Robert Yates at Crisis Magazine has a great essay on the growing war in the United States on the Catholic Church.
An excerpt:
I think that the current treatment of Catholicism specifically and Christianity generally in the U.S. and in many parts of Europe does bear some similarity to the rhetoric in cultures in the years preceding more aggressive suppression of the Church. Much of it is driven by pure bigotry-- the calumny against priests on the topic of child sexual abuse is abhorrent (the Church is and always has been one of the safest places for children. Abuse in the home and in schools is much more common and is rarely reported in the media and rarely prosecuted). The portrayal of priests as sexual predators has a pedigree that goes back many centuries, and is morally similar to portraying blacks as rapists and Jews as greedy. It is ugly stuff. Pure hate.
Is the "Civil War" warning excessive and unrealistic? I pray that it is. But the hate directed against the Church and Christians is remarkable and growing.
Who would have imagined a few years ago that the federal government would issue a mandate that is clearly intended to drive the Church out of healthcare and charity and all aspects of public life in which it employs people?
An excerpt:
The real war [against the Catholic Church] was declared when the people behind [the New York Times ad encouraging Catholics to leave the Church] decided that what we have to say for ourselves is irrelevant and that our opinions and our consciences mean nothing. This level of hostility, disrespect, and hatred—and you have to truly and deeply hate that which you are willing to so brazenly lie about—is like a swarm of termites eating away at the foundations of our civilization. It is clear that there is a significant section of the political, media and social elite that would like to see the Catholic Church run out of the country, permanently silenced, or perhaps even physically destroyed.
America is looking more like Spain on the eve of its Civil War, not long before radical leftists dragged priests and nuns out of their churches and convents to be executed in cold-blood. It has the air of Bismarck’s Prussia when the Kulturkampf was getting into swing, or revolutionary France not long before the Republic’s troops marched into the Vendée. I say this not because of the overt signs that a widespread persecution is about to happen, but because the level of disdain that one must be possessed with in order to persecute, rob, and murder is hardly different than that required for the propagation of black legends and blood libels (the piece accuses the Church of perpetuating every manner of “social evil”). If you think this alarmist, consider why the Obama White House would advise the bishops to listen to “the voices of accommodation”—one must ask, or else what?
I think that the current treatment of Catholicism specifically and Christianity generally in the U.S. and in many parts of Europe does bear some similarity to the rhetoric in cultures in the years preceding more aggressive suppression of the Church. Much of it is driven by pure bigotry-- the calumny against priests on the topic of child sexual abuse is abhorrent (the Church is and always has been one of the safest places for children. Abuse in the home and in schools is much more common and is rarely reported in the media and rarely prosecuted). The portrayal of priests as sexual predators has a pedigree that goes back many centuries, and is morally similar to portraying blacks as rapists and Jews as greedy. It is ugly stuff. Pure hate.
Is the "Civil War" warning excessive and unrealistic? I pray that it is. But the hate directed against the Church and Christians is remarkable and growing.
Who would have imagined a few years ago that the federal government would issue a mandate that is clearly intended to drive the Church out of healthcare and charity and all aspects of public life in which it employs people?
People don't hate silly religious views; they just laugh at them. The same way we laugh at you and this insane column.
ReplyDeletePeople with silly religious views can't defend them, so the only recourse they have is to label legitimate criticism as "hate" and compare themselves to real victims of hate and discrimination, like gay people, blacks, and Jews.
Anon,
DeleteIt is the 'people' (ie 'We the people')who hold the very religious views you mock.
If you could manage to poke your nose out from that cave you dwell in, you'd clearly see this. Perhaps you should make an effort to leave the city once in a while. Maybe get your sociological ideas from other sources than Hollywood 'Red State' type films?
People with religious views should not have to DEFEND them in your country, they are protected. Your admission to the fact that they must do so speaks VOLUMES.
Further your attempt to co-opt the victim culture crap is even more evidence of your Hegelian slant. The Jews are in the same boat, and increasingly KNOW it. The blacks are as free as any man in your country and do more violence on EACH OTHER than any other group does unto them.
Gays? What on earth do sexual ticks have to do with this? There is no movement to restrict, control, or force Gay people into some modified form of behaviour. Quite the contrary. They are being FORCED into the mainstream.
