Download a Permanent Printable PDF Version of This Article.
Challenge for the Catholic Thinker: Catholic faith demands to be lived, not merely held. Doing good apologetics (defending the faith) alone is not enough. Evangelizing and bringing others into the faith, alone, is not enough. Regular participation in Catholic Liturgy, and a rich Catholic prayer life, alone, is not enough. Being Catholic is very demanding; it is not a part time job, and there is no stepping back from being fully Catholic. One is either Catholic, or one is not.
There is a similar challenge for the American Thinker: If you are too embarrassed to sing the National Anthem out loud in public, or if you feel that wearing an American Flag lapel pin is jingoistic or too nationalistic, or if you are not openly proud to be an American everywhere and in all circumstances, then in good conscience you should stop calling yourself an American, renounce your American citizenship, and emigrate to whatever land you feel is a better place, all around, in which to live as a citizen. Then you, and we, might live happier lives with less internal conflict.
The Catholic Thinker, like the American Thinker, is well armed by strong arguments in favor of the Catholic position, on every topic in every category touched by Catholic faith and reason. Now, many will recoil at that statement, because they incorrectly (in my view) hold the term argument to be a purely negative term. But, to the old-time, pre-scientism scientist, the term argument is meant to clearly state an arguable position, or hypothesis, for peer review, testing and criticism. In accordance with how well or how poorly an argument withstands peer review, testing and criticism, it gains or looses value and credibility among scientists, including the one who originally put forth the argument. This was the time-honored method of such luminaries as Galileo, Newton and Einstein. They put it out there, in public, and said, in essence, Let us all put it to the test, and let the chips fall where they may.
If such an argument is clearly refuted by a good counter-argument or is proven wrong by valid testing, any old-time scientist in the tradition of Galileo, Newton or Einstein would withdraw it, and either reject it, or perhaps modify it and later re-present it again in some corrected form for peer review, testing and criticism. Those who truly seek the truth have no fear of peer criticism, for it is the truth of the matter that is being sought, not merely peer support for a personally held position. Personal ego has no valid place in the honest quest for truth.
As we have seen again and again in this site, this method is just about dead in material science today. Arguments that are easily provably false are predominantly held by the majority of modern “scientists” to be “true” anyway. They don’t want to argue about it. Perhaps they are too embarrassed. Examples abound.
We have the HIV=AIDS=DEATH formula, almost universally accepted today even by the field of medicine, which states that HIV causes AIDS, and that infection with HIV is close to a death sentence, despite the fact that this argument has never been and cannot possibly be proven to be true, by anyone, ever. Indeed it is proven false by its own gathered mathematical statistics, and has been from the very beginning. It was never even published for peer review before being ordered into being a virtual scientific law, not by any scientist, but by a high-ranking government bureaucrat, in a government which held the purse strings to government grants for all university and corporate scientific research projects.
We have the universally accepted Human Population Problem, seen to be so dangerous as to warrant major international intervention to “control” third-world human populations, despite the fact that simple arithmetic is all that is needed to prove that England has a higher population density than China. The problem of poor nations being poor nations has nothing whatsoever to do with national population. It’s national organization.
We have the Human-Induced Global-Warming; Running Out Of Fossil-Fuel; Pollution’s Gonna Get You; etc., etc., etc., public frights out there enjoying the media limelight with no scientific evidence whatsoever to back them up, and plenty readily available to refute them.
We witness millions of human deaths per year from malaria, a disease proven easily controllable by the simple use of DDT, an unfairly demonized insecticide that never hurt any human or any bird, despite wild stories (best sellers among them) to the contrary. My neighborhood (and me, and my bicycle) were regularly hosed-down with the stuff before it became a “deadly substance,” and I’m still around, and so are so many others in my age group. We grew up in homes painted with lead paint, pipes soldered with lead solder, furnaces and ductwork insulated by asbestos, playing around with substances like mercury in grade school, and we’re all still here. Imagine that.
I could go on, almost indefinitely.
False or grossly exaggerated assumptions, on their own, are usually harmless enough to let pass. But when they become widely trumpeted as true and programs are built up around them, and when they enter the public psyche as truisms, they do more than a little damage. Time after time on issue after issue, legal cases are adjudicated, new representative laws are legislated and/or, worse, unrepresentative bureaucratic regulations, with full force of law, are issued, tax dollars are expended and new bureaucracies are created and built up to solve a problem that a little critical thinking done ahead of time would have shown was not even a real problem to begin with.
It always involves two things:
Which is another way of describing a migration of power from the people to the government. It’s a sneaky way to kill truly representative government, because “the people,” for the most part, are convinced that the government is actually representing their best interests, when in fact what the government is doing is growing itself.
Now, all of that may look like what I’m addressing here would be better titled American Thinker rather than Catholic Thinker, because it looks to be a lot more political than religious. But what I’m trying to point out is that the quasi-religion enemy-from-within that is most dangerous to the Catholic Thinker (and the Greek Orthodox Thinker, and the Protestant Thinker, and the Jewish Thinker) is pure materialistic thought.
