Featured Post

Catholics Failed in America Part 1: Maryland

There are many reasons that Catholicism has remained mostly politically insignificant in the United States.  If I could boil it down to thre...

Saturday, April 22, 2017

News From the Crossroads

I'm not a guy who's "in" on any circles.  I make the friends that I make before the ringleader feels threatened and gives me the boot.  I don't have any super rich backers.  Nor do I get support or recommendation too often.  This blog, I suppose, is a form of guerrilla cultural warfare from one guy chained up at a crossroads.

Being the exiled outlier, as sometimes happens, people pass by me, and yours truly gets mentioned somewhere.  A lot of different people end up coming across this blog for different reasons.  This week, it was over at the website of Randy Engel.  She wrote a piece titled All the Men Behind the Opus Dei Curtain.  It's a very long article that is the result of an investigation into the associations of Michael Voris and E. Michael Jones.

She cites a moment from last October when I asked E. Michael Jones why he wrote a book about Michael Voris' past.  Jones told me he wrote his attack on Voris because he wanted to explain what really happened, and he wanted to show the dominant culture's downplaying of such sins and the Protestant notion of cheap grace.

What was Engel's aim with her article?  Basically to show different associations between Voris, Jones, and Opus Dei:
I'd like to propose two other reasons why Jones decided to write the book and use Fidelity Press as the publishing vehicle.
First, because his friend and benefactor of more than thirty years, Opus Dei supernumerary Marc Brammer, asked him to and secondly, because E. Michael Jones's publishing enterprise is an Opus Dei apostolate/auxiliary society.
I may disagree with Jones' attacks against Traditionalist Catholics, and I may not be comfortable with his book about Voris.  However, I do admire much of Jones' writing, and I have already stated that I will be glad when Jones takes on other projects beyond Voris and Traditionalists.

Just today, I listened to a discussion about how there is hardly any Catholic evangelization in the United States.  I am frequently reading about the spread of Satanism and atheism in this country.  These circular firing squad scenarios frustrate me to no end.  Why do we continue to shoot each other in the back?

To make matters worse, as of this moment, E. Michael Jones' Culture Wars website has been hacked.  Type in the web address, and it directs you straight to the Google home page.  You cannot get access to it.  The timing of this hack coincides with the release of Engel's article.  Are there really people out there who hate Opus Dei that much?  I don't know.

I do not know much about Opus Dei.  From what I read of Engel's article, it sounds like a Catholic version of the Freemasons in terms of its secrecy.  If that's the case, then so what?  Why be up in arms about a battle tactic or strategy?  Perhaps someone will correct me, but if anything, we need as many Catholics in positions of power as possible.  I could be wrong.

I mean, if any kind of real Catholic political power is to be achieved in the United States (remember, I'm the guy pushing for a Catholic Monarchy in this country), then some kind of concrete strategy with real money and power will need to be enacted.  But again, I could be wrong.  My opinions are subject to change.

