Hungry Revolution

The slogan “Liberty, Equality, Fraternity” was a PR maneuver, the dressed-up brainchild of the leftist maniacs of the French Revolution who were possessed by a fratricidal rage and who wanted to destroy the existing social order so as to bring in by force the kind of society that the American left wants to foist on the American people today.

It was never about fair treatment for all, it was only ever about mindless, hopeless, bitter resentment, envy, and rebellion.

The goal was for those who were not in power to seize power and then abuse anyone and everyone who got in their way.

But even that could not work, because the revolution is about thoughtless change and turning, never about progress.

As a witness of the French Revolution observed, "Like Saturn, the Revolution devours its children" (Jaques Mallet du Pan).

14th Amendment

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled several times that the 14th Amendment does not grant birthright citizenship. The 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause was written to establish citizenship for the slaves freed after the Civil War. The amendment was passed to counter the Dred Scott decision, which explicitly held that black slaves were not citizens.

That’s why, for example, the children of diplomats and foreign ministers are not granted citizenship on the basis of being born here. Only since 1982 has there been a claim that birth inside the country automatically conferred birthright. The source for this idea was a footnote to a decision written by Justice William Brennan. The claim is not Constitutional, and it has not been supported by the Supreme Court.

Here are a few examples of relevant Supreme Court cases.

Supreme Court opinion in the Slaughterhouse cases (1873)

"No one can fail to be impressed with the one pervading purpose found in (the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments), lying at the foundation of each, and without which none of them would have been even suggested; we mean the freedom of the slave race, the security and firm establishment of that freedom, and the protection of the newly-made freeman and citizen from the oppressions of those who had formerly exercised unlimited dominion over him."

Supreme Court opinion in Ex Parte Virginia (1879)

"[The 14th Amendment was] primarily designed to give freedom to persons of the African race, prevent their future enslavement, make them citizens, prevent discriminating State legislation against their rights as freemen, and secure to them the ballot."

Supreme Court opinion in Strauder v. West Virginia (1880)

"The 14th Amendment was framed and adopted ... to assure to the colored race the enjoyment of all the civil rights that, under the law, are enjoyed by white persons, and to give to that race the protection of the general government in that enjoyment whenever it should be denied by the States."

Supreme Court opinion in Neal v. Delaware (1880)

"The right secured to the colored man under the 14th Amendment and the civil rights laws is that he shall not be discriminated against solely on account of his race or color."

Supreme Court opinion in Elk v. Wilkins (1884)

John Elk was a Native American who argued that he was a citizen in light of the 14^th Amendment.

The Supreme Court ruled that the 14th amendment did not grant Indians citizenship, saying, "The main object of the opening sentence of the 14th Amendment was to settle the question, upon which there had been a difference of opinion throughout the country and in this court, as to the citizenship of free negroes and to put it beyond doubt that all persons, white or black, and whether formerly slaves or not, born or naturalized in the United States, and owing no allegiance to any alien power, should be citizens of the United States and of the state in which they reside...The evident meaning of (the words, "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof") is, not merely subject in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States, but completely subject to their political jurisdiction, and owing them direct and immediate allegiance...Persons not thus subject to the jurisdiction of the United States at the time of birth cannot become so afterward, except by being naturalized...no one can become a citizen of a nation without its consent..."

Indians did not become citizens until passage of the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924.

Latter-day Puritans

Puritanism has long been a part of the American mind-set. Like their forebears, latter-day Puritans eschew any nuance as utter betrayal; they see human conduct only in terms of extremes and absolutes, and they want to burn away whatever (or whoever) they deem inadequate while covering their excesses in self-righteous feigned piety. Their new City of God is to be populated by people who would appear good without actually being good. As Jonathan Edwards put it in his Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God screed, "The wrath of Almighty God is now undoubtedly hanging over a great part of this congregation."

Byrne on Day

In this post last year I mentioned Carol Byrne's book that debunks the Dorothy Day-as-hero myth (hear that, Cardinal Dolan?). Strange though it seems, there are misguided souls who still want to see Day canonized.

Byrne recently gave an interview about her book and her research here.

Candyland

In last night's presidential debate, the two candidates went at it like light-weight grade-schoolers. Had I been there, my question would have been, "Can either of you tell the truth?"I give the trophy for the event to the moderator, Candy “death wish ticket” Crowley.

To wit:
* She gave 9% more time to her candidate, Obama.

* She got to tell Romney to “sit down.”

* The question about why Obama had not kept his promise to ban assault rifles she re-cast as why Romney had flip-flopped on his stance on assault weapons.

* More than once she broke with the format of the session to deny Romney his follow-up comment.

* She interrupted Romney 28 times; Obama, a mere 9.

* The time when Obama took over Romney’s session for a full minute, she remained mute.

