Jews News reports:
'British Government refuses to say whether proclaiming divinity of Christ is a hate crime,' Catholic Herald, December 14, 2017:
The British government has refused to say whether telling people about the Christian faith could be a hate crime.
Lord Pearson of Rannoch, a UKIP peer, says when he raised a question on the issue on the House of Lords, the government failed to state clearly whether Christians cannot be prosecuted just for stating their beliefs.
"I said to the government ‘Will they confirm unequivocally that a Christian who says that Jesus is the only son of the one true God cannot be arrested for hate crime or any other offence, however much it may offend a Muslim or anyone of any other religion?’”
In response to the question, government whip Baroness Vere of Norbiton said: “My Lords, I am not going to comment on that last question from the noble Lord.” She added that the legal definition of “hate crime” has been the same for the past 10 years.
Speaking to Premier Christian Radio, Lord Pearson said the refusal to comment was “pretty unique” and “makes one very worried”.
He said the current definition of “hate crime”, which relies on whether the victim feels offended, was “stupid” and called for the law to be clarified."
Today, a growing army of lost souls - the children of Belial - are feverishly preparing a world which will be ready and eager to accept the reign of Antichrist, a rule which will be thoroughly saturated with witchcraft and occultism, a demon-state where daily libations of human bodies and blood will be offered in satanic worship to placate the Man-God and his master Satan. Under the banner of a political and militarily organized atheism, this army of secular and occult humanists are uniting to deny the true God and His plan for humanity.
Only those who remain faithful to prayer will persevere to the end. This explains why so many who once professed the Christian faith have now abandoned the faith altogether or remain in the Church only in a bodily manner (see Lumen Gentium, No. 14).
Father Livio Fanzaga reminds us that, "Prayer is another fundamental weapon for the great battle of the end times. When man will glorify himself and proclaim the Antichrist as God made man, the supernatural principle will be preserved only by those who cling to the divine presence in prayer. These will 'experience' God, His existence, lordship, power and glory. In the time of Antichrist, the power of suggestion will cloud reason. Only those who intimately experience the supernatural in prayer will have the strength to acknowledge God's existence, despite the apparent evidence to the contrary...in an era marked by the seduction of the heart, of a general obscuring of the mind, and of the folly of reason, only those who have had a strong experience of God in prayer will preserve the faith. In that supernatural experience the faith will be conserved and you will conform to it. If you look to the sun and see the light, even if man denies the existence of the sun, what can you say? Having seen the sun you will not vacillate in the faith. You will be a rock in the waves of the sea." (Wrath of God: The Days of the Antichrist, pp. 149, 150).
Romano Guardini, in his classic work entitled The Lord, warns us that the Antichrist's arguments, "will be so impressive, supported by means of such tremendous power - violent and diplomatic, material and intellectual - that to reject them will result in almost insurmountable scandal, and everyone whose eyes are not opened by grace will be lost." (p. 513).
We pray because we love the Lord Jesus and desire to have an intimate relationship with Him. Our prayer is rooted in love. And this love will preserve us from the Man of Sin (even if we lose our bodies to martyrdom). This is the love that has made the martyrs, virgins, apostles and all the saints. St. Paul assures us that because of this love, "Neither death, nor life, nor angels...nor things present, nor things to come, nor might...nor any other creature shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus Our Lord." (Romans 8: 35).
Showing posts with label Belief. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Belief. Show all posts
Friday, December 22, 2017
Is the UK about to proclaim belief in Christ's divinity a "hate crime"?
Labels:
Antichrist,
Baroness,
Belief,
Christ,
England,
Hate Crime,
Jews News,
Lord Pearson,
Norbiton,
Preparation,
Rannoch,
UK,
Vere,
Whip
Friday, September 23, 2016
Francis to journalists: Belief in God isn't necessary, only honesty
Francis just told journalists:
"The question here isn't to believe in God or not. The question is to be or not to be honest with oneself and with others. This is the journalist's job -we might say his mission too-: to get as close as possible to the truth and never to say or write anything that one knows, in his conscience, to be false.”
This isn't the teaching of Vatican II's Inter Mirifica:
3. The Catholic Church, since it was founded by Christ our Lord to bear salvation to all men and thus is obliged to preach the Gospel, considers it one of its duties to announce the Good News of salvation also with the help of the media of social communication and to instruct men in their proper use.
It is, therefore, an inherent right of the Church to have at its disposal and to employ any of these media insofar as they are necessary or useful for the instruction of Christians and all its efforts for the welfare of souls. It is the duty of Pastors to instruct and guide the faithful so that they, with the help of these same media, may further the salvation and perfection of themselves and of the entire human family. In addition, the laity especially must strive to instill a human and Christian spirit into these media, so that they may fully measure up to the great expectations of mankind and to God's design.
4. For the proper use of these media it is most necessary that all who employ them be acquainted with the norms of morality and conscientiously put them into practice in this area. They must look, then, to the nature of what is communicated, given the special character of each of these media. At the same time they must take into consideration the entire situation or circumstances, namely, the persons, place, time and other conditions under which communication takes place and which can affect or totally change its propriety. Among these circumstances to be considered is the precise manner in which a given medium achieves its effect. For its influence can be so great that men, especially if they are unprepared, can scarcely become aware of it, govern its impact, or, if necessary, reject it.
5. It is, however, especially necessary that all parties concerned should adopt for themselves a proper moral outlook on the use of these media, especially with respect to certain questions that have been vigorously aired in our day.
The first question has to do with "information," as it is called, or the search for and reporting of the news. Now clearly this has become most useful and very often necessary for the progress of contemporary society and for achieving closer links among men. The prompt publication of affairs and events provides every individual with a fuller, continuing acquaintance with them, and thus all can contribute more effectively to the common good and more readily promote and advance the welfare of the entire civil society. Therefore, in society men have a right to information, in accord with the circumstances in each case, about matters concerning individuals or the community. The proper exercise of this right demands, however, that the news itself that is communicated should always be true and complete, within the bounds of justice and charity. In addition, the manner in which the news is communicated should be proper and decent. This means that in both the search for news and in reporting it, there must be full respect for the laws of morality and for the legitimate rights and dignity of the individual. For not all knowledge is helpful, but "it is charity that edifies."(1)
6. The second question deals with the relationship between the rights, as they are called, of art and the norms of morality. Since the mounting controversies in this area frequently take their rise from false teachings about ethics and aesthetics, the Council proclaims that all must hold to the absolute primacy of the objective moral order, that is, this order by itself surpasses and fittingly coordinates all other spheres of human affairs-the arts not excepted-even though they be endowed with notable dignity. For man who is endowed by God with the gift of reason and summoned to pursue a lofty destiny, is alone affected by the moral order in his entire being. And likewise, if man resolutely and faithfully upholds this order, he will be brought to the attainment of complete perfection and happiness.
Pope John Paul II, speaking to journalists, echoed this teaching:
"You are very concerned about freedom of information and of expression: you are right. Think yourselves lucky to enjoy it! Use this freedom well to grasp the truth more closely and to admit your readers, your listeners or viewers into "whatever is true, whatever is honourable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is gracious", to repeat the words of St Paul (Ph 4:8); into what helps them to live in justice and brotherhood, to discover the ultimate meaning of life, to open them up to the mystery of God, so near each of us."
It is critical that journalists remain open to the order created by God. Yet Francis the Masonic Destroyer would have them believe that belief in God simply isn't relevant to their vocation.
Francis is preparing the Church and the world for an age without Christ, for the reign of Antichrist.
