.

  • Elaine, I submit to you that Fr. Barron wasn’t actually misquoting or taking him out of context. Also, my selection of de Tocqueville’s point about tyranny’s manifestation in a democratic republic is precisely supported by Cuomo’s original statement as well as the “clarification”. Let me line these up (hopefully the HTML works with me…):

    Cuomo: “if they are the extreme conservatives, they have no place in the state of New York. Because that is not who New Yorkers are.”

    Cuomo clarification (per the statement excerpt at Politico): “If you read the transcript, it is clear that the Governor was making the observation that an extreme right candidate cannot win statewide because this is a politically moderate state.”
    http://www.politico.com/story/2014/01/new-york-gop-ed-cox-andrew-cuomo-102436.html#ixzz2r4tibn39

    Father Barron: “he said they should be actively excluded from civil society!”

    de Tocqueville: ” For if you seek the votes of your fellow citizens, they will withhold them, and if you seek only their esteem, they will feign to refuse even that.”

    Personally, I can see how the “clarification” has the veneer of making the statement appear less offensive…but to me, I still hear the hollow ring from the application of public relations spin. Maybe I’m jaded, but that’s why I’m looking to what a host of other more learned folk are saying, including Father Barron.

    First Things chief editor R.R. Reno observed when interviewed by National Catholic Register said this:

    “My predecessor [Father] Richard John Neuhaus has the answer: When orthodoxy is optional, it will eventually be prohibited. Put differently, when moral truths are made optional so as to be ‘inclusive,’ they will eventually be prohibited,” Reno told the Register.
    […]
    “Andrew Cuomo’s remarks are telling,” said First Things’ Reno. “Yes, they were off-the-cuff and shouldn’t be taken as thought out or programmatic. But they reflect a sometimes unconscious liberal intolerance. Everybody is welcome — as long as they’re liberals. I see it as a political expression of the ‘dictatorship of relativism.’”
    http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/the-slippery-slope-of-mario-and-andrew-cuomo-and-abortion/

    In that same article by Joan Frawley Desmond, George Weigel weighed in:

    “Father Neuhaus’s observation about optional orthodoxy becoming banned orthodoxy helps a bit in explaining the slippery slope from Mario Cuomo to Andrew Cuomo. But so does a lot of obviously ineffective catechesis and preaching,” Weigel told the Register.

    “Andrew Cuomo has often talked about the portrait of Thomas More in his office. He doesn’t seem to understand that he’s playing Henry VIII (or at the very least, Thomas Cromwell), not More, in the drama of Albany.”

    And Desmond had linked to Michael Gerson at The Washington (com)Post:

    Cuomo has reached an advanced stage of political polarization: regarding one’s democratic opponents as unfit for democracy. I imagine the feeling will now (in some quarters) be returned. And so the spiral continues — sometimes leftward, sometimes rightward, ever downward.
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/michael-gerson-andrew-cuomo-silences-the-opposition/2014/01/20/68d3af78-8211-11e3-8099-9181471f7aaf_story.html

    Then you have Rev. George W. Rutler over at Crisis Magazine comparing and contrasting Cuomo with Pliny the Younger (who persecuted Christians, contra Candida Moss’ “scholarship”):

    “He [Cuomo] did not threaten to throw anyone to wild beasts, but the tone of the governor of the Empire State was decidedly imperious, and the threat of having to move west of Hudson River might be unsettling to even the most devout Catholics.”
    http://www.crisismagazine.com/2014/governor-pliny-and-governor-cuomo

    I really think that the crux of the quotes, citations, and such is that Cuomo is exhibiting a social intolerance for certain types of thought. As a test, if you were to substitute, say, racism/slavery as the subject of Cuomo’s rant, I daresay virtually everyone here would be onboard with him. The Ku Klux Klan has effectively been marginalized in civil society, and that’s just and proper. But here, the same exercise is being applied to a significant minority of the state (and that same minority in New York represents various majorities elsewhere in the Union). Further, whereas the positions and views that the KKK can be regarded as objectively and morally wrong, the position and views of those, at the least, on the pro-life side are quite the opposite on the yardstick of merit. The point is that since Cuomo is unanchored from any apparent moral ground as a consequence of moral relativism, he can’t make any distinction between the two. Thus, the only consistent reaction he, like other progressives can take, is the superficial equivalence of treating pro-lifers, pro-Second Amendment types, and traditional marriage supporters.
    So I close with a final observation on James Madison from Gerson’s comments:

    While James Madison would not be surprised, he would not approve. “In all cases where a majority are united by a common interest or passion,” he warned, “the rights of the minority are in danger.” A majority, he argued, can easily become a “faction,” seeking “illicit advantage.” This is dangerous in a democracy, not only because the rights of individuals are important but also because diversity of opinion balances factions against each other. Madison hoped that U.S. leaders would help check the passions of factions rather than inciting them for political advantage, so that “reason, justice and truth can regain their authority over the public mind.”

  • Editing fail:
    Thus, the only consistent reaction he, like other progressives can take, is the superficial equivalence of treating pro-lifers, pro-Second Amendment types, and traditional marriage supporters with legitimately wrong groups that should be excluded from civil society. Let me also add another de Tocqueville quote that I think is relevant here:

    Most religions are only general, simple, and practical means of teaching men the doctrine of the immortality of the soul. That is the greatest benefit that a democratic people derives from its belief, and hence belief is more necessary to such a people than to all others. When, therefore, any religion has struck its roots deep into a democracy, beware lest you disturb them; but rather watch it carefully, as the most precious bequest of aristocratic ages.
    http://www.gutenberg.org/files/816/816-h/816-h.htm#link2HCH0036

    This appears to be the source of the quote “America is great because she is good, and if America ever ceases to be good, America will cease to be great”, frequently mis-attributed to de Tocqueville…which, while he didn’t write that, it still has the ring of truth to it.

  • “”Cuomo: “if they are the extreme conservatives, they have no place in the state of New York. Because that is not who New Yorkers are.””
    Cuomo does not get to say who New Yorkers are. That is like telling a woman to get gender reassignment, or a man to get sterilized.

Those Christers Had It Coming

Thursday, October 3, AD 2013

National Catholic Reporter

 

 

Now that Dale Price is back to blogging at Dyspeptic Mutterings, he makes my job so much easier.  I was going to comment on The National Catholic Reporter’s new found respect for the Taliban in the wake of the suicide bombing of All Saints’ Church in Peshawar, Pakistan, but how could I top this?:

 

 

Shorter Maureen Fielder: Krystallnacht was not anti-Jewish, it was anti-Versailles Treaty.

He first characterized the bombing as a “horrific act” without a shred of justification. He praised the Christian community in Pakistan, now more fearful than ever, and noted that he himself was educated by Catholic priests and later by Presbyterians. He counts many Christians as friends.
So I asked him point-blank, “Was this bombing an act of religious discrimination?” Was it religiously motivated? Without hesitation, he said, “No.” He pointed to a statement from the Taliban themselves saying it was a response to the United States’ frequent and continuing drone attacks in the tribal areas of Pakistan. He said the Pakistani government’s protests to the United States have been unable to stop the drones, so the frontier tribes have resorted to their ancient “eye for an eye” response to perceived injustice.

Nice to See Dr. Ahmed has “many” Christians as friends.
Much like the white bigot who’s “friends with a black guy.”
Yeah, despicable.
And of a piece with freshly-minted chickenhawk Michael Sean Winters’ airy dismissal of concern about the fate of Syria’s Christians, should Assad fall.
Say what you will about the Reporter, they always manage to find a new low. And if Catholics ever go into ghettos, you can guess from whose ranks the authorities will recruit the Order Police from.

OK, upon further reflection, it’s not that worrisome.
Continue reading...

Bishop Paprocki on Anti-Catholic Bigotry

Monday, September 9, AD 2013

12 Responses to Bishop Paprocki on Anti-Catholic Bigotry

  • Nietzsche was absolutely right in his criticism of George Eliot:

    “They are rid of the Christian God and now believe all the more firmly that they must cling to Christian morality. That is an English consistency; we do not wish to hold it against little moralistic females à la Eliot. In England one must rehabilitate oneself after every little emancipation from theology by showing in a veritably awe-inspiring manner what a moral fanatic one is. That is the penance they pay there.

    We others hold otherwise. When one gives up the Christian faith, one pulls the right to Christian morality out from under one’s feet. This morality is by no means self-evident: this point has to be exhibited again and again, despite the English flatheads. Christianity is a system, a whole view of things thought out together. By breaking one main concept out of it, the faith in God, one breaks the whole: nothing necessary remains in one’s hands. Christianity presupposes that man does not know, cannot know, what is good for him, what evil: he believes in God, who alone knows it. Christian morality is a command; its origin is transcendent; it is beyond all criticism, all right to criticism; it has truth only if God is the truth–it stands and falls with faith in God.”

    Pascal had pointed out the same truth two centuries earlier; “Thus, without Scripture, which has only Jesus Christ for its object, we know nothing and see only obscurity and confusion in God’s nature and ours.”

  • I think the Bishop also understands that some of the worst anti-Catholic bigots are within the Church, cheering on the secular authorities in their actions against the Church:

    More precisely, they have the same list of anointed and benighted as the secular culture and their participation in Catholic discussions is in search of opportunities to condescend to people. (The two most obvious examples do not post here much anymore).

  • I think that the motivations for Catholic persecution are the same today as they were under Nero, Caligula, Lenin, Hitler, et al.

    The Church was the first and only catholic/universal religion. The innumerable pagan religions were national or tribal (today Islamic pan-Arabism) and all easily coexised with other pagan superstitions; or could be dealt with piecemeal. No pagan mytholgy posed a challenge/threat to the empire/state.

    Christianity places one universal, divine (teaching) authority over all and everyone and everything. It was a threat to the liberal state and its horrid plans.

    Same thing today. The Church is the only universal institution standing in opposition to these rats and their dastardly agendae.

    The all-devouring state cannot countenance a serious competitor.

  • I have a theological question. I can’t say what in the interview got me thinking about this; it’s something that’s been on my mind a lot lately. There’s a Catholic principle that grace builds on nature. You don’t find this concept in Protestantism; in fact, Calvinism teaches the opposite, and there’s quite a bit of Calvinism in the American Evangelical movement. When we identify ourselves as Christians in the US, we carry the baggage of Protestant errors. That hurts us in discussions about things like natural law.

    Without the idea of grace building on nature, the supernatural becomes unnatural. My question is, where is the principle that grace builds on nature stated?

  • From Paprocki’s interview:

    I think some of the people that have been very articulate in refuting this have been members of the black community, African Americans who resent, frankly, depicting this as a civil rights issue. They say, “I have no choice over the color of my skin.” Whereas the way we live our lives – in terms of our sexual activity – we do have choices over that.

    Yes. We are being persecuted because we want to teach our children to… have less sex outside of marriage, rather than more sex outside of marriage.

    To the adult gay male, this is child abuse. Potential child abuse, of the infant gay male.

  • Standing on the principle of separation of church and state, the state refuses to protect virtue or even to defend a person’s First Amendment civil rights to practice virtue. (All this while redefining virtue) The individual who is called a bigot must know that this is the personal and private opinion of the name-caller and counts only as one opinion. “That is your opinion, sir, or madam and I do not share it. If you put it in writing and can bring proof this slander may be addressed in court.” The mob-mentality is too lazy to think as individual, responsible persons. Unfortunately, too many of these are in Congress.
    “Bishop Paprocki began by telling the crowd how his secretary, a mother of four, had been murdered by a homosexual man after she suggested that he change his lifestyle.” The mother was not entitled to her opinion.

  • Another thought: “God save the Queen” cannot be said by atheists in Great Britain. “God bless America” cannot be said by anybody in America. The state has no control over the privacy of one’s home, so, “Go say your prayers in private.” cannot be a public law, nor does it fullfil the First Amendment civil rights of citizens who wish to pray as Freedom of religion, speech, peaceable assembly and the common good, a virtue inside and outside, in public and in private.

  • Pinky

    You may well be thinking of St Thomas Aquinas

    “Cum enim gratia non tollat naturam, sed perficiat, oportet quod naturalis ratio subserviat fidei; sicut et naturalis inclinatio voluntatis obsequitur caritati”

    [Since therefore grace does not destroy nature but perfects it, natural reason should minister to faith as the natural bent of the will ministers to charity.]” — Thomas Aquinas, ST, Iª q. 1 a. 8 ad 2

  • MP-S – Thanks. That’s exactly the kind of clear statement I was looking for. Can you tell me if it has a pre-Thomist origin? I can see how it would fit perfectly into his philosophy, and I think it’s essential to a healthy understanding of man and God. Indeed, the whole idea of natural virtues would seem to require something like it. It surprises me how black-and-white evangelical thinking can be – black as sin, washed whiter than snow, no understanding of human nature growing toward God, no framework for explaining the persistence of habitual sin after baptism, and no sacrament for removing that sin.

    There aren’t many (maybe any) things that the Church assumes without stating clearly and with footnotes.

  • Pinky asked, “Can you tell me if it has a pre-Thomist origin?”

