Looking Like Christmas
14 hours ago
Friday, September 30, 2016
Metropolitan Hierotheos (Vlachos) of Nafpaktos on the Church of Greece and the Recent Cretan Council's Documents
It's a tad long and I am not going to excerpt it. Go here to read it.
Thursday, September 29, 2016
Enough already!
This
This
This
This
And now this
To hell with you Barack Obama, you and your Communist fellow travelers!
Enough is enough!
Georgian Church reassures believers—Pope's visit not to cross into ecumenism
In response to some strong reactions among the clergy and faithful to the Pope's upcoming visit to the country of Georgia, Sept. 30-Oct. 2, which will include meeting with His Holiness Patriarch Ilia II, the Patriarchate has released a statement aimed at reassuring those concerned.
"We note that prayerful-sacramental communion between us and the Catholic church of Rome has been severed since medieval times and as long as there are dogmatic differences between us, according to Church law, Orthodox believers do not take part in their services," the statement reads.
The release notes that Pope Francis' visit to Georgia is by invitation of President Margvelashvili and Patriarcha Ilia and aimed at strengthening multilateral relations towards peacekeeping in the region.
Referring to some excited public statements of clergy and laity, the statement calls upon all to remain calm, stating that "It is obvious that the Pope will serve Mass only for Catholics, which means it can’t be considered proselytism, as some people claim."
It should be noted that Pope John Paul II also visited Georgia in November 1999, meeting with Patriarcha Ilia, although no ecumenical prayers took place. The Georgian Church has taken a strict stance on matters of ecumenism, ceasing activity in the World Council of Churches in 1983 and abstaining from the recent pan-Orthodox gathering on Crete, offering critiques of its documents as well as the joint statement stemming from the recent Orthodox-Catholic meeting in Chieti, Italy.
Source.
"We note that prayerful-sacramental communion between us and the Catholic church of Rome has been severed since medieval times and as long as there are dogmatic differences between us, according to Church law, Orthodox believers do not take part in their services," the statement reads.
The release notes that Pope Francis' visit to Georgia is by invitation of President Margvelashvili and Patriarcha Ilia and aimed at strengthening multilateral relations towards peacekeeping in the region.
Referring to some excited public statements of clergy and laity, the statement calls upon all to remain calm, stating that "It is obvious that the Pope will serve Mass only for Catholics, which means it can’t be considered proselytism, as some people claim."
It should be noted that Pope John Paul II also visited Georgia in November 1999, meeting with Patriarcha Ilia, although no ecumenical prayers took place. The Georgian Church has taken a strict stance on matters of ecumenism, ceasing activity in the World Council of Churches in 1983 and abstaining from the recent pan-Orthodox gathering on Crete, offering critiques of its documents as well as the joint statement stemming from the recent Orthodox-Catholic meeting in Chieti, Italy.
Source.
Wednesday, September 28, 2016
Rod Dreher's Latest on Boundaries and the Limits of Acceptable Diversity of Opinion
This is a really excellent piece. Not going to excerpt it. Just go here and read it all.
HT: Dr. Tighe
HT: Dr. Tighe
Monday, September 26, 2016
The Debate
No dog in this fight, I’m not voting for either one. But
I actually watched the whole thing. My impression; with a few
exceptions where he did get in some zingers, I think the wicked witch
was clearly dominant and in control through most of it. This was not a
good night for the Donald.
Welcome to the NFL Mr. Trump. Practice is not optional at this level of competition. Your lack of debate prep showed, badly.
Welcome to the NFL Mr. Trump. Practice is not optional at this level of competition. Your lack of debate prep showed, badly.
Besieged Globalists Ponder What Went Wrong
Until recently, you didn’t hear people being referred to as “globalist” very often. But in a time of rising nationalism, those who see the upside of globalism have become a distinct — and often embattled — tribe.
Last week, the globalists had a big family reunion in New York. The gathering was focused on the United Nations General Assembly, but a growing array of side conferences and summits and dinners also attracted concerned internationalists of every stripe: humanitarians, leaders of nongovernmental organizations, donors, investors, app peddlers, celebrities.
But an absence haunted the week. Almost by definition, nationalists and localists are underrepresented at these global gatherings. Their paucity was especially notable this time, because the rising signs of nationalism — whether in the form of Donald J. Trump’s winning the Republican nomination, the British vote to leave the European Union, or the German backlash against Angela Merkel’s welcome to refugees — hovered like a specter over many of the discussions.
The globalists have lofty aims, of course, like working toward a climate-change agreement, finding a solution for the refugee crisis, and deepening cross-border trade. But there seemed to be a growing realization that solving the problems of the world’s commons becomes harder when the globalists neglect their own backyards.
Again and again, in private conversations and in public forums, the globalists spoke of feeling besieged. Take the valedictory address of former President Bill Clinton, the paterfamilias of the globalist reunion. The Clinton Global Initiative is one of the major factors in helping to transform what had been a week centered on United Nations diplomacy into a broader Davos-on-the-Hudson for international aspirations...
Read the rest here.
Last week, the globalists had a big family reunion in New York. The gathering was focused on the United Nations General Assembly, but a growing array of side conferences and summits and dinners also attracted concerned internationalists of every stripe: humanitarians, leaders of nongovernmental organizations, donors, investors, app peddlers, celebrities.
But an absence haunted the week. Almost by definition, nationalists and localists are underrepresented at these global gatherings. Their paucity was especially notable this time, because the rising signs of nationalism — whether in the form of Donald J. Trump’s winning the Republican nomination, the British vote to leave the European Union, or the German backlash against Angela Merkel’s welcome to refugees — hovered like a specter over many of the discussions.
The globalists have lofty aims, of course, like working toward a climate-change agreement, finding a solution for the refugee crisis, and deepening cross-border trade. But there seemed to be a growing realization that solving the problems of the world’s commons becomes harder when the globalists neglect their own backyards.