Who will be able to resist the Antichrist when he reveals himself? - which could be at any time now. As I mentioned in a previous post, Romano Guardini has provided us with the answer:
"One day the Antichrist will come: a human being who introduces an order of things in which rebellion against God will attain its ultimate power. He will be filled with enlightenment and strength. The ultimate aim of all aims will be to prove that existence witout Christ is possible - nay rather, that Christ is the enemy of existence, which can be fully realized only when all Christian values have been destroyed. His arguments will be so impressive, supported by means of such tremendous power - violent and diplomatic, material and intellectual - that to reject them will result in almost insurmountable scandal, and everyone whose eyes are not opened by grace will be lost. Then it will be clear what the Christian essence really is: that which stems not from the world, but from the heart of God; victory of grace over the world; redemption of the world, for her true essence is not to be found in herself, but in God, from whom she has received it. When God becomes all in all, the world will finally burst into flower."
Those who believe in their own intellectual prowess will succumb to the lie. They will be seduced by the Antichrist. Already we see the spirit of Antichrist seducing so many as they scramble to find teachers who will tickle their ears and tell them what they want to hear. But their end is destruction.
"The question here isn't to believe in God or not. The question is to be or not to be honest with oneself and with others. This is the journalist's job -we might say his mission too-: to get as close as possible to the truth and never to say or write anything that one knows, in his conscience, to be false.”
This isn't the teaching of Vatican II's Inter Mirifica:
3. The Catholic Church, since it was founded by Christ our Lord to bear salvation to all men and thus is obliged to preach the Gospel, considers it one of its duties to announce the Good News of salvation also with the help of the media of social communication and to instruct men in their proper use.
It is, therefore, an inherent right of the Church to have at its disposal and to employ any of these media insofar as they are necessary or useful for the instruction of Christians and all its efforts for the welfare of souls. It is the duty of Pastors to instruct and guide the faithful so that they, with the help of these same media, may further the salvation and perfection of themselves and of the entire human family. In addition, the laity especially must strive to instill a human and Christian spirit into these media, so that they may fully measure up to the great expectations of mankind and to God's design.
4. For the proper use of these media it is most necessary that all who employ them be acquainted with the norms of morality and conscientiously put them into practice in this area. They must look, then, to the nature of what is communicated, given the special character of each of these media. At the same time they must take into consideration the entire situation or circumstances, namely, the persons, place, time and other conditions under which communication takes place and which can affect or totally change its propriety. Among these circumstances to be considered is the precise manner in which a given medium achieves its effect. For its influence can be so great that men, especially if they are unprepared, can scarcely become aware of it, govern its impact, or, if necessary, reject it.
5. It is, however, especially necessary that all parties concerned should adopt for themselves a proper moral outlook on the use of these media, especially with respect to certain questions that have been vigorously aired in our day.
The first question has to do with "information," as it is called, or the search for and reporting of the news. Now clearly this has become most useful and very often necessary for the progress of contemporary society and for achieving closer links among men. The prompt publication of affairs and events provides every individual with a fuller, continuing acquaintance with them, and thus all can contribute more effectively to the common good and more readily promote and advance the welfare of the entire civil society. Therefore, in society men have a right to information, in accord with the circumstances in each case, about matters concerning individuals or the community. The proper exercise of this right demands, however, that the news itself that is communicated should always be true and complete, within the bounds of justice and charity. In addition, the manner in which the news is communicated should be proper and decent. This means that in both the search for news and in reporting it, there must be full respect for the laws of morality and for the legitimate rights and dignity of the individual. For not all knowledge is helpful, but "it is charity that edifies."(1)
6. The second question deals with the relationship between the rights, as they are called, of art and the norms of morality. Since the mounting controversies in this area frequently take their rise from false teachings about ethics and aesthetics, the Council proclaims that all must hold to the absolute primacy of the objective moral order, that is, this order by itself surpasses and fittingly coordinates all other spheres of human affairs-the arts not excepted-even though they be endowed with notable dignity. For man who is endowed by God with the gift of reason and summoned to pursue a lofty destiny, is alone affected by the moral order in his entire being. And likewise, if man resolutely and faithfully upholds this order, he will be brought to the attainment of complete perfection and happiness.
Pope John Paul II, speaking to journalists, echoed this teaching:
"You are very concerned about freedom of information and of expression: you are right. Think yourselves lucky to enjoy it! Use this freedom well to grasp the truth more closely and to admit your readers, your listeners or viewers into "whatever is true, whatever is honourable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is gracious", to repeat the words of St Paul (Ph 4:8); into what helps them to live in justice and brotherhood, to discover the ultimate meaning of life, to open them up to the mystery of God, so near each of us."
It is critical that journalists remain open to the order created by God. Yet Francis the Masonic Destroyer would have them believe that belief in God simply isn't relevant to their vocation.
Francis is preparing the Church and the world for an age without Christ, for the reign of Antichrist.
Who will be able to resist the Antichrist when he reveals himself? - which could be at any time now. As I mentioned in a previous post, Romano Guardini has provided us with the answer:
"One day the Antichrist will come: a human being who introduces an order of things in which rebellion against God will attain its ultimate power. He will be filled with enlightenment and strength. The ultimate aim of all aims will be to prove that existence witout Christ is possible - nay rather, that Christ is the enemy of existence, which can be fully realized only when all Christian values have been destroyed. His arguments will be so impressive, supported by means of such tremendous power - violent and diplomatic, material and intellectual - that to reject them will result in almost insurmountable scandal, and everyone whose eyes are not opened by grace will be lost. Then it will be clear what the Christian essence really is: that which stems not from the world, but from the heart of God; victory of grace over the world; redemption of the world, for her true essence is not to be found in herself, but in God, from whom she has received it. When God becomes all in all, the world will finally burst into flower."
Those who believe in their own intellectual prowess will succumb to the lie. They will be seduced by the Antichrist. Already we see the spirit of Antichrist seducing so many as they scramble to find teachers who will tickle their ears and tell them what they want to hear. But their end is destruction.
Tuesday, February 16, 2016
University of Portland: Report "incidents of discomfort."
The University of Portland is encouraging students to report “incidents of discomfort” to its Public Safety department.
“We ask members of our community to SPEAK UP and report alleged incidents of discrimination and incidents of discomfort regarding observed or experienced interactions of intolerance."
Barry-Arquit, the university’s director of marketing and communication, said that, “The creation of this web-page reflects our desire to create a welcoming community for everyone. Campus safety is simply one of the many resources available and would be up to the discretion of the individual as to whether public safety needed to be involved..
“The words ‘incidents of discomfort’ are intentionally broad as each person within the community would likely describe a different situation or experience that would define that description..."
Intentionally broad for a reason. It is not difficult to imagine this being used as a tool by homosexuals and homosexual activists to silence opposition to the homosexual agenda or any expression of belief that authentic marriage is between one man and one woman.
As one website explains:
"Once they succeeded in ending democracy and turning Germany into a one-party dictatorship, the Nazis orchestrated a massive propaganda campaign to win the loyalty and cooperation of Germans. The Nazi Propaganda Ministry, directed by Dr. Joseph Goebbels, took control of all forms of communication in Germany: newspapers, magazines, books, public meetings, and rallies, art, music, movies, and radio. Viewpoints in any way threatening to Nazi beliefs or to the regime were censored or eliminated from all media.
During the spring of 1933, Nazi student organizations, professors, and librarians made up long lists of books they thought should not be read by Germans. Then, on the night of May 10, 1933, Nazis raided libraries and bookstores across Germany. They marched by torchlight in nighttime parades, sang chants, and threw books into huge bonfires. On that night more than 25,000 books were burned. Some were works of Jewish writers, including Albert Einstein and Sigmund Freud. Most of the books were by non-Jewish writers, including such famous Americans as Jack London, Ernest Hemingway, and Sinclair Lewis, whose ideas the Nazis viewed as different from their own and therefore not to be read.
The Nazi censors also burned the books of Helen Keller, who had overcome her deafness and blindness to become a respected writer; told of the book burnings, she responded: "Tyranny cannot defeat the power of ideas." Hundreds of thousands of people in the United States protested the book burnings, a clear violation of freedom of speech, in public rallies in New York, Philadelphia, Chicago, and St. Louis.
Schools also played an important role in spreading Nazi ideas. While some books were removed from classrooms by censors, other textbooks, newly written, were brought in to teach students blind obedience to the party, love for Hitler, and antisemitism. After-school meetings of the Hitler Youth and the League of German Girls trained children to be faithful to the Nazi party. In school and out, young people celebrated such occasions as Adolf Hitler's birthday and the anniversary of his taking power."
Today, censorship is beginning to be used against Christians to silence moral opposition to abortion and homosexuality. Today's censors do not have to gather up thousands of books, march by torchlight in nighttme parades and throw books into huge bonfires. They have merely to strike a few keys from the comfort of their offices.
Inflated in their rebellion against the God-Man, the Sons of Satan, those committed toward the atheistic program of attacking the Church from without and undermining it from within in preparation for the Man-God, will continue to intensify their persecution of craftiness and subversion until it reaches its culmination in an explosion of hate-filled rage which will bear much blood and death. Father Livio Fanzaga, writing about the Antichrist, says that, "Catholicism alone will resist him. How then do we destroy this superstition which alone obstructs the world's self-revelation? How do we destroy this superstition which divides mankind and which prevents man from being truly brotherly and free? The true Antichrist is revealed in the replies to these questions. Here is perceived his profound being as the man of iniquity. He will not tolerate the idea of men who adore any god other than himself. His intolerance obliges him to make an exception to his pacifism and his philosophy of non-violence. He is the greatest pacifist in the history of the human race, but because peace and justice really reign on earth he will make an exception to kill and destroy the great superstition of Catholicism, once and for all time..." (Wrath of God: The Days of the Antichrist, p. 124).
“We ask members of our community to SPEAK UP and report alleged incidents of discrimination and incidents of discomfort regarding observed or experienced interactions of intolerance."
Barry-Arquit, the university’s director of marketing and communication, said that, “The creation of this web-page reflects our desire to create a welcoming community for everyone. Campus safety is simply one of the many resources available and would be up to the discretion of the individual as to whether public safety needed to be involved..
“The words ‘incidents of discomfort’ are intentionally broad as each person within the community would likely describe a different situation or experience that would define that description..."
Intentionally broad for a reason. It is not difficult to imagine this being used as a tool by homosexuals and homosexual activists to silence opposition to the homosexual agenda or any expression of belief that authentic marriage is between one man and one woman.
As one website explains:
"Once they succeeded in ending democracy and turning Germany into a one-party dictatorship, the Nazis orchestrated a massive propaganda campaign to win the loyalty and cooperation of Germans. The Nazi Propaganda Ministry, directed by Dr. Joseph Goebbels, took control of all forms of communication in Germany: newspapers, magazines, books, public meetings, and rallies, art, music, movies, and radio. Viewpoints in any way threatening to Nazi beliefs or to the regime were censored or eliminated from all media.
During the spring of 1933, Nazi student organizations, professors, and librarians made up long lists of books they thought should not be read by Germans. Then, on the night of May 10, 1933, Nazis raided libraries and bookstores across Germany. They marched by torchlight in nighttime parades, sang chants, and threw books into huge bonfires. On that night more than 25,000 books were burned. Some were works of Jewish writers, including Albert Einstein and Sigmund Freud. Most of the books were by non-Jewish writers, including such famous Americans as Jack London, Ernest Hemingway, and Sinclair Lewis, whose ideas the Nazis viewed as different from their own and therefore not to be read.
The Nazi censors also burned the books of Helen Keller, who had overcome her deafness and blindness to become a respected writer; told of the book burnings, she responded: "Tyranny cannot defeat the power of ideas." Hundreds of thousands of people in the United States protested the book burnings, a clear violation of freedom of speech, in public rallies in New York, Philadelphia, Chicago, and St. Louis.
Schools also played an important role in spreading Nazi ideas. While some books were removed from classrooms by censors, other textbooks, newly written, were brought in to teach students blind obedience to the party, love for Hitler, and antisemitism. After-school meetings of the Hitler Youth and the League of German Girls trained children to be faithful to the Nazi party. In school and out, young people celebrated such occasions as Adolf Hitler's birthday and the anniversary of his taking power."
Today, censorship is beginning to be used against Christians to silence moral opposition to abortion and homosexuality. Today's censors do not have to gather up thousands of books, march by torchlight in nighttme parades and throw books into huge bonfires. They have merely to strike a few keys from the comfort of their offices.
Inflated in their rebellion against the God-Man, the Sons of Satan, those committed toward the atheistic program of attacking the Church from without and undermining it from within in preparation for the Man-God, will continue to intensify their persecution of craftiness and subversion until it reaches its culmination in an explosion of hate-filled rage which will bear much blood and death. Father Livio Fanzaga, writing about the Antichrist, says that, "Catholicism alone will resist him. How then do we destroy this superstition which alone obstructs the world's self-revelation? How do we destroy this superstition which divides mankind and which prevents man from being truly brotherly and free? The true Antichrist is revealed in the replies to these questions. Here is perceived his profound being as the man of iniquity. He will not tolerate the idea of men who adore any god other than himself. His intolerance obliges him to make an exception to his pacifism and his philosophy of non-violence. He is the greatest pacifist in the history of the human race, but because peace and justice really reign on earth he will make an exception to kill and destroy the great superstition of Catholicism, once and for all time..." (Wrath of God: The Days of the Antichrist, p. 124).
Tuesday, October 13, 2015
Look who's calling the kettle black....
As noted here, "President Obama lamented the rancorous, divided state of U.S. politics in a wide-ranging interview with Pulitzer Prize-winning author Marilynne Robinson.
In the unusual discussion, Obama revealed some of his longstanding frustrations with politics while asking the Iowa author questions about her family, her Christian faith and her writings.
'How do you reconcile the idea of faith being really important to you and you caring a lot about taking faith seriously with the fact that, at least in our democracy and our civic discourse, it seems as if folks who take religion the most seriously sometimes are also those who are suspicious of those not like them?' Obama asked during the interview, which was published Monday in the New York Review of Books."
Rather than addressing the serious and substantive criticisms – or just plain concerns – directed at his policies, Obama has chosen time and again to dismiss his critics by painting them as dishonest, emotionally unstable or simply obstinate. His fiercest criticism has been directed at those who are actually committed toward their religious beliefs, especially Christians.
Remember when he asserted that Americans who disapprove of homosexuality are clinging to worn arguments and old attitudes. Clearly no one has ever gifted Obama with a copy of Dale Carnegie's best-selling book.
