The American TFP https://www.tfp.org/ Fighting for the Counter-Revolution Fri, 15 Mar 2024 13:23:17 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://www.tfp.org/content/uploads/2016/03/cropped-screenshot-32x32.png The American TFP https://www.tfp.org/ 32 32 The CDC’s Failure to Eliminate Syphilis Ignores Causes and Harms Babies https://www.tfp.org/the-cdcs-failure-to-eliminate-syphilis-ignores-causes-and-harms-babies/ https://www.tfp.org/the-cdcs-failure-to-eliminate-syphilis-ignores-causes-and-harms-babies/#respond Mon, 18 Mar 2024 04:00:35 +0000 https://www.tfp.org/?p=82387 The U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) is again announcing a healthcare crisis that is surging in America. The facts are stark and threatening. The crisis involves syphilis, the venereal disease that affects those who lead dissolute lives. For a long time, campaigns against promiscuity have been effective in increasing public awareness ... Read more

The post The CDC’s Failure to Eliminate Syphilis Ignores Causes and Harms Babies appeared first on The American TFP.

]]>
The CDC’s Failure to Eliminate Syphilis Ignores Causes and Harms Babies
The CDC’s Failure to Eliminate Syphilis Ignores Causes and Harms Babies

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) is again announcing a healthcare crisis that is surging in America. The facts are stark and threatening.

The crisis involves syphilis, the venereal disease that affects those who lead dissolute lives. For a long time, campaigns against promiscuity have been effective in increasing public awareness of the causes and effects of the disease. Antibiotic treatment has also helped dramatically to bring the disease under control.

From a high of 450 syphilis cases per 100,000 people in the forties, the cases dwindled to the point that some believed the illness would be effectively eliminated in America at the turn of the twenty-first century.

Rates Now Spiraling Due to Cultural Changes

However, this disappearance did not happen. The low rate of under 32,000 syphilis cases in 2000 figure spiraled to more than 207,000 in 2022. The problem is not going away.

The reasons are not all medical. Like so many things associated with the CDC these days, the centers are introducing cultural and leftist factors into the equation that could be costing American lives by failing to address causes.

For example, the center reports that the crisis is especially affecting “pregnant people” and their babies. The use of the term “pregnant people” is a telltale sign that the CDC is introducing woke ideas in its medicine. Accompanying this designation is the acceptance of the promiscuous lifestyles and practices that favor the spread of syphilis.

The Tragedy of Pregnant Mothers

The cases of pregnant mothers are especially tragic and urgent. The maternal rate for syphilis during pregnancy stood at 280 per 100,000 births in 2022, up from 87 per 100,000 births in 2016.

What makes the illness so devastating is that pregnant women (not people) can pass the syphilis infection to their babies in the womb.

Eternal and Natural Law: The Foundation of Morals and Law

The disease can have the following effects: miscarriage, stillbirth, blindness, premature birth, severe post-birth health problems or the infant’s death. Over 3,700 babies were born with syphilis in 2022, ten times more than in 2012.

A Refusal to Deal With Causes

Syphilis has always been known as a sexually transmitted disease affecting those living licentiously. Many historians trace its origins to the New World, where it later passed to Europe after the return of Columbus.

A logical strategy for diminishing the number of cases would be to discourage promiscuous lives. Such actions would deal with the problem before it happens, not after.

However, the CDC has ruled out such a strategy. Its principal focus is to promote testing of those living promiscuously. Healthcare officials insist that blood tests for the sexually active would be a significant step in bringing the numbers down.

The Traditional Approach Is Abandoned

Thus, the CDC departs from the traditional approach toward syphilis and adopts an agenda following all the talking points of the sexual revolution that have resulted in so much misery and death.

The old strategy was clear. It did not solve the moral problem but demonstrated the dangers of contracting the disease by recommending a sure way of avoiding it: abstaining from sexual promiscuity.

The measure consisted of a widespread educational campaign about the dangers of promiscuous behavior. There was an element of fear attached to the disease since people could see the consequences of their actions.

Prophecies of Our Lady of Good Success About Our TimesLearn All About the Prophecies of Our Lady of Good Success About Our Times

However, there was also a social stigma attached to the disease whereby the people sensed the immoral aspect of their behavior. This fear of shame also had its role in controlling the highly contagious disease.

The Imposition of the Public Health Infrastructure

Both of these healthy fears helped people avoid the occasions of risk. It lowered the number of syphilis cases. This approach depended upon a vibrant social infrastructure to convey its message.

The Breakdown of Public Health

However, this policy is no longer in place. Officials claim that the public health infrastructure has imploded. With the breakdown of the family and community, educational campaigns are more difficult.

Above all, there is no longer the same sense of public morality or the religious notion of sin that condemns sexual promiscuity. Sexual relationships outside of marriage are now mainstream. Clergy and civil leaders do not warn about this threat to society.

More than a third of syphilis cases, for example, occur in men who have sex with men, because this group, which represents some four percent of the male population in America, is more likely to have multiple recent sexual partners.

Normalizing Sexuality and Sexual Exploration not Vilifying It

Thus, the CDC has fully adopted the sexual revolution as its guide for dealing with the crisis. It now automatically assumes that all people will be sexually active and seeks to do damage control when the consequences destroy health—and even harm innocent babies.

Testing for syphilis is the principal instrument of prevention. CDC officials are insisting that this testing be destigmatized. People should feel no remorse for their behaviors or for infecting others.

Science Confirms: Angels Took the House of Our Lady of Nazareth to Loreto

This destigmatizing consists of normalizing sexuality and sexual exploration and not vilifying it. The idea is to turn the test into an almost mechanical checkup done after being sexually active. This policy assures people and partners that they can continue the destructive relationships that cause disease.

Officials call for doing away with the fear factor. There should be no more fear of the disease since antibiotic treatments (now in short supply) can make syphilis go away. Acts need not have consequences.

People no longer need to have shame but can proclaim their sexuality proudly during these visits that resemble almost a flu checkup. All moral considerations are off the table.

Above all, the CDC gives the government a major role in fighting syphilis by providing funding, designing programs and reaching out to disadvantaged communities. The CDC instructions manage to insert identity politics into the equation by blaming economic inequalities, not moral behaviors, for the surge.

This is a moral problem that must be part of the solution. The result of this CDC policy will have the effect of throwing gasoline on a fire. It will stroke the unbridled passions to greater intensity—and harm those babies that survive abortion.

Photo Credit:  © Tada Images – stock.adobe.com

The post The CDC’s Failure to Eliminate Syphilis Ignores Causes and Harms Babies appeared first on The American TFP.

]]>
https://www.tfp.org/the-cdcs-failure-to-eliminate-syphilis-ignores-causes-and-harms-babies/feed/ 0
China’s Baby Bust: A Result of Decades-Old Miscalculations and Bad Rocket Science https://www.tfp.org/chinas-baby-bust-a-result-of-decades-old-miscalculations-and-bad-rocket-science/ https://www.tfp.org/chinas-baby-bust-a-result-of-decades-old-miscalculations-and-bad-rocket-science/#respond Fri, 15 Mar 2024 04:05:56 +0000 https://www.tfp.org/?p=82371 China’s rapid demographic decline is fast becoming a severe population crisis. This unexpected shift can be traced back to misjudgments made over 40 years ago. Deng Xiaoping’s implementation of a controversial population control policy in 1979 was considered one of history’s most significant and disastrous social experiments. In response to China’s growing ... Read more

The post China’s Baby Bust: A Result of Decades-Old Miscalculations and Bad Rocket Science appeared first on The American TFP.

]]>
China’s Baby Bust: A Result of Decades-Old Miscalculations and Bad Rocket Science
China’s Baby Bust: A Result of Decades-Old Miscalculations and Bad Rocket Science

China’s rapid demographic decline is fast becoming a severe population crisis. This unexpected shift can be traced back to misjudgments made over 40 years ago. Deng Xiaoping’s implementation of a controversial population control policy in 1979 was considered one of history’s most significant and disastrous social experiments.

In response to China’s growing population, Deng Xiaoping approved a radical solution limiting each couple to just one child to combat overpopulation and maintain sustainable growth. This led to the nationwide enforcement of the infamous one-child policy.

The policy was conceived in the context of a worldwide panic over a global population explosion in the sixties and seventies. This specter echoed the warnings of economist Thomas Malthus (1766-1834), who is known for his theory that population growth will always tend to outrun the food supply and that the progress of humanity is impossible without limits on reproduction.

Eternal and Natural Law: The Foundation of Morals and Law

In response to this perceived threat, the Communist Chinese government turned to a rocket scientist trained in Moscow. Song Jian, a prominent scientist with a unique background in military science and mathematics, engineered the one-child policy. He used mathematical models derived from rocket trajectory calculations and applied them to population growth. He was China’s senior cabinet member overseeing science and technology.

In 1975, Song was part of a Chinese academic delegation that visited the University of Twente in the Netherlands, where he met Dutch mathematician Geert Jan Olsder. Olsder, now in his eighties, reminisced that his discussions with Song influenced the mathematical models of missile trajectories that gave rise to the one-child policy.

As Song and his scientific team fine-tuned these models, he projected the impact of varying fertility rates on China’s population. By late 1979, he presented reports based on these models, revealing alarming projections. He calculated that sustaining a fertility rate of three babies per woman would skyrocket China’s population to 4.26 billion by 2080.

When issuing the policy, officials suggested the possibility of adjusting strategies if the birth rate declined too sharply. A Communist Party statement in 1980 stated that an evaluation would be made after 30 years to see if more liberal population models might be implemented.

The failure of the policy started ten years later when fertility rates quickly fell below replacement levels. Adding to the problem was the rapidly decreasing number of newborn girls.

As time passed, demographers and economists criticized the policy as outdated and flawed. They argued that China’s fertility rate would have naturally decreased with rising life expectancies and improved economic conditions.

The enforcement of the policy brought about the unintended consequence of creating a one-child mindset. Decades of forced abortions and sterilizations drove couples to avoid unauthorized pregnancies. Propaganda promoting the advantages of small families had the desired effect on the population. In addition, the traditional preference for sons created a surplus of males, making finding marriage partners more difficult.

Prophecies of Our Lady of Good Success About Our TimesLearn All About the Prophecies of Our Lady of Good Success About Our Times

China’s Communist Party inadvertently changed the culture, not only policy. Now, the Party is finding it impossible to reverse the situation by changing the policy.

Presently, young women stand at the heart of China’s demographic challenge. Their reluctance to have children is growing, compounded by a diminishing population of young women.

Harvard anthropologist Susan Greenhalgh noted that women raised under the one-child policy were groomed to fit Beijing’s vision of a “higher-quality” of life population: educated, astute, worldly and independent. These women are unlikely to revert to traditional roles as housewives any time soon, if at all.

Beyond societal shifts, Song’s model disregarded economic influences, like the significant urban migration unleashed by Deng’s reforms, which had a more substantial impact than anticipated in driving down fertility rates.

Even after demographers raised concerns a decade ago, Song supported maintaining zero population growth. When China’s one-child policy was lifted in 2015, some birth restrictions still remained.

Demographers are racing to address the sharp decline in births with data that is constantly changing. The United Nations’ population projections for China, which are based on the 2020 census and assume a fertility rate of 1.19, are already outdated.

Projections by experts from Victoria University in Australia and the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences paint a grim picture. They anticipate China’s population to dwindle to just 525 million by the century’s end, down from the current 1.4 billion.

The implications for the future are overwhelming. Few young workers plus an older retiring population means a bankrupt elder care and pension system.

According to forecasts by the state-run Chinese Academy of Sciences, the current pension system is projected to be depleted by 2035. By then, the population of Chinese citizens above the national retirement age of 60 is expected to surge from roughly 280 million to 400 million.

10 Razones Por las Cuales el “Matrimonio” Homosexual es Dañino y tiene que Ser Desaprobado

China’s population policies have long relied on a materialistic outlook that reduces everything to economic and scientific speculations. These projections do not include cultural and spiritual considerations that significantly impact population growth.

The communist ideology rejects the God-given natural order that regulates and orients all things to Him. When people resolve to live according to God’s law, these problems are resolved.

Communist China chose to impose an anti-natural system upon its people. Now, it must reckon with the unintended consequences of meddling with God’s plan for China.

The solution is a return to order and God. It is actually quite simple—it’s not rocket science…

Photo Credit: © superjoseph – stock.adobe.com

The post China’s Baby Bust: A Result of Decades-Old Miscalculations and Bad Rocket Science appeared first on The American TFP.

