Shop for thousands of Catholic gifts at Aquinas and More/affiliate/ThinkingCath1376
SiteSell Hosting

Download a Permanent Printable PDF Version of This Article.

Returning America to her original consecration: the Way the Truth and the Life.

Is it to be the Way the Truth and the Life, or is it to be randomness, pointlessness and oblivion?

Vic Biorseth, Saturday, April 20, 2013
http://www.
CatholicAmericanThinker.com/

Certain points in human history are pivotal, and decisive.  America, and perhaps the world, have reached such a point.  It is decision time.  Is it to be the Way the Truth and the Life, or is it to be randomness, pointlessness and oblivion?  What does that even mean?  Do we know, any more, what the Way the Truth and the Life are?  It might be time to refresh our memories. 

The Old:

I, Tobit, walked in the ways of truth and righteousness all the days of my life, and I performed many acts of charity to my brethren and countrymen who went with me into the land of the Assyrians, to Nineveh. -Tobit 1:3

The New:

Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me. -John 14:6

In days of old, God's first chosen people, Israel, were ruled by judges, whose mission it was to make sure the people correctly followed the law of God.  Judges were committed to studying, understanding and correctly passing on the law; thus the people were ruled by the rule of law rather than the rule of mere men.  There were multiple tribes and there were multiple judges.  But some of the judges and many of the people were falling away from love of God and the spirit of the law, and they were seduced by the worldly distractions of pleasure, riches, power, pomp and circumstance.  Even the sons of Samuel, who were judges, fell victim to bribery at the expense of truth and justice. 

We all know - or should know - what happened next.

[1] When Samuel became old, he made his sons judges over Israel.
[2] The name of his first-born son was Jo'el, and the name of his second, Abi'jah; they were judges in Beer-sheba.
[3] Yet his sons did not walk in his ways, but turned aside after gain; they took bribes and perverted justice.
[4] Then all the elders of Israel gathered together and came to Samuel at Ramah,
[5] and said to him, "Behold, you are old and your sons do not walk in your ways; now appoint for us a king to govern us like all the nations."
[6] But the thing displeased Samuel when they said, "Give us a king to govern us." And Samuel prayed to the LORD.
[7] And the LORD said to Samuel, "Hearken to the voice of the people in all that they say to you; for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected me from being king over them.
[8] According to all the deeds which they have done to me, from the day I brought them up out of Egypt even to this day, forsaking me and serving other gods, so they are also doing to you.
[9] Now then, hearken to their voice; only, you shall solemnly warn them, and show them the ways of the king who shall reign over them."
[10] So Samuel told all the words of the LORD to the people who were asking a king from him.
[11] He said, "These will be the ways of the king who will reign over you: he will take your sons and appoint them to his chariots and to be his horsemen, and to run before his chariots;
[12] and he will appoint for himself commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and some to plow his ground and to reap his harvest, and to make his implements of war and the equipment of his chariots.
[13] He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers.
[14] He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive orchards and give them to his servants.
[15] He will take the tenth of your grain and of your vineyards and give it to his officers and to his servants.
[16] He will take your menservants and maidservants, and the best of your cattle and your asses, and put them to his work.
[17] He will take the tenth of your flocks, and you shall be his slaves.
[18] And in that day you will cry out because of your king, whom you have chosen for yourselves; but the LORD will not answer you in that day."
[19] But the people refused to listen to the voice of Samuel; and they said, "No! but we will have a king over us,
[20] that we also may be like all the nations, and that our king may govern us and go out before us and fight our battles."
[21] And when Samuel had heard all the words of the people, he repeated them in the ears of the LORD.
[22] And the LORD said to Samuel, "Hearken to their voice, and make them a king." Samuel then said to the men of Israel, "Go every man to his city."
-1 Sam 8:1-22

Thus it came to be that the rule of law began to be replaced by the rule of man.  Because God gave man free will, and intended for man to make use of his free will, out of respect for man and his free will, God allowed man to make such decisions and suffer such consequences.  There followed Saul, and David, and Solomon.  There was good in each, and there was bad in each, but the important thing is this: it was a very significant turning point.  From the appointment of the first king, there began a growing emphasis on worldly attentions, and a lessening of emphasis on the will of God.  

From that day on, until the founding of America, the entire history of the world ever increasingly involved conquest, rule by might, cruelty, injustice, slavery, and a rigid, fixed, permanent class division between nobility and serf, and the increasing ability of the few to use the many to their own advantage. All of this was in opposition to the way the truth and the life.  It was all predicted in 1 Samuel 8 above. 

