Tuesday, March 14, 2017

How to get banned on 'Ethika Politika'


Folks,

Try commenting on Ethika Politika's

Anthony M Barr wonders if Trump is Nietzchean

Hopefully you will have more luck than I did!  This one got removed...:-(,,,,,








AMB>>>>>>>>>>>For if Trump is truly embracing Nietzsche, “winning” will also mean abandoning those deemed as weak or inferior and suppressing the pity which Christianity calls us to have for those who are marginalized.<<<<<<
AMB,
You bring up 'those deemed as weak or inferior" but don't bring up Trump's attack on abortion. What gives?
Perhaps you are not aware that abortion is modern America's smart bomb for the marginalized e.g........
-Down Syndrome fetus': aborted in 75% of cases
-Black fetus' : aborted at 40% of the live birthrate  ( rate almost 3 x that of whites, despite the former's strong cultural abhorrence to abortion)
I am quite convinced that Kermit Gosnell went unpunished for decades because he was doing the social-darwinist elite's dirty work, i.e. thinning out Philadelphia's black underclass. (PA's Republican Governor Ridge was totally down with that.)
Help me out here! you don't bring up abortion because
a. it doesn't fit your 'Trump the Ubermensch' narrative?
b. you are pro-choice and, like Gov Ridge, have been cheering on the Gosnells of the world?
c. you are a pacifist and believe Christians are never entitled to push back when elites bulldoze Christian culture.....
In the clip below Harrison Ford does a good job of pushing back!!

What am I missing?

Monday, February 27, 2017

2015 'Christ the King' amendment poll


 The First Lady's Our Father , where she quietly blasted a hole in the 'Wall' separating American  Church and State, reminds me....

During the American Civil War,  some abolitionist Protestant ministers began lobbying to have our Lord's name inserted into the preamble of the Constitution.  Their argument, bluntly, was: God is punishing America for leaving His Son out of its Constitution.  President Lincoln met with them and expressed sympathy but was assassinated before his sincerity was ever tested.

The ministers' association's idea was to make the US Government leaders and their bureaucracies pay lip service to Jesus Christ as Lord of the nations.  It  faded away at the time, but has been visited a number of times since then, never quite catching fire.(until recently? more on that later)  The story of the 'National Reform Association' (NRA) is no secret, though it may as well be .

Today's atheist secularists, such as Christopher Hitchens (RIP),  have made much hay of the fact that many of America's founding Fathers entertained as much animosity towards the Christian religion as modern atheists do.  In this regard, I am afraid Hitchens was closer to being right than many of today's 'consititutionalists' who claim that the U. S. Constitution squares up perfectly with Christianity or at least with 'judeo-christian' values.  If America was designed to be Christian, then why has it taken a secularist path?

 I am afraid that while our guiding fathers assumed that  Religion might be a good help  to keep the masses from adopting nihilistic morality, they  also assumed that Religion is a dangerous force which must be resisted and contained.  If all faiths are to be treated equally, then all faiths must be equally valid. This is logically impossible unless they are all equally fantasies! From such a hidden axiom we get our Jesus-less, platitudinous, public prayers uttered by a neutered clergy.

Thought experiment: Let's rewind the clock and imagine how different America might have acted had the National Reform Association succeeded.  Would Pius IX have opposed the NRA's effort? Leo XIII? Pius XI?  Would simple act of forcing the State to honor our Lord's Name have done anything to resist:

-the rise of the Ku Klux Klan?
-the mistreatment of American Indians?
-instituting practical atheism in public education?
-banishing public prayers?
-the adoption of social darwinism?
-instituting eugenics laws?
-mass targeting of civilian populations in WWII?
-legalizing abortion?
-redefining marriage?
-etc.?

would our Lord Jesus' name have had no effect?

Bringing the topic closer to today...PPP actually polled Republican voters in 2015 and discovered that most Republican voters, and especially the youngest Republican voters**, want Christianity officially recognized as America's Religion....