* On Benghazi, she seconded Obama’s false statement about how he’d called the attacks acts of terror the day after the assault (to which reporters in the audience cheered).

It was Candy all the way - trick or treat. On the plus side, she did become the first woman to ever win a presidential debate.

Catholics, Obama, the HHS Mandate

Catholics, Obama, and the HHS Mandate

16 Political Cartoons of 2012

 

See http://www.stpeterslist.com/8142/catholics-obama-and-the-hhs-mandate-16-political-cartoons-of-2012/

DNC and the Russian Navy

During last week's Democratic National Convention, images of the Russian Black Sea Fleet were used on the giant screen when a retired Navy four-star toook the stage.

See http://www.navytimes.com/mobile/news/2012/09/navy-russian-warships-displayed-dnc-veterans-tribute-091112

Perhaps someone will eventually apologize for the mistake/Freudian slip.

Dolan's Waltz

Cardinal Timothy Dolan is to close the conventions of both political parties. By playing to either side of the aisle, he has helped make himself -- and the Catholic Church -- irrelevant to both.

The conventional wisdom is that by attending both conventions, he is demonstrating that he is nobody's servant; that he is not beholden to any political party; that he is above partisanship.

What's he's really done, of course, is try to appease everybody, which is why he satisfies nobody.

Yet I should qualify that last remark. He has not satisfied those who are on the front lines fighting the tyrannical HHS Mandate (e.g. this open letter). What he has done, however, is given approbation to people who would seek to benefit from the good name of "Catholic" without bothering to honor its principles.

This is what happens when you give priority to being politically savvy instead of just doing the right thing: the souls doing the good work are betrayed and demoralized, while the characters who despise you simply exploit your weakness.

How significant is Cardinal Dolan's actions? It's as if St. John the Baptist left off the sermons so that he could waltz with Salome. Quo vadis, Eminence?

Gunman who Attacked FRC Worked for LGBT Group

Source: http://dailycaller.com/2012/08/15/report-suspected-family-research-council-gunman-volunteered-at-lgbt-center/

A politicially-motivated domestic terrorist tried to shoot up the socially conservative Family Research Council (FRC) headquarters. He was stopped by security guards, one of whom was shot in the process.

From the article: "Gunman Floyd Corkins II from Herndon, Va., had been working with the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender community center for six months, according to The Associated Press."

Not surprisingly, this fact -- along with the fact that ther incident even happened -- is receiving only anemic media attention.

The gunman also had what are being described as "Chick-fil-A promotional materials" in his backpack. Chick-fil-A had given the FRC a $1,000 donation in the past; as a result, the Souther Poverty Law Center (SPLC) reported that Chick-fil-A supports a "hate group."

Did the SPLC put the cross-hairs on the FRC for Corkins? I think it's a fair question.

Democrat Resigns From Party, Cites Her Catholic Faith

Jo Ann Nardelli (from the Altoona, PA area) has been a pro-life Catholic Democrat her entire life. Her father was one before her. And she couldn't imagine a day where that wouldn't be true. But that day was Wednesday of last week.

See http://www.ncregister.com/blog/matthew-archbold/democrat-commiteewoman-resigns-from-party-cites-her-catholic-faith

From the article:

* Nardelli was the president and founder of the Blair County Federation of Democratic Women, Vice President of the PA State Women’s Caucus, and 1st Vice President of the PA State Federation of Democratic Women (she had been in line for the presidency of that organization in 2014).

* She's met with Hillary Clinton and gave a rosary to Joe Biden.

* She's never shied away from speaking about her Catholic faith or her pro-life views as a Democrat.

* Nardelli says she simply had no other choice than to leave the Democrat party for its pro-abortion, pro-gay stances. When it came to choosing between her faith and her party, she chose her faith. "God is the reason for all being," she said. "We have to follow our faith."

Catholic Voting Principles

Source: sspx.org

From this PDF guide published by the SSPX, the following:

I. "In the rare case that there is a clearly, publicly Catholic candidate who supports the teaching of the Church, there is a strict moral obligation to vote, under the pain of mortal sin. Where there is a clear gain possible from the correct use of a vote for some other candidate, it can be recommended or counseled. However, when there is no clear advantage, it would be better to abstain so as not to contribute even to a material participation.

II. "However, it can be permissible to tolerate the lesser of two evils for a proportionate reason, and such toleration can be for the common good, precisely because it is the lesser of two evils. Thus, it is possible to vote or even campaign for a candidate whose platform contains evils with which we do not agree. Everything depends upon a hierarchy of the most important values and issues taking priority over lesser ones.

