Goodbye England, land of Chaucer, Shakespeare and the Magna Carta. It was nice to have known you. Thanks for all that you have given to America


Englands Houses of Parliament in London

> “Farewell to England”   This is an sobering wakeup call to America.
England has experienced Hijrah.  Hijrah is the Muslim doctrine that advocates the conquering of a nation by immigration without going to war. 
Don’t think for a moment that America is not a target or that there are no American cities where Islamic and Sharia victories and takeovers have
already occurred.
During the eight years of the Barack Hussein Obama administration priority was given to Muslim ‘refugees’ and Christians were rejected.
It’s time for strict border control and a sane legal immigration policy for America.
 Here’s what has already happened to England within a few years of opening their borders without reasonable entry control; the British have
passively succumbed to the Muslim Hijrah invasion: 

> Mayor of London … MUSLIM 

> Mayor of Birmingham … MUSLIM

> Mayor of Leeds … MUSLIM 

> Mayor of Blackburn … MUSLIM 

> Mayor of Sheffield … MUSLIM  

> Mayor of Oxford … MUSLIM  

> Mayor of Luton …MUSLIM  

> Mayor of Oldham … MUSLIM  

> Mayor of Rochdale … MUSLIM
All the that was achieved by just 4 million Muslims voters out of the 66 million total  population in England.

England now has:
> Over 3,000 Muslim Mosques  

> Over 130 Muslim Sharia Courts  

> Over 50 Muslim Sharia Councils 

> Muslims Only No-Go Areas Across The UK 

> Muslim Women… 78% don’t work and are on FREE
> benefits/housing  

> Muslim Men… 63% don’t work and are on FREE
> benefits/housing 

> Muslim Families… 6-8 children planning to go on FREE
> benefits/housing.
 >Now all UK schools are ONLY serving HALAL MEAT!,
>We  (the USA) even can’t decide on an immigration policy???    
Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment


Ali in Wonderland



Here’s a recent news item that caught my eye:

Ayaan Hirsi Ali was scheduled to present a paper on radical Islamic terror at the National Security Council before being blocked by H.R. Mc Master and his recently appointed Senior Director of Counter-Terrorism, Mustafa Javed Ali.

Mustafa Javed Ali is now the senior director of counter-terrorism? Could that be right? Please don’t accuse me of racism. After all, Islam is not a race. For all I know, Mustafa Javed Ali could be a Caucasian convert to Islam formerly known as Billy Bob Pickens. If I read that someone named Vasily Vladimir Petrovich had been suddenly appointed as deputy director of the CIA, my curiosity would be similarly piqued.

What’s in a name? Usually nothing that would have a bearing on national security. But some names make you sit up and take notice. Take care… er, I meant to say, “Take CAIR, for example.” That’s the acronym for the Council on American-Islamic Relations. Before taking command of counterterrorism, Mr. Javed Ali was CAIR’s diversity outreach coordinator.

CAIR, if you don’t already know, was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the nation’s largest terrorist-funding case. The organization is considered by many to be a front group for the Muslim Brotherhood. Along with its opposition to virtually every anti-terrorism initiative ever proposed, CAIR has also been at the forefront of the “Islamophobia” campaign. It’s likely no coincidence that Mustafa Javed Ali’s opposition to Ayaan Hirsi Ali is that she was “Islamophobic.”

The important name to remember here, however, is not M.J. Ali, but General H.R. McMaster. The H.R. stands for Herbert Raymond, which in itself should be enough to disqualify the man from the position of National Security Advisor. But no such luck. He’s in like Flynn. Well, not like Flynn. Flynn is out. And so are a lot of other people who share Flynn’s silly view that Islamic terror has something to do with Islam.

Since replacing Flynn, McMaster has been firing people left and right–well, mostly on the right. The people on the left are the ones who are being hired to replace them. According to the Washington Free Beacon, “McMaster has been targeting long-time Trump loyalists who were clashing with career government staffers and holdovers from the Obama administration.” Now it looks like the Obama holdovers are holding the trump hand, and Trump is left holding the bag.

Among those fired from top positions at NSC are K.T. Mc Farland, Ezra Watnick-Cohen, Rich Higgins, Derek Harvey, Adam Lovinger, and Robin Townley. For the most part they are anti-Iran deal, pro-Israel, and anti-Muslim Brotherhood. Some of them also worry about the left. For example, Rich Higgins was fired for a memo that warned about the alliance between “cultural Marxists” and “Islamists.” Once McMaster has completed his purge, writes Daniel Greenfield, “the NSC will be a purely Obama-Bush operation.”

