Friday, 25 May 2018

Chevalier Charles Coulombe on Godfrey de Bouillon

On my old blog The New Crusade, the picture at the left stood at the top of each page. As the Chevalier explains, there were Nine Worthies, three pagans, three Jews, and three Christians. The pagans were Hector, Alexander, and Caesar. The Jews were Joshua, David and Judas Machabeus. The Christians, Arthur, Blessed Charlemagne, and Godefroi de Bouillon, the subject of this video.

Godefroi is a hero of mine, for reasons I'm sure you'll gather from the Chevalier's discussion of him.

The Crusades, Good or Bad?

I wrote this for the Traditian Order and it was originally published, edited slightly, on the Order's website

The Crusades are like White Castle hamburgers. Either you love them or you hate them. Of course, given the secular, anti-Christian education most people are subjected to these days, the overwhelming majority of people hate them as 'Eurocentric' imperialism.

However, on what basis were they bad?

First of all, what were the 'Crusades'? They were wars in which the Crusade Indulgence was granted by the Pope. Whilst most people think of only the Crusades to retake the Holy Land from the jihad, there were Crusades in other lands as well. There were Crusades against the jihad in the Iberian Peninsula, normally referred to as the Reconquista. There was a Crusade preached against the Albigensian Cathari in Languedoc in the South of France. There were the Northern Crusades, including the Wendish, Livonian, Swedish, Danish, and Prussian Crusades, and a Crusade against the Bogomils in Bosnia.

However, since the average person with a modern, secular education only knows of the Eastern Crusades and, possibly, the Reconquista, I will be discussing only the Crusades against the jihad in this article.

It is important to remember that at the founding of Islam by Muhammad, the world looked like this:

All of the purple (fitting, it being the Imperial colour!) was Christian. This was pre-Great Schism, so whilst all of the Empire was Christian, not all Christian lands were part of the Empire, an important point later on.

Muhammad had his visions, founding Islam in AD 610. From then, until the death of Muhammad in AD 632, Islam concentrated on consolidating control of the centre of the Arabian Peninsula. By the next year, the Muslims had begun conquering the hinterlands of the Peninsula, and had started raids into the Zoroastrian Sassanid Empire to the East.

The following year, AD 634, they began raiding into the Christian Byzantine Empire to the north, and by September of that year, Damascus, the jewel of the Empire in the Levant, had fallen to the jihad.

By AD 750, the map now looked like this. Everything west of the Arabian Peninsula that had been conquered by the jihad had been Christian land.

This includes the portion of the North African Littoral that had been the Kingdom ruled by the Arian Vandals, a Germanic tribe, tho' the bulk of their subjects were orthodox Catholics. It had been conquered, just a few years before, by the Byzantine Emperor, but soon fell to the jihad.

It also includes the Visigothic Kingdoms on the Iberian Peninsula that had recently converted from Arianism to orthodox Christianity. You will notice a very small strip across the northwest littoral of the peninsula that is not coloured in as a part of the Muslim conquest. That is the Kingdom of the Asturias, from which the Reconquista was launched.

They had also crossed the Pyrenees, raiding France, until they were stopped at the Battle of Tours in AD 732 by Charles Martel, Duke and Prince of the Franks, founder of the Carolingian Dynasty, and grandfather of Bld Charlemagne, Emperor of the Romans.

All of this territory, once Christian, Eastern or Western, had been conquered by force of arms, combined with looting, burning, raping, and forced conversion at the point of the sword.

By the time His Holiness Pope Urban II proclaimed the First Crusade at the Council of Clermont in 1095, the Holy Places had fallen to the Seljuk Turks. The previous rulers, the Arab Shi'ite Fatimid Caliphate had taken a relaxed view of the pilgrims from the West and the indigenous Christian population. This had changed under the Sunni Seljuks, causing great distress to native Christians and pilgrims alike. Not that things had ever been peaceful between Christendom and the Muslims! Here is a graphic illustrating the events that led up to the First Crusade.

Here is a video from the Real Crusades Youtube channel which looks at the Western world on the eve of the Crusades.

Real Crusades is a favourite of mine because, in my opinion at least, they actually present a balanced view of the truth, without getting into 'Those horrible Christians attacking peaceful Muslims' diatribes that are so common when discussing the period.

Gesta Francorum et aliorum Hierosolimitanorum (The deeds of the Franks and the other pilgrims to Jerusalem) written within a few years of the arrival of the Crusaders in the Holy Land, records Pope Urban's exhortation thus,

