Peter Hitchens’ on the Demise of the English Church

The brother of the late author and atheist Christopher Hitchens recently spoke in Copenhagen on immigration and the end of western culture (extremely pessimistic, but very entertaining). Below is a short sample from the long Q&A that follows the speech. He reflects on the Church of England, referring to it as the “enemy of it’s heritage”:

The full speech is below and the Q&A follows, both are worth taking the time to listen to.

…rjt

Pope Francis, Scripture, and Universal Brotherhood

When I read the Pope’s homilies (I’ve read hundreds) I noticed that he will carefully draw out spiritual applications from that day’s readings that are simple and usually (not always) consistent with the given passage’s meaning. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said regarding many of his other writings and particularly the encyclicals where he cites biblical passages to support his specific instruction.

In the following examples the Pope appears to be manipulating scripture to deemphasize Christian brotherhood and elevate universal brotherhood.

The context of the following is a lesson that spiritual formation of a Catholic is not solely based on doctrinal instruction. But notice how Francis commingles the love commandments:

“…It has to do with ‘observing’ all that the Lord has shown us as the way of responding to his love. Along with the virtues, this means above all the new commandment, the first and the greatest of the commandments, and the one that best identifies us as Christ’s disciples: ‘This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you’ (Jn 15:12). Clearly, whenever the New Testament authors want to present the heart of the Christian moral message, they present the essential requirement of love for one’s neighbour: ‘The one who loves his neighbour has fulfilled the whole law… therefore love of neighbour is the fulfilling of the law'” (Rom 13:8, 10) (Evangelii Gaudium, 161).

Continue reading “Pope Francis, Scripture, and Universal Brotherhood”

Contraception and Spousal Accountability

Everyone knows that millions of Catholic married couples are using contraceptives irrespective of the Church’s condemnation of the practice. What is interesting about this reality is that the common methods being used place the responsibility on either the man or the woman, but not both. This means that only one of the two is actively facilitating contraception. So, for example, what if a Catholic man has a change of heart on moral grounds and would rather his wife switch from the pill to natural family planning and she refuses? According to Pope Pius XI, he would not be culpable for the sin of contraception:

“Holy Church knows well that not infrequently one of the parties is sinned against rather than sinning, when for a grave cause he or she reluctantly allows the perversion of the right order [contraception]. In such a case, there is no sin, provided that, mindful of the law of charity, he or she does not neglect to seek to dissuade and to deter the partner from sin” (Casti Connubii, 1930, #59).

Continue reading “Contraception and Spousal Accountability”

300 Years of Masonic Mischief

masons1
Shriners on parade

While Freemasonry originated in 1717, it was in 1870, the same year the American order, the Shriners, were founded, that it began a concerted assault on the institutions of the Roman Catholic Church. It was a portentous year as the government of Italy seized the Papal States, leaving the Church with no sovereign home. It was also the year of the Franco-Prussian War, won by the Germans in a rout that was viewed by many in northern Europe as a victory over Catholicism. The Kulturkampf was instituted in Germany after the victory leading to the imprisonment of thousands of priests. In France, Church-run institutions like education and hospitals were seized and secularized. Discriminatory laws against Catholics were also passed in Switzerland and Italy. Continue reading “300 Years of Masonic Mischief”

Why Europe Will Return to the Christian Faith

“Because we have the truth”

Otto von Habsburg
Otto von Habsburg

This was the reply of the late Otto von Habsburg (1912-2011) when asked the question of why he was so convinced Europe would once again return to Christianity. The inquiry was in the context of Europe’s continuing secularization on the one hand, and non-Christian immigration on the other.

The interviewer, an instructor at Thomas More College, was surprised by the would-be Emperor of Austria’s confidence:

“The manner of his response made a deep impression on me. It was sovereign and serene, and filled with a glowing, inspiring hope—a hope anchored in an unwavering faith in Christ and His Church.”

Continue reading “Why Europe Will Return to the Christian Faith”

The Validity of a Marriage is Determined by Proper Consent

marriage2Marriage as we know it today originated in the twelfth-century. It was the result of the efforts of the Gregorian reform movement to wrestle full jurisdiction over marriage from the pagan-influenced customs of the feudal nobility. The latter treated marriage as means of forming strategic alliances with other families, or as a way of keeping wealth within an extended family. Arranged marriages precluded consent which often meant that it precluded love. They were often arranged before the child (usually the daughter) had even reached adolescence.