Jones Responds to Engle

In any event, Jones has prepared a response to Engle in the hopes that she might post it on her site:
Dear Randy,
I am not a member of Opus Dei, nor do I have any ties “concrete” or otherwise to that organization. Once upon a time I attended evenings of reflection at the local center, but more recently I was banned from speaking at Opus Dei’s Catholic Information Center in Washington. I have friends in Opus Dei. Marc Brammer is one of them. Another Opus Dei friend was warned by the American prelate not to have anything to do with me. Fortunately, he didn’t follow that advice. I have no intention of distancing myself from my friends even if their organization has distanced itself from me. 
At this point, I have a question. Why would an organization like Opus Dei want to be associated with someone with my views? Opus Dei is probably the world’s most prominent purveyor of neoconservative Catholicism, not just here but throughout the world. Why would a group like that want me as a member? Do you think that hobnobbing with the author of The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit is going to enhance Opus Dei’s image in the halls of power in Washington or New York? I don’t think so. Nor do they, which is why they do whatever they deem necessary to avoid any contact with me. Opus Dei is happy to invite George Weigel, but Father Stetson showed what he thought of me when he unilaterally canceled the book signing I had at the Catholic Information Center.
This brings me to the really pernicious aspect of your expose. It’s not simply that it’s full of factual errors, like the alleged location of a nonexistent Opus Dei center in Ferndale, Michigan. Your article is suffused with the sense that personal friendship, far from transcending political differences, is reason to denounce someone for what someone else does or believes. Since you could not make a connection between me and Opus Dei and the sordid story of Church Militant on factual or principled grounds, you had to stoop to guilt by association. Are we now supposed to be judged by our associations instead of what we believe and say and do? As someone I admire once said, “If what I said is false, point out the error. If what I said is true, why do you strike me?”
Why am I responsible for someone else’s activities? Who made you the judge of my friendships? This is the way the Pharisees treated Jesus when he ate with tax collectors and prostitutes. Was Jesus contaminated by his association with them? Am I somehow contaminated by my friendship with Marc Brammer? Or, more importantly, is he somehow contaminated by his association with me? I’m sure there are people in Opus Dei who think so, but I don’t and don’t think Jesus would either.
If this is not the case, why have I been subjected to the same pharisaical strictures which the Jews imposed on Jesus? Who put you in charge of my relationships? The answer to all of these questions is the schismatic lack of charity that pervades traditionalist circles. In his treatises on Donatism and Baptism, St. Augustine defined schism as refusal to associate with the body of Christ out of lack of charity and fear of contamination. Bishop Fellay expressed this fear when he said, “the church has cancer. We can’t associate with the church because then we would get cancer.” 
Now I am subjected to the same intolerable lack of charity by you. This is not the way I run my life. To the point, Bishop Williamson stayed at my house twice. Does this establish “concrete ties” with the Society of St. Pius X? Does it make me a closet Lefebvrite? Or is it an indication that personal friendship can sometimes transcend ideological difference? Is that what you’re trying to preclude? If so, I reject your attempt to do so and the stunning lack of charity and narrow-mindedness that prompted you to make the attempt. 
Please post this response on your website.
As of the writing of this article, Jones' response has not yet been posted.  The events surrounding Jones' The Man Behind the Curtain are beginning to resemble a multi-stage timebomb.

As I've said before, I look forward to seeing all parties involved taking on other projects.

Moving On

Finally, I'm not completely ostracized.

Special thanks to Okie Trad for keeping me in mind.  Your coverage of Tulsa's recent issues has been heartening to a lot of people who feel like they're adrift on a raft at sea.  It was, in fact, just today that someone told me over on DISQUS that there is "a charismatic history of the [Tulsa] area which in recent times has run amok with very strange spiritual activities."

And thank you to all of my readers.  This blog has grown quite a bit since its beginning.  I enjoy everyone's comments, and I hope to see more in the future.  This internet phenomenon is a rare treasure that we have for the moment, so let's make the best of it while it lasts.

Thursday, April 20, 2017

Catholic Culture vs Pan-Judaism

In the comment box last week, a commenter named TuCasaEsMiCasa asked the following question:

The culture should be Catholic? What's Catholic culture? Can you describe it and how it differs from pan-Judaism?

What Is Catholic Culture?

The political foundation for a Catholic culture is laid out in many places, though I recommend Star Spangled Crown.

Generally speaking, however, what would a Catholic culture resemble? Off hand? No usury. No infanticide. No sodomy. No corruption from Hollywood. Less unjust wars. Community, a mutual culture and language, all the while respecting the various sub-cultures (blacks, Hispanics, etc.) without forcing different groups to integrate. Also, fathers would be encouraged. Basically subtract today's Leftism, and you've got Catholic culture.