All of that began to change with the founding of America.  The first Pilgrims, and all of the original Colonies, all involved people coming here to avoid religious persecution by theocratic rulers.  What they were looking for was religious freedom; in order to establish it, for themselves only, they established new theocratic governments, Christian denomination by Christian denomination.  It was the only way they knew to keep any other denomination from being legally imposed over them.  The original official American Colonial Christian religions are listed below. 

Rhode Island
Pennsylvania
Maryland
Connecticut
Georgia
Massachusetts
North Carolina
New Hampshire
South Carolina
Virginia
Florida

West Indies
New York
Delaware
New Jersey

Baptist
Quaker
Roman Catholic
Congregational
Church of England
Congregational
Church of England
Congregational
Church of England
Church of England
Catholic (Spanish era) Church of England (British era)
Church of England
Church of England
Undifferentiated Christian
Undifferentiated Protestant

While the Colonists differed in their specific Christian theological interpretations, which flowed forth from the First Tablet Commandments, they were all in total agreement on their morality, which flowed forth from the Second Tablet Commandments.  This Christian moral code - based on the law of God - formed the basis of civil law in the American Colonies.  These are the Commandments of God that describe how man is to treat his fellow man.  This is the moral law. 

Implicit within Honor Thy father and Thy mother is the sacredness of the normative family, and the presumptive right of parents to first authority over their own children, and to special social protections for the family.

Implicit within Thou shalt not kill is the inalienable right of all innocent human beings to continue to live.

Implicit within Thou shalt not commit adultery is the sanctity and inviolability and protected nature of the marriage covenant, and, again, the sanctity and protected nature of the family.

Implicit within Thou shalt not steal is the inalienable right to private property: the right of an individual to actually own something.

Implicit within Thou shalt not bear false witness is the protected and sacred nature of truth, and the moral requirement to protect it and to profess it fully and without distortion.

Implicit within Thou shalt not covet is, again, the sanctity of marriage, and, again, the protected right to own private property.

It is a vitally important yet generally overlooked fact that the early Colonialists, even in their new self-created Christian theocratic Colonies, did not impose their chosen religion upon the population or force everyone to worship a certain way.  Religious toleration was the order of the day.  Religious intolerance of the British and European states was the most important factor that they fled when they came here; it was the reason the Pilgrims sailed, and it was the main reason for the Colonies coming into being. 

Other Europeans who wanted to come to the new Colonies but could not afford the passage wanted to sign contracts in-debting themselves to Colonialists, committing themselves to periods of indentured servitude to the family or patron who paid their way over.  The Catholics in Maryland, and the Quakers in Pennsylvania, etc., could not always find willing servants of the same faith to come over and help work the land or other growing businesses, and so they willingly paid the fare of immigrants of other faiths. They took them in, sheltered, fed and clothed them, in return for (usually) seven years of servitude, after which they were free of the debt. 

Thus it came to be that the Catholics in Maryland, the Quakers in Pennsylvania, etc., were eventually outnumbered, Colony by Colony, by voting citizens of other denominations of Christianity.  The Colonies were still officially Christian theocracies, but the official Christian denominations had become voting minorities in each Colony, and people worshiped in many divergent Christian Churches everywhere, without hindrance.  While they still differed in theological interpretation, they all held to the same moral code, which formed their strong American Judeo-Christian Ethos, and the universally accepted basis for all civil law. 

The matter of rule by a King remained.  The Colonists had gotten out from under the religious intolerance of European kings which sprang from Luther's dictum Cujus region, ejus rligio (Whoever’s reign, his religion.)  It was this new Protestant dictum that kicked off the horrible wars of the Reformation, and the new radical combination of Church and State that took over all of Europe.  These fiercely theocratic kingdoms were precisely what the Pilgrims had fled, and what the early Colonists fled.  (We talked about this in For God and Country.) 

King George of England, who claimed sovereignty over the Colonies, insisted upon imposing his rule in them, and upon collecting increasing taxes from them, because - well, because he was the King.  It was his due.  The American Revolutionary War and its aftermath was one of history's most important decisive turning-point events; it was, potentially, the beginning of the end of rule by kings.  Two great earth-shaking documents were produced; one before the war - the document that started the Revolutionary war, the Declaration of Independence, and one after the final victory, the Constitution of the United States and its Bill of Rights. 