                        Christianity National Religion

Yes/No Support establishing Christianity as the national religion

Age             18 to 45             46 to 65     Older than 65

Favor*          63% **             57%            51%

Oppose*       27%                  30%             31%

 *establishing Christianity as the national religion

source 2015 PPP poll of Republican Voters
(http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_National_22415.pdf)

Where am I going with this?  I am still wondering myself.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxkRVdPxDYo



Thursday, January 26, 2017

Kneeling responds to Catholic in Brooklyn's thoughts on mass emigration/immigration

Kneeling responds to Catholic in Brooklyn's thoughts on mass emigration/immigration






Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free -- NOT!!

Credit
Last weekend we saw millions of people around the world protesting the Donald Trump presidency, demanding that the voices of all people be heard.  Of course, these are the same people who feel abortion on demand is a human right.  Obviously unborn children are completely disposable in their eyes, which proves the hypocrisy and cognitive dissonance of their movement.

Unfortunately, those on the right are no better.  The right are passionate in their defense of the unborn and of the sick, weak and elderly who so often have no voice in our world.  And that truly is commendable.  But then they also fight for the right to capital punishment - killing criminals who need as much time in this life as they can get for a chance at repentance - and the right also fights against anyone strange and unknown coming into their land, no matter how desperate these people may be.  We are talking about victims of war and persecution who have seen their homes destroyed and left with nothing but the clothes on their back.  There is a faint, faint chance that 1 in a million may be a terrorist (if the odds are even that high), so it's us first and forget about anyone else.

Word in the news now is that Trump says the wall blocking off Mexico will be built in the new few months, and he plans to indefinitely ban ALL immigrants from Syria, and implement a month-long ban against all immigrants from Iraq, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia or Yemen.  When the program does resume, it will be cut in half, allowing far fewer refugees into the United States.

These Syrian refugees better forget about coming to the US
Just a few days ago, Pope Francis warned against populism, which is the driving force behind Donald Trump.  HERE.
Pope Francis on Saturday warned against populism, saying it could lead to the election of "saviours" like Adolf Hitler.
In an hour-long interview with Spanish newspaper El Pais, conducted as Donald Trump was being sworn in as US president, the pontiff also condemned the idea of using walls and barbed wire to keep out foreigners, among them refugees and migrants.
"Of course, crises provoke fears and worries," he said, but added that for him "the example of populism in the European sense of the word is Germany in 1933".
The pope added: "Germany ... was looking for a leader, someone who would give her back her identity and there was a little man named Adolf Hitler who said 'I can do it'."

"Hitler did not steal power," the pope said. "He was elected by his people and then he destroyed his people."
I do not like speculating about prophesy and "signs".  But I can't help but notice that we are in 2017, the centennial year of Fatima, and that we have just concluded the Year of Mercy.  Our Lord told St Faustina that first He would offer mercy to the world and for those who do not accept His Mercy, then judgment.  Through Pope Francis we have just been offered a Year of Mercy, offered to the entire world.

Many did not even take notice of this offer of Mercy, and went on with their lives as normal.  Certainly the world has only gotten worse since the Year of Mercy stated in 2015.

Is now the time of judgment?
Write down these words, My daughter. Speak to the world about My Mercy; let all mankind recognize My unfathomable Mercy. It is a sign for the end times; after it , will come the day of justice. While there is still time, let them have recourse to the fount of My Mercy; let them profit from the Blood and water which gushed forth for them…….. before I come as the just one, I first open wide the gates of My Mercy. He who does not pass through the gates of My Mercy must pass through the gates of justice. (Diary 848)
I am also concerned about President Trump's seemingly close relationship with Russia.  Our Lady of Fatima warned about the errors of Russia:
Russia will spread its errors throughout the world, raising up wars and persecutions against the Church. The good will be martyred, the Holy Father will have much to suffer, and various nations will be annihilated.
President Trump has more than once praised President Putin of Russia, calling him a strong leader and calling for closer ties between our two countries.  Trump seems to ignore the fact the Putin is a despot who murders his enemies.  He boldly invaded the Ukraine.  He is helping the tyrannical leader of Syria in Syria's civil war, bombing women and children and even hospitals.