The McMaster disaster is an example of what is meant by the “deep state,” or, if you like, the “swamp.” The “swamp” refers primarily to upper-level bureaucrats who seem to be permanently embedded in government agencies. They are supposed to be civil servants, but mostly they serve the man who appointed them. But if the Obama loyalists in the D.C. bureaucracy are the swamp, McMaster is more like the Creature from the Black Lagoon. The swamp waits for its victims to sink in the mud, the Creature actively seeks them out.

Of course, he has help—people like Mustafa Javed Ali. Some might question Mr. Ali’s qualifications, but let’s not quibble about that. His service as diversity outreach coordinator for CAIR surely qualifies him to be Senior Director of Counter-Terrorism for U.S.A. He was so qualified that Mc Master catapulted him to Senior Director without even a tryout as Junior Director. Still, one could question Javed Ali’s tactics. Take his cancellation of Hirsi Ali’s talk. According to one source, Javed Ali said “the only way she could present her paper would be to have someone from CAIR come in to refute her work.”

Equal time for CAIR—an organization that, for good reason, has been dubbed the “Muslim Mafia”? It must all seem very strange to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who has spent a good part of her life trying to escape the CAIR-ing type. She left Somalia for the Netherlands to get away from Islam’s harsh treatment of women. Then she left Holland for America because of Muslim death threats against her. Now that she’s in the land of the free, she must wonder why her competence to speak on Islam to the NSC is being questioned by a former functionary of a Muslim Brotherhood organization.

Like Alice in Wonderland, Ali must be trying to make sense of it all. Why are the Mad Hatters and the Red Queens still in charge of Washington? Why are ex-CAIR men in the National Security Council? One could ask these questions, but perhaps it’s better not to. One question leads to another, and pretty soon you’re on a witch hunt or a fishing expedition and you might catch a red herring, and then where would you be?

If you’re going to ask why there are Muslim Brotherhood types in the NSC, you might as well ask why the current co-chair of the Democratic National Committee is a convert to Islam who spends much of his time hobnobbing with people from CAIR and ISNA. You might just as well ask why his predecessor Debbie Wasserman Schultz failed to fire her top IT aide Imran Awan until after he was arrested at Dulles Airport for trying to flee the country. Imran and his two brothers, Abid and Jamal, had already been relieved of their duties as information technology managers for dozens of Democrat members of the House of Representatives. The three Pakistani brothers were suspected of illegal access and data theft. Yet, over the course of several years, they worked for three members of the House Committee on Intelligence, five members of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, and for various Democratic members of the Homeland Security Committee and the Armed Services Committee.

But who cares? Why make a mountain out of a Capitol Hill full of moles? That would be like making a fuss about the fact that John Kerry’s daughter married into an Iranian family. Of course, ordinary mortals with at-risk in-laws in Iran would be expected to recuse themselves from sensitive negotiations with the Iranian government over nuclear weapons. But John Kerry is not an ordinary person. He’s a Democrat. And Democrats don’t do recuse.

If you would raise a fuss about such a small thing, you’re probably the kind of person who would make a big deal about Hillary Clinton appointing Huma Abedin as Deputy Chief of Staff at the State Department. Sure, Abedin’s family were entangled with the Muslim Brotherhood, and sure, Abedin herself was managing editor of a Muslim Brotherhood magazine. But what of it? It’s not as though the Clinton State Department ever showed any partiality to the Muslim Brotherhood—except for helping them take over Egypt, and a few other minor favors.

Why is Mustafa Javed Ali in charge of counter-terrorism at the NSC? You might as well ask why John Brennan, the head of the CIA under Obama, ordered the FBI and about 14 other security agencies to purge their training materials of any reference to “jihad” and “radical Islam.” Why did he do that? It’s really none of your business, but if you must know, it was because such terms are offensive to Muslims.

Speaking of purges, Obama conducted one of his own. During his eight-year tenure, he replaced several hundred generals and other high-ranking officers with people who shared his own view of a more peaceful and tolerant military. As a result, the only generals left to choose from in the swam…I mean, the pool, tend to be made in the image of the ex-president. That’s why every time Trump turns over a new hire card, it doesn’t turn up trumps, it turns up Obamas.

While we’re on the subject of cards, I want you to look at this one. It’s the Queen of Diamonds. It’s better that you don’t trouble your mind anymore over the matters we’ve been discussing. Just concentrate on the card. Empty your mind of all bothersome thoughts. These are complicated matters best left to the wise ones. The military-industrial complex is too complex for you to ever understand. When you wake you will forget everything said here.


William Kilpatrick


William Kilpatrick taught for many years at Boston College. He is the author of several books about cultural and religious issues, including Why Johnny Can’t Tell Right From Wrong; and Christianity, Islam and Atheism: The Struggle for the Soul of the West and The Politically Incorrect Guide to Jihad. His articles have appeared in numerous publications, including Catholic World Report, National Catholic Register, Aleteia, Saint Austin Review, Investor’s Business Daily,and First Things. His work is supported in part by the Shillman Foundation. For more on his work and writings, visit his website,

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment


Help us stop pornography and sexual exploitation in video games.