The pure materialist does not consider anything to be sacred, and indeed denies or does not recognize even the term sacredness itself. He holds nothing to be sacred. He has no religion-based moral guidelines or axioms to limit or direct his critical thinking, because he believes only in material, and in accidental interactions of bits of matter. That’s his religion, or his guiding belief system, which he cannot materially prove to be true, but which he rigidly holds, professes and adheres to – get this - by faith alone.
It’s a rather silly superstition, or superstitious belief, based on nothing material or natural, although devotees claim to believe only in the material and the natural.
Nevertheless, it is dangerous, partially because in denying sacredness it denies, among other things, the notion that human life is sacred. Once that ethic is done away with, it clears the ground for the political and legal promotion of everything from artificial contraception to legal abortion to infanticide to mercy-killing to genetic-cleansing to even genocide, in the interest of solving a completely bogus Human Population Problem that in fact exists only in the popularized theory, but not in fact. I’m not saying that the theory is merely unsubstantiated; I am stating that it is patently false.In the pure materialist’s religious view, matter is all there is and all there ever was. Contemporary scientists, materialists among them, if not the majority of them, hold that the age of the universe – meaning everything – is somewhere between 10 and 20 billion years old, based on the speed at which the universe is expanding and material objects are getting farther away from each other. Therefore, it cannot be said that matter “always was and always will be.” At some point in the past, the first matter went poof, and appeared, as if by magic. The so-called Big Bang; so the question regarding Who lit the firecracker remains not only unanswered, but largely unasked. The notion of some initial Primal Cause of all other causes, and a First Mover to start all other motions, is not to be considered by the pure materialist, because his faith dictates that matter is all there is and ever was, and so there must be a purely material answer to eventually be found by one or another of TTRSTF4 .
The empirically improvable argument that there exists nothing other than matter is the silly superstition dogmatically held by the materialistic disciples of Scientism. Naturalists and materialistic “scientists” such as Richard Dawkins who cheer-lead and promote the Darwinism Hoax as being somehow scientific are, in truth, nothing more than silly twits. Evolution, natural selection, survival-of-the fittest are all supposed to be so-called scientific theories, but are in fact nothing more than silly superstitions with no empirical material evidence whatsoever to back them up. If they were scientifically established, then they would prove that Orientals, Blacks and People-Of-Color are vastly superior to Caucasians, because they all have always out-reproduced Caucasians, and are therefore superior races. Right?
Of course a race is not a species. All human races can interbreed; all human beings came from one and only one originating parent set. The DNA proves it. No one has ever even observed any naturally occurring new species that can reproduce itself, but can no longer reproduce with the theoretical parent species from which it naturally evolved. Thus, speciation, the cornerstone of Darwinism, has never even been observed. Yet it is held to be somehow scientific by a clear majority everywhere on Earth today. It’s touted to be how all species originate.
So, where’s the speciation? Where’s even any fossil evidence of it?
The only evolution anyone on Earth, including Darwin, ever observed was micro-evolution, meaning changes in breeds or races strictly within a species. No one, including Darwin, ever witnessed macro-evolution, meaning evolution between species. And the incredibly rich fossil record is completely devoid of material evidence of any occurrence of macro-evolution.
The religion of Materialism, like its sub-denominations of Scientism and Darwinism, has piss-poor to non-existent arguments for itself to put forth in any public arena in which old fashioned critical thinking might be applied.
The Catholic Thinker is well armed with good arguments that can be put forth in any public forum, on any and all items of faith and morals addressed in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Pick one. Materialism is not nearly so well armed. Most all so-called mainstream Christian denominations, and Judaism, have much, much stronger public arguments than does the religion of Materialism.
Yet, Materialism has infected thought in America, and everywhere on Earth, to a worse degree than any other enemy of the highest morality to ever exist on Earth: the Judeo-Christian ethos, upon which all of Western Culture was built. The morality that all non-Western cultures eventually adopted, emulated, or at least pretended to adopt.
A People’s Religion is the root source of a people’s morality.
Judeo-Christian morality springs from the Decalogue; the Ten Commandments. The first three Commandments address man’s relationship with God, or his Faith. The last seven Commandments address man’s relationship with his fellow man, or his morality.
Each First Tablet commandment, addressing our faith, should not be addressed by civil law except to the extent that civil law should not interfere with them or hinder their obedience in any way. The next Commandments, dealing with our morality, should form the foundational basis for civil law, in a land ruled by representative government.
Each Second Tablet commandment carries with it strong implications of certain attitudes and rights, which bear strong similarities to those promoted by ideals of Democracy, and free markets, and what has become known as the American Ideal. It is on these rules of morality that the civil law and the ecclesial law must agree if a Western Culture society is to live harmoniously. Let's look at what rights are implied in these Commandments.
For thousands of years the world has recognized that these Commandments represent what are called the wise restraints that make men free. When any of them are weakened, so is freedom weakened. Only so long as we all agree to adhere to these quite reasonable rules can we trust each other and cooperate together. When that is no longer the general case, we begin the decline into barbarism. Even in the absence of faith, these wise restraints remain the best rules for human conduct ever written, and they remain the best possible foundational basis for civil law. This is what all the world knows as Western morality.
