“On religious matters, Father Richard John Neuhaus comes as close to anyone on today’s scene in serving as a modern day Chesterton.”

Oh, for Heavens sake! Father Neuhaus couldn’t carry Chesterton’s reading glasses on his best day !! If he is “as close to a anyone on today’s scene as a modern day...” we should drive a stake through the modern day “thing” and be done with it. The problem with today’s conservatives is that they really believe this kind of sentimental drivel and actually believe small men like Father Neuhaus really are like the giants of old --kinda, sorta, etc.. Great God in Heaven, spare us !

I used to respect Neuhaus but he sold his soul to the neocons long ago.He defys Catholic just war theory and now he lies about Joe Sobran and Pat Buchanan.Its all about Israel at First Things abortion comes a distant second.

I hereby confess and beg forgiveness for once having subscribed to First Things.  Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.  Fr. Neuhaus is the chaplain of the Catholic neo-cons and his magazine is simply a Catholic version of Commentary - almost identical not just in politics and cultural tone, but even in format and lay-out.

Kirt don’t be too hard on yourself. The more neo-con stoofes get exposed for what they are the closer we will be to serious change.  It’s no sin to have been fooled by someone.  The sin is all in the perpetrator.  The more I see articles like this the more I start to think that maybe this war on terror is really a war on life.  The Pro-life issues that so many have abandoned.  What appears to be bumbling and stupidity is pure evil genius.

that’s stooges.  I’m writing blind on Taki mag!!1

I’ll say just one thing here:  Sobran and Buchanan spent decades fighting “on the side of the angels,” yet they wind up betrayed by their own brothers.  After that, who needs enemies?

As I said, the RCC is a gigantic operation.  It could squash the neocons in a heartbeat.  Yet it chooses not to.  So is this laziness, ignorance or negligence?

American “conservatism” is, frankly, a complete sham; a total phony. It has always accepted egalitarianism. It has swallowed feminism whole (note how any opposition to women in the military disappeared with the war). Its dedication to traditionalism is highly suspect (its willingness to crusade for the export of gay rights, secularism, and feminism to the religious and traditionalist Islamic world has been noted here). It has shown an appalling willingness to get into bed with modernism and atheism in order to crush Islam (withess the lionization of militant atheist Ayaan Hirsi Ali in “conservative” circles).

What it is attached to, without doubt, is a vaguely Objectivist economic viewpoint and militant nationalism - and more even the latter than the former. It is, in short, a pro-imperial movement - one attached to an even sicker and more dangerous vision of Manifest Destiny than its 19th century predecessor.

Traditionalism and Christian morality are not crucial issues to the American “conservative” movement. They will gladly sell out the family and the lives of the unborn to whomever promises to kill the most Muslims and expand the empire (or its collection of vassal states) the most aggressively.

Rudy Giuliani is the man to do that. That is why he is ahead.

Even more awful, the ideas and values of America’s Hollywood (which are little more than the ideas and values of Weimar Berlin and the French Revolution) have been transmitted to every square inch of the Earth via film and television, the greatest cultural weapons of mass destruction ever known. We are witnessing a great die-off of cultures, as everywhere on Earth slowly morphs into Los Angeles.

Other than Islam, which, punch-drunk and bloodied, nevertheless continues to put up an admirable fight, a few groups like the Amish which are small and powerless enough that the establishment can write them off as crazies and ignore them, and a few isolated die-hards like myself who still stride the wastelands, copies of Chesterton in hand, there are no such things as conservatives anymore.

I’m sorry - the awful truth is that Wellington managed to smash Napoleon’s army, but in the end, the French Revolution swept the world anyway. Nothing has been able to stop it, merely to slow it down, and it will only die when it collapses under its own weight, as did its bastard offspring, Communism. Don’t worry though - it shouldn’t take more than a couple centuries for that to all play out.

In the mean time, you can console yourself with the fact that good whiskey and cigars are not completely illegal yet.

Neuhaus tells lies about James Joyce - so it does not shock that he would lie about politics. Right?

re: Nergol’s erudite post; yes, a good whiskey, or burbon, say Buffalo Trace, and a decent cigar should suffice. One may add a pencil and a sheet of paper for amusement.

@Nergol

You might want to consider how inimical to traditional
values capitalims - at least the libertarian variety -
is.

Prudence and savings, for starters, one of the basis
of traditional values goes against the need to sell to
keep the economy going (notice that each time people
spend less around Christams, all economic commentators
predict bad things for the economy - a religious
holiday, when our minds should be turned to things of
the spirit turned into an economic engine).

Traditional values says that certain kinds of behavior
and entertainment are sinful, but the capitalistic logic
is that people are free to buy or sell what they want,
and as long as people buy pornography, othres should
be able to sell it.  No matter what it is, alcohol,
drugs, sex, there is a line of thought that all that
matters is that these things are sold in a free market,
without goverment influence.

By the way, has anyone examined the relationship between
Fox News and Fox entertainment? Does anyone believe tht
the majority of shows on Fox are morally uplifiting?
That they conform with traditional values?

Has anyone stopped to think that the conservative bent
on Fox News is there as camouflage so that cultural
conservatives do not blast the Fox entertainment because
“they are allies”?

I like Neuhaus’ claim about Zinn and Sobran being locked in a common cause, followed by “Who would have thought it?”

Well, I could just as easily come back with, “Father Neuhaus and Hillary Clinton locked in a common cause.” Or “Father Neuhaus and Howard Stern [another war supporter] locked in a common cause.” Or “Father Neuhaus and the New York Times locked in a common cause.” And so on.

Fr. Neuhaus’s comments are sophistical and disingenous in the extreme.

First he feigns ignorance about the “exotic” Catholics who write in the Wanderer.

Then he recovers enough acquaintance with “Joe” Sobran to find it “bizarre” that he and Zinn have made common cause against an unjust and immoral war.

I suppose the real story is that no one finds it “bizarre” that Neuhaus and others have made common cause with the likes of the bloodthirsty Michael Ledeen and Christopher Hitchens.

And along the way Neuhaus finds the time to trot out the anti-Semetic brickbat against the newspaper that was among the first to come out against the Nazis, and was banned from Hitler’s Germany.

The abounding ironies of Neuhaus’s selective memory (his civil-rights background, the End of Democracy affair) would be exceedingly humorous, were it not for the fetid stench of hypocrisy.

Maybe Fr. Neuhaus should concentrate on penning the long overdue apology for FT’s dissimulation on behalf of Bush Administration re: Iraq, based on their priviledged access to highly placed figures, which allowed them to assure Catholics that they could ignore two Popes on Just War Doctrine, because the “prudential judgement” of our leaders was sound, and they had access to information which demonstrated just what a “threat” Saddam was.

It might come as a shock to some sincere pro-Life advocates, but they might as well join the Democrat Party’s populist wing (see http://www.rightdemocrat.blogspot.com or http://www.democratsforvalues.com/), and agitate from within, then support the Republican Party, whose appeal is frankly to southern Dixiecrat racists, and not the working class white vote who are as angry about the outsourcing of jobs under the “libertarian” vision of “free trade” as they are to the cosmopolitan elitism that manifests itself as the “diversity” and “multiculturalism” we see dominating our government policy.

The “Conservative” movement is about benefiting the Park Avenue crowd, the trust fund babies, and the CEO classes that profit from the undermining of the economic security of the middle class. Yeah, they talk like Populists, but in reality, they don’t care a damn about the social issues, because their agenda is Wall Street economics, not Main Street attitudes.