Geremia, over at Cathinfo, reminded me of some Catholic amendments that would ideally be attached to the U.S. Constitution. These are called the Blanshard Amendments, and you can read about them in the Afterword of Charles Coulombe's Puritan's Empire:
Blanshard declared that American Catholics had a hidden agenda to "subject" this nation to the Church's social teachings. We have seen the great outrage this brought about in U.S. Catholic circles, and the resulting dispute between Frs. John Courtney Murray [author of Vatican II's Dignitatis Humanæ] and Joseph C. Fenton regarding relations between Church and State. But Blanshard had outlined what he believed would become of the vaunted American Democracy, did the Catholics gain political power. This was a list of three amendments to the Constitution. [source] The first he called the "Christian Commonwealth Amendment:"

1. The United States [are] a Catholic Republic, and the Catholic Apostolic and Roman religion is the sole religion of the nation.
2. The authority of the Roman Catholic Church is the most exalted of all authorities; nor can it be looked upon as inferior to the power of the United States government, or in any manner dependent upon it, since the Catholic Church as such is a sovereign power.
3. Priests and members of religious orders of the Roman Catholic Church who violate the law are to be tried by an ecclesiastical court of the Roman Catholic Church, and may, only with the consent of the competent Catholic authority, be tried by the courts of the United States or the states.
4. Apostate priests or those incurring the censure of the Roman Catholic Church incurring the censure of the Roman Catholic Church cannot be employed in any teaching post or any office or employment in which they have immediate contact with the public.
5. Non-Catholic faiths are tolerated, but public ceremonies and manifestations other than those of the Roman Catholic religion will not be permitted.
6. The First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.

This shocker was to be followed up by the "Christian Education Amendment:"

1. American religious education belongs pre-eminently to the Roman Catholic Church, by means of a double title in the supernatural order, conferred exclusively upon her by God Himself.
2. The Roman Catholic Church has the inalienable right to supervise the entire education of her children in all educational institutions in the United States, public or private, not merely in regard to the religious instruction given in such institutions, but in regard to every other branch of learning and every regulation in so far as religion and morality are concerned.
3. Compulsory education in public schools exclusively shall be unlawful in any state of the union.
4. It shall be unlawful for any neutral or non-Catholic school to enroll any Catholic child without permission of the Church.
5. Since neutral schools are contrary to the fundamental principles of education, public schools in the United States are lawful only when both religious instruction and every other subject taught are permeated with Catholic piety.
6. The governments of the United States and of the States are permitted to operate their own schools for military and civic training without supervision by the Roman Catholic Church, provided they do not injure the rights of said Church, and provided that only the Roman Catholic Church shall have the power to impart religious instruction in such schools.
7. With due regard to special circumstances, co-education shall be unlawful in any educational institution in the United States whose students have attained the age of adolescence.
8. The governments of the United States and of the states shall encourage and assist the Roman Catholic Church by appropriate measures in the exercise of the Church's supreme mission as educator.

Then at last came the "Christian Family Amendment:"
1. The government of the United States, desirous of restoring to the institution of matrimony, which is the basis of the family, that dignity conformable to the traditions of its people, assigns as civil effects of the sacrament of matrimony all that is assigned to it by the Canon Law of the Roman Catholic Church.
2. No matrimonial contract in the United States that involves a Catholic can be valid unless it is in accordance with the Canon Law of the Roman Catholic Church.
3. Marriages of non-Catholics are subject to the civil authority of the state, but all civil laws that contradict the Canon Law of the Roman Catholic Church are hereby declared null and void.
4. All marriages are indissoluble, and the divorce of all persons is prohibited throughout the territory of the United States: provided that nothing herein shall affect the right of annulment and remarriage in accordance with the Canon Law of the Roman Catholic Church.
5. Attempted mixed marriages or unions between members of the Roman Catholic Church and non-Catholics are null and void, unless a special dispensation is obtained from the ecclesiastical authority of the Catholic Church.
6. Birth Control, or any act that deliberately frustrates the natural power to generate life, is a crime.
7. Direct abortion is murder of the innocent even when performed through motives of misguided pity when the life of a mother is gravely imperiled.
8. Sterilization of any human being is except as an infliction of grave punishment under the authority of the government for a crime committed.
This supposed "Catholic Master Plan" for America received much criticism from Catholic and non-Catholic critics of Blanshard alike. But Blanshard rightly defended it, declaring (p. 305):
"I remember a verse from Job which is appropriate at this moment: "If I justify myself, mine own mouth shall condemn me." That is meant for Catholic liberals whose temperature has been rising while they have been reading these three amendments. As most of my readers have doubtless guessed, there is not a single original word in my entire three Catholic amendments. They are mosaics of official Catholic doctrine. Every concept, almost every line and phrase, has been plagiarized line by line from Catholic documents. The most important phrases are derived from the highest documents [sic!] of Catholicism, the encyclicals of the Popes. The provisions on education come from Pius XI's Christian Education of Youth [Divini Illius Magistri], and those on family life from his Casti Connubii, both of them accepted universally in the Catholic Church as the Bibles of present-day educational and family policy. A few provisions are taken directly from Canon Law, the recent laws of Catholic countries like Spain, and the 1929 Concordat between Mussolini and the Vatican [Lateran Treaty], all of which have been publicly approved by Catholic authorities. Only place-names and enabling clauses have been added to give the Papal principles local application. The sources are listed in the notes."