]]>
https://www.tfp.org/chinas-baby-bust-a-result-of-decades-old-miscalculations-and-bad-rocket-science/feed/ 0
Pope Pius IX’s Special Blessing for Persecuted Journalist, Louis Veuillot https://www.tfp.org/pope-pius-ixs-special-blessing-for-persecuted-journalist-louis-veuillot/ https://www.tfp.org/pope-pius-ixs-special-blessing-for-persecuted-journalist-louis-veuillot/#respond Fri, 15 Mar 2024 04:00:46 +0000 https://www.tfp.org/?p=82373 Napoleon III signed the order suppressing l’Univers on January 29, 1860. When the police officer arrived with the order, the editorial staff of l’Univers was assembled in the newspaper’s offices. After the order was read, the editors embraced each other. They promised to remain united until the newspaper could be published again. ... Read more

The post Pope Pius IX’s Special Blessing for Persecuted Journalist, Louis Veuillot appeared first on The American TFP.

]]>
Pope Pius IX’s Special Blessing for Persecuted Journalist, Louis Veuillot
Pope Pius IX’s Special Blessing for Persecuted Journalist, Louis Veuillot

Napoleon III signed the order suppressing l’Univers on January 29, 1860. When the police officer arrived with the order, the editorial staff of l’Univers was assembled in the newspaper’s offices. After the order was read, the editors embraced each other. They promised to remain united until the newspaper could be published again. Before they parted, each one signed a letter Louis Veuillot drafted to Pius IX.

“Most Holy Father,

“Prostrating at your feet is the first impulse and greatest consolation of the editors of l’Univers after the blow they have just suffered. Our work no longer exists, but our hearts are inflamed more than ever by the zeal which, thank God, has always animated them. Devoted sons of the Holy Roman Church, we are glad to have fallen while making Your Holiness’ word resound. An encyclical of Pius IX gave life to l’Univers; now, life is taken from it because of an encyclical of Pius IX. May God and Pius IX be blessed! Most Holy Father, our work was entirely yours, and our hearts, endeavors, and ourselves always remain yours.

Eternal and Natural Law: The Foundation of Morals and Law

“Most Holy Father: We ask indulgence for our past faults, which we did not commit, moved by anger or evil intent. We beg you to bless us for the future so that, if we can get back on our feet, we may do better work and are always inspired by the same good desires. We plan to stay together for as long as possible. If forced to separate, each of us will work alone with a team spirit. If Your Holiness wants to give any of us a particular task, he will obey it as an order from God.

“At the feet of Your Holiness, we remain your very humble, grateful, and forever faithful children.

“Louis Veuillot, Du Lac, Eugène Veuillot, Coquille, Aubineau, Rupert, Chantrel, De La Roche Heron, Count de La Tour, deputy to the Legislative Body, Count de Maumigny, Father Cornet, Barrier, Taconet.”

In the following days, a large crowd of friends and admirers flocked to the editorial office of l’Univers and Louis Veuillot’s home, expressing their sympathy and solidarity. Even the editors of newspapers opposed to him, such as the Journal des Débats, made sure to be represented. All registered their protests against the government’s action. Even outside of France, the reaction to the disappearance of l’Univers was enormous. Many newspapers published expressive comments about it. Veuillot received countless letters applauding his attitude and condemning the Emperor’s policy. It was a universal expression of support.

As a result, desolation reigned in most Catholic circles. Only the liberals kept an impenetrable silence. The great newspaper which interpreted Catholics’ aspirations and brilliantly defended their cause had disappeared. But it had done so gloriously. L’Univers was suppressed because it made public the Pope’s condemnation of the imperial government. Joseph de Maistre’s daughter, Duchess of Montmorency-Laval—the famous Constance of his letters—aptly expressed the opinion of Catholics in a letter to Veuillot.

“You will undoubtedly find in yourselves and your consciences’ testimony a most beautiful reward for the heroic act you have just performed. All ardent Catholics with elevated and sincere hearts need to express their recognition, profound esteem, and admiration to you. The Sovereign Pontiff’s encyclical was a formidable cannon shot that resounded throughout the world, but you were the one who set fire to the wick, and the effect of the explosion is partly your doing.”

Prophecies of Our Lady of Good Success About Our TimesLearn All About the Prophecies of Our Lady of Good Success About Our Times

On February 25, the Pope offered his sympathies to the suppressed journalists. More than any other manifestation, Pius IX’s response approving the newspaper’s entire conduct was the great reward of the editors of l’Univers.

“To Our dear sons Louis Veuillot and the other editors of the religious newspaper titled Univers:

“Dear sons, greetings and apostolic blessing;

“We regretfully learned through your letter of the second of this month that your resolution to publish Our Encyclical Letter of January 19, addressed to all bishops of the Catholic universe, has been censored by the government and led to the suppression of your religious newspaper by imperial decree.”

Given today’s wanton and malevolent publications and the vile calumnies of the enemies of this Holy See, this blow has struck you, dear sons, who have long upheld and defended the most beautiful and noble cause of this See and the Church. It is Our duty to particularly praise the ardor with which you have fearlessly striven to refute impudent newspapers, defend Church laws, and fight for the rights of the Holy See and the civil sovereignty that the Roman pontiffs have enjoyed for so many centuries by permission from Divine Providence.

“We strongly desire that you be sure of Our charity toward you. To Us, your pious hearts and the respect and zeal you showed in defense of truth are very welcome testimonies. Receive as a pledge of Our particular love, Our apostolic blessing. We impart it with deep tenderness and all the affection of Our fatherly heart, wishing that it may bring upon all of you and your families, dear sons, the most abundant blessings from Heaven.

10 Razones Por las Cuales el “Matrimonio” Homosexual es Dañino y tiene que Ser Desaprobado

“Given in Rome, at St. Peter’s, February 25, 1860, year XIV of Our Pontificate.”

Veuillot decided to go to Rome before dedicating himself to new tasks. He had an audience with Pius IX. As he entered the room, the pontiff exclaimed, “Blessed are those who suffer persecution for the sake of justice!”

The post Pope Pius IX’s Special Blessing for Persecuted Journalist, Louis Veuillot appeared first on The American TFP.

]]>
https://www.tfp.org/pope-pius-ixs-special-blessing-for-persecuted-journalist-louis-veuillot/feed/ 0
Security Concerns Rise Over Chinese Cranes at Virginia Port https://www.tfp.org/security-concerns-rise-over-chinese-cranes-at-virginia-port/ https://www.tfp.org/security-concerns-rise-over-chinese-cranes-at-virginia-port/#respond Thu, 14 Mar 2024 04:05:21 +0000 https://www.tfp.org/?p=82411 As Fred Schwarz, author of You Can Trust the Communists (to Be Communists), affirmed, communists can be trusted to be communists, inveterate liars and deceivers, but not to be trusted otherwise. This begs the question as to why anyone would buy any security-sensitive equipment from Chinese communists. The recent arrival of ship-to-shore ... Read more

The post Security Concerns Rise Over Chinese Cranes at Virginia Port appeared first on The American TFP.

]]>
Security Concerns Rise Over Chinese Cranes at Virginia Port
Security Concerns Rise Over Chinese Cranes at Virginia Port

As Fred Schwarz, author of You Can Trust the Communists (to Be Communists), affirmed, communists can be trusted to be communists, inveterate liars and deceivers, but not to be trusted otherwise. This begs the question as to why anyone would buy any security-sensitive equipment from Chinese communists.

The recent arrival of ship-to-shore cranes at the Port of Virginia’s Norfolk International Terminals manufactured by Shanghai Zhenhua Heavy Industries Company Limited (ZPMC), a state-owned engineering company, has sparked security concerns among U.S. defense officials.

The most recent findings confirm that some Chinese-made cranes used at U.S. ports have communications equipment with no apparent purpose or record of their installation

The investigation by the House Committee on Homeland Security and House Select Committee on China focused on some 200 Chinese-made cranes installed at U.S. American ports and other facilities.

House lawmakers reported that cellular modems on the cranes can be used for remote communication. These modems were not documented in any contract.

U.S. defense and national security officials fear China will exploit its crane technology to gather intelligence on shipments supporting U.S. military operations. The cranes are equipped with sensors capable of tracking container origins and destinations, and there are also concerns that potential remote access vulnerabilities could disrupt shipping operations, as reported by Pentagon and national security officials.

Devices such as cameras and weight and safety sensors constitute vital technology integrated into equipment systems. The potential espionage dangers are alarming.

For instance, China could exploit a crane’s cameras to track a container by identifying its serial number and origin. Moreover, the ability to disrupt cargo operations by manipulating safety sensors or generating false readings poses significant risks.

Eternal and Natural Law: The Foundation of Morals and Law

Since 2000, the Port of Virginia has relied on ZPMC cranes except for its Newport News Marine Terminal, whose cranes are manufactured by a U.S. company.

ZPMC accounts for some 70 percent of the global market share for large-scale cranes handling port containers and bulk materials. Its cranes are present in 104 countries and comprise nearly 80 percent of those used at U.S. ports. The absence of comparable American-made cranes has been highlighted in recent discussions with alternatives from Finnish company Konecranes, which cost significantly more.

Amid escalating tensions between the United States and China, the Chinese Foreign Ministry has dismissed U.S. concerns as “complete paranoia,” a predictable response from an untrustworthy adversary.

A bipartisan group of twelve United States senators, including Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA), chairman of the Senate’s Select Committee on Intelligence, and Sen. John Thune (R-SD), have introduced a bill that empowers the Department of Commerce to review and prohibit transactions involving information and communication technology products with potential security risks.

The proposed Restricting the Emergence of Security Threats and Communications Technology (RESTRICT) Act could lead to banning platforms like TikTok. While not banned by the federal government, as of April 2023, thirty-four states have either announced or enacted bans on using TikTok by state government agencies, employees and contractors on government-issued devices.

During the Senate Intelligence Committee’s hearing on global threats, Sen. Warner stressed the critical need for U.S. investment in talent, tools and research to retain its lead in emerging technologies. Noting China’s increasing role in international technology standards-setting bodies and its integration into global supply chains, he urged the United States to bolster its technological capabilities.

Prophecies of Our Lady of Good Success About Our TimesLearn All About the Prophecies of Our Lady of Good Success About Our Times

The technological race between the United States and China has extended to artificial intelligence (A.I.). In March 2021, President Biden signed an executive order to boost U.S. competitiveness in A.I., stating that bold investments in American innovation will ensure our economic strength and national security for decades to come.

Even a fundamental understanding of communist philosophy and practice makes it clear that communists cannot be trusted in the global technology domain, let alone to reshape the world order. The West must develop and secure a robust tech sector and ensure that Xi’s fevered vision of Chinese dominance does not come to pass.

Photo Credit:  © thirdkey – stock.adobe.com

The post Security Concerns Rise Over Chinese Cranes at Virginia Port appeared first on The American TFP.

]]>
https://www.tfp.org/security-concerns-rise-over-chinese-cranes-at-virginia-port/feed/ 0
“On the Papal Deposition of Bishops”—Second Reply to Dr. Lamont’s Study https://www.tfp.org/on-the-papal-deposition-of-bishops-second-reply-to-dr-lamonts-study/ https://www.tfp.org/on-the-papal-deposition-of-bishops-second-reply-to-dr-lamonts-study/#respond Thu, 14 Mar 2024 04:00:59 +0000 https://www.tfp.org/?p=82360 In a previous essay, I showed external errors in Dr. John Lamont’s argument against my article “Why a Good Bishop Should Not Ignore but Obey His Unjust Deposition by a Pope,” on Bishop Joseph Strickland’s removal from the diocese of Tyler, Texas. Specifically, it was about a mistranslation of a text from ... Read more

The post “On the Papal Deposition of Bishops”—Second Reply to Dr. Lamont’s Study appeared first on The American TFP.

]]>
“On the Papal Deposition of Bishops”—Second Reply to Dr. Lamont’s Study
“On the Papal Deposition of Bishops”—Second Reply to Dr. Lamont’s Study

In a previous essay,1 I showed external errors in Dr. John Lamont’s argument against my article “Why a Good Bishop Should Not Ignore but Obey His Unjust Deposition by a Pope,”2 on Bishop Joseph Strickland’s removal from the diocese of Tyler, Texas. Specifically, it was about a mistranslation of a text from the Dictionnaire de théologie catholique, a misinterpretation of the opinions of theologians Francisco de Vitoria and Domenico Palmieri, underrating the magisterial authority of Pius XII’s encyclicals, and an unacceptable dogmatization of the Second Vatican Council’s constitution Lumen gentium.