Adriana;

Oh, don’t get me wrong at all. I am not at all an Objectivist, and am a capitalist only in the “as opposed to communist” sense. A general belief that people ought to be able to trade wth each other more or less freely is far different than support for a culture of crazed materialism and unrestricted corporate rapine.

I am also not a libertarian, though I make common cause with them on both the war and the sad current state of the US government.

Kari;

“Turn the other cheek” is not the same as “remain silent about moral horrors”. More of the unborn have been massacred this year in the United States alone than have died - American and Iraqi - in all the 4 1/2 years of the Iraq War. Just on numbers alone, abortion is still the greater catastrophe. And yet yes, the greatness of one horror does not diminish another.

And there is the real tragedy of the American Iraq War: That by and large it’s the portion of America which considers itself the most religious, traditional, and conservative, which seeks to impose by force modernism upon a people who simply wish to live life in a religious, traditional, and conservative way. It is Evangelical grunts from Georgia and Tennessee who are doing the dirty work and taking the bullets for atheism, feminism, gay rights, pornography, and cultural Marxism of the Frankfurt school. No doubt Herbert Marcuse is laughing at us from Hell.

“We are witnessing a great die-off of cultures, as everywhere on Earth slowly morphs into Los Angeles.”

A chilling vision of the future, Nergol.

“And there is the real tragedy of the American Iraq War: That by and large it’s the portion of America which considers itself the most religious, traditional, and conservative, which seeks to impose by force modernism upon a people who simply wish to live life in a religious, traditional, and conservative way.”

Equally true.  But that’s what we’ve become.  I only wonder if this trajectory was inherent in this nation’s founding principles and historical origin, or if we’ve been hijacked.  Sounds like a simple question, but I just can’t wrap my mind around it.

(withess the lionization of militant atheist Ayaan Hirsi Ali in “conservative” circles).

Ayaan Hirsi Ali also worked as an interpreter at an abortion clinic. She wrote books like ‘The factory of sons’ and ‘The virgin cage’.

The comments of Father Neuhaus show the intellectual corruption of “conservative” voices by the aggressive recruiting through moneyed war profiteers. It seems that it is just too tempting for those looking for a stage or a pulpit to accept the funds for their activities in return for a “little compromise”.
Not to do so would mean to share the fate of Joe Sobran, who had to struggle and ultimately discontinue the publishing of his column, due to a lack of funds. But it means that his opinions will remain with me as the words of a man of principle and character. I can’t say the same for “Father” Neuhaus anymore.

What you boys and girls seem to forget or simply do
not know is that Neuhaus, EWTN, and the like-minded
perpetuate the fraud of Vatican 2 under an oh-so
“sensible and dispassionate” verbalism. I guess that
makes me “exotic.”

Aggiornamento, indeed. Chesterton, my ass.

Neuhaus and Bennett are proof that neocons come in more than one flavor.

Twenty comments and not one good thing to say about the Neo-cons chaplain of choice. Well let me be the first, he is a priest,he isn’t the first or the last in that category and in the larger scheme of things is insignificant in the life of the Church and culture. In the life of grace, however, he is what he is and we can be grateful for that.

@Nergol

Good to know that you are no libertarian. I do not deny
that they make some good points, but I do not blind
myself to their tendency to reduce everything to a
question of “free market”, which leads them to think
of humanity as homo economicus and nothing else.

Having met Neuhaus, and watched his position morph over the last few years, I am more and more unimpressed. He is a media legend in his own mind, cold, and rather boring. I subscribed for years but First Things became more and more divorced from reality and increasigly fixated on the Zionist agenda First, Last, and Always. Too bad.

I found Hitchcock’s article odd.  For example, The Wanderer and The Remnant have upheld the same positions since 1967.  Anyone competent to talk about American Catholicism knows this.  So why does Hitchcock wait until now, late in his career, to notice that right-wing Catholics write like… right-wing Catholics.  I disagree with both wings of the Matt clan, but I respect the courage of their convictions.

Another thing: MANY protestants, both liberal and conservative, believe that the Catholic articles in First Things consistently represent the traditional Roman teachings. I have never been able to convince anyone otherwise.

I want to second Nergol’s comments. The True Conservatives of America were called Loyalists and most of them left after the Rev. War.  I don’t think there is any such thing as a true “conservative” in America.  I mean to see Rush Limbaugh call himself the “Dr. of Democracy” and GW Bush pushing for democracy in the Middle East, is the height of ludicrousness. A “conservative” for democracy?  A true conservative is a Loyalist, a monarchist.

And yes, the first thing our “conservative” government did was implement female suffrage in Iran and Afghanistan! If female suffrage is a conservative plank, then the Pope is a Protestant!

“A true conservative is a Loyalist, a monarchist.”

The world takes the British Royals as seriously as it does Michael Jackson or Elizabeth Taylor. Besides, William the Conqueror was a “French bastard landing with an armed banditti—and establishing himself king of England against the consent of the natives.” But I like him more than Fr. Neuhaus!

There is a good movie out about this theme called “ The Story of The Dirty Little Coward, Who Shot Mr. Howard.” Not great but not bad and evidently the theme is perennial and very much with us. Afterall, a picture is worth a thousand....

WLindsay Wheeler,
“A true conservative is a Loyalist, a monarchist.”

Where do you propose the Restoration to occur? You can’t say here without engaging in the same universalism as our enemies the Jacobins. Like them you be attempting to graft an alien layer of skin upon a hostile host.

Proposing a return of the Crown or prattling on about the virtues of other deceased, foreign political forms(Action Française, Carlists, legitimists,"Whites", et al)is fun if you’re vying for the Most Romantic Guy in The Room Award at the Yale Political Union, but it is not conservative.

We look reality in the eye and work towards a social order that conforms to the traditions, customs and cultural particularities that define a nation.

Do you really think those of us on the American Right, who don’t bellow out “Long Live the King” are sell-outs or deficient in some way?

Peter;

To be a monarchist in principle does not necessarily imply support for this or that particular monarch. I in general support monarchy strongly informed and advised by Christian principle in general and The Church in particular.

That said, I prefer the Islamic Republic to the Shah (puppet of US hegemony that he was), and would prefer an Islamic Republic to the King of Jordan. And I’d take Franco (who, along with Ronald Reagan, was as close to a great leader as the 20th century had on offer) over that worthless weakling Juan Carlos any day. Again, general principle does not necessarily trump individual experience.

My feeling is that the United States is in fact incapable of genuine conservatism. Someone said that in 1914 the US, as a republic, represented the international left, but by 1919, it represented the international right. It was not the US that had changed, but the world that had changed around it. Just so.

But that does not make the US genuinely conservative - it is only an indication of how far the rest of the world - the Dar al Islam excepted - has fallen.

Kevin;

Democracy is a horror that inevitably leads to other horrors. Plato, Lord Woodhouselee, and Hans Hermann-Hoppe were correct - eventually democracies bankrupt tjemselves and end up in empire or other tyranny.

But ultimately, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. So when the people have absolute power, who is it that ends up being corrupted?

Thus, I hate democracy with a burning passion, as corruptor of the people and enemy of righteousness.

Nergol,
“So when the people have absolute power, who is it that ends up being corrupted?”

We did not start-out as a democracy, but as a constitutional republic. There is a substantial difference.And hard for me to believe that you could contend that here in modern day America:"the people have absolute power”

“I in general support monarchy strongly informed and advised by Christian principle in general and The Church in particular.”

O.k., so outline your plans for such a transition. Or is this just a parlor game without real world application?

