Yes Joe Biden, let's talk about racism!

See here.

President Barack Obama now considers himself to be the living teaching office of the Church?

President Obama insists that, "his understanding of the Bible and his Christian beliefs led him to issue the directive at public schools calling on students to be allowed to use the bathroom of their choosing regardless of their biological sex.

Speaking at a town hall in Elkhart, Indiana, Mr. Obama said that: "My reading of scripture tells me that that [the] Golden Rule is pretty high up there in terms of my Christian belief."

And therein lies the problem.  In 2 Peter 3: 15-16, we read, "And consider the patience of our Lord as salvation, as our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, also wrote to you, speaking of these things as he does in all his letters. In them there are some things hard to understand that the ignorant and unstable distort to their own destruction, just as they do the other scriptures."


It isn't Barack Obama's role to interpret the Sacred Scriptures.  It is the task of the Church.  In Dei Verbum, No. 10, of the Second Vatican Council we read: "...the task of authentically interpreting the word of God, whether written or handed on,  has been entrusted exclusively to the living teaching office of the Church,  whose authority is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ. This teaching office is not above the word of God, but serves it, teaching only what has been handed on, listening to it devoutly, guarding it scrupulously and explaining it faithfully in accord with a divine commission and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it draws from this one deposit of faith everything which it presents for belief as divinely revealed.

It is clear, therefore, that sacred tradition, Sacred Scripture and the teaching authority of the Church, in accord with God's most wise design, are so linked and joined together that one cannot stand without the others, and that all together and each in its own way under the action of the one Holy Spirit contribute effectively to the salvation of souls."

The Golden Rule is a moral rule found in many religions, though it takes slightly different forms. In the Christian West, it takes the form based on the words of Jesus, "Whatever you wish that men would do to you, do so to them" (Matt 7:12), or more popularly, "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you."

 

It is true that everything must be done to help sinners but this cannot include helping them to sin or to remain in sin. Because of human frailty, every sinner deserves both pity and compassion. However, vice and sin (Such as that outlined in Deuteronomy 22:5, see here) must be excluded from this compassion. This because sin can never be the proper object of compassion. (Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 30, a.1, ad 1).

It is a false compassion which supplies the sinner with the means to remain attached to sin. Such "compassion" provides an assistance (whether material or moral) which actually enables the sinner to remain firmly attached to his evil ways. By contrast, true compassion leads the sinner away from vice and back to virtue. As Thomas Aquinas explains:

"We love sinners out of charity, not so as to will what they will, or to rejoice in what gives them joy, but so as to make them will what we will, and rejoice in what rejoices us. Hence it is written: 'They shall be turned to thee, and thou shalt not be turned to them.'" (St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 25, a.6, ad 4, citing Jeremiah 15:19).
St. Thomas Aquinas teaches us that the sentiment of compassion only becomes a virtue when it is guided by reason, since "it is essential to human virtue that the movements of the soul should be regulated by reason." (Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 30, c.3). Without such regulation, compassion is merely a passion. A false compassion is a compassion not regulated and tempered by reason and is, therefore, a potentially dangerous inclination. This because it is subject to favoring not only that which is good but also that which is evil (Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 30, a.1, ad 3).

An authentic compassion always stems from charity. True compassion is an effect of charity (Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 30, a.3, ad 3). But it must be remembered that the object of this virtue is God, whose love extends to His creatures. (Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 25, a.3). Therefore, the virtue of compassion seeks to bring God to the one who suffers so that he may thereby participate in the infinite love of God. As St. Augustine explains:

"'Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.' Now, you love yourself suitably when you love God better than yourself. What, then, you aim at in yourself you must aim at in your neighbor, namely, that he may love God with a perfect affection." (St. Augustine, Of the Morals of the Catholic Church, No. 49, which may be found here: http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1401.htm).
 

This is the true practice of the Golden Rule.  Barack Obama doesn't understand this.  He interprets the Scriptures unto his own destruction....while doing damage to the common good of the nation he is supposed to represent.

 

The fruit of secular humanism in the public schools: Terrified children who no longer feel safe

As reported by NBC Chicago, "When a 13-year-old Chicago boy wrote a letter to Santa asking simply for 'safety' this Christmas, he didn’t expect to get a response from the president of the United States.

