Stephen Roney's Blog, page 76

Is the Pope Catholic?

 

A Catholic friend sends me this link, Pope Francis complaining about “reactionary American Catholics who oppose church reform.” He asks for my response.

My response is that Pope Francis is a heretic. He speaks of the “evolution” of the faith, “church teaching evolving over time,” and of “backwardism.” “True doctrine always develops and bears fruit.”

This is the heresy of modernism, which Pius X called “the synthesis of all heresies.” In a nutshell, that, as Justin Trudeau put it when asked why he insisted on half his cabinet being women, “this is 2015.” As if a date on the calendar made a difference.

Truth does not change with time. An evil deed does not become a good deed through the passage of time. Therefore, Catholic teachings on faith and morals, the “deposit of faith,” cannot change; they cannot “evolve.” They can only b elucidated, perhaps to apply to new circumstances. Just as in an Act of Contrition, the Ten Commandments are applied to one’s individual circumstances.

Pope Francis gives examples of Catholic morals supposedly changing over time.

"Today it is a sin to possess atomic bombs; the death penalty is a sin, it cannot can be practiced, and it was not so before. As for slavery, some pontiffs before me have tolerated it, but things are different today."

It could not have been declared to be a sin to possess atomic bombs before there were atomic bombs; but it is not a sin to possess atomic bombs. It would be a sin to detonate one over a city.

Tolerating slavery is not the same as declaring it moral. Politics is the art of the possible. The Catholic Church is obliged to tolerate many things it thinks are sinful.

The death penalty, it has become illicit due to applying s consistent ethics to changing circumstances. As the Catechism of the Catholic Church explains, “more effective systems of detention have been developed, which ensure the due protection of citizens but, at the same time, do not definitively deprive the guilty of the possibility of redemption.” The death penalty was once justifiable to preserve public order when there was no prison system, and less effective law enforcement.

Francis especially has in his sights “the so-called 'sin of the flesh',” which he accuses traditionalists of having under a magnifying glass.

But it is not traditionalists who chose this focus. It is the modernists, who as of the 1950s began scorning sexual sins as “conventional morality,” and preaching, “if it feels good, do it.” It is the modernists who chose this battle, on this ground.

One might, by construing Francis’s words in a very careful, lawyerly way, avoid the charge of heresy. 

I do not accept that. It is his duty, as pontiff, to be a reliable shepherd. Even if he is just obscuring the matter, he is doing Satan’s work. He seem to be consistently obscuring, at best, the correct teaching. Surely he is not so stupid as to be consistently doing this by mistake. He believes the heresy; or, rather, he wants to promote it.

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

The Future of War

 

Our first surprise in the current Russo-Ukraine War was that Russia was a paper tiger. Its vaunted military could not make progress after the initial surprise attack was stalled.

Our second surprise is that everyone is a paper tiger. Now Ukraine too, with NATO doctrine and all its NATO weapons, is struggling to make progress.

It turns out it is not that the Russians were so incompetent. It is that the current state of weaponry gives an advantage to defense. We did not see this coming, because the offense has been dominant since the Second World War, and as recently as the Second Gulf War. 

This balance between offence and defense has swung back and forth many times over history; although in the days of set battles it mattered less. Mounted knights gave advantage to the offense; a charge could mow down a static line. Then the longbow gave advantage to the defense. Muskets gave advantage to the offense: their accurate range was short, and cavalry could break through infantry with a charge. The machine gun decisively killed the cavalry charge, and we had the static tranches of WWI. Then the tank broke things open again, unexpectedly, aided by air power, and we had the shock of blitzkrieg. 

Now the era of the tank is over.

What has changed since the Gulf Wars? 

Drones and portable missiles like HIMARS. 

These are cheap weapons. Cheap and simple enough to be mass produced by countries like Iran and Turkey, not famous for efficiency and high-tech.

Cheap drones and HIMARS can too easily take out a fantastically expensive modern tank or jet fighter.

I wouldn’t want to risk an aircraft carrier in a war situation these days, either.

This is good news for world peace. So long as defense has the advantage over offense, aggressors are much less likely to start a war. War becomes too costly in general.

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

The Mug Shot Heard around the World

 

Trump’s recent mug shot has me pondering whether God is taking an active role in political events in North America. 

Trump had little control: the photographer was not there to make him look good, and it was probably just one shot. Yet the picture makes Trump look like a true and resolute leader; as good as Karsh doing Churchill. It is going to rally a lot of support behind him. It seems at least a small miracle; the opposite of what Trump’s enemies intended.