Any Catholic priest that does not condemn contraception
is suspect in my eyes. I lived in NYC for years and
read Fr. Neuhaus’s articles and listened to his sermons
...never have i come across his saying a peep regarding
contraception or promoting rescue movements, etc…
Nay, only the soft cuddly middle of the road stuff the
Neo-cons like to hear. Sometimes i wonder if he has
truly converted or if he is truly pro-life…

Kevin;

Semantics. Any system in which the people have ultimate sovereignty is a “democracy”, constitutional republic, direct democracy via assembly, or whatever.

As for transition; it’s too late for that. The whole thing will just collapse under its own weight eventually. The empire and its fiat money regime are on its way out. The 23rd century, after China implodes, will be an incrediby interesting time.

Just remember: Democracy is a homosexual fantasy.

It was invented by homosexuals, and remains to this day the fount of libertinism, destruction of the ladylike ideal, destruction of the traditional family, and other homosexual ideals.

Monarchy is the best form of gov’t- St.Thomas Aquinas.
Constitutional republic no more, the constitution is
worthless- agreed? Democracy is collapsing worldwide, the
the irony is Bush & co. sounding off about democracy
while it teeters on brink of extinction, ie. Chavez,
EU, etc. Ergo,what or whom is filling the vacuum? New
World Order and to boot probably the anti-christ.
However, a new Christendom shall arise (not much left
of the old one to save) and perhaps Monarchy with it.
Our Lady will surprise us all in the end -with irony.

The Catholic Church does not teach one form of govt is better than all others.

And govt has to sort of involve man, and man being what he is…

IOW, all forms of govt, philosophically speaking, suck.

Some suck less than others.

The Catholic Church teaches that government is an intrinsic good, and necessary for human function.

The notion that government is some kind of necessary evil is protestant nonsense.

Pace the last blogger, the notion that government is
a necessary evil is a recurrent theme in St.
Augustine’s City of God, which presumably was a
Protestant rather than Catholic document. I am
shocked that the neocons would put the screws on their
Catholic frontmen to turn against their moral
theological convictions in order to back Giuliani.
This makes them look (well) like lackeys. Yes I know
that we know they are. But the public may have
believed differently until now.

The notion that government is some kind of necessary evil is protestant nonsense.

Al. My post was somewhat tongue-in-cheek. Al. I didn’t write that govt was a necessary evil. I failed to make it clear I was writing about govt operationally.

I love America but my govt is tyrannical. If my govt was more the civil authority described here

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02137c.htm

then me and thee would be much happier and the rest of the world much safer,

Pace the last blogger, the notion that government is a necessary evil is a recurrent theme in St.Augustine’s City of God, which presumably was a Protestant rather than Catholic document.

Not everything the great Doctor of the Church wrote has been adopted by the Church and taught as Doctrine.

The Catholic Church does not teach that government is a necessary evil.

That was what my Father told me though :)

Professor Gottfried,
Though I much admire your writings, and your struggles against the Straussians (having struggled with them myself when I was at Catholic U) I’m afraid I have to take issue with your characterization of Church teaching on Governments.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church cites Leo XIII’s formulation of this doctrine in Immortale Dei, which doubteless Leo, that great Thomist, got from St. Thomas, the Church’s formost commentator on St. Augustine.

This is because the Church, adhering to Aristotle’s understanding of the human being as a rational, social animal, believes the Common Good takes priority over even aggregate private goods. Leo cites Augustine prominently in support of this principle.

The Catechism also cites Leo’s Diuturnum, which I’ll quote here: “In every association and community of men, necessity itself compels that some should hold pre-eminence, lest society, deprived of a prince or head by which it is ruled should come to dissolution and be prevented from attaining the end for which it was created and instituted. But, if it was not possible that political power should be removed from the midst of states, it is certain that men have used every art to take away its influence and to lessen its majesty, as was especially the case in the sixteenth century, when a fatal novelty of opinions infatuated many. Since that epoch, not only has the multitude striven after a liberty greater than is just, but it has seen fit to fashion the origin and construction of the civil society of men in accordance with its own will.

5. Indeed, very many men of more recent times, walking in the footsteps of those who in a former age assumed to themselves the name of philosophers,(2) say that all power comes from the people; so that those who exercise it in the State do so not as their own, but as delegated to them by the people, and that, by this rule, it can be revoked by the will of the very people by whom it was delegated. But from these, Catholics dissent, who affirm that the right to rule is from God, as from a natural and necessary principle. . . .

8. But, as regards political power, the Church rightly teaches that it comes from God, for it finds this clearly testified in the sacred Scriptures and in the monuments of antiquity; besides, no other doctrine can be conceived which is more agreeable to reason, or more in accord with the safety of both princes and peoples.

9. In truth, that the source of human power is in God the books of the Old Testament in very many places clearly establish. “By me kings reign . . . by me princes rule, and the mighty decree justice."(4) And in another place: “Give ear you that rule the people . . . for power is given you of the Lord and strength by the Most High."(5) The same thing is contained in the Book of Ecclesiasticus: “Over every nation he bath set a ruler."(6) These things, however, which they had learned of God, men were little by little untaught through heathen superstition, which even as it has corrupted the true aspect and often the very concept of things, so also it has corrupted the natural form and beauty of the chief power. Afterwards, when the Christian Gospel shed its light, vanity yielded to truth, and that noble and divine principle whence all authority flows began to shine forth. To the Roman governor, ostentatiously pretending that he had the power of releasing and of condemning, our Lord Jesus Christ answered: “Thou shouldst not have any power against me unless it were given thee from above."(7) And St. Augustine, in explaining this passage, says: “Let us learn what He said, which also He taught by His Apostle, that there is no power but from God."(8) The faithful voice of the Apostles, as an echo, repeats the doctrine and precepts of Jesus Christ. The teaching of Paul to the Romans, when subject to the authority of heathen princes, is lofty and full of gravity: “There is not power but from God,” from which, as from its cause, he draws this conclusion: “The prince is the minister of God."(9)

10. The Fathers of the Church have taken great care to proclaim and propagate this very doctrine in which they had been instructed. “We do not attribute,” says St. Augustine, “the power of giving government and empires to any but the true God."(10) “

Nergol writes: “I’m sorry - the awful truth is that Wellington managed to smash Napoleon’s army, but in the end, the French Revolution swept the world anyway. Nothing has been able to stop it, merely to slow it down, and it will only die when it collapses under its own weight, as did its bastard offspring, Communism.”

That is true. The reason is that the English themselves were infected en masse before the French with the pollutions and perversions of moral and political philosophy. The Puritan Revolution was very much a Judaizing, Anglo-Saxon Calvinist manifestation of all that was necessary precursor to the French Revolution. In terms of basic philosophy, in 1812, the French and the English were equally far left, equally in opposition to historic orthodox Christendom.

Seeing the English during the French Revolution/Napoleonic era as being the reasonable conservative opposition to murderously insane and culturally suicidal liberalism is as diametrically wrong, and therefore self-defeating, as seeing Rudolph Giulianni, Christopher Hitchens, and the Neocons as the conservative opposition to the Christ-hating left of the Southern Poverty Law Center, ADL, NARAL, and North American Man-Boy Love Association. Far from being opposites, they are two sides of one coin.