The most religious among us adhere to these rules, this morality, out of the motive of obedience to Divine Will. The least religious among us adhere to these rules purely out of a motive of avoiding punishment under civil law. We are, for the most part, a good and decent people. Many visitors from other lands, particularly non-Western lands, have noted this goodness. It is, to many foreigners, remarkable that so many Americans obey, for instance, various piddling little traffic and parking laws even when there is no cop around. In other places in the world, a red light really means “stop” only when there is a cop present, or a bunch of them.
Pure Materialist Morality, exemplified by the Dialectic Materialism of Karl Marx, replaces this moral foundation with one commandment: The Ends Justify The Means. Achieving the End of his pipe-dream utopian ideal economic and government system justifies using any Means at all, including even mass-murder. The world has seen it applied, in Lenin’s New World Order and his terror famines; in Hitler’s National Socialism and atrocities; in Stalin’s purges, gulags and enslaved nations; and in Mao’s boast of having conquered and killed more people than Genghis Khan. The worst horrors of 20th Century history were all produced by ruthless conquerors and dictators pretending to be “good Marxists.” These terrible events, this horrible history, were all the direct result of the open rejection and repudiation of the Decalogue-based moral norms of Western Civilization in favor of the “morality” of pure materialism.
Materialism was popularized and infected Western so-called intellectual thought to the Nth degree due largely to the “discoveries” and writings of Western Culture’s Unholy Trinity: Darwin, Freud and Marx. Early Darwinists sought to relegate Genesis to the dust bin of history, or at least turn it into little more than a quaint fairy tail. Early Freudians sought to remove all human inhibitions and to eliminate any human sense of guilt, which, necessarily, meant the elimination of any notion of the existence of sin. Early Marxists sought Utopia; Worldly Perfection; man made Heaven, right here on Earth. The ridiculous and silly belief that a perfect Communist Utopia is possible for man to create justifies any means at all that may be used to create it.
The Catholic Thinker knows that perfection is not of this world, but the next. There is no perfect candidate for President, or any other office. Reagan (like Lincoln, and Washington, etc.) was not a perfect President. John Paul II the Great (like Peter, and like all other Popes) was not a perfect Pope. Jesus instructed us to try to “be perfect” even as He was perfect; and thus we are duty bound to try. But the Catholic Thinker knows that worldly perfection is not possible; Satan still rules the World, and he knows that he is never more powerful than when people do not even believe that he exists. The real battle is between the Spirit (the Kingdom) and the Flesh (the World.)
But the Marxist Ideologue operates by a different moral norm. You show me a Marxist and I’ll show you an ends-justify-the-means flagrant categorical liar. Truth has no real value to the Marxist; only ends have real value. Living evidence of this argument exists in the persons of Cronkite, Rather, Fonda and Kerry. You can see just a few of their public lies at the Vietnam War link. Their word, like the word of all Marxists, is quite worthless. Anything any Leftie-Liberal says should always be suspect and subjected to extra scrutiny.
The Leftist-popularized myth regarding how Western man was rescued from superstition (i.e., religion) by the Enlightnement represents an example of the Leftist revisionist history taught in American government schools today. They may call themselves Public Schools, but they are, in truth, Government Schools. That a civil government should provide and/or control formative education of a nation’s children is not a Western notion, but an anti-Western culture notion. In the Leftist view, the Leviathan State should rigidly control formative education simply because it says so in the Communist Manifesto. It enables "Socialism" to crank out unthinking happy little workers for the future Worker's Paradise. You will find no such argument anywhere in the writings of our Founders or in any of America’s founding documents.
Now that the Left owns show biz, the news room and academia, Leftist thought is being inculcated into the impressionable minds of America’s children. Leftist “intellectuals” betray their true colors by their open, habitual use of Darwinian, Freudian and Marxist buzz-words and their un-critical acceptance of all three theories. They embrace this Unholy Trinity of Western thought as great thinkers of history, who freed Western man’s mind to explore new possibilities and new universes.
This is the real reason that American school children who do not know their multiplication tables, have no sense of such principles as future value of money and cannot point out their own home state on a map of the USA, can demonstrate how to put a condom on a cucumber. It is why sex education, meaning, literally, increasingly detailed education in the mechanics of “safe” fornication, “protected” sodomy and “responsible” promiscuity, have preempted and replaced much of classical formal education. And it’s why American children rank behind those of some 27 other nations on tests of classical education (unless they are home-schooled, or are educated in private or parochial schools.)
Classical education is nearly dead in America’s government school system. If students understood the future value of money principle, they would be able to figure out that, in constant dollars, the current price of oil, and all other fossil fuels, for instance, is pretty much the same or lower than it was way back when the automobile was first invented, and they wouldn’t be so easily stampeded into the herd mentality that says “we (meaning the Leviathan State) must gain control over “our” Precious Resources.”. And they might know that proven reserves historically go up, not down, and that the free market – Adam Smith’s Invisible Hand of Capitalism - continually finds ways to get it to market in a more competitive manner, meaning, of course, cheaper. And if they were properly inculcated with the time tested morality of Western Civilization, they would know that it really takes two good parents, rather than any (Global) Village, to most properly raise a child.