President Trump has also said he plans to build up our nuclear weapons, as has Putin.  Where does this put the rest of the world?

If America insists on turning her back on those in the most need, we cannot expect Our Lord to be there for us.  As He said, whatsoever we do to the least of his brethren, we do unto Him.  He did not make a caveat of, you don't have to do this if there is a slight chance that there might be bad people among those you are helping.  Certainly Christ never made that distinction when He walked the earth.

Last year when Pope Francis was asked about Donald Trump, he replied:
A person who thinks only about building walls - wherever they may be - and not building bridges, is not Christian ... I'd just say that this man is not Christian, if he said it this way.
What hath the United States wrought in the election of Donald J. Trump?

8 comments:

  1. on another note, did you see President Trump put in a plug for this Weekend's March for Life?

    http://kneelingcatholic.blogspot.com/2017/01/trump-promotes-2017-march-for-life-in.html
    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, but to me this is as much an example of cognitive dissonance as the left pushing for abortion. How can you shut out war refugees and push for capital punishment and at the same time say that you are pro life because you are against abortion? My mind just goes "TILT" at this whole thing.

      And to be honest, I don't trust for a moment that Trump is pro life. He is supporting this movement because this is what his supporters are about. It is convenient for him. He made a very blanket statement back in his "liberal" days that although he did not like abortion, he "absolutely" supported a woman's right to choose.
    2. "It is convenient for him." I'm glad to have whatever measures he puts in place that are pro-life (like the restoration of the Mexico City policy a few days ago), but I think you are right: All the evidence we have of his character and record seems to suggest this is a position of political convenience for him, unfortunately. Pro-lifers would be wise to expect little from this administration, and to assume nothing.
  2. This is yet another unfortunate elevation of the animus against capital punishment into a dogmatic position such as that which obtains in Church doctrine against abortion and euthanasia, which it simply is not.

    As the Catechism says, echoing what John Paul II said in Evangelium Vitae: "2267 Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor." After which it goes on to affirm a preference for non-lethal means, where these are effective, noting that this is quite often the case in developed countries. Nonetheless, it clearly works to stay in some continuity with longstanding Church teaching, which has always allowed room for the state to resort to the death penalty. Were it to do otherwise, it would not only engage in rupture with that teaching, it would also stand in condemnation of the over 180 popes who ruled as sovereign over a polity (the Papal States) which employed capital punishment in its organic legal code through its entire existence (and which remained on Vatican City's code books until 1969).

    It is possible as a Catholic to advocate against the death penalty. But it is also possible to advocate for it, too. In this respect, I would recommend Edward Feser's and Joseph Bissette's forthcoming book, "By Man Shall His Blood Be Shed: A Catholic Defense of the Death Penalty" (Ignatius Press).
    Reply
    Replies
    1. You are not theologically wrong. But I have every right to disagree with you, as does most of Church authority.

      The death penalty is designed to keep people safe from those who could do them harm. Those men (and women) living behind bars are of little danger to the rest of us. Our first concern for them should be their souls, for truly they are in eternal peril. Killing them when it is not necessary shows no concern for their souls whatsoever.

      We do not live under the Old Covenant where people could be stoned for breaking the Sabbath. Our Lord brought a new way of dealing with sinners, and that is love and mercy and concern for their souls, not vengeance.
  3. Dear CIB,

    Thanks for responding...I thought it was related to your topic because Trump was responding to Muir bringing up the women's march.

    regarding the refugees and uncontrolled immigration I would like you people who seem to want a sort of lassaiz faire border to contemplate the following:

    Strict controls on immigration save lives.

    How?

    every year we in South Texas read about hundreds of poor souls who perish out in the sticks here from dehydration, exposure, etc. If there had been a wall or even better enforcement, I cannot imagine a scenario where those deceased people wouldn't still be alive. (probably living happily with intact families in their ancestral homelands.)

    a similarly sad situation has occurred in the Mediterranean. On Lampedusa in 2013 the Holy Father highlighted his invitation to boat people. Since that time the annual death toll due to drownings has sky-rocketed 25 fold (( http://mapreport.com/subtopics/d/migrant.boat.accident.html ))

    I don't see how the Holy Father doesn't share some responsibility for luring these people out of their homelands.
    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Holy Father "luring" people out? These people are not living in comfort and security like we are. They live in squalor with no hope for the future. That is why they are willing to risk everything - including their lives - for a better future. It is the same thing that drove our ancestors in the 17th and 18th Century to come to America, facing horrendous hardships in an uncivilized land with no one to help them.

      One of the main reasons we are seeing the terrible tragedies among the refugees is because so many have turned their backs on them, and we will all have to answer for that. If we were there to help them, they would not have to depend on those who are taking advantage and putting their lives at risk.
    2. >>>>The Holy Father "luring" people out? These people are not living in comfort and security like we are. They live in squalor with no hope for the future.<<<

      ....as they have for centuries and have lived contentedly. When westerners dangle the prospect of a welfare-state before people used to working with their own hands for a living, many happy people suddenly become unhappy. Their families are roiled and their cultures are subjected to whatever Western fad dominates. Currently LGBT is the rage, in 10 years it might be something even more inimical to those cultures. We must help them. Corporally and spiritually, but promoting mass migration does neither. It disrupts lives and gets people killed along the way.

      The Holy Father, and you, seem to think you are doing these people a great favor by transplanting them into secular western-welfare states which eschew God and tradition and worship Hollywood values. Please don't tell me you think America and Europe are something other than that!

      People love home. Texans have convinced themselves they are living in heaven....most visitors here disagree. Believe it or not, most people, even Arabs and Africans and Asians, think their native land is the closest thing to heaven.

      We must help these people since we funded the wars in Syria and Libya and Iraq and Yemen and Afghanistan and ???. So we do owe them. But we must be careful not to encourage any more deadly migration waves. You and the Holy Father seem unaware of all people who will die along the way.
      Delete

Wednesday, January 25, 2017

Trump Promotes 2017 March for Life during ABC interview 25 JAN

video


....They say the crowds were large, but you're gonna have a large crowd on Friday too, which is mostly pro-life people.  You're gonna have a lot of people coming on Friday and I will say this--I didn't realize this, but I was told-- you will have a very large crowd of people-- as large or larger-- some people say it's gonna be larger--PROLIFE PEOPLE--and they say the press doesn't cover them...(courtesy of ABC news)


[[Handel's Thanks be to Thee, Lord!]]

added note:  Let's pray for a big turn out for the March for Life....if you are close by...please go there....please distribute this news ASAP...make your own Blog posts, get a better video of this, etc. whatever you do, don't rub it in the faces of pro-life never Trumpers, and by 'don't', I mean........
 'do'!!!

later....the Blaze has picked this up
Muir gets Trumped

heavy also has the video hear
heavy


Wednesday, December 28, 2016

KC dedicates letter to Fr. Martin Fox's soliciting bad Catholic hymnals

 Father Fox, et. al.

I wrote this letter for my   pastor back in 2007 when I was agitating for us to lose our RITUALSONG  hymnal.   .................                                                                                                                                                                  05 JUL 07

......... A couple of months ago you asked me if there was something wrong with our hymnal, RitualSong.  It has taken me a while to put my thoughts on the subject in order, so please bear with me.