Your entire comment serves as a clear example of exactly what the Doctor's post was about.
You make his point for him.
What a total TOOL you are.
America is looking more like Spain on the eve of its Civil War, not long before radical leftists dragged priests and nuns out of their churches and convents to be executed in cold-blood.
ReplyDeleteAnd you want us to take this drivel seriously why?
"And you want us to take this drivel seriously why?"
DeleteIt is historic precedent, not drivel. Such things happened in the past, and they were preceded by almost identical rhetoric. Where as in the past the immediate course was violence, the current course in incremental. Fabian style, as opposed to Marxist.
The intended end result is the same: Deconstructionism.
@ Dr Egnor,
ReplyDeleteYour fears are well founded.
The precedent has been set many times. Only a form of imperial hubris prevents many urbanites from considering this. 'Not in America' is the mantra. As if the soil or air will somehow protect the charters and freedoms of that land from being incrementally worn into meaningless artefacts by fiat, decree, and rulings. Religiosity and historical awareness are MAJOR impediments to these types of efforts - this is, I suspect, why we see them targeted with such ferocity time and again.
The good news is that you are not in Spain or Germany, and the reaction to the libel and the furthering of potential oppression will be far more vigorous. There is much more of a chance to avoid the bloody outcomes the author cites.
You still have very powerful people, and the VAST majority of normal folks who are not blinded by the amorality and anti-Americanisms of 'counter culture' or 'progressive' movements.
You still have the same in your neighbouring Dominion.
In fact, I would dare say we are now moving in the opposite direction as a result of similar (many since reversed) policies instituted during the latter half of the 20th century by a similarly - now almost defunct - internationalist style movement.
Media is becoming MORE open and being forced to admit bias, as it once was. Big government is being scaled back and growth is fast becoming the key element in political strategy.
No surprise then that religiosity is on the rise, and church attendances are UP in all but the largest cities (no shock there) were the decline has at least halted. The exception, quite ironically, being Quebec's large cities where the European model is oh so Haute couture.
The birth rate is also beginning to show a blip of a rise in the correct direction (up!). Immigration is once again controlled and flowing healthily. No more votes for visas. No more ethnic selections in order to dilute local/native populations. Integration is once again the ideal that drives the engine.
A VERY welcome shift, indeed. A reversion. And with that reversion (and still more to come) there is a chance at REAL progress.
There is still much work to be done, but I am quite happy to say: It has begun, and holds a great momentum.
The 'civil war' concept you hit on is something that both your neighbours worry about and have expressed at summits and meetings over the last decade. Secessionist and separatists thinking, once thought to be a thing of the past, is making a come back State-side. 'Truther' movements abound.
The polarization of the US general population against the elite classes (sometime referred to as 'the hollow elite' in these parts) and most evidently against each other (regionally and marginally) is a growing concern.
The 'victim classes' are an excellent example of this.
Each group competing to hold the title of the 'grand victim' of the state. These groups who, at first, had some form of solidarity and general public sympathy are now being played off one against the other for the privilege of that title in a very cynical and overt fashion. Ribbons of every colour. Awareness days. College courses. You name it!
ANYTHING but address the issues head on with the means already in your hands (your constitution).
CNTD
DeleteBut, by far the biggest warning signal to date was the recent attempt by the executive office to assert power over the other independent branches of government. The carefully chosen 'health care' model was a Hegelian masterpiece. Mr Obama's tirade (threats?) aimed at the Supreme Court was borderline totalitarian. Quite shocking to anyone who understands even the basics of your system. To oppose judicial activism is one thing, to IMPOSE policy on those courts is another entirely.
Another is the oft vaunted concept known as 'engineered decline'. This is the idea that certain members of the highest echelon are intentionally moving their wealth and influence to offshore shelters and deliberately destroying the industrial sector and the broader economy in order to foster 'change'. This combined with an obvious and almosty TOTAL control of the media? The idea is an intentional period of engineered instability and inflamed strife that makes the the masses far more malleable. Divide and rule.
A sign of our growing concern can be seen in how our monetary systems are becoming less connected, and the concept of a more frequently suggested NA currency is met with open hostility by our populace. Consider that this is happening in a nakedly 'globalist' atmosphere.