James Cantrell is a wise writer. He should post more comments. There are only about 150 people in America who could write what he wrote above and defend it because they understand it. Sixty of them hang around Taki’s Top Drawer, seventy are Chronicles readers and the other twenty are Old Lutherans and contemplatives who don’t say or write anything at all. None of them ever use FT except for their wood burning stoves and fireplaces. rr

Dr. Hitchcock call your office. Here is a list of considerations from your friend, George Wiegel, for republican,cathokic party types to consider asking of our next president. Presumably in the order of importance. WAR, WAR, WAR, Jihad and then the appointment of judges,education,etc.. Would you mind to spend a little more of your time analysing your own fellow travelers and leave the older, more tried and true,wounded,but still valiant, warriors alone ? Or as the old timers still say to bothersome and impolite men of your caliber, “Thanks, it was nice to hear from you.”

Presidential Spring Training
By George Weigel
Posted: Wednesday, March 21, 2007

THE CATHOLIC DIFFERENCE

Publication Date: March 14, 2007

“Herewith, questions to be put to any presidential candidate with whom you’re in contact:

Iran: Iran is, at most, a few years away from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability. The Iranian government today is led by an apocalyptic who seems quite serious in his belief that incinerating the State of Israel—even if that would involve the retaliatory incineration of Iran—would be worthwhile, because it would hasten the coming of the messianic age. Iran with nuclear weapons would be an unprecedented danger: a nuclear power with a passion for martyrdom. What do you propose to do to forestall Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s doomsday scenario?

Iraq: Is the war in Iraq a singularity, or is it part of the fabric of the global struggle against Islamic jihadism? If you believe it’s a singular situation, why do so many jihadists think otherwise? If Iraq is one front in a global contest, how do you imagine the U.S. end-game in Iraq shaping the rest of the struggle?

Defunding jihadism: One reason why Wahhabism and other jihadist ideologies have traction in the 21st century is that the West has transferred trillions of dollars to people who have exported radical Islamism around the globe. This is suicidal. What can be done about our dependency on Middle East oil—not in the next 20 or 30 years, but in the next ten?

Hearts and minds: Do you think it’s a good idea for U.S.-funded Arab-language radio to broadcast Britney Spears, J. Lo. and Eminem throughout the Arab world? Is this the best story we can tell about our culture and its values?

The Life Issues: Are you aware that embryonic stem-cell research has yet to produce a single clinical application, while dozens of cures have been effected with adult stem-cell therapies? Do you agree that the oversell of embryonic stem-cell research is cruel? What should the U.S. government do to accelerate the development of therapies based on non-embryo-destructive stem cells?

Do you believe that Roe v. Wade was rightly decided? Would you nominate Supreme Court justices who think that Roe v. Wade was rightly decided? Would you ask potential Supreme Court nominees whether they agreed with Justice Byron White (a Kennedy appointee) that Roe was an act of “raw judicial usurpation”?

Europe’s experience demonstrates that, where euthanasia is permitted, euthanasia will soon be required. What will you do, in health care policy and federal judicial nominations, to prevent America from becoming inhospitable to the so-called “burdensome” elderly?

Education: Why does the United States do such a poor job in its elementary and secondary schools, measured by the standards of other information-age societies? Are you “pro-choice” when it comes to parents being empowered to choose the best education for their children? If so, do you support vouchers, tax credits, or some other form of financial aid that “follows the child,” irrespective of whether the school the child attends is religious? Is something awry when colleges and universities accumulate multi-billion-dollar tax-free endowments but charge their undergraduates $50,000 (at least) per year?

Partisanship: Do you agree that there is “partisan division” in Washington because there are real disagreements about serious issues?

Roots: Is the presidency, for you, an ambition, a job, or a vocation?

-- George Weigel is a senior fellow of the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, D.C.

Let me second Bob’s comment: I, too, agree with James
Cantrell’s brief, but cogent, summary. It was Jacques
Maritain (during his Action Francaise period)in his
TROIS REFORMATEURS: LUTHER, DESCARTES,ROUSSEAU, who
outlines the three proto-demons of modernity, and then,
tracing their subsequent influences on modern society,
offers a devastating critique of each. But each of them
has triumphed...and we see the results.

The French Revolution was, of course, a watershed event, and in
its essence it was a revolt against both God and nature.
De Bonald was correct: “There are only two parties,
one favors ‘la Revolution’ and wishes to invert all
that is given to us from God and our traditions; the
other is the ‘contre-revolution,’ and it seeks to preserve
what we have received and restore what we have lost.”

Concerning that divide, the neo-conservatives, the global
democrats,the FT folks, the NR and Weekly Standard,
the Bush/Cheney cabal, the various neo- think tanks,
the neo- “Catholics,” the raving Dispensationalists,etc.
are on the side of the (continuing) Revolution, just as
their revolutionary forefathers were. As such they must be
opposed, in word, in print, in deed, and they must be
exposed for the who and what they are. A few may be
converted (hopefully), but the rest should be sold
into bondage to some Somali warlord....and even that
is better than they deserve.

[By the way, both The Remnant and The Wanderer are
edited by two branches of the Matt family; but they
differ quite markedly on Vatican II, the Old Mass,
and how things have transpired in the Catholic Church
since Vatican II. I am an assiduous reader of The
Remnant, which is a fine journal, with an excellent
website. Years ago I was published in The Wanderer,
but their basically uncritical response to the abuses
that followed Vatican II and their defense of the Novus
Ordo Missae, and the implementation of some of the
worst “applications” supposedly issuing from the Council,
soured me a bit on them.]

“Seeing the English during the French Revolution/Napoleonic era as being the reasonable conservative opposition to murderously insane and culturally suicidal liberalism...”

Yep, you hate the same thing the neocons hate: America’s traditional Anglo-protestant culture.  You have no desire to see America survive as a republic without the sophistries and obscurantism of traditional European institutions.  If you dream of an authoritarian ultramontane theocracy, don’t call your self an American conservative.

“the neo- “Catholics… are on the side of the (continuing) Revolution...”

The Revolution was spawned by a degenerate France that killed and exiled its Protestants.  Both atheist and Catholic tossed aside true Christendom for pagan theocracy, abstraction and tyranny.  The Italian prince refused to accept limited government, wrecked Europe, and left modernity and egalitarianism in its wake.

Catholics, neocons and social democrats all seek socialism and managerial society.  The difference is who gets to run the big bureaucratic nightmare.

“The Remnant and The Wanderer are...”

...both aimed at people who refuse to accept that Holy Mother Church revised Holy Tradition and isn’t going to change back.  You guys trying to roll back Vatican II are as doomed as if I tried to roll back Trent.  THE CHURCH SOLD YOU OUT.  If you ever figure that out, maybe you also can figure out that the “Catholic” faith is not based in smells and bells and effeminate men in funny clothes.

35000 Protastant churches all fighting over the Catholic bible.The good old USA was founded by a bunch of nominal Protastant Christians that were mostly Masons. The Masons the Masons still run the show.Quit blaming the Catholics for the mess this country is in.The boob evangelicals are following Bush and the zionists over the cliff.

“.The good old USA was founded by a bunch of nominal Protastant Christians that were mostly Masons.”

Those Freemasons upheld the Common Law and the Rights of Englishmen.  They had no intention of terrorizing orthodox ptotestants.  Catholics supported big government and tyranny, from French Kings to Boston Kennedys.

“Quit blaming the Catholics for the mess this country is in.”

They are only part of the problem.  If you think Catholic rule is so great, go to the Dominican Republic, where virtually the entire country is under the Pope’s dominion.

“They are only part of the problem.  If you think Catholic rule is so great, go to the Dominican Republic, where virtually the entire country is under the Pope’s dominion.” - Peter Ramus

So many good things I have heard about the Dominican Republic, Mr. Ramus, and you keep adding to them.  Now if only I could persuade my wife to relocate . . .