The fundamental error of Dr. Lamont’s study was apparent already in this first external analysis, attributing to the traditional position—according to which the bishops receive the power of jurisdiction directly from the pope and indirectly from God—the assumption that the Vicar of Christ possesses not only the fullness but all power that exists within the Church so that the bishops are merely his delegates. This is simply not true. Dr. Lamont himself quotes a passage from Palmieri that proves the inconsistency of this interpretation:

“It is false that according to our position the bishops are the vicars of the pope. For bishops do not exist in the Church in right of papal authority, but in right of the authority of Christ, and the pope cannot abolish the episcopal dignity and authority; furthermore, the power and tribunal of the pope and of bishops are two different things, because Christ willed that besides the chair of Peter there should also be an episcopal chair. Nor are the bishops delegates of the pope, because they possess an ordinary jurisdiction through the power of the office that Christ has instituted. The bishops rule their flock as their own, for by Christ’s institution they must be pastors of a portion of the sheep, over which they exercise the power of binding and loosing. And although the Roman pontiff may remove jurisdiction from any and all, he is nonetheless bound to ensure that other bishops exist, in order that there may always be bishops in the Church; for he may not abolish episcopal authority itself.”3

According to Dr. Lamont, Palmieri “evades the issue,” which is that “individual bishops in their dioceses rule by divine right derived from their order and their office” (p. 15). But his comment is incorrect because Palmieri explicitly states that the bishops “possess an ordinary jurisdiction through the power of the office that Christ has instituted” (p. 15).

Eternal and Natural Law: The Foundation of Morals and Law

The same can be said of Dr. Lamont’s criticism of St. Thomas Aquinas. He claims there is a supposed contradiction in the Angelic Doctor’s teaching. This is what I will address next, analyzing Dr. Lamont’s study no longer from an external point of view but going to the core of his argument.

A Misinterpretation of Saint Thomas Aquinas’s Doctrine on Causality

Dr. Lamont recognizes that “St. Thomas is the earlier and greater of the advocates of the strong view” (p. 13). This statement is true if by “strong view” is meant that bishops receive the power of jurisdiction directly from the pope but govern with and under him a portion of the flock by an ordinary power of their own. But this affirmation is false if, by “strong view,” one understands that every power in the Church is either the pope’s power or is derived from his own power in such a way that the pope’s power either formally or virtually contains every other power by which the Church is ruled. Dr. Lamont erroneously attributes this second position to St. Thomas based on a misinterpretation of his metaphysics, which he identifies with Neoplatonism. He affirms:

“St. Thomas Aquinas holds the strong view that all power of jurisdiction whatsoever in the Church derives from the papal power:

“I answer that a superior power and an inferior power can relate to each other in two different ways. In one way, the inferior power originates entirely from the superior power; and in this case, the entire power of the inferior is founded on the power of the superior; and then the power of the superior is to be obeyed simpliciter rather than the inferior, and is so to be obeyed in all things, just as in natural causes, the first cause acts more on an effect produced by a secondary cause than the secondary cause itself does, as is stated in the Liber de causis. This is the way in which the power of God is related to all created powers; it is the way in which the power of the Emperor is related to the power of the proconsul; and it is the way in which the power of the pope is related to all other spiritual powers in the Church, since every dignity in the Church is distributed and ordered by the pope, whose power is in a certain manner the foundation of the Church, as is shown by Matthew ch. 16. And therefore we are bound in all things without distinction to obey the pope more than bishops or archbishops, or a monk is to obey an abbot. In another way, the power of a superior and an inferior are related by both of them having originated from a higher power, which subordinates the one to the other as it chooses; and in this way the one is only superior to the other in so far as it has been subordinated to the other by a higher power, and the superior is to be obeyed rather than the inferior only in so far as it has been given authority by the higher power. The powers of bishops and archbishops, which are established by the pope, are related in this way. (In II Sent., d. 44 q. 2 a. 3 expos.)

“St. Thomas argues from Matt. 16, but he supplements this scriptural argument with an appeal to the Neoplatonic metaphysical conception of causation, where the actions of a lower agent are also the actions of the higher agents that cause the lower one. In consequence, his position is somewhat different from that of later theologians, because this Neoplatonic conception asserts that all higher agents act immediately in the lower agents whose existence and action they bring about (Summa contra gentiles, bk. 3, ch. 67). It cannot therefore entirely correspond to the later claim that the power of jurisdiction is received immediately from the pope and mediately from God. We should note as well that he makes no mention of the power of the pope to remove bishops at will (pp. 3—4).”

Further on, Dr. Lamont reiterates:

“St. Thomas does more than appeal to this tendentious exegeses [of Matt. 16]; he also argues from his Neoplatonic conception of causation. This conception applies to the metaphysical category of efficient causation in the created world. Those who accept it are bound to agree that it describes every instance of such causation…

“St. Thomas’s claim that the power of bishops is related to the power of the pope in the same way as the power of proconsuls is related to the power of the Emperor effectively reduces the bishops to vicars of the pope (p. 13).”

These passages from Dr. Lamont’s study deserve various observations.

  1. It Is Historically and Intellectually Unfounded to Describe the Thomistic Concept of Causality as an Expression of Neoplatonism

Until the beginning of the twentieth century, historians of medieval thought assured us that Aquinas was essentially Aristotelian. This assessment gradually changed. One of the first directors of the Revue thomiste, H.-A. Montagne, in a text titled “Notre programme,” indicated that to delve deeper into Thomistic doctrine, it was necessary to “determine what he owes to the Stagirite, what he also owes to Plato and the other great thinkers of antiquity.”4 Two years later, he published a study by Charles Huit on this topic in that journal: “Les éléments platoniques de la doctrine de Saint Thomas.”5

Prophecies of Our Lady of Good Success About Our TimesLearn All About the Prophecies of Our Lady of Good Success About Our Times

The movement gained greater momentum on the eve of the Second World War, notably after the publication of the study The Metaphysical Notion of Participation by Fr. Cornelio Fabro (1939). But to conclude that Aristotelianism in St. Thomas is an ancillary element of his Platonism, or that his concept of causality is purely Neoplatonic, is to mischaracterize his truly original thinking.

The Dictionnaire de philosophie et de théologie thomistes, by Dominicans Philippe-Marie Margelidon, director of the Revue thomiste, and Yves Floucat, member of the St. Thomas Aquinas Pontifical Academy, contains two entries about the matter. Seen together, they provide a well-balanced view of their respective contributions. Let us see their most relevant passages:

“St. Thomas’s Aristotelianism

“1. It is fair to say that the metaphysics of St. Thomas and the primary philosophy of Aristotle are in a relationship of continuity, kinship, filiation, and essential fidelity of spirit from the former to the latter. The Stagirite and Aquinas are committed to the primacy of individual substance as ens per se and principle of activity. The analogy of attribution finds its first authentic expression in Aristotle…On the other hand, it was St Thomas who brought to light how, beyond substantiality, the ens per se is called habens esse; it was he who brought out the formal aspect of the actus essendi. If the idea of creation is absent in Aristotle, as are those of Providence and efficient cause, it is nonetheless true that the five ways [to prove the existence of God] find in him a framework, sometimes even their formulation (God conceived as the First unmoved mover)…

“…St. Thomas’s relationship with Aristotle is certainly more than material, but despite their undeniable similarities, the consciously assumed heritage and the profound intellectual debt between the former and the latter, we are dealing with something quite different. The metaphysics of St. Thomas is not Aristotelian: substance is created; it implies a metaphysics of participation and causality that crosses Platonism and biblical creationism in a superior, original synthesis.6

“St. Thomas’s Neoplatonism

“1. Historians of medieval thought stopped long ago saying that St. Thomas was essentially a medieval Aristotelian, i.e., a sort of mixed bag (heteroclite, at worst) between Aristotle (via Averroes and Avicenna) and Augustinian philosophy inspired by (a Christianized) Neoplatonism. However, it is undeniable that if Saint Thomas has constructed an original synthesis that is not a heap of juxtaposed pieces, we can, without accusing him of plagiarism, recognize what he owes to Neoplatonism, or rather to Neoplatonic metaphysics fully assumed and integrated into the architecture of his thought…

“…The Aristotelian site of his metaphysics is greatly enriched by the Neoplatonic contribution, even to the typically Aristotelian question of substance. Aristotle’s interpretation is colored by Neoplatonic influence in various parts; God as driving cause has become efficient cause thanks to Avicenna, who reads Aristotle in a Platonic climate. The interpretation of De causis was decisive for his own metaphysics of causes according to the principle: “Every primary cause infuses its effect more powerfully than does a universal second cause” (Book of Causes, proposition 1) because it is the source of its causality not only as regards its existence but also concerning its exercise and effect…Moreover, Saint Thomas retains this capital but reinterpreted idea: “The first of created things is being (esse)” (Book of Causes, proposition 4)…The real composition of finite being (ens) and being (esse) is not found in Aristotle, but the thesis of being (esse) as the principle of finite being is found among medievals under Neoplatonic influence. Esse as actus essendi [“act of being,”] is specific to St. Thomas, beyond all Aristotelianism and Platonism. St. Thomas’s Aristotelianism is permeated by Neoplatonism; for example, the notion of participation, which is central to his account of the relationship of existing being to the universal first cause as their efficient and exemplary cause. It would be wrong, however, to speak too much of Thomism as a Neoplatonic Aristotelianism. Here again, St. Thomas is not an amalgam or a simple juxtaposition or interweaving of heterogeneous philosophies. He soars higher than eclecticism. The theology and the metaphysics that it implies are sui generis and should be considered in their own right.”7

The quote is long, but necessary to understand in what sense the concept of causality in St. Thomas—and, therefore, its practical application to the kind of relationship that exists between the power of the pope and other spiritual powers in the Church—does not correspond to its misinterpretation in Dr. Lamont’s study. If the Thomistic concept of causality were truly Neoplatonic, Dr. Lamont would be right because it would follow that second causes do not have an actual existence and, therefore, the bishops’ power of jurisdiction, derived from that of the pope, has no substance of its own as an ordinary power possessed in virtue of the office. But this is not true, as we will see.

  1. The Thomistic Concept of Causality Differs Radically From the Neoplatonic One

As is known, for Neoplatonic philosophers (notably Plotinus and Proclus) the One is the supreme principle, the cause of the existence of all things in the universe, which emanate from it not through a creation ex nihilo (as we profess in the Creed), but by the superabundance of his own being which, without undergoing any change, deploys itself in a descending and diversified hierarchy of secondary manifestations with no substance of their own, like rays emanating from the sun. According to Plotinus, “The One is all things and no one of them; the source of all things is not all things; all things are its possession—running back, so to speak, to it—or, more correctly, not yet so, they will be.”8 In other words, “the isness of the One is nothing but its appearance in all things;”9 for his part, each being is a mere manifestation or image of the One. But an image is not another being added to what is represented.