Ditto with the proposed 'AU', which was leaked by our high level officials in the PMO to the populace and media. The same ideas are 'laughed' at in the US as 'conspiracy theory'. Here it is greeted with open hostility. Here the meetings of these groups and attendees make the national papers and are discussed in schools, military bases, staff rooms, board rooms, and in the pubs.
I understand the same news is only disseminated in 'alternate media' sources down your way. The so called 'far right' radio networks and internet sites. (Note: How can they be 'far right' and hold the same position as the 'socialist Utopia' Canada? Perhaps because NEITHER is true?)
The reason for our attention to these matters is quite simple, yet profound: Canadians want to chart our own destiny, and while we love our neighbours - we do NOT want to move in with them and marry. We will not give up ouor culture, history, and faith - and we do not want to see you folks do that either.
This is why 'open borders' and 'perimeter defence' are met with such sceptical caution in this land. This is why we have only agreed to redrafted versions of these concepts, much to the chagrin of many in the US elite who decry we are only open to 'half measures'.
This very real caution stems from the growing evidence that there are elements/movements in the US federal system that do not care about party differences, the sovereignty of the US government branches, states, or citizens - so why on Earth would they care about OURS?
My final thought: Mike, just remember that the sane and loyal Americans have many friends North of their border; and that despite our historic and political differences we would gladly help you defend what you have forged in your great nation from those who would see it shattered and de-constructed for their own cynical and maniacal purposes. Politically, and God forbid, literally of need be.
We do not wait in the wings like vultures, we hope to see our friends and allies rise to the challenge and will do all we can to help.
Also have faith there are many ranking military officers in YOUR defence complex that are also VERY aware of what is happening and stand ready to guard your nation from those who would topple and redesign it by stealth or naked force and that the people of your land are industrious and intelligent - unlike their portrayal by the sneering elitist media.
May God bless you and guide you in this struggle.
Remember you are nowhere near alone. You have friends at home and abroad that pray for and work toward for your efforts in this.
'God keep our land, Glorious and Free'
(A line from our Anthem)
CrusadeREX
Fear of whom? Atheists? A tiny minority in a thoroughly Christian nation? You, guys, are wimps.
ReplyDelete"Fear of whom? Atheists? A tiny minority in a thoroughly Christian nation?"
DeleteNo.
Atheists are merely tools, and only a small one in a very large box. They are no more to be feared than a and aluminium screwdriver or plastic trowel.
My personal focus (not fear) is on the hand that wields these tools as weapons against and in order to undermine civilization. The agenda is MUCH bigger than the planned obsolescence that is atheist dogma.
"You, guys, are wimps."
LOL
The surgeon and soldier are wimps. So says the academic.
That IS funny.
But please, don't get too excited now Oleg, you'll get foam all over your pocket protector and fog up your glasses.
If atheists are merely tools, who is using them? The Christian majority itself? Spill the beans, crus. Tell us the whole story. :)
Delete"Much of it is driven by pure bigotry-- the calumny against priests on the topic of child sexual abuse is abhorrent"
ReplyDeleteThe ire has not been because priests abused children. No one was shocked that there would be priests who would do this. The ire directed at the Catholic church is the result of the fact that the Church as an institution covered it up for years. In effect, the Church knew that they had priests who were abusing children, and rather than come clean on the issue, chose instead to cover it up and enable those priests to continue abusing children.
"(the Church is and always has been one of the safest places for children. Abuse in the home and in schools is much more common and is rarely reported in the media and rarely prosecuted)."
This claim is essentially unsupported. The study that you cited, when one actually reads it, reveals that a given priest is more likely to abuse a child than a given teacher. Plus, the figures in the study are an amalgamation of a lot of stuff that isn't sexual abuse. You are just making shit up when you make this claim. But that's not new for you. Your primary skill appears to be lying.
"Who would have imagined a few years ago that the federal government would issue a mandate that is clearly intended to drive the Church out of healthcare and charity and all aspects of public life in which it employs people?"
ReplyDeleteYou mean a mandate that is identical to ones that have been in place for years in thirty-three states and which somehow hasn't driven the Church out of healthcare or charity? You mean that mandate?
Anyone ever heard about Catholic Eschatology?
ReplyDelete