We have spoken of these two documents in Foundational Principles and in Constitutional Principles.  Here, we will only address one aspect of the American Founding Principles from the Declaration, and it is:

... that all men are created equal, ...

This seemingly insignificant, throw-away line was and is of the most profound importance, to kings, and to subjects of kings.  To nobility and to serfs.  To aristocrats and to working men.  To farmers and to hired hands.  To Presidents, Senators, Congressmen, Judges and Justices, Governors, Mayors, Legislators at all levels, Councils, Sheriffs, soldiers and citizens. 

What this line meant then, and what it means today, is that all men stand equal before the law.  No one is above the law.  No one.  President and citizen stand as equals before the bench.  We are a nation of laws, not merely of men.  The law is the ruler; we have no king; we have no ruler.  We have the law, and it is the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.  That, and that alone, is the supreme law of the land, no inferior laws may contradict it, and no other law from any source whatsoever may be superimposed over it. 

We will have no kings.  We are a nation of laws. 

America is the first classless nation, since the rule of Saul. 

The inspired brilliance of the Framers cannot be overstated; I truly believe they were inspired by God.  The Colonies would not ratify the Constitution without the Bill of Rights, and one of the most important was the right to freedom of religion, which they addressed in the First Amendment, as follows:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; ...

Congress, who held sole authority to make new law, could never establish any official state religion, nor could they restrict the free exercise of religion.  Thus, at the federal level, there could never be any official state religion, and the state could never dictate or impose any religion upon the people. 

Now, by this time, all of the individual states already enjoyed freedom of religion, even though they each had an official state (Colonial) religion established in law.  We have already spoken of the reason these Colonial theocracies were established; it was for religious freedom.  Now, with the ratification of the Bill of Rights, everyone saw the wisdom of the First Amendment religious clause.  Each state began a "disestablishment" program to repeal existing religious establishment laws at the state level, and to include the same religious prohibition in their state Constitutions.  The eventual result was that every state in America had a similar statement or amendment prohibiting an official state religion, and allowing for free exercise. 

We had a good beginning of returning our major focus to God, and concentrating less on the world.  The Founders and the Framers were humbled to their knees by the overall beauty of what they had collectively designed.  The new government was designed and constrained to be representative of the people, with governmental authority and power specifically limited and enumerated.  The Constitution provided the makeup of the government, and its rules of operation.  The whole of it, the whole design, was to enhance human liberty and free the human soul.  To make the citizen the sovereign, in the final analysis.  The citizen hires, and fires, even the President. 

But such liberty carries with it both a blessing and a curse.  Wherever man has free will, he is free to choose wrongly, and to be led astray; the world is still ruled by the evil one.  Temptations abound, falsehood is everywhere. 

The Founders and the Framers, and the first administrations of the American government, just about all of whom were really statesmen before they were politicians, had a good foundation in Scripture and in history.  They also stood on the shoulders of the greats of Western Civilization while trying to develop something new.  They used Socratic, Platonic and Aristotelian discipline in seeking to arrive at ultimate truth.  This meant that they appealed to ethos, pathos and logic, all in their proper order and with proper limitations.  That is how they argued and decided issues of contention, and that is how they legislated, executed and adjudicated new law. 

But Lucifer had planted seeds of deceit and deception in the Garden.  It may be argued that they were watered by the likes of Luther and Munzer, and that they were fertilized by the likes of Machiavelli, Hegel and Marx.  It may also be argued that they are nearing harvest by the likes of Comrade Obama, the Democrat Party, the New World Order and the House of Islam.

Earlier we spoke of the Aristotelian science of rhetoric, which made proper use of ethos, pathos and logos.  All of that is now radically distorted on the Left side of the street. 

If we look solely, for the moment, at the Democrat Party, we see a twisted view of America, her founding and her Constitution. 

The "ethos" of the Democrat Party is most certainly not the ethos of the Founders, Framers and the overwhelming majority of the current citizenry.  It is pro-abortion, pro-homosexual marriage, protective of pornography, hostile to Christian religion, hostile to the family, hostile to private property, seeking redistribution of property, driving toward the collective, and in general following Marx's Communist Manifesto to a T.  On the Left, there is no ethos; there is only an anti-ethos. 