Sign our petition to the video game platform Steam demanding they stop supporting video games pornographic and sexually exploitive in nature.

House Party prides itself for allowing users to sexually assault, rape, strip, blackmail, or ejaculate on any woman of their choosing. This game creates a virtual fantasy without consequences and is within clicking distance to games children can access.

Steam, the mainstream video game platform, is hosting video games that are pornographic and sexually exploitive in nature.

Steam boasts itself as easy to access and available consumers of all ages, including children. Two video games must be taken down immediately: House Party and Porno Studio Tycoon.

House Party prides itself for allowing users to sexually assault, rape, strip, blackmail, or ejaculate on any woman of their choosing. This game creates a virtual fantasy world for predators without consequences.

Sexual content games like House Party and Porno Studio Tycoon are located within clicking distance from games children can access, by genre, like Lego or Mario Brothers.

Sign our petition to Steam demanding they remove these games and institute more robust policies to reject pornography and sexual exploitation on their platform.

Sign the petition here:

Rape and sexual coercion are not things that should be rewarded and Steam is promoting an environment that not only rewards players but honors them for committing activities that are both heinous and illegal. 

Read the following game review from an actual player. Imagine that he is describing what he did at a real house party (warning: contains explicit language):

Text reads: “First I walked Stephanie out of her dress. That was fun. Then I blackmailed Madison into giving me a wonderful show. She hates me for it. She probably should. Then I made her blow me. Yup. Then I made Ashley walk around without any clothes. She hates more for it. I don’t blame her. Nice boobs though. Madison loves me now. Then I got Katerin or whatever her nerdy ***** name is to let me take pictures of her topless. I gave the photos to Frank. What an***** that guy is. Got some booze. I got her drunk and had sex with her. Twice. While her boyfriend listened in. I got Rachel to do ALL KINDS of *****. Then I nailed her. Flipped her over. Nailed her some more. Britney is a lesbian. I’m gonna hit that one way or another. Trust me. And that is why this whole review should be covered in [*’s]. YAY STEAM! 300/10 would **** on angry Rachel’s face again!”

Does this sound like innocent fun to you? This is not the type of thing that should be promoted.

In response, CitizenGO is partnering with National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE) to stop this behavior. We need your help. We are asking that you sign your name to our joint petition to Steam demanding they remove these games at once.

Join our joint petition here:

Steam and game developers are already feeling significant pressure. Two weeks ago, NCOSE members sent over a thousand emails to executives at Steam. Steam immediately responded by placing black censor bars over nudity and the developer of House Partypenned an unapologetic open letter defending the game and its themes.

The arguments the developer presents in the letter are riddled with messages that perpetuate rape myths.

Read the rest of the letter here.

Porno Studio Tycoon is a business simulator game which allows users to coerce models into pornography. The game is flagged for sexual content and nudity. Much like House PartyPorno Studio Tycoon is easy to access and located way too close to content children can access.

To access the game Porno Studio Tycoon, users only need to click a checkbox acknowledging the sexual content. There is no age verification.

House Party and Porno Studio Tycoon trivialize the most tragic crimes committed against women. They are dangerous, offensive, and traumatizing to sexually assaulted persons everywhere. No mentality justifying sexual exploitation is acceptable or safe. By distributing these games, Steam not only exposes children to pornography, but normalizes sexual assault.

Unfortunately, these two games are not the only games glorifying this type of behavior. But, we are only starting the conversation by removing the most blatantly offensive content. Our long-term goal is for Steam to institute more robust policies to reject sexual exploitation on their platform.

Together, Steam will not tune us out!

Sign here:

Thank you,

Gregory Mertz and the entire CitizenGO team

P.S. For additional information, please refer to the articles cited at the bottom of the petition. To access the article, click here. Don’t forget to sign the petition. 

CitizenGO is a community of active citizens that seeks to defend life, the family and fundamental rights worldwide. To find out more about CitizenGO click here or follow us on Facebook or Twitter. This message is addressed to If you do not wish to receive emails from CitizenGO, click on this link.

To contact CitizenGO, do not respond to this email, reply at this link:

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment



It’s more than just ‘irreconcilable differences.’
JUL 28, 2017

It’s summer, and the marriage business is booming. During these hot summer months, wedding venues are cashing in and years of Pinterest dreams are finally becoming a reality.