The Left despises Reagan and his memory in part because he tried (in vain) to eliminate the Department of Education, in the view that the federal government had no good, arguable interest in being the sole provider of the formative education of the nation’s children. Education is not the proper business of government, any more than health care is. In point of fact, the Department of Education has proved again and again that its only interest is in rigidly censoring, distorting and controlling what is taught to America’s children, rather than in classically educating them. We can all readily see the results of that.
Leftists further despise Reagan because he turned the Cold War into an Economic War, which was infinitely preferable to a shooting war, and then destroyed their beloved Evil Empire, the once great Soviet Union. The hope of the Left was and remains an eventual Communist Utopia in which history will stop and everyone will be happy, and the world will be perfect. This is stupid, silly twittery, passing itself off as brilliant, elitist intellectual thought. The Left hates Reagan’s memory further because he used the word evil, and all good Lefties know that there is no such thing as evil, and no such thing as good; there are only outcomes of actions or events, which must be judged after-the-fact. An outcome might turn out to be preferable, or not preferable, but not good or evil. That’s Leftist morality, as opposed to Western Culture morality.
Since the Reagan – Thatcher – John Paul the Great era that witnessed the end of the Soviet Union, the Leftist position, which was previously almost openly pro-Communist, has morphed into a bland, indistinctive form of just general anti-Western, anti-Americanism. The old Communist slanders still are heard; America is still held to be “imperialistic,” although America holds no empire. Germany is ruled by Germans, not Americans, and Japan is ruled by Japanese, not Americans; we hold no ground in any foreign nation our troops have ever trod upon, except for enough consecrated ground in which to bury our own dead, who died for the freedom of the place. We leave behind us Democracies, and representative governments, not vassal states or puppet governments. If Germany is a puppet state of ours, she certainly has a funny way of showing it. Most German citizens today probably prefer the form of government they have now to going back to Nazism. Most Japanese citizens today probably prefer the form of government hey have now to going back to empire building via military conquest. And, even more importantly, their neighbor nations and the rest of the civilized world are happier with the current situation than the former.
Our Left has lost much of what it once stood for since the collapse of the Soviet Union, and it is left mostly with things to be against. All the previously demonized things: Capitalism, interpreted solely as a Greed System; Big Business, especially Big Oil; the fabled Military Industrial Complex, including all Defense Contractors; The Rich, even though all of the most vocal and visible Lefties happen to be rich; the White Man, even though the most vocal and visible Lefties happen to be white men; and so forth. It’s a general negativism and pessimism expressed toward all things American and Western and Judeo-Christian. It’s “the system” that’s all wrong.
A Leftie can never admit that he was wrong about being a Leftie.
The Leftist damage that has been and is being done to America is staggering. The worst of it may be the pessimism and negativism that trickles down upon the young from teachers, news anchors, celebrities and stars. The touted and popularized myths, such as the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, untrue though it is, anchored in the Communist Manifesto, it gains rather than looses ground over time. The warped view of wealth as a sort of fixed pie in need of apportioning out, rather than a living, breathing, constantly changing thing is another example. The young mind grasps the seeming justice in dividing up everything – property, money, food, clothes, houses, etc. – so that everybody gets a “fair share” of everything. Equitable redistribution seems to be just, on its face.
And it is, to me, as long as I am the one who gets to do the confiscating and redistributing. Of course, you might not agree with that, and you may prefer to be the one to do the confiscating and redistributing. When two of us, or many of us, or all of us, concentrate on getting to be the one to do the confiscating and redistributing of everything, who is left to keep on creating more wealth to be confiscated and redistributed? And will he be spending most of his time defending what he earns, trying to be the one who confiscates and redistributes, or creating more wealth?
After everything that exists is confiscated and redistributed, and there is no more being created, we then begin the process of starving to death, if we don’t all kill each other first.
Governments do not create wealth, they only consume it.
Businesses enable the creation of new wealth.
Only individual citizens can create new wealth.
Free Citizens Create Wealth when and only when they are free to do so. Un-free Citizens Consume Wealth until they are free, when they begin to create wealth. The free citizen is, to his nation, human capital who will produce something. The free nation therefore should seek to grow its population of free citizens. The un-free citizen is, to his nation, another mouth to feed, and a drag on the national economy. The un-free nation therefore typically seeks to limit or even reduce its human population.
Since the pre-historical development of specialization, men free to do so have produced more of whatever they produce than they need, in order to be paid more, for their extra effort. This is the source of new wealth. It was explained by Scotland’s Adam Smith in his Wealth Of nations in 1776, the same year as our Declaration of Independence.
Be all that as it may, Leftie-Liberalism has made and is still making inroads in America and elsewhere in Western culture. It almost owns public discourse, and directs if not predominates in the broadcast and print media and in entertainment. It has gained ground not only among unbelievers and weak believers, but it has made some serous progress among practicing Protestants, Catholics and Jews.
Today you may hear a priest, minister or rabbi talking about how it doesn’t matter so much what you believe, so long as you believe in something. This is, of course, hogwash; it is the sin of indifferentism. It does indeed matter what you believe. Immortal souls are at stake here. All belief systems are not “equal” nor are they all even desirable, among a civilized Judeo-Christian People. Jews and Catholics and Protestants may tolerate and even love one another, but they may not tolerate such things as cannibalism, Nazism, Communism, Fascism, pedophilia, Islam, anarchy, terrorism, etc., etc., etc., and still remain Jews and Catholics and Protestants, true to their respective faiths, for very long. All the world recognizes the unique American Ideal that we are called to protect and strengthen. That necessarily involves protecting and strengthening our enduring guiding national ethos, rather than pretending that we don't have one.