10 Razones Por las Cuales el “Matrimonio” Homosexual es Dañino y tiene que Ser Desaprobado

For Saint Thomas, on the contrary, beings created in their esse simpliciter (i.e., limited by an essence; in man, for example, it is esse homo) by the Creator, are autonomous and subsistent creatures. He states: “to be made and to be created properly belong to whatever being belongs; which, indeed, belongs properly to subsisting things.”10 André de Muralt, a Swiss specialist on ancient and medieval philosophy, describes the consequence of this real subsistence of creatures: “They participate as such in their cause, and particularly in their divine cause. They do not have their participative similitude to the divine as their quidditative being; their subsistence is not owed to being a modified One, nor to be ‘God without anything’; they are substances subsisting by themselves through creation. That is why the Second Person of the Holy Trinity can unite with one of them in a true Incarnation, which does not merely give Him the appearance of human reality.”11

The ontological difference between the pseudo-being—a mere image for Neoplatonists—and St. Thomas’s subsistent substantial being bears on the concepts of causality and participation. When Neoplatonists affirm that all things engender just as the One engenders, this means for them that the lower efficient causes are merely successive and univocally similar emanations of the One. For St. Thomas, on the other hand, each second efficient cause is different since it operates through its own autonomous activity and causality, albeit participating in divine causality according to a non-univocal similarity. Thus, he rejects the idea that a creature, in its own action, exercises only a simple instrumental causality while depending entirely on the principal cause. “If he sometimes uses the word instrument, it is only to mark the creature’s radical dependence on the Creator, not to deny it its own autonomy in being and acting, that autonomy which participation in creation implies, establishes, causes, and manifests…[The notion of participation according to Saint Thomas Aquinas] makes it possible to understand that the second cause is totally dependent on divine causality insofar as it is created, and that…the creature participates in divine causality by exercising its various operations autonomously according to the ‘dignity’ of its own being and causality.”12

Therefore, that notion assumes and reconciles “the fact of every created substance’s self-subsistence and the necessity of its total dependence on its Creator. Conversely, Neoplatonism emphasizes the necessity of dependence so radically that it sees the creature’s participation or image-being as its very quiddity at the risk of denying its character as an autonomous created subsistence.”13

  1. The True Meaning of St. Thomas’s Paragraph Quoted (and Misinterpreted) by Dr. Lamont

St. Thomas’s phrase should be understood in this sense of reconciling the second cause’s autonomous created subsistence and its total dependence on God: “The first cause acts more on an effect produced by a secondary cause than the secondary cause itself does, as is stated in the Liber de causis” (pp. 3—4), quoted by Dr. Lamont. This phrase does not mean that secondary causes lose their character of autonomous, created subsistence (and free, as in the case of spiritual substances endowed with an intellect and will).

The Equality Myth, a Founding Legend

The obvious counter-evidence to this is that the paragraph in which the phrase is inserted is taken from St. Thomas’s commentary on the forty-fourth and last distinction of Book II of the Sentences, where Peter Lombard first discusses the question of whether the power to sin (potentia peccandi) in man comes from God or from ourselves and the devil. He answers that it comes from God. If the Angelic Doctor’s phrase were to be understood in a strictly Neoplatonic sense, in which the second cause is a mere instrument without autonomy, one would have to conclude that God himself sins through his creature, which would be blasphemy.

By interpreting this phrase from St. Thomas in a strictly Neoplatonic sense, Dr. Lamont concludes that “although God exercises efficient causation in causing the power of jurisdiction to exist in the Church, that does not mean that the power of jurisdiction that He causes is itself an instance of efficient causation” (p. 13). In other words, according to Dr. Lamont, the plenitude of the power of jurisdiction the pope receives from God is not sufficient cause to transmit part of his power to his subordinates, contrary to what St. Thomas teaches in the text quoted in his study: “It is the way in which the power of the pope is related to all other spiritual powers in the Church, since every dignity in the Church is distributed and ordered by the pope, whose power is in a certain manner the foundation of the Church” (p. 4).

A few pages before that, Dr. Lamont had stated that “his [St. Thomas’s] position is somewhat different from that of later theologians, because this Neoplatonic conception asserts that all higher agents act immediately in the lower agents whose existence and action they bring about (cf. Summa contra gentiles, bk. 3, ch. 67). It cannot therefore entirely correspond to the later claim that the power of jurisdiction is received immediately from the pope and mediately from God” (p. 4).

Learn All About The Encyclical that Condemned the Sexual Revolution

Indeed, in a Neoplatonic interpretation of the text, the pope’s action as a second agent would be ineffective and, imperatively, a bishop would receive his jurisdiction directly from God. However, as we have seen, according to Thomistic doctrine, the pope operates with his own autonomous causality while participating in divine causality, and, therefore, he can indeed be the immediate source of the power of jurisdiction of the bishop to whom he entrusts part of the Lord’s flock. For his part, the bishop designated by the pope, while participating in the fullness of papal power, also operates with his own and autonomous action—his ordinary power—and is not reduced to the condition of a mere vicar of the pope, as Dr. Lamont erroneously deduces (see pp. 13—14).

A Misinterpretation of the Supernatural Character of Jurisdiction

Also due to a misunderstanding of St. Thomas Aquinas’s true thought on causality, Dr. Lamont states in his study:

“Amicus Thomas, sed magis amica veritas. St. Thomas’s position on papal authority is not compatible with his own theory of grace and the sacraments.

“Ecclesiastical jurisdiction confers divine authority, not natural authority. It cannot arise from any natural basis of authority. If it is a proper and ordinary jurisdiction, it is a supernatural gratia gratis data that cannot originate in any created cause. Hence, it can only be conferred by God alone (cf. 1a2ae q. 112 a. 1). It can only be produced by the action of a created cause when the created cause is an instrumental cause used by God as the principal cause and agent (1a2ae q. 112 a. 1 ad 2). The assertion of later theologians that episcopal jurisdiction is derived immediately from the pope and only mediately from God is thus incompatible with the fact that episcopal jurisdiction is a supernatural rather than a natural power. If the conferring of episcopal jurisdiction is only mediately from God, then it cannot be caused by God as the principal agent (p. 13).”

Again, this passage contains inaccuracies that call for clarification.

  1. Difference Between the Power of Order and the Power of Jurisdiction in Terms of Their Nature and Mode of Transmission

As I explained in my article on the legal validity of an unjust deposition of a bishop by the pope, the Second Vatican Council’s constitution Lumen gentium omitted any reference to the traditional distinction between the powers of order and jurisdiction. In its place, it adopted the three munera theory to designate what one receives with episcopal consecration. These functions or offices (lat. munus, –eris; plural munera) are the sanctifying (munus sanctificandi), teaching (munus docendi), and governing (munus regendi) of the faithful.

What the Popes Have to Say About Socialism

The munera theory was forged by John Calvin, starting in 1545, and was adopted by Lutherans in the middle of the eighteenth century. Some German-speaking Catholic theologians, obviously influenced by Protestant theology, started using it in the early twentieth century. In the second half of the nineteenth century, two lay German canonists, Ferdinand Walter and George Phillips, presented a munera trilogy for the first time, and also defended it against the traditional division of two powers: order and jurisdiction.14

As I wrote in earlier articles, the Council Fathers resorted to the three munera argument and those powers’ simultaneous transmission to bishops during their episcopal consecration to give a theological foundation to the novel notion of collegiality. It is through consecration that a bishop becomes part of the episcopal college, which is supposed to be a permanent holder, cum Petro and sub Petro, of the fullness of supreme power.

Based on this conception of three inseparable munera received simultaneously, neo-modernist theologians logically attribute sacramental character not only to the munus sanctificandi but also to the munera docendi et regendi. However, it is problematic and illogical to attribute such a character to these two offices when one admits the traditional distinction between the power of order and that of jurisdiction and recognizes that governing and teaching are integral elements of the latter. But that is precisely what Dr. Lamont has done in his study, as one can see in the passage quoted above, where he states that the power of jurisdiction is a gratia gratis data that God alone can confer.

To demonstrate that this view is erroneous, it suffices to quote a few excerpts from Cardinal Journet’s renowned treatise, The Church of the Word Incarnate.

What Does Saint Thomas Say About Immigration?

After stating that both powers differ in their purpose—the power of order, which bestows grace and atones for sin, opens heaven directly, while the power of jurisdiction points the way to heaven, enabling the pope and the hierarchy to determine and preach the object of Faith, to regulate the legitimate use of the power of order, and to control all things in the Church Militant—Cardinal Journet shows their respective characters:

“1. The two powers differ in nature. The power of order is a participation of the priesthood of Christ. The sacramental characters, says St. Thomas, “are nothing else than certain participations of Christ’s priesthood, flowing from Christ Himself.” The power of jurisdiction is a participation of Christ’s kingship: Christ being Head of the Church in a sovereign manner and in virtue of His own proper authority, the others being heads in a dependent manner and as delegated by Christ.

“The end of Christ’s priesthood is to pour into souls the very virtue of the Redemption. The created intermediaries are unable to produce so divine an effect save as simple instruments. The sacramental power is therefore a purely instrumental ministerial power. Hence it is infallible, not of course on account of its own proper virtue, but because it transmits the virtue of a Principal Agent. But the end of Christ’s kingship is the outward proclamation of the full divine revelation, so that the created intermediaries can here play a freer part.

“The power of jurisdiction is still ministerial; but it can be said to act more in the manner of a secondary cause; and it will not be infallible save in so far as it is divinely aided. The power of order, which exists to bring the redemptive virtue to souls, is a physical spiritual participation of the spiritual power of Christ the Priest…Like every sacramental character, the power of order is a physical spiritual power and hence indelible. It can persist, and can even be transmitted, in schism and heresy. The power of jurisdiction, which exists for the external preaching of Christian truth, speculative and practical, is a moral authority, mission and power;…It is lost as soon as the subject leaves the Church. Apostolic authority, but not the power of order, was lost to Judas. No regular jurisdiction can of itself continue under conditions of heresy and schism.

2. The two powers differ in the mode of their transmission. The sacramental power, being physical, will be normally conferred by way of consecration, per consecrationem (consecration received from Baptism, Confirmation, Holy Orders). The power of jurisdiction, being moral, will be normally conferred by way of designation, of commission, of mandate, ex simplici injunctione.”15

2. The Difference in the Mode of Transmission Stems From the Disparity in Causality

A Century Before Fatima, Providence Announced a Chastisement

While Dr. Lamont attributes a single cause to both powers, Cardinal Journet explains that they come from different causes:

“1. Jesus is Priest as none other is priest. There is only one redemptive sacrifice: His own. There is but one fountain of grace: His transpierced heart. As far as the sacerdotal and redemptive power is concerned, the power that obtains and dispenses grace, there is not in all the Church any other head, any other ruler, any other source, any other cause, save only Him.

“When the time of His visible presence among us was ended, He abandoned no part of this role. Nor did He wish to deprive us of His sanctifying contact. He availed Himself of mortal priests through whom He might carry out the acts of the Christian cultus, like an artisan using tools that need constant renewal. But it was He alone, and none other, who, through them, was to bring about the presence among us of the sacrificial intercession of the cross; He alone who, through them, was to baptize and absolve. His sacerdotal and sanctifying action was to pass through them independently of their moral worthiness or unworthiness, and to do so infallibly, for—and this is true above all on the supernatural plane—an instrument does not act by its own proper virtue, but by the virtue of him who uses it. The ministers of the sacraments, their sacerdotal power, and the sacraments themselves, are in fact no more than purely external instruments, mere transmitters of impulsions coming from Christ Himself, which, in souls made ready for them, blossom into graces.

“The priesthood of Christ is thus participated in the Church only in a purely instrumental manner.

“2. It is not quite the same with His kingship. We have just said that Jesus is Priest as none other is priest. We must also say that Jesus is King as none other is king. He rules angels and men…

“Jesus is the fountain-head of a universal kingship, and He never ceases to exercise it from heaven where He sits at the right hand of the Father. And yet, so that men might not be deprived of the help His living voice had brought them, He has in His mercy left them a visible power, continuing to speak with authority in His name—the power of jurisdiction…

“To force open the door of the soul and then to pour grace into it, is possible to none but God; and creatures therefore can here avail only as instruments in His hand, and for ends beyond their scope. But to propose to minds a speculative or practical message from without, even were this message of divine origin, is a work which seems more connatural to men, and one in which they can have a greater share in the initiative. The interior influx of grace, remarks St. Thomas, cannot be transmitted save by instruments, and, in this matter, Christ alone can be Head of the Church…On the contrary, the “exterior government of the Church,” the “authority” over the Church, the “pastoral power” over the Church, the dignity of being a “foundation” of the Church—all that can be communicated to others. They too can be called heads of the Church, though not as Christ is called Head. For Christ is Head and Foundation of the Church in an unique way, in His quality as Principle, or, to put it another way, universally and by His own proper virtue; whereas they are heads and foundations in a dependent and secondary manner—that is, not universally but only of the Church immersed in history, or only for some few years like the pope, or for some small area like the bishops; and this not by their own virtue but in their quality as ambassadors of Christ…

“Consequently, the depositaries of the jurisdiction act as second causes rather than as mere transmitters. They have certain initiatives and certain responsibilities.”16

Devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary

And what about the gratia gratis data Dr. Lamont refers to? It is not something inherent to the power of jurisdiction and permanent, but is granted as an external help whenever required:

“The drawback of giving men such a privilege is that in proportion to the importance of their office their natural fallibility will threaten to invade the government of the Church. Hence, so that the Church may be directed by them and not misled, so that it may continue to be the salt of the earth, and not be reabsorbed into the world, it needs the help of a particular providence, a prophetic gift, Christ’s assistance: “Go therefore, teach ye all nations…teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. And behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world” (Matt. xxxiii. 19—20).”17

  1. Neither the Pope’s Power of Universal Jurisdiction (Which Derives From Christ Directly) nor the Bishops’ Limited One (Received Through the Pope’s Mediation) Need a Sacrament for Their Transmission

Dr. Lamont states:

“St. Thomas’s position is ruled out by the nature of a sacrament. A created cause that is a sign, and is used by God to directly produce supernatural grace, is a sacrament (3a q. 60 a. 2). The conferring of the power of jurisdiction upon a bishop is a gift of a supernatural grace that is done through a sign. It must therefore be done through a sacrament. Both the consecration of bishops and the assignation of subjects to a bishop by the pope are signs; they are speech acts with intelligible meanings that effect what they signify. But only the consecration of a bishop is a sacrament. The assignation of territory and subjects to a bishop by the pope is not a sacrament. The source of the jurisdiction of bishops must therefore originate in the sacrament of their consecration. St. Thomas’s Neoplatonic conception of causation explains how authority received by a bishop in consecration is received directly by Christ (p. 13).”