When now that time was at hand which the Lord Jesus daily points out to His faithful, especially in the Gospel, saying, "If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me," a mighty agitation was carried on throughout all the region of Gaul. (Its tenor was) that if anyone desired to follow the Lord zealously, with a pure heart and mind, and wished faithfully to bear the cross after Him, he would no longer hesitate to take up the way to the Holy Sepulchre.
And so Urban, Pope of the Roman see, with his archbishops, bishops, abbots, and priests, set out as quickly as possible beyond the mountains and began to deliver sermons and to preach eloquently, saying: "Whoever wishes to save his soul should not hesitate humbly to take up the way of the Lord, and if he lacks sufficient money, divine mercy will give him enough." Then the apostolic lord continued, "Brethren, we ought to endure much suffering for the name of Christ - misery, poverty, nakedness, persecution, want, illness, hunger, thirst, and other (ills) of this kind, just as the Lord saith to His disciples: 'Ye must suffer much in My name,' and 'Be not ashamed to confess Me before the faces of men; verily I will give you mouth and wisdom,' and finally, 'Great is your reward in Heaven."' And when this speech had already begun to be noised abroad, little by little, through all the regions and countries of Gaul, the Franks, upon hearing such reports, forthwith caused crosses to be sewed on their right shoulders, saying that they followed with one accord the footsteps of Christ, by which they had been redeemed from the hand of hell.
To which the assembled crowd of nobles and commoners responded with a mighty shout of 'DEUS VULT!' (God wills it), as they rushed forward to don the Cross of the Crusader.

Thus, far from being imperialist wars against a peace loving Islam, the Crusades were an, ultimately unsuccessful,  attempt at freeing some of the lands conquered by the Muslim jihad.

To conclude, here is a Youtube video from Dr Bill Warner's channel, Political Islam, that graphically illustrates the expansion of Islam and the, comparatively, paltry response of the Crusades to the unjustified aggression of the jihad.

I Hope This Man is Rotting in Hell

I know it is unChristian and uncharitable, but his crimes are so horrific that I can't imagine him being saved. Combined with his pride in his crimes and his conviction that he was being a good Muslim by slaughtering Christians, I see little hope that he repented.

Who is he, you ask? Halil Pasha, a Turkish general in the early 20th century, who claimed in his memoirs that he had personally killed around 300,000 Armenian Christians. And, who publicly proclaimed, 'I have endeavored to wipe out the Armenian nation to the last individual.'

And yet, to this day, the government of Turkey, which pretends to be 'Western' and 'enlightened' refuses to admit the genocide and criminalises any mention of it in Turkey.

When Turkey makes noises about wanting to join the EU, I always point out that it is an Asiatic country, speaking an Asiatic language, and practicing an Asiatic religion!

18. The Expanded Ownership Revolution

Another instalment from Mr Greaney.

From The Just Third Way

As we saw in the previous posting in this series (we don’t actually begin every posting like that, but it saves us from trying to come up with a clever segue each time), the most effective counter to Keynesian economics and the New Deal came from Dr. Harold G. Moulton, president of the Brookings Institution from 1928 to 1952.  That is, the most effective theoretical counter came from Moulton.  He was never able to come up with a just and viable means of generating the mass purchasing power essential to a sound — and just — economy.

Louis O. Kelso
It was not until the work of Louis Orth Kelso (1913-1991) that anyone presented a viable solution.  Kelso combined the growing need to expand the base of capital ownership as advancing technology displaced human labor, with sound monetary theory to finance sustainable, non-inflationary growth.
Popes Leo XIII and Pius XI had assumed — incorrectly — that universal capital ownership must be financed using past savings.  They recommended workers be paid more (via a “living” or “family” wage) to enable them to save enough to purchase capital.
Unfortunately, in addition to increasing the costs of production and raising prices for consumers, this recommendation led commentators to mistake the means for the end.  They failed to realize that paying higher-than-market-valued wages was intended to serve two different purposes.  The first purpose was to address the immediate need to redistribute existing wealth in order to take care of people in the short term while a permanent solution was developed and implemented.  The second purpose was to provide the financing for a program of widespread capital ownership.
Pope Pius XI
Kelso’s idea was to finance widespread ownership of new capital or transfers of existing capital by expanding bank credit, just as Moulton advocated for the already wealthy.  Avoiding the presumed necessity of confiscation and redistribution to achieve his goal, Kelso realized that by purchasing new capital or transferring existing capital on credit and repaying the credit with the future profits of the capital itself, ordinary people could purchase capital without redistribution, restricting consumption, or taking cuts in pay or benefits.

Shifting from past savings (by definition a monopoly of the currently wealthy) to “future savings” — repayment of credit used to purchase capital with the future profits of the capital itself — makes it possible for anyone to own capital.  As Moulton had demonstrated, in the century preceding the Crash of 1929 and the Great Depression, the rich had typically financed new capital during periods of rapid growth by employing this concept of “financial feasibility” to purchase “self-liquidating” assets.
Still, the major advantage the rich enjoy over propertyless people is ownership of collateral. Collateral makes bankers willing to create money for the rich with as little risk as possible.

Since the issue is managing risk, Kelso advocated using capital credit insurance and reinsurance in place of traditional forms of collateral owned by the borrower.  The risk premium typically charged on all loans (except the allegedly “risk free” loans to government) could be used as the premium on an insurance policy that would pay off in the event of default, thereby taking the place of traditional forms of collateral.