"For a Catholic, there can be no doubt that the issues that take the highest priority must be the moral issues, and not personal or economic issues. The whole continuation of society as we know it depends upon this, and those who deny the most basic principles of the natural order are bringing about an unheard of perversion. Consequently, it is permissible and prudent to vote on the one single issue of proscribing abortion, or forbidding same-sex marriages, or putting an end to euthanasia, or freedom of the Catholic Church to run educational institutions. All of these issues are of the utmost importance. Consequently, it is likewise permissible to vote for a candidate who is known to be a Freemason, although Freemasonry is an evil society condemned by the Church and opposed to the Catholic Church, if he maintains an important principle of the natural law such as the evil of abortion.

"Lesser issues are also of moral importance such as the justice or injustice of a particular war, or the paying of a just wage to employees, maintaining the right to private property by limiting government intervention, and so on. All other things being equal, one could vote on the basis of such issues. However, it would be wrong to vote for a candidate who has a correct position of one of these issues, but a perverse and wrong position on more important issues."

Abp. John Donoghue, RIP

The retired Archbishop of Atlanta, John Francis Donahue, died last Friday. Requiescat in Pace.

An article published by a local paper ended its story on the topic with this parting shot:

"The AJC cited several controversial stands, including refusing the participation of women in foot-washing ceremonies and denial of the Eucharist to politicians who took pro-abortion positions."

Not surprisingly, the article's author describes himself as "a registered Democrat, with moderate to liberal beliefs" and a "casual Catholic." Pity he didn't also include the moniker "casual reporter."

Anyway, the irony here is that the controversy is not the late Archbishop's lawful directives. Rather, the controversy is (1) the intrusion of anti-establishment notions into ancient Catholic ceremonies and (2) the fact that pro-choice opportunists try to exploit the good name of "Catholic" for their own political ends. If the agitators would quit trying to outrageously pass off these utterly foreign elements as Catholic, then the Archbishop's routine statements about everyday Catholic matters would have a better chance of being reported in the proper light.

Christian Civilization

From Our Apostolic Mandate of St. Pius X, August 25, 1910:

No, civilization is not something yet to be found, nor is the New City to be built on hazy notions; it has been in existence and still is: it is Christian civilization, it is the Catholic city. It has only to be set up and restored continually against the unremitting attacks of insane dreamers, rebels and miscreants. Omnia in instaurare in Christo.

Occupied

I've noticed that the occupy crowd -- aside from the late-arriving communists and their ilk -- is having trouble coming up with the reason for what they want or why they are there.

In a spirit of fraternal helpfulness, I’ve compiled a list of starter ideas (only the first one is mine). Feel free to add your own.
* Occupy Here and There, Now and Then, This and That
* Students Wildly Indignant About Nearly Everything (SWINE)
* The Flea Party

Don't Ask Adams

Last week Martha sent out the following request:

I ran across someone who has the preposterous signature line shown below...I would like to compile a list of quotes from the Gospels which refute, would you like to help? Or would you recommend just forgetting about it?

"The divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity. Nowhere in the Gospels do we find a precept for Creeds, Confessions, Oaths, Doctrines, and whole carloads of other foolish trumpery that we find in Christianity." ~John Adams

Yes, that's this John Adams.

=======

My reply to Martha went thus:

That Adams was a liberal and a harbinger of modernism there is, I think, little dispute.

Even so, liberals have been mis-quoting Adams as their messenger to attack Christianity for years now. The "quote" you named, for example, is spurious -- coddled together by different people over the years and made to look a bit different from the original.

Spurious Quotation #1
"The ‘divinity’ of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity. Nowhere in the Gospels do we find a precept for Creeds, Confessions, Oaths, Doctrines, and whole carloads of other foolish trumpery that we find in Christianity."

Attributed to Adams in Spirit (1988) by William Edelen. This is actually a paraphrase portions of two of Adams' diary entries:

"Mystery is made a convenient cover for absurdity." (13 February 1756)

"Where do we find a precept in the Gospel requiring Ecclesiastical Synods? Convocations? Councils? Decrees? Creeds? Confessions? Oaths? Subscriptions? and whole cart-loads of other trumpery that we find religion incumbered with in these days?" (18 February 1756)

Spurious Quotation #2

"The doctrine of the divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity."

Attributed to Adams in Pathway to the Stars (2007) by Rev. Ernest A. Steadman. Another paraphrase of the entry for 13 February 1756.

I suppose one could debunk the spurious quotation, and then tackle the original (there are problems in both instances). Perhaps something like this:

"The 'popular sovereignty' of the governed is made a convenient cover for absurdity. What need does anyone have of Declarations, Protests, Oaths, Continental Congresses, and whole carloads of other foolish trumpery that we find in the colonies."

=======

In the same vein, Helmut offered, "If the assumed logic from Adams is correct, what does that mean for the Pledge of Allegiance, the Star Spangled Banner, the Declaration of Independence, The Constitution, Supreme Court rulings, the procedures of Congress and the inauguration of presidents and swearing in of elected officials..."