    I do not know of one, at least, nothing so explicit. I believe this insight is based on St Thomas’s study of Aristotle. What St Thomas is doing throughout his work, it seems to me, is harmonising the Virtue Ethics of Aristotle, with the Law concept of Judeo-Christian morality; for this, of course, he needs a concept of human “flourishing,” which he finds in natural reason (but always, in the concrete, illuminated and supported by grace)

    Earlier theologians, in the West at least, writing under the influence of the Pelagian controversy and of St Augustine, of St Prosper of Aquitaine and the Council of Orange were inclined to take a much gloomier view of fallen human nature, not far removed from the Reformers’ doctrine of Total Depravity. In the 17th century, this led to Jansenism, a sort of Catholic Calvinism. It led Pascal to say that “We do not understand the glorious state of Adam, nor the nature of his sin, nor the transmission of it to us. These are matters which took place under conditions of a nature altogether different from our own, and which transcend our present understanding.” and “You are not in the state of your creation.” This can be given an orthodox sense and the Later Augustinians in the 18th century (Joannes Laurentius Berti, Fulgentius Bellelli and Cardinal Henricus de Noris) did just that.

    But St Thomas’s remains the prevailing one

  • Pingback: No More Tears: Moral Healthcare for Women - BigPulpit.com
  • I love it that the internet can connect me to smart people.

Lincoln and the Jesuits!

Sunday, July 14, AD 2013

 

Lincoln Shocked!

I am not a Know-Nothing. That is certain. How could I be? How can any one who abhors the oppression of negroes, be in favor of degrading classes of white people? Our progress in degeneracy appears to me to be pretty rapid. As a nation, we begin by declaring that “all men are created equal.” We now practically read it “all men are created equal, except negroes.” When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read “all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners, and catholics.” When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretence of loving liberty-to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocracy .

Abraham Lincoln, letter to Joshua Speed, August 24, 1855

 

 

Presidential assassinations attract nut cases like bribes attract politicians.  The original presidential assassination conspiracy theorist was Charles P.T. Chiniquy, a Catholic priest from Quebec, who came to Kankakee County in Illinois circa 1850 to serve a colony of French Canadians who had settled there.  In 1860 he left the Church with some of his parishioners, having run afoul of his Bishop.  Eventually he became a Presbyterian Minister and made a living from publishing anti-Catholic books and tracts and giving anti-Catholic lectures

Chiniquy had used Lincoln’s services as a lawyer in a slander case in 1856.  From this slight association, after Lincoln’s assassination he created a fable of the Jesuits having been behind Lincoln’s death and putting anti-Catholic sentiments in the mouth of a man who knew no religious bigotry.  Chiniquy’s lies have been exposed for well over a century by historians.  One of the best eviscerations of Chiniquy was undertaken by Professor Joseph George, Jr. in an article which appeared in the Journal of the Illinois State Historical Society in 1976:

In 1891 John G. Nicolay, Lincoln’s former secretary, received a note  from Benedict Guldner, a Jesuit priest in New York, asking for information about a “libellous pamphlet” printed in Germany.   The pamphlet, according to Guldner, was a translation of a work “originally written in this country … in which the author maintains that the assassination of President Lincoln was the work of Jesuits.” Nicolay and John Hay, another former secretary to the President, had not mentioned the allegation in their biography of        Lincoln, and Guldner wished to know if they had heard the charge and if they considered it false. [1]         Nicolay consulted Hay, and then replied:        

          To [y]our first question whether in our studies on the life of Lincoln we came upon the charge that “the assasination of President Lincoln was the work of Jesuits”, we answer that we have read such a charge in a lengthy newspaper publication.  To your second question, viz: “If you did come across it, did the          accusation seem to you to be entirely groundless?”, we answer Yes. It seemed to us so entirely groundless as not to merit any attention on our part.  [2]        

        

        Perhaps the decision of Nicolay and Hay to ignore the charge of a Jesuit conspiracy against Lincoln was unwise. A prompt and firm denial might have prevented further publication of the story.  [3]        

        The originator of the conspiracy theory was Charles P.T. Chiniquy, a former Catholic priest who claimed to be a close friend and confidant of Abraham Lincoln’s.   According to Chiniquy, “emissaries of the        Pope” were plotting to murder Lincoln for his defense of Chiniquy in an 1856 trial.   Chiniquy’s autobiography, Fifty Years in the Church of Rome, published in 1885,  attributes remarks to the President on a variety of subjects, particularly religion. [4]  Most of Chinquy’s stories are so foreign to what is known about the Sixteenth President that scholars  have ignored them. Nevertheless, many of the less sensational portions of Chiniquy’s reminiscences have been used by serious students of Lincoln’s life, and the most sensational passages have been widely quoted and disseminated by writers engaged in anti-Catholic polemics.

Continue reading...

6 Responses to Lincoln and the Jesuits!

Fear of the Cross

Wednesday, July 3, AD 2013

AudreyJarvis1

But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews indeed a stumblingblock, and unto the Gentiles foolishness:

Saint Paul:  1 Corinthians 1:23

The current administration has certainly emboldened bigots.  Case in point:

Audrey Jarvis, 19, a liberal arts major at the northern California university, said she had no choice but to seek a “religious accommodation” in order to wear the cross. Her lawyer said she deserves an apology, and the school seems ready to oblige.

“It’s amazing in this day of diversity and tolerance on university campuses that a university official would engage in this type of obvious religious discrimination,” said Hiram Sasser, an attorney with Liberty Institute, which is representing Jarvis.

Jarvis was working for the university’s Associated Students Productions at a June 27 student orientation fair for incoming freshmen when her supervisor told her to remove the two-inch-long cross necklace, according to Sasser.

Sasser said the supervisor told her that the chancellor had a policy against wearing religious items and further explained “that she could not wear her cross necklace because it might offend others, it might make incoming students feel unwelcome, or it might cause incoming students to feel that ASP was not an organization they should join.”

“My initial reaction was one of complete shock,” Jarvis told Fox News. “I was thrown for a loop.”

Jarvis said she is a devout Catholic and she wears the cross as a symbol of her faith in Christ.

“I was offended because I believe as a Christian woman it is my prerogative to display my faith any way I like so long as it is not harming anyone else,” she said. “I was very hurt and felt as if the university’s mission statement – which includes tolerance and inclusivity to all – was violated.”

Continue reading...

9 Responses to Fear of the Cross

  • Kashack said Sonoma State President Ruben Arminana was “angered” by the incident and they are trying to contact Jarvis so they can apologize.

    “The president was very upset about it and asked me to contact Miss Jarvis and give a profuse apology,” she said.

    Why do we doubt this is true?

  • Because it gives no explanation why this incident happened in the first place. What is their policy regarding religious symbols? Was this a “rogue” supervisor or are they reacting in this way because they were caught and a big stink is starting over this? What about the future? Are Christian students and employees now free to wear crosses on campus?

  • These sort of incidents do seem to have a ‘try every door’ aspect to them.

    There are people in this world who are remarkably parochial. I am an occasional participant at a blog moderated by a man who has been practicing political journalism (on and off) for 27 years. Now 48 years of age, he is barely able to process an argument contrary to the regnant attitudes of the institutions where he has spent his life. That is what an Ivy League B.A. (including some graduate work at Harvard) and two decades in magazine journalism gets you.

    There are also people in this world who resemble the world’s difficult and self-centered mothers. Their default mode of interacting with people is to insist on their way with regard to the pettiest matters.

    I will wager both types are fairly common in MEd. programs, and the one’s who do not wish to brave the classroom end up in the student affairs apparat at your local college.

  • 1st Corinthians 1:18-19 – “For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written, ‘I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the cleverness of the clever I will thwart.'”

    Philippians 3:18-19 – “For many, of whom I have often told you and now tell you even with tears, live as enemies of the cross of Christ. Their end is destruction, their god is the belly, and they glory in their shame, with minds set on earthly things.”

  • “Sasser said the supervisor told her that the chancellor had a policy against wearing religious items and further explained “that she could not wear her cross necklace because it might offend others, it might make incoming students feel unwelcome, or it might cause incoming students to feel that ASP was not an organization they should join.”

    So they were afraid of scaring away bigots?

  • I hope that my sons meet and marry a woman like Audrey Jarvis, and not because she is a beautiful lady (unless they become priests).

    Colleges and universities are the devil’s domain when it comes to leftist thought, theory and practice.

  • I hope that my son Donald is fortunate enough to ultimately marry a woman as faithful and beautiful, both internally and externally, as Miss Jarvis appears to be.

  • Pingback: Our Lady's Seven Sorrows - BigPulpit.com
  • O Glorious Guardian Angel of the United States, to whom God has entrusted the care of our beloved country, we honor you and thank you for the care and protection you have given to this great nation from the first moment of its inception.
    O Powerful Angel Guardian, whose watchful glance encompasses this vast land from shore to shore, we know that our sins have grieved you and marred the beauty of our heritage. Pray for us.
    O Holy Angel, before the throne of God. Obtain for us, from the Queen of Heaven, the graces we need to overcome the forces of evil so rampant in our beloved land.
    Help us, our God-given protector and friend, to respond wholeheartedly to the urgent pleas of the Mother of God…Assist us to offer the prayer and sacrifice necessary to bring peace and goodness to our nation.
    We want to make you known and loved throughout our land, so that with your help we may become once more “a Nation under God”!

    By thy Holy and Immaculate Conception, O Mary, deliver us from evil.

Jimmy Carter, Ex-President and Anti-Catholic Bigot, Attacks Pope John Paul II

Monday, June 24, AD 2013

(In light of Carter’s latest tirade against the Catholic Church, I thought TAC readers would like to see this post from March of last year.)

 

Bad enough that James Earl Carter, Jr. is the worst president this country has had not named James Buchanan or Barack Obama, but he is also an anti-Catholic bigot as his latest mind droppings amply demonstrate:

Former US President Jimmy Carter has disclosed that he had angry exchanges with Pope John Paul II about liberation theology and about the ordination of women.  

The former president said that he complained to the Pontiff about the Church’s “perpetuation of the subservience of women” while Blessed John Paul II was visiting the US in 1978, and “there was more harshness when we turned to the subject of ‘liberation theology.” Carter said that he classified the Pope as a “fundamentalist,” placing him in that category along with Iran’s late Ayatollah Khomeini.  

In the same interview Carter said that “it is very fine for gay people to be married in civil ceremonies,” although he suggested—“maybe arbitrarily”—that churches should not be required by law to solemnize same-sex unions.  

Carter made his remarks as he introduced a new edition of the Bible with his own study notes, helping readers to follow his understanding of the Scriptures. 

Jimmy, here is a clue for you.  No one cares a rat’s nether regions about what you think about anything.  You were a completely incompetent president and the American people have tried their best to forget you.  You were such a wretched president that even in your own party you are a non-person, and it difficult to embarrass Democrats over anything.  Pope John Paul II was a magnificent pope.  Here is a list of just a few of his accomplishments, although it will take centuries for historians to fully assess his almost 27 year-long papacy, but here are some of the factors that I think they will note.

1.  He largely stopped the post Vatican II chaos-After Vatican II the impulse to transform the Church into an institution fully reflecting the current views of cultural elites in the West wreaked much havoc.  Paul VI, a good and holy man, drew a line in the sand with Humanae Vitae, but he lacked the stomach and the will to fight it out with those who would have transformed the Catholic Church into what the Anglican Church is now:  a dying institution, adrift from any allegiance to traditional Christianity, and fully in accord with the mores and beliefs of the secular elite of the West.  Many were rubbing their hands with glee after the death of Pope Paul, in confident assurance that a new liberal pope would complete the transformation of the Church into something akin to Unitarianism with fancy dress.  Instead they got John Paul II, a Polish fighter who had stood toe to toe with the atheist rulers of Poland and was not the least frightened or impressed by the forces that sought to neuter Christ’s Church.  The chaos and low morale of the Church could not be completely reversed in one papacy, but John Paul II began the process and made a huge amount of progress.

2.  Presiding at the Funeral of Communism-During World War II, both the Nazis and the Communists slaughtered a huge number of Polish priests, viewing them as deadly enemies.  How very right they were!  The Polish Church, in the midst of one of the worst persecutions sustained by the Catholic Church in the last century, never lost faith that the Church and Poland would both ultimately outlast the totalitarian regimes and emerge triumphant.  John Paul II was the embodiment of this robust confidence that Communism, like Nazism, was merely a brief historical aberration that could and would be defeated.  The rise of Solidarity was completely predictable to him, and his embrace of it made a crackdown by the Polish Communist regime, and its Kremlin puppet masters, impossible.  John Paul II and Ronald Reagan in the Eighties brought about the largely peaceful collapse of Communism in Eastern Europe and laid the groundwork for its collapse in the former Soviet Union.  The heirs of Joseph Stalin learned to their sorrow that the type of power wielded by a skillful and determined pope cannot be counted in divisions but rather in human hearts.

3.  Culture of Life-In the teeth of an overwhelming movement among Western elites to jettison the belief that human life is sacred, John Paul II rededicated the Church to that proposition and waged a long uphill struggle throughout his papacy against abortion and euthanasia.  Like Moses, John Paul II did not live to see the victory in this fight, but ultimately we will win, and his brave stand at a crucial moment in history will be one of the reasons why.