(I included Islam among the social menaces above because the open, published goal of Islam is the destruction or elimination of Catholicism, Protestantism and Judaism, along with Democracy and any form or representative government. To tolerate Islam within your household is to invite your own eventual doom. Islam is a social and societal menace.)
We have before us the new gospel of archbishop Daniel Pilarczyk of Cincinnati, which tells us that Jesus Christ, the Lord thy God, didn’t necessarily know who He was, wasn’t necessarily aware of His “ministry” until it overtook Him, didn’t necessarily select His 12 Apostles, didn’t necessarily rise from the Dead, but that His life story still provides a good example for us all to follow and emulate. While Pilarczyk may not openly preach this new gospel from the pulpit, he knowingly allowed and/or directed it to be taught as good Catholic catechesis in his particular Church (the archdiocese of Cincinnati) in official Catholic teaching institutions. It was taught in his name and with his full authority by his faculty, and when it was challenged, he defended it.
He stated that he found nothing heterodox (unorthodox) in one of his official “Catholic” text books, which called into question, among other things, the Resurrection, arguably the single most fundamental and even foundational dogma in all of Christianity, and perhaps the most important element in the Creed. You can see the gruesome details by clicking the various Cafeteria Catholic navigation buttons to the left of any Catholic American Thinker webpage.
[NOTE: Left column navigation buttons have been replaced by straight links to related pages in the right column. See the Home Page for new site navigation.]
Leftie-Liberalism has entered the Church. Thus is Catholic catechesis watered-down in America, to make us more “inclusive” and less “exclusive,” to make us more “equal,” and to make our faith vague enough to say and believe that it doesn’t matter so much what you believe so long as you believe in something. In archbishop Pilarczyk we see living evidence of my contention that, in contemporary America, a man can fake his Catholic belief and piety well enough, with the help of other high ranking Leftie-Liberal clerics, to be raised to the Purple, be made a Prince of the Church, and obtain for himself an important bishopric.
Leftie-Liberal thought has also gained strong ground in the area of weakening our national defense through the demonizing of our military in the collective public psyche. There was a long-running Communist disinformation program operating in America and in the rest of the world, aimed at the false portrayal of the nature of American serviceman, on average, in the most negative way possible. It was (and is) extremely successful. Vietnam veterans were portrayed (and are still largely believed) to be:
In point of fact, slightly less the one quarter of all the men who served in Vietnam were drafted; all the rest volunteered. Of those who were drafted, very few were front line grunts (infantrymen) who actually did the fighting. Almost all draftees who even went to the war theater were in some behind-the-lines support role. Among the elite corps – Airborne, Rangers, Special Forces, Marines, etc. – there were no draftees at all. You have to volunteer (and be accepted) to get into any of those units. The vast majority of draftees saw no action in Vietnam.
The portrayal of the average GI as a semi-literate dummy is also false. Drug use among veterans was considerably less than among college students, hippies, journalists and other active “revolutionaries” back home. War crimes of any kind were exceedingly rare, found out about, investigated and prosecuted, unlike the situation on the Communist side of the war. The few criminal events committed by Americans were vastly over-reported by the Leftie-Liberal media, and the many criminal events committed by the Communists were censored by the same media. Go to the Vietnam War link to see the details of the purposeful miss-reporting done by American and other “journalists” throughout the entire war.
As a simple matter of fact, real Vietnam veterans are among the most well adjusted and productive American citizens of their era, certainly better adjusted than the druggie-hippies who never served, many of whom later would pretend to be Vietnam veterans as an excuse for their addiction, alcoholism, unemployable nature and general failure in life. Kerry, Rather and other Leftie Liberals rubbed elbows with lots of them.Being a Catholic Thinker requires skepticism and cautious reading of all journalistic output, to try to discern the truth, when most news and commentary is delivered by a medium overloaded with known, proven liars. The overwhelming agenda of the American media is Leftist-Liberal, and you may fully expect a Leftist slant to have been applied to whatever comes out of it. That’s why I call it the SLIMC1 . The Catholic Thinker must discern whether the source of the information he is examining follows the ethos of Judeo-Christianity and Western Culture, or some other recognized ethos, or the ethos of BMDFP10 and Leftie-Liberals. It is a foreign ethos that does not belong here.
No Thinking Catholic or Protestant or Orthodox or Jew should allow it to chip away at our existing national ethos.
Seek the Truth, find the Way, live the Life; please God and live forever.
Hover-Link Footnotes: For the convenience of those readers using devices that lack a mouse, these footnotes are provided for all webpages, in case any webpage contains any hover-links. (If you don't have a mouse, you can't "hover" the mouse over a link, without clicking, to just to see the related Acronym appear.)