What about pathos?  The sympathies of the Democrats are both twisted and misplaced.  Truth itself is twisted to invent classes where classes do not exist, in order to jinn up undeserved sympathies.  It began with "organized" labor, in which workers were alienated from their own employers and made to feel exploited, instead of employed, with a gigantic social wedge driven between them.  They did the same thing with the sexes, and with the races, and with the LGBT "communities," and with doctors and insurance providers, and with corporations and consumers, - the list is endless.  Worst of all is the poor versus everyone else.  The rich are blamed for the poor being poor, and every effort is bent to alienate the rich from everyone else, unless the rich man is a Democrat or a political supporter. 

That leaves logos, or logic.  This is where truth is twisted to the breaking point.  Reality is redefined, and the false redefinitions are incorporated into public education.  The biggest redefinition in play here is the one that redefines American equality before the law to become equality of - a long and eternally growing list of things.  Income.  Savings.  Property.  Social status.  Education.  Housing.  Food.  Medicine.  Medical treatment.  Clothing.  The list is endless; but that's not the only point. 

Before Marxian-Democrat redefinition of rights, the Constitution guaranteed American citizens legal rights to:

  1. Freedom from state directed religion.
  2. Freedom of religious exercise.
  3. Freedom of speech.
  4. Freedom of the press.
  5. Freedom of peaceful assembly.
  6. The right to petition the government for redress of grievances.
  7. The right to keep and bear arms.
  8. The right to refuse quarters to military in peacetime.
  9. The right to personal security.
  10. The right to security of private property.
  11. Legal protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.
  12. The right to due process of law.
  13. The right against self incrimination.
  14. The right to confront witnesses.
  15. The right to compel witnesses to testify.
  16. The right to legal counsel.
  17. Protection against excessive bail, excessive fines and against cruel and unusual punishment. 

There are more, but these represent the heart of the Bill of Rights.  As you can see, they are all protections of the citizen against the encroachment of the government on individual liberty.  The citizen rights set forth in the American Constitution are, first of all,

  1. compatible with the laws of God,
  2. possible to fulfill, and therefore
  3. practical, and therefore,
  4. logical

But the Marxian-Democrat rights imagined into being are not possible to fulfill, and therefore impractical, and therefore, illogical

It may have begun with FDR's famous (of infamous) Four Freedoms, which included two impossible human rights: freedom from want, and freedom from fear.  There is no way to fully satisfy these "rights" of all citizens.  The government would break itself trying to satisfy these impossible to satisfy rights.  But, the Four Freedoms were only the beginning; they led to the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and a whole new universe of illogical impossibilities.  Here's what we said about some of them in the political ideologies page:

 ... the absolute rights to Social Security, Equal Pay, a specific Standard of Living, Health Care, Unemployment Pay, Sick Pay, Disability Pay, Old Age Pay, Motherhood and Child Care Pay, Formative Education (which shall be compulsory and designed to inculcate all of these UN rights into the students,) and more.

The problem is that these items are not called mere benefits, or wishes, or even described as part of any social safety net for unfortunates; they are called absolute rights, of everyone. Rights and Responsibilities come in paired sets; if someone has an absolute right to something, then someone has the corresponding absolute responsibility to supply it. ...

But it's worse than even the quote above, because rights above are granted to everyone.  That is to say, everyone has a right to everything listed.  And more.  It just goes on and on with these people.  Modern "Social Justice" demands that everyone has a right to a job, a right to an "adequate" pay, a right to "decent" housing, a right to "complete" health care, and so forth. 

If every single one of us demanded such rights, who would be left to supply them?  No one.  We would be left with a world full of benefit recipients, and a world devoid of people to provide the benefits. 

The very idea of equality of stuff, born of the Marxian program of Redistribution of Wealth, is, first of all,

  1. incompatible with the laws of God (Thou shalt not steal; thou shalt not covet), 
  2. a violation of the Constitutional right to private property,
  3. impossible to fulfill, and therefore
  4. impractical, and therefore
  5. illogical.  

Socialism, which is to say, the Democrat Party agenda, is nothing but a gigantic Ponzi Scheme.  It pays benefits taken from a decreasing population of tax payers to an increasing population of recipients, until eventually the whole population is on the recipient end, and there are no more tax payers.  At which point the system collapses upon itself. 

So the Democrat program fails the Aristotelian approach on all counts: it has no guiding ethos at all, it has a misguided, impractical and downright stupid sense of pathos, and it is so illogical as to be demented. 