4.  Pope of the people-With modern means of transportation, a vigorous Pope can treat the whole world as his diocese by globe-trotting and that is precisely what John Paul II did.  In the Nineteenth Century, modern means of communication, the telegraph, photography and newspapers, were skillfully used by Pius IX to forge a personal contact between the Pope and average Catholics.  Pope John Paul II took this a step farther by bringing the Pope to the average Catholic.  A masterful stroke and superbly executed.

Continue reading...

13 Responses to Jimmy Carter, Ex-President and Anti-Catholic Bigot, Attacks Pope John Paul II

  • “Carter made his remarks as he introduced a new edition of the Bible with his own study notes, helping readers to follow his understanding of the Scriptures.”

    Anybody want to buy a failed President’s Study Bible?

    http://www.christianbook.com/niv-lessons-personal-reflections-jimmy-carter/9780310950813/pd/950813

    I wrote a nasty letter to Zondervan Publishing about a year or so about this, highlighting Carter’s anti-Semitism and anti-Catholicism. I got a nastier letter back, as expected. I would have been disappointed otherwise. My advice: boycott Zondervan. There are plenty of other good Christian publishing houses, both Roman and otherwise, without giving them your business.

  • How is denying the doctrine of the all-male priesthood anti-Catholic in a way that denying the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception is not? We generally don’t call those who do not believe in the Immaculate Conception anti-Catholic.

  • Don’t be obtuse Kurt. Carter isn’t merely saying that this is a Catholic doctrine that he doesn’t accept. He is saying that not ordaining women is wrong and leads to women being treated as second class and mentions some of the most odious elements of the Islamic world in the bargain. He also makes up history by claiming that women were once ordained as priests by the Church. By claiming that not ordaining women is a human rights abuse he is also, not so subtly, implying that some authority like the UN should get those benighted Catholics to stop abusing women.

  • Perhaps Carter is just as “Catholic” as you are, Kurt! 😉

    Not.

  • Pingback: Jimmy Carter, Ex-President and Anti-Catholic Bigot, Attacks Pope … - Christian IBD
  • Why doesn’t he go away?! He is SO irrelevant. Oops! I guess I just answered my own question.

  • “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but underneath are ravenous wolves. Matthew 7:15

  • Kurt:

    What Carter is doing is trying to pave the way for Catholics to be excluded from civil society. Painting Catholics as bigoted and discriminatory is the way they will go about this. Denying the Immaculate Conception isn’t going to do that. If one expresses belief in the Immaculate Conception in public, you might get some puzzled looks, but no one is going to say you shouldn’t participate in public life. It might not be well understood by the rest of society, but it won’t get you lynched. It might prompt a conversation about what Catholic teaching is on the matter.

    On the other hand, if you can misrepresent Catholic teaching and say that Catholics hurt women and discriminate against women and gays, then you get some real leverage. Again, the public won’t understand what Catholic teaching is and they will believe the lie. And once they listen to someone like Carter, they will shut their minds and not listen to a thing you have to say about the matter. In fact, Carter can drum up support for persecution of Catholics on the grounds that we are violating someone’s human rights. It’s sort of like in the days of Nero when they said Catholics were cannibals. It’s a misrepresentation of Catholic teaching designed to shut minds against the Church and lead to persecution. It was back in Nero’s time, and it is the same today. To quote the TV series Galactica, “All of this has happened before, and all of it will happen again.”

  • I meant “Battlestar Galactica”, the more recent version from 2004.

  • Obama says that Catholic schools are a cause of the Irish troubles. Carter piles on with his anti-woman nonsense. Sibelius forces us to provide contraception and abortifacient drugs to employees. Caesar, Henry, Elizabeth, Cromwell, Napoleon, Marx, Bismarck, Mussolini, Hitler, Stalin are all gone. The Church remains.

  • The peanut farmer kissed Brezhnev on the cheek.

    John Paul II, Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher kicked Gorbachev in the a**.

  • Pingback: The Human Family and the Family of God - BigPulpit.com
  • Carter’s osculation of the Soviet leader led The Economist to remark that he was “a-wastin’ Christian kisses on a heathen idol’s foot” (cf Kipling). The only political legacy of Jimmy Carter was that he started the fashion among politicians of holding hands with their wives in public (dashed bad form, don’t you know). However, unlike the present incumbent of the White House, he didn’t use Rosalind as a cheer-leader and warm-up act.

    Seriously, Karol Wojtyla was the only undeniable great man of the second half of the 20th century. And the western democracies had the sense to replace Carter and Callaghan with Reagan and Thatcher.

The Left’s Astroturf War Against the Catholic Church

Sunday, June 23, AD 2013

Christopher Johnson, a non-Catholic who has taken up the cudgels so frequently for the Church that I have designated him Defender of the Faith, has a barnburner of a column over at his blog Midwest Conservative Journal:

 

Gay conservative Kevin DuJan lets the cat out of the bag:

John Nolte at Breitbart.com just published a hard-hitting piece that’s worth your very valuable time…exposing Barack Obama’s commitment to the institutional Left’s Alinskyite objective of “dismantling, undermining, and toxifying the Catholic Church”; this article’s one of those that I’ll probably quote from for years to come, because I’ve never seen this articulated so succinctly before.  Dismantle. Undermine. Toxify.  That is precisely what Leftists have been attempting in their decades-long war against the Catholic Church. Kudos to Nolte for precisely encapsulating so much evil into three small words…which I hope you’ll join me in making everyday vocabulary from this point forward.

What John Nolte probably doesn’t know firsthand, though, is that the Left’s weapon of choice against Catholics is normally gays…who serve as a Gaystapo goon squad that is revved up into frenzies of hatred against Christians in general (but Catholics quite specifically).  If you observe the institutional Left’s strategic moves long enough, you’ll see it’s almost always gays who are bused in to block the entrances to cathedrals or churches and scream expletives at parishioners heading into mass; this is, of course, the toxification aspect of the Leftists’ agenda…since they are attempting to make going to Catholic mass so unpleasant an experience for believers that they’ll potentially start staying home, just to avoid being screamed at by obnoxious gays out on the street (most of whom, in the video above at least, are actually members of the Chicago Teachers’ Union…more on that later).

The Left uses the Gaystapo against the Church (with gays screaming “Bigots!”) in much the same way that Democrats trot blacks (led, of course, by the likes of Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and Henry Gates) in front of cameras to accuse conservative businesses, Republican politicians, or any of the Democrats’ other perceived “enemies” of being “Ray Ciss”. This is stage crafting coordinated by the DNC, with gays and blacks serving as useful idiots and foot solders for the institutional Left.

It’s a long article and there’s lots of video at the link.

Is this what Catholics have to look forward to?  Sure, if this country’s gays are titanically stupid.  For my part, nothing would get me into the Catholic parish directly across the street from where I live faster than hearing that I would be greeted by wild-eyed hordes of marauding gays as I walked in the door.

Of course, the Archdiocese here would probably discourage me from coming quite strongly, what with the fact that as I walked in, I would point and laugh at the assembled homosexuals, perhaps drop an F-bomb or two, physically react to any physical assaults on my person and break out an Anglican apology (I’m sorry if you were offended…) later if anyone called me on it.

You get the idea.

John Nolte, in the Breitbart.com post DuJan linked to above, overstates the case a bit.  Would the left really like to “demystify, undermine and toxify” the Roman Catholic Church?  Undoubtedly.

Why?  Because at the present time, the Roman Catholic Church is the single largest and most influential worldwide organization standing in the way of the leftist agenda.  I certainly don’t mean to suggest that strong opposition to the left does not also exist in Protestantism or Orthodoxy; it most certainly does.  But Protestantism is too fragmented and Orthodoxy still too exotic and foreign to put up the kind of fight that only the Catholics can currently wage.

I’m not making a judgment, I’m simply stating a fact.  Think of it like this; once you take Helm’s Deep, all you have left to do is to quietly wait for the rest of Middle Earth to fall into your hands.

Continue reading...

27 Responses to The Left’s Astroturf War Against the Catholic Church

  • Pingback: Weekend Link Love: The Cars Edition - All American Blogger
  • “Useful idiots” is what Lenin called his mob of revolutionaries. The gays’ final goal is to make the human being property of the state, deny the human, rational, immortal soul and our Creator endowed unalienable rights.The “Our Father” is going to be labeled hate speech and prohibited in spite of: “or prohibit the free exercise thereof.” If every gay was a dictator, he would need slaves or persons to whom to dictate. The sovereign state would no longer exist as the sovereign personhood of the individual human being constitutes government, but without the acknowledgment of the Supreme Sovereign Being, and the sovereignty of the human person, there can be no state. So, the gays think that they will rule…but the devil has other plans for the gays. The man practicing homosexual behavior takes as his bride the asinine sphincter of another man. Equality of sodomy? with what? Fornication is the chief form of devil worship. Even the devil does not want sodomy. Oh brimestone and fire where is your tenderness?

  • Sir Sean Connery is indeed a devout Catholic. See “Darby O’Gill and the Little People”, a Disney movie circa 1959 about leprechauns, especially the added bonus features which are more fun than the movie.

  • “This is stage crafting coordinated by the DNC, with gays and blacks serving as useful idiots and foot solders for the institutional Left.”

    I agree that certain tactics are obnoxious (of course for anyone who believes wholeheartedly in their cause, whatever the issue, there’s no such thing as too obnoxious.) However “useful idiots” implies that these protesters are dupes of something they’re not fully onboard with. Which I kinda doubt is the case.

    Ms. De Voe you complain about speech-policing and then launch into an over-the-top tirade about “gay rule” and hellfire rhetoric…no one is trying to legally prohibit you from saying those things but are you really surprised that certain people take issue with this sentiment

  • so apparently God created adam and steve…well that is what the stupid gay community thinks anyway….they are just sick perverted morons…

  • “The Holy Spirit apparently has a long history of commandeering both the ordinary and the oddball for service as needed, no matter how unexpected it would be.”

    Best news I’ve had in years. Bring it.

  • Pingback: Pp. Francis: More Martyrs Today Than Early Centuries - BigPulpit.com
  • at the present time, the Roman Catholic Church is the single largest and most influential worldwide organization standing in the way of the leftist agenda.

    Really? Our nation’s leading proponent of amnesty for the illegals? The world’s most vocal opponent of capital punishment? A church that never met a social spendng program it didn’t like (in the words of one leading conservative)? The Church that funds hundreds of left wing community organizing initiatives? The Church that has long been in the hip pocket of labor unions?

  • Kurt,
    I agree. Note, though, that the USCCB is composed only of U.S. Bishops, so whatever wise or unwise pronouncements they make concern only the Catholic Church in the U.S.

    Cardinal Ratzinger, before he became Pope Benedict XVI, had some interesting things to say about the danger of Bishops Conferences and their ability to stifle the voices of good bishops in “The Ratzinger Report,” a book-length interview by Vittorio Messori, in 1987. Ratzinger, then prefect of the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith (CDF), said:

    “We must not forget that the episcopal conferences have no theological basis, they do not belong to
    the structure of the Church, as willed by Christ, that cannot be eliminated; they have only a practical, concrete function.

    “No episcopal conference, as such, has a teaching mission; its documents have no weight of their
    own save that of the consent given to them by the individual bishops.”

    Elsewhere, he explained the difference between the College of Bishops, which In union with the Pope to magisterium because collegiality transcends geographical and historical boundaries. In other words, things The Twelve taught at the very beginning hold true for the Church to this day and in the future , all over the world.

    That said, Pope Benedict also had something to say about about the “common good.”
    ” The more we strive to secure a common good corresponding to the real needs of our neighbours, the more effectively we love them. Every Christian is called to practise this charity, in a manner corresponding to his vocation and according to the degree of influence he wields in the pólis. This is the institutional path — we might also call it the political path — of charity, no less excellent and effective than the kind of charity which encounters the neighbour directly, outside the institutional mediation of the pólis.”

  • Marietta —

    But are the bishops anywhere else in the world any different? In most of western Europe, save the Protestant UK and Nordic countries, the expansive social welfare schemes they now have were not enacted by the Socialists but by Catholic politcians with the firm support of the bishops and with priests generally designing the programs of the welfare state. I am referring to Germany, Austria, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland, Spain, Italy and Malta.

  • BTW, check out liberal Catholic Senator Tom Harkin’s hearing at 2:30 ET today on raising the federal minimum wage. His star witness will be the bishop chairing the USCCB’s domestic policy conference.