Nor was Kelso’s idea simply a pragmatic application of advanced financial technology — although it is supremely practicable.  It is theoretically and philosophically sound as well.
Pope Paul VI and
Mortimer J. Adler
Kelso, a lawyer-economist, and Aristotelian philosopher Mortimer Jerome Adler (1902-2001), the “Great Books” advocate, presented the new paradigm in the two books they co-authored, The Capitalist Manifesto (New York: Random House, 1958), and The New Capitalists. (New York: Random House, 1961).  It should be noted that the titles do not accurately describe what Kelso eventually ended by calling “binary economics.”  This is in recognition of the fact that the two factors of production — labor (human) and capital (non-human) — when broadly owned bring the economy system back into balance, restoring Say’s Law.  In the two volumes, Kelso and Adler made a logical case for expanding the base of capital ownership and financing economic growth with future savings.

This, so Kelso and Adler argued, would not only vest “as many as possible of the people” with capital ownership, but emancipate humanity from “the slavery of savings.”  By shifting from past savings to future savings, savings would work for people, rather than people work for savings.  Kelso demonstrated the feasibility of his idea with the Employee Stock Ownership Plan (ESOP).
Lincoln drove the original
Homestead Act of 1862
By means of an ESOP, employees of a corporation can purchase shares of the company on credit and repay the loan out of the future pre-tax profits of the corporation.  Today in the United States millions of workers have become part owners of the thousands of companies that employ them without risking their personal savings or in most cases without taking any reductions in pay or benefits.
CESJ has proposed a “Capital Homestead Act” (that might be called an “Economic Empowerment” or “Economic Democracy” Act outside the U.S.), that would enable every person (even those who cannot work) to realize Kelso’s ultimate vision of equal access to capital ownership and private property as a fundamental human right.

Key to the “expanded ownership revolution” are the three principles of economic justice.  Kelso and Adler articulated these as interconnected systems principles in Chapter 5 of The Capitalist Manifesto.  CESJ later refined and integrated these principles into the social doctrine of Pius XI as analyzed by CESJ co-founder Father William Ferree.

Like the three legs of a tripod, the three principles of economic justice operate together, providing the framework for a just and stable economic order.  Like a tripod, if even one principle is missing or violated, the structure collapses.  As refined by CESJ, the three essential principles of economic justice are:

·      Participative Justice.  This principle defines how one makes input to the economic process in order to make a living. It requires equal opportunity in gaining access to private property in (control over, and enjoyment of the income from productive assets) as well as equality of opportunity to engage in productive work.  Participative justice does not guarantee equal results, but requires that every person be guaranteed by society’s institutions the equal human right to make a productive contribution to the economy, both through one’s labor (as a worker) and through one’s productive capital (as an owner).  This principle rejects monopolies, special privileges, and other social barriers to economic self-reliance and personal freedom.

Fr. William Ferree,
expert in social justice.
·      Distributive Justice.  “The most classical form” of distributive justice (Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, § 201), the out-take principle, is based on the exchange or market value of one’s economic contributions.  This is the principle that all people have a right to receive a proportionate, market-determined share of the value of the marketable goods and services they produce with their labor contributions, their capital contributions, or both.  This respects human dignity by making every producer’s and consumer’s economic vote count.

·      Social Justice.  As the feedback and corrective principle, social justice governs participative and distributive justice, enabling both to operate properly.  Within an economic system, social justice restores balance between overall production and consumption.  It rebalances participative justice and distributive justice when the system violates either essential principle.  Social justice includes a concept of limitation that discourages personal greed and prevents monopolies and barriers to participation.

In general, social justice embodies the principles of solidarity and subsidiarity: every person has a moral responsibility to organize with others to correct organizations, institutions, laws, and the social order itself at every level whenever the principles of participative or distributive justice are violated or are not operating properly.  The application of social justice to the common good of specific economic institutions brings those institutions into conformity with the demands of the common good of all society.

The Polls Have Opened in Ireland!

Polling in the referendum is taking place from 01.00 to 16.00 Central Standard time. I will be fasting during that period and making a Holy Hour for the intention of the defeat of the Satanic Culture of Death in the referendum.

I ask my readers to join me.

Our Lady of Knock, pray for Ireland.

St Patrick, Pray for Ireland.

St Bridget, Pray for Ireland.

All ye Martyrs and Saints of Ireland, pray for your Native Land.


IN LUMINE FIDEI: 25 MAY – SAINT URBAN (Pope and Martyr): Urban, a Roman by birth, governed the Church during the reign of the emperor Alexander Severus. By his learning and holy life he converte...


IN LUMINE FIDEI: 25 MAY – SAINT GREGORY VII (Pope and Confessor): Pope Gregory VII, whose baptismal name was Hildebrand, was born at Soana in Tuscany in about 1020. He excelled in learning, sanctity...


IN LUMINE FIDEI: 25 MAY – EMBER FRIDAY IN PENTECOST WEEK: Dom Prosper Gueranger: So far we have considered the action of the Holy Ghost in the Church. We must now study its workings in the soul...

25 May, A Chesterton Calendar

MAY 25th

There is no hope for men who do not boast that their wives bully them.

‘Alarms and Discursions.’