Church authorities used a variety of strategies to accomplish its goals, one of which was that fact that within Latin Christendom it was the Church that determined whether a particular marriage was valid or not. People wanted their marriage to be valid; it determined the legitimacy of their children and their ability to inherit. The Church knew this. But its problem was that it did not possess a uniform definition of what constituted a valid marriage. Continue reading “The Validity of a Marriage is Determined by Proper Consent”

Why Social Engineering is Intensifying in the U.S.

Future historians analyzing our recent history will notice that Western leaders of the 1990s and after (e.g. Clinton, Blair, Cameron, et al.) reflected a major shift away from their predecessors on moral questions. There was still a shared acknowledgement of the Judeo-Christian foundations of the West, but it obviously had become less of a guide for positions on moral issues. What social historians in particular might note is that these government book1administrators were the first generation of graduates that were educated in institutions saturated with the phenomenon known as political correctness. Students in the major universities from about 1970 on were being increasingly indoctrinated as to what were the acceptable opinions on race relations, sexuality, homosexuality, cultural values, etc. This was exposed by University of Chicago professor Allen Bloom in his widely-read 1987 book The Closing of the American Mind.

Compare the moral outlooks of two contemporaries, Barack Obama and David Cameron, with two other contemporaries, Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher. Can you picture the latter two defending the government’s attempt to impose a legal right for transgender people to use bathrooms corresponding to their new sexual identity? One can imagine hearing Thatcher’s response to the notion —  “preposterous!”. There is a precise reason behind why we are seeing the social engineers of today intensify the force of their efforts to impose their agenda on American society and why it will continue to increase in severity. Continue reading “Why Social Engineering is Intensifying in the U.S.”

“You are Allowing Evil to Raise Itself up Arrogantly!” St. Hildegard Reproves Her Pope

“This agglomeration which was called and which still calls itself the Holy Roman Empire was neither holy, nor Roman, nor an empire.”

…Voltaire

There was a time when St. Hildegard would have probably agreed with these paradoxical but generally true shortcomings of the Holy Roman Empire. As an adult Hildegard had come to know a succession of Emperors, since they were in reality no more than Kings of Germany and she was as famous a German as they were. She especially detested Emperor Frederick Barbarossa for his determination to usurp the authority of the pope in ecclesiastical appointments. Hildegard received a gracious letter from the Emperor, in which he referred to her as “holy lady”, and “beloved lady”, requesting her prayers as a means of obtaining grace. Not uncharacteristically, she responds by fearlessly assuming her role as a prophet, of the Old Testament type, delivering threats in the first-person voice of God (very unusual for a woman in medieval times):

“He who Is says: By My own power I do away with the obstinacy and rebellion of those who scorn me. Woe, O woe to the evil of those wicked ones who spurn me. Hear this O king, if you wish to live. Otherwise my sword will pierce you” (Baird, Joseph L. The Personal Correspondence of Hildegard of Bingen. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006. Letter #44, p.78).

She follows up with another letter in which explicitly insults the King (a guy who could make her life very difficult):

“…[I]n a mystic vision I see you like a little boy or some madman living before Living Eyes. Yet you still have time for ruling over worldly matters. Beware, therefore, that the almighty King does not lay you low because of the blindness of your eyes, which fail to see correctly how to hold the rod of proper governance in your hand. See to it that you do not act in such a way that you lose the grace of God” (Letter #45, p.78).

Continue reading ““You are Allowing Evil to Raise Itself up Arrogantly!” St. Hildegard Reproves Her Pope”

5 Reasons Why Western Europe Will Lose the Battle Against Islamic Extremism

1. REFUSAL BY AUTHORITIES TO ACKNOWLEDGE AND DEAL EFFECTIVELY WITH CRIME IN IMMIGRANT COMMUNITIES .

nogo1
England

A major debate erupted earlier in the year over the existence of “no-go zones” in a number of European cities. These are dangerous neighborhoods primarily populated by Muslim immigrants that even the police avoid. The following description of no-go zones near Paris comes from an article in the New Republic:

“The word banlieue (“suburb”) now connotes a no-go zone of high-rise slums, drug-fueled crime, failing schools and poor, largely Muslim immigrants and their angry offspring.”