  • That would be completely pro-abort Senator Tom Harkin, right Kurt? Ignore the Bishops when it comes to killing kids in the womb, and then attempt to use them to drive up unemployment in the middle of the great Obama Recession.

    http://www.ontheissues.org/social/Tom_Harkin_Abortion.htm

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/08/sen-tom-harkin-forcing-catholic-church-to-pay-for-abortions-and-birth-control-is-ok-because-women-have-terrible-menstrual-cramps/

  • “Most of the major ills of the world have been caused by well-meaning people who ignored the principle of individual freedom, except as applied to themselves, and who were obsessed with fanatical zeal to improve the lot of mankind-in-the-mass through some pet formula of their own. The harm done by ordinary criminals, murderers, gangsters, and thieves is negligible in comparison with the agony inflicted upon human beings by the professional do-gooders, who attempt to set themselves up as gods on earth and who would ruthlessly force their views on all others with the abiding assurance that the end justifies the means.” From The Mainspring of Human Progress by Henry Grady Weaver

  • Ergo, . . .

    In 1950, 80% of men were employed, today 65%.
    In 1979, the real, entry-level hourly wage for a HS grad was $15.64, today $11.68.
    In 1960, 72% of adults were married, today 51%.
    In 1950, 78% of households contained a married couple, today 48%.
    One-in-three children live in a home with no father.

  • Yep, Don, that would be him. Guess how much gushing the bishop will be doing towards the Senator this afternoon. I predict a lovefest.

    Amnesty, minimum wage, spend more for food stamps. That our bishops for you.

  • You wish Kurt. Amnesty is not getting out of the House and neither will an increase in the minimum wage. Increasing the food stamp rolls by 70% along with other forms of dependence upon the State will certainly be one of the things the Obama administration will be remembered for when national debt repudiation occurs and our economy goes on life support for a few decades. But not everyone holds the life of the unborn with the callous indifference of the politicians you help elect, even Bishops who know as much about economics as a pig does about penance, or Tom Harkin knows about the sanctity of innocent human life.

  • “Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good
    of its victim may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”

    -C.S. Lewis

    The classics never die.

  • Amnesty is not getting out of the House and neither will an increase in the minimum wage.

    Can’t have everything. Already got Obamacare, Dodd-Frank, repeal of DADT, Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, some good pro-union NLRB rulings, the Auto/UAW bailout, higher taxes on the rich, kicked big banks out of the federal student loan program, new regulations on credit cards, significant defense cuts, Hate Crimes Act, and some really great appointments. And that’s not counting the secret stuff to steer work to unionized firms.

    All in all, the laity’s church tithes have been used more to help the President than to hurt him. Remember what your friend Deep Throat said, “follow the money”.

  • Doesn’t look like you have the obsolete Voting Rights Act any more.

  • “Can’t have everything. Already got Obamacare, Dodd-Frank, repeal of DADT, Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, some good pro-union NLRB rulings, the Auto/UAW bailout, higher taxes on the rich, kicked big banks out of the federal student loan program, new regulations on credit cards, significant defense cuts, Hate Crimes Act, and some really great appointments. And that’s not counting the secret stuff to steer work to unionized firms.”

    1. Obamacare remains massively unpopular and that is before the onerous provisions kick in which begins next year. Obamacare will do permanent damage to your party Kurt, so perhaps on balance it is a good thing after all.

    2. Dodd-Frank-Fortunately that misbegotten piece of legislation from two of the more corrupt members of Congress is dying on the vine from the ineptitude of the Executive Branch. Massive incompetence, the saving grace of the Obama administration!

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/06/06/dodd-frank-isnt-close-to-implemented/

    3. Repeal of Dadt-Why am I not surprised Kurt that you would hail a development that both weakens the military and is a slap in the face to traditional morality? The main impact of this development is that cowards will no longer have an easy way to get out of their enlistments, which was overwhelmingly the cause of most discharges under Dadt which involved self-informing.

    4. Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009-The main impact of which is to allow members of my profession to bring lawsuits decades after the alleged pay discrimination. As always with most Democrat legislation the true beneficiaries are the lawyers.

    5. Some good pro-union NLRB rulings-Too bad that Obama jeopardized most of them by using recess appointments to the NLRB since he couldn’t get the hacks he wanted approved by the Senate:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/25/us/justices-agree-to-hear-case-on-presidents-recess-appointments.html?_r=0

    6. Kicked big banks out of the federal student loan program-Yep, by making the taxpayers foot the bill of a loan system that is rapidly going into default.
    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505123_162-57585366/student-loan-defaults-rising-despite-a-way-out/

    By doing this the Obama administration made it highly unlikely that bankruptcy laws will be reformed to allow discharging student loans in bankruptcy as the taxpayer will always be on the hook. The Feds of course have mechanisms that are denied to private student loan lenders including garnishing social security and pensions. It takes a certain type of deranged partisan mindset to view making the student loan system a federal preserve in any way pro-student.

    7. new regulations on credit cards-Which have had little benefit for consumers:

    http://www.foxbusiness.com/personal-finance/2012/05/22/winners-and-losers-3-years-after-credit-card-act/

    Anyone who thought it was going to be otherwise should have asked themselves why Obama picked the Senator from Mastercard to be his Veep.

    More after I finish my afternoon tour in the law mines.

  • 1. Obamacare remains massively unpopular and that is before the onerous provisions kick in which begins next year. Obamacare will do permanent damage to your party Kurt, so perhaps on balance it is a good thing after all.

    I’ll take my chances. You can guess about the future. For now, it is the law. Upheld by the Roberts Court. 🙂

    . Repeal of Dadt-Why am I not surprised Kurt that you would hail a development that both weakens the military and is a slap in the face to traditional morality? The main impact of this development is that cowards will no longer have an easy way to get out of their enlistments, which was overwhelmingly the cause of most discharges under Dadt which involved self-informing.

    That one you don’t even predict will be repealed. Settled and done.

    4. Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009-The main impact of which is to allow members of my profession to bring lawsuits decades after the alleged pay discrimination. As always with most Democrat legislation the true beneficiaries are the lawyers

    Trial lawyers need jobs too. Settled and done.

    . Kicked big banks out of the federal student loan program-Yep, by making the taxpayers foot the bill of a loan system that is rapidly going into default.

    Settled and done!

    It takes a certain type of deranged partisan mindset to view making the student loan system a federal preserve in any way pro-student.

    So, Democrat degranged partisans are ruling the day. Settled and done!

    7. new regulations on credit cards-Which have had little benefit for consumers:

    Awwwh, but it must create some bureaucrat jobs and mess over the banks.

    Settled and done!

  • From “The Idiot Vote” by Harry Stein:
    “Yet in America today, only one of the dominant political parties–guess which one–is actually dependent on the idiot vote for its very survival.
    Ignoramuses are the Democrats’ core constituency. Can’t name your congressman or a single Supreme Court justice? Have vaguely heard of Gettysburg, but can’t quite place the war? Get your idea of news from People and Us or Comedy Central? You’re a single-issue voter and the single issue is more-more-more and who-cares-how-it-gets-paid-for. The Dems not only want you to vote, they’ll hunt you down, fill out the registration form for you and show up on Election Day to drag you to the polls. And if you can’t make it, they’ll send someone else and say you did. And all the while, proudly cast themselves as defenders of democracy, because the right to vote is, you know, like, sacrosanct.”

  • But think how much the Catholic faith is advanced by calling other people idiots.

  • Can’t resist quoting today’s Gospel here, kurt, as regards ‘advancing’ for the world.
    Matthew 7: 6, 12-14
    ( It’s valuable. We were reminded that God calls us to holiness and must recognize qualities that aren’t. So many ways the Catholic faith is rich beyond imagination in care. )

    “Jesus said to His disciples:
    Do not give what is holy to dogs or throw your pearls before swine, lest they trample them underfoot, and turn and tear you to pieces.
    Do to others whatever you would have them do to you. This is the Law and the Prophets.

    Enter through the narrow gate;
    for the gate is wide and the road broad that leads to destruction,
    and those who enter through it are many.

    How narrow the gate and constricted the road that leads to life.
    And those who find it are few.”

  • “But think how much the Catholic faith is advanced by calling other people idiots.”

    About as much as your fit of putrid gloating has done.

  • Mr. Stein nailed it. Please provide facts to refute his essay.

  • AP will no longer use the phrase ‘illegal immigrant, it will use ‘undocumented democrat.’

    Dems push Amnesty in attempt to replace 53,000,000 aborted children. Limbaugh

The Anti-Catholic Party

Thursday, May 10, AD 2012

Cardinal Dolan yesterday released this statement regarding Obama’s announcement that he had “evolved” and now, as he did in 1996 when first asked about it, supports gay marriage:

 

May 9, 2012 WASHINGTON—Cardinal Timothy Dolan, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), issued the following statement:

President Obama’s comments today in support of the redefinition of marriage are deeply saddening. As I stated in my public letter to the President on September 20, 2011, the Catholic Bishops stand ready to affirm every positive measure taken by the President and the Administration to strengthen marriage and the family. However, we cannot be silent in the face of words or actions that would undermine the institution of marriage, the very cornerstone of our society. The people of this country, especially our children, deserve better. Unfortunately, President Obama’s words today are not surprising since they follow upon various actions already taken by his Administration that erode or ignore the unique meaning of marriage. I pray for the President every day, and will continue to pray that he and his Administration act justly to uphold and protect marriage as the union of one man and one woman. May we all work to promote and protect marriage and by so doing serve the true good of all persons.

When the Tokugawa shogunate was stamping out Christianity in Japan, it made use of Fumi-e (stepping on pictures).  Regime officials would place pictures of Jesus or Mary before suspected Christians and order them to step on them.  Refusal to do so, if persisted in, would end in execution.  In our own country we are seeing the growth of a movement just as antithetical in theory to Catholicism and traditional Christianity as the Tokugawa shogunate, and it finds its home in the Democrat party. 

What we have seen over the past few decades is the evolution of the Democrat party into an overtly anti-Catholic party.  The Obama administration is the culmination of this trend.  This of course is deeply ironic, because the Democrat party is a major party in this country with the help of the votes of tens of millions of purported Catholics.

In the past four decades the Democrats, with honorable exceptions, have championed abortion which is anathema to the teachings of the Church.  The embrace of homosexuality followed, which has caused governments around the nation to drive the Church out of adoptions because the Church refuses to arrange adoptions by homosexual couples.  In California, a state wholly controlled by the Democrat party, homosexual indoctrination, masquerading as education, is now mandated in public schools.  For cynical political purposes the Obama administration this year has proposed that Catholic institutions, and individual Catholic employers, be required to provide “free” contraceptive coverage, and is quite willing to run roughshod over the First Amendment to accomplish this goal.  Now we have the President’s support of gay marriage, although, until he further “evolves” I guess, he “generously” stated his opinion that churches opposed to gay marriages should not be required to officiate at them.  These changes in society are the modern Fumi-e by which believing Catholics and traditional Christians are made to renounce, in effect, the teachings of Christ step by step.

Continue reading...

64 Responses to The Anti-Catholic Party

  • I don’t see how any Catholic can now vote Democratic unless they are so ideologically blinded that they cannot see what they are doing. I also believe that one now has to vote to limit the evil that is the Obama Administration. Unfortunately, at least as I see it, one must vote for Romney unless they are in a very red state.

  • No thanks to you traitors that keep voting democrat.

    You and your politicians are enemies of the Kingdom of God.

    The worst president in history needs gay marriage, class hatred, etc. in order to distract drones and serfs from endless war and the depressed economy.

  • There are two Catholics from birth at my place of work. One (I know) goes to Mass regularly. Both support gay marriage and contraception. One (the individual who goes to Mass) supports abortion. I have spent hours (and many written pages) discussing these things with each of them. Even last night I discussed for 45 minutes with one of them why I supported NC Amendment One (in response to his question). Nothing I have done or said can persuade them, though both admit that I know much more about the Catechism and the Bible. They are blind – completely, totally and hopelessly blind – as is perhaps 50% of the Church.

    BTW, the company for which I work is completely in favor of LGBT rights. We have to go through annual diversity training on this very issue. We’re not good nuclear professionals unless we support and agree with LGBT rights. I suspect this is true in any large, mulitnational or regulated company or corporation nowadays. You cannot imagine my disgust and anger.

  • On a positive note: Obama is not all failure all the time.

    Using mathematical formulas, math geniuses have calculated based on Ministry of Truth methods for calculating the unemployment rate, it will be zero by 2022, and negative a month later.

  • Here’s our old friend Tony trying to pretend that his party is anything BUT the overtly anti-Catholic monstrosity that it has become:

    “Support the Big Tent of the Democratic Party

    With the Republican party becoming completely unacceptable as a valid electoral choice, this initiative assumes greater importance than ever. Please sign, and please pass on!

    The idea is to support the following language in the Democratic platform:

    “We respect the conscience of each American and recognize that members of our Party have deeply held and sometimes differing positions on issues of personal conscience, like abortion and the death penalty. We recognize the diversity of views as a source of strength and we welcome into our ranks all Americans who may hold differing positions on these and other issues.

    However, we can find common ground. We believe that we can reduce the number of abortions because we are united in our support for policies that assist families who find themselves in crisis or unplanned pregnancies. We believe that women deserve to have a breadth of options available as they face pregnancy: including, among others, support and resources needed to handle the challenges of pregnancy, adoption, and parenthood; access to education, healthcare, childcare; and appropriate child support. We envision a new day without financial or societal barriers to bringing a planned or unplanned pregnancy to term.”

    http://vox-nova.com/2012/05/09/support-the-big-tent-of-the-democratic-party/

    I’ll agree with Tony re: the Republicans (at the very least for this presidential election cycle), but for different reasons than he would conclude. But he’s either completely delusional or completely dishonest (and those really ARE the ONLY options) regarding his party of choice. I’ll be charitable and go with delusional.