Return to Latest News page
Return to HOME PAGE
Respond to This Article Below The Last Comment
Date: Wed Feb 27 13:14:08 2008
From: Name Withheld
Subject: Contact Me
I am a veterinarian. I worked, sacrificed, and suffered to get through such a difficult course of study. I would not have bothered to do that as a member of a socialistic society, for obvious reasons. Where will the doctors, lawyers, and other professional service-providers come from if none decide to become educated? I have always been confused about that.
Date: Sun Apr 7 21:18:13 2008
Subject: Advanced Education
Sorry to take so long to get to your comment; life is hectic right now.
Not sure what page you were on when you sent your comment and thus not certain about the full context, since I don’t know what particular article you were looking at. In many places on the site I have taken formal education in America, particularly public (i.e., state) education, to task, not because I oppose education per se, but because I strongly oppose the Socialistic spin professionally put on it, predominantly, by American educators. If you lived in a truly Socialist society you would have been told what your advanced education would be, if any. And you would have been told what you would be doing for a living, whether veterinarian work, chemistry, factory labor, world-class gymnastics, farm work, or whatever.
You chose your future occupation, pursued it, and achieved it; at least America still has that much going for it. I would never encourage anyone to not pursue higher education; what I try to encourage the student to do is to learn, practice and do critical thinking as a life-long endeavor along with their education, however long and to whatever extent they seek to farther educate themselves. To be objective and skeptical about everything, but especially about the seemingly unrelated and thus seemingly less important social and/or political issues, whether presented as side remarks or while-you’re-at-its from professors, or perhaps required credit courses unrelated to your chosen field of study.
Notice the world-wide uncritical acceptance of the wild and unproven so-called scientific theories of Darwin, Freud and Marx. Note the overwhelming preponderance of highly educated people, everywhere, who embrace all of these theories despite the fact that none of them have ever even been proven to be true. Note all the sub-theories that are built upon these easily falsifiable theories. All of this nonsense stands the test of public opinion for one and only one reason:
Children tend to believe what their teachers teach them.
The world needs more veterinarians, physicists, concert pianists, priests, judges and so forth. No question about that. But it seems to me not too much to hope for that, as their education advances, their skills as critical thinkers would also advance, and they wouldn’t just automatically accept everything dished out to them out of an unthinking, knee-jerk “teacher said so” or “text book says so” or “consensus says so” or “most scientists say so” or “TV says so” or “popularity poll says so” reaction.
All education in Socialist societies is rigidly controlled by the government; that is one of the absolute demands in the Communist Manifesto. What I am stating here is that the exact same thing, to a lesser degree, is now happening in our formal education right here in America, since our theoretically representative government took over “public” education, and since virtually every major university in America went Leftist. Note that universities crank out teachers. In a Socialistic society, before one may be educated in anything, he must first be indoctrinated in Marxist ideology, and Marx’s ideals flatly oppose individuality and thinking for yourself. That – Party Thinking, Group Thinking, Village Thinking, Consensus Thinking, etc. – is becoming more the norm in American education than individual educational pursuits. Academia is cranking out, or trying to crank out, number one, future Marxist revolutionaries, and/or, number two, unthinking, happy little workers for a future utopian worker’s paradise.
The seemingly fewer, over time, brilliant or good thinkers and objective pursuers of truth who emerge from American academia get to where they are more in spite of, and less because of, most of their professors. I sincerely hope you’re one of them.
At the bottom of it all is the contest between the Flesh (the World) and the Spirit (the Kingdom.) Most academics and journalists are obsessed with the World, and know not the Kingdom.
Date: Various, up to Sun Apr 29 2008
Subject: Contact Me
This is an attempt to summarize multiple questions, comments and challenges to my most recent “allegations” against archbishop Pilarczyk of Cincinnati. All of them came in through the “Contact Me” rather than the “Publish Your Thoughts” page, and were not intended to be published. However, I currently lack the available time to respond individually, and so I hereby seek to kill multiple birds with one stone, right here. The multiple contributions may be fairly summarized as follows:
Date: Sun Apr 29 2008
Subject: Response to Multiple Similar Comments/Challenges
Dear Multiple Names-Withheld:
First, I did indeed take up these issues with Archbishop Daniel Pilarcyk. I openly and directly challenged all the theoretically Catholic teachings that so obviously opposed the Catholic Magisterial teaching and the Catechism of the Catholic Church, and he actually defended them. He thereby took ownership of them, and I therefore refer to them, collectively, as his New Gospel.
While it is true that the Archbishop cannot be aware of everything taught in every class or presented in all teaching material, it is also true that he was most certainly made aware, by me, of false teachings that I was taught in specific classes that were under his exclusive teaching authority.
Our correspondence was closed, by him, with his response to my challenge of the last heterodox, if not heretical Athenaeum of Ohio LPMP course I took, which was the Christology course. He said “I find nothing heterodox in this text” … and … “I now consider this matter to be closed.” That settled it for me. Our personal communications ended at that pronouncement. He had ruled on the matter from his Pastoral and ecclesial chair of authority, as the sole authority on proper Catechesis in the Particular Church of Cincinnati. This new teaching is, therefore, his new gospel. It is not the unchanged and unchangeable Gospel of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church; it is, rather, the new gospel of the Particular Church of Cincinnati, Archbishop Daniel Pilarczyk presiding.