But it is even worse than that.  The Democrats are not stupid.  It is a trick; they are laying a trap.  See the Refuting Marx page for the specifics of the game they are playing.  The News Media is in on it.   Machiavelli first laid out the plan, Hegel improved on it and Marx boxed it all up in his Communist Manifesto.  It's all a game to get someone who is not in power into power, displacing whoever is in power at the moment.  That's what it's really all about. 

In our current case, it means displacing our Constitution and instituting a pure dictatorship. 

You don't want to believe that the Democrat Party is anti-American, but it is.  You don't want to believe that the News Media is equally anti-American, but it is.  Nobody wants to entertain the notion that a president of the USA could be an anti-American, but he is. 

He was raised in a world of equal parts of Marxism, Islam, anti-Colonialism and anti-Americanism.  His chief mentor was Frank Marshal Davis; do you think Frank Marshal Davis was not anti-American?  His longest tenured Pastor was Jeremiah Wright of Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ.  Do you think Reverend Wright and his church are somehow not anti-American?  He got his political start in the home of the infamous anti-American terrorist and bomber Bill Ayers; do you think Bill Ayers is not anti-American? 

You would be hard pressed to list any public statements our current President made that were not outright lies.  You would be hard pressed to name any appointment he made to any office who was not some variety of anti-American.  His first secretary of state, Madam Hillary, wrote her thesis on her hero, Saul Alinksky.  Do you think Saul Alinsky was not an anti-American? 

If you don't know about Saul Alinsky and his radical agenda, here it is in a nutshell: 

Read the Communist Manifesto, and every place you see the word "revolution" replace it with the word "organization" and you will have the Alinsky model of shutting down a nation from the inside, while pretending to be a good "insider" citizen of the nation. 

His second secretary of state was John Kerry, who, as a private citizen, illegally met and "negotiated" with the leaders of the Viet Cong Party in Paris, while we were still at war with them

The real question should be, especially after studying his own written and spoken words, why on earth would you ever think that Comrade Obama, peace be upon him, would not be an anti-American? 

Now, with the Boston Marathon bombings, our attention turns again to Islam.  We don't think about Islam much, until it kills some more of us.  Islam is, after all, a totally foreign ideology / religion / way of life.  It is interesting to note how the News Media instantly, right off the bat, publicly hoped that the perpetrator(s) was (were) white, conservative and male, because if any person of color were involved, it would be a "setback for the whole Liberal agenda." 

Always, the Democrats and their propaganda wing, the News Media, point to Right Wing Extremists with every new terror event, which is, of course, the exact opposite of what history shows us.  Such violence just about always comes from the Left.  It's what they do. 

If you didn't think of Moslems, who would you first think of? 

I remember the film Casablanca, and the scene in which Rick (Humphrey Bogart) shoots Major Strasser (Conrade Veidt.)  After the police arrive, Captain Renault (Claude Rains) orders them to:

Round up the usual suspects.

Going strictly by American history involving bombing, murder, terrorism, assassination, secret subversive organizations and so forth, in the case of the Boston Marathon bombings, I know who my usual suspects would be. 

Where was Bill Ayers? 

Where was Bernadine Dohrn? 

Where was Kathy Boudin? 

They have all done this sort of thing before; they are all just as anti-American as the current administration, the Democrat Party and the News Media.  They all prove the fact that being a member of an anti-American terrorist organization, committing terrorist acts involving bombs and murder is a good thing, a resume enhancement, a step in the right direction, if you want to become an American Ivy league university Professor. 

American Ivy League universities are loaded down with anti-American professors.  Teaching subjects like medicine, engineering, etc., are secondary objectives in American academia; the primary objective involves feeding the anti-American animus.  That is their main mission. 

But, this time, it again turned out to be a Moslem thing.  Surprise.  This time the perpetrators were of Russian extraction, and the Moslem connection involved Chechnya, a state or province or whatever that has warred on-and-off with larger Russia, with horrible atrocities committed on both sides. As usual, larger Islam is defended by the Democrats and the News Media. 

What's the connection between our Left and Islam?  Anti-Americanism.

And everyone, including even conservatives, dances around lesser Islamic connections, such as, Al Queda, or any other organized terror group.  The overriding assumption remains that larger Islam is a "religion of peace," which it is not and has never been, throughout its entire history.  It is an ideology of conquest and war.  See the Refuting Mohammed page. 

Yet, the terrorism "experts" diligently track relationships and connections, however tenuous, between disparate Islamic groups, to see whether it is an isolated incident, or a larger terror plot.  Well, here's a news flash: Islam itself is a larger terror plot. 