There are other recent hints of divine intervention, improbable and pointed things happening. Chrystia Freeland being stopped for speeding bare days after claiming she did not own a car and did not drive. The Trudeau separation, suddenly, in midweek. The sudden rise out of nowhere of Oliver Anthony. A year ago, the uncanny organization of the ad hoc Freedom Convoy. At a more granular level, eucharistic miracles, uncorrupted corpses, and Protestant revival meetings in the US. At a global level, the improbable ability of Ukraine to hold off the Russian invasion; the surprising solidarity of NATO.

Those who do not believe God works through history will scoff. But that has always been the Jewish and Christian understanding: that history has a purpose, and is working towards the redemption of all things.

Recent events have shown us wickedness in high places: to list all that has come out would be tedious. That list is now too long. Culminating, for the moment, in this attempt in the US to imprison the leading opposition candidate.

God may have allowed all this to come about, may have given the wicked free rein for a time, in order to make the moral plain. 

He may now be gathering the reins in his strong hand.

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

Abortion Unwound

 

The young adult novel Unwind is being used to teach our children. Resolutely woke, it argues the case for abortion. This hinges, apparently, on when a human being gets a soul. It gives four positions, presumably spanning the field:

At conceptionAt quickening—"when the baby kicks”At birthWhen someone loves it.

And then the novel gives its own conclusion: that we really do not know. 

Therefore, no one has a right to impose their own views on the next person.

“If more people could admit they really don’t know, maybe there never would have been a Heartland War.”

Therefore, unrestricted abortion.

It is indeed true that we do not know whether a child at any given age has a soul. We also do not know whether Jews have souls. We do not know whether blacks have souls. Or women. We actually do not know whether anyone other than ourself has a soul, is conscious and self-conscious. We cannot see or hear the soul, or consciousness, or thoughts, other than our own. Everyone else might be imagined, or simulations, or alien lizard people.

Accordingly, this argument for unrestricted abortion is just as serviceable as an argument for unrestricted murder, or genocide. 

“Hey, nobody likes the Jews. That mean they don’t have souls. Let’s kill them and take their stuff.”

Why is it morally necessary to assume all other humans have souls? Because of the golden rule: do unto others as you would have them do unto you. If you are not prepared to accept that these lizard people or simulations have the right to kill you on a whim, you must not claim for yourself the same right over them. You cannot honourably take to yourself a right you would not want everyone else to have.

The question, therefore, is when the foetus is alive, and when it becomes human. 

It is identifiably human at conception, and it is identifiably alive.

Any other position ends in holocaust.

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

Oliver Anthony Gives His Backstory

 

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

Black Hats

 

More woke wisdom from Unwind, the novel your children are reading in high school:

“One thing you learn when you’ve lived as long as I have—people aren’t all good, and people aren’t all bad. We move in and out of darkness and light all of our lives.”

The rap against American culture is that it tends to be white hats against black hats: villains in American novels and movies are one-dimensionally evil. Think of “Injun Joe “in Tom Sawyer.

Andrew Breitbart said that politics is downstream from culture. Yes; and culture is downstream from religion. This tendency to such a clear divide between good and evil characters comes, I warrant, from America’s Calvinist upbringing. Baptists are the dominant American denomination, especially in the South. Baptists are Calvinists. New England was settled by the Pilgrims. They were Calvinists. New York was settled by Dutch Reformed: Calvinist. By contrast, England is Anglican, a bit of everything; Canada Catholic and Methodist; not Calvinist.

Calvinism believes in predestination. People are simply created for salvation or damnation, good or evil. They do not have a choice. They do not have free will. This does not leave a great deal of room for character development; or for moral ambiguity.

No doubt in reaction, Unwound and modern wokery go too far. If we are all just moving in and out of darkness all our lives, there is no moral distinction to be made between Adolph Hitler and Albert Schweitzer; between Charlie Manson and Mother Teresa.

They preserve the idea that we have no free will, and ditch the idea that there is either salvation or damnation. Wrong move. 

The Catholic understanding is that we all sin; we must struggle constantly against temptation. Some of us have given up the fight, turned away from the good and committed ourselves to evil. In Jesus’s words, some of us seek the darkness and fear the light. Others, the saints, shine like a city on a hill.

 There are indeed good and bad people. But a bad person can become good.

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

Lost Sheep

 

The gospel reading from last Sunday, the story of the Canaanite woman, sheds light on true evangelization. People commonly think it is about converting people from some other religion to their own: from Catholicism to Mormonism, say, or Islam to Christianity. But Jesus here actually refuses to do this.