  • There are no big tents in Heaven.

    “Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is easy, * that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life, and those who find it are few.” Matthew 7:13-14

  • Obama’s announcement that he had “evolved” and now, as he did in 1996 when first asked about it, supports gay marriage

    I suppose it’s more accurate to say he “revolved” than evolved. Although the truth is he simply lied about his ambivalence or lack of support.

    As far as I know, abortion and the death penalty are not issues of personal conscience, and certainly not from a Catholic perspective. There is an objectively right and objectively wrong answer on both.

    And what is this pablum about diversity of views being a source of strength?!?! HA! The Demoncratic Party has the LEAST diversity of views of any organization on Earth!!

  • I don’t know who “our old friend Tony is,” but at the risk of sounding naive, the piece has a snarky, passive-aggressive sarcastic demeanor to it; a kind of “if they were who they said they were, this is what they would do, but we all know the truth” nudge, nudge, wink, wink.

    The very notion of a “Big Tent” Democrat Party is so absurd that there really can’t be anything but absurdity in the whole thing. It can’t be seriously taken seriously.

    Seriously.

  • One (I know) goes to Mass regularly. Both support gay marriage and contraception. One (the individual who goes to Mass) supports abortion. I have spent hours (and many written pages) discussing these things with each of them. Even last night I discussed for 45 minutes with one of them why I supported NC Amendment One (in response to his question). Nothing I have done or said can persuade them, though both admit that I know much more about the Catechism and the Bible. They are blind – completely, totally and hopelessly blind – as is perhaps 50% of the Church.

    What is their counter-argument? From where are they taking their cues?

  • WK,

    If you knew Morning’s Minion (aka Tony) like we know him, you’d know that he’s 100% serious.

  • If I recall, Tony is either Irish or Canadian. He is not to my understanding a naturalized American citizen. He showed up on blogs before the last election using the wars and torture issues to turn votes away from Republicans. Used the standard “social justice” lines to justify voting for the most anti-social justice President in history.

    Now going about spreading his distorted presentation of Catholic Social Teaching to enshrine voting for Democrats.

    Why he doesn’t just go back home is beyond me. Unless he is some fellow traveller type presenting himself as Catholic.

  • Paul, I can relate to what you’re saying. Unbelievably, the people that I work with who voted for Obama the first time are going to vote for him again. And I work for a Catholic Church! I do not for the life of me understand their logic and blindness. This man is an “anti-christ” and they cannot see his evil. I know we must pray for them, and I too have on occasion discussed the issues with them, but it is no longer any good. We are at a point where we have to pray to Our Lord and Our Lady for ourselves and everyone we love to be placed under their protection and to be a part of the remnant that will remain faithful to Him during the coming chastisement that is now inevitable.

  • Pingback: THURSDAY MID-DAY EXTRA: Catholic Reaction to President Obama on Same-Sex Marriage | The Pulpit
  • While EVERY person may choose to love God in his own way, public funds and those in public office compensated by public taxes may not deconstruct our Declaration of Independence by removing “their Creator”, the Person of God, WHO endows unalienable rights to all men, WHO created all men equal and keeps them in existence, from one moment to the next. The Person of God speaks to us through our founding principles, The Declaration of Independence, The Constitution for the United States of America, with laws that protect and provide for each and every Person, especially the PERSON OF GOD, because the Person of God is “their Creator”, and as persons, all men are the image of God in sovereignty expressed as free will in FREEDOM, the will of the people and the voice of the people. God gives us freedom and the state may not remove our freedom nor the knowledge of our freedom, such as conscience, from the people using the public money. Private persons may agree with the HHS mandate, gay marriage, abortion, but they are not free to use tax dollars to deconstruct out First Amendment rights to freedom, or to use the public forum to deny people knowledge of their First Amendment civil rights, or any freedom of our founding principles.

  • Only a shameless partisan hack would somehow turn Obama’s support for gay marriage into a post condemning Cardinal Dolan and Lockean liberalism. And luckily, Tony is just that kind of partisan hack.

  • The USA doesn’t have an anti-Catholic party. It is an anti-Catholic country, founded by anti-Catholics, using an anti-Catholic political philosophy. The USA isn’t just anti-Catholic by inclination. It is anti-Catholic by design. (Which means that it’s point of reference is still the Catholic Church in that the program models itself upon being against what so ever the Catholic Church is for.)*

    Root meet fruit.

    The point of attack has to be against the the tacit assumptions upon which this castle of sand is founded: Protestantism, and it’s unnatural progeny Liberalism. Every ounce of Catholic effort has to directed towards completing the counter-reformation. The Roman Catholic Church is the higher order of government. Washington must be brought to renounce London and kneel before the Chair of Peter.^

    *First Rule of Catholic blogging: make sure to write “Catholic” as many times as possible.
    ^Second Rule of Catholic blogging: aim high (be ye not lukewarm). God likes to do the miraculous.

  • It is an anti-Catholic country, founded by anti-Catholics, using an anti-Catholic political philosophy.

    Channeling Don here: rubbish. Although your writing does vaguely resemble that of the blogger mentioned in the previous comment. You even have that first name, last initial thing going for you.

    General Rule of Blogging: try to be at least minimally coherent.

  • Paul Zummo:
    You might want to check the best-before-date on your Ph.D in politics. Have you investigated going back and trying to get a refund? What? No warranty? Sucker.

    General rule of history: read it. Oh, wait, you are a political science guy. Never mind.

  • Darren:

    You might want to check this out. It more than ably refutes your contention that this country was founded on an anti-Catholic political philosophy:

    http://catholiceducation.org/articles/politics/pg0003.html

  • Paul Zummo:

    Look, I am sorry. I’m new here and I don’t know you. Nobody likes to get their comments treated so dismissively, but that doesn’t give me the right to resort to snark. I hope that you can accept my apology.

    My name is Darren Ouellette. I’m from Canada, which I gather is a negative around here. Whatever. We like to surf.

  • Greg Mockeridge:
    Well, that establishes that Jefferson was highly influenced Catholic sources, but it would surely be a leap to say that this establishes Jefferson as a Catholic. Important distinction, no? In addition, he was probably the only framer that knew he cribbed from Catholic sources. It is safe to say that he was very well read. In deed, this has to be one of the great cover-ups of history to only now have the DOI unmasked as a stealth Catholic document. The article you link to actually only pertains to the DOI. An insufficient counter-balance to the otherwise thorough-going Protestant character of War of Independence-era colonial America, IMHO.

    Interesting never the less.

  • “My name is Darren Ouellette. I’m from Canada, which I gather is a negative around here.”

    Not by me since my late mother was a proud Newfie and I spent most of the first four years of my life in Saint John’s. My mother became a naturalized citizen of the United States, but she never lost her fondness for her home land, a fondness I share as the previous blog posts I have done on aspects of Newfoundland culture can attest.

    “It is an anti-Catholic country, founded by anti-Catholics, using an anti-Catholic political philosophy.”

    No. The Founding Fathers, although some of them shared in the anti-Catholic prejudices of their day, established a country where Catholics, as well as Protestants, could live in freedom, practice their faith, and participate in the government. The greatest of the Founding Fathers, George Washington, was ever a friend to Catholics:

    http://the-american-catholic.com/2009/11/05/george-washington-and-catholics/

    Here is what Pope Leo Xiii had to say about American and its founding:

    http://the-american-catholic.com/2009/02/22/pope-leo-xiii-on-america-and-george-washington/

  • No worries Darren. I certainly instigated with my own snark, and I do apologize to you.

    But yes, considering the time period the Framers were generally respectful of Catholicism, with certain exceptions of course. John Adams had a grudging respect for the Church, though I recall him not caring much for the Latin Mass.

    And while I know the comment was made in sarcastic jest, some of us poly sci guys still love our history – at least those of us not trying to find the median voter in Chicago’s 11th ward on windy and rainy Tuesdays in March.

  • Jay Anderson, thanks for the insight. In that case, the man truly is certifiable.

    “My name is Darren Ouellette. I’m from Canada, which I gather is a negative around here.”

    Not a chance, unless some NDP blather starts leaking out . . .

    My Dad is the first American on his side of the family tree. Nowadays the clan hails from Trenton, Ontario, and there’s even an “Aiken’s Road” that leads out to where the RCAF base is, or used to be if it isn’t anymore.

    I have an Uncle Danny who used to work for Chrysler Canada, the makers of the largest cargo van Chrysler made. I had an Uncle Sonny who used to work for Labatt’s, and supervised the loading dock. Back in the day, we had family reunions up in the area every July.

    You do the math.

  • Wow, Darren. Think about what you’re saying. Massive colonial territories in the Western hemisphere were ruled by a country where to be Catholic meant either persecution (executions, having monasteries stolen or destroyed, priests hiding in tiny holes in the floor of homes) at worst and second class status at best (a lot of history on these in Ireland). To this day no Catholic can become the Monarch. The War of Independence freed Catholics of that rule and the resulting government reaffirmed their dignity and free exercise of religion.

    Your last name indicates that you’re French, at least partly so. You realize that while Quebec was French (The US attained french territories as well), most of the rest of your nation was ruled by an anti-Catholic regime, right? You realize that Canada wasn’t borne out of explicitly Catholic principles either? Though I would argue that while the founding of the United States wasn’t borne out of explicit Catholic principles, most were compatible with Catholic understanding of the dignity of man. These were ahead of their time and answer to a seriously problem of an older age. This has been affirmed repeatedly over the last 200 years by popes and bishops.

  • The USA isn’t just anti-Catholic by inclination. It is anti-Catholic by design.

    I think I recognize the writings of John Rao here. That is spoilt Vegemite you should not eat.

  • Art Deco:
    I have no idea who John Rao is. My reading of history in this instance is more influenced by Hilaire Belloc. I will look him up.

    RL:
    I am not saying any other countries are better and freely acknowledge that some were significantly worse. In fact it would not occur to me to separate out the developments in European culture and its transatlantic extension in terms of one country vs. another. I view it to be all of a piece, namely: to watch how a house turned against itself falls.

    My name indicates that I am Canadien (you will not find it in France prior to Quebec), and I am well aware that many of my cousins were loosing their heads to anti-Catholic traitors in France, but my kin had been away from France for well over 100 years by then.

    The DOI was compatible with natural law reasoning which, being written upon our hearts by Him who created us, should not cause surprise. Men, in searching their hearts for the truth, will often make recourse to natural law reasoning. The Catholic faith is truly the teaching of the heart, so, no surprise that there is a rich load of natural law reasoning tradition to be sieved by those with the charitable inclination. Never the less, I do not see the recourse to natural law reasoning by the F. F. as sufficient grounds to admit that this indicates a widespread pro-Catholic inclination (at best a toleration) among the general population or intelligentsia. They were Protestants and Masons, keenly given over to reasoning models fully untethered from sound Orthodoxy. I just do not see how these clearly anti-Catholic dispositions can be of no account when the foundation of the USA and it’s subsequent course of development is brought before one’s consideration.

    No, the most compatible understanding of the true nature of Man is the Catholic understanding. The inherent contradictions of those traditions that explicitly reject or do not fully assent to the Catholic understanding bring forth the fruits we in the West enjoy {sic} today.

    Now to the meat of your point: the FF’s allowed room for Catholics to practice the “cult” aspect of their religion, so long as accepted the Protestant-style deal with the secular powers. That deal, while probably better than nothing, is less than it should be.

  • Oh, and thank you to all for your expressions of affection for your northern neighbours. Perhaps the feeling will not last towards me, but at least I will know it will be centred in your disagreement with my historical interpretations and not a knee-jerk reaction to my non-US subjecthood.

    Again, my thanks.

  • Don McClarey:
    Please accept my thanks for your efforts in providing this wonder blog with so many richly interesting posts. It pains me that I am in disagreement with you upon your assessment of the USA has having an if not pro- then at least not anti-Catholic character, but I just do not see sufficient grounds on the basis of a few isolated instances of less than a handful of FF having a magnanimity towards Catholicism in general and Catholics in particular, to accept that, in the great tumult of post-reformation European culture (noting that I do not separate the USA from the European nations for purposes of culture), the USA can be considered as a Catholic nation.
    Granted, I’d be hard pressed to actually name ANY nation that would be considered Catholic by my admittedly high standard, but in affirming to all the tenants which the Catholic faith purposes to my reasoning, I am obliged to expect nothing less.

    I do not wish to be an ungrateful guest. I hope that I do not become an unwelcome one in my dissent.

  • Now to the meat of your point: the FF’s allowed room for Catholics to practice the “cult” aspect of their religion, so long as accepted the Protestant-style deal with the secular powers. That deal, while probably better than nothing, is less than it should be.