There is one and only one connection between all the various Islamic factions aligned against us, and it is the Koran.  The link between the Chechen version of the world Caliphate, and the "12th Imam" version of the world Caliphate, and Al Queda, and Major Nidal Hasan, and the Moslem Brotherhood, and Lee Boyd Malvo, and CAIR, etc., etc., etc., is the Koran. 

There is not one thing any of these terrorists or terrorist organizations have said or done that they were not commanded to do by the Koran.  Islam is the enemy.  It is just so glaringly obvious that I cannot understand why more people don't see it.  Perhaps we have been "educated" into sheer suicidal stupidity. 

Thomas Jefferson knew that Islam was the mortal enemy of all of Christendom, and all of Western Civilization, and all of the non-Islamic world, and he knew it way back in the 18th century, for heaven's sake.  Don't look now, but it is the 21st century, and we are in need of learning this terrible lesson all over again.  Jefferson was so alarmed by what he learned of Islam that he personally published and distributed an English translation of the Koran, as a warning to all who spoke English, about what these people intended to do to us. 

Are we all deaf, dumb and blind? 

Are we now so semi-literate that we cannot read with understanding? 

Sometimes I feel like I'm flogging a dead horse. 

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.)

SLIMC1 Secularist Liberal Intellectual Media Complex
GESGOEAEOT2 Gradually, Ever So Gradually, Over Eons And Eons Of Time
PEWAG3 Punctuated Equilibrium's Wild Assed Guess
TTRSTF4 Them There Real Scientifical Type Fellers
TTRSPTF5 Them There Real Smart Perfesser Type Fellers
TTRSJTF6 Them There Real Smart Journalistical Type Fellers
SNRTACBT7 Surely No Right Thinking Adult Could Believe Today
STNSEACPB8 Surely Today No Serious, Educated Adult Could Possibly Believe
WDN9 We Don't Know
BMDFP10 Baboons, Mongrel Dogs, Filthy Pigs
HBAACOTE11 Human Beings Are A Cancer On The Earth
ACLU12 Anti-Christian Litigation Union
FLORMPORIF13 Flagrant Liar, Or, Mindless Parrot, Or, Innocent Fool
MEJTML14 Marxist Ends-Justify-The-Means Liar
IEJTML15 Islamic Ends-Justify-The-Means Liar
MPAV16 Marxist Principles And Values
WBESSWG17 Wise, Benign, Elite, Super-Scientific World Governance
TRMITM18 The Reason Man's In This Mess
IYI19 Intellectual Yet Idiotic

Reference Material

Return to Latest News page

Return to HOME PAGE

Respond to This Article Below The Last Comment

Comments

Respond to this specific article immediately below.  Or,
publish your own new subject Web Page.  Or,
publish your own unrelated brief Passing Thought.


Date:  Sun Apr 21 15:54:33 2013
From:  Sue
Email:   rcsherrillj@gmail.com
Location:  Gwynn's Island, VA, USA
Comment: 

Vic: As always, I love what you have said here -just noticed a few language errors that you might want to remedy :

1)  ...the Declaration of Independence, and one after the final victory, the Constitution of the United States and it's [Should be 'its' - no apostrophe] Bill of Rights.

2) Ivy not Ivey League  & same paragraph 'academia' (the 'e' is missing)[I think I am right although when I read the difference between 'Moslem' and 'Muslim', I am all for 'Moslem'!]

Don't expect to see this in the comments, but I did want to tell you that I have been waiting for your take on this since even unfolded last week. I only wish we could open more eyes! I think you are right:  Perhaps we have been "educated" into sheer suicidal stupidity. 

Highest regards, Sue



Date:  Sun Apr 21 18:10:50 2013
From:  Vic Biorseth
Comment:  

Sue:

Thank you so much; I have corrected the errors. 

Lots of people don't like my use of the word Moslem, among others of my stubborn linguistic oddities.  I wrote the Ethics of Language page to answer some of those criticisms. 

Regards,

Vic


Date:  Sun Apr 21 16:03:43 2013
From:  Sue
Email:   rcsherrillj@gmail.com
Location:  Gwynn's Island, VA, USA
Comment: 

One other thing: did I understand you to say the the 'evil one' rules the world? I don't think I ever heard anyone offer that idea before, have I?