Again and again, in private conversations and in public forums, the globalists spoke of feeling besieged. Take the valedictory address of former President Bill Clinton, the paterfamilias of the globalist reunion. The Clinton Global Initiative is one of the major factors in helping to transform what had been a week centered on United Nations diplomacy into a broader Davos-on-the-Hudson for international aspirations...
Read the rest here.
Sunday, September 25, 2016
A Sad Day in the Sports World
First this morning there was the shocking news that Jose Fernandez, a 24 year old Cuban immigrant with an arm like greased lightning, who pitched for the Florida Marlins was killed in what looks like a tragic boating accident. And now just breaking, the news that golf legend (and a true gentleman) Arnold Palmer has reposed at the more respectable age of 87. We should also remember that two other young men whose names are not yet known were killed in the same accident with Jose.
May their memory be eternal.
A Whiff of Schism
At a Catholic parish in Athy, Ireland, a lesbian couple who resigned from parish ministry after entering a legal marriage has returned to active participation—and to loud applause. So now everyone is welcome in St. Michael’s parish, right?
Wrong.
Anthony Murphy, the editor of Catholic Voice—the man who objected to the lesbian couple’s prominent role in parish life—has received so many threats that he is, on the advice of the local police, staying away from the parish. But then again, if you know the whole story, you may wonder why Murphy would ever want to attend Mass at St. Michael’s.
The bitter dispute in this Irish parish is an extreme example of a sort of conflict that has become sadly familiar within Catholic communities. These conflicts erupted in the 1960s, peaked in the 1970s and 1980s, then subsided for a few decades. They have escalated again during the past three years, since the election of Pope Francis. They involve fundamental disagreements about what it means to be Catholic: debates between people with irreconcilable views, who sometimes suggest (and sometimes forthrightly proclaim) that their adversaries must be excluded from the Church. These conflicts pose a clear and present danger to the unity of the Catholic faith, and they will continue until the fundamental questions that are now in dispute have been resolved.
Many good Catholics, motivated by the best of intentions, have sought to downplay these tensions, to avert a showdown. But the conciliatory approach cannot succeed when two sides are irreconcilable. A healthy Church cannot long accept a situation in which some members anathematize what other members endorse. (The worldwide Anglican communion, desperately fighting to avoid formal recognition of a schism that is already apparent to the world, illustrates my point.) Fundamental questions cannot be ignored and finessed and explained away indefinitely. Eventually the failure to answer a question is itself a sort of answer: a judgment that truth and integrity are less important than temporary peace and comfort. Such an answer is unworthy of Christians.
Since the shocking case of St. Michael’s in Athy is the starting point for this essay, let me recount the story:
Read the rest here.
Wrong.
Anthony Murphy, the editor of Catholic Voice—the man who objected to the lesbian couple’s prominent role in parish life—has received so many threats that he is, on the advice of the local police, staying away from the parish. But then again, if you know the whole story, you may wonder why Murphy would ever want to attend Mass at St. Michael’s.
The bitter dispute in this Irish parish is an extreme example of a sort of conflict that has become sadly familiar within Catholic communities. These conflicts erupted in the 1960s, peaked in the 1970s and 1980s, then subsided for a few decades. They have escalated again during the past three years, since the election of Pope Francis. They involve fundamental disagreements about what it means to be Catholic: debates between people with irreconcilable views, who sometimes suggest (and sometimes forthrightly proclaim) that their adversaries must be excluded from the Church. These conflicts pose a clear and present danger to the unity of the Catholic faith, and they will continue until the fundamental questions that are now in dispute have been resolved.
Many good Catholics, motivated by the best of intentions, have sought to downplay these tensions, to avert a showdown. But the conciliatory approach cannot succeed when two sides are irreconcilable. A healthy Church cannot long accept a situation in which some members anathematize what other members endorse. (The worldwide Anglican communion, desperately fighting to avoid formal recognition of a schism that is already apparent to the world, illustrates my point.) Fundamental questions cannot be ignored and finessed and explained away indefinitely. Eventually the failure to answer a question is itself a sort of answer: a judgment that truth and integrity are less important than temporary peace and comfort. Such an answer is unworthy of Christians.
Since the shocking case of St. Michael’s in Athy is the starting point for this essay, let me recount the story:
Read the rest here.
Thursday, September 22, 2016
The New German Catholic Bible is... problematic
GERMANY, September 21, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) — The German Bishops have presented a new “Unified Translation” of the Bible that follows a significant modernization of the language and will be binding for all German-speaking areas starting in 2017.
On Tuesday, the German Bishops Conference (DBK) presented in Fulda the fruit of many years of scientific work: a new edition of the so-called “Unified Translation” (Einheitsübersetzung) of the Bible into German. It’s called “unified” because, from the original published from 1962 onward, these editions are supposed to be used ecumenically, unifying Catholics and Protestants in Germany. The original aim, however, was thwarted in 2005 when Protestants reverted to the Luther translation.
The leader of the research project was the bishop (now emeritus) of Erfurt, Joachim Wanke, who explained that the new edition is a “moderate revision” of the older text. Wanke added that a translation is always also an interpretation. The new edition shows more “braveness” to present “biblical jargon,” he said, reported by kath.net.
According to Jewish tradition, the personal names of God cannot be pronounced, so “Yahweh” is substituted by “Lord” in the new edition. In fact, every paragraph has a change, explained Michael Theobald, president of the German Bible Association.
When the apostle Paul calls two new followers, they are not two men anymore, Andronicus and Junias; rather, a new discovery showed that apparently it was one man and one woman, hence Andronicus and Junia. This led to the discussion that the word “apostle” must be applied to women as well as men (Author’s note: In German, different genders of the word exist and usually gender-ideologists insist on using male and female forms).