But all year round, wary Millennials and hopeful newlyweds want to know the secret to making intimacy and marital bliss last. Among the many secrets and tricks for safeguarding your marriage, there is one piece of advice that often falls through the cracks, but interestingly enough, it’s divorce lawyers who are raising the alarm.

There, at the dreaded end, around a table full of grievances and wounds accumulated throughout the years, divorce lawyers have begun to notice a trend: Porn is ruining marriage.

In an informal meeting survey in 2002, the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers questioned 350 divorce attorneys and found that roughly 60 percent reported that internet porn played a significant role in the divorces, with excessive interest in online porn contributing to more than half of such cases.

It’s not just lawyers who are picking up on the trend. In 2005, Dr. Jill Manning, a licensed marriage and family therapist specializing in sexual addiction, pornography, or betrayal trauma, brought her research on porn and its connection to divorce before the Senate. According to Manning’s research, 56 percent of divorce cases involve one party having an obsessive interest in pornographic websites.

John Mathews*, Family Law and Divorce Attorney, has also found porn to be a prevalent problem within his practice. Mathews explains that, in most cases, spouses deny porn use. But during discovery, a process wherein each spouse is given a list of questions to answer under oath, and during the back and forth between spouses as he tries to understand the complaints, he sees clearly the role porn plays in crumbling marriages.

Mathews explains that porn is most often cited amongst complaints of “Constructive Desertion,” meaning the spouse is at fault for emotionally abandoning their partner and withdrawing from sexual intimacy. Mathews says that he has had several cases in which a husband can’t stop engaging with porn, causing him to withdraw from quality time that could be spent with his wife. Most often, Mathews explains, porn use takes its toll by creating false expectations for physical intimacy. “I have had many cases where the husband won’t even touch his wife and several cases in which the spouses have not had sex in three or four years,” Mathews says.

In recent years there has been plenty of research documenting the addictive powers of porn and its ability to ruin sexual intimacy. But it’s eye-opening to hear it from lawyers who document the couples’ stories, from “I do” to the piles of paperwork at the end.

The burning question then is: If divorce lawyers have been raising the red flag on porn use in marriage since 2002, why are we only just starting to hear about it in the past couple years?

In a humble and heartfelt open letter to readers in 2016, Dr. John Gottman explains that even today there are varying theories on how to manage porn use in marriage. According to Dr. Gottman, many marriage counselors recommend that couples merely accept porn use, especially by men, as natural and harmless. In fact, Dr. Gottman admits that in the past, he had even recommended porn use in the hopes of increasing intimacy for couples who were struggling with intimacy after the birth of a child. But, in his 2016 letter, Dr. Gottman corrected his recommendation and now stands by research that indicates porn is indeed destructive to intimacy.

“First, intimacy for couples is a source of connection and communication betweentwo people. But when one person becomes accustomed to masturbating to porn, they are actually turning away from intimate interaction. Second, when watching pornography, the user is in total control of the sexual experience, in contrast to normal sex in which people are sharing control with the partner. Thus a porn user may form the unrealistic expectation that sex will be under only one person’s control. Third, the porn user may expect that their partner will always be immediately ready for intercourse (see Come as You Are by Emily Nagoski). This is unrealistic as well.”

Dr. Gottman’s years of research on marital intimacy align with what divorce lawyers have been witnessing for at least the past fifteen years: Porn use destroys marital intimacy and significantly increases the chances that your marriage will end.

For those of us Millennials who are looking toward marriage with a discerning eye, this warning could not come urgently enough. The chances that your partner uses porn is high. According to a 2006 study, 84 percent of people ages 18 to 49 view porn. Yes, that likely includes that nice guy you met at church. Porn use is addictive, and you shouldn’t shame or vilify your partner if he uses, but when it comes to having a healthy relationship that can stand the test of time, couples who talk about porn and create boundaries to protect their marriage from it are much better off.

Want to know how to discuss porn with your partner? Read on.

*Attorney’s name was changed, at his request, to protect the privacy of his clients.

Photo Credit: Shelby Deeter

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment



Image | Posted on by | 4 Comments



Mexico is the most violent Latin American country for priests

.- For the ninth year in a row, Mexico is the most violent country in Latin America for priests, said a report from the Catholic Multimedia Center.

The report covers 2012 to 2017, which aligns with the presidency of current Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto. During this time, 19 priests and two lay persons were murdered, and two priests reported as missing.

“This year, 2017 specifically, has been disastrous for the priesthood in Mexico,” the Catholic Multimedia Center reported. “Four murders, two thwarted kidnappings, two iconic attacks, one at the Metropolitan Cathedral of Mexico City and the other at the Offices of the Mexican Bishops’ Conference, as well as hundreds of threats and extortions of priests and bishops.”

“This is a sad scenario which makes us assert that things are far from getting better,” they said.