I will begin with a recent quote by the Pope regarding church music and Gregorian chant: ( I colored the red portions myself, not His Holiness)


"In the course of her two-thousand-year history, the Church has created, and still creates, music and songs which represent a rich patrimony of faith and love.
This heritage must not be lost. Certainly as far as the liturgy is concerned, we cannot say that one song is as good as another. Generic improvisation or the introduction of musical genres which fail to respect the meaning of the liturgy should be avoided. As an element of the liturgy, song should be well integrated into the overall celebration. Consequently everything – texts, music, execution – ought to correspond to the meaning of the mystery being celebrated, the structure of the rite and the liturgical seasons. Finally, while respecting various styles and different and highly praiseworthy traditions, I desire, in accordance with the request advanced by the synod fathers, that Gregorian chant be suitably esteemed and employed as the chant proper to the Roman liturgy."

To RitualSong’s credit, it does have a section of Gregorian chant.  It also includes the proper readings for each Sunday.

On the down side, I briefly surveyed RitualSong’s ratio of old hymns to new (i.e. those composed after Vatican II) and the balance seems to be about a 1 to 4 ratio (old to new).  Given the perspective of 2000 years, RitualSong’s compilers opted to weight the hymnal heavily in favor of hymns most of which had yet to pass the test of time.  A huge number of RitualSong’s new hymns have already fallen into disuse and it has only been ten years since the hymnal’s release.  The compilers decided to do this at the expense of having us forget Catholic hymns which are 100, 200, 1500 years old, which have passed the test of time and have appealed to the Catholic Church throughout the ages and throughout the entire world and not just to American baby-boomers.


Secondly, on the issue of altering the lyrics of old hymns:  Whatever advantage there might be for doing that, there seem to be at least two negative things going on,
i.                 dumming us down so we won’t have to deal with “Thee’s and Thou’s” of the original, and
ii.                Altering the meaning of older hymns to match the editors’ modern problems with traditional Catholic doctrine. Below I show examples of older hymns being edited to avoid mentioning Christ’s Death as well as being edited to avoid mention of Christian Martyrdom.   Ironically we get spared Thee’s and Thou’s of old Catholic hymns, presumably we cannot understand old English, but then we are expected to understand Amen Siakudumisa, (698), Bwana Awabriki (720), Mayenziwe (725), Jesus Tawa Pano (806), Thuma Mina (796)  All these are more unintelligible than archaic English, yet they are all in RitualSong, while “Sweet Sacrament we Thee adore”, “Panis Angelicus”, Ave Verum, the Te Deum … et.al. are not. 

I feel the easiest way to illustrate my point is in the form of the table, below, which presents some of the hymns which I feel have problems and what I specifically see as a problem.  This is not exhaustive. However it did exhaust (and exasperate) me compiling it.  J 

You will see, I concentrate on RitualSong’s “Eucharistic” section.  It seems to me, in the future, if a hymnal we consider for adoption has a preponderance of its “Eucharistic” hymns being penned by protestants who don’t even believe in the Eucharist, then that should be a red flag for us, indicating that the compilers were more interested in being stylish and modern than in helping us to worship and pray as Catholics.  Earlier I forwarded to you an email from our former pastor, Bishop Flores, where he also mentions being irked by modern Eucharistic hymns, therefore I don’t think I am alone in this arena, and this raises the whole question of why we ever would want to sing hymns that irk people, like Bishop Flores, who are simply trying to be true to Catholic tradition and teaching.  Lex orandi lex credendi.  Aside from doctrinal considerations, I think it is just insensitive.

I hope and pray you will not be offended by what I have written here, and I ask forgiveness in advance  if I what I have written here seems brash or angry. (I have stopped being angry and have  ‘moved on’ to just being puzzled) I certainly think   it is the role of the committee formed to look around and make sure we have enough options to choose from (which don’t offend any Catholic believers) before we decide on our next hymnal selection.