Lastly, I cannot “know” with any certainty that the majority of dioceses and archdioceses in America follow the Liberal pattern of the Church of Cincinnati. But I can make certain extrapolations from the available information about them. The eight or so American dioceses that offer thoroughly orthodox Catholic Catechesis and that rigidly adhere to the original and unchanging Magisterial Catholic teaching are the only ones in America that have no priest shortage, seem to be devoid of or lagging far behind all the others in major scandals, public controversies and law suits, and have the most full pews. That alone should tell us something.
The goals of most (this is admittedly a conjecture) American dioceses and archdioceses seem likely to coincide with those of the Archdiocese of Cincinnati. I was able to “discern” these goals in the LPMP classes partially because they were, now and again, openly presented by teachers and course material. Perhaps they didn’t know that any old-time Catholics were in the room, or they just let their guard down, or, in supreme arrogance, they just didn't give a damn. What they want seems to be what Protestantism, and The World always seems to want: for the Roman Catholic Church to “get with the times” and change her teaching on contraception, divorce and remarriage, a celibate priesthood, a male priesthood, “choice,” acceptance and “normalizing” of homosexuality, and on, and on, and on – just like everybody else.
It involves, at the core, at least negotiation with if not surrender to The World, in order to wind up with a religion of convenience and of tolerance and super-inclusiveness. They are so mesmerized by The World that they do not see themselves as promoting the movement of America toward becoming the world’s new Sodom. America and the world needs a sure peg, an unchanging moral standard, something fixed forever and always reliable upon which to base individual and cultural life decisions.
The One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church is it.
(See the Cafeteria Catholic 1 through 5 navigation buttons on the left side of this page to see the material I objected to and presented to the Archbishop.)
Date: Thu Jun 03 14:47:36 2010
This site seems to confront the errors of liberalism, communism, and materialism.
Revealing such TRUTH is necessary; however this site FAILS to critique the Jewish contribution to each of these errors. Therefore "for fear of the Jews" you have compromised the TRUTH. Such a failing yields error because you ignore the source of error.
Date: Thu Jun 03 15:31:27 2010
From: Vic Biorseth
The Jewish contribution to liberalism, Communism and materialism? Excuse me? If you are going to attribute Marxism to Judaism simply because Marx was a Jew, you are really reaching. A so-called secular Jew is no Jew; he has abandoned the tenets of Judaism. Marx renounced all religion.
I have no fear of the Jews. When St. Paul, who incidentally was a Jew, used that term in Scripture, he was talking about the Jews who opposed Christ and His message.
I cannot explain why there are so many liberal Jews out there, but I can tell you that Judaism did not contribute to liberalism, Communism and materialism. I would surmise that there are just as many (per capita) miss-guided Catholics and Protestants as there are miss-guided Jews. How many pro-abortion or pro-contraception Catholics do you suppose are out there?
Saturday, December 08,
Converted Page to SBI! Release 3.0 BB 2.0.
Date: Wed Nov 12 2014
From: Vic Biorseth
Changes pursuant to changing the website URL
and name from
Thinking Catholic Strategic Center to
Catholic American Thinker.
Pulled the trigger on the 301 MOVE IT option June 1, 2014. Working my way through all the webpages. .
Language and Tone Statement
Please note the language and tone of this monitored Website. This is not the place to stack up vulgar
one-liners and crude rejoinders. While you may support, oppose or
introduce any position or argument, submissions must meet our
standards of logical rigor and civil discourse. We will not
participate in merely trading insults, nor will we tolerate participants merely
trading insults. Participants should not be
thin-skinned or over sensitive to criticism, but should be prepared to
defend their arguments when challenged. If you don’t really have a
coherent argument or counter-argument of your own, sit down and don’t
embarrass yourself. Nonsensical, immoral or merely insulting submissions will
not be published here. If you have something serious to contribute to
the conversation, back it up, keep it clean and keep it civil. We humbly
apologize to all religious conservative thinkers for the need to even say
these things, but the New Liberals are what they are, and the internet is what it is.
If you fear intolerant Leftist repercussions, do not use your real name and do not include email or any identifying information. Elite Culturally Marxist Authoritarians will never tolerate your freedom of speech or any opposition to their own pro-Marxist/anti-Christian/anti-American/Globalist/anti-Nation/immoral/anti-white/racist and bigoted point of view.
Never be lukewarm.
Life itself demands passion.
He who is indifferent to God has already forfeited his soul.
He who is indifferent to politics has already forfeited his liberty.
In America, religion is not mere window dressing and citizenship is not a spectator sport.
Do not allow our common destiny as a whole people to just happen without your input.
Catholic American Thinker
Free E-zine Subscription
Your email is perfectly secure here. We use it only to send you the
Catholic American Thinker
The purpose of this grouping of articles is to attack and refute perverted Catholicism, and to point the way back to Catholic orthodoxy and adherence to magisterial authority and teaching.
Refuting Perverted Catholicism
Opposing "soft" Catholicism, I'm OK - You're OK Catholicism, Cafeteria-Catholicism of the pick-and-choose variety, and the pure evil that seeks to pervert Catholicism from within, while wearing the mask of piety.