So far this year, Fr. Felipe Altamirano Carrillo of the Nayar Prelature; Fr. Joaquín Hernández Sienfuentes of the Diocese of Saltillo; Fr. Luis López Villa of the Diocese of Nezahualcóyotl; and Fr.  José Miguel Machorro of the Archdiocese of Mexico City have been murdered.

While “the members of the Church are not in conflict with the groups that are committing crimes in the country,” the Catholic Multimedia Center said, “there are sectors of society that are taking advantage of the surge of violence and demonstrate insolence toward the religious in places such as Chiapas, Tabasco, Mexico City, Puebla, Tlaxcala, Hidalgo, Mexico State, Jalisco, Nayarit, Veracruz, San Luis Potosí, Colima, Culiacán, Tabasco, Michoacán, Guerrero and Tamaulipas.”

The report denounced that “these groups that attack priests and religious seek to limit the activities of the pastoral work of the Church in Mexico which are carried out in the fields of healthcare and education as well as aid work – aid, shelter, relief – in support of the human rights of migrants who are passing through Mexican territory.”

It also found that while priests, religious and lay persons have all been victims of hate crimes, pastoral workers – and specifically priests – are particularly vulnerable to various attacks.

With a lack of security, indifferent authorities, and growth in organized crime, the Catholic Multimedia Center said, “we can no longer keep quiet, as the blood of thousands of Mexicans continues to be shed.”

The organization called on all levels of government in Mexico to “provide guarantees for the exercise of the priestly ministry in many areas of Mexico where violence has rebounded.”

Crime in Mexico was also denounced recently by the Catholic Mexican newspaper Desde la Fe.

Corruption, poverty and unemployment only contribute to rising crime levels, the publication said, and Cuernavaca in Morelos State, popularly known as “the city of eternal springtime,” has become the “city of eternal shooting.”

The newspaper lamented that “violent robberies, sexual assaults and homicides are committed, and the citizenry does not report them because of mistrust and frustration.”

Tags: Catholic News, Mexico, Priests, Violence against priests

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The emphasis on our minds’ ability to apprehend reality—and not just empirical potentialities and actualities but also philosophical and religious truths—is woven into the West’s very fabric.

Reason, Faith, and the Struggle for Western Civilization
by Samuel Gregg
within Culture, Politics
Aug 14, 2017 07:00 am
Any defense of the West must be clear about those core commitments to reason and the reasonable God that are central to its identity.

President Trump’s outspoken defense of Western civilization in his July 2017 Warsaw speech was a pointed reminder that one troubling characteristic of our time is the ongoing assault on the very idea of the West. This is most vividly manifested in the relentless use of physical violence by jihadists determined to terrorize us first into acquiescence and, eventually, submission.

Nor, however, is there a shortage of efforts to dismantle Western culture from within. Sometimes this occurs through focusing on real evils committed by Westerners, such as slavery, while studiously ignoring or denigrating the West’s impressive achievements. On other occasions, the West’s deepest roots are condemned as inherently oppressive, burdensome legacies bequeathed by dead, white, logocentric men.

One effect of these attacks is that they force us to clarify what is central to Western culture. Clearly Western civilization isn’t primarily about geography. Would anyone suggest that a southern hemisphere country such as Australia or a Middle Eastern state like Israel is not part of the West because each exists outside North America and Europe?

We move onto firmer ground when we start listing accomplishments that can only be described as products of the West. No one would designate the Rule of Benedict, Magna Carta, Michelangelo’s “David,” Mozart’s “Coronation Mass,” Plato’s Gorgias, Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations, Justinian’s Corpus Juris Civilis, Jefferson’s Monticello, or Shakespeare’s Richard III as representative of Japanese, Persian, or Tibetan culture. Likewise, would anyone seriously question that ideas such as the rule of law, limited government, and the distinction between the spiritual and temporal realms, have developed and received their fullest expression in Western societies rather than Javanese or Arab cultures?

These things, however, are essentially derivative. They proceed from specific philosophical and religious commitments without which the West as we know it could never have developed. When those foundations are shaken, we should not be surprised that all that is built on them starts to falter.

Reason as the Root of Freedom and Justice

Perhaps the first building block that comes to mind when considering the West’s roots is the commitment to reasoned inquiry in search of truth. Reason is operative in all societies, as it is one of man’s defining characteristics. Nonetheless, the emphasis on our minds’ ability to apprehend reality—and not just empirical potentialities and actualities but also philosophical and religious truths—is woven into the West’s very fabric.