Other changes are more ideological.
Most frightening is the change to the iconic Isaiah passage (7:14): “The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son” (NIV) will now read: “The virgin has conceived and gives birth to a son.” The change seems to suggest that the virgin is not at all a virgin anymore (after having conceived) and at the same time removes the prophetic impetus by putting the words from the future into the past. This trend continues and a note from the translators explains that the Hebrew word “almáh” means “young woman” instead of “virgin,” as it has been reported. This change goes back to an old — and refuted — disputation of Hebrew apologists:
Read the rest here.
On Tuesday, the German Bishops Conference (DBK) presented in Fulda the fruit of many years of scientific work: a new edition of the so-called “Unified Translation” (Einheitsübersetzung) of the Bible into German. It’s called “unified” because, from the original published from 1962 onward, these editions are supposed to be used ecumenically, unifying Catholics and Protestants in Germany. The original aim, however, was thwarted in 2005 when Protestants reverted to the Luther translation.
The leader of the research project was the bishop (now emeritus) of Erfurt, Joachim Wanke, who explained that the new edition is a “moderate revision” of the older text. Wanke added that a translation is always also an interpretation. The new edition shows more “braveness” to present “biblical jargon,” he said, reported by kath.net.
According to Jewish tradition, the personal names of God cannot be pronounced, so “Yahweh” is substituted by “Lord” in the new edition. In fact, every paragraph has a change, explained Michael Theobald, president of the German Bible Association.
When the apostle Paul calls two new followers, they are not two men anymore, Andronicus and Junias; rather, a new discovery showed that apparently it was one man and one woman, hence Andronicus and Junia. This led to the discussion that the word “apostle” must be applied to women as well as men (Author’s note: In German, different genders of the word exist and usually gender-ideologists insist on using male and female forms).
Other changes are more ideological.
Most frightening is the change to the iconic Isaiah passage (7:14): “The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son” (NIV) will now read: “The virgin has conceived and gives birth to a son.” The change seems to suggest that the virgin is not at all a virgin anymore (after having conceived) and at the same time removes the prophetic impetus by putting the words from the future into the past. This trend continues and a note from the translators explains that the Hebrew word “almáh” means “young woman” instead of “virgin,” as it has been reported. This change goes back to an old — and refuted — disputation of Hebrew apologists:
Read the rest here.
Ireland in 1902
A fascinating glimpse of life in Ireland around the turn of the previous century. Most of the video was shot in Cork with the last few minutes in Wexford. It's as close to a time machine as we are likely to find.
Wednesday, September 21, 2016
Former Archbishop Peter Leo Gerety, world's oldest Catholic bishop, dead at 104
From here.
I remember this guy from the early 80’s when I was still a (very young) trad Catholic. His name was a pejorative. He was solid on abortion but in every other respect he was a moonbat hippie Vatican II says we can do whatever we want guy, right down to the tie dye vestments and Mass for bongo drums in G minor. In politics, foreign policy and economics he was only slightly to the left of Gus Hall. His favorite color was definitely red and this predates our modern, very weird, inversion of the normal political color associations. Any hint of conservative (forget Traditionalist) Catholicism was ruthlessly suppressed.
I am surprised that John Paul II and Benedict XVI did not send him to an early grave. But he hung on, long enough to see his ideological soul mate sitting on the throne of Peter.
I remember this guy from the early 80’s when I was still a (very young) trad Catholic. His name was a pejorative. He was solid on abortion but in every other respect he was a moonbat hippie Vatican II says we can do whatever we want guy, right down to the tie dye vestments and Mass for bongo drums in G minor. In politics, foreign policy and economics he was only slightly to the left of Gus Hall. His favorite color was definitely red and this predates our modern, very weird, inversion of the normal political color associations. Any hint of conservative (forget Traditionalist) Catholicism was ruthlessly suppressed.
I am surprised that John Paul II and Benedict XVI did not send him to an early grave. But he hung on, long enough to see his ideological soul mate sitting on the throne of Peter.
UN Sounds Alarm Over Global Debt
The third leg of the world's
intractable depression is yet to come. If trade economists at the United
Nations are right, the next traumatic episode may entail the greatest
debt jubilee in history.
It may also prove to be the definitive crisis of globalized capitalism, the demise of the liberal free-market orthodoxies promoted for almost forty years by the Bretton Woods institutions, the OECD, and the Davos fraternity.
"Alarm bells have been ringing over the explosion of corporate debt levels in emerging economies, which now exceed $25 trillion. Damaging deflationary spirals cannot be ruled out," said the annual report of the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD).
Read the rest here.
It may also prove to be the definitive crisis of globalized capitalism, the demise of the liberal free-market orthodoxies promoted for almost forty years by the Bretton Woods institutions, the OECD, and the Davos fraternity.
"Alarm bells have been ringing over the explosion of corporate debt levels in emerging economies, which now exceed $25 trillion. Damaging deflationary spirals cannot be ruled out," said the annual report of the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD).
Read the rest here.
Why the U.S. Can’t and Shouldn’t Try to ‘Police’ the World
Anders Fogh Rasmussen essentially wants the U.S. to govern the planet:
The costs of such a role are not only exorbitant, but there is an inherent danger in justifying U.S. actions in these terms. Setting the U.S. up as the enforcer of order around the world effectively puts the U.S. above the rules that all states are supposed to follow, and it gives it an excuse to trample on the sovereignty of other states when the enforcer deems it appropriate. Even if our leaders had consistently good judgment, that would create many opportunities for abuse. Since we know our leaders often make poor choices about how and where to intervene, it opens the door to one disaster after another. We also know our government’s “enforcement” is arbitrary and selective, and when its allies and clients break the rules the U.S. is usually helping them or covering for them. Most of the world doesn’t need and presumably doesn’t want a “policeman” that can do what it likes, shield its clients from punishment, and never has to answer to them, and most Americans don’t want their government to act as one.
Read the rest here.
In this world of interconnections, it has become a cliché to talk about the “global village.“ But right now, the village is burning, and the neighbors are fighting in the light of the flames. Just as we need a policeman to restore order; we need a firefighter to put out the flames of conflict, and a kind of mayor, smart and sensible, to lead the rebuilding.Rasmussen’s op-ed makes many familiar mistakes here. For one thing, the entire “village” isn’t burning, and the vast majority of the world is at peace. The need for both “policeman” and “firefighter” is exaggerated to make it seem as if the world will fall into chaos unless the U.S. acts as the author wants, but that isn’t the case. For another, it can’t possibly be the responsibility of any one government to do all of the things mentioned here. No government has the right or authority to do these things, and there is no single government with either the resources or the competence to police the world. Besides, there simply isn’t enough political support for such a role here in the U.S. Even if the U.S. could competently fill the role Rasmussen describes, it would be a mistake to do it.
Only America can play all these roles, because of all world powers, America alone has the credibility to shape sustainable solutions to these challenges.
The costs of such a role are not only exorbitant, but there is an inherent danger in justifying U.S. actions in these terms. Setting the U.S. up as the enforcer of order around the world effectively puts the U.S. above the rules that all states are supposed to follow, and it gives it an excuse to trample on the sovereignty of other states when the enforcer deems it appropriate. Even if our leaders had consistently good judgment, that would create many opportunities for abuse. Since we know our leaders often make poor choices about how and where to intervene, it opens the door to one disaster after another. We also know our government’s “enforcement” is arbitrary and selective, and when its allies and clients break the rules the U.S. is usually helping them or covering for them. Most of the world doesn’t need and presumably doesn’t want a “policeman” that can do what it likes, shield its clients from punishment, and never has to answer to them, and most Americans don’t want their government to act as one.
Read the rest here.
Saturday, September 17, 2016
Swedish church leaders oppose support for persecuted Christians
Liberal Church leaders in Sweden have opposed an initiative aimed at showing support for persecuted Christians. After the murder of French priest Father Jacques Hamel by jihadists in July three Swedish priests started an initiative called Mitt kors (“My cross”) in which Swedish Christians took “selfies” with a cross to show solidarity with persecuted Christians. However, the initiative has been attacked by liberal church leaders apparently concerned that it might offend Muslims! The head of communications for the Church of Sweden even called it “seditious and un-Christian”. The Church of Sweden's attacks on the "My cross" initiative continued until one of the priests who had started it publicly left the Church of Sweden. In a newspaper article, Johanna Andersson, the priest who has resigned wrote:
"Church leadership has for several weeks been running a campaign against us who started the group 'My cross.' In this campaign, I have been discredited, called 'questionable', 'unclean', 'agitator', 'un-Christian' and attributed xenophobic hidden agendas."
Read the rest here.
HT: Dr. Tighe
You just can't make this up.
"Church leadership has for several weeks been running a campaign against us who started the group 'My cross.' In this campaign, I have been discredited, called 'questionable', 'unclean', 'agitator', 'un-Christian' and attributed xenophobic hidden agendas."
Read the rest here.
HT: Dr. Tighe
You just can't make this up.
Nigel Farage: Going out with a bang
He got loaded and went for a midnight dip, au naturale according to at least one source, off the Bournemouth pier.
Anyways, best wishes wherever life takes you Nigel. And if by some fluke we should ever meet, the first round is on me.
UK armed forces 'could not withstand attack by major power like Russia'
The UK’s armed forces would not be able to protect the country from a full-scale attack by Russia or another major military power, the recently retired commander of joint forces command has said.
Gen Sir Richard Barrons, who stepped down in April, delivered a scathing assessment of the UK military in a 10-page private memorandum to the defence secretary, Sir Michael Fallon.
It comes despite the government’s decision to increase defence spending by nearly £5bn by 2020/21 and to meet Nato’s target of 2% of GDP for the rest of the decade.
In his memo, Barrons said: “Capability that is foundational to all major armed forces has been withered by design.
“There is a sense that modern conflict is ordained to be only as small and as short term as we want to afford, and that is absurd.
“The failure to come to terms with this will not matter at all if we are lucky in the way the world happens to turn out, but it could matter a very great deal if even a few of the risks now at large conspire against the UK.”
Read the rest here.
I have posted on this before, but it's worth repeating. Britain has effectively joined most of the rest of Western Europe in becoming a military protectorate of the United States.
Gen Sir Richard Barrons, who stepped down in April, delivered a scathing assessment of the UK military in a 10-page private memorandum to the defence secretary, Sir Michael Fallon.
It comes despite the government’s decision to increase defence spending by nearly £5bn by 2020/21 and to meet Nato’s target of 2% of GDP for the rest of the decade.
In his memo, Barrons said: “Capability that is foundational to all major armed forces has been withered by design.
“There is a sense that modern conflict is ordained to be only as small and as short term as we want to afford, and that is absurd.
“The failure to come to terms with this will not matter at all if we are lucky in the way the world happens to turn out, but it could matter a very great deal if even a few of the risks now at large conspire against the UK.”
Read the rest here.
I have posted on this before, but it's worth repeating. Britain has effectively joined most of the rest of Western Europe in becoming a military protectorate of the United States.
Thursday, September 15, 2016
Pandas aren't cute, they're death-loving oxygen-thieves. Let's just eat the idiot-bears
Let me get straight to the point. Pandas are pointless, wasteful and silly. They should die.
Let’s look at the facts here. A lot of conservationists argue that pandas are the victims of man’s actions, that urbanisation and industrialisation is killing the precious bamboo they need to live.