We have seen how this latter statement is erroneous because St. Thomas’s concept of causality is not Neoplatonic but Thomistic. However, what precedes it is also wrong because Jesus Christ willed to make the apostles and their successors participate in His external government of the Church as second causes rather than as mere transmitters. And just as He established a difference in powers between Peter and the rest of the Twelve, He also established a difference in the manner of reception between the pope and the bishops, but in neither case does this reception take place through a sacrament. That is what Cardinal Journet says:

“Christ, as we have said, bestowed on the apostles immediately, besides certain exceptional and temporary powers of which they were the sole depositaries, the regular and permanent powers of which they were the first depositaries. However, although it was conferred on them immediately by Christ, the regular jurisdiction proper to each of the apostles, which they would hand on to their successors, did not belong to all of them in the same degree or by the same right. Not in the same degree, for in Peter it was sovereign and universal while in the others it was subordinated and particular. Not by the same right, for in Peter it dwelt as in a fountainhead, in the others as something derived. It was by a special favour, as we have seen, that Christ Himself bestowed on the apostles a jurisdictional power which, normally, was to reach them through Peter as intermediary. The consequence of this doctrine is that as time went on the jurisdictional power would devolve differently on the pope and on the other bishops. On the pope it is bestowed immediately by Christ as soon as he is validly elected. To the bishops it is given mediately, through the pope: the Saviour, says Cajetan, sends down His power first on the head of the Church, and thence to the rest of the body. When a pope is created the electors merely designate the person, and it is Christ who then confers on him immediately his dignity and power. But, when the sovereign pontiff, either of himself or through others, invests bishops, the proper jurisdiction they receive does not come to them directly from God, it comes directly from the sovereign pontiff to whom Christ gives it in a plenary manner, and from whom it comes down to the bishops: somewhat after the manner of the life-pulse that begins in the heart and is transmitted thence to the other organs. And that is why the sovereign pontiff must not be conceived as merely designating bishops who then receive directly from Christ their proper and ordinary authority; but as himself conferring the episcopal authority, having first received it from Christ in an eminent form.”18

In light of the above, this statement of Dr. Lamont is erroneous: “A proper and ordinary divine authority must be derived from God, and can only be taken away by Him: no merely human authority can remove it. But a pope deposing a bishop at will, independently of the divine law, is not acting with divine authority” (p. 15).

Christ’s Passion in Our Days

Conversely, Domenico Palmieri is right when he teaches that “the pope cannot indeed licitly remove a bishop without cause, but he can certainly validly do this, and his act will have force on its own; a bishop in this situation cannot claim jurisdiction for himself on the pretext that there is no just cause for his removal. It is apparent from what has already been stated that this is not a question of words, as will become more clear further on: it touches on the nature of the papal primacy and the whole economy of ecclesiastical jurisdiction” (p. 5).

A Final and Friendly Consideration

As I finish defending the postulates of my original article, I am reminded of a recent conversation in a Paris café with a respected and erudite traditionalist priest. When I mentioned the growing exasperation of many faithful Catholics at the heresies and scandalous pastoral attitudes of Pope Francis and top Church authorities and the fragmentation of opinions in the pusilus grex, giving rise to various theories that lead to mismatched attitudes, my learned companion said: “We must avoid the mistake of doing theology—and especially ecclesiology—starting from the anomalous reality the Church is experiencing today, because this inductive method can lead to drawing wrong conclusions.”

I immediately thought of my experiences with Latin American liberation theologians in the seventies. They sought to rework the Church’s social doctrine based on situations of extreme poverty in some sectors of the population but ended up aligning themselves with Marxist thought. The big mistake of progressive German bishops and laity seeking to reinvent Church teaching on the sacrament of Holy Orders and ministries and change Church discipline on priestly celibacy based on biased conclusions about reports of sexual abuse among the clergy also came to mind.

Science Confirms: Angels Took the House of Our Lady of Nazareth to Loreto

I fear that some friends and colleagues in the trenches defending Tradition make a similar mistake. Seeing the Vatican’s current abuses of power, the lack of courage of a majority of cardinals and bishops, and the willful blindness of some conservatives who hide their heads in the sand, they deduce that one needs to reform the papacy by shrinking papal power or at least reducing it to the modalities seen in the first millennium. An even greater mistake is to try to justify such proposals based on claims and theories developed by neo-modernist theologians from before and after the Second Vatican Council.

It is not the divine and beautifully hierarchical structure established by Jesus Christ for the part of His Mystical Body militating here on Earth that needs reform. Instead, reform—one entirely based on traditional Church teaching—is needed by sinful churchmen and all of us laity, who are so badly influenced by the revolutionary and evil spirit of today’s world.

Photo Credit:  © Tomas Marek – stock.adobe.com

The post “On the Papal Deposition of Bishops”—Second Reply to Dr. Lamont’s Study appeared first on The American TFP.

]]>
https://www.tfp.org/on-the-papal-deposition-of-bishops-second-reply-to-dr-lamonts-study/feed/ 0
Is the United States Department of Education On a Vendetta Against Conservative Christian Colleges? https://www.tfp.org/is-the-united-states-department-of-education-on-a-vendetta-against-conservative-christian-colleges/ https://www.tfp.org/is-the-united-states-department-of-education-on-a-vendetta-against-conservative-christian-colleges/#respond Wed, 13 Mar 2024 04:00:02 +0000 https://www.tfp.org/?p=82366 The liberal-dominated world of higher education is in freefall. Colleges and universities have abandoned the standards that once defined them. When Christopher Rufo proved that the President of Harvard had plagiarized the work that led her to that position, the trustees tried to defend her. When that failed, she stepped down but ... Read more

The post Is the United States Department of Education On a Vendetta Against Conservative Christian Colleges? appeared first on The American TFP.

]]>
Is the United States Department of Education On a Vendetta Against Conservative Christian Colleges?
Is the United States Department of Education On a Vendetta Against Conservative Christian Colleges?

The liberal-dominated world of higher education is in freefall. Colleges and universities have abandoned the standards that once defined them.

When Christopher Rufo proved that the President of Harvard had plagiarized the work that led her to that position, the trustees tried to defend her. When that failed, she stepped down but remains a tenured faculty member. There seem to be no rules—except for conservative universities.

Targeting Christians?

Consider the U.S. Department of Education’s (DOE) penalties against two colleges claiming to promote Christian principles. In October 2023, the DOE fined Grand Canyon University (GCU) $37.7 million. Less than six months earlier, the same bureaucracy fined Liberty University (LU) $37.5 million.

Eternal and Natural Law: The Foundation of Morals and Law

The Arizona Southern Baptist Convention founded Grand Canyon University (GCU) in 1949. That connection ended in 2000. Today, GCU claims to be a “non-denominational” Christian institution. Suffering severe financial difficulties, the school adopted a “for profit” status in 2004. The school grew and prospered. In 2016, it reversed course and reclaimed non-profit status. By 2018, the federal Internal Revenue Service, the State of Arizona, its accrediting body and the NCAA acknowledged GCU’s status change.

Non-Profit or For Profit?

However, the U.S. Department of Education insists that GCU is still a for-profit institution. The school tried to resolve the impasse, but the DOE was adamant. In February 2021, GCU brought suit against the DOE over the issue. Three years later, that suit is unresolved.

While for-profit educational institutions have a long history, the non-profit university system looks down on them. The state and federal education bureaucracies agree. The Obama Administration increased scrutiny of for-profit schools. The Trump Administration revoked many of these rules, but President Biden restored them.

The specific charge against GCU concerns a relatively small number of its students. The DOE charges that doctoral students were forced to pay for “continuation courses” as they wrote their dissertations. The school did not include these costs in the estimates provided to those students when they entered the program. Seventy-eight percent of these students, the DOE claims, had to pay anywhere from $10,000 to $12,000 extra. GCU claims that this is a “common practice.” Indeed, this author paid for similar courses at the University of Maryland. In this case, there do not appear to be any specific students who have filed complaints against the school.

GCU sees the DOE’s attitude as an attempt to gain power over a successful Christian institution with a conservative outlook. GCU claims “roughly 30,000 graduates annually” from its 25,800 on-campus and 92,000 online students. A press release in the GCU News states the University’s position.

Two Perspectives

“By intentionally mis-classifying GCU as a for-profit institution for purposes of federal student aid, [DOE] is now able to target the university as part of a coordinated effort…to ‘pursue the full range of sanctions’ against for-profit institutions…due to the disproportionate number of Americans who attended those schools and then defaulted on federal student loans.”

GCU claims, “We know of no other traditional university that has received this level of scrutiny.” Of course, the DOE spins a very different picture.

Prophecies of Our Lady of Good Success About Our TimesLearn All About the Prophecies of Our Lady of Good Success About Our Times

“‘GCU lied about the cost of its doctoral programs to attract students to enroll,’ said FSA [Federal Student Aid] Chief Operating Officer Richard Cordray. ‘FSA takes its oversight responsibilities seriously. GCU’s lies harmed students, broke their trust, and led to unexpectedly high levels of student debt. Today, we are holding GCU accountable for its actions, protecting students and taxpayers, and upholding the integrity of the federal student aid programs.’”

Other than the fact that they are both Christian Universities and the curious similarity in the amount of the fines, the DOE case against Liberty University is very different.

The Liberty Way

The DOE charged Liberty with breaking the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations at 34 CFR §668.46, sometimes known as the Clery Act. It requires universities that receive federal aid to keep records about crime on or near their campuses. That information is to be made available to both current and prospective students. It is named after Jeanne Clery, who was raped and murdered at Lehigh University in 1986.

The liberal Washington Post summarizes the story. “The initial report on the school’s Clery Act compliance—which the University can respond to and dispute before the department makes a final determination—paints a picture of a university that discouraged people from reporting crimes, underreported the claims it received and, meanwhile, marketed its Virginia campus as one of the safest in the country.

“Liberty failed to warn the campus community about gas leaks, bomb threats and people credibly accused of repeated acts of sexual violence—including a senior administrator and an athlete—according to the report, a copy of which was obtained by The Washington Post.”

However, one factor significantly complicates the picture. Liberty’s student conduct code varies sharply with those of most American colleges. Unlike the lax behavior codes that rule other campuses, Liberty’s rules—sometimes called The Liberty Way—forbids alcohol consumption and premarital sexual relations by students.

A Compromised Situation

The Liberty Way creates difficult situations for students who become crime victims while, or as a result of, consuming alcoholic beverages. Do they disregard the reprimand for drunkenness and report the crime to the University or keep quiet about the incident?

10 Razones Por las Cuales el “Matrimonio” Homosexual es Dañino y tiene que Ser Desaprobado

In a November 2021 article for The Dispatch, David French related the story of Elizabeth Axley. Miss Axley attended a party and drank so much that she lost consciousness. When she came to, another Liberty student was attacking her. She went to the local hospital. A nurse reported fifteen bruises and lacerations on her arms, face and torso.

Mr. French continues, “When Axley told her [Resident Assistant] about the alleged attacks, she said the RA urged her not to report the incident. Axley had been violating the Liberty code of conduct—the “Liberty Way”—in part by drinking. But Axley reported it anyway. She had text messages supporting her claim. She had pictures taken at the hospital showing her injuries.”