Consider Socratic thought, Roman law’s careful clarification of various legal relationships, or the effort of specific Enlightenment thinkers to apply the scientific method. Each of these constituted an explicit attempt to comprehend and shape aspects of reality as well as to distinguish which choices are rational, good, and right from those that are not. They also helped facilitate wise intellectual and social habits: a wariness of superstition and a desire to avoid error, as well as a concern for just relationships, a suspicion of arbitrary power, and an attachment to liberty.

To be sure, traces of these ideas can be found in other cultures, though arguably not in as sophisticated and consistent ways. These characteristics also took centuries to develop as key ingredients of Western societies—and not without trial and error. Nevertheless, the proposition that reason itself is intrinsically connected to freedom, justice, and the doing of good has been easily detectable as long ago as Socrates’ refusal to obey the Athenian oligarchy and to participate in Leon of Salamis’s arrest and unjust execution.

Even European absolutist monarchs generally sought to avoid being seen to act arbitrarily. Arbitrary government, they understood, was widely regarded as infringing the demands of justice and reason and thus risked resistance, as Charles I of England discovered. The same criteria allow us to identify Communist or National Socialist regimes as antithetical to Western culture precisely because they subordinated liberty and justice to the whims of “the dictatorship of the proletariat” or “the master race.”

Yet neither freedom nor justice in the West has ever been reducible to eliminating unjust coercion. Reason itself allows us to know that we can transform not just the world around us but also ourselves in the direction of what reason identifies as good and right for humans. Western thinkers ranging from Aristotle to Alexander Hamilton have long held that there is a real difference between choosing to spend one’s life smoking marijuana in downtown Amsterdam and using one’s liberty to improve the political, legal, and economic order.

Put another way, it’s a civilization that emphasizes what the theologian Servais Pinckaers called freedom for excellence. The West’s fullest idea of liberty is thus what the author of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Edward Gibbon, called “rational freedom”: a state in which our passions are ruled by reason.

Religion and the Reasonable God

While an attachment to this full-bodied conception of reason is integral to Western culture and has helped universalize its achievements, there is another dimension to that civilization without which the West cannot do if it wants to retain its distinct identity.

Put bluntly, without Judaism and Christianity, there is no Ambrose, Benedict, Aquinas, Maimonides, Hildegard of Bingen, Isaac Abravanel, Thomas More, Elizabeth of Hungary, John Calvin, Ignatius of Loyola, Hugo Grotius, John Witherspoon, William Wilberforce, Søren Kierkegaard, Fyodor Dostoyevsky, C.S. Lewis, Edith Stein, Elizabeth Anscombe, Joseph Ratzinger, Gregorian Revolution, Reformation, Oxford, Harvard, Caravaggio’s “Calling of Saint Matthew,” Bach’s “Saint John Passion,” Augustine’s City of God, Dante’s Divine Comedy, Pascal’s Pensées, Hagia Sophia, Mont Saint-Michel, London’s St Paul’s Cathedral, Florence’s Duomo, or Rome’s Great Synagogue. It’s also much harder to imagine the delegitimizing of slavery, the affirmation of the essential equality of men and women, or the de-deification of the state and the natural world without the vision of God articulated first by Judaism and then infused into the West’s marrow by Christianity.

In short, the answer to Tertullian’s famous question—“what has Athens to do with Jerusalem?” —is “everything.” This is not simply because these distinctly Western figures, architecture, music, and books are intimately associated with Judaism or Christianity. As the French philosopher and theologian Claude Tresmontant argued in Les origines de la philosophie chrétienne (1962):

When the prophets of Israel bitterly rebuke pagan idolatry, they are doing something strictly rational. When they refuse to sacrifice human children to idols or to myths, they carry their work of the use of reason into practical human conduct. . . . The inspiration which has led to this intellectual revolution . . . is not something dictated from without on a servile human instrument. It is a revolution that works from within, and which starts to create a new, holy, reasonable humanity . . .

In this and other books, Tresmontant showed that the Hebrew Scriptures contain remarkably clear accounts of (1) human reason’s capacity to comprehend moral and material truth, (2) the reality of free will, and (3) the design and causality that permeates the world. Furthermore, as John Finnis has stressed, these biblical propositions were articulated centuries before some Greeks arrived at similar but less clear conclusions.

The notion that all humans are equal qua humans, and that there are consequently no sub-humans or super-humans, acquired unique force thanks to Judaism and Christianity’s emphasis on the creation of all humans as imago Dei. Likewise freedom in the sense that God leaves man in his own counsel andurges him to choose to transcend mediocrity is spelled out in texts ranging from Sirach 15:14 to Galatians 5:11. Genesis’s call to humans to unfold the potentiality contained in God’s original creative act via their intelligence and work encouraged positive views of human creativity and an impatience with passivity.

These insights are bounded by the Bible’s insistence that man is not God and is susceptible to using his reason in wrong and destructive ways. This reinforced the Western emphasis on limiting state power and created resistance to those utopian impulses that periodically rear their heads.