Sophocles, in Antigone 1. 1023, says, "Stubborness and stupidity are twins." How so? Dr. Montague Brown explains as he makes the distinction between tenacity and stubborness: "Tenacity is the dedicated adherence to something we know to be worthwhile. As such, tenacity is positive. It involves a clear purpose - to persevere in what is good - and welcomes new evidence and perspectives that clarify or enrich that good...Tenacity is particularly evident when the adherence required is difficult. If my perseverance requires great effort of body or mind, or if it requires me to face a great deal of peer pressure and perhaps even ridicule, then my holding fast to my good purpose shows strength of mind and courage. In such cases, there may be little to gain in terms of social standing, but much in moral standing. Tenaciously holding to what is true and good not only benefits me in terms of virtue; it also works to ensure the stability of these goods in the community....Stubborness is the uncompromising insistence on having our own way. As such, stubborness is negative. It involves a kind of blindness, along with a willful rejection of evidence and the perspectives of others. Stubborness is particularly evident when the compromise required is easy. If the evidence I need to convince me to change my mind is readily available, or if accepting another's perspective would mean giving up little of importance, then my refusal to yield is not reasonable, but is motivated by stubborness. There is little to lose except my desire to be in control. Such rigid clinging to my own will hurts the community, because I refuse to cooperate with others, and it also prevents me from becoming successful and virtuous." (Dr. Montague Brown, Ph.D, The One-Minute Philosopher, pp. 162-163, Sophia Institute Press).
Obama accuses people of faith with sincere and deeply held religious beliefs as being "suspicious of others." This from the same POTUS whose administration authorized a document entitled the "Domestic Extremism Lexicon," which was issued to the Department of Homeland Security. In this lexicon, the Obama administration defined pro-life advocates as follows: "A movement of groups or individuals who are virulently anti-abortion and advocate violence against providers of abortion-related services, their employees, and their facilities. Some cite various racist and anti-Semitic beliefs to justify their criminal activities."
Religious belief isn't the reason why we lack civil discourse in our politics. The root behind such incivility is fanaticism; The fanaticism which seeks to demonize the other, as Obama frequently does. See here for example.
In his work of critical importance entitled "Man Against Mass Society," the French philosopher Gabriel Marcel writes, "..the fanatic never sees himself as a fanatic; it is only the non-fanatic who can recognize him as a fanatic; so that when this judgment, or this accusation, is made, the fanatic can always say that he is misunderstood and slandered...Fanaticism is essentially opinion pushed to paroxysm; with everything that the notion of opinion may imply of blinded ignorance as to its own nature....whatever ends the fanatic is aiming at or thinks he is aiming at, even if he wishes to gather men together, he can only in fact separate them; but as his own interests cannot lie in effecting this separation, he is led, as we have seen, to wish to wipe his opponents out. And when he is thinking of these opponents, he takes care to form the most degrading images of them possible - they are 'lubricious vipers' or 'hyenas and jackals with typewriters' - and the ones that reduce them to most grossly material terms. In fact, he no longer thinks of these opponents except as material obstacles to be overturned or smashed down. Having abandoned the behaviour of a thinking being, he has lost even the feeblest notion of what a thinking being, outside himself, could be. It is understandable therefore that he should make every effort to deny in advance the rights and qualifications of those whom he wishes to eliminate; and that he should regard all means to this end as fair. We are back here again at the techniques of degradation. It cannot be asserted too strongly or repeated too often that those the Nazis made use of in their camps - techniques for degrading their victims in their own eyes, for making mud and filth of them - and those which Soviet propagandists use to discredit their adversaries, are not essentially different though we should, in fairness, add that sadism, properly so called, is not to be found in the Russian camps." (pp. 135-136, 149).
Marcel explains that, "In fact, the greatest merit of the critical spirit is that it tends to cure fanaticism, and it is logical enough that in our own fanatical times the critical spirit should tend to disappear, should no longer even be paid lip service as a value."
It is obvious that President Obama is no fan of the critical spirit but has, rather, succumbed to ideological fanaticism and the techniques of degradation.
He is the one suffering from suspiciousness of others. To the point of anti-religious paranoia.
In the unusual discussion, Obama revealed some of his longstanding frustrations with politics while asking the Iowa author questions about her family, her Christian faith and her writings.
'How do you reconcile the idea of faith being really important to you and you caring a lot about taking faith seriously with the fact that, at least in our democracy and our civic discourse, it seems as if folks who take religion the most seriously sometimes are also those who are suspicious of those not like them?' Obama asked during the interview, which was published Monday in the New York Review of Books."
Rather than addressing the serious and substantive criticisms – or just plain concerns – directed at his policies, Obama has chosen time and again to dismiss his critics by painting them as dishonest, emotionally unstable or simply obstinate. His fiercest criticism has been directed at those who are actually committed toward their religious beliefs, especially Christians.
Remember when he asserted that Americans who disapprove of homosexuality are clinging to worn arguments and old attitudes. Clearly no one has ever gifted Obama with a copy of Dale Carnegie's best-selling book.
Sophocles, in Antigone 1. 1023, says, "Stubborness and stupidity are twins." How so? Dr. Montague Brown explains as he makes the distinction between tenacity and stubborness: "Tenacity is the dedicated adherence to something we know to be worthwhile. As such, tenacity is positive. It involves a clear purpose - to persevere in what is good - and welcomes new evidence and perspectives that clarify or enrich that good...Tenacity is particularly evident when the adherence required is difficult. If my perseverance requires great effort of body or mind, or if it requires me to face a great deal of peer pressure and perhaps even ridicule, then my holding fast to my good purpose shows strength of mind and courage. In such cases, there may be little to gain in terms of social standing, but much in moral standing. Tenaciously holding to what is true and good not only benefits me in terms of virtue; it also works to ensure the stability of these goods in the community....Stubborness is the uncompromising insistence on having our own way. As such, stubborness is negative. It involves a kind of blindness, along with a willful rejection of evidence and the perspectives of others. Stubborness is particularly evident when the compromise required is easy. If the evidence I need to convince me to change my mind is readily available, or if accepting another's perspective would mean giving up little of importance, then my refusal to yield is not reasonable, but is motivated by stubborness. There is little to lose except my desire to be in control. Such rigid clinging to my own will hurts the community, because I refuse to cooperate with others, and it also prevents me from becoming successful and virtuous." (Dr. Montague Brown, Ph.D, The One-Minute Philosopher, pp. 162-163, Sophia Institute Press).
Obama accuses people of faith with sincere and deeply held religious beliefs as being "suspicious of others." This from the same POTUS whose administration authorized a document entitled the "Domestic Extremism Lexicon," which was issued to the Department of Homeland Security. In this lexicon, the Obama administration defined pro-life advocates as follows: "A movement of groups or individuals who are virulently anti-abortion and advocate violence against providers of abortion-related services, their employees, and their facilities. Some cite various racist and anti-Semitic beliefs to justify their criminal activities."
Religious belief isn't the reason why we lack civil discourse in our politics. The root behind such incivility is fanaticism; The fanaticism which seeks to demonize the other, as Obama frequently does. See here for example.
In his work of critical importance entitled "Man Against Mass Society," the French philosopher Gabriel Marcel writes, "..the fanatic never sees himself as a fanatic; it is only the non-fanatic who can recognize him as a fanatic; so that when this judgment, or this accusation, is made, the fanatic can always say that he is misunderstood and slandered...Fanaticism is essentially opinion pushed to paroxysm; with everything that the notion of opinion may imply of blinded ignorance as to its own nature....whatever ends the fanatic is aiming at or thinks he is aiming at, even if he wishes to gather men together, he can only in fact separate them; but as his own interests cannot lie in effecting this separation, he is led, as we have seen, to wish to wipe his opponents out. And when he is thinking of these opponents, he takes care to form the most degrading images of them possible - they are 'lubricious vipers' or 'hyenas and jackals with typewriters' - and the ones that reduce them to most grossly material terms. In fact, he no longer thinks of these opponents except as material obstacles to be overturned or smashed down. Having abandoned the behaviour of a thinking being, he has lost even the feeblest notion of what a thinking being, outside himself, could be. It is understandable therefore that he should make every effort to deny in advance the rights and qualifications of those whom he wishes to eliminate; and that he should regard all means to this end as fair. We are back here again at the techniques of degradation. It cannot be asserted too strongly or repeated too often that those the Nazis made use of in their camps - techniques for degrading their victims in their own eyes, for making mud and filth of them - and those which Soviet propagandists use to discredit their adversaries, are not essentially different though we should, in fairness, add that sadism, properly so called, is not to be found in the Russian camps." (pp. 135-136, 149).