He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.”

Later, it is true, he sends out the disciples to preach and baptize to all nations; but this is apparently a secondary consideration.

This suggests that the primary focus of evangelization, ought to be fellow Christians: those already belonging to the flock, but who have lost their way.

If someone is a devout Hindu, or Muslim, or Jew, it seems malicious to try to convince them that Hinduism or Islam is wrong. Now, they have clear direction in their life. You are trying to rob them of it.

Lost sheep, for us in the task of evangelization, are firstly Christians, or more specifically, for Catholics, Catholics, who are suffering a loss of meaning or direction in their lives. This is not necessarily due to a lack of faith on their part, or culpable. Given that they are believing Christians, it is due to demonic oppression or possession, or some event that has them disoriented and questioning what they thought they knew. They have gotten turned around, confused, often by some false premise or false guide.

In a word, the depressed or “mentally ill.” These are the lost sheep in need of our attention.

This may extend to those of other faiths as well—if they are disoriented and confused in that faith, and feeling unsatisfied. In such cases, they too benefit from learning and embracing the Catholic faith. In such cases, as Jesus with the Canaanite woman, one should stand aloof and let them come to you. It is up to them to indicate such a need and such a desire.

God calls his sheep, and knows who they are. It is not up to you.

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

Trump's Lies

 

Here’s a riddle. The number one complaint about Trump on the left is that he lies. The Washington Post claims to catalogue 30,573 “lies or misleading claims” over his first term; a “tsunami of untruths.”

Examples:

“He overstated the ‘carnage’ he was inheriting, then later exaggerated his ‘massive’ crowd and claimed, despite clear evidence to the contrary, that it had not rained during his address. He repeated the rain claim the next day, along with the fabricated notion that he held the ‘all-time record’ for appearing on the cover of Time magazine.”

Yet, according to a recent poll, those who support Trump trust him to tell the truth more than they trust religious leaders, their friends, or even their own family.

These views directly contradict one another. How is this possible? Are we experiencing different truths?

Exactly.

The claim that Trump lies is intrinsically dubious. All politicians lie; Joe Biden will say anything. So will Justin Trudeau. So why this peculiar focus on Trump? Surely Trump is being held to a different standard here.

And note the lies the Post first cites to make their case: whether or not it was raining during his inauguration. Whether he holds the record for most Time cover stories. A claim that he exaggerated America’s problems. They seem oddly trivial. Would you call an acquaintance a liar for thinking it rained when it had not?

Here’s how the paradox is solved: the left, those who oppose Trump, are likely to embrace postmodernism and the dogma that there is no objective truth; only “my truth” and “your truth.” So that a man can declare himself a woman, and that becomes incontestably true.

When they say Trump “lies,” what they really mean is that he is not endorsing “their truth”: what they wish were true. He refuses to go along with their preferred “narrative,” which is to say, fiction.

Interestingly, Trump is apparently not entitled to a pass on the premise that he is asserting “his truth.” 

This is a backhanded admission that he is not asserting “his truth,” but truth itself. He refuses to lie, and that is what is intolerable.

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

Canada's Disappearing Genocide

 

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

Why Trump Should Win in 2024

 

Pundits are saying a race between Biden and Trump is a tossup, that the polls are neck and neck.

But polls also show a large majority of people do not want to see another contest between Biden and Trump.

So if that is what is offered to them—which seems at this point most likely—what happens?

Those who support Trump will come out in huge numbers to vote, over the dead bodies of wild horses. The people who do not want a second matchup are anti-Trumpers dissatisfied with Biden. They don’t want Trump; but they don’t want Biden either. 

There is already at least one unusually strong third-party candidate in the race, Cornell West. And he is on the left. The general dissatisfaction with the choice of candidates is likely to draw others in: perhaps JFK Jr.; there is talk of a “no labels” candidacy by either Joe Manchin or former Maryland governor Larry Hogan.

They are not going to pull votes from Trump. You either love him or you hate him. Those who have him are never going to vote for him anyway. Those who love him will never vote for anyone else if he is running.

So ther support comes entirely from the anti-Trump side; which means entirely for Biden. Nobody feels that strongly about voting for Biden.

The resulting split in the anti-Trump vote should throw the election to Trump.

Because Trump’s voters back him more strongly than Biden’s voters back Biden, this predictable strong showing by third parties should throw the election to Trump.

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.