Malik Bryant, who lives in a high-crime neighborhood on the South Side called Englewood, didn’t ask for your typical Christmas toys when he participated in a charitable Letters to Santa program in the city.

“All I ask for is for safety. I just want to be safe,” his letter read, according to Direct Effect Charities' website."

What is this but the fruit of secular humanism?

Secular Humanism has all the characteristics of a religion. The Secular Humanist places man at the center of things. In the Humanist Manifesto II, which was released in 1973, humanists called for a new faith: "...traditional theism, especially faith in the prayer-hearing God, assumed to love and care for persons, to hear and understand their prayers, and to be able to do something about them is an unproved and outmoded faith. Salvationism, based on mere affirmation, still appears as harmful, diverting people with false hopes of heaven hereafter. Responsible minds look to other means for survival." (Humanist Manifesto II, The Humanist; September/October 1973, p. 4). Humanism is, therefore, fundamentally at odds with Christianity which regards God and not man as the supreme value of the universe.

Because Humanists recognize the importance of the public schools in advancing their man-centered religion, they do everything in their power to ensure that children are indoctrinated into the tenets of Humanism even as they attack faith-based schools. It was Paul Blanshard, writing in The Humanist, who said, "I think that the most important factor moving us toward a secular society has been the educational factor. Our schools may not teach Johnny to read properly, but the fact that Johnny is in school until he is 16 tends to lead toward the elimination of religious superstition. The average American child now acquires a high school education, and this militates against Adam and Eve and all the other myths of alleged history." (The Humanist State, March/April 1976, p. 17).

Humanist John Dumphy, also writing for The Humanist, said "I am convinced that the battle for humankind's future must be waged and won in the public school classroom by teachers who correctly perceive their role as the proselytizers of a new faith: a religion of humanity that recognizes and respects the spark of what theologians call divinity in every human being. These teachers must embody the same selfless dedication as the most rabid fundamentalist preacher, for they will be ministers of another servant, utilizing a classroom instead of a pulpit to convey humanist values in whatever subjects they teach regardless of the educational level - preschool daycare or large state university. The classroom must and will become and area of conflict between the old and the new - the rotting corpse of Christianity, together with all its adjacent evils and misery and the new faith of humanism resplendent in its promise of a world in which the never realized Christian idea of 'love thy neighbor' will finally be achieved." (The Humanist, January/February 1983, p. 26).

Has the last fifty years of secular humanist agitprop resulted in love of neighbor and a peace-filled environment where children feel safe?

How many school shootings must we endure before we realize where secular humanism is taking us? How many Sandy Hook style episodes before we realize we're on the wrong track?

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. 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. And secular humanist propaganda has produced

 a public school system rife with violence where students simply cannot feel safe.

God is not the delusion. The myth of the atheistic humanist who truly values reason and peace is the real delusion.

Richard Dawkins and the Battle for Humankind's Future

Secular Humanism has all the characteristics of a religion. The Secular Humanist places man at the center of things. In the Humanist Manifesto II, which was released in 1973, humanists called for a new faith: "...traditional theism, especially faith in the prayer-hearing God, assumed to love and care for persons, to hear and understand their prayers, and to be able to do something about them is an unproved and outmoded faith. Salvationism, based on mere affirmation, still appears as harmful, diverting people with false hopes of heaven hereafter. Responsible minds look to other means for survival." (Humanist Manifesto II, The Humanist; September/October 1973, p. 4). Humanism is, therefore, fundamentally at odds with Christianity which regards God and not man as the supreme value of the universe.

Because Humanists recognize the importance of the public schools in advancing their man-centered religion, they do everything in their power to ensure that children are indoctrinated into the tenets of Humanism even as they attack faith-based schools. It was Paul Blanshard, writing in The Humanist, who said, "I think that the most important factor moving us toward a secular society has been the educational factor. Our schools may not teach Johnny to read properly, but the fact that Johnny is in school until he is 16 tends to lead toward the elimination of religious superstition. The average American child now acquires a high school education, and this militates against Adam and Eve and all the other myths of alleged history." (The Humanist State, March/April 1976, p. 17).