Thus armed, Martha sent these and similar pointers to the source of the offending signature line. The offender's response in turn was not surprising -- as Martha put it, he "jumped into the last ditch immediately (sneering) and told me to save my stereotyping for someone who cares."

How very Adams-like.

Slow Learners

"The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed lest Rome become bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance."

- Marcus Tullius Cicero, 55 BC

Updated 8/10/2011: The chap from Delphi wrote me that Cicero was not the author of the remark above. I did a bit of research and confirmed the fact; it appears the quotation was from a fictionalized history of the Roman statesman. Looks like the authority of Cicero can't be invoked for this one; we're just obliged to take the wisdom and good sense of the statement on its own merits.

Marxists With Rosaries

Source

Below is the review I wrote recently on Amazon.com for The Catholic Worker Movement (1933-1980): A Critical Analysis.

If you're interested in the subject of Catholic views of economics, then avoid anything coming from Dorothy Day, Peter Maurin, or the CWM. What a horrible mess those people made!

=======

"The Catholic Worker Movement (1933-1980): A Critical Analysis" by Carol Byrne is a well-researched analysis of the writings and activities of the two founders of the Catholic Worker Movement, Dorothy Day and Peter Maurin.

I approached the book with the understanding that Day was a dupe for the Communists -- and it was a role she didn't particularly mind playing: she struck me as a mole with one good eye. She misidentified the source of many of the world's woes (liberal capitalism with its materialism yes, but not original sin, which would have implicated herself and her comrades as well) and so adopted incorrect remedies (liberation theology; agrarian reform; bolshevism -- materialist creeds all, a fact that she managed to reliably overlook in her efforts to overthrow capitalism). I gave Day credit for intending well, but not for having the wherewithal to completely overcome her radical Communist past. I read Byrne's offering to see how well that postulate held up under closer scrutiny.

The author provides numerous examples that illustrate how the truth was far sadder than I suspected. Byrne thoroughly demonstrates that Day maintained a radicalism steeped in Marxist thought: she was a Communist who became a Catholic, but rather than repudiate her old erroneous ideas, she set about to create a synthesis between the two contradictory creeds. It was an oil and water mix steeped in false pretenses, one in which the Catholic element lost out almost every time to Marxist angst.

To wit, Day and Maurin:
* were nurtured on a Socialist ideology,
* campaigned with active Communists and their travelers,
* unfailingly supported Communist teachings and activities,
* attended conferences organized by Communists in the USSR,
* promoted Communist writings and propaganda,
* advocated worker strikes that were started by Communist-infiltrated unions,
* denigrated cash given by capitalists but accepted it willingly from socialists,
* defended the use of violence and class warfare to achieve joint ownership of property and the forcible redistribution of wealth,
* maintained a posture of hatred for Western democracy and admiration for Leninist and Stalinist totalitarianism,
* weakened the West in its defense against Communist aggression in the name of pacifism,
* praised Garibaldi in Italy, Castro in Cuba, and Ho Chi Minh in Vietnam -- men who used armed force to brutalize and murder their enemies,
* refused guidance from orthodox Catholic clerics, and
* re-interpreted the Gospels and papal encyclicals to support their radicalism.

Hats off to Carol Byrne for providing the documentation needed to provide the correct context and background for a more complete understanding of the CWM.

Saving Said

In this post I described how Afghani Said Musa was to be hanged for converting from Islam to Christianity.

Here is a happy update: last week an official from the U.S. Embassy in Kabul confirmed that Said Musa was released from prison and is now safely out of the country and will be reunited with his family. For the safety of Said and his family, his whereabouts are unknown.

Read more here.

Looking For the Moderate Voice

Source

A Muslim cleric has announced that he will hold a protest outside the White House. Anjem Choudary, who proclaimed that "the flag of Islam will fly over the White House," says he will lead a demonstration rallying Muslims to establish Sharia law across the United States. This after he called Americans “the biggest criminals in the world today.”

Choudary is the former leader of the outlawed British-based group Islam4UK. The rally is schedule to take place in March; it is organized by the extremist group Islamic Thinkers Society of New York.

"The event is a rally, a call for the Sharia, a call for the Muslims to rise up and establish the Islamic state in America," Choudary declared.

Perhaps moderate Muslims will publicly condemn this rally, so that nobody will think they quietly agree.

Catholics Need Not Apply

Source

Legal conscience protections were just rescinded for health care workers who object to numerous immoral medical procedures.

Obama's Secretary for Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, acknowledged that "rescission of the rule would limit access to pro-life counseling...providers would either leave the health care industry or choose not to enter it" [emphasis added].

As a result, Catholic hospitals and health care workers will find themselves without legal protection when they decline to administer in vitro fertilization or distribute contraceptives for purposes of birth control.

The changes to vital civil rights regulations were made without evidence or justification -- the act was sheer politics. Conscientious physicians and other healthcare professionals can thus be discriminated against with impunity.