Eh? Bamboo? They are bears, but they eat leaves. Hello, excuse me? Panda bear. Bear. You know, large, aggressive carnivore. Big teeth, claws. Grrrr. You’re supposed to eat meat.
What on earth is with the bamboo thing? A panda’s digestive system is still set up to digest meat. The reason they can only eat only one of the hundreds of different types of bamboo the world has to offer is that their guts aren’t supposed to break down bamboo. It’s elevating fussiness to the level of suicide. It’s like me eating only car tyres and gravel and then asking for sympathy when I starve to death. Idiots.
Read the rest here.
Let’s look at the facts here. A lot of conservationists argue that pandas are the victims of man’s actions, that urbanisation and industrialisation is killing the precious bamboo they need to live.
Eh? Bamboo? They are bears, but they eat leaves. Hello, excuse me? Panda bear. Bear. You know, large, aggressive carnivore. Big teeth, claws. Grrrr. You’re supposed to eat meat.
What on earth is with the bamboo thing? A panda’s digestive system is still set up to digest meat. The reason they can only eat only one of the hundreds of different types of bamboo the world has to offer is that their guts aren’t supposed to break down bamboo. It’s elevating fussiness to the level of suicide. It’s like me eating only car tyres and gravel and then asking for sympathy when I starve to death. Idiots.
Read the rest here.
Wednesday, September 14, 2016
Happy New Year!
For those who hew to really really traditional church calendars, today is the first day of the year 7525 since the creation of the world.
NY Times Posts anti-Russian Orthodox Hit Piece
There really is no other way to describe it. The lack of balance and naked journalistic bias is breathtaking, even for the Times. How dare a church that doesn't support the pan-sexual dogma of the enlightened West build churches and preach conservative values in... FRANCE! Reading the article one can almost feel the editorial board on the verge of a collective stroke.
Monday, September 12, 2016
Anti-Semitism and the British Left
LONDON — Opponents of Jeremy Corbyn, the left-wing leader of Britain’s Labour Party, usually claim one of two things about him: that his politics are extreme and will lead the party to electoral oblivion, or that his values are admirable but he is too incompetent to put them into effect.
These two arguments seem contradictory, but in Mr. Corbyn’s handling of an anti-Semitism scandal that has hung over the Labour Party, they have converged. In April, after months of accusations of anti-Semitism among party members, particularly on social media, Mr. Corbyn ordered an inquiry and asked Shami Chakrabarti, who had just stepped down as the director of Britain’s leading civil liberties organization, Liberty, to head it. So far, so good.
The aftermath of her report, however, has aggravated the very wounds it was supposed to heal. It was inauspicious that, at the news conference in June for its publication, Mr. Corbyn looked on in silence as one of his supporters accused Ruth Smeeth, a Jewish member of Parliament, of conspiring against the party leader. Ms. Smeeth left the room in tears.
Worse followed when, a few weeks later, Mr. Corbyn broke his vow not to create any new members of the House of Lords by nominating Ms. Chakrabarti for a peerage. Whatever justification there might be for this award, it gave the impression of a quid pro quo: that Mr. Corbyn was willing to compromise his lifelong hostility to Britain’s system of unelected privilege in return for an inquiry that pulled its punches.
Read the rest here.
The problem is not confined to the left in Britain. It is widespread in Europe and among progressives here. Indeed it is rampant in the lefty circles that dominate our college campuses.
These two arguments seem contradictory, but in Mr. Corbyn’s handling of an anti-Semitism scandal that has hung over the Labour Party, they have converged. In April, after months of accusations of anti-Semitism among party members, particularly on social media, Mr. Corbyn ordered an inquiry and asked Shami Chakrabarti, who had just stepped down as the director of Britain’s leading civil liberties organization, Liberty, to head it. So far, so good.
The aftermath of her report, however, has aggravated the very wounds it was supposed to heal. It was inauspicious that, at the news conference in June for its publication, Mr. Corbyn looked on in silence as one of his supporters accused Ruth Smeeth, a Jewish member of Parliament, of conspiring against the party leader. Ms. Smeeth left the room in tears.
Worse followed when, a few weeks later, Mr. Corbyn broke his vow not to create any new members of the House of Lords by nominating Ms. Chakrabarti for a peerage. Whatever justification there might be for this award, it gave the impression of a quid pro quo: that Mr. Corbyn was willing to compromise his lifelong hostility to Britain’s system of unelected privilege in return for an inquiry that pulled its punches.
Read the rest here.
The problem is not confined to the left in Britain. It is widespread in Europe and among progressives here. Indeed it is rampant in the lefty circles that dominate our college campuses.
Sunday, September 11, 2016
Woman Sexually Assaulted by Sailor in 1945 Dies
Her son, Joshua Friedman, said she died on Thursday in Virginia after suffering a series of ailments, including pneumonia, NBC News reported.
CBS News said she would be laid to rest with her late husband, Mischa Elliot Friedman, at Arlington national cemetery in Virginia.
Read the rest here.
Memory eternal.
Saturday, September 10, 2016
Kaine Predicts Catholic Church Will Change its Teaching on Gay Marriage
Democratic vice-presidential nominee Tim Kaine, a practicing Catholic, on Saturday described his evolution on same-sex marriage and predicted that his church would change its views as well.
“My full, complete, unconditional support for marriage equality is at odds with the current doctrine of the church that I still attend,” Kaine said at a dinner celebrating gay rights. “But I think that’s going to change, too.”
Kaine, a senator from Virginia, spoke to a crowd of about 3,700 attending the 20th Annual Human Rights Campaign National Dinner in Washington, at which he also touted reasons why his running mate, presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, was far better on equality issues than Republican Donald Trump.
“Donald Trump is no friend to this community, and he’s no friend to the value of equality.”
Kaine said he wanted to be honest about his own struggles with reconciling his advocacy of equal rights with the teachings of a church that restricts marriage to a man and woman.
Read the rest here.
This man is a heretic.
“My full, complete, unconditional support for marriage equality is at odds with the current doctrine of the church that I still attend,” Kaine said at a dinner celebrating gay rights. “But I think that’s going to change, too.”
Kaine, a senator from Virginia, spoke to a crowd of about 3,700 attending the 20th Annual Human Rights Campaign National Dinner in Washington, at which he also touted reasons why his running mate, presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, was far better on equality issues than Republican Donald Trump.
“Donald Trump is no friend to this community, and he’s no friend to the value of equality.”
Kaine said he wanted to be honest about his own struggles with reconciling his advocacy of equal rights with the teachings of a church that restricts marriage to a man and woman.
Read the rest here.
This man is a heretic.
Friday, September 09, 2016
Civil Rights Commission: ‘Religious Liberty,’ ‘Religious Freedom’ Code Words for Bigotry
A new report by the United States Commission on Civil Rights supports
the majority on the federal commission, who say that efforts to protect
religious liberty and freedom are really a way for individuals and
entities to discriminate against people who don’t share their beliefs.
“The phrases ‘religious liberty’ and ‘religious freedom’ will stand for nothing except hypocrisy so long as they remain code words for discrimination, intolerance, racism, sexism, homophobia, Islamophobia, Christian supremacy or any form of intolerance,” Martin Castro, chairman of the commission, said in a statement included in the 296-page report.
“Religious liberty was never intended to give one religion dominion over other religions, or a veto power over the civil rights and civil liberties of others,” Castro said. “However, today, as in the past, religion is being used as both a weapon and a shield by those seeking to deny others equality.
“In our nation’s past religion has been used to justify slavery and later, Jim Crow laws,” Castro said. “We now see ‘religious liberty’ arguments sneaking their way back into our political and constitutional discourse (just like the concept of ‘state rights’) in an effort to undermine the rights of some Americans.
“This generation of Americans must stand up and speak out to ensure that religion never again be twisted to deny others the full promise of America,” Castro said.
Read the rest here.
“The phrases ‘religious liberty’ and ‘religious freedom’ will stand for nothing except hypocrisy so long as they remain code words for discrimination, intolerance, racism, sexism, homophobia, Islamophobia, Christian supremacy or any form of intolerance,” Martin Castro, chairman of the commission, said in a statement included in the 296-page report.
“Religious liberty was never intended to give one religion dominion over other religions, or a veto power over the civil rights and civil liberties of others,” Castro said. “However, today, as in the past, religion is being used as both a weapon and a shield by those seeking to deny others equality.
“In our nation’s past religion has been used to justify slavery and later, Jim Crow laws,” Castro said. “We now see ‘religious liberty’ arguments sneaking their way back into our political and constitutional discourse (just like the concept of ‘state rights’) in an effort to undermine the rights of some Americans.
“This generation of Americans must stand up and speak out to ensure that religion never again be twisted to deny others the full promise of America,” Castro said.
Read the rest here.
The Kremlin Really Believes That Hillary Wants to Start a War With Russia
If Hillary Clinton is elected president, the world will remember Aug. 25 as the day she began the Second Cold War.
In a speech last month nominally about Donald Trump, Clinton called Russian President Vladimir Putin the godfather of right-wing, extreme nationalism. To Kremlin-watchers, those were not random epithets. Two years earlier, in the most famous address of his career, Putin accused the West of backing an armed seizure of power in Ukraine by “extremists, nationalists, and right-wingers.” Clinton had not merely insulted Russia’s president: She had done so in his own words. Worse, they were words originally directed at neo-Nazis. In Moscow, this was seen as a reprise of Clinton’s comments comparing Putin to Hitler. It injected an element of personal animus into an already strained relationship — but, more importantly, it set up Putin as the representative of an ideology that is fundamentally opposed to the United States.
Even as relations between Russia and the West have sunk to new lows in the wake of 2014’s revolution in Ukraine, the Kremlin has long contended that a Cold War II is impossible. That’s because, while there may be differences over, say, the fate of Donetsk, there is no longer a fundamental ideological struggle dividing East and West. To Russian ears, Clinton seemed determined in her speech to provide this missing ingredient for bipolar enmity, painting Moscow as the vanguard for racism, intolerance, and misogyny around the globe.
The nation Clinton described was unrecognizable to its citizens. Anti-woman? Putin’s government provides working mothers with three years of subsidized family leave. Intolerant? The president personally attended the opening of Moscow’s great mosque. Racist? Putin often touts Russia’s ethnic diversity. To Russians, it appeared that Clinton was straining to fabricate a rationale for hostilities.
Read the rest here.
In a speech last month nominally about Donald Trump, Clinton called Russian President Vladimir Putin the godfather of right-wing, extreme nationalism. To Kremlin-watchers, those were not random epithets. Two years earlier, in the most famous address of his career, Putin accused the West of backing an armed seizure of power in Ukraine by “extremists, nationalists, and right-wingers.” Clinton had not merely insulted Russia’s president: She had done so in his own words. Worse, they were words originally directed at neo-Nazis. In Moscow, this was seen as a reprise of Clinton’s comments comparing Putin to Hitler. It injected an element of personal animus into an already strained relationship — but, more importantly, it set up Putin as the representative of an ideology that is fundamentally opposed to the United States.
Even as relations between Russia and the West have sunk to new lows in the wake of 2014’s revolution in Ukraine, the Kremlin has long contended that a Cold War II is impossible. That’s because, while there may be differences over, say, the fate of Donetsk, there is no longer a fundamental ideological struggle dividing East and West. To Russian ears, Clinton seemed determined in her speech to provide this missing ingredient for bipolar enmity, painting Moscow as the vanguard for racism, intolerance, and misogyny around the globe.