So many good things I have heard about the Dominican Republic

One in three live below the poverty line there. Two in three <i>married</i< women use contraception.  Did I mention that it shares a border with Haiti?  Enjoy it!

The Masons still run this country.The Masons gave us the French revolution and the Mexican revolution and the Spanish civil war, all of which were aimed at destroying the Catholic Church and lets not forget how the great Masons FDR and Churchhill sold Catholic Poland down the river.You Protastants are nothing but a bunch of squabling chickens kissing the governments ass.The Catholic Church is the greatest institution for freedom and liberty that ever existed.We stood up the the Roman emperor, the Turkish Emperor, the Holy Roman Emperor,the English King, Hitler, Stalin, Mao,and we are still here.If the Catholics hadn’t won the battle for Spain, the Battle of Tours,The Battle of Lepanto, and the battle of Vienna none of us would be here.

The Masons still run this country.

Hey, I’d rather be run by a Shriner’s convention that the Archdiocese of Boston!

Why does Neuhaus look so feminine in that photo?  He even has a limp wrist.  Now, I’m not saying anything, but…

both aimed at people who refuse to accept that Holy Mother Church revised Holy Tradition and isn’t going to change back.

Mr. Ramus. Liberals in Fiddlebacks are still liberals. The Remnant succors the schism, attacks the Magisterial authority exercised by the Divinely-constituted Catholic Church using the methodology of private judgment protestantism and is functionally a liberal project while The Wanderer is orthodox vis a vis Catholic Doctrine.

As for the Catholic Church “revising” Holy Tradition it does not appear to me you understand the difference twixt Apostolic and ecclesial tradition.

+++++++ begin quotes +++++++++++++++

Apostolic Tradition and ecclesial traditions

83
The Tradition here in question comes from the apostles and hands on what they received from Jesus teaching and example and what they learned from the Holy Spirit. The first generation of Christians did not yet have a written New Testament and the New Testament itself demonstrates the process of living Tradition.

Tradition is to be distinguished from the various theological, disciplinary, liturgical, or devotional traditions, born in the local churches over time. These are the particular forms, adapted to different places and times, in which the great Tradition is expressed. In the light of Tradition, these traditions can be retained, modified or even abandoned under the guidance of the Church’s magisterium.

++++++++++ end quotes +++++++++++++++

Ubi Petrus, ibi eclesia

As for the Catholic Church “revising” Holy Tradition it does not appear to me you understand the difference twixt Apostolic and ecclesial tradition.

My point is that Vatican II represents a change from the speculations of Trent to an updated “Holy Tradition” that has been made safe for Democracy.  Thus the traditionalists and conservatives who are loyal to the old rules are getting screwed and abused.

Amen on the very orthodox Wanderer,it follows church doctrine on abortion, just war and the social enclyicals.Fr. Neuhaus started as a Protastant, its too bad he is a pick and choose Catholic who follows his social group instead of church doctrine.I kind of like the guy anyhow and will pray for him.With all due respect,you can be run by Jim Jones, John Hagee,Ted Haggard,Jim Baker,Jimmy Swagert,Billy Ray Harigis,Aimee Macphereson, the gay bishop of New Hampshire, the United Church of Christ and the Rev. Ike.I shall continue to follow the Church founded by Jesus and stll led by Him for 2000 years.

Mr. Ramus I was trad before being trad was cool. As for your attempt to cleave me from me the Church, forget it.

Far from me thinking I have been screwed by the Catholic Church, I am a trad who cleaves to the Church because she is the sole institution ever worthy of my trust.

The Church is in the business of salvation and mediating the Grace of our Triune God through the Sacramental System instituted by Jesus Christ.

If you think it’s business is arguing for this or that political economy then you have a mistaken idea about the purpose of her being. She is the Ark of Salvation not the plank of politics.

(Just as an aside, Rerum Novarum, the first social enclclical, trashed socialism by name - 3 times as I recall off the top of my head).

I think you are not making the necessary distinctions twixt legitimate decisions taken by the Magisterium and the sad observable decline in Christianity resulting, in part, from a craven refusal to implement those decision on the part of Bishops who freely undertook the Duties to Teach, Rule, and Sanctify.

(One can think of the Bishops refusing to fulfill their duties as akin to politicians who do not discharge their oaths vis a vis the Constitution).

With all due respect, I think you too readily conflate Church and politics.

To claim that the Catholic church was founded by Jesus is a real stretch. As with all organized religion, a couple of marketing guys snap up a good idea and mold it into a construct that will allow them a good living here on earth. All those from the pope, who is a decent man in my opinion, on down to the last pedophile priest running a seminary, they all are making a good living selling life after death - and consuming the earning from this sale happily here on earth. They are as far removed from Jesus teachings as the moneychangers in the temple.

To claim that the Catholic church was founded by Jesus is a real stretch.

It’s in all the Bibles - on page 28 in mine.

And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

<i>With all due respect,you can be run by Jim Jones, John Hagee,Ted Haggard,Jim Baker,Jimmy Swagert,Billy Ray Harigis,Aimee Macphereson, the gay bishop of New Hampshire, the United Church of Christ and the Rev. Ike.<>

All of these are liberals or Anabaptists, not protestants.  You have all manner of loon within your own communion: Charles Curran, Andrew Greeley, Andrew Sullivan, Michael Novak, George Weigel, Frank Gaffney, Ted Kennedy, Richard John Neuhaus, Bill Press, Tom Hayden, John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi, etc.  All of these people are in good standing, despite their flagrant public behavior.

I am a trad who cleaves to the Church because she is the sole institution ever worthy of my trust.

Few parents in this country will allow their children in the company of Catholic priests unescorted, fearing seduction, molestation or rape.  The institution, to which you cleave. covered it up for decades.  How can you trust that?

I submit you support a Roman Catholic Church that exists in your head.  It has little resemblance to the Italian bureaucracy that hired your pastor or built your parochial school.  The institution considers you a useful idiot, as it presses for mass immigration, wealth redistribution, anti-racism, social justice, universal human rights, Latin American solidarity, sexual justice, and the destruction of Western civility.

That thou art Peter; and upon this rock

Back up a few verses. The rock is Peter’s confession of Christ, not Peter himself.  To the extent the Rome denies Christ, it is neither catholic nor a true Church.  Calvinists and Lutherans have warned you people for 450 years.  Did you miss the memo?

Peter Ramus,
Please !! You are diminishing my respect for you with every sectarian rant. Sure, not many read Calvin’s Institutes, Papal encyclicals or anything else these days, but that doesn’t mean we must imitate them adding insults to injury. If they are here,they are friends in some sense. We have enough enemies. Pace .

I think you are not making the necessary distinctions twixt legitimate decisions taken by the Magisterium...

Letting the “Magisterium” off the hook is like a giving George a free pass for Abu Ghraib.  Your faith is inexorably tied to the institution. Mine is not.

If they are here,they are friends in some sense.

I’m not saying they aren’t.  I’m saying that activist Catholics far outnumber Jewish neocons in number, visibility and institutional power. I’m sick of hearing that the answer to the world’s problems is a Mass, Latin or otherwise.

In addition, the so-called Catholic Right predominated from the 1950’s to the 1980s, when the neocons overran them without firing a shot.  I’m saying that these two groups share a common vision of equality, peace and justice that outweighs their disagreements. Not to mention that both groups care barely hide their resentment toward Anglo protestants who dominate Middle America.

Getting back to the Hitchcock article that
started it all…

Hitchcock’s diatribe is particularly reprehensible
in that I vividly remember him arguing around 1982
that the Democratic party was still the natural home
for American Catholics.