Chesterton, G. K.. The G. K. Chesterton Collection [50 Books] (Kindle Locations 44230-44231). Catholic Way Publishing. Kindle Edition.

26 May, The Roman Martyrology

ante diem vii Kalendas Junias

May 26th anno Domini 2018 The 11th Day of the Moon

On the same 26th day of May, were born into the better life:

At Rome, holy Philip Neri, founder of the Congregation of the Oratory, famous for his virginity, his gift of prophecy, and his wondrous works. 
Also at Rome, the holy Pope and martyr Eleutherius, who led many noble Romans to believe in Christ, and who sent into Britain holy Dyfan and Ffagan, who baptized Lleurwg, Prince [of Morgan,] along with his wife and nearly all his people. We keep his feast upon the 29th day of this present month of May. 
Also in England the feast of the holy Augustine, first Archbishop of Canterbury, called Apostle of England. He was sent hither, along with others, by the blessed Pope Gregory. He preached the Gospel of Christ to the English people. He fell asleep in the Lord at Canterbury, glorious for his graces and wondrous works. 
Also at Rome, the holy Priest Simitrius, and twenty-two others, who suffered martyrdom under the Emperor Antoninus Pius. 
At Athens, the blessed Quadratus, a disciple of the Apostles. During the persecution under Hadrian the Church was scattered in great fear, but he gathered it together again by his faith and labour, and gave unto it a book very useful for the defending of the Christian religion, and worthy of the teaching of the Apostles. 
At Vienne, in Dauphiny, the holy Zachary, Bishop [of that see,] who suffered martyrdom under Trajan. 
In Africa, the holy martyr Quadratus, on whose feast-day holy Austin [of Hippo] preached a sermon. 
At Todi, [in the persecution under the Emperor Diocletian,] the holy martyrs Felicissimus, Heraclius, and Paulinus. 
In the country of Auxerre, [in the second century,] the holy Priscus and a vast multitude of Christ's faithful people suffered martyrdom. 
V. And elsewhere many other holy martyrs, confessors, and holy virgins.
R. Thanks be to God.

Memes of the Day

Thursday, 24 May 2018

Speech Slavery and the Misery of Vicki Momberg

This article is absolutely frightening! It shows the progression of the 'political correctness' of the left. I am not defending Vicki Momberg's use of racist language, but compare the punishment for her 'unPC' speech, a $10,000 fine and three years in prison, with the 'punishments' given those who have called for torture and death for whites, including an officer in the SADF (South African Army), who called for murdering an 80 year old man because he was white. His 'punishment'? His superiors ordered him to apologise!

This fascistic insanity has already begun in the UK and Canada, and it is being pushed heavily by the SJWs in the US. Resist now, before it's too late!

From the American Thinker

Recent congressional testimony regarding Facebook's politically driven exclusionary tactics delineated Silicon Valley's hard-left predilections, but the exposition was a mere foot-candle's worth of illumination in a constellation of threats to the realm of free thought, speech, and expression.
Examples make for a loaded itinerary, but why not start at the bottom – literally?  In this instance, the bottom is South Africa, where, in the week leading into Passover and Easter, a 48-year-old former real estate agent from Durban, Vicki Momberg, was singled out for a type of putative justice befitting any Soviet-era kangaroo court designed for condemnation of anyone whose words and thoughts are dissonant with the state's diktats.
Her ordeal is a siren's-wail warning of how the left's political correctness shaming strategy can be converted into a cudgel for clobbering any soul whose expressions contravene what national agents deem acceptable.
On Feb. 3, 2016, Momberg was stopped near a Johannesburg shopping center when unidentified black men robbed her of belongings in what's known as a "smash-and-grab": busting a car window and snatching whatever's in sight while the helpless motorist recoils in fear.  For female drivers, the terror is undoubtedly compounded by the realization that South Africa is the rape capital of the world.
In the ensuing half-hour, Momberg reportedly called the police several times to summon help.  When she finally flagged down a patrol car, the first constable she encountered was a black man.  She refused to speak with him, and when his white colleague stepped in, Momberg vented her spleen.
The encounter was captured on video.