Marcel explains that, "In fact, the greatest merit of the critical spirit is that it tends to cure fanaticism, and it is logical enough that in our own fanatical times the critical spirit should tend to disappear, should no longer even be paid lip service as a value."
It is obvious that President Obama is no fan of the critical spirit but has, rather, succumbed to ideological fanaticism and the techniques of degradation.
He is the one suffering from suspiciousness of others. To the point of anti-religious paranoia.
Labels:
Belief,
Black,
Calling,
Civility,
Discourse,
Fanaticism,
Kettle,
Look,
Obama,
Others,
President,
Religious,
Suspicious,
Who's
Thursday, October 27, 2011
Why do so many Catholics no longer believe in Our Lord's True Presence in the Most Holy Eucharist?
Many Catholics, as this article explains, no longer believe in Our Lord's True Presence in the Most Holy Eucharist. Why is this? Largely because of false interpretations of Vatican II which encouraged the erroneous idea that devotion to Our Lady was "a thing of the past." Theological opinions which sought to downplay the importance of such devotion.
This eclipse was foretold in Sacred Scripture. We read in Revelation 12: 13-17:
"When the dragon saw that he had been cast down to the earth, he pursued the woman who had given birth to the boy. But the woman was given the wings of a gigantic eagle so that she could fly off to her place in the desert, where, far from the serpent, she could be taken care of for a year and for two and a half years more. The serpent, however, spewed a torrent of water out of his mouth to search out the woman and sweep her away. The earth then came to the woman's rescue by opening its mouth and swallowing the flood which the dragon spewed out of his mouth. Enraged at her escape, the dragon went off to make war on the rest of her offspring, on those who keep God's commandments and give witness to Jesus.."
What else is this "torrent of water" from the serpent's mouth but false opinions which have sought to sweep away devotion to the Mother of God? Our Lady made this clear when she told Father Gobbi, on June 14, 1980 - the feast of the Immaculate Heart of Mary - "What is this flood of water if not the ensemble of these new theological theories, by which an attempt is being made to bring your heavenly Mother down from that place where the Most Holy Trinity has put her? Thus it has been possible to obscure me in the souls, in the life and in the piety of many of my children, even to the point of denying some of those privileges with which I have been adorned by the Lord."
You might ask: What does this have to do with belief in Our Lord's True Presence in the Most Holy Eucharist? Father Andre Richard, writing in the January 31, 1985 edition of the Wanderer newspaper, explains: "The eviction of the Mother has cast a shadow on the holy humanity of Jesus, upon the truth of the Incarnation of the Word of God, upon the Real Presence in the Host.." The Devil, knowing the consequences of false theological theories which seek to undermine devotion to Our Lady and to deny her privileges, has cast doubts upon the Immaculate Conception, the perpetual virginity and the divine and spiritual maternity of Mary.
St. Louis de Montfort, in his classic treatise True Devotion to Mary, reminds us that: "Our Lady's charity towards her faithful servants goes further. She provides them with everything they need for body and soul. We have just seen that she gives them double garments. She also nourishes them with the most delicious food from the banquet table of God. She gives them the Son she has borne, the Bread of Life, to be their food. "Dear children," she says in the words of divine Wisdom, "take your fill of my fruits," that is to say, of the Fruit of Life, Jesus, "whom I brought into the world for you." "Come," she repeats in another passage, "eat the bread which is Jesus. Drink the wine of his love which I have mixed" for you with the milk of my breasts.
As Mary is the treasurer and dispenser of the gifts and graces of the Most High God, she reserves a choice portion, indeed the choicest portion, to nourish and sustain her children and servants. They grow strong on the Bread of Life; they are made joyful with the wine that brings forth virgins. They are carried at her breast. They bear with ease the yoke of Christ scarcely feeling its weight because of the oil of devotion with which she has softened its wood." (True Devotion to Mary, 208).
Jesus is the fruit of His Mother's womb. The enemies of Mary are the enemies of Jesus. And the enemies of Jesus are the enemies of the Father. Again, St. Louis de Montfort emphasizes the necessity of devotion to the Mother of God as he writes of her role in the Incarnation: "God the Father gave his only Son to the world only through Mary. Whatever desires the patriarchs may have cherished, whatever entreaties the prophets and saints of the Old Law may have had for 4,000 years to obtain that treasure, it was Mary alone who merited it and found grace before God by the power of her prayers and the perfection of her virtues. "The world being unworthy," said Saint Augustine, "to receive the Son of God directly from the hands of the Father, he gave his Son to Mary for the world to receive him from her."
The Son of God became man for our salvation but only in Mary and through Mary.
God the Holy Spirit formed Jesus Christ in Mary but only after having asked her consent through one of the chief ministers of his court.
God the Father imparted to Mary his fruitfulness as far as a mere creature was capable of receiving it, to enable her to bring forth his Son and all the members of his mystical body.
God the Son came into her virginal womb as a new Adam into his earthly paradise, to take his delight there and produce hidden wonders of grace. God-made-man found freedom in imprisoning himself in her womb. He displayed power in allowing himself to be borne by this young maiden. He found his glory and that of his Father in hiding his splendours from all creatures here below and revealing them only to Mary. He glorified his independence and his majesty in depending upon this lovable virgin in his conception, his birth, his presentation in the temple, and in the thirty years of his hidden life. Even at his death she had to be present so that he might be united with her in one sacrifice and be immolated with her consent to the eternal Father, just as formerly Isaac was offered in sacrifice by Abraham when he accepted the will of God. It was Mary who nursed him, fed him, cared for him, reared him, and sacrificed him for us.
The Holy Spirit could not leave such wonderful and inconceivable dependence of God unmentioned in the Gospel, though he concealed almost all the wonderful things that Wisdom Incarnate did during his hidden life in order to bring home to us its infinite value and glory. Jesus gave more glory to God his Father by submitting to his Mother for thirty years than he would have given him had he converted the whole world by working the greatest miracles. How highly then do we glorify God when to please him we submit ourselves to Mary, taking Jesus as our sole model." (True Devotion to Mary, Nos. 16-18).
Do we wish to see Eucharistic Adoration thrive once again in all of our parishes? Ad Jesus per Mariam! - To Jesus through Mary! Let this be our battle cry.
This eclipse was foretold in Sacred Scripture. We read in Revelation 12: 13-17:
"When the dragon saw that he had been cast down to the earth, he pursued the woman who had given birth to the boy. But the woman was given the wings of a gigantic eagle so that she could fly off to her place in the desert, where, far from the serpent, she could be taken care of for a year and for two and a half years more. The serpent, however, spewed a torrent of water out of his mouth to search out the woman and sweep her away. The earth then came to the woman's rescue by opening its mouth and swallowing the flood which the dragon spewed out of his mouth. Enraged at her escape, the dragon went off to make war on the rest of her offspring, on those who keep God's commandments and give witness to Jesus.."
What else is this "torrent of water" from the serpent's mouth but false opinions which have sought to sweep away devotion to the Mother of God? Our Lady made this clear when she told Father Gobbi, on June 14, 1980 - the feast of the Immaculate Heart of Mary - "What is this flood of water if not the ensemble of these new theological theories, by which an attempt is being made to bring your heavenly Mother down from that place where the Most Holy Trinity has put her? Thus it has been possible to obscure me in the souls, in the life and in the piety of many of my children, even to the point of denying some of those privileges with which I have been adorned by the Lord."