Assessing Responsibility

Eventually, Liberty’s officials ruled that Miss Axley’s actions at the party contributed to the attack. Had she not passed out due to her excessive (and forbidden) alcohol consumption, the attack would not have taken place.

Such an attitude is uncommon today. In today’s feminist environment, no responsibility in such a situation can be attached to the woman’s state of mind, dress, or conduct. Such attacks are always the man’s fault. There is no reason to believe that anyone at the DOE disagrees with that assessment.

Whether or not Miss Axley’s case is part of the DOE complaint is uncertain. The document has not been released to the general public, although the Washington Post claims to have seen a leaked copy.

Violating Due Process

The GCU situation awaits a final determination by an appeals court. On March 5, the New York Times reported that Liberty agreed to pay an adjusted fine of $14 million and to spend an additional two million over two years to fund a “compliance committee” and make other “campus safety improvements.”

The Times said the substantially reduced settlement “dwarfed every previous fine the department had levied for such violations.” Indeed, it is more than triple the fine paid by the secular Michigan State University in 2019 after a university employee there was found guilty of molesting at least “265 young women and girls” as an athletic trainer and physician. At the time of the conviction, the Times said that some of the victims were “as young as 6.” Even if everything in the DOE’s report is accurate, LU’s violation concerns record-keeping. Can that possibly be three times worse than the molestation of hundreds in university facilities?

Clearly, both cases raise questions about the power of the U.S. Department of Education.

The United States has a justice system. Legislatures make laws. If a violation occurs, the police (or someone invested with police power) investigate. If the investigators are convinced, a prosecutor receives the collected evidence. If the evidence appears sufficient, the prosecutor presents it to a grand jury. If the grand jury agrees, it indicts the suspected criminal. A trial with a different judge and a different jury then takes place. At that trial, the accused has the opportunity to present a defense. The jury decides whether the accused is guilty. If the verdict is guilty, the judge or the jury determines the punishment.

This “due process” may be tiresome, but each step is crucial. The goal is not punishment but justice. When the system works as it should, no one is punished because of whims or musings about what the law should be.

Science Confirms: Angels Took the House of Our Lady of Nazareth to Loreto

The DOE operates under “administrative law.” It acts as the legislator, investigator, prosecutor, grand jury, judge and trial jury. This process is rapid, but is tailor-made for abuse. Each step can be decided according to the prevailing mood of the bureaucrats and what appears to be the political leanings of the administration.

Photo Credit:  © othman – stock.adobe.com

The post Is the United States Department of Education On a Vendetta Against Conservative Christian Colleges? appeared first on The American TFP.

]]>
https://www.tfp.org/is-the-united-states-department-of-education-on-a-vendetta-against-conservative-christian-colleges/feed/ 0
The International Russophile Movement’s Second Congress: Behind the Fight for “Multipolarity” Is a Hatred of the West https://www.tfp.org/the-international-russophile-movements-second-congress-behind-the-fight-for-multipolarity-is-a-hatred-of-the-west/ https://www.tfp.org/the-international-russophile-movements-second-congress-behind-the-fight-for-multipolarity-is-a-hatred-of-the-west/#respond Tue, 12 Mar 2024 04:00:53 +0000 https://www.tfp.org/?p=82339 The International Russophile Movement (MIR), founded last year in Moscow on the initiative of Bulgarian socialist Nicolay Malinov, held its second Congress on February 26-27. The first day featured a “Forum on Multipolarity,” a term dear to all those who see themselves as opponents of Western universalism. The second day was devoted ... Read more

The post The International Russophile Movement’s Second Congress: Behind the Fight for “Multipolarity” Is a Hatred of the West appeared first on The American TFP.

]]>
The International Russophile Movement’s Second Congress: Behind the Fight for “Multipolarity” Is a Hatred of the West
The International Russophile Movement’s Second Congress: Behind the Fight for “Multipolarity” Is a Hatred of the West
Photo: © Kremlin.ru, CC BY 4.0 DEED

The International Russophile Movement (MIR), founded last year in Moscow on the initiative of Bulgarian socialist Nicolay Malinov, held its second Congress on February 26-27.

The first day featured a “Forum on Multipolarity,” a term dear to all those who see themselves as opponents of Western universalism.

The second day was devoted to the Russophile movement with a clear objective: to agree on the need for a “multipolar world structure,” “based on mutual respect,” as they put it, but fundamentally a unique globalist structure (a globalism built up in regional stages, as Alex Newman of The New American recently pointed out).

Like last year, the Moscow event received Vladimir Putin’s blessing, and prominent members of his administration participated. That is all the more noteworthy given that the “brains” behind the MIR consist of two people. The first is none other than oligarch Konstantin Malofeev, whose St. Basil’s Foundation has lobbied pro-family movements in the West. The second is Alexander Dugin, the movement’s resident thinker, who participates in all its media initiatives. This Gnostic philosopher is the creator of the “Fourth Political Theory.” Dugin follows in the footsteps of René Guénon and a host of occultists described here by John Lamont.

Without going so far as to say that Dugin is Putin’s éminence grise (there’s no proof of that), we can at least see the coherence and unity of thought between the two men.

Putin’s Message to the Second International Russophile Movement Congress

Putin sent his greetings to this second MIR congress, stressing that “the Russophile movement is making a significant contribution to the fight against the collective West’s attempts to isolate Russia and is helping to spread objective information about the country abroad.” He praised the Congress for its work against what he called “anti-Russian falsehoods and propaganda myths.”

Eternal and Natural Law: The Foundation of Morals and Law

Putin also praised the fact that this year’s event brought together hundreds of delegates from over 130 countries on all continents—an improvement on the first Congress, which brought together 90 people representing 42 countries. “Such a representative composition of participants clearly demonstrates that the international social movement of Russophiles is growing, growing with confidence and gaining new supporters,” the Russian head of state said.

The meetings were held at the Lomonosov Pole Lomonosov Innovation Centre of Moscow State University in Moscow. They were graced by the presence of Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, who read out Putin’s message, declaring, without laughing: “Our country will pursue a peaceful and constructive foreign policy based on non-interference in the affairs of other states.”

He promised “a fairer multipolar order designed to ensure the prosperity of all mankind, not just the so-called ‘golden billion.’”

Everyone agreed that Putin is the champion of the values of all present.

The International Russophile Movement Preaches Peace and Goodwill (and Supports the Invasion of Ukraine)

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zhakarova also spoke at the opening of the “Forum on Multipolarity.” She denounced the prevailing “antagonism” among people today, asserting that Russia offers a contrary program: “We are establishing a unifying program. There are no preconditions; it’s not compulsory. It doesn’t represent a form of dictatorship, administrative control or elements of totalitarianism. It’s a unification based on that goodwill we hear so little about today.”

Is this why China, in particular, took center stage? The conference leaders extolled this still Communist China for its “role in a multipolar world.” China was represented in particular by Eric X. Li, founder of Guancha Online Media, the voice of Chinese “nationalism.”

Prophecies of Our Lady of Good Success About Our TimesLearn All About the Prophecies of Our Lady of Good Success About Our Times

Guancha presents itself as an independent media outlet, which is surprising in a country like China, where the Communist Party controls everything. However, Eric Li, a Berkeley and Stanford graduate and darling of globalist platforms like the Aspen Institute and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, loudly proclaims his attachment to China’s one-party system. He argued in a TED Talk that electoral democracy doesn’t work, which shows his positions are not so different from the ideology of those in power and, therefore, are no concern to them. Moreover, his main associates are close to those in power.

Following the tyrannical COVID-19 quarantines in China, Li wrote in Foreign Policy that the government’s response to the pandemic proved once again that China’s one-party system is not only superior to democratically elected governments but more popular. “Only a high degree of confidence on the part of the people in the expertise and capacity of their political institutions can result in such observance,” he wrote.

Second Russophile Congress Welcomes Che Guevara’s Daughter

However, the propaganda doesn’t stop there. Malofeev and Dugin’s Tsargrad website made it very clear: “The plan for the collapse of the West is ready: Elites from 130 countries have gathered in Moscow.” European “elites,” in particular, were singled out. There was the presence of Pierre de Gaulle, grandson of Charles de Gaulle, presented as “a supporter of Greater Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals and an alter-globalist,” and Fabrice Sorlin, a Frenchman living in Moscow, who moderated one of the conferences. Did other Frenchmen attend? We’ll find out later, but it’s worth noting the presence—among many others—of African-American Cynthia McKinney, a former U.S. House of Representatives member elected in 1992 on the Democratic ticket, who later switched to the U.S. Green Party.

The MIR also welcomed Ernesto “Che” Guevara’s eldest daughter, Aleida, an avowed Marxist and great admirer of her bloodthirsty father, and the author of a book praising Chávez, Venezuela and the New Latin America.

10 Razones Por las Cuales el “Matrimonio” Homosexual es Dañino y tiene que Ser Desaprobado

Many guests came from Africa and the Muslim world. “Multipolarity” is based on respect for all the great so-called traditional religions, identified in some way with their major geographical areas, and which must be preserved (to the exclusion of all Christian evangelization).

On the geopolitical front, the session was dedicated to the “global South.” The purpose was to spread the idea of cutting off developing countries from Western “hegemony,” but, in fact, the result is the creation of one more dialectic fracture line.

Aleksandr Dugin Wants to Create a “New World” with the International Russophile Movement

On this subject of creating this break with the West, Aleksandr Dugin said:

“The people who will build a new multipolar world have gathered here. In this respect, they are more than like-minded people. The concept of like-minded people suggests that we have an idea. But we don’t yet have an idea as such—we’re just developing it and looking for it. And these people represent their civilizations—Chinese, Indian, Islamic, African, Latin American. These civilizations are alternatives to the West, which are also looking for their own ideas today. Our categorical rejection of American hegemony and a unipolar world unites us. But we still don’t really know what kind of world we want. Yes, right now, we are united by our rejection of American hegemony. We don’t want that, and we don’t want liberalism. Everyone here does not want that, including the representatives of Western countries who have come to Moscow recently. This is what we call the counter-elite. There are ruling elites—the globalists—and a global counter-elite. And today, this counter-elite is meeting in Russia. We are people with enormous intellectual potential, education, will and knowledge who disagree with the Western ruling class. This counter-elite has gathered here to build the parameters of a multipolar world. We are truly creating a new world. And it’s not pathetic.”

Faith Brings Harmony to Family, Society and State

Many people disagree with the Western globalist leaders who reject Christian civilization and morality. However, this position does not automatically put them on the bandwagon of Putin…who, whatever one may say, is not the champion of Christianity.

From the Comoros, Muhammad Maarouf, a graduate of a Soviet university and U.N. program manager, especially attacked France at the Congress:

“All of Africa today is for Russia. Because your country has always fought against Western colonialists, has never exploited slaves from our continent, and has contributed to the sovereign development of African countries.

“After all, what is France doing in Africa today, for example? The French are plundering African countries. Under the pretext of fighting terrorism, they are creating instability in the Sahel countries.

“That’s why today, myself and many other Africans are in Moscow to support Russia in the fight against neo-colonialism.”

The USSR, Guardian of Freedom!

The former prime minister of the Slovak Republic, octogenarian Jan Czarnogursky, a celebrated anticommunist but also a “Russophile,” took center stage as the highest-ranking foreign politician attending the MIR meeting. He declared:

“We can tell the world that at key moments in world history, Russians have defended and preserved their freedom and that of other peoples. Last time, in the Second World War (for Russia, the Great Patriotic War), without the struggle and sacrifices of Russia (the USSR), the victory over Hitler would not have been decisive.”

Does he really mean the freedom of other peoples? What about Yalta? And the division of Europe that threw Czechoslovakia under the Soviet boot?

Science Confirms: Angels Took the House of Our Lady of Nazareth to Loreto

Czarnogursky continued:

“After the war and up to the seventies, without Russia’s direct or indirect support, many countries would not have been able to free themselves from the colonial yoke. Even now. …”

Yes, decolonization was encouraged, supported and armed by the Soviet Union and often carried out with bloodshed. And many ex-colonies were plunged into Communist tyranny and misery. Should this be forgotten in the name of “Russophilia”?

Afrique Média’s YouTube channel published the video of the Forum on Multipolarity with French dubbing. It shows the video speech by Most Rev. Carlo-Maria Viganò, who had already spoken at the first MIR congress last year. His message was followed by that of an Islamic philosopher specializing in Islamic eschatology, Sheikh Imran Hosein, formerly of Cairo’s Al-Azhar University, who preached “diversity” and “the brotherhood of humanity in this diversity” against those who feel “superior” within the framework of “unipolarity” and the desire to “civilize others.”

Pan-Africanism in the Spotlight: the 2nd MIR Congress Also Preaches a Form of Globalism

French-Beninese pan-Africanist Kémi Seba, a once officially bigamist black supremacist known for calling whites “leucoderms” and advocating apartheid, also spoke. Le Monde quoted him as admitting to having received material support from Evgeny Prigozhin in exchange for “calling on African youth to take violent action against French interests in Africa.”

Born a Muslim, he is now a “Kemite”—a religion inspired by ancient Egypt, from which he created his famous Ka Tribe. According to the Beninese newspaper Notre époque, he loudly rejects “Western dogmas and doctrines adopted by Africans,” which “constitute the pillars of the entrenchment of underdevelopment in Africa.”

His Moscow speech was smoother, but his message sums up his hatred of the West. Some might say that the decadent West deserves this hatred. However, it is only not the decadence that is the object of this resentment against the continent that brought the Catholic faith to the ends of the earth.

This article originally appeared at this link: https://reinformation.tv/congres-mouvement-russophile-international-smits/

The post The International Russophile Movement’s Second Congress: Behind the Fight for “Multipolarity” Is a Hatred of the West appeared first on The American TFP.

]]>
https://www.tfp.org/the-international-russophile-movements-second-congress-behind-the-fight-for-multipolarity-is-a-hatred-of-the-west/feed/ 0
When People React to Their Imposed Agenda, Liberals Call It “Christian Nationalism” https://www.tfp.org/when-people-react-to-their-imposed-agenda-liberals-call-it-christian-nationalism/ https://www.tfp.org/when-people-react-to-their-imposed-agenda-liberals-call-it-christian-nationalism/#respond Mon, 11 Mar 2024 04:00:43 +0000 https://www.tfp.org/?p=82307 Whenever the extreme left is in trouble, it labels the other side as extremists. One such label is Christian nationalism. The expression is now being used to mischaracterize the Christian right. Its meaning is so elastic that it can be used to suit any occasion. It is vague enough to include any ... Read more

The post When People React to Their Imposed Agenda, Liberals Call It “Christian Nationalism” appeared first on The American TFP.

]]>
When People React to Their Imposed Agenda, Liberals Call It “Christian Nationalism”
When People React to Their Imposed Agenda, Liberals Call It “Christian Nationalism”

Whenever the extreme left is in trouble, it labels the other side as extremists. One such label is Christian nationalism.

The expression is now being used to mischaracterize the Christian right. Its meaning is so elastic that it can be used to suit any occasion. It is vague enough to include any Christian engaged in the culture war. It has just enough punch to insinuate a threatening agenda.

Eternal and Natural Law: The Foundation of Morals and Law

Recently, the term made headlines again, being trotted out by those who foresee the danger of an imagined theocracy of Christian supremacists who would govern America based on the Bible.

Alabama’s Tom Parker Opinion

Chief Justice Tom Parker triggered the new attack with his concurring opinion on the recent 8—1 Alabama Supreme Court decision on embryo personhood. The outspoken Methodist chief justice supported his opinion by citing God, Scripture, Saint Augustine, Saint Thomas Aquinas and others.

The February 16 decision was enough to unleash outrage from leftists and moderates. Washington Post associate editor Ruth Marcus penned a column titled: “Welcome to the Theocracy.” The more moderate New York Times columnist David French immediately attacked the opinion as an ominous development.

Mr. French said he had no problems with people being Christian or even bringing their beliefs to the public square. However, they must not advocate deference to Christianity in the body politic. Christians should not seek to return America to its Christian roots, even if done through logical and gentle persuasion.

A Vague Religion Is Ideal

Mr. French’s attitude recalls the comment of the late Sen. Eugene McCarthy, who once said there are only two kinds of religion that are permitted in America: Strong beliefs that are vaguely expressed or vague beliefs that are strongly expressed.

These liberals think Christians should be free to believe what they want, just keep it vague and ineffective. They can strongly desire their salvation but not make it a program for everyone else.

Mr. French’s main criticism of strongly-believed, strongly-expressed Christianity is that it turns into Christian identity politics. Christians end up wanting to change all society and convert the world. Imagine that.

The Seven Mountain Mandate

He joins many others who are critical of Justice Parker’s support for the Seven Mountain Mandate promoted by the Pentacostalist dominionist movement. This mandate holds that Christians should get out of the prayer closet and seek to exert dominion in seven key societal institutions: the family, the church, education, the media, the arts, business and government.

Prophecies of Our Lady of Good Success About Our TimesLearn All About the Prophecies of Our Lady of Good Success About Our Times

Liberals consider this desire to take back the culture intolerable since any Christian domination would reduce non-Christians to second-class citizens. These liberals call for more than a separation of church and state. They demand separation of church and culture.

If these liberals had their way, Christians would be fated to lose the culture war since all religion would then be reduced to a personal feel-good thing for the weak of character—a typical liberal characterization. Ultimately, that is what liberals want.

The Nature of Christianity

There are two things wrong with these recent criticisms of left-labeled Christian nationalism.

The first involves a gross misunderstanding of the nature of Christianity itself.

Christianity is an identity religion. By Baptism, the person is reborn in Christ and ontologically changed. The person and the Christian form a single unity. Christianity is not a pastime, a hobby or an interest. It is part of who one is. This Christianity manifests itself in all that Christians do—in all (seven) fields.

Christianity is also, by its nature, expansive. Joyful Christians tend to spread the “good news” of the Gospel to everyone so that others might also share in their joy.

Indeed, Christ gave His disciples the Divine Commission to go and teach all nations, baptizing them. Christians are called to change society—all society, every society. They pursue this goal with charity and zeal, respecting the free will of individuals. Wherever Christianity has gone, its charity has transformed nations and peoples.

Christians are also called to denounce sin and injustice. They cannot remain silent in the face of iniquity. Thus, Christians create conditions favorable to the practice of the Faith and the benefit of all society, not just its Christian portion. They oppose sins and obstacles that prevent the practice of virtue.

Changing Society for the Better

Faithful Christians change society for the better. They will necessarily influence the seven key societal institutions and seek to change them. They have always zealously done so. To ask them to do the contrary is to ask them to stop being real Christians.

10 Razones Por las Cuales el “Matrimonio” Homosexual es Dañino y tiene que Ser Desaprobado

Indeed, American history has long reflected this dominant Christian influence in the public forum. For example, with English jurists Sir William Blackstone (1723-1780) and Sir Edward Coke (1552-1634), religious references in the nation’s legal tradition date back to colonial times. The Christian influence in the other Seven Mountain domains is undeniable in the country’s birth and development.

That’s why Christians must affirm their Faith strongly and unapologetically. If they follow the liberals’ advice to practice a vague and toned-down Christianity, the result will be skin-deep Christians unable and unwilling to defend what they believe. The Church will become a sentimental collection of souls seeking feel-good spiritual experiences, not Faith. All will be reduced to selfish individuals who do not care about the good of their neighbors or truly love God. This policy would make all things liberal—even Christianity.

The Double Standards of Liberalism

The second problem with those now criticizing what they label Christian nationalism is that they do not subject their own avowed ideology—liberalism—to the same rigid standards of irrelevancy.

A simplified definition of liberalism is an ideology that demands the right to feel, think and do whatever the unbridled passions desire. Liberalism has other elements that define it, but it always results in removing the restraints that Christian civilization imposes on these passions.

Over the decades, liberalism has eroded the Christian values that keep order in society by doing exactly what it accuses sincere Christians of wanting to do—influencing and dominating societal institutions. It is just one more example of liberals’ egregious projection. However, there is a difference. Those who subscribe to liberalism impose their agenda on society. They do not propose it.

Liberal Tyranny

Those who uphold the ideology of liberalism make no effort to express their strongly held beliefs vaguely. They have established themselves well inside and dominate the seven key societal institutions. There is no concern for the Christians who rightly complain of being reduced to second-class citizens at school board meetings and library hearings.

Science Confirms: Angels Took the House of Our Lady of Nazareth to Loreto

Liberal tyranny has now reached a postliberal phase where even the will of the democratic majority must be sacrificed on the altar of wokeness and identity politics. Institutions, such as schools, must accommodate the outlandish behavior of anyone who identifies as something else and demands rights. Companies like Bud Light’s Anheuser-Busch will opt to lose $1.4 billion rather than apologize to its vast consumer base for the single comment of Dylan Mulvaney’s promotion of transgender activism.

Christians have no choice but to defend moral principles and challenge these disordered acts that undermine the common good. This is not a theocracy but a return to those perennial principles that undergird the Christian order.

This is not “Christian nationalism” but Christians fighting for the common good—or better, affirming that there is an objective good and an objective evil. They affirm the reality of a loving God who exists despite the absurd denials from liberals. They strive to uphold standards of morality and decency in a world that glorifies the contrary.

Mr. French’s call for a vaguely held Christianity is consistent with his demand that everyone take a seat at his postliberal table, including the porno-drag queens whose indecent story hours he so passionately defends.

Indeed, it is not Christians who are creating theocracies but liberals like Mr. French and Ruth Marcus who build and defend the dictatorship of relativism and imagine caricatures of what they suppose a Christian order to be. These imaginings would mimic the liberal tyranny now imposed upon the nation since liberals can only think in terms of their own power structures bereft of Christian charity, virtue or grace. These liberal fantasies are unchristian.

The Breakdown of an Order

Meanwhile, the liberal order is breaking down as the last moral restraints are discarded. A new postmodern disorder is rising that breaks all the old rules of engagement.

In the face of ever more radical moral outrages, reacting Christians are supposed to pretend they do not see the results of broken families, shattered communities and empty churches that litter the social landscape.

Eternal and Natural Law: The Foundation of Morals and Law

This new postliberal disorder would destroy all existing narratives that order society. It would be a phantasmagoric meeting place of clashing wills and passions. It will lead to a postmodernity described by Czech poet Václav Havel, where “everything is possible and nothing is certain.”

Americans act well when striving in every way they can for the opposite: a Christian America that trusts in God.

Photo Credit: © vectorfusionart – stock.adobe.com

The post When People React to Their Imposed Agenda, Liberals Call It “Christian Nationalism” appeared first on The American TFP.

]]>
https://www.tfp.org/when-people-react-to-their-imposed-agenda-liberals-call-it-christian-nationalism/feed/ 0
France Invites Disaster by Becoming the World’s First Country to Enshrine Abortion into Constitution https://www.tfp.org/france-invites-disaster-by-becoming-the-worlds-first-country-to-enshrine-abortion-into-constitution/ https://www.tfp.org/france-invites-disaster-by-becoming-the-worlds-first-country-to-enshrine-abortion-into-constitution/#respond Sat, 09 Mar 2024 01:03:59 +0000 https://www.tfp.org/?p=82353 Some events mark history by the violence of their passion and the intensity of their hatred. Their activists make use of every artifice and symbolism to sear into the minds of the public the fact that a great betrayal has been perpetrated, resulting in a day that will live on in infamy. ... Read more

The post France Invites Disaster by Becoming the World’s First Country to Enshrine Abortion into Constitution appeared first on The American TFP.

]]>
France Invites Disaster by Becoming the World’s First Country to Enshrine Abortion into Constitution
France Invites Disaster by Becoming the World’s First Country to Enshrine Abortion into Constitution

Some events mark history by the violence of their passion and the intensity of their hatred. Their activists make use of every artifice and symbolism to sear into the minds of the public the fact that a great betrayal has been perpetrated, resulting in a day that will live on in infamy.

March 4 was one such day. The world looked on in horror as French lawmakers approved a bill that enshrined abortion in the French Constitution, the world’s first country to make it specifically the supreme law of the land.

Three considerations come to mind while reflecting on the event.

An Act Designed to Cause an Impression

The first consideration is that the government wanted to do everything possible to make this a historical act. It was not an ordinary vote but a dramatic statement of intent.

Eternal and Natural Law: The Foundation of Morals and Law

To fit the 925 MPs and senators, the government called a special joint session of parliament at the Palace of Versailles. The measure had already overwhelmingly passed in both legislative chambers. A joint session was held at this most prestigious place because a three-fifths majority of all legislators must approve any constitutional amendments.

The Republican Guard, in full regalia and with sabers drawn, formed a guard of honor (where only dishonor reigned) and solemnly drummed in the National Assembly’s first female president, Yaël Braun-Pivet, who entered in total silence.

After speeches emphasizing the importance of the issue, a vote was taken. Around 7 p.m., the Assembly president announced the results: “780 votes in favor, 72 votes against.” The legislators applauded the vote with a wild and prolonged standing ovation that recalled raucous scenes from the French Revolution.

In addition, the vote was broadcast live on every French news channel while hundreds gathered around a giant screen at the Paris Trocadéro opposite the Eiffel Tower. Thus, scenes of a jubilant crowd provided the street theater to give the impression of the support of “the People.”

The French legislators knew what they were doing and supplied all the ceremonial trappings to highlight the importance of this grave offense. They were also aware of how France has a unique capacity to hold symbolic events and, therefore, enjoys worldwide influence.

Mathilde Panot, a Member of Parliament from the far-left party France Unbowed, understood this impact when she proposed the amendment. She told the chamber that the move was “a promise…for all women fighting [for abortion] everywhere in the world.”

An Act that Offended God

The most important consideration is how this first enshrining of abortion into a national constitution is an offense against God. What made this act more tragic was that it was France.

France is the first-born daughter of the Church. For centuries, she has given the Church saints, crusaders, Catholic kings and statesmen. France lies at the heart of Christendom and is the model of a Christian civilization.

Prophecies of Our Lady of Good Success About Our TimesLearn All About the Prophecies of Our Lady of Good Success About Our Times

Thus, enshrining abortion was more than a legislative act. It was a monumental rejection of God’s law, a denial of France’s Christian past, and the celebration and exaltation of a moral evil. This historic rupture cannot fail to weigh heavily upon the nation.

The constitutional amendment is a sin that will have consequences. Sin is not only something personal. Nations can collectively sin when they accept things against God’s law.

Indeed, Saint Augustine teaches that since nations per se have no existence in eternity (only individuals do), they are rewarded or punished here on earth for their collective good or evil actions. Those directing nations who want peace for their peoples should lead them toward virtue and away from sin.

The Wages of Collective Sin

Indeed, secular France has long officially abandoned the Faith. Today, she is enmeshed in misfortune and violence, which has shattered her unity. The country has the largest number of “no-go zones” in Europe, with some 751 designated Zones Urbaines Sensibles (called “sensitive urban zones”), where Muslim youth gangs and radical imams rule, and the police dare not uphold law and order. In addition, more than 120 knife stabbings take place in France every day. There is also the unchecked immigration crisis, crime and civil strife. All these things are destroying France and represent a chastisement upon the nation for veering from its virtuous past.

This latest dramatic act of defying God’s law can only make matters much worse.

A Purposeful Attack

The final consideration concerns how this move to enshrine abortion into the French Constitution was purposeful and deliberate.

However, it was seemingly done without purpose.

Many observers rightly note that from the point of view of existing abortion law, the dramatic measure was not needed. France already provided one of Europe’s most secure and protective umbrellas for the slaughter of the unborn.

10 Razones Por las Cuales el “Matrimonio” Homosexual es Dañino y tiene que Ser Desaprobado

Tragically, well over eighty percent of the population supports abortion. All of France’s major political parties represented in Parliament support procured abortion, including Marine Le Pen’s “far-right” National Rally party and other misnamed conservatives. Madame Le Pen, who voted in favor of the constitutional amendment, seemed to give the issue little importance by commenting that “there is no need to make this a historic day.”

Despite this massive support, the debate about the abortion amendment revolved around the threats of those who would ban the killing of the unborn in Europe.

The pro-life movement in Europe is growing. Even in France, tens of thousands march for life yearly. The left realizes how the defense of the unborn can spread. The speakers in Versailles spoke from a position of weakness and insecurity. They felt the need to throw the most difficult legal obstacle conceivable across the path of those fighting abortion.

However, as history has proven, such legal roadblocks can be overturned against all odds and even after decades of procured abortion being “settled law” on the books. Fearful French liberals felt they needed to take some action.

The shameful March 4 amendment targeted not only France but especially the United States. Indeed, the promoters of the amendment openly admitted that America’s reversal of Roe v. Wade was the reason for their action.

American pro-lifers dared to challenge the revolutionary myth that procured abortion was irreversible. The Dobbs decision struck terror in the cold and cruel hearts of feminists and liberals everywhere. They believe that if abortion could be overturned in America, then abortion worldwide is vulnerable. The French constitutional amendment was their fiendish answer.

Photo Credit:  © OceanProd – stock.adobe.com

The post France Invites Disaster by Becoming the World’s First Country to Enshrine Abortion into Constitution appeared first on The American TFP.

]]>
https://www.tfp.org/france-invites-disaster-by-becoming-the-worlds-first-country-to-enshrine-abortion-into-constitution/feed/ 0
Napoleon III Silences L’Univers Due to Its Valiant Defense of Pius IX https://www.tfp.org/napoleon-iii-silences-lunivers-due-to-its-valiant-defense-of-pius-ix/ https://www.tfp.org/napoleon-iii-silences-lunivers-due-to-its-valiant-defense-of-pius-ix/#respond Fri, 08 Mar 2024 05:01:30 +0000 https://www.tfp.org/?p=82320 Not content with Napoleon III’s peace treaty with Austria, the kingdom of Sardinia-Piedmont continued to entangle itself in Italian politics. True, King Vitorio Emanuel had dismissed his Prime Minister, the Count di Cavour. The king also recalled to Turin, the agitators his former minister had distributed throughout Italy. However, on the other ... Read more

The post Napoleon III Silences L’Univers Due to Its Valiant Defense of Pius IX appeared first on The American TFP.

]]>
Napoleon III Silences L’Univers Due to Its Valiant Defense of Pius IX
Napoleon III Silences L’Univers Due to Its Valiant Defense of Pius IX

Not content with Napoleon III’s peace treaty with Austria, the kingdom of Sardinia-Piedmont continued to entangle itself in Italian politics. True, King Vitorio Emanuel had dismissed his Prime Minister, the Count di Cavour. The king also recalled to Turin, the agitators his former minister had distributed throughout Italy.

However, on the other hand, the French forced the Austrian troops to withdraw from all the Italian states they had protected from revolutionaries.

The major European powers recommended that Italian sovereigns avoid using force against insurrection. This reticence facilitated the development of revolutionary parties everywhere. These, in turn, could promote riots, confident they would not be effectively repressed. Such acts made the progress of the revolution appear spontaneous. By avoiding its hitherto unofficial responsibility, Sardinia-Piedmont stirred unrest in the Papal States without jeopardizing the policy of its leading ally, Napoleon III. Meanwhile, the French Emperor still pretended to respect the rights of the Holy See while waiting for an opportune moment to side openly with the revolutionaries against the Pope. That resulted in the revolutionary appropriation of parts of the Papal States.

Eternal and Natural Law: The Foundation of Morals and Law

When asked by Italian emissaries to recognize the dismemberment of the papal territories, the Emperor decided to hasten his pronouncement. He dismissed his foreign minister, Count Alexandre Colonna-Walewsky, who disagreed with the policy. He then launched an anonymous booklet titled Le pape et le congrés (The Pope and the Congress) to prepare public opinion and gauge how people reacted. The book’s author, claiming to be a sincere Catholic, invited the Pope to accept the fait accompli and surrender his temporal power. It soon transpired that this pamphlet had been written by state councilor Arthur de la Gueronnière and that Napoleon III had either dictated it or provided its outline. The booklet’s repercussions were enormous.

The revolutionary press applauded the government’s coming betrayal. With few exceptions, Catholic newspapers (including L’Ami de la réligion) protested and refuted the pamphlet. In that emergency, French Catholicism was all the more cohesive because Interior Minister Ernest Arrighi de Casanova, the Duke of Padua, had resigned on November 1, 1859. He was one of the few Catholics who had remained in the cabinet after the Emperor’s change of policies.

To show Louis Napoleon that French public opinion massively opposed his attitude, l’Univers prepared a message of displeasure and reparation to the Pope. The text was published with a notice that it would remain in the editorial office to receive signatures before being sent. The next day, the government prohibited the collection of signatures. Their pretext was that the message was a political action. Even more threatening for the newspaper was a second official warning accompanying the prohibition.

Pius IX could not fail to protest the publication of Le pape et le congré. The world, especially French Catholics, anxiously awaited His Holiness’s response. On January 1, 1860, an episode made it clear that Pius would speak out. The Apostolic Nuncio in Paris was to greet the Emperor on behalf of the Diplomatic Corps. After the usual greetings, the papal representative merely said: “Sir, on this first day of the year, which gathers the Diplomatic Corps around Your Majesty, I am honored to present to you their respectful greetings and homage.” Everyone understood that the papal representative’s brief remark meant the Holy Father was about to make a strong statement of his own.

On that same date, the Pope met with General de Goyon, commander of the French troops headquartered in the papal states. The General who had come to greet him with the other officials gathered in Rome. The Pope ended by saying:

Prophecies of Our Lady of Good Success About Our TimesLearn All About the Prophecies of Our Lady of Good Success About Our Times

“In the humility of Our heart, We ask God to bring down abundant graces and lights upon the August Head of your army and nation so that, thus enlightened, he may proceed in his difficult task of recognizing the falsity of some principles expressed over the last few days in a booklet [Le pape et le congré] that can be defined as a monument of hypocrisy and an ignoble tissue of contradictions. We hope—and even better, are sure—that with the help of these lights, he will condemn the principles contained in that booklet. We are convinced of this because we possess documents that His Majesty kindly sent us earlier, which are veritable condemnations of these principles. With this conviction, We ask God to shower His blessings upon his august consort, the prince imperial, and all of France.”

When the French Government heard of the remarks a few days later, the reaction was to forbid their publication.

Due to postal censorship, l’Univers only learned of the Holy Father’s speech when a government official came to the editorial office to forbid its publication. Veuillot replied that he would not obey the government’s demand. Indeed, he would print the document the next day. Napoleon III then changed tactics and had the remarks published in the Moniteur. They were preceded by a note that the Holy Father would not have spoken in such words if he had received a letter the Emperor had sent him.

The effect of Pius IX’s pronouncement was enormous. However, the letter the Emperor referred to could diminish its effect if left unanswered. In it, Napoleon III sought to justify his new policy as the only means of preventing the progress of the revolution. He expressed his firm resolve to continue on that path.

The answer was not long in coming. In Rome, on January 19, 1860, Pius IX published the encyclical Nullius Certe Verbus (On the Need for Civil Sovereignty). It condemned the entire political orientation of Sardinia-Piedmont and the French Empire. The Pope exposed the Emperor’s duplicity.

10 Razones Por las Cuales el “Matrimonio” Homosexual es Dañino y tiene que Ser Desaprobado

“We asked that he, by his most powerful patronage in the Congress at Paris, defend the integral and inviolate nature of the temporal power belonging to us and the Holy See and that he be willing to safeguard it from evil rebellion. In his letter, the great Emperor, recalling his somewhat earlier proposal to Us concerning rebellious provinces of Our papal states, advises that We should, of Our own accord, surrender the possession of these same provinces since it seems to him to be the only way to amend the present disorder.”

Communications were slow, and the encyclical only arrived in France a few days later. The editors of l’Univers held a continuous meeting as they impatiently waited for it. Finally, on January 26, the Apostolic Nuncio sent for Louis Veuillot and gave him the official text. Upon returning to the editorial office, Veuillot showed the encyclical to his colleagues and exclaimed, “This is our death warrant. The newspaper will no longer exist.”

The editors immediately began translating it to have it published before the government could prevent its circulation in l’Univers. It came out in the January 29 issue. That same day, the cabinet met under the Emperor’s chairmanship and approved the suppression decree:

“Under article 32 of the organic decree of February 17, 1852, we decree:

Art. 1-The Univers newspaper is hereby terminated.

Art. 2-Our Interior Minister is charged with executing this decree, to be published in the Bulletin of Laws.

Given at the Palais des Tuileries, January 29, 1860.”

The decree arrived at the editorial office of l’Univers at half past nine in the evening. After twenty years of struggle, the newspaper had gloriously disappeared.

The post Napoleon III Silences L’Univers Due to Its Valiant Defense of Pius IX appeared first on The American TFP.

]]>
https://www.tfp.org/napoleon-iii-silences-lunivers-due-to-its-valiant-defense-of-pius-ix/feed/ 0