The sine qua non of the curbside caterwauler, Momberg submits that she dislikes South African blacks, believes they're "arrogant" and incompetent, and wants nothing to do with them generally.  But her cardinal sin?  As the statist S.A. media ballyhooed, she used the word "kaffir" 48 times.  Kaffir, an Arabic term that means "disbeliever," was assimilated into the Afrikaans language to have a derogatory connotation comparable to the "N"-word in the United States.
The constable at whom Momberg leveled her criticism that night sued for racial abuse and was awarded nearly $10,000.  But that was just a warm-up pitch compared to the S.A. government's big swing for lex in terrorem.  She was prosecuted for violating a pop-up variety piece of lawfare that falls under the heading crimen injuria.  As Boer scholar Dan Roodt observed, the charge gives the communist African National Congress – S.A.'s ruling party – wide latitude to "persecute whites suspected of a 'racist' attitude."
Momberg received a bench verdict from a magistrate of Indian descent, who imposed a three-year prison sentence, castigating the defendant for treating the black officer indignantly.
Momberg is serving her term in Soweto's notorious "Sun City" prison, teeming with what Roodt described as appalling third-world conditions and violence.
AfriForum attorney Ernst Roets opined in a March 28 tweet that the "sentence imposed on Vicki Momberg confirms double standards in South Africa regarding race."  Boer citizen-journalist Willem Petzer was epigrammatic in a tweet on the same point: "That was the death of the last crumbles of free speech left in South Africa."
Momberg was undeniably out of line.  But turning a crime victim's histrionics – however racially tinged – into a penological excoriation to stress the need for sterilization of certain offensive language is malicious.
By comparison, in the U.S., Momberg might have faced charges of disturbing the peace or disorderly conduct – misdemeanors with fines.  But even those allegations could have been blunted, given the 1974 Supreme Court case Lewis v. City of New Orleans, in which "opprobrious language" used against police officers was generally recognized as protected speech.
The iron-fisted punishment meted out to Momberg epitomizes South Africa's deep dive into state-enforced political correctness.  She is a de facto political prisoner in the post-Apartheid "rainbow nation" that touts the benefits of "diversity" in its constitution, when in fact diversity counts only if you are not a member of S.A.'s second largest minority: whites, principally Boers, whose roots stretch to the very founding of the nation.  They've arguably been reserved unequal treatment because they are considered political undesirables.  Independent.  Religious.  Conservative.  The fact they're white is convenient to the churlish political heavyweights ever seeking easy targets (and diversions).
Examples of the "double standards" of which Roets spoke are innumerable.  Here are a few that have cemented many white South Africans' perception of existing in a state of hellish suzerainty, minus any benefit of self-determination:
– Luvuyo Menziwa, a black University of Pretoria student, posted a Facebook message stating, "F--- white people.  Just get me a bazooka or AK-47 so I can do the right thing and kill these demon possessed people."  He was prosecuted on grounds similar to Momberg – and received a court admonition to apologize, as well as perform community service.
– In March, 80-year-old clergyman Braam Van Wyk of Randpark Ridge was set upon by several black home invasion robbers, who bound the senior's hands and severely pummeled him.  A South African National Defense Force major, M.V. Mohlala, posted to social media that Van Wyk's assailants "should actually have poked out his eyes and tongue so that the last people he ever see, were the killers, and he could go to his grave with the nightmare."  Mohlala was ordered by his superiors to apologize, with no other known repercussions.
– Julius Malema, leader of the Marxist Economic Freedom Fighters, has led supporters in public chants and songs – complete with dancing and pistol-firing hand gestures – that urge, "Kill the Boer, kill the farmer."  He's also on record vilifying whites as "criminals [who] must be treated as such" and proclaiming the need for "cutting the throat of whiteness."  These acts have been committed with virtual impunity.
South Africa's brand of political correctness is a one-sided shackling mechanism, or what Ronald Reagan always saw in Marxism-Leninism – "primitive as tribal rule."
Arbitrarily policing speech is intrinsically linked to the institutionalization of anti-Boer, or anti-Afrikaner (in essence, anti-white), sentiment that has triggered indescribably wanton farm murders – considered to be an escalator to genocide – targeting the Boer population.
Speech is at the front end of the U.S. Bill of Rights for good reason.  But the bulwark is under siege and depends on upright judicial interpretation.  Without that, we will mirror Europe, which bears all the hallmarks of a graveyard spiral into statist speech suppression and thought control, mainly in the interest of bolstering Islamic stratification.  Britain's 2003 Communications Act is illustrative.  Germany's more recent Net Enforcement Law as well.  Other reality checks abound.
Diamond & Silk's lockout by Facebook was reflective of anti-conservative truncation in the U.S.  But it was a mere surface wrinkle in the wider scheme.
Speaking at Hillsdale College's 2016 commencement, Supreme Court justice Clarence Thomas exhorted graduates to be ever vigilant in a "world gone mad with political correctness."
In America, as Dennis Prager recently posited, "people whisper that they are conservative," akin to dissidents fearful of being found out.
Where does it end?
To know the level of derangement that militant P.C. enforcement can effect, look to South Africa, and remember Vicki Momberg.

I know Exactly What She Meant!

Are Progressives More Biased Than Conservatives?

An interesting article on research being done on 'bias'. I would not be at all surprised if further research replicates the findings of these studies. 