You might ask: What does this have to do with belief in Our Lord's True Presence in the Most Holy Eucharist? Father Andre Richard, writing in the January 31, 1985 edition of the Wanderer newspaper, explains: "The eviction of the Mother has cast a shadow on the holy humanity of Jesus, upon the truth of the Incarnation of the Word of God, upon the Real Presence in the Host.." The Devil, knowing the consequences of false theological theories which seek to undermine devotion to Our Lady and to deny her privileges, has cast doubts upon the Immaculate Conception, the perpetual virginity and the divine and spiritual maternity of Mary.
St. Louis de Montfort, in his classic treatise True Devotion to Mary, reminds us that: "Our Lady's charity towards her faithful servants goes further. She provides them with everything they need for body and soul. We have just seen that she gives them double garments. She also nourishes them with the most delicious food from the banquet table of God. She gives them the Son she has borne, the Bread of Life, to be their food. "Dear children," she says in the words of divine Wisdom, "take your fill of my fruits," that is to say, of the Fruit of Life, Jesus, "whom I brought into the world for you." "Come," she repeats in another passage, "eat the bread which is Jesus. Drink the wine of his love which I have mixed" for you with the milk of my breasts.
As Mary is the treasurer and dispenser of the gifts and graces of the Most High God, she reserves a choice portion, indeed the choicest portion, to nourish and sustain her children and servants. They grow strong on the Bread of Life; they are made joyful with the wine that brings forth virgins. They are carried at her breast. They bear with ease the yoke of Christ scarcely feeling its weight because of the oil of devotion with which she has softened its wood." (True Devotion to Mary, 208).
Jesus is the fruit of His Mother's womb. The enemies of Mary are the enemies of Jesus. And the enemies of Jesus are the enemies of the Father. Again, St. Louis de Montfort emphasizes the necessity of devotion to the Mother of God as he writes of her role in the Incarnation: "God the Father gave his only Son to the world only through Mary. Whatever desires the patriarchs may have cherished, whatever entreaties the prophets and saints of the Old Law may have had for 4,000 years to obtain that treasure, it was Mary alone who merited it and found grace before God by the power of her prayers and the perfection of her virtues. "The world being unworthy," said Saint Augustine, "to receive the Son of God directly from the hands of the Father, he gave his Son to Mary for the world to receive him from her."
The Son of God became man for our salvation but only in Mary and through Mary.
God the Holy Spirit formed Jesus Christ in Mary but only after having asked her consent through one of the chief ministers of his court.
God the Father imparted to Mary his fruitfulness as far as a mere creature was capable of receiving it, to enable her to bring forth his Son and all the members of his mystical body.
God the Son came into her virginal womb as a new Adam into his earthly paradise, to take his delight there and produce hidden wonders of grace. God-made-man found freedom in imprisoning himself in her womb. He displayed power in allowing himself to be borne by this young maiden. He found his glory and that of his Father in hiding his splendours from all creatures here below and revealing them only to Mary. He glorified his independence and his majesty in depending upon this lovable virgin in his conception, his birth, his presentation in the temple, and in the thirty years of his hidden life. Even at his death she had to be present so that he might be united with her in one sacrifice and be immolated with her consent to the eternal Father, just as formerly Isaac was offered in sacrifice by Abraham when he accepted the will of God. It was Mary who nursed him, fed him, cared for him, reared him, and sacrificed him for us.
The Holy Spirit could not leave such wonderful and inconceivable dependence of God unmentioned in the Gospel, though he concealed almost all the wonderful things that Wisdom Incarnate did during his hidden life in order to bring home to us its infinite value and glory. Jesus gave more glory to God his Father by submitting to his Mother for thirty years than he would have given him had he converted the whole world by working the greatest miracles. How highly then do we glorify God when to please him we submit ourselves to Mary, taking Jesus as our sole model." (True Devotion to Mary, Nos. 16-18).
Do we wish to see Eucharistic Adoration thrive once again in all of our parishes? Ad Jesus per Mariam! - To Jesus through Mary! Let this be our battle cry.
Saturday, May 28, 2011
Deacon Nick Donnelly on "Catholics for Choice" credal statement: "To raise the use of condoms onto the same level as belief in God is a gross act of heresy and apostasy.."
My good friend Nick Donnelly, a permanent deacon of the Diocese of Lancaster, is reporting that, "On the eve of the Vatican conference on the morality and effectiveness of condoms in response to HIV/AIDS the pro-abortion group ‘Catholics’ for Choice have issued a ‘creed’ that puts belief in condoms on the same level as belief in God:
‘We believe in God.
We believe that sex is sacred.
We believe in caring for each other.
We believe in using condoms.
We thank Pope Benedict for acknowledging that condoms save lives.’
In a press release issued with this advert in an Italian newspaper Jon O’Brien, the president of Catholics for Choice, mischievously attempts to portray Pope Benedict XVI as supporting the use of condoms: 'The first ray of light from the Vatican came from Pope Benedict XVI himself last year when he acknowledged that condom use can prevent the spread of the disease. Since then, conservatives within the church have worked to try and muddy this clarity, but Catholic health workers must resist their attempts to roll back progress and endanger the lives and health of millions of people at risk for contracting HIV and AIDS. No longer can the Vatican stand by dangerous statements of men like Cardinal Trujillo, who claimed that HIV could pass through a condom.'
In his interview with Peter Seewald published in Light of the World Pope Benedict said that the use of condoms was always immoral and less than human. He did say that a homosexual prostitute considering using a condom to stop the spread of HIV was the beginning of moral reasoning. This example was clearly not an endorsement by the Holy Father of the use of condoms as moral.
Protect the Pope comment: This ‘credal’ statement from ‘Catholics for Choice’ captures the depth of dissent that they, and their supporters, have sunk. The God they believe in is a ‘god’ created by them in their own image, and is not the God of Jesus Christ and apostolic faith.
Their statement of belief in the sacredness of sex is impoverished and debased, for it makes no mention of love, nor does it distinguish between the moral sexual love between wives and husbands, and the immorality of sex outside of marriage.
They say they believe in caring for each other but this care does not include pre-born children, who they actively seek to kill.
Their pressing Pope Benedict into supporting their position is intentionally misleading and mendacious.
That ‘Catholics for Choice’ call opposition to the use of condoms ‘dissent’ is not only absurd, but also a diabolical twisting of the truth.
To raise the use of condoms onto the same level as belief in God is a gross act of heresy and apostasy. When will the Church take legal action to stop this anti-catholic organisation that is funded by enemies of the Church from passing itself off as ‘Catholic’?" (See here).
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/catholics-stand-behind-popes-statement-that-condoms-save-livesurge-conference-attendees-to-resist-minority-dissent-122719173.html
It was Saint Cyprian of Carthage, writing against the Greco-Roman pagan world and its vices, who said that, "That Jupiter of theirs is not more supreme in dominion than in vice, inflamed with earthly love in the midst of his own thunders...now breaking forth by the help of birds to violate the purity of boys. And now put the question: Can he who looks upon such things be healthy-minded or modest? Men imitate the gods whom they adore, and to such miserable beings their crimes become their religion." (Letters 1:8).
In a series of letters written from 1969-1970, Sister Lucia [of the Fatima apparition] wrote: "It is indeed sad that so many people let themselves be dominated by the diabolical wave that is sweeping the world, and that they are blinded to the point of being incapable of seeing error! Their principal fault is they have abandoned prayer; in this way they have become estranged from God, and without God everything fails. The devil is very cunning and looks for our weak points in order to attack us. If we are not diligent and careful to obtain strength from God, we shall fall, for our age is very wicked and we are weak. Only the strength of God can keep us on our feet."