    The ‘meat’ is institutional architecture, not cogitations about institutional architecture. The architecture may have its defects, but it is neither more nor less compatible with a Catholic society than any other architecture. As for the ‘Protestant-style’ deal, there was and is no Catholic society upon which to construct a confessional state. There was a modest (and much abused minority) in Maryland and a presence in three other colonies. The society was not merely protestant but modally Calvinist. A confessional state would have injured the Church and would continue to injure it (see the relation between state and society surrounding the “Church of Sweden”).

  • Art Deco:
    No, I do not mean a confessional state, I mean a subsidiary governing structure, ie: a state, but necessarily a state, being in acknowledgement of the fact that the Pope and the Hierarchy of the Church is the superior source of governing authority because it maintains the deposit of faith upon which truth in society may be maintained. The USA most definitely does not acknowledge this relationship. That is an architectural, not dispositional, element of the governing structure of the USA. The concept I put forward supposes that those states that so acknowledge the Chair of St. Peter will have a sizable percentage of the population actively practicing the faith and forming their morality in accord there with, while the balance of the people do not actively attempt to undermine it.

    My reading of the Protestant revolution is that the rebel novel confessions sought to place themselves under the protection of secular rulers violating the relationship between the Christian religion and secular authority by inverting it. Supporting this inversion paid hansom dividends for some, but rent Christendom.

    For Catholics in Protestant dominated states, as I said above, you are free to engage in those aspects of the Catholic faith that can be placed under the distinction of cult, for it is held that one “cult” be of no different value than any other denomination (heresy of denominationalism), but Catholics may not make claims, in defense, that the law of the Church (teaching magisterium, code of canon law, traditional worship) precludes the practicing Catholic from actions of the secular state that violate the Faith. Nor is appealing to the Pope likely to do one much good today as the praxis of “how many divisions does the Pope command?” or “You and what army?” is the order of the day for almost all states. This is the out come of the Protestant rebellion. I do not see how the USA, in drawing so heavily upon the claims constellation of Protestantism, specific exceptions noted, can be considered as Catholophilic except in so far as Catholics accept the deal to abjure the status of the Magisterium as higher authority. In practice, so long as it is convenient for the interests which have domiciled themselves in the governing architecture of the USA, there can be good times. Inherent, however, is the inevitability of a clash between the unable to change Catholics and the change as needed secularists.

  • being in acknowledgement of the fact that the Pope and the Hierarchy of the Church is the superior source of governing authority because it maintains the deposit of faith upon which truth in society may be maintained. The USA most definitely does not acknowledge this relationship. That is an architectural, not dispositional, element of the governing structure of the USA

    No, it is a dispositional and not architectural feature. There is a distinction between spiritual and temporal power.

    Parastatal authority could be found in the hands of diocesan bishops and also abbots, but the papacy was not typically the locus of temporal power outside of central Italy.

  • I am not claiming that the Church Hierarchy is, except in tertiary functions, a temporal power.

    It could relent in the dispositional/architectural distinction.* The USA could, in theory, start acknowledging the authority of the Church Hierarchy, making it dispositional. I am incapable of determining if that would affect governing structures in already in place and active for some period of time within the USA, leaving aside the obvious cultural issues.

    *I could also not relent. I highly doubt, for example, that the SCOTUS could overturn federal law because it was deemed to be in conflict with the teachings of the RCC, no? That would be architectural.

  • Correction:
    I could relent in the…

  • “The USA could, in theory, start acknowledging the authority of the Church Hierarchy, making it dispositional.”

    That would never happen. The great thing for Catholicism in this country is that the State left the Church alone. One of the popes in the early portion of the nineteenth century, no fan of new fangled democracies, said that in no country was he more the Pope than in the United States. The experience of the Church with Catholic confessional states has often been far from happy, because of constant government interference with the Church, up to and including controlling the nomination of bishops. The Church in America has flourished with the hands off policy of the government. Currently we are battling against the Obama administration because it is diverging from that salutary policy, but for over two centuries freedom from government interference has been a boon for the Church in this country.

  • Donald R. McClarey:
    Which is largely my point, in that the Obamba reading of American liberal democracy is not without source material, even if that potential has been rarely actuated over the course of American history.

    It is my purpose to attempt to understand this phenomenon and search for more suitable ground upon which the Faith may flourish. It will likely be difficult to now have status quo ante.

  • What Obama is attempting to do is in direct contradiction to the intention of the Founding Fathers and the express language of the Constitution. There is no source material in our country’s history for his actions against the Church. That is why his actions are being challenged in our courts and why Obama has an excellent chance of being a one term president.

    I do not think you can find a government in history where the Church has so rapidly expanded as it has in the United States over the past two centuries and with virtually zero interference from the State.

  • Darren:

    I was not asserting Jefferson was a proto-Catholic, but that the political philosophy that undergirds the Declaration of Independence and thus America herself, is in line with Catholic political thought. In any case, the U.S. was not founded on an anti-Catholic political philosophy.

  • Greg:
    I thought you were suggesting that he was a crypto-Catholic. By your standard, Protestants are in line with Catholic theology because they read the Bible. You overstate your case. Congruence in a few particulars is not synonymous with concordance in generalities.

    It is my position that every post 1517 Western intellectual development – in the non- and anti-Catholic camp – is an ostracon of the Catholic Faith. Why should I drop my panties when someone manages to finds a fragment of what was lost in the Frankenstein cobbled together to save face after the original was shattered?

    Seriously, how does one find a political philosophy that is “of this world” that isn’t anti-Catholic? The capital “T” Truth has been established. Any other attempts at restatement are necessarily going to be bizarre fun house mirror images.

    I realize that being a foreigner & pulling out the j’accuse is likely to cause the wagons to circle, but I at least thought on a site for those claiming fealty to the RCC there would be a little more awareness of how American Exceptionalism probably isn’t quite so.

    My bad.

  • Let me give another perspective from a political progressive. Our sense is that there is a distinct movement in the Church hierarchy to a “take or leave it” mentality as it relates to issues like abortion, birth control and homosexuality. The USCBB has been uneven, if not totally hypocritical in its use of a false “religious liberty” argument with respect to PPACA regulations relating to access to birth control. The Church’ teaching on that matter is certainly not an inerrant one and as recently as 1968 a commission sent a recommendation to Paul VI to allow birth control, which he unfortunately declined to do.

    It is the liberal perspective that the Church lives and thrives when it engages in constructive dialogue with all parties and evolves in its teachings that are not core to the faith. Revealed Gospels say little if not anything authoritative about marriage, birth control, abortion and homosexuality once you read the texts and understand the context. From my personal perspective, it’s the lack of textual literacy, bad interpretations and lack of constructive dialogue within the Church itself that leads to our current divisions.

    I just listened to a Town Hall in which Cardinal Dolan spoke. He sounds like a very nice man on a personal basis. My sense is that he is either so out of touch with how a large number, if not the majority of US Catholics feel about these issues, or doesn’t care. That ultimately is sad.

  • Don:
    I get that you rebuff my suit on the basis of the intention of the FF*, but the original effort to found/constitute the USA isn’t the only instance of an act of constituting in the course of American political development. I believe that it is fair game to state that there have been other acts of constituting AKA re-constituting. I forward for your consideration, the Gettysburg Address in which Lincoln re-constituted America. I suspect that the New Deal would be an additional candidate as would Marbury vs. Madison, as would the 1913 founding of the Federal Reserve, or Johnson’s signing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. I do not agree with what he is doing, quite the contrary, but it is upon this president that, rightly or wrongly, Obama draws.

    Cavet: I am not putting his actions in the same class as the above noble/ignoble events, and would suggest his reading of history is on par with his recent demonstrations of his understanding of Christian theology.

    *and your position of “proof in the pudding” numbers of Catholics on the ground. To paraphrase your position, “How could there be an anti-Catholic character to this great nation, when there are so many Catholics around?”

  • Correction:
    … it is upon this precedent…

  • “Our sense is that there is a distinct movement in the Church hierarchy to a “take or leave it” mentality as it relates to issues like abortion, birth control and homosexuality.”

    Your problem Stephen is with 2000 years of Church teaching on these issues. The Church since the time of Christ has consistently condemned abortion, birth control and homosexuality. This quotation from the Didache from the first century demonstrates the antiquity of the teaching on abortion and homosexual acts:

    “You shall not commit murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not commit pederasty, you shall not commit fornication, you shall not steal, you shall not practice magic, you shall not practice witchcraft, you shall not murder a child by abortion nor kill that which is born. You shall not covet the things of your neighbor, you shall not swear, you shall not bear false witness, you shall not speak evil, you shall bear no grudge. You shall not be double-minded nor double-tongued, for to be double-tongued is a snare of death. Your speech shall not be false, nor empty, but fulfilled by deed. You shall not be covetous, nor rapacious, nor a hypocrite, nor evil disposed, nor haughty. You shall not take evil counsel against your neighbor. You shall not hate any man; but some you shall reprove, and concerning some you shall pray, and some you shall love more than your own life.”
    The condemnation of birth control is of equal vintage. Your quarrel is not with the current bishops but with the clear teaching of the Church founded by Christ for the past two millenia.

  • “I forward for your consideration, the Gettysburg Address in which Lincoln re-constituted America.”

    Lincoln’s entire political career was spent upholding the Declaration of Independence.

    Here is my take on the Gettysburg address:

    http://the-american-catholic.com/2009/02/05/much-noted-and-long-remembered/

  • ” I suspect that the New Deal would be an additional candidate as would Marbury vs. Madison, as would the 1913 founding of the Federal Reserve, or Johnson’s signing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.”
    Yes as to the New Deal. No as to Marbury as to judicial review as the courts in colonial America played that type of role in numerous cases citing the unwritten English constitution. No as to the Federal Reserve, crazy Glenn Beck notwithstanding. No as to the Civil Rights Act of 1964. American political history since the beginning has largely been a fight over the legacy of the Founding Fathers, and that fight continues today and is the true major issue in the 2012 Presidential election.

  • “To paraphrase your position, “How could there be an anti-Catholic character to this great nation, when there are so many Catholics around?””

    My position is that the Church has flourished where the government has left it alone. Church-State conflicts have been a constant theme in the history of the Church. American history, until very, very recently, largely avoided such conflicts, to the great benefit of the Church.

  • This may be opening up a huge can of worms and might be a topic for another thread, but I’ll tackle it anyway.

    Some conservative/libertarian types seem to push the idea that if you truly believe in conservative or federalist ideals, you have to view Lincoln as a villain who created the intrusive big federal government we know today, and the Civil War as an unjust War of Northern Aggression.

    Well, I don’t agree with either premise. But I am beginning to wonder if a situation might not eventually develop where some “red” states would secede in order to preserve something resembling a Judeo-Christian culture based on the rule of law against a tyrannical and aggressively secularist/atheistic federal government dominated by (ahem) Democrats. I’d almost rather it came to that, than to have Catholics or evangelicals forced to flee to South America or some remote, dirt poor Third World country in order to practice their faith. It would certainly be a lot easier to emigrate to Texas than to Chile or Argentina, right?

    My question is, it is possible, or logically sound, to believe that Lincoln did the right thing and the Southern states weren’t morally justified in seceding in 1860, yet also believe that secession MIGHT be morally justified in the 21st or 22nd century if things get really, really bad?

  • If there is any seceding to be done Elaine it will be by blue states. I intend to win this fight for the political future of this country, and I believe I am far from alone in that determination.

  • Don:
    Declaration of Independence is not a constitutional document. At the G. A. he reconstituted on the basis of the preamble of the DoI.

  • No, it is more important than the Constitution. The Declaration established the United States of America and what this nation stands for. The Constitution is merely the mechanism to carry forward the philosophy of govenment embodied in the Declaration.

  • “The Church since the time of Christ has consistently condemned abortion, birth control and homosexuality.”

    Actually, the Church has NOT condemned birth control per se, but contraception. Otherwise, even so-called NFP (which if used to avoid pregnancy is a form of birth control) would have to be likewise condemned by the Church. This is not by any means splitting hairs. Contraception acts against the meaning and purpose of the body regarding the reproductive system, whereas so-called NFP acts according the natural function of the reproductive system. That’s a major distinction. In fact, not understanding this distinction, which the “Church has condemned birth control” mistakenly implies, has contributed in no small part to the misunderstandings people have about the Church’s teaching and thus to its rejection of it.

  • Not to change the subject or anything, but did everyone notice how today’s Gospel reading is so relevant to our society’s normalization of sexual promiscuity, abortion and homosexuality with its concurrent ridicule and marginalization of Christianity?

    John 15:18-21

    Jesus said to his disciples:
    “If the world hates you, realize that it hated me first.
    If you belonged to the world, the world would love its own;
    but because you do not belong to the world,
    and I have chosen you out of the world,
    the world hates you.
    Remember the word I spoke to you,
    ‘No slave is greater than his master.’
    If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you.
    If they kept my word, they will also keep yours.
    And they will do all these things to you on account of my name,
    because they do not know the one who sent me.”

  • “This is not by any means splitting hairs.”