All this is undergirded by Judaism and Christianity’s affirmation that God’s true nature is not revealed in beliefs that posit nothingness as illumination, or religions populated by the frivolous, all-too-human gods of Rome and Greece, or creeds dominated by a hard desert Deity that mandates blind compliance with a Divine Will that commands us to act unreasonably. Instead, we find a God who, in addition to being a God of Love, is also Divine Reason, thereby affirming that, at the beginning of everything created, there is not chaos. Instead, we find Logos.

A West Minus Logos

Absent widespread confidence in the truth of this understanding of God, I’d suggest that Western civilization cannot help but decline. Today, for instance, emotivism and appeals to hurt feelings are weaponized to shut down discussion in elite and popular culture about topics ranging from marriage to immigration. This eclipse of reason has been accompanied by the ascent of scientism, which inevitably follows the empirical method’s detachment from the pre-empirical philosophical assumptions on which it rests.

Is it a coincidence that such developments parallel the falling away of many from orthodox Christianity’s claims? I think not. Edward Gibbon famously associated the Roman Empire’s decay with the rise of Christianity. In parts of the West today, however, we can see what happens when skepticism and practical atheism, not to mention those forms of Judaism and Christianity that have abandoned these faiths’ central truth claims about the nature of God and man, start taking hold.

We start, for example, to subordinate basic scientific truths about women and men to the lie of gender ideology. Others begin reattributing divine characteristics to the environment. A willingness to remove legal constraints on the use of lethal force against pre-born, sick, and elderly humans becomes more widespread. Utopian economic schemes to be realized via state fiat become popular. A concern for liberty collapses into the promotion—again, via state intervention—of libertinism. Taken together, these trends amount to Western civilization’s polar opposite: i.e., barbarism.

Judaism and Christianity’s central purpose is not, of course, to promote Western culture. That would be to subordinate these religions to the realization of other ends. That said, just as the West’s emergence took a decisive turn with the rise of Christianity, so too does Christianity’s gradual supplanting by pale facsimiles such as liberal religion, or outright antagonists like philosophical materialism, have grave consequences for that same culture.

Need people be faithful Jews or orthodox Christians to affirm Western civilization’s achievements? No. There are agnostics and atheists described by the late Michael Novak as “smiling secularists.” Though they might not accept Judaism and Christianity’s religious claims, they have no doubts whatsoever about these faiths’ indispensable role in the growth of Western culture.

Unabashed discussion and affirmation of that contribution is a good starting point for believers and non-believers alike to rediscover and reaffirm those truths without which, I fear, the West will eventually become unknown to itself.

Samuel Gregg is Research Director at the Acton Institute.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment





Print Friendly and PDF

by Bradley Eli, M.Div., Ma.Th.  •  •  August 9, 2017

Original records show 3,000 more Catholics than Jews died in that period

Today’s the feast day of St. Teresa Benedicta of the Cross, the Jewish-born Edith Stein, who converted to Catholicism, became a Carmelite nun and died in the German prison camp of Auschwitz in 1942. Many people are unaware of original records, showing more Catholics than Jews died from 1941–1943 at this infamous Nazi prison camp built in Catholic Poland.

According to original records titled Death Books, which were captured at Auschwitz prison camp by Russians in 1945 and preserved at the British Library, almost 3,000 more Catholics died during this three-year period than Jews. The records show that of the 68,864 total people, who died there during that period, 31,814 were Catholic and 29,125 were Jews.
During that three-year period, 46 percent of the total number who died at Auschwitz were Catholic compared to 42 percent who were Jewish. Records for the period between 1944–1945 when the camp was liberated are not accounted for here. It’s telling to note, however, that the percentage of Catholics being killed at that location each year was actually increasing towards the end of that period.

During 1943, the last year records were kept in this original source, two and a half times more Catholics than Jews died at Auschwitz. Adding each journal entry for that year shows that 6,869 Jews died in this sector of the Holocaust compared to 16,960 Catholics, whose deaths were recorded that year in this original journal kept at Auschwitz.


Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Church has a certain strength its enemies lack: She is bound to survive in spite of Herself.


Democrat Fingers in the Vatican Pie: Did Obama Force Benedict’s Abdication?



On May 17, I published an article in the Italian newspaper La Verità about pope Benedict’s abdication. A few days before, in a renowned Italian geopolitical magazine called Limes, Professor Germano Dottori had argued that Joseph Ratzinger’s 2013 abdication, and the former Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi’s resignation in 2011, after a financial storm sold to public opinion as a “public debt” crisis, were the result of pressures on the part of Obama administration in the United States.

According to Dottori, Obama was eager to dethrone Benedict XVI for two reasons. On the one hand, his presidency was close to fundamentalist Islam (de facto fostered by regime change in Libya and Egypt and civil war in Syria, provoked by U.S. former secretary of state Hillary Clinton’s foreign policy design), whereas Ratzinger, ever since his famous Regensburg lecture, had been identified internationally as a strong opponent of Islamism. On the other hand, Obama was worried about the Church’s reconciliatory efforts toward Moscow’s Orthodox patriarch, within the scope – Dottori wrote – “of a geopolitical project aimed at European-Russian integration, actively supported by Germany and Italy.”

The Obama administration may have resorted to two instruments: fostering scandals within the Church and the Italian government and threatening to drain away Italian and Vatican financial resources. Italy was at risk of being excluded from international financial markets. The menace against the Vatican was to bar the IOR (Istituto per le Opere di Religione, the Vatican bank) from the SWIFT (Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication) network. Taking as an excuse the fact that the IOR did not abide by international rules of transparency, Deutsche Bank (which runs point-of-sale payment systems in the Vatican and was suspected by Bankitalia of hosting an IOR account where all money earned within the Vatican converged) had been induced to block all ATMs in Vatican City, a service curiously reactivated, Dottori noticed, right after Pope Benedict’s abdication.

With regard to this story, it is useful to spend a few more words on an important figure: former president of the IOR Ettore Gotti Tedeschi. Chosen by Pope Benedict in 2009 to reform the IOR and bring it back to international standards of transparency, in 2010, Tedeschi was the subject of a money-laundering investigation.

Notice how suspicious the events look: two years after the beginning of the inquiry, in 2012, Tedeschi was fired from his office; in 2014, after Pope Benedict’s resignation, Rome’s judge dismissed the inquiry and all allegations against Tedeschi; in 2015, in an interview with The Catholic Herald, Tedeschi declared that he had been kicked out by the IOR’s board of directors because of his intention to make radical reforms. And in a 2012 interview released to the Italian newspaper Il Fatto Quotidiano, Tedeschi had already revealed that in those months, he was so scared of being assassinated that he had written down a secret report on the IOR. (According to my sources, he had written his will as well.) The secret report had been entrusted to two of Tedeschi’s close friends as a sort of insurance policy on his own life. Tedeschi stated that he had discovered “something scary” and had engaged a struggle against the Vatican’s secretary of state, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, who was resolutely opposing any disclosure of the IOR’s secret archives to Italian authorities.

If you connect Tedeschi’s story to Dottori’s claim regarding financial blackmail enacted against the Vatican Bank in order to pressure Pope Benedict, you might suspect that Tedeschi was well aware that obscure forces, from within and without the Vatican, were swarming, and that his opposition to those influences was probably the cause of his misfortunes.

Dottori’s considerations should be taken with a grain of salt. For instance, his interpretation of Berlusconi’s government crisis in 2011 is slightly in contrast with the prevailing reading, which assigns responsibility to German chancellor Angela Merkel and French former president Nicolas Sarkozy. Moreover, it has to be noticed that the Obama administration’s main concern was unlikely to be Ratzinger’s ideological opposition to radical Islam. It is probably more useful to focus on the Russian question.

On the one hand, the perspective of a tighter political integration between Europe and Russia, supported by the Catholic Church for the sake of the construction of a sort of religious “conservative front,” was a cause of anxiety for Obama and Clinton. The role of the pope could be that of a trait d’union (literally, a hyphen) between Angela Merkel and Vladimir Putin – as a German, and as a moral leader, Benedict XVI could mediate to ease friction between two politicians joined by a love-hate relationship, but whose intentions, beyond all, were to deepen the ties between their countries. That the United States backed Ukraine’s revolt against the pro-Russian government there and supported civil war in Donbas region (the Obama administration’s involvement was denounced by Foreign Affairs in 2014), and that they sabotaged the project for the South Stream pipeline (with the help of Senator John McCain, who literally threatened Bulgaria’s prime minister and obtained his withdrawal from the project), is proof that Democrats were willing to do anything they could to prevent a closer political and economic partnership between Europe and Russia. In this sense, Berlusconi, Putin’s (and Libyan dictator Gaddafi’s) personal friend, was a troublesome individual.

On the other hand, the Obama administration was likely to be frightened by Pope Benedict’s conservative stance on the liturgy, morals, and politics. A conservative pope, in a moment when the Church’s aid was no more required to fight communism in the Soviet Union – and Russia was becoming a conservative nation – could mean an undesired, and politically dangerous, rightist breakthrough for American Catholics and an unseen convergence between religious conservatives in the U.S. and Russia.

That Obama’s fear was well informed is apparent, since Donald Trump won the Catholