Tuesday, April 30, 2019
Monday, April 29, 2019
The State Accepts No Competitors
The Vatican body, in a message approved by Pope Francis, said that religious freedom is compromised by an “ideology of neutrality which, in fact, imposes the exclusion of religious expression from the public sphere.” 🎯🎯🎯
— Adrian Vermeule (@Vermeullarmine) April 29, 2019
https://t.co/nQY9vZPRTS
Rather Moronic
Baby shark doo doo doo doo doo doo!
— x - San Jose Sharks (@SanJoseSharks) December 5, 2018
Congrats to @Burnzie88 and Susan on their newest (and totally adorable) addition, Olivia Grace! Mom and family are doing well. pic.twitter.com/vTBb3aNDaG
The local hockey team refers to it in its advertising and social media; but I think the song represents the dumbing down of American mass culture, even if it was originally aimed at children. Who passes on traditional nursery rhymes and children's songs?
Prayer is Important
Taking on the Toxic Feminist Revolution by John Horvat II
His review of The Anti-Mary Exposed: Rescuing the Culture from Toxic Femininity by Carrie Gress
Good liturgy is not enough.
A lesson I’ve learned from writing my 4th Book on the Red Pill & Religion (thread): Feminism has or is in the process of assimilating every mainstream faith and their subcultures. Yes, even the faiths that are founded on Patriarchy are subject too.
— Rollo Tomassi (@RationalMale) April 29, 2019
Sunday, April 28, 2019
Two Threads from Yoram Hazony
.@woodardcolin's map of 11 American "nations" may describe distinct cultures. But it doesn't describe nations, or even tribes. The essential characteristic of a tribe or nation is its internal cohesion: A group that's bound by bonds of mutual loyalty. https://t.co/tH4bji1lEL
— Yoram Hazony (@yhazony) April 23, 2019
A nation is held together by the mutual loyalty of its tribes. Once the leadership of the nation no longer gives a fig about this mutual loyalty, it has only two options left: Dissolution or rule by force.
— Yoram Hazony (@yhazony) April 25, 2019
The American Scholar Advances the Narrative
On the Frontlines by Katie Daniels
An excerpt from Women Warriors: An Unexpected History by Pamela D. Toler
An Opportunity
More Academic Nonsense
Reducing Catholic polarization will almost certainly require reducing overall political polarization in the country, a difficult challenge. At the same time, the Church can and should try to convince more American Catholics to embrace Catholic ideals and support the countercultural approach of Catholic Social Teaching.A version of [Roman] Catholic Social Teaching more akin to a SJW version of liberalism/statism? A statist counterfeit of the common good is no replacement for the authentic common good and community, which requires that the right to association be respected.
Step one in confronting Catholic political polarization should be to unite against all forms of bigotry and those seeking to undermine our democratic system. We must not forget the lessons of the 1930’s and allow brutal ideologies to become mainstream among American Catholics. Essentially, this is about preventing a new political pole to emerge—one more toxic and antithetical to Christian values than the existing poles. A failure to arrest rising Alt-Catholicism would make Catholic polarization far worse—creating new obstacles to communion, jeopardizing souls, pulling the American Church away from the global Church, and badly damaging Christian witness. It is perhaps the gravest threat to Catholicism in the United States.
Actually, the gravest threat to Catholicism in the United States are SJW bishops and academics such as the author of this piece, who fail to realize that their advocacy is in opposition to the Natural Law.
One critical way to reduce enmity is for American Catholics who are publicly dissenting from Church teaching to be honest about their dissent. Catholics should not overstate their knowledge of Church teaching or their commitment to it. They should not distort it—intentionally or through neglect. And they should never downplay it or undermine it by making it seem optional by twisting concepts like intrinsic evil or the need for prudential reasoning. They should describe Church teaching in a way that is clear and fair, having examined it with the desire to fully understand and accept it. If ultimately, having looked at Church teaching in its best light, they feel that core Catholic principles and factual reality point to a different conclusion than what the Church teaches and they wish to discuss this publicly, they should be honest and clear about it and explain precisely why.
While the author postures as being fair in asking "dissenters" to explain their reasons, he is actually indulging in the worst of Latin positivism in assuming that the teaching of the Patriarchate of Rome is identical to Tradition. The burden of proof is on those who have "developed" Church teaching so that it sounds like liberalism to show that their teaching is grounded within Tradition or the Natural Law.