Now, What Would Pan-Judaism Look Like?

Pan-Judaism would look like...what we have today. It is the opposite of the Catholic culture that I talked about in the first section of this post. Various hubs of society lie to us, there is no sexual morality, we have a thriving pornography industry in this country that helps the entire American society to masturbate itself blind. Christianity is scoffed at, the family is denigrated, fathers are spurned, feminists are extolled, sodomites are praised, and the Left flirts with pedophilia. America has become hated throughout the world, thanks to our Hebraic-Puritanism and homage to Zionist interests across the globe.

Consider the words of Israel Shamir, a Jew converted to Orthodox Christianity:
"Palestine is not the ultimate goal of the Jews; the world is. Palestine is just the place for world state headquarters…..The Jews intend to turn Jerusalem into the supreme capital of the world, and its rebuilt temple into the focal point of the Spirit on Earth. Christianity will die, the spirit will depart from the nations in our part of the world, and our present dubious democracy will be supplanted by a vast theocratic state. De-spiritualized and uprooted, homeless and lonely, yesterday’s Masters of the World [WASPs] will become slaves in all but name….The Jewish universe is good for Jews. It is a curse for others. In the US, as Jewish influence has grown steadily since 1968, the lives of ordinary people have worsened. A good time for the Jews is not a good time for mankind. The blessing of the Jews is a curse for others. The regimes that are “good for Jews” are rarely good for anybody else."
To bolster this idea, consider the following direct quotations from Zionists who've co-opted the reigns of United States power.

“We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it.”
— Israel Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, October 3, 2001
“Once we squeeze all we can out of the United States, it can dry up and blow away.”
— Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, 2002.
“I don’t care if Americans think we’re running the news media, Hollywood, Wall Street or the government. I just care that we get to keep running them.”
— Joel Stein, Jewish columnist for Los Angeles Times, Dec 2008
We are ruled by a hostile, elitist parasite that despises the very nation that it rules over. This elitist minority that keeps the United States as a Jewish colony has nothing but contempt for the traditional people of the United States.

The foundations for the pan-Judaism that we are already currently enjoying were laid in the beginning of our "republic." E. Michael Jones states the following in The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit:
The standard history of Freemasonry as beginning with the formation of the Grand Lodge in 1717 is Whig history in every sense of the term. For political reasons, Anderson's Constitutions deliberately obscured the real history of the Craft, causing consternation among scholars who could not make sense of historical documents that proved the lodge existed at least a century before. One document showed that the first American lodge was created in Newport, Rhode Island, in 1658, when 15 Jewish families migrated from Holland. That and the colonization of the Massachusetts Bay Colony by English Judaizers would ensure America became the "new Jewish wonder world'' in the 20th Century. Protestant revolution in England would be fulfilled in socialist revolution in Russia four centuries later. That revolution found supporters in America, most of whom were Jews. And the children of disaffected Trotskeyites would forge yet another vehicle for Revolution by appropriating America as the messianic anti-Communist nation. But the trajectory set in motion by Judaizing Protestants would find its fulfillment in Cabalistic Freemasonry before it would find it in Jewish Socialism, described by an American Jew as "the most glorious page in the story of the Jewish people since the destruction of the Second Temple at the hands of Titus.''


