I have sometimes commented critically about King Henry VIII. Even going so low as to suggest that Barry Hussein, the Great and Powerful O, is like him for meddling in the internal affairs of the Church.
But were ExC a consul of the Alternative Post-American Republic,
the depraved civilizational suicidality which is official Catholic "social justice" policy would come under severe State restriction. Pope Francis, whose ego is slathered all over everything he humbly, simply and poorly touches, recently dramatized this grotesque self-erasure by celebrating as martyrs illegal immigrants who die in their attempt to invade Europe.
The APA Republic would concern itself not at all with the doctrines or beliefs of any religion unless that religion refused to live peacefully and quietly with the State's fundamental rejection of multiculturalism and all its pomps. Islam would be constitutionally banned, of course. An expansionist theocracy is by definition incompatible in any way with a sovereign Western state.
But if the mitered traitors felt the need to take "a prophetic stance" against the Republic's attack on "the fundamental dignity of every human person" ExC the Seven and a Halfth would be happy to provide them with whatever kind of martyrdom they'd prefer. A forest of pontifical gallows along the border, a la Vlad Tepes, might do the trick nicely.
The irony here is that the Church's current game of playing Judas to the culture and peoples that are its foundation is one that it learned from the State. It was not imposed on it, but voluntarily embraced by it, in slavish imitation of the modern liberal regime of tolerance and diversity.
Part of this is the Church's abandonment of the (White) West in favor the Third World, where its demographic future lies. This was apparent to me more than 25 years ago and was part of the pragmatics of my leaving said Church. I knew that it would never take a tolerant stance toward homosexuality when its future was clearly wedded to the peoples of the global South. (Just ask the Church of England.)
What galls me is that a policy of national, cultural and ethnic self-preservation --once the unquestioned common sense of humanity-- is now considered by the supposed intellectual and moral elite to be a crime of the greatest magnitude.
The guilt of every crime committed by illegal immigrants against the native peoples of Europe --actively by violence or passively by dispossession and cost--, or against the historic American people here, is shared by their political, cultural and religious enablers.
His Grace, the Consul Ex Cathedra, would be happy to serve as the hand of justice for them.
---
*Adding to the irony and paradox is that ExC is also finding himself in the company of Pope Piux IX, as well as Henry VII. Is this hyper-enantiodromia?
---
3 comments:
As the rate of black-on-white and hispanic-on-white violence increases in this country, will the Church be willing to act against it, or will they offer tepid claptrap about the need for mutual understanding and "respect for universal human rights"? If this nonsense keeps up, things could get tense between me and my family. Of course, some of them may join me. And who knows, the American Church may just get fed up and schism. Seems to be the way of things with the Church.
At the end of the day, the Catholic Church is interested in its own existence. I don't bear them a grudge for that, that's what every properly self-interested person or group would do. But the apparent ease with which they abandon the civilization they have had a symbiotic relationship with for two thousand years is infuriating. For all their supposed concern, it makes the bishops and cardinals seem ruthlessly mercenary. Will the Church survive in the South? Yes. I would even say that, given their innate ability to adapt their customs to their audience, and adopt their audience's culture for their own needs, the Catholic Church will flourish. But they should not be surprised that the survivors of the Falls of America and Europe come to use "Catholic" as a four-letter word for their betrayal.
-Sean
The Nativists had a point.
As much as it pains me to admit it, you are correct. If the Founders had been Catholic, George Washington really would've been George the First, and he would be remembered for his coronation speech, not his retirement speech. I wonder if we would even have the Bill of Rights. Possible, but I'm uncertain.
How likely do you think an American schism is? As the situation gets more dire, the bishops may give Rome the finger and break away. Assuming it was an Orthodox-style schism, the sacraments would still be valid. But if I read the American bishops correctly, I fear the American Church would be as stiflingly liberal and moribund as the Episcopalians. Sinless abortion, guilt-free contraception, same-sex marriages, and empty churches. Any change on moral positions would be a cave to the progressive establishment, not an honest reexamination of doctrines.
Time to start writing up a catechism for a new denomination, I fear. Hey, if every Tom, Dick and Harry can do it, why not me? :)
-Sean
Post a Comment