Worried about a drop in American tourism, the Mayor of Paris threatened to sue Fox News over reports about these zones in Paris. Fox retracted. Nevertheless, in an earlier post, I reported in detail how dangerous Paris can be and how hesitant the authorities are in responding to Muslim immigrant crime.

It’s a problem all over Europe. The following rare admission comes from the Chief Constable of the Police Directorate Osnbrück, Germany, regarding these sorts of areas:

“Every police commissioner and interior minister will deny it. But of course we know where we can go with the police car and where, even initially, only with the personnel carrier. The reason is that our colleagues can no longer feel safe there in twos, and have to fear becoming the victim of a crime themselves. We know that these areas exist. Even worse: in these areas crimes no longer result in charges. They are left ‘to themselves.’ Only in the worst cases do we in the police learn anything about it. The power of the state is completely out of the picture.” (Link)

Refusing to acknowledge a social problem doesn’t make it disappear. A bias toward multiculturalism in the European pressrooms only support this. Continue reading “5 Reasons Why Western Europe Will Lose the Battle Against Islamic Extremism”

Is Social Engineering the Salient Evil of Our Time?

The term “social engineering” originated in the late 19th century and was used by early sociologists to define the attempt by governments to influence human attitudes toward certain ideas or behaviors. It is primarily associated with authoritarian governments like Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, and Chairman Mao’s China. Using manipulative laws, re-education, and propaganda, they sought to reshape their societies according to their repective ideologies. All governments, however, practice social engineering to some extent, with the intention of producing a desirable outcome that is in the best interest of the public. Regulation of industry and financial markets, laws, and tax incentives are a few examples. But social engineering, even in free societies can have a sinister side.

jpiiPope St. John Paul II tried to warn the West about this in his 1993 encyclical Veritatis Splendor. Written just after the fall of the Soviet Union, something he had helped accomplish, he cautioned the West about the dangers of freedom in a society that was losing its moral foundations:

“Today, when many countries have seen the fall of ideologies which bound politics to a totalitarian conception of the world — Marxism being the foremost of these — there is no less grave a danger that the fundamental rights of the human person will be denied and that the religious yearnings which arise in the heart of every human being will be absorbed once again into politics. …Indeed, if there is no ultimate truth to guide and direct political activity, then ideas and convictions can easily be manipulated for reasons of power. As history demonstrates, a democracy without values easily turns into open or thinly disguised totalitarianism.”

It may not be correct to assert that social engineering itself is an evil; that would depend on whether the desired outcome is evil in nature. We get a clue about the intentions of today’s social reformers from a recent article in the New York Post. Citing Gallup Polls, the writer points out some of the dramatic changes that have affected American culture in the last decade or so. They reflect a complete shift in attitudes toward moral issues over very brief periods of time. Some examples:

  • In 2003 34% of people polled said they were in favor of legalizing marijuana; in 2013 it was over 50%. (Interestingly, only 7% said they used it).
  • In 2006, support for homosexual marriage stood at 39%, today it is 60%.
  • In 2001, only 40% of those surveyed considered homosexuality morally acceptable; today it is 63%.
  • In 2003 only 34% of people polled thought that having a child out of wedlock was morally acceptable. Today that number is 61%.

He compares the scale of these massive changes to the cultural revolutions of the 1960s and notes perceptively: “We’ve hardly taken notice of it, because it happened in people’s minds instead of in the streets.” He cannot explain how this came to be, but suspects it has to do with the degrading nature of pop culture. In my view, however, what is ultimately responsible for this is social engineering by government institutions: schools, legislatures, presidents, judges, as well as lobbyists and special-interest groups, and those that fund them. The journalist rightly poses a troubling question that should give Roman Catholics a cause for concern, “…what comes along with this mass departure of moral judgment from public life?” social10In his encyclical, St. John Paul II answers that question: “…if there is no ultimate truth to guide and direct political activity, then ideas and convictions can easily be manipulated for reasons of power.” (note the word “easily”) Continue reading “Is Social Engineering the Salient Evil of Our Time?”