Refuting Perverted Catholicism: defending the Church as the Center of all Truth. Refuting Perverted Catholicism at the Layman Level. If proper Catholic catechesis dies, all is lost.
Has the USCCB morphed into the Catholicrat Party with it's own agenda? Our Democrat Party is now Maxocrat; our Republican Party is now Republicrat; has our USCCB gone Catholicrat?
On the Anti-Church metastasizing within the Roman Catholic hierarchy. The anti-Church within the Church: the anti-Papal agenda advancing even in the Vatican itself.
Babbling Christianity: The Loss of Unity in the Christian Message. Is some New Testament "Tower of Babble" moment behind babbling Christianity's ever increasing disunity?
Why is our whole culture going to pot? It's our morality, stupid. Every cultural thing - law, order, decency, indecency, salvation, damnation - hangs on a recognized cultural morality.
Can we find actual Evil inside the Catholic Church? Well, why not? The war between Satan's kingdom (the World) and the Kingdom of God, and Evil inside the Catholic Church.
The Modernist Heresy: Western Man's Descent from Philosophy into Modernism. Modernism is the heresy of heresies, because it carries within it all previous heresies, being as it is a direct, frontal assault upon faith and all doctrine and dogma.
Lucifer and the CCHD: The Catholic Campaign for Human Development.
Lucifer and the CCHD: how Lucifer’s disciples infected Catholic thinking, enjoyed Catholic funding and advanced evil in America.
The Catholic Communizer Dorothy Day is up for Sainthood? Excuse me?
The Catholic Communizer Dorothy Day’s life work was Marxist Community Organizing for future revolution.
The anti cafeteria Catholic forum is a thorn in the pew for Catholic wimps.
The anti cafeteria Catholic forum addresses weak-kneed, wimpy, inclusive, "Spirit of Vatican II" heterodox Catholicism. Refute these contentions if you can.
On Straying, Right or Left, from the Catechism.
We have before us, on one side, excesses of "Social Justice" and "Liberation Theology", and on the other, the "Lefebvre" movement and related groups. In the center: the Catechism.
Do our Catholic bishops promote and teach Roman Catholicism, or something less?
Cafeteria Catholicism, i.e., Pick-And-Choose Catholicism, is rampant in America, thanks to many American Catholic bishops.
(Cafeteria Catholicism 101)
My "Education" at the Athenaeum Of Ohio LPMP (Lay Pastoral Minstry Program).
The Athenaeum Of Ohio LPMP program was the required pre-requisite for entry into the Deaconate program in Archbishop Daniel E. Pylarczyk's Cincinnati Archdiocese.
(Cafeteria Catholic 1)
The hidden dissident agenda in the Athenaeum of Ohio LPMP teaching.
The overriding dissident agenda of Liberal Catholicism appeared sometimes mostly in teaching material, sometimes in teachers themselves, sometimes in both.
(Cafeteria Catholic 2)
A better name for the LPMP's Formation for Discipleship class: Catholic Dissent.
The Athenaeum of Ohio LPMP course called Formation for Discipleship was one big long exercise in Catholic dissent, pure and simple.
(Cafeteria Catholic 3)
Moral Theology, Cincinnati Archdiocese style: This ain't your daddy's religion. Christian Ethics is the title of the course in the Athenaeum of Ohio LPMP course on Catholic Moral Theology.
(Cafeteria Catholic 4)
Athenaeum of Ohio LPMP Christology Course: NOT about the Christ Who Rose Again.
This theoretically Catholic Christology course teaches about a Christ Who didn't know who he was, didn't necessarily rise again after death, but Who "teaches us valuable lessons" nonetheless.
(Cafeteria Catholic 5)
Athenaeum courses consistently taught that the early Church condoned slavery.
This teaching is clearly false. Yet the Athenaeum of Ohio LPMP program, in multiple courses, officially taught that the Church "changed" its teaching on slavery.
The "Enlightened" birthing of Historical-Critical Scripture analysis.
Historical Criticism of the most paranormal literature ever produced calls into question the "enlightenment" of the enlightened.
Catholic Communism: Similarities between Church Hierarchy and Pure Bureaucracy.
Mises said that Communism equals Bureaucracy; the Church is a bureaucracy, therefore we have Catholic Communism. True?
Materialistic Culture Versus The Catholic Thinker.
The Catholic Thinker is called to openly oppose Materialistic Culture.
The Thinking Catholic Challenge: Walking that very inconvenient walk.
The Catholic American Thinker seeks a return to Critical Thinking, recognition of Objective Reality, and living a solid, morally grounded life.
Compromise with Evil begins the ultimate death spiral.
Compromise on any Vital Principle leads to death, for individual souls and for cultures.
On the Origin and Destiny of the American Catholic Identity Crisis. The ongoing 50+ year American Catholic identity crisis was born of a split between the Magisterium who protected it, and the academics who taught it.
Cafeteria Sinners: Selecting Mortal Sins from the Catholic Smorgasbord. Catholicism's Cafeteria Sinners pick and choose the mortal sins they will commit, and still participate in Eucharist.
Defining "Difficulty", "Doubt" and "Dissent" in Catholicism. Reactions to Doctrine(s) presenting difficulty, doubt and dissent among the faithful need examination.
If you can't find the page you're looking for, try the