Thanks,  Sue

https://www.facebook.com/sue.sherrill?ref=tn_tnmn


Date:  Sun Apr 21 18:21:18 2013
From:  Vic Biorseth
Comment:  

Sue:

You probably have heard it somewhere before.  I mentioned it most recently in Truth Versus Agenda.  But where the notion comes from is from the Bible, in Revelations 12:7-9:

[7]Now war arose in heaven, Michael and his angels fighting against the dragon; and the dragon and his angels fought,
[8] but they were defeated and there was no longer any place for them in heaven.
[9] And the great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the Devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world -- he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him.

Note that Satan was thrown down to earth, not to hell. 

In Luke 10:18 we have the Lord's own words:

[18] And he said to them, "I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven.

Matthew 4:9 and Luke 4:7 speak of Satan's temptation of the Lord after His fast in the desert, offering Him all the kingdoms of the world, which had been given into his hand, if only the Lord would bow down and worship him. 

Satan does indeed rule the world. 

Regards,

Vic


Date:  Mon Apr 23 23:21:14 2013
From:  Ahmed
Email:   
Location:  
Comment: 

What you say about Islam and the holy Qur'an is not correct.  What you are describing it radical Jihad, not Islam.  Islam is a religion of peace. 


Date:  Tue Apr 22 06:49:03 2013
From:  Vic Biorseth
Comment:  

Ahmed:

What I say here is quite correct.  There is no such thing as radical Jihad.  There is only Jihad, which is an important, integral part of Islam.  Jihad is mentioned at least 41 times in the Koran.  And, Islam is most certainly not a religion of peace.  Besides the Koran, actual history itself proves the militaristic, warlike nature of Islam. 

Jihad is an important and required duty of all Moslems. 

There are different kinds of Jihad, but the most frequently referred to and the most frequently applied kind of Jihad involves violence or actual war. The Holy War aspect of Jihad outweighs both non-violent Koranic references and non-violent historical events. 

The inner or "greater" Jihad is the inner struggle to submit oneself totally to God.  The outer or "lesser" Jihad is the external struggle to spread Islam all over the world. 

There are peaceful forms of outer Jihad; there is Jihad by debate or argumentation, and there is a "Jihad of the pen."  But the peaceful uses of Jihad are and always have been vastly outnumbered by the violent uses called for in the Koran.  When all other forms of outer Jihad fail, the disciple is called to at least support, if not actually perform, violent Jihad against unbelievers. 

And they always do. 

That's just the way it is. 

Regards,

Vic


Date:  Wed Apr 24 07:32:23 2013
From:  Noname
Email:   
Location:  
Comment: 

We are supposed to be a pluralistic society.  It is our diversity that made us into a great nation.  You are always attacking anyone who supports any part of what Marx taught, and all Muslims, because of what you think they think.  How can we have freedom of speech and press if we cannot first have freedom of thought?  Almost all Muslims are decent people why can you not see that and accept it?  This is narrow mindedness.  When we are welcoming to everyone, without exception, we will begin to eliminate war.  We should be increasing diversity, not restricting it. 


Date:  Wed Apr 24 08:52:09 2013
From:  Vic Biorseth
Comment:  

Noname:

Ho hum, heavy sigh and here we go again. 

Pluralism and diversity is not what made us into a great nation.  It was a homogeneity of guiding ethos that did that.  An increasing heterogeneity can only be destructive of any culture.  There is nothing wrong with diversity of race, ethnic origin or foreign traditions.  But what you are talking about is diversity of guiding ethos, and even purpose for being.  As much as I hate to pop your happy balloon, let me recommend that you turn down any dinner invitation you receive from any tribe of cannibals. 

First, re Marx, the central theme in Marxism is the elimination of private property and the program of redistribution, right?  Anyone who subscribes to a program of redistribution opposes the Constitution (Amendment 4; Amendment 14), i.e., the Constitutional right to private property.  I submit that opposing the Constitution is opposing America, as Constituted, particularly if the person ever took and oath to defend the Constitution.  The Constitution is still the supreme law of the land.  (At least it says so.) 

Second, re Islam, and all those peaceful Moslems: I am reminded of the old Western movies in which the wagon train was nervous about Indians lurking about, and the warning "It's when you don't see 'em that they're there", and "It's the one you don't see who will get you."  I see all those peaceful Moslems, and they make me quite nervous.  As I said, when push comes to shove, they will at least support, if not actively participate in, violent Jihad against unbelievers.