    Oh there is nothing wrong about splitting hairs Greg, I make a decent living doing it. 🙂

    Pius XII was the first pope to give limited approval to abstinence during infertile periods in his allocution to midwives in 1951:

    “Here again we are faced with two hypotheses. If, one of the parties contracted marriage with the intention of limiting the matrimonial right itself to the periods of sterility, and not only its use, in such a manner that during the other days the other party would not even have the right to ask for the debt, than this would imply an essential defect in the marriage consent, which would result in the marriage being invalid, because the right deriving from the marriage contract is a permanent, uninterrupted and continuous right of husband and wife with respect to each other.

    However if the limitation of the act to the periods of natural sterility does not refer to the right itself but only to the use of the right, the validity of the marriage does not come up for discussion. Nonetheless, the moral lawfulness of such conduct of husband and wife should be affirmed or denied according as their intention to observe constantly those periods is or is not based on sufficiently morally sure motives. The mere fact that husband and wife do not offend the nature of the act and are even ready to accept and bring up the child, who, notwithstanding their precautions, might be born, would not be itself sufficient to guarantee the rectitude of their intention and the unobjectionable morality of their motives.

    The reason is that marriage obliges the partners to a state of life, which even as it confers certain rights so it also imposes the accomplishment of a positive work concerning the state itself. In such a case, the general principle may be applied that a positive action may be omitted if grave motives, independent of the good will of those who are obliged to perform it, show that its performance is inopportune, or prove that it may not be claimed with equal right by the petitioner—in this case, mankind.”

    Humane Vitae 16 broadened this approval:
    Recourse to Infertile Periods

    “16. Now as We noted earlier (no. 3), some people today raise the objection against this particular doctrine of the Church concerning the moral laws governing marriage, that human intelligence has both the right and responsibility to control those forces of irrational nature which come within its ambit and to direct them toward ends beneficial to man. Others ask on the same point whether it is not reasonable in so many cases to use artificial birth control if by so doing the harmony and peace of a family are better served and more suitable conditions are provided for the education of children already born. To this question We must give a clear reply. The Church is the first to praise and commend the application of human intelligence to an activity in which a rational creature such as man is so closely associated with his Creator. But she affirms that this must be done within the limits of the order of reality established by God.

    If therefore there are well-grounded reasons for spacing births, arising from the physical or psychological condition of husband or wife, or from external circumstances, the Church teaches that married people may then take advantage of the natural cycles immanent in the reproductive system and engage in marital intercourse only during those times that are infertile, thus controlling birth in a way which does not in the least offend the moral principles which We have just explained. (20)

    Neither the Church nor her doctrine is inconsistent when she considers it lawful for married people to take advantage of the infertile period but condemns as always unlawful the use of means which directly prevent conception, even when the reasons given for the later practice may appear to be upright and serious. In reality, these two cases are completely different. In the former the married couple rightly use a faculty provided them by nature. In the later they obstruct the natural development of the generative process. It cannot be denied that in each case the married couple, for acceptable reasons, are both perfectly clear in their intention to avoid children and wish to make sure that none will result. But it is equally true that it is exclusively in the former case that husband and wife are ready to abstain from intercourse during the fertile period as often as for reasonable motives the birth of another child is not desirable. And when the infertile period recurs, they use their married intimacy to express their mutual love and safeguard their fidelity toward one another. In doing this they certainly give proof of a true and authentic love.”

  • “The USCBB has been uneven, if not totally hypocritical in its use of a false “religious liberty” argument with respect to PPACA regulations relating to access to birth control.”

    Yes, because it’s so painfully difficult to get ahold of contraceptives these days.

    One has to go as far as one’s local gas station, and that’s such an injustice.

  • Don:

    Do you know what they call a lawyer with a .0000001 IQ?

    Your honor.

  • The 1951 allocution to Midwives was also a veiled slap at theologians who were basically equating NFP with contraception. Founding father of the present day pro-life movement the late Fr. Paul Marx put it this way:

    “In 1951, Pope Pius XII twice addressed the subject of natural fertility control. In his first address (to midwives) he said, ‘There are serious motives…that can exempt for a long time, perhaps even the duration of marriage, from the positive and obligatory carrying out of the act. From this it follows that observing the non-fertile periods alone can be lawful only under a moral aspect.’ (Address to Midwives, 29 October 1951, n. 36). He studiously refused to use the term ‘birth control,’ which implies that babies are a kind of a product to be manufactured through the whim and will of the individual couple. In that first address, Pius XII showed himself quite aware of what had developed and was still developing in the field of NFP. He therefore admonished the midwives to base their advice not on popular publications but on scientific objectivity and the authoritative judgment of specialists in medicine and biology (n.30).

    Note that he recognized the possibility that some couples would find themselves in such a difficult situation that they could legitimately avoid all births; they would place their sexual relations in the infertile phase of the cycle exclusively. The rule that couples consult a priest before practicing NFP was the unfortunate invention of theologians, not of Pope or Church. This Pope once told a confidant that he would give his right arm if he could solve the problem of regulating births.

    I recall theologians of that era who thought that the conservative Pius XII had become rather liberal about the control of fertility through use of only the infertile phase of the cycle. Apparently their opinion was reported to him Less than a month later, 26 November 1951, he spoke as follows to the Congress of the Family Front. He did not hesitate to affirm a wide latitude in the legitimacy of regulating births by using the infertile times only: ‘ Therefore, in our last allocution on conjugal morality, we affirmed the legitimacy and at the same time, the limits–in truth very wide–of a regulation of offspring, which is unlike so-called ‘birth control’ is compatible with the law of God’ (n.21)” (Faithful for Life pp 101-102)

  • “The USCBB has been uneven, if not totally hypocritical in its use of a false “religious liberty” argument with respect to PPACA regulations relating to access to birth control.”

    Stephen,

    Perhaps in the spirit of dialogue you can explain why arguing from religious liberty is hypocritical. You cite the theological commission’s recommendations to Paul VI to allow birth control. But such commissions’ recommendations are not Magisterial pronouncements. Such pronouncments are the Pope’s and those bishops in union with him. A minor analogy would be Obama and his debt commission. The commission made recommendations to cut the deficit. Obama did nothing with these recommendations even though he set up the commission. Again not a precise analogy but, just because there is a commission, does not mean the recommendations need to be followed by those with the ultimate authority.

    “It is the liberal perspective that the Church lives and thrives when it engages in constructive dialogue with all parties and evolves in its teachings that are not core to the faith. Revealed Gospels say little if not anything authoritative about marriage, birth control, abortion and homosexuality once you read the texts and understand the context. From my personal perspective, it’s the lack of textual literacy, bad interpretations and lack of constructive dialogue within the Church itself that leads to our current divisions.”

    Please take this in the spirit of dialogue. The Gospels say little about many things. They say nothing about welfare being provided by the state. Does this mean it shouldn’t be done? Of course not. Jesus said precious little about many things. That’s why he gave us the Church to continue His mission in the world. This includes, as noted above, the Pope and bishiops in union with him teaching on morals and Faith. This is their charism given to them from God. A charism which theologians do not share in the same way. So, going back to your argument about the Pontifical Commission, no number of commissions will have an authority that the Pope has.

    And Revelation is not limited to the Gospels. It includes the whole of the Bible and the Churches Tradition. So for a little of the Bible see here:

    http://blog.adw.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Biblical-Teaching-on-Homosexual-Activity.pdf

  • “It is the liberal perspective that the Church lives and thrives when it engages in constructive dialogue with all parties and evolves in its teachings that are not core to the faith.”

    /gas station snark off

    That sounds nice, almost persuasive even, but quickly gets shoaled by vagueness. Starting with the insurmountable obstacle that there is no agreement as to what is “core to the faith.”

    Roger Haight, after all, argues that an empty tomb is not “core to the faith.” With one honorable exception, the liberals I read defended the poor confused apostate tooth and nail.

    Without agreement as to the core (and the liberal understanding is that this is a much smaller sphere than those to their “right”), “dialogue” is an exercise in dumbshow.

  • Liberals have no use for the Truth except to subvert it to serve the vile agenda.

    The Truth is not susceptible to dialogue or debate; nor to whining and gnashing of teeth.

    Plato: “Opinion is not Truth.”

  • Maryland has a Catholic name but is filled with protestants so most people pronounce it “Ma-riland”. In comparison with it’s neighbor Delaware where at least in Newcastle county lots of people are baptized Catholics but there are also a lot of Heretics like Mike Castle and Vice President Joe Biden, And if you live in Newark lots of College professors.

  • T Shaw has a point people should have their opinion tailored to the truth.

  • “He who is not with me, is against me.” Jesus Christ, Luke 11:23. Simple as that.

  • I totally agree with His Eminence but would adjust it to anti-Christian and anti-Jewish and Moslem (except for the Christians and Jews who have let today’s un-Natural Law views contradict their official Bibles which endorse the Natural Law that is imprinted in our Nature)

Surprise: Anti-Catholic Bigot Heads Pro-Abort Organization

Sunday, May 6, AD 2012

Anti-Catholic bigot, homosexual activist and Episcopalian minister Harry Knox is back in the news.  Long time readers of this blog will recall that President Obama appointed Knox to his Advisory Council on Faith Based and Neighborhood Partnerships back in 2009.  Go here to read a post on that appointment.

Knox has recently become the head of  the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice.  He has a post on the Huffington Post explaining why religious people should support the slaying of children in the womb, a post which proves, once again the truth of Socrates’ adage that an unexamined life is a tragedy.  Christopher Johnson, a non-Catholic  former Episcopalian, and a man who has taken up the cudgels so frequently in defense of the Church that I have designated him Defender of the Faith, gives one of the arguments of Mr. Knox a proper response:

A homosexual Episcopal minister named Harry Knox is set to become Führer und Reichskanzler of the national organization of Einsatzgruppen America the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice and while explaining why “religious” people should be celebrating abortion rather than mourning it, wrote one of the five or six stupidest statements I’ve read this year:

The harsh and condemning judgments of some religious leaders are troubling. They suggest that abortion is morally wrong, while ignoring the fact that miscarriages and unwanted pregnancies are common.  They deny that God is present in these times

Let’s take that one out for a spin, shall we?

(1) The harsh and condemning judgments about dropping a nuclear bomb on Tehran are troubling.  They suggest that the complete annihilation of Iran’s largest city and every single man, woman and child in it is morally wrong while ignoring the fact that hurricanes and tsunamis regularly destroy cities and kill innocent people.  They deny that God is present in these times

(2) The harsh and condemning judgments about setting off that bomb in a crowded city are troubling.  They suggest that terrorism is morally wrong while ignoring the fact that volcanoes regularly explode, killing thousands of people all over the world.  They deny that God is present in these times.

(3) Your harsh and condemning judgments about me boinking your wife are troubling.  They suggest that adultery is morally wrong while ignoring the fact that more men and women have sex outside of so-called “wedlock” than in it.  They deny that God is present in these times.

Continue reading...

22 Responses to Surprise: Anti-Catholic Bigot Heads Pro-Abort Organization

  • “One can only imagine what He will have to say to a purported minister of His Gospel who adopted such a stance.”

    He may not say anything. “…Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground.” John 8:6b

    And their response will be as follows, “…they went away, one by one, beginning with the eldest…” John 8:9.

    The only place they will have to go away to isn’t Heaven.

  • Harry knox’s mother thought abortion to be morally wrong for she brought him to birth, uinknowing who or what her son would become on earth. Also, Harry Knox’s father ought to have been involved in his son’s destiny. Harry Knox dishonors his parents. To be a minister of the Word and disobey God’s commandment to “Honor thy mother and thy father that thou shalt be long lived upon the face of the earth.” is an indication to what kind of job Harry Knox is going to do. Our tax dollars deserve better use.

  • Paul,
    The reason Christ wrote in the dirt that second time is found in the Douay Rheims version in Jeremiah 17:13:
    ” 17:13 O Lord, the hope of Israel:  all that forsake thee shall be confounded:  they that depart from thee, shall be WRITTEN IN THE EARTH…”
    In my opinion, Christ, who wrote Jeremiah 17:13, was writing each man’s name in the dirt with a clue to each of them ( e.g. name of a female) that told each of a hidden sin in their past.
    That is why they walk away one by one and in order of decreasing age because Christ writes each name and clue in order of descending age. But there is mercy here ( not in Jer.17:13 context) because each man may repent after having their self righteousness removed. Each already knew their hidden sin that was not hidden from Christ because Jeremiah 17:1 reads…”  The sin of Juda is written with a pen of iron, with the point of a diamond, it is graven upon the
    table of their heart…”

  • Gosh Mr. Knox, thanks! I can now stab my annoying neighbor in the chest and call it a heart attack! Woot!

  • The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) says that condoms do not prevent HIV/aids. The FDA says that HIV/aids and all viruses pass between the molecules of the material, a scientific fact. The Center for Disease Control (CDC) says that SOME protection is better than none. The only way to use a lethal condom properly with HIV/aids is total abstinence as Pope Benedict XVI has proclaimed. Read: “Do Condoms leak HIV?” Does Harry Knox accept that he is guilty for every person who has contracted HIV/aids through his advocacy? Does Harry Knox accept that there is an Eighth Commandment that says: “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor”? And a Fifth Commandment that states: “Thou shalt not kill” even through HIV/aids advocacy? If Harry Knox is a minister of the Word of God, He needs to minister to the Word of God by telling the truth. Concealing and withholding the scientific truth about HIVV/aids and condoms from the taxpayers is criminal. Distorting scientific fact does violence to the common good and to the will of God through abortion, promiscuity and disease. Our tax dollars deserve someone who is who he says he is. If Harry Knox takes an oath of office he is a perjurer.
    My immediate response to Harry Knox’s indifference to HIV spread is that he is infected.