The nation Clinton described was unrecognizable to its citizens. Anti-woman? Putin’s government provides working mothers with three years of subsidized family leave. Intolerant? The president personally attended the opening of Moscow’s great mosque. Racist? Putin often touts Russia’s ethnic diversity. To Russians, it appeared that Clinton was straining to fabricate a rationale for hostilities.
Read the rest here.
Wednesday, September 07, 2016
70 Year Old Man Robs Bank- Preferring Jail to His Wife
A 70-year-old man charged with robbing a Kansas City, Kan., bank said he did it because he preferred a jail cell over living with his wife.
Lawrence John Ripple is charged in federal court with the Friday afternoon robbery of the Bank of Labor at 756 Minnesota Ave.
According to court documents, Ripple handed a teller a note that read, “I have a gun, give me money.”
The teller complied.
But instead of fleeing, Ripple took the money and then took a seat in the bank lobby, according to the documents.
When a bank security guard approached him, Ripple told the guard, “I’m the guy you’re looking for.”
The guard took the money from Ripple and held him until police arrived, which wasn’t long, because Kansas City, Kan., police headquarters is on the same block.
When he was questioned later by investigators, Ripple told him that he and his wife had argued and he “no longer wanted to be in that situation,” according to the documents.
“Ripple wrote out his demand note in front of his wife … and told her he’d rather be in jail than at home,” an FBI agent wrote in the affidavit filed in support of the robbery charge.
Read the rest here.
The judge should sentence him to house arrest.
Lawrence John Ripple is charged in federal court with the Friday afternoon robbery of the Bank of Labor at 756 Minnesota Ave.
According to court documents, Ripple handed a teller a note that read, “I have a gun, give me money.”
The teller complied.
But instead of fleeing, Ripple took the money and then took a seat in the bank lobby, according to the documents.
When a bank security guard approached him, Ripple told the guard, “I’m the guy you’re looking for.”
The guard took the money from Ripple and held him until police arrived, which wasn’t long, because Kansas City, Kan., police headquarters is on the same block.
When he was questioned later by investigators, Ripple told him that he and his wife had argued and he “no longer wanted to be in that situation,” according to the documents.
“Ripple wrote out his demand note in front of his wife … and told her he’d rather be in jail than at home,” an FBI agent wrote in the affidavit filed in support of the robbery charge.
Read the rest here.
The judge should sentence him to house arrest.
Tuesday, September 06, 2016
Monday, September 05, 2016
Sunday, September 04, 2016
350 Years Ago: The Great Fire of London As it Happened
It is now 350 years since the Great Fire of London razed the city's medieval heart to the ground. But at such a distance it is easy to forget the human drama which played out as thousands of people lost their homes, their livelihoods, and in some cases their lives.
This is the story of a city on knife's edge, riven by religious and political tensions, made vulnerable to disaster by its own neglect and avarice. It is a story of official blunders which turned a minor, commonplace accident into an all-consuming conflagration. It's a story of chaos, mass hysteria, profiteering and racist violence – but it is also a story of some heroism and charity, from royal and commoner alike. It unfolds over 72 hours, beginning at midnight on September 2, 1666, and ending at the climax of the fire's worse day. Of course, in an era without reliable watches, all timings are approximate.
For this account I am indebted to the Museum of London, as well as the following sources:
- The Diaries of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn
- Thomas Vincent – God's Terrible Voice In The City
- Walter George Bell – The Great Fire of London In 1666
- Adrian Tinniswood – The Great Fire of London: The Essential Guide.
Read the rest here.
Saturday, September 03, 2016
Catholic priest suspended for homosexual advocacy
A New Jersey priest has been suspended from public ministry because of his persistent homosexual advocacy.
Father Warren Hall revealed on Twitter that he had been suspended by Archbishop John Myers of Newark, because his public statements and actions are “confusing the faithful.” Last year Father Hall had been removed from his post as chaplain at Seton Hall University because of his outspoken support for homosexual causes.
Father Hall indicated that he thought his suspension showed that Archbishop Myers was out of step with Catholic thinking. He wrote on Twitter that “@Pontifex’s Reform are taking too long.”
From here.
Father Warren Hall revealed on Twitter that he had been suspended by Archbishop John Myers of Newark, because his public statements and actions are “confusing the faithful.” Last year Father Hall had been removed from his post as chaplain at Seton Hall University because of his outspoken support for homosexual causes.
Father Hall indicated that he thought his suspension showed that Archbishop Myers was out of step with Catholic thinking. He wrote on Twitter that “@Pontifex’s Reform are taking too long.”
From here.
Rod Dreher: Would you encourage faithful orthodox Christians to serve in the US military?
Dreher's post on the military and the mess it has become.
My answer...
No. There is a difference between tolerance and compulsion. It is one thing to say we might tolerate homosexuals in the ranks provided they keep their personal affairs to themselves. Some might well argue against even that. (And for the record I never cared for the barracks room talk/boasting by my heterosexual shipmates either.) But it is altogether another thing to demand not just tolerance of someone's private life, but actual affirmation of it. The last straw for me was the decision to permit, and demand affirmation of transgenderism in the military. The armed forces are not the place for people with personality disorders to sort out their issues. And the demand that people affirm lifestyle choices that are flatly incompatible with Christian morality and faith is unacceptable. If I were still in and only one more hitch from retirement I'm not sure what I'd do. But I can't in good conscience encourage anyone to enlist under the current conditions.
I suggest that they do their recruiting in the Castro district of San Francisco.
My answer...