How's that purely academic, completely impractical and downright stupid program of Celebrating Diversity working out for Boston these days? 

Regards,

Vic


Date:   Tue Oct 14 2014
From:  Vic Biorseth
Comment:  

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.  . 

Regards,

Vic


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 cannot and will not tolerate your freedom of speech or any opposition to their own rigid pro-Marxist/anti-Christian/anti-American/Globalist/anti-Nation/immoral/anti-white/racist and bigoted point of view. 

ADD COMMENT

Please note that all fields followed by an asterisk must be filled in.

Please enter the word that you see below.

  


Copyrighted Material


Your Host, Vic Biorseth

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

You will receive immediate email newsletters with links to new articles as they are published here.  Your email is perfectly secure here; we use it only to send you the
Catholic American Thinker
Newsletter
and nothing else.

Back Issues

Keep This Website Going

Related Webpages

The Truth Pages

Highlighting the inconvenient, uncomfortable and alienating absolute divisiveness of Truth.  We either stand in Truth, or we do not.  Truth is simple black and white.  There are no shades of grey.  You will either align yourself with the ruler of the world, or with the Creator of the world, Who is Truth Himself. 

The Politics versus Truth dichotomy conundrum.  Even knowing how vehemently both Establishment Political Parties hate the Constitution, it's still shocking how openly they oppose that which they have all sworn to uphold.

Questioning Truth:  "There is no absolute truth", say the Enlightened Elite.  Questioning Truth itself has been the pop-culture wave since the 1960s.  Loss of faith in man's ability to even identify reality is the real source of all the social chaos.

When Worldly Authority meets Truth, it is Decision Time.  When Just Authority meets Truth there is harmony; when Unjust Authority meets Truth, there is a Contest.

Truth is the only thing we can Unite on.  Yet Real Truth Divides.  Truth Divides, because Truth Hurts.  Any "Truth" that indiscriminately Unites is a False Truth.

Regarding the SLIMC Vs. the Truth.  Regarding the SLIMC (Secularist Liberal Intellectual Media Complex) and its treatment of the Truth.

Returning America to her original consecration; the Way the Truth and the Life.  Is it to be the Way the Truth and the Life, or is it to be randomness, pointlessness and oblivion?

The Truth about Islam, finally, in a homily at Mass.  You never hear the unvarnished truth about Islam, or other evils, from Catholic clerics. Maybe that's finally changing.

Truth Denial:  Über-elitist, high intellectual, super sophisticated Stupidity.  Evil = Falsehood; the opposite of Truth.  It is not possible to oppose reality and not be stupid.

How Truth Hurts, when it smacks us in the face.  But if Truth hurts, it also saves, and makes us free (John 8:23)

Truth versus Agenda addresses the simplest of problems greatly complexified.  Truth versus Agenda examines the contest between reality and its opposition.

Truth Versus Evil sums up this whole Website in one concise sermon.  Truth versus Evil, or, The Kingdom versus The World, describes the contest. Do we really recognize the contestants?

Absolute Truth, as The  Winning Political Force to be Reckoned With.  The 2016 Candidate who stands in Truth rather than whatever various audiences want to hear will beat everyone, severely.

"We belong to the Church militant; and She is militant because on earth the powers of darkness are ever restless to encompass Her destruction. Not only in the far-off centuries of the early Church, but down through the ages and in this our day, the enemies of God and Christian civilization  make bold to attack the Creator’s supreme dominion and sacrosanct human rights.”--Pope Pius XII

"It is not lawful to take the things of others to give to the poor.  It is a sin worthy of punishment, not an act deserving a reward, to give away what belongs to others."--St. Francis of Assisi

Traditional Latin Tridentine Mass, offered at Assumption Grotto Church in  Detroit, Michigan.  Our deepest prayer, our highest form of worship, and the way God should be treated.

Find a Latin Mass

The Vietnam War Proved the American News Media's Treacherous Anti-American Marxism.
Note the Military Assault Rifle common to the American Founding Era.

Atheist Genesis:

In the beginning there was nothing, and nothing happened to nothing.
And then nothing accidentally exploded and created everything.
And then some bits of everything accidentally encountered other bits of everything and formed some new kinds of everything.
And then some bits of everything accidentally arranged themselves into self-replicating bits of everything.
And then some self-replicating bits of everything accidentally arranged themselves into dinosaurs.
See?

(See The Darwinism Pages)

If you can't find the page you're looking for, try the
SITE MAP.