Humanist John Dumphy, also writing for The Humanist, said "I am convinced that the battle for humankind's future must be waged and won in the public school classroom by teachers who correctly perceive their role as the proselytizers of a new faith: a religion of humanity that recognizes and respects the spark of what theologians call divinity in every human being. These teachers must embody the same selfless dedication as the most rabid fundamentalist preacher, for they will be ministers of another servant, utilizing a classroom instead of a pulpit to convey humanist values in whatever subjects they teach regardless of the educational level - preschool daycare or large state university. The classroom must and will become and area of conflict between the old and the new - the rotting corpse of Christianity, together with all its adjacent evils and misery and the new faith of humanism resplendent in its promise of a world in which the never realized Christian idea of 'love thy neighbor' will finally be achieved." (The Humanist, January/February 1983, p. 26).

Richard Dawkins, and atheist and evolutionary biologist, is doing his best to wage war against faith schools in Britain. Even though Johann Hari, columnist for The Independent, has celebrated what he refers to as "the slow whining death of Christianity" in Britain, writing that, "My country, Britain, is now the most irreligious country on earth. This island has shed superstition faster and more completely than anywhere else," Mr. Dawkins is alarmed at the tremendous growth of faith schools in Britain. We read here, "The number of faith schools in Britain is rising. Around 7,000 publicly-funded schools - one in three - now has a religious affiliation." And Richard Dawkins, being a propagandist for the new religion of Humanism, finds this intolerable. "Enough is enough" he says.

And so it can be seen that Humanists in the UK are engaged in a propaganda war against religion in general and Christianity in particular. When it suits their agenda, they express "alarm" at the tremendous growth of faith schools. At other times, they proclaim cheerfully that Christianity is dying. Humanists are not interested in truth. Their goal is the elimination of religious belief, and most especially belief in Christianity, because it stands in the way of their own religion.

Humanists have a right to believe as they do. But so do people of faith. Tolerance of different beliefs is an essential ingredient of a free society. But Humanists do not embrace such tolerance. They are, in fact, the most intolerant as they seek to indoctrinate and coerce others into their belief system.

While the Church respects freedom of conscience and shuns any form of coercion, our Holy Father reminds us that, "We are building a dictatorship of relativism that does not recognize anything as definitive and whose ultimate goal consists solely of one's own ego and desires. We, however, have a different goal: the Son of God, the true man. He is the measure of true humanism. An "adult" faith is not a faith that follows the trends of fashion and the latest novelty; a mature adult faith is deeply rooted in friendship with Christ. It is this friendship that opens us up to all that is good and gives us a criterion by which to distinguish the true from the false, and deceit from truth."

This dictatorship of relativism seeks to impose its immoral agenda on Christians in the name of "tolerance." But this "tolerance" is a sham. It is simply an attempt to make an idol out of a false conception of freedom. Again, our Holy Father explains that, "..what clearly stands behind the modern era's radical demand for freedom is the promise: You will be like God...The implicit goal of all modern freedom movements is, in the end, to be like a god, dependent on nothing and nobody, with one's own freedom not restricted by anyone else's...The primeval error of such a radically developed desire for freedom lies in the idea of a divinity that is conceived as being purely egotistical. The god thus conceived of is, not God, but an idol, indeed, the image of what the Christian tradition would call the devil, the anti-god, because therein lies the radical opposite of the true God: the true God is, of his own nature, being-for (Father), being-from (Son), and being-with (Holy Spirit). Yet man is in the image of God precisely because the being-for , from, and with constitute the basic anthropological shape. Whenever people try to free themselves from this, they are moving, not toward divinity, but toward dehumanizing, toward the destruction of being itself through the destruction of truth. The Jacobin variant of the idea of liberation...is a rebellion against being human in itself, rebellion against truth, and that is why it leads people - as Sartre percipiently observed - into a self-contradictory existence that we call hell. It has thus become fairly clear that freedom is linked to a yardstick, the yardstick of reality - to truth*. Freedom to destroy oneself or to destroy others is not freedom but a diabolical parody. The freedom of man is a shared freedom, freedom in a coexistence of other freedoms, which are mutually limiting and thus mutually supportive: freedom must be measured according to what I am, what we are - otherwise it abolishes itself."

In the name of "tolerance," the New World Order seeks to impose its rebellion from truth on all. It will not tolerate any dissent, any disagreement. Coercion is an acceptable tool in a dictatorship. Soon, the New Order will use violence to achieve its goals and not just coercion and propaganda. In the end, every dictatorship must rely on violence in its vain attempt to hold onto power.