What would a Catholic culture resemble in the United States? Something wonderful that no conservative of our generation can imagine, and something no Leftist could fathom.

What would a culture of pan-Judaism resemble? We've already got it. We are the frog that is already boiling in a pan of water.

And what does this Jewish colony have to offer us in the future? Consider the testimony of Eustace Mullins, who tells us about the horrors experienced by Russian Christians at the hands of Jewish/Bolshevik overlords:
There are too many well documented massacres in history in which the Jews tortured and murdered their victims with the greatest glee, gloating in such barbaric practices as tearing out the hearts of women and children and smearing the blood on their faces.
The orgy of murder, torture and pillage which followed the Jewish triumph in Russia [after the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917] has never been equaled in the history of the world. The Jews were free to indulge their most fervent fantasies of mass murder of helpless victims.
Christians were dragged from their beds, tortured and killed. Some were actually sliced to pieces, bit by bit, while others were branded with hot irons, their eyes poked out to induce unbearable pain.
Others were placed in boxes…then hungry rats placed in the boxes to gnaw upon their bodies. Some were nailed to the ceiling by their fingers or by their feet, and left hanging until they died of exhaustion.
Others were chained to the floor and hot lead poured into their mouths. Many were tied to horses and dragged through the streets of the city, while the mob attacked them with rocks and kicked them to death.
Mothers were taken to the public square and their babies snatched from their arms….the baby [was] tossed into the air while another member of the mob rushed to catch it on the tip of his bayonet.
Pregnant Christian women were chained to trees and their babies cut out of their bodies.
American tolerance for non-Zionists will only last so long. Currently, most Catholics in the United States are sitting comfortably unaware that there is already a war against them. As a result, they will be defeated in a battle they never engaged in. Read more about our pan-Judaic culture here.

Thursday, April 13, 2017

Catholics Failed in America Part 1: Maryland

There are many reasons that Catholicism has remained mostly politically insignificant in the United States.  If I could boil it down to three reasons, it would be because on the important levels, Catholics have lacked spine, force, and conviction.

Today, we will examine what went wrong with Maryland.  

* * * 

When the colonies were first coming into existence under the British Crown in the 1600s, it was not just the Judaized Puritans who crossed the Atlantic.  There were also a significant number of English Catholics coming to the New World in hopes of escaping persecution from the Anglicans.  Unfortunately, when the English Catholics got here, they discovered that the colonies were filled with Puritans who despised Catholicism even more than the Anglicans despised it.  The Puritans hated Catholicism so much, that they despised seeing even the traces of Catholicism in their Anglican cousins--which is why the Puritans came here in the first place.  They wanted to be isolated from all forms of Catholicism, even Anglicanism.  Like the Jews who held a tribal sense of temporal destiny, so too would the Puritans come to the New World in hopes of building their City on a Hill.  

George Calvert, properly known as Lord Baltimore, had the idea of establishing a New World refuge for the fiercely persecuted Catholic Englishmen, and so Maryland would be the place where they could practice the Faith freely without fear of being arrested.  

George Calvert
The First Lord Baltimore
This is the same Lord Baltimore that my own family had worked with in the initial establishment of Maryland.  

So, why is there no Catholic paradise in Maryland today?  What was the problem for Maryland from the outset?  A lack of spine, force, and conviction.

Lord Baltimore was a convert from Protestantism.  As such, he had the bright idea of giving non-Catholics the same freedom in his colony.  But even this concession to the Protestants drew heavy protest form the Puritan government of Virginia.  

Lord Baltimore was timid with the Faith.  How was Catholicism to find a refuge, when one of the first orders was that "all Acts of the Roman Catholic Religion...be done as privately as may be"?  

To make matters worse, Lord Baltimore did not establish the Catholic Church as Maryland's religion.  The other Puritan colonies were all too happy to put Puritanical laws on the books that would penalize Catholics.  However, Lord Baltimore feared any resemblance to his hateful neighbors.  
Instead, Lord Baltimore demonstrated his weakness and granted the Protestants equality.  