Back up a few verses.

Go forward. When Jesus first meets Simon Bar Jona, Jesus tells he he will change his name to Peter/Rock/Kepha/Cephas

1 John… 42 And he brought him to Jesus. And Jesus looking upon him, said: Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is interpreted Peter

The rock is Peter’s confession of Christ, not Peter himself.

Both.

Letting the “Magisterium” off the hook is like a giving George a free pass for Abu Ghraib.  Your faith is inexorably tied to the institution.

Do you even read what I write? I was not letting the Magisterium off the hook I was criticising Bishops who do not implement decisions taken by The Magisterium.

Few parents in this country will allow their children in the company of Catholic priests unescorted, fearing seduction, molestation or rape.

Mine routinely go into the Confessional without a gun.

The institution, to which you cleave. covered it up for decades.  How can you trust that?

If you were more capable of reading what is before you you would see I write that I trust the Catholic Church’s Magisterium. As to trusting this or that Bishop/Priest personally that is, sadly, a question that has never been out of vogue ever since Jesus, in part imparting an instrutcion to us, chose Judas as an Apostle.

I am sure you will have something to say about Jesus’ failure.

I submit you support a Roman Catholic Church that exists in your head.

The Catholic Church is quite real. Your idea of it is the chimera.

The institution considers you a useful idiot...

I object. I have had private meetings with my Bishop. He knows I am a worthless idiot. But, I know enough to know what you mean.

as it presses for mass immigration,… and the destruction of Western civility.

Yes. You were writing about western civility, I think…

I’m sick of hearing that the answer to the world’s problems is a Mass, Latin or otherwise.

A culture is based upon Cult - the Cult of Christ. If you think you can have the culture you desire without Christ and the Mass you will find yourself a lot sicker in the future.

http://www.takimag.com/site/article/could_the_latin_mass_save_western_civilization/

I’m sick of hearing that the answer to the world’s problems is a Mass, Latin or otherwise.

Any time, any place, the answer to the problems of the world is a Divine Person, Jesus, not a political program.

Unless you first get that right, you will never get anything right.

You don’t like the sinners that are protastant.The Catholics you mention are in no way in good standing with the Church. We gave up on excummication in most cases as counter productive. We hope these sinners return to grace before their death.Everyone has to answer for himself before God, Catholic or Protastant.The Protastant clergy is full of crooks, adulterers and perverts, I hope they repent before they die as well.Most clergymen of all faiths are descent people but are sinners as we all are

A culture is based upon Cult - the Cult of Christ.

Christ tells us that what is Caesar’s differs from what belongs to God.  Augustine, who we both admire, warned us not to confuse the city of man with the city of God.  Carlists, TFPers and Remnant readers do not understand that.

I was not letting the Magisterium off the hook I was criticizing Bishops who do not implement decisions taken by The Magisterium.

The Magisterium tolerates and promotes said Bishops.  If it wanted liberalism stopped, it would be gone already.

Around the world, the Catholic Church promotes social justice, universal human rights and the brotherhood of man.  It is not a conservative force. 

Neither Law, Mahoney nor Bernadin have said a word against mass immigration, multiculturalism, or the demographic replacement of traditional America.  In fact, they support it.  So does the Magisterium.  Yet you keep paying their salaries.

We gave up on excummication in most cases as counter productive.

You’re saying the RCC no longer cares about using the keys to the kingdom.  So why does it deserve your loyalty?

Baloney we are trying to reach out. We haven’t changed anything.Jesus is with us till the end of time how else could we have surrived for 2000 years.35000 squabling Protastant churches depending on a bible that was put together by the Catholic Church to be used during the holy Liturgy of the Mass.Luther, Calvin and Zwigli all Catholic priests that fell from grace and started all the squabling

...a bible that was put together by the Catholic Church to be used during the holy Liturgy of the Mass.

What you know as “The Mass” is a comparatively recent innovation.

Neither Law, Mahoney nor Bernadin have said a word ....

Peter,
Law has been exiled, Mahoney is ignored as a clown and Bernadine died several years ago. The Mass as most of us know it today is indeed a new invention as an opening to the Calvinist. The venerable and ancient rite date backs to the Last Supper. This is not the thread to demonstrate this fact or call for the return of the Orangemen but a little restraint is in order would you not agree. Pace rr

Not paying Cardinal Bernardin’s salary--he has gone to his reward.

The only kind of people we have in the Church nowadays (including bishops) is sinners--they don’t make the sinless kind any more. But the grace of Christ is more powerful than the sins of men. (pace Fr. Mitch Pacwa, SJ, from whom I stole it)..

The Mass came long before the cannon of the Bible.The Eucharist goes back to the Last Supper.Cathoic means universal, that means for all mankind.That means we are all children of God including the immigrants who we have all descended from, including the Indians who were the first immigrants from Asia.Learn to live with the fact that the world is changing for the worse but we still have hope in our Savior. We are only here for a short time anyhow.

But the grace of Christ is more powerful than the sins of men...

If mass immigration, multiculturalism and social justice count as “grace,” who needs judgment?

The Eucharist goes back to the Last Supper.

The Eucharist reminds us that Christ has performed the final sacrifice.  For a priest to perform a new sacrifice defies the Gospel.

That means we are all children of God...

This is Universalism, which is not even Christianity.  You are closer to Bolshevism!

...the return of the Orangemen...

They never left, although I haven’t joined them. The Protestant Boys are loyal and true, though fashions are changed and the loyal are few....

The Eucharist reminds us that Christ has performed the final sacrifice.  For a priest to perform a new sacrifice defies the Gospel.

The Eucharist is the Gospel actualised. The Mass fulfills the Command of Jesus and it is the pluperfect sacrifice of the New Covenant. It is not a new sacrifice - it is the same sacrifice continually re-presented throughout time.

“That means we are all children of God...”

This is Universalism, which is not even Christianity.  You are closer to Bolshevism!

Balderdash. You do not even known what Universalism is. Quit while you are behind.

This is Universalism, which is not even Christianity.  You are closer to Bolshevism!

So, Bolshevists cleave to Apocatastasis, the defining creedal belief of Universalism?

Mr. Ramus. I read where you are now exercising your AntiCatholicism on Mr. Zimrak’s new thread, so, I’ll just bid you good day and stop wasting my time.

@Peter Ramus

Not only the Catholic Church is a revolutionary force. So
is Christianity.

You really should read Chesterton, who says it openly, that the
essence of Christianity is revolt against the Prince of the
World.

I have a feeling that the only reason Peter Ramus is anti-Catholic is because
he is anti-brown people, and a lot of brown people in America are Catholic.

If his Protestant church were over-run by Black Africans coming to America,
where would he go?

It is amazing, though I would say predictable, to see where this thread has gone since my post asserting that the Anglo-Saxon Puritan Revolution was the necessary precursor to the French Revolution. The eminent historian Eugene Genovese noted in an article published many years ago that to the young Marxists of his college years, the English Puritan revolution was presented by the older Marxists as a great example to emulate. When I read that article, I all but predicted that Genovese was already a fallen away Marxist who was on the fast track to entering the Catholic Church and that his analyses and insights would prove indispensable to the intellectual opposition to the status quo that had given us the post-modern cesspool.

Then as now, the really smart people who run the really smart ‘conservative’ journals (and websites, we must add for our time) failed to see much, if any, merit in anything I write, which means that yet another of my assessments that would be proven correct had no forum from which to reach a public wider than the few with whom I speak personally about such matters.