Indeed. Those who have abandoned prayer have succumbed to a multitude of vices and crimes which quickly become their religion. Abortion becomes an ersatz "sacrament" in the Moloch religion and contraception a sort of unholy sacramental for those who would worship at the altar of lust. And too many clerics, paralyzed with either fear or indifference or both, say nothing. These cowardly clerics, these chicken Catholics, are afraid to stand against the Culture of Death and the emerging Moloch religion which will serve the City of Satan.
Deacon Nick is not one of them. He is, rather, a shining example of everything a Catholic deacon should be. I am honored to count him as a friend.
‘We believe in God.
We believe that sex is sacred.
We believe in caring for each other.
We believe in using condoms.
We thank Pope Benedict for acknowledging that condoms save lives.’
In a press release issued with this advert in an Italian newspaper Jon O’Brien, the president of Catholics for Choice, mischievously attempts to portray Pope Benedict XVI as supporting the use of condoms: 'The first ray of light from the Vatican came from Pope Benedict XVI himself last year when he acknowledged that condom use can prevent the spread of the disease. Since then, conservatives within the church have worked to try and muddy this clarity, but Catholic health workers must resist their attempts to roll back progress and endanger the lives and health of millions of people at risk for contracting HIV and AIDS. No longer can the Vatican stand by dangerous statements of men like Cardinal Trujillo, who claimed that HIV could pass through a condom.'
In his interview with Peter Seewald published in Light of the World Pope Benedict said that the use of condoms was always immoral and less than human. He did say that a homosexual prostitute considering using a condom to stop the spread of HIV was the beginning of moral reasoning. This example was clearly not an endorsement by the Holy Father of the use of condoms as moral.
Protect the Pope comment: This ‘credal’ statement from ‘Catholics for Choice’ captures the depth of dissent that they, and their supporters, have sunk. The God they believe in is a ‘god’ created by them in their own image, and is not the God of Jesus Christ and apostolic faith.
Their statement of belief in the sacredness of sex is impoverished and debased, for it makes no mention of love, nor does it distinguish between the moral sexual love between wives and husbands, and the immorality of sex outside of marriage.
They say they believe in caring for each other but this care does not include pre-born children, who they actively seek to kill.
Their pressing Pope Benedict into supporting their position is intentionally misleading and mendacious.
That ‘Catholics for Choice’ call opposition to the use of condoms ‘dissent’ is not only absurd, but also a diabolical twisting of the truth.
To raise the use of condoms onto the same level as belief in God is a gross act of heresy and apostasy. When will the Church take legal action to stop this anti-catholic organisation that is funded by enemies of the Church from passing itself off as ‘Catholic’?" (See here).
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/catholics-stand-behind-popes-statement-that-condoms-save-livesurge-conference-attendees-to-resist-minority-dissent-122719173.html
It was Saint Cyprian of Carthage, writing against the Greco-Roman pagan world and its vices, who said that, "That Jupiter of theirs is not more supreme in dominion than in vice, inflamed with earthly love in the midst of his own thunders...now breaking forth by the help of birds to violate the purity of boys. And now put the question: Can he who looks upon such things be healthy-minded or modest? Men imitate the gods whom they adore, and to such miserable beings their crimes become their religion." (Letters 1:8).
In a series of letters written from 1969-1970, Sister Lucia [of the Fatima apparition] wrote: "It is indeed sad that so many people let themselves be dominated by the diabolical wave that is sweeping the world, and that they are blinded to the point of being incapable of seeing error! Their principal fault is they have abandoned prayer; in this way they have become estranged from God, and without God everything fails. The devil is very cunning and looks for our weak points in order to attack us. If we are not diligent and careful to obtain strength from God, we shall fall, for our age is very wicked and we are weak. Only the strength of God can keep us on our feet."
Indeed. Those who have abandoned prayer have succumbed to a multitude of vices and crimes which quickly become their religion. Abortion becomes an ersatz "sacrament" in the Moloch religion and contraception a sort of unholy sacramental for those who would worship at the altar of lust. And too many clerics, paralyzed with either fear or indifference or both, say nothing. These cowardly clerics, these chicken Catholics, are afraid to stand against the Culture of Death and the emerging Moloch religion which will serve the City of Satan.
Deacon Nick is not one of them. He is, rather, a shining example of everything a Catholic deacon should be. I am honored to count him as a friend.
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
The enemies of the Church want to destroy belief in the divinity of Christ...

John Henry Cardinal Newman, who was truly a prophet, warned more than a hundred years ago of the desolation which we are experiencing today: "Surely there is at this day a confederacy of evil, marshalling its hosts from all parts of the world, organizing itself, taking its measures, enclosing the Church of Christ in a net, and preparing the way for a general apostasy from it..."
It is no secret today that the enemies of the Church want to destroy belief in the divinity of Christ. For, as Fr. Vincent Miceli, S.J., explained, "Once the liturgy is humanized, Christ the Center and Object of it becomes the humanist par excellence, the liberator, the revolutionary, the Marxist ushering in the millenium; he ceases to be the Divine Redeemer. We must be alerted to those who plan, by convincing us to abandon our sacred forms, at length to seduce us into denying our Christian faith altogether. The Church is attacked by these Sons of Satan, in and outside her fold, because she is a living form, the sacrament - sign and instrument - of communion with God and of unity among all men; because she is the visible body of Religion. Hence these shrewd masters of sedition know that when her sacred forms go, religion will also go. Violate the lex orandi and you must inevitably destroy the lex credendi. That is why they rail against so many devotions as superstitions, why they propose so many alterations and changes, a tactic cleverly calculated to shake the foundations of faith...."
We are approaching the day prophesied by Romano Guardini in The Lord, "One day the Antichrist will come: a human being who introduces an order of things in which rebellion against God will attain its ultimate power. He will be filled with enlightenment and strength. The ultimate aim of all aims will be to prove that existence without Christ is possible - nay rather, that Christ is the enemy of existence, which can be fully realized only when all Christian values have been destroyed.." (p. 513).
Inflated in their rebellion against the God-Man, the Sons of Satan, those committed toward the atheistic program of attacking the Church from without and undermining it from within in preparation for the Man-God, will continue to intensify their persecution of craftiness and subversion until it reaches its culmination in an explosion of hate-filled rage which will bear much blood and death. Father Livio Fanzaga, writing about the Antichrist, says that, "Catholicism alone will resist him. How then do we destroy this superstition which alone obstructs the world's self-revelation? How do we destroy this superstition which divides mankind and which prevents man from being truly brotherly and free? The true Antichrist is revealed in the replies to these questions. Here is perceived his profound being as the man of iniquity. He will not tolerate the idea of men who adore any god other than himself. His intolerance obliges him to make an exception to his pacifism and his philosophy of non-violence. He is the greatest pacifist in the history of the human race, but because peace and justice really reign on earth he will make an exception to kill and destroy the great superstition of Catholicism, once and for all time..." (Wrath of God: The Days of the Antichrist, p. 124).
Already the signs of hatred and persecution are emerging. In East Longmeadow, Massachusetts, a Catholic priest who called the Mystical Body of Christ "insidiously evil" received a standing ovation. The cancer of infidelity has made such inroads even into the Church. These Sons of Satan will welcome the Man of Sin. They will celebrate him. They will adore him. And they will do so because they do not really belong to Christ.