While it may be true that cousin Captain Thomas Cornwallis was able to vigorously blow a broadside into the hull of the Cockatrice, such defense of Maryland was isolated.  Perhaps the force of arms was not a priority for Maryland's leaders.  As a result, this lack of forcefulness resulted in the pirate Richard Ingle and his Puritan friend William Claiborne taking over Maryland's government for a year in 1642.  It was an atrocious humiliation.  

(As an aside, the Cockatrice was actually one of Claiborne's ships, sent out to attack Maryland ships.  Cousin Tom captained the St. Helen and the St. Margaret in the naval battle, which took place off of Pocomoke Sound.)

Where leaders failed, the people prevailed, driving out the two usurpers, and giving Parliament back over to the Catholics.

However, Maryland's status as a Catholic refuge would not last.  As Charles Coulombe explains in his book, Puritan's Empire:
Maryland was, of course, a different case.  Like his father and grandfather, the third Lord Baltimore, Charles Calvert, allowed Protestants to freely settle in Maryland and enjoy full civil rights.  By 1689, they were a majority of the population.  A group of the more wealthy and influential formed, when the news from London arrived, the Protestant Association.  On July 27, the Association seized the capital at St. Mary's City.  In 1690, King William officially took control of the colony, and voided the rights of the Catholic proprietor.  The Assembly made it illegal for Catholics to hold office in Maryland.  
The Catholics of Maryland foolishly put everyone on equal footing.  They tried to practice pluralism.  And by allowing in outsiders, they lost everything.  Maryland became co-opted by the Protestants.  They failed to kick out heretics and impose negative sanctions against the Puritans.  They missed their chance.  The opportunity was there, and they failed to take it.

The Catholic leadership was dull and dim-witted, while the Protestant Association was deliberately focusing on the capture of the Maryland government.  The Puritans were fully prepared for a bureacratic long-game, as the Catholics instead rested on their laurels and enjoyed a false peace.  In reality, the surrounding Protestant hordes were fully prepared to overtake them, and they were at war with the Maryland Catholics--even though the Catholics never knew they were in a political and cultural war in the first place.  

Insult was later piled on top of the Catholic Marylanders' grievous mistake:
1704 saw a political victory for the Protestants in Maryland as great as Moore's in Florida was for Carolina.  In that year the Assembly passed the Act to Prevent The Growth of Popery.  This prohibited Catholic worship and forbade priests to make converts or baptize any but children of Catholic parents.  The wealthier Catholics of the colony petitioned for a temporary reprieve from the first clause in respect to private homes; in an extraordinary move, Queen Anne intervened to make the exception permanent.  Because of this, Catholic Maryland survived.  
It survived in tatters, never becoming what it was supposed to be.  While the Catholics of Maryland were fully prepared to be merciful, be tolerant, embrace pluralism, and pretend there was unity, in reality their enemies stood next to them the entire time holding concealed knives behind their backs.

The Catholic Marylanders wanted to "not be like those guys."  They wanted to not be the same bigots they tried to flee from in England.  But ultimately, they proved to be sell outs.  The Protestant Assembly consolidated their power and were all-too-happy to kick out all who might oppose them.  The Puritans of Maryland had the balls to win a war, while the Catholics were completely lacking.  The latter were completely unprepared to respond to the challenges of their surrounding and internal enemies.

If I could make an analogy of what happened in Maryland it would be of a silly man going to the beach to build a sandcastle, but the beach is filled with his enemies, and they come to kick over his sandcastle.  Lord Baltimore and his followers were filled with ideology and utopian thoughts, lacking any understanding in bureaucratic warfare.  The idea of Maryland was a defensive posture, and there was nothing offensive or aggressive to protect it.

The Catholic failure of Maryland is but a mere microcosm for so many other Catholic failures, such as the eventual co-opting of the Church by liberals and Freemasons.  Yet such co-opting techniques of dissidents, liberals, and rebels goes beyond the Catholic Church to corporations, your job, and even your Protestant church, if you go to one.