Page
#
First
Line
Idiosyncracy
For Example
911
Let Us Break Bread Together
No hint of Transubstantiation
nor of the sacrificial nature of the Mass

916
In Christ There is a Table Set for All
Ambiguous and confusing Eucharistic statement. However if it is remembered that the author is Methodist, then there is no real ambiguity.  The song is about the protestant “Lord’s Supper” and not about the Holy Eucharist.
“Here he gives himself to us as bread”
917
Draw Us in the Spirit’s Tether
No hint of Transubstantiation
nor of the sacrificial nature of the Mass

919
Taste and See
Though it is loosely based on Psalm 34,  the only thing having remotely hinting of the Eucharist is the word “taste”
The tune is a fake gospel style complete with swaying to the music
Francis Patrick O’brien is not an. African Amercan Baptist. Just an Irish Catholic priest from Boston “tryin’ to get down”
921
As the Grains of Wheat
Though loosely based upon the Didache, the Eucharist’s Sacrificial emphasis which is central to the Didache, has been edited out

922
At That First Eucharist
This beautiful hymn has been butchered to change “Thou” into “You”, I have to wonder why  RitualSong didn’t update the protestant “How Great Thou Art?  Are only old Protestant hymns too holy to alter?
Somehow “grant us at every Eucharist to say with longing heart and soul, ‘Thy will be done’” becomes:
“At this our Eucharist again preside and in our hearts your law of love renew”
It just doesn’t have the same meaning
924
Song of the Body of Christ
This song seems to be all about “us”, not about Jesus, and has no hint of Transubstantiation
nor of the sacrificial nature of the Mass

925
Take the Bread, Children
No hint of Transubstantiation
nor of the sacrificial nature of the Mass
I believe we are to RECEIVE the Holy Eucharist, not TAKE it. Singing “take the bread” over and over, manages to simultaneously perpetuate two misconceptions in one little phrase.
926
All who hunger
The closest this gets to Eucharistic teaching is the statement “Jesus is the living Bread”, yet any protestant who denies Transubstantiation would make the identical statement
The author is the Canadian Protestant Union’s first self-avowed lesbian priestess
927
Bread to Share
No hint of Transubstantiation
nor of the sacrificial nature of the Mass

929
Let Us Be Bread
No hint of Transubstantiation
nor of the sacrificial nature of the Mass

930
Jesus Is Here Right Now
No hint of Transubstantiation
nor of the sacrificial nature of the Mass
“with this bread and wine, his peace you’ll find” contributes to an deficient understanding of the Eucharist
933
Now In This Banquet
It does say “Christ is our bread”, (as would any Protestant hymns,) but that is as far as it goes.
“bring us dancing into to day” hearkens back to the 70’s and liturgical dancing

A Mighty Fortress
Besides being The ‘battle hymn’ of the Reformers because it was written by the man who split the Church. Martin Luther believed many odd things, e.g. there is no free will, God hates the vast majority of humanity, the souls of the blessed sleep until Christ returns, mentally retarded people are “changelings” and should be euthanized, polygamy is ok, and many other errors.

850
Gather Us In

Not in some heaven light-years away” (last verse)
seems to be sneering at the Catholic teaching on the Four Last Things: Death, Judgment, Heaven, Hell.  Maybe it is only sneering at #3.
809
I Danced in the Morning
Flippant lyrics, which put rhyming and cuteness above reverence

“I danced on a Friday when the sky turned black
It’s hard to dance with devil on your back”
The author, explains his pithy lyrics  as follows:
"I see Christ as the incarnation of the piper who is calling us. He dances that shape and pattern which is at the heart of our reality. By Christ I mean not only Jesus; in other times and places, other planets, there may be other Lords of the Dance”

Faith of our Fathers
Unrecognizable when compared to the original. 
The martyrdom verse has been edited out and replaced with a trendy “faith of our brothers and sisters”
626
Crown Him with many Crowns
The changes made to this beautiful hymn seem to be made just for the sake of change but then again……….
Changing “Of Him who died for Thee”
to
“Of Him who set us free’ seems to be doctrinally driven by the modernist reluctance to mention Christ’s Redeeming Death.
Loading...
Loading...
Loading...
Loading...
Loading...