From Intellectual Takeout

It’s no secret that university faculties these days—at least in the humanities and social sciences—are overwhelmingly “progressive” in outlook. Social psychologist Jonathan Haidt, founder of Heterodox Academy, argues that such lack of political diversity can measurably harm the quality of research, at least in his own field.
But as one might expect, progressives tend to see no problem here. They take for granted that one of the hallmarks of their worldview is a relative lack of “bias,” so that all other things being equal, progressives are less likely to be biased than conservatives.
But now there’s good reason to doubt that.
In a new article at Quillette, Florida State University graduate student Bo Winegard begins by noting that many of his progressive colleagues have trouble understanding how any intelligent person could be a conservative. It is simply assumed that progressivism is the rational default and obviously correct, so that being conservative (and thus wrong) calls for an explanation in terms of some abnormal or irrational factor constituting or causing “bias.”
As Winegard shows, a considerable body of research has been motivated by just such an assumption. But research he is conducting strongly suggests that progressives are actually more biased than conservatives in how they react to some situations.
He first reminds us that “bias” is a broad and multivalent concept. It does not manifest itself simply as prejudice against people whom progressives see as oppressed or exploited. Bias also manifests itself in “selective exposure” to ideas, which entails “motivated skepticism” about ideas opposed to one’s outlook, and “motivated credulity” about ideas that appear to confirm one’s outlook. All that reinforces a natural tendency: “…people are strongly motivated to maintain positions that allow them to remain members of their preferred political coalition.” Such positions typically belong to what Winegard calls a “sacred narrative” of reality, and progressives have one every bit as much as conservatives do.
The sacred narrative of progressivism begins with the premise that various groups which are not white-male-and-Christian have been historically oppressed and exploited, and still are. This oppression and exploitation is judged morally wrong because the most important things about people are what we all naturally have in common apart from differences of race, gender, or culture, so that fairness requires that people be treated the same. Winegard calls that narrative “equalitarianism.” A standard corollary of equalitarianism is the belief that conservatives are likely to be biased against such victim groups, and thus tend, immorally, to reinforce historic wrongs.
Yet in a rigorously constructed series of studies, Winegard and his associates obtained results indicating that progressives are more likely to be biased in favor of such groups than conservatives are likely to be biased against them. That should not come as a surprise. For example:
“In Study 3, we described an entrance exam that colleges were considering using, but which favored either men or women…We then asked participants to rate the exam’s fairness, [or] sexism, and asked how much it should be used… As predicted, progressives were significantly less likely to accept the test when men outperform women than when women outperform men. Also, as predicted, but probably surprising to many progressives, conservatives did not differ in their responses in either condition; in other words, conservatives were completely fair, and progressives were biased... Also, as with the other results, these results were partially explained by equalitarian scores.”
To be as useful as they could be, such results need to be replicated across a wider range of examples and issues than the several that Winegard et al. chose. But it’s not a stretch to think that they would be.
Assuming they would be replicated, that would not of course show that progressives are more biased than conservatives in any questionable way. It would only go to show that progressives are more likely than conservatives to be biased in favor of groups that have been historically oppressed or exploited, which need not be a bad thing in itself. But by the same token, it would be just as likely to show that conservatives are not nearly as biased against such groups as progressives typically believe.
So there doesn’t seem to be much scientific basis for progressive bias against conservatives. Yet the sacred narrative of equalitarianism virtually necessitates that such bogeymen be biased against—unfairly. That’s quite an irony. 

U.S. Bishops’ Pro-Life Chair Defends Denying Communion to Pro-Abortion Politicians

I am proud to say that His Excellency was my Ordinary before I moved to Canada. Indeed, my house was directly across the street from his Cathedral. I am glad that we still have some Shepherds who will stand up for the Teachings of Christ's Church, even when such a stand is not in agreement with the Zeitgeist and is unpopular.

From LifeSiteNews

His Excellency Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City in Kansas

WASHINGTON, D.C., May 24, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – The incoming head of the U.S. bishops’ pro-life efforts defended denying Communion to pro-abortion politicians, saying they need to be held to “accountability.”
Kansas City Archbishop Joseph Naumann said this to EWTN before the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast. He explained that when Kathleen Sebelius – later one of the architects of the HHS contraception mandate – was the governor of Kansas, she persistently supported abortion while claiming to be Catholic.
Naumann said he had a “long dialogue” with Sebelius about this before banning her from Communion, but ultimately, “I had no alternative but to take that rather drastic step.”
Canon 915 of the Catholic Church’s Code of Canon Law says that those “obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to Holy Communion.”
Many Catholic bishops ignore canon 915 and distribute Holy Communion, which the Church teaches is the literal body, blood, soul, and divinity of Jesus Christ, to public officials who actively advocate for abortion while purporting to be Catholic.
Naumann also revealed that he was in a way a “crisis pregnancy” because his father was murdered before he was born.
“As a Church, our responsibility is to surround with love those that might be in a difficult pregnancy,” he said, and help them choose life.
Commenting on the abortion referendum in Ireland tomorrow, Naumann assured the pro-life Irish of his prayers.
“We’re really grateful for the leaders in Ireland that have really done a remarkable job…awakening” the nation, said Naumann. That country is “a symbol of faith and Catholicism in so many ways. And for Ireland to abandon its long history of protecting all lives [especially the unborn], this would be a devastating blow internationally.”

Distributism is Not Dead

This was originally written by Dorothy Day and published in the 'Catholic Worker'  in the July-August 1956 issue. Its thesis is no less true today. Catholics on both sides of the political divide, those who support the Papally condemned theories of laissez-faire or free market capitalism and those who support the equally condemned theories of socialism continue to try to bury it.

The laissez-faire capitalist critics usually call Distributism 'socialism', whilst its socialist critics refer to it as 'fascist' in support of the capitalist economy. If they don't even know what it is, and the obviously have no idea, how can they bury it?

From the Distributist Review

Dorothy Day
The very fact that people are always burying Distributism is evidence of the fact that it is not dead as a solution. John Stanley buried it last year in the Commonweal and Social Justice of the Central Verein in St. Louis some months ago buried it. But it is an issue that won’t be buried, because Distributism is a system conformable to the needs of man and his nature.
We write of farming communes as an ideal form of institution towards which we should aim, and for which we should plan and we will continue to write about those which are in existence today in a continuing attempt as a way of living. We feel that there are ways of combating the servile state, and working towards a restoration of property.
During those months there was an exchange of visits between Soviet farmers to this country and some of our farmers to the U.S.S.R. There were some very interesting newspaper accounts. One of our Iowa farmers visited some large-scale collective farms where 5,000 or so Russians were employed by the State in spite of the fact that they were using modern machinery. This was a collective farm, but each family was allotted anywhere from half an acre to two acres, and on this small plot they had their own cow and chickens and pigs, and raised such an amount of vegetables, that it was due to their efforts that so much foodstuffs were able to go on the market. The cities would be hard put to find the foods they needed, were it not for these smaller plots.
At the same time one would feel that communal farming of such vast acreage as there is in the Soviet Union and the United States would not be out-of-place in the raising of wheat and flax and cotton and fruits and other such stuffs that demand large acreage and in some cases many men employed.
Here in the U.S. we have our migrant laborers, millions of them, to harvest the crops, and they live ill-fed, ill-clad, ill-housed and are definitely a problem in our economy. In Russia they seem to be stabilized. The very mention of such numbers would indicate that there could be no speed up, though planting and harvest time necessarily mean long hours, from dawn to dark, with corresponding shorter hours and lighter toil in winter.
I’ve been told on farms I have visited in my trips around the country that winter is just as hard as summer for the individual farmer, since the animals have to be fed more often (not having the grazing they do in the summer) and the work is done under the difficult conditions of the cold and dark, with fewer laborers.
Governor Harriman talked of poverty being a national problem and he was doubtless thinking of migrants, and Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, and Negroes and our city and country slums. Labor leaders have talked of pockets of unemployment. Where industry has moved south, or to another town there is great fanfare over enterprising real estate men who buy up the factories and invite other diversified industries to take over. With all our prosperity there is still the specter of unemployment.
But on the land, as Peter Maurin always said, there is no unemployment. There is food, clothing, shelter, and fuel and work to do. Proof of this is in spite of our poverty and pockets of unemployment, is the fact that in all the 23 years of the Catholic Worker, only one farmer has come to us, and that was John Filliger, who was a seaman during the 1936 strike, who seeing our need, stayed with us. There is the saying, “Scratch a seaman and you will find a farmer.”
In the New World Chesterton series published by Sheed and Ward, the volume Tremendous Trifles has an essay called “The Dickensian.” Our readers will remember that G.K.’s Weekly championed Distributism and his two books, What’s Wrong with the World and The Outline of Sanity are basic volumes to read on Distributism, together with The Sun of Justice, by Harold Robbins, his friend.
In this essay, “The Dickensian,” Chesterton and a stranger meet on a little pleasure boat crawling up Yarmouth Harbor. The stranger is mourning the passing of good old things like the wooden figureheads on ships and he prowls around the old parts of the town looking for traces of Dickens in Yarmouth. During the course of the afternoon they visit a church and there is a stained glass window which was flaming “with all the passionate heraldry of the most fierce and ecstatic of Christian Arts,” there was the angel of the resurrection. Chesterton dashed out of the church, dragging his friend after him, to buy as he said, ginger beer, postal cards, to listen to the concertinas, to ride on a donkey. And when the Dickens enthusiast all but decided Chesterton needed to be committed to a mental hospital, the latter explains:
“There are certain writers to whom humanity owes much, whose talent is yet of so shy or retrospective a type that we do well to link it with certain quaint places, or certain perishing associations.” And he went on to say that were Dickens living today, he would not be harking back to the past, but dealing with things just as he found them. So that he, Chesterton, was being particularly Dickensian by enjoying his surroundings as they were, and beginning from there.
It is the same with Distributism. It needs to be constantly rewritten, re-assessed, restated, with the wisdom and clear-sightedness of a Chesterton who by his paradoxes, made us see our lives and our problems in the light of Faith, who can help us today to make a synthesis of Cult, Culture and Cultivation.
In spite of the nuclear age we are living in, we can plant our gardens even if they are only window boxes, we can awaken ourselves to God’s good earth and in little ways start going out on pilgrimage, to the suburbs, to the country, and when we get the grace, we may so put off the old man, and put on Christ, that we will begin to do without all that the City of man offers us, and build up the farming commune, the Village, the “city” of God, wherein justice dwelleth.