It is no secret today that the enemies of the Church want to destroy belief in the divinity of Christ. For, as Fr. Vincent Miceli, S.J., explained, "Once the liturgy is humanized, Christ the Center and Object of it becomes the humanist par excellence, the liberator, the revolutionary, the Marxist ushering in the millenium; he ceases to be the Divine Redeemer. We must be alerted to those who plan, by convincing us to abandon our sacred forms, at length to seduce us into denying our Christian faith altogether. The Church is attacked by these Sons of Satan, in and outside her fold, because she is a living form, the sacrament - sign and instrument - of communion with God and of unity among all men; because she is the visible body of Religion. Hence these shrewd masters of sedition know that when her sacred forms go, religion will also go. Violate the lex orandi and you must inevitably destroy the lex credendi. That is why they rail against so many devotions as superstitions, why they propose so many alterations and changes, a tactic cleverly calculated to shake the foundations of faith...."
We are approaching the day prophesied by Romano Guardini in The Lord, "One day the Antichrist will come: a human being who introduces an order of things in which rebellion against God will attain its ultimate power. He will be filled with enlightenment and strength. The ultimate aim of all aims will be to prove that existence without Christ is possible - nay rather, that Christ is the enemy of existence, which can be fully realized only when all Christian values have been destroyed.." (p. 513).
Inflated in their rebellion against the God-Man, the Sons of Satan, those committed toward the atheistic program of attacking the Church from without and undermining it from within in preparation for the Man-God, will continue to intensify their persecution of craftiness and subversion until it reaches its culmination in an explosion of hate-filled rage which will bear much blood and death. Father Livio Fanzaga, writing about the Antichrist, says that, "Catholicism alone will resist him. How then do we destroy this superstition which alone obstructs the world's self-revelation? How do we destroy this superstition which divides mankind and which prevents man from being truly brotherly and free? The true Antichrist is revealed in the replies to these questions. Here is perceived his profound being as the man of iniquity. He will not tolerate the idea of men who adore any god other than himself. His intolerance obliges him to make an exception to his pacifism and his philosophy of non-violence. He is the greatest pacifist in the history of the human race, but because peace and justice really reign on earth he will make an exception to kill and destroy the great superstition of Catholicism, once and for all time..." (Wrath of God: The Days of the Antichrist, p. 124).
Already the signs of hatred and persecution are emerging. In East Longmeadow, Massachusetts, a Catholic priest who called the Mystical Body of Christ "insidiously evil" received a standing ovation. The cancer of infidelity has made such inroads even into the Church. These Sons of Satan will welcome the Man of Sin. They will celebrate him. They will adore him. And they will do so because they do not really belong to Christ.
Friday, April 16, 2010
The intellectual insecurity of the atheist and where it eventually leads...
The atheist is crippled by an intellectual insecurity. He must strive continually to convince others - and even himself - that God does not exist. But he is always haunted by the fear that he has not really banished the presence or power of the Divine Other. This canker of insecurity, which gnaws at his heart unceasingly, manifests itself in the incessant need to propagandize against belief in God.
For example Richard Dawkins, an atheist who authored "The God Delusion," devotes much if not most of his time attempting to convince others that belief in God is even dangerous (see here). This charge is most ironic since, as Fr. Vincent Miceli, S.J., reminds us, "When man becomes his own absolute center, then God becomes his hell, because God sets limits to man's greatness. But once having attained autoerotic sovereignty, a monstrous metamorphosis takes place in atheist man. He begins to feed on his fellow men, for they now are his hell, threatening to rob him of his freedom. When God is rejected because he is seen as man's hell, then man, whom God loves, suffers the same fate and for the same reason. There is a frightening resemblance between the atheist humanist as a cell of society and a malignantly cancerous cell in the human body. Both cells have thrown off any service of subordination to the health of the communities in which they thrive. They act and grow according to their own uncontrolled ravenous appetites feeding parasitically on the whole organism. As runaway cells they invade and destroy every healthy cell in the body until they extinguish life and speed to completion the total disintegration of the unity of the body. Atheistic humanism is a psychic cancer. It shares two major characteristics with physical cancer. Both these human cancers arise from the arbitrary rebellion of a subordinate cell against the established social harmony of the whole. Secondly, both these cancerous rebellions are metastatic and messianic in their aggression to the death against organism and community." (The Gods of Atheism, pp. 463-464).
Gilbert Keith Chesterton reminded us that when man denies God he does not believe in nothing. Rather he will believe in anything. Moreover, he will not do nothing but as a fanatic he will do anything:
"There are men who will ruin themselves and ruin their civilization if they may ruin also this old fantastic tale. This is the last and most astounding fact about this faith; that its enemies will use any weapon against it, the sword that cuts their own fingers, and the firebrands that burn their own homes...He [the atheist fanatic who is crippled by his own insecurity] sacrifices the very existence of humanity to the non-existence of God. He offers his victims not to the altar, but merely to assert the idleness of the altar and the emptiness of the throne. He is ready to ruin even that primary ethic by which all things live, for his strange and eternal vengeance upon some one who never lived at all." (Orthodoxy, pp. 238-239).
Atheistic fanatics have a long history of unmatched violence. Today, fanatical rhetoric from atheist fanatics has resulted in actual violence against the Church as well as calls for such violence. See here.
God is not the delusion. The myth of the atheistic humanist who truly values reason is the real delusion.
For example Richard Dawkins, an atheist who authored "The God Delusion," devotes much if not most of his time attempting to convince others that belief in God is even dangerous (see here). This charge is most ironic since, as Fr. Vincent Miceli, S.J., reminds us, "When man becomes his own absolute center, then God becomes his hell, because God sets limits to man's greatness. But once having attained autoerotic sovereignty, a monstrous metamorphosis takes place in atheist man. He begins to feed on his fellow men, for they now are his hell, threatening to rob him of his freedom. When God is rejected because he is seen as man's hell, then man, whom God loves, suffers the same fate and for the same reason. There is a frightening resemblance between the atheist humanist as a cell of society and a malignantly cancerous cell in the human body. Both cells have thrown off any service of subordination to the health of the communities in which they thrive. They act and grow according to their own uncontrolled ravenous appetites feeding parasitically on the whole organism. As runaway cells they invade and destroy every healthy cell in the body until they extinguish life and speed to completion the total disintegration of the unity of the body. Atheistic humanism is a psychic cancer. It shares two major characteristics with physical cancer. Both these human cancers arise from the arbitrary rebellion of a subordinate cell against the established social harmony of the whole. Secondly, both these cancerous rebellions are metastatic and messianic in their aggression to the death against organism and community." (The Gods of Atheism, pp. 463-464).
Gilbert Keith Chesterton reminded us that when man denies God he does not believe in nothing. Rather he will believe in anything. Moreover, he will not do nothing but as a fanatic he will do anything:
"There are men who will ruin themselves and ruin their civilization if they may ruin also this old fantastic tale. This is the last and most astounding fact about this faith; that its enemies will use any weapon against it, the sword that cuts their own fingers, and the firebrands that burn their own homes...He [the atheist fanatic who is crippled by his own insecurity] sacrifices the very existence of humanity to the non-existence of God. He offers his victims not to the altar, but merely to assert the idleness of the altar and the emptiness of the throne. He is ready to ruin even that primary ethic by which all things live, for his strange and eternal vengeance upon some one who never lived at all." (Orthodoxy, pp. 238-239).
Atheistic fanatics have a long history of unmatched violence. Today, fanatical rhetoric from atheist fanatics has resulted in actual violence against the Church as well as calls for such violence. See here.
God is not the delusion. The myth of the atheistic humanist who truly values reason is the real delusion.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)