No. There is a difference between tolerance and compulsion. It is one thing to say we might tolerate homosexuals in the ranks provided they keep their personal affairs to themselves. Some might well argue against even that. (And for the record I never cared for the barracks room talk/boasting by my heterosexual shipmates either.) But it is altogether another thing to demand not just tolerance of someone's private life, but actual affirmation of it. The last straw for me was the decision to permit, and demand affirmation of transgenderism in the military. The armed forces are not the place for people with personality disorders to sort out their issues. And the demand that people affirm lifestyle choices that are flatly incompatible with Christian morality and faith is unacceptable. If I were still in and only one more hitch from retirement I'm not sure what I'd do. But I can't in good conscience encourage anyone to enlist under the current conditions.
I suggest that they do their recruiting in the Castro district of San Francisco.
Thursday, September 01, 2016
Deaconesses: This is Not That
...Orthodox feminists often collapse the office of deacon and deaconess
into a single office, referring sometimes to “male and female deacons”,
as if the office were identical for both. It is true that Chrysostom
referred to “woman deacons”, but he also knew that the two offices were
utterly different in kind and function. The feminists pushing hard for
the creation of an order of female deacons often emphasize that the rite
wherein the candidate was made a deaconess was a true ordination (as
opposed to a simple blessing), a true cheirotonia, not a mere cheirothesia,
and that it took place at the altar. That is true, but the
anachronistic distinction between ordination and blessing hides the
profound distinction between the two ordinations, and therefore the
office to which the candidate was ordained. That is, both male deacons
and female deaconesses were given the ceremonial orar (which was rapidly becoming customary among subdeacons also, indicating that the bestowal of the orar
did not indicate sacramental parity between deacon and deaconess), but
the deaconess wore it differently than did the deacon. The deacon was
given the chalice during his ordination, so that he could help
administer it during the Eucharist that followed, while the deaconess
immediately returned the chalice, expressing her exclusion from
Eucharistic administration. Also, the deacon was ordained while kneeling
on his knee, resting his head on the altar, while the deaconess stood
and merely inclined her head. Most significantly of all, the prayers of
ordination for the two orders were entirely different. These liturgical
differences were not merely stylistic; they reveal that the two orders
are different in kind.
Read the rest here.
Read the rest here.
Spain Threatens Four Catholic Bishops With Criminal Prosecution
MADRID, Spain August 31, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) – Only weeks after a failed attempt to secure the prosecution of the Archbishop of Valencia for denouncing the gay political agenda, homosexual groups are calling for the prosecution of four other Spanish bishops for criticizing a new homosexual “protection” law recently passed by the Province of Madrid.
Three of the bishops are being threatened with a criminal complaint for having written and published a condemnation of Madrid’s new “Law of Integral Protection against LGTBIphobia and Discrimination for Reasons of Orientation and Sexual Identity,” which prohibits all “degrading” and “discriminatory” statements regarding homosexuals and transsexuals. The fourth bishop is being criminally investigated for expressing support for the statement of the first three.
The Madrid LGBTI “protection” law “seeks to prohibit the public teaching of the Bible” and to “prohibit, even, public prayer for those people who ask for prayer for a change of orientation in their lives,” according to the bishops of the dioceses of Alcalá de Henares and Getafe, Juan Antonio Reig Pla and Joaquín María López, as well as an auxiliary bishop of Getafe, José Rico Pavés.
The law constitutes “an attack against religious liberty and liberty of conscience,” an “attack and censure against the right of parents to educate their children in accordance with their own beliefs and convictions,” and “an attack against freedom of expression, freedom of teaching, the freedom of scientists and professionals in search of the truth, and the freedom of people to orient their lives or to ask for help, including religious help, for that which they need,” the bishops write.
The bishops are referring to provisions in the law prohibiting any speech that constitutes “degrading expressions” regarding homosexuals or transsexuals, and outlaws “acts that imply isolation, rejection, or public and notorious disrespect for people because of their sexual orientation and their gender identity or gender expression.” The law also prohibits any form of therapy, even for religious reasons, for those who suffer from same-sex attraction.
Those who violate the statutes of the law can be fined up to 45,000 Euros ($50,382 USD) and may be deprived of all government benefits for up to three years.
Read the rest here.
I am beginning to think that the Communists won the Civil War.
Three of the bishops are being threatened with a criminal complaint for having written and published a condemnation of Madrid’s new “Law of Integral Protection against LGTBIphobia and Discrimination for Reasons of Orientation and Sexual Identity,” which prohibits all “degrading” and “discriminatory” statements regarding homosexuals and transsexuals. The fourth bishop is being criminally investigated for expressing support for the statement of the first three.
The Madrid LGBTI “protection” law “seeks to prohibit the public teaching of the Bible” and to “prohibit, even, public prayer for those people who ask for prayer for a change of orientation in their lives,” according to the bishops of the dioceses of Alcalá de Henares and Getafe, Juan Antonio Reig Pla and Joaquín María López, as well as an auxiliary bishop of Getafe, José Rico Pavés.
The law constitutes “an attack against religious liberty and liberty of conscience,” an “attack and censure against the right of parents to educate their children in accordance with their own beliefs and convictions,” and “an attack against freedom of expression, freedom of teaching, the freedom of scientists and professionals in search of the truth, and the freedom of people to orient their lives or to ask for help, including religious help, for that which they need,” the bishops write.
The bishops are referring to provisions in the law prohibiting any speech that constitutes “degrading expressions” regarding homosexuals or transsexuals, and outlaws “acts that imply isolation, rejection, or public and notorious disrespect for people because of their sexual orientation and their gender identity or gender expression.” The law also prohibits any form of therapy, even for religious reasons, for those who suffer from same-sex attraction.
Those who violate the statutes of the law can be fined up to 45,000 Euros ($50,382 USD) and may be deprived of all government benefits for up to three years.
Read the rest here.
I am beginning to think that the Communists won the Civil War.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