Pray Hard For Ireland!

The Church in Ireland is asking our prayers to defeat the Culture of Death! Pray!!!

From Catholic News Agency

.- With a referendum vote that could legalize abortion in Ireland just days away, the country’s clergy and Church leaders are asking the world for prayers.
In a video message posted to YouTube, Irish priest Father Marius O’Reilly appeals to Catholics and Christians around the world to pray for the country of Ireland ahead of the vote, particularly through praying the rosary and offering Masses.
O’Reilly noted that while other countries have legalized abortion through legislation or court decisions, “Ireland would be the first country in the world where the people would legalize abortion,” he said.
“We can’t allow that to happen. And so I’m making an appeal to you today - please come to our assistance. Pray the rosary for Ireland. Please have Masses offered for Ireland,” he said.
On May 25, Irish citizens will vote whether they want to repeal the country’s eighth amendment, which recognizes the equal right to life of the mother and the unborn child. Under current law, the practice of abortion in Ireland is illegal, unless the mother’s health is deemed to be endangered. Pro-life Irish citizens are encouraging a “no” vote on the referendum.
The eighth amendment was passed in Ireland in 1983, with upwards of 67 percent voter-approval. It reads, in part: “The State acknowledges the right to life of the unborn and, with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother, guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right.”
Despite the high percentage of the population - 78 percent - that identifies as Catholic, polling has predicted that the vote will be close.  
Two months ago, EWTN Ireland started a 54-day rosary novena campaign for the “affirmation of the inestimable value of every human life.”
The campaign’s website urges “all people of good will to join together in prayer in defence of unborn babies and their mothers. All those professing faith, and those professing secular values, are invited to join as one voice on behalf of the unborn babies and their mothers: to affirm the life of the most vulnerable who may be classed as terminally ill, disabled or ‘unwanted’.”
A Christian prayer and a secular affirmation were also included on the campaign’s site.
EWTN Ireland as well as many clergy are particularly urging Catholics to pray a nine-day rosary novena leading up to the vote, starting on Thursday, May 17 and ending on Friday, May 25, the day of the referendum.
The novena website Pray More Novenas, which sends out daily reminders for various prayers, has also begun a novena through the intercession of the Irish Our Lady of Knock specifically for the abortion referendum.
There is also a prayer and fasting initiative, inspired by Sr. Briege McKenna (O.S.C.) that calls for Masses and days of prayer and “medically safe” fasting to be offered for the “Reparation, Conversions of hearts and Protection of the 8th amendment.”
Pro-life group Human Life International has asked for the offering of 1,000 Masses for the referendum, and has a form on their website where the Masses offered for this intention may be added to the calendar.
In his video, Fr. O’Reilly recalled Pope John Paul II’s 1979 visit to the country, during which he urged Irish citizens to defend life.
“He said to the Irish people ‘you must protect life;’ he knew what was coming down the road. And so the Irish people took this very, very seriously and rosary crusades began all around the country,” O’Reilly said.
This also led to the proposal of the constitutional amendment that is currently in place, which gave equal protection to mother and child “so that Ireland would be a country that in the constitution would say that the unborn child has a right to life.”
“This was an incredible gift from God for our country because it meant that the politicians couldn’t just bring in abortion when they wanted. They would have to put it to the people,” he added. “And so we fought it for years and years and now in 2018 we’re being asked to vote on abortion.” 
The Ancient Order of Hibernians, a Catholic Irish-American men’s fraternity, has asked its members to set aside May 18 as a day of prayer in solidarity with the Save the 8th Campaign.
“Every prayer for a ‘No’ vote is a compassionate plea to spare Ireland the pain America has suffered for 45 years,” Ancient Order of Hibernians National President James F. McKay said, alluding to the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decisions that mandated legal abortion across the country.
He encouraged prayers invoking the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus and Our Lady of Fatima to “save Ireland’s mothers and unborn from the evils of abortion.”
He also encouraged immediate social media outreach as well as discussions with family and friends about “the importance of protecting the unborn.”
Bishop James D. Conley of Lincoln, Neb. used his May 18 column in the Southern Nebraska Register to ask readers to join him in prayer that the people of Ireland will choose life.
“I pray that the people of Ireland will see that the legalization of abortion in countries around the world has not made women free. That abortion has only caused more violence, more ruin, and more despair,” Bishop Conley said.
The bishop said the Catholic faith “has long given the Irish people an acute and attentive sense of human dignity, human rights, and justice,” but Ireland has secularized in part due to “Church leaders who failed to give authentic and faithful witness to the Gospel.”
Conley, who spent a semester in Ireland as a 20-year-old recent Catholic convert, said “my introduction to the day-to-day practice of my newfound Catholic faith was in Ireland.”
“It has now been over 40 years since I spent those four delightful months in Ireland, but I still remember vividly the strong faith of the Irish people and how Catholicism ran deep in the Irish soil and soul. I owe so much to the Irish people for nurturing me in my Catholic faith. And we, as a country, owe so much to the Catholic Church in Ireland for bringing that same faith to these shores.”