It is inevitable that anytime anyone mentions what I did that there will be a flurry of response, much of it getting far off track. That is so because the situation is rather like that in Flannery O’Connor’s story ‘A Good Man is Hard to Find.’ In that tale, the Misfit, the man who has chosen to be a violent criminal because he cannot believe in Christ because he was not there to see the resurrection, makes it plain to discerning readers that there is always a choice: God and anti-God. Translated into ethno-cultural terms that fit the ‘Anglosphere,’ that understanding means that whatever church a person proclaims, he either chooses the basic position of historic (which began long before there was anything close to a written English language, much less Henry VIII creating a national church to serve his and the State’s earthly interests) orthodox Christianity (orthodox in terms of morals and political philosophy as well as theological doctrines and dogmas) or the basic position of the English revolutions against historic orthodox Christianity.

In historic Christianity, the Church, which necessarily must be visible, is the ark upon which men must cleave for salvation because Christ founded one Church for that purpose. In the English revolutionary world, the ark is some combination of the English language and Anglo-Saxon culture and Anglo-Saxon law and government (for Henry VIII, that government was royal and his family, while for the Puritans that government was representative not of all people – they kept paring the Parliament and its electors ever smaller to guarantee that they had little or no viable opposition – but to the ‘Saints’).

Anyone who knows the history of French and Marxist and other Modern leftist revolutions (like that of Lincoln and the Radical Republicans) will recognize immediately in the Puritan fine tuning of the revolution that had called for mass voting and popular rule to make certain there could be no opposition to the reigning revolutionary elite the precursor of the later atheist pattern. That is the kind of thing that older mid-20th century Marxists meant when they taught young Marxists to emulate Anglo-Saxon Puritans: use mass violence to destroy an existing order proclaimed to be corrupt and unfair, and then, while using the language of representation and democracy, fine tune a system of increasingly centralized tyranny that allows no viable opposition.

In terms of political philosophy, what Henry VIII declared was that church is ancillary to State, that church serves State, that, therefore, State is supreme. That was a turning back of the clock to the pagan world, to the Roman Empire. Theologically, that position asserts that State creates and/or defines church, and if that is true, then church is anything but divine, anything but the plan of the Incarnated Second Person of the Holy Trinity.

The Puritan revolution worsened that of Henry VIII by shifting the power from the monarchy and a royal family to the elected representatives. In other words, the Puritan revolution took a perverse political philosophy that could not never be anything but an equally perverse theology and democratized it, making the mass will of the people (as understood by the revolutionary elites, of course, such as in later France and Russia) the arbiter of both political and moral philosophy and of church and church doctrines. Ultimately, to foster the various heretics (Quakers, Unitarians, universalists, Deists, resurgent pagans, etc.) living peacefully under one a-doctrinal Protestant banner (English language and Anglo-Saxon ethno-cultural supremacy arming unrelenting contempt for Celtic cultures and Catholicism), tolerance for everything and everyone that assimilated to the basic likes and dislikes of the regnant culture (see parenthetical aside above) was mandated.

Like the Misfit, the Anglo-Saxon Puritan and his followers took to self-serving, will-to-power destruction like ducks to water because they could not believe and so acted, in effect, as if they were beyond good and evil, which is to say, acted to create a world in which their ethnicity (and the Judaizing religion of the Anglo-Saxon Puritans was defined significantly by unrelenting hate for most other European ethnic groups, who were, in varying degrees [most often due to how much Germanic blood they were assumed to have, Germanic blood equaling the good and non-Roman blood] seen as inferior) and its attendant culture would be linked inextricably to the Saved, the Elect.

Thus, whenever anyone notes anything as obvious as the fact that in 1812 the English were, in terms of historic Christendom, as far to the left as the Napoleonic era French, that they were in effect two sides of one coin, there must be smoke blown and the topic altered. The fear for the devotee of the cultural religion of the Anglosphere (and the average Neocon is an ardent Anglophile, just as the average Necocon engages in talk asserting that what is wrong with Islam is that it never had a Reformation, which means the average Neocon sees at least the two phases of the English reformation as necessary to his world view) is that finally people may see it for what it is and simply stop supporting it in any form, including politically and nationally. Its telos is philosophical perversion and spiritual entropy.

The Misfit has made his choice. The question is: will you be like the grandmother and have your epiphany, at gunpoint, too late for you and your family, or will you understand the choice and the stakes in time to make the right decision?

These two editorials from Oxford Review (September 2005 and December 2005 respectively) shed some bright light on the neo-conservatism of Fr. Neuhaus and other editors of purportedly “Catholic” publications. As with most things, “follow the money”:

1) http://www.newoxfordreview.org/article.jsp?did=0905-editorial

2) http://www.newoxfordreview.org/article.jsp?did=1205-editorial

“Mr. Ramus. I read where you are now exercising your AntiCatholicism on Mr. Zimrak’s new thread...”

Shouting “anti-Catholic” lacks the zing of “anti-Semite,” doesn’t it>?

--->”...the Anglo-Saxon Puritan Revolution was the necessary precursor to the French Revolution.”

The St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre and the revocation of the Edict of Nantes set things in motion.  It removed the bourgeois Calvinist center, leaving first absolutism then revolution.

“the English Puritan revolution was presented by the older Marxists as a great example to emulate.”

If Marxists want to fight for representative government and the British constitution, why stop them?

“The Puritan revolution worsened that of Henry VIII by shifting the power from the monarchy and a royal family to the elected representatives.”

Hip, hip, hooray!  And we smashed Divine Right of Kings too, because romanticism makes lousy politics.

“English language and Anglo-Saxon ethno-cultural supremacy arming unrelenting contempt for Celtic cultures and Catholicism.”

This is an Anglo nation that speaks English, not a proposition nation. I never said anything about contempt, just concern over unmeltable ethnics.

---->"You really should read Chesterton, who says it openly, that the essence of Christianity is revolt against the Prince of the World.”

Recent history looks like Rome fights FOR the Prince of the World: universal human rights, distributive justice, Latino solidarity…

----->"I have a feeling that the only reason Peter Ramus is anti-Catholic is because he is anti-brown people, and a lot of brown people in America are Catholic.”

I see Anti-Racism is a new part of Church Teaching.

Dear Uncle Ramus the Church has always been for all races.Within the generation of the Apostles the Church spread from Eithopia to India to Spain and England.Paul the Apostle to the gentiles was followed by Peter in spreading the good news to all people.
Xavier went to Idia, China. and Japan.Padre Las Casas went to Mexico and the Carribean the Jesuits to Paraguay, Mexico,and Canada,etc to the whole world.the Church has just built cathedrals in Mongolia and Magadan Siberia for example.

The Church has always been for all races...

That’s not what I’m talking about.  I mean rubbish like “racial justice,” “ethnocultural equity,” and anything under the heading of “peace and justice,” all of which are staffed an financed by the institution.  The Catholic Church is exponentially better at teaching “primacy of conscience,” “economic and social justice,” and “equality” than any Bolsheviks ever were.

In the Diocese of Chicago members of the anti-racism committee (ARC) have worked to
acquire a studied understanding of racism based on the experiences of people of color. We
have come to see how we all are conditioned to accept and participate in deeply imbedded
structures in our society and Church that grant unearned privilege to some, and undeserved
hardship to others, based on skin color. For whites to recognize this is not easy. The horrific
tragedies of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita are momentous reminders that beneath the surface
of “political correctness” there is still much anti-racism work to do. The structures of racism
are operative in many situations, and cause grievous harm to every one of us.