  • This can be an amusing and diverting activitie.

    Here’s my corollary to Knox’s moral deviance.

    Everyone will rightly condemn the following: “Make the World a better place. Shoot a liberal in the face.” Let’s give it the “Knox Treatment.”

    The harsh and condemning judgments of some religious leaders are troubling. They suggest that shooting liberals is morally wrong, while ignoring the fact that shootings and armed assaults are common. They deny that God is present in these times . . .

    Knox is either dumber than dirt or so controlled by evil as to be unable think rationally.

    A religious person might contemplate miscarriage and ascribe it to God’s will.

    God is not present with baby murders. The baby murderer violently acts against God’s will and denies the victim God’s creative act.

    What an evil idiot.

  • Is a homosexual taking the lead in an antiabortion mocment somwhow equivalent to a blind mind taking charge of a gun club? Perhaps he sees his new role as advancing the gay anti “breeders” hate campaign.

  • I do hope this is not to off topic but did anyone else notice the man with the bag on his head?

  • Valentin says:
    Sunday, May 6, 2012 A.D. at 7:29pm
    I do hope this is not to off topic but did anyone else notice the man with the bag on his head?
    That was no bag.

  • Yeah it was a bag. The bag guy who was on the panel to the side of Knox in the video was called “Moses” and supposedly was a homosexual from Nigeria fleeing persecution. The bag over his head was a media attention getting device, although the purported reason was to protect his identity.

  • I think the whole coexist unitarian is not a group to trust at the school I go to there was once a couple of boys whose dad ran the local unitarian church and he would not let them eat meat (how tolerant) because he was a vegetarian so at the school the staff members would let them eat the food that they had there so they eat tonnes of meat at the school and eventually started looking like shining Adonises and their decided to pull them out and move his whole family to Mexico because he was inspired by nature and when they got there he left them there and ran off with some mistress.

  • I am sorry there is supposed to be a “dad” in between “their” and “decided”

  • Harsh and condemning judgements trouble Harry Knox. Murder of babes, soaking the earth with blood, cannot be morally wrong when the cause is so common. Abuse of Free Will is God’s fault. He shouldn’t have given it to the human race because it doesn’t want to be held responsible for justifying its insanity. If the kids want to cheat in school, then take risks with the lives of others for what they’re supposed to know; well cheating is common, so tragedies of failure and error should be allowable, not accountable. Blame whoever sheds light on – yes, even Harry Knox – right and wrong, good and evil, up and down, sane and insane. That’s the way it goes.

    Just wondering about the root of the word Episcopal – is it tied to Epistles, such as are found in the Holy Bible?

  • Episcopal derives from the Greek episkopos. Yes, it’s in the New Testament.

  • Donald, it is not a surprise that Obama has appointed yet another “Chief Advocate of the Culture of Death”. You should all have seen it coming. By now, Obama’s Evil design on Humanity is as clear as the Sun at Noon. He is mocking God with every breath he takes and each beat of his heart. Yes, and Jesus HAS WRITTEN IN THE EARTH about him and his cohorts. He wrote and continues to write IN THE EARTH for those Sinners whom He knows – as only God can know – who will never, ever repent because they sold their souls to the Devil a long time ago.

  • Pingback: MONDAY MORNING EDITION | The Pulpit
  • bill bannon,

    Thanks for the insight.

  • Huh. Minor mystery.

    The NAB translation of Jeremiah 17:13b is very different most other bibles:

    “The rebels shall be enrolled in the netherworld; they have forsaken the LORD, source of living waters.” http://www.usccb.org/bible/jer/17:13

    Virtually every other translation has something along the lines of “those who turn away from you shall be written in the earth, for they have forsaken the LORD, the fountain of living water.” http://bible.cc/jeremiah/17-13.htm

    There is almost always a good reason for the word choice in NAB, but this one is escaping me.

    The Hebrew verb is ‘kathab’ and the various meanings are shown here, mostly supporting the translation ‘written’ where NAB uses ‘enrolled’: http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/hebrew/kjv/kathab.html

    The Septuagint uses ?????????? which I would suspect also supports ‘written’. http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jeremiah&c=17&t=LXX#13

    Also, NAB’s choice of ‘netherworld’ where other translations use ‘earth’ or ‘dust’. But what’s really baffling is that NAB’s footnote to John 8:6 references RSV: “Cf. Jer 17:13 (RSV): “Those who turn away from thee shall be written in the earth, for they have forsaken the LORD, the fountain of living water”; cf. Jn 7:38.”

    Anyway, thanks again to Bill for bringing this up.

  • He’s not just anti-Catholic; the guy is also anti-sequitur. I read the original column of his at HuffPo and every bit of it was as poorly-reasoned as the example given above.

  • We can do these all day: The harsh and condemning judgments about beating my wife, perhaps to death, are troubling. They suggest that wife-beating is morally wrong while ignoring the fact that wives are beaten, occasionally to death, all over the world. They deny that God is present in these times. Call it the Harry Knox defense.

  • Episcopal (episcopos) and Epistle (epistole) are only related in the Greek – linguistically – by their preposition starting the words. Epi… has several meanings but upon or over are a basic hit.

    Their root words are different – EpiSCOPOS is related to seeing, thus the bishop’s office is one of oversight. EpiSTOLE is related to the word “to send.” Thus it is something sent to (upon).

    They are both in the New Testament because functionally for the faith the ARE related, as the Epistles are letters which the teaching office (magisterium) of the Episcopacy sent to their “flocks.” Thus, to use them correctly in a sentence: I certainly hope the Episcopal conference in the U. S. would send more epistles with the quality of the recent document on our first freedom!

  • And yes – I noticed I’m not perfect with my grammar. I’ll blame it on the construction happing in my office right now.

The Courage of the New York Times

Wednesday, March 14, AD 2012

 

Recently the New York Times ran a Catholic bashing ad calling for Liberal Catholics to desert the Faith.  The ad was sponsored by the virulently anti-Catholic atheist group Freedom From Religion.  Go here to read a superb evisceration of the ad by Charles Lewis.

Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugged decided to submit an ad which made similar accusations, but against Islam instead of the Church.  The New York Times rejected the ad.

Bob Christie, Senior Vice President of Corporate Communications for the New York Times, just called me to advise me that they would be accepting my ad, but considering the situation on the ground in Afghanistan, now would not be a good time, as they did not want to enflame an already hot situation. They will be reconsidering it for publication in “a few months.” So I said to Mr. Christie, “Isn’t this the very point of the ad? If you feared the Catholics were going to attack the New York Times building, would you have run that ad?” Mr. Christie said, “I’m not here to discuss the anti-Catholic ad.” I said, “But I am, it’s the exact same ad.” He said, “No, it’s not.” I said, “I can’t believe you’re bowing to this Islamic barbarity and thuggery. I can’t believe this is the narrative. You’re not accepting my ad. You’re rejecting my ad. You can’t even say it.”

We used the same language as the anti-Catholic ad. The only difference is, ours was true and what we describe is true. The anti-Catholic ad was written by fallacious feminazis.

Continue reading...

22 Responses to The Courage of the New York Times

  • All the news that’s fit to print … er … spin … uh … omit.

  • What liberal, pray tell, actually DOES support free speech and actually HAS courage?

  • This is getting scary. Where is this going?

    When the Church faced these kinds of bigoted attacks in the 1920s, Catholics took to the streets. Do we have the courage to do more than talk?

  • I have my qualms about Pam Geller, but this was pure, unadulterated brilliance.

    Starting with the fawning treatment of the “mostly peaceful” Occupiers, the President’s embrace of Bill Maher’s sweet, sweet cash and now this, 2012 is shaping up to be the Year of the Double Standard.

    Good to have it out in the open.

  • “Catholics took to the streets. Do we have the courage to do more than talk?”

    The first step is to give the forces of anti-Catholic bigotry a thrashing this year at the polls that they, and the nation, will long remember.

  • They are so easily played.

    It’s censorship, too. They do not tolerate dissent.

    All the news that’s fit to print with a pinko yellow tint.

  • The Imam in the back said everyone attack and it turned into a ballroom blitz.
    ~The Sweet

  • Pingback: THURSDAY MORNING EDITION | ThePulp.it
  • Ugh. Just read the original. Isn’t the “owner” of the blog here a lawyer? What are the definitions of libel? Is the original ad libelous? If not, it sure comes awfully darned close.

    That said, though, I must (while holding my nose) agree with one thing it says. At the end, it asks all liberal, lukewarm and “cafeteria” Catholics to exit. Fine with me. Vaya con Dios, and please, do come back if you want to actually observe the faith. Remember the Prodigal.

    I forget where I read it, but somebody of some import said that those who do not stand with Cardinal Dolan, et al., against this onslaught have already left the Church. They just don’t know it. It all comes down to actions vs. words. I could stand in the garage, go “vroom vroom” and expel smelly fumes but that does not make me a car.

    If you want to work on Saturdays and eat a McRib, help yourself. Just don’t call yourself an Orthodox Jew.

    If you want to throw back a shot or two of Jack Daniel’s and your wife & daughters can wear things other than a body-length shower curtain, fine. Just don’t call yourself a Muslim.

    If you want to artificially interrupt God’s gift of the creation of life for your own carnal needs, hey, more power to ya. Just don’t call yourself a Catholic.

    And, if you want to lie, twist, propagandize, oppress, attack, persecute, threaten and tyrannize, take your best shot. Just don’t call yourself an American, because that’s the last thing in the world you are. I’d suggest, too, that you go someplace else to do it – Americans are pretty patient but we do have our limits. Remember, there’s a Second Amendment right behind the First.

  • It is a group blog WK although I, for my sins no doubt, am an attorney. Nothing in the original ad would constitute libel in the legal sense, since it is basically a long rant based upon opinion. Additionally since the Church most definitely is a “public figure” it would be virtually impossible to prevail in a libel suit under current case law.

  • What liberal, pray tell, actually DOES support free speech and actually HAS courage?

    Prof. Robert David Johnson (a.k.a. “KC Johnson”).

    Prof. Harold Pollack is a fairly resonable fellow.

  • Never pick an argument with someone who buys ink by the barrel. There was a story the other day about a toilet paper shortage in New Jersey. Seems to me that The New York Times could very well fill the gap.

  • “When the Church faced these kinds of bigoted attacks in the 1920s, Catholics took to the streets.”

    Unfortunately there would be a fair number taking to the streets to attack the Church:

    http://vox-nova.com/2012/03/13/us-bishops-veering-off-track/#comments

  • It is a group blog WK although I, for my sins no doubt, am an attorney.

    Thanks for the chuckle and explanation. To my discredit I am not up to snuff on the basics of such things, and should probably reinforce my fundamental knowledge.

    Maybe when the next teenager departs for academia and I get half my house back . . .

  • What liberal, pray tell, actually DOES support free speech and actually HAS courage?

    Nat Hentoff.

  • DP:

    I’m not sure Nat H. is a real liberal.

    Can you cite any writing or statement where he either called a conservative woman a dirty name or defended those that did?

    AD: Clueless college professors don’t count.

  • eat a McRib

    I’m not so sure that counts as pork. In fact, I’m not sure what it is.

  • I wonder whether those dissing the ‘lack of courage’ of the NYT have considered that their response – not wanting to inflame an already tense situation – – most likely had to do with our young men and women who are “in harm’s way” in Afghanistan and, in smaller numbers, in some other countries overseas. There’s nothing whatever in their response that indicates that the concern was for themselves.

  • The New York Times Tade has never been shy about reporting alleged misdeeds by American forces in Iraq and Afghanistan in banner head lines. The fact that this might have inflamed jihadis in those country and lead to the death of American servicemen never bothered them in the slightest. The rejection of the ad was all about the cowardice of the New York Times personnel fearing for their own safety if they printed the ad, and also because it is not politically correct to give vent to anti-Islamic sentiment while anti-Catholic bigotry is virulent on the ever so tolerant Left.

  • Nat Hentoff is my favorite pro-life atheist, a contradiction in realities. Pro-life persons are conservative. It was lovely meeting him here again.

  • Yeah, the Times is desperately concerned about the safety of our servicemen overseas. That must be it. It doesn’t jibe with how they reported Abu Ghraib, but charity believeth all things, I suppose.

    http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/news/international/countriesandterritories/iraq/abu_ghraib/index.html

  • It’s our own fault. When are Catholics going to stop voting for Democrats? Yes, there is a connection between seeing this kind of anti-catholic bullying and politics. Do you think it’s coincidental this ad runs so closely following the contraception coverage controversy in the Obamacare law?
    No, it’s no coincidence…..and it will continue…. Wake up and stop voting for Democrats!