Necocon engages in talk asserting that what is wrong with Islam is that it never had a Reformation

They also say “Ïslam needs a Pope,” because a centralized institution is easier to bribe, pressure and manipulate.

One last comment in this spree of posts: you have other options besides chaining your soul to a decaying relic.  The attempted suicide of Roman Catholicism is not the end of Christianity. This despair can be relieved. The Good News of Jesus Christ is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes.

The Church of the Creator and the KKK are never going to win Ramus, the Catholic Church will be here till the end.If the KKK couldn’t win in the 20’s when the country was overwhelming white and Protastant, how the hell is it going to win now?Grow up the Jews blacks Muslims and Hindus are here I live with them every day.

The Church of the Creator and the KKK are never going to win Ramus

Calling me a racist means you can’t answer me. I have no use for either of those groups; one is a pagan religion and the other is a sting operation. 

Besides, race is too abstract to be the basis of a coherent society.  I agree with the traditionalists about the importance of culture, heritage and church for holding society together. We just have incompatible visions, which does not rule out working together against the welfare- warfare state.

The Catholic Church is the home of tradition and faith and has been for 2000 years. The Protastants change their minds every couple of years.  Not a racist glad to here it, are you a Calvinist or just another fallen away Catholic in a holy roller church.You sound like a racist even if you aren’t one and on religion like a follower of Jack Chick.I will pray for you good luck

This article, and the one to which it links in the body of its text, are spot on about the hoodwinking and hijacking of the American pro-life movement by the Republican Party, which is not in principle any more pro-life than the Democrats, and is in practice rather less so because of the consequences of its economic policies, not to mention, of course, its record of warmongering and convict-killing even worse than that of the Democrats (which is quite a feat).

A key strand in neoconservatism, at least in America, is made up of Catholics who agree with the Pope and his predecessor about sex but not about economics, seem immune to the enormous amount of work that they have done and still do in explaining how these things are connected, and manage to present themselves, quite falsely, as somehow more orthodox than those who, with similar disregard, agree with the Popes about economics but not about sex.

But alike, they are in fact inheritors of the misappropriation of the name of the Second Vatican Council. And alike, they hark back to the nineteenth-century Americanist heresy, which conceived of an oxymoronic American Catholic Church autonomous from Rome.

Alas, for all his gifts, Father Neuhaus has been a key figure in the sex-but-not-economics camp, and a leader in its support for the neoconservative war agenda. Might he now be shifting? I hope and pray so. And after (or alongside) him, who?

Catholics of this hue are electorally indispensable to the neocons, just as Catholic opponents of abortion are electorally key to the actually pro-abortion Republican Party. If this shift is finally happening, then praise God!

@Kevin
“Where do you propose the Restoration to occur?”

Back to where it all this mess started-- to correct a few things. This whole modern experimental movement to make everything democratic has failed.  The modern movement started June 28th 1914 with the assassination of Franz Ferdinand, Archduke of Austria. TheHoly Roman Emperor has now been in a 100year abeyance and as Dante foretold : “yet is it no small confirmation of the truth, that when the throne of Augustus is vacant, the whole world goes out of course, the helmsman and rowers slumber in the ship of Peter, and unhappy Italy, forsaken and abandoned to private control, and bereft of all public guidance, is tossed with such buffeting of winds and waves as no words can describe, nay as even the Italians in their woe can scarce measure with their tears.” Epistle VI. The Restoration begins by petitioning the eight Imperial Electors to do their civic duty by electing the Holy Roman Emperor. But men have to ask first. If you fail to ask these Imperial Electors, then the next four years you will have Hilary “cosmocrator” Clinton as the universal ruler and not a True and Holy Roman Emperor. Good luck world. The last 100 years was a failure. Kill our kings and you will suffer for it.

DOWNLOAD CHEAP ADOBE PHOTO
DOWNLOAD CHEAP ADOBE 8.0 - 9 DOWNLOAD CHEAP ADOBE download flash FREE player
DOWNLOAD CHEAP ADOBE premiere pro
DOWNLOAD CHEAP ADOBE download flash player - 9 DOWNLOAD CHEAP ADOBE flash player
DOWNLOAD CHEAP ADOBE pagemaker

rh1vuom6aj7ifnx http://www.142757.com/129346.html een9ft5ugjgy0

DOWNLOAD VERY CHEAP ADOBE premiere
DOWNLOAD VERY CHEAP ADOBE CS2 download FREE PHOTO SHOP - DOWNLOAD VERY CHEAP ADOBE after effects
DOWNLOAD VERY CHEAP ADOBE download flash install player
DOWNLOAD VERY CHEAP ADOBE flash - DOWNLOAD VERY CHEAP ADOBE better complete
DOWNLOAD VERY CHEAP ADOBE creative CS2 editor guide image macintosh

WE KNOW HOW TO MAKE YOU HAPPY!. DOWNLOAD OEM SOFTWARE! AND RELAX!
ACROBAT FREE DOWNLOAD ADOBE PROFESSIONAL 60 license
FREE DOWNLOAD ADOBE ACROBAT 8 standard 8
DOWNLOAD CHEAP ADOBE create delusion got - DOWNLOAD CHEAP ADOBE pdf
DOWNLOAD CHEAP ADOBE shock wave
FREE DOWNLOAD CHEAP ADOBE PHOTO SHOP 8.0 download - DOWNLOAD CHEAP ADOBE 8.0

best american ONLINE PHARMACIES ..!! FREE OVERNIGHT DELIVERY..!!
BUY CHEAP PILLS IN ONLINE PHARMACY steroids ..!! FREE OVERNIGHT DELIVERY..!! - indian PHARMACY NO PRESCRIPTION ..!! FREE OVERNIGHT DELIVERY..!!
best NO PRESCRIPTION PHARMACIES ..!! FREE OVERNIGHT DELIVERY..!!

discount PRESCRIPTION medications PHARMACIES ONLINE
BUY hydrocodone ONLINE ONLINE PHARMACIES ..!! FREE OVERNIGHT DELIVERY..!! - BUY hydrocodone ONLINE ONLINE PHARMACIES ..!! FREE OVERNIGHT DELIVERY..!!
best ONLINE PHARMACIES in india ..!! FREE OVERNIGHT DELIVERY..!!

links to ONLINE PHARMACIES ..!! FREE OVERNIGHT DELIVERY..!!
cialis and BUY CHEAP PILLS IN ONLINE PHARMACY ..!! FREE OVERNIGHT DELIVERY..!! - CHEAP BUY CHEAP PILLS IN ONLINE PHARMACY ..!! FREE OVERNIGHT DELIVERY..!!

canada DOWNLOAD CHEAP OEM SOFTWARE
basic skills on PHOTO SHOP
corel PHOTO paint SHOP pro v2 key - PHOTO SHOP programs FREE
FREE DOWNLOAD ADOBE CREATIVE SUITE 3 design premium for pc
FREE DOWNLOAD ADOBE CREATIVE SUITE 3 web - FREE DOWNLOAD ADOBE CREATIVE SUITE 3
FREE DOWNLOAD CHEAP AutoCAD 2008 free crack

Corel Designer Technical Suite 12.0 - $59.95..!!!
http://forums.lionsgate.com/showthread.php?p=139944

BUY CHEAPEST VIAGRA 1.27$ per PILL..! cheapest ONLINE
http://groups.google.com/group/pl.comp.sieci.bezprzewodowe/browse_thread/thread/7262fea730961964/f7ef98ea7fe95c6a
BUY CHEAPEST VIAGRA 1.27$ per PILL..! lowest prices - vigra CHEAPEST BUY 1.27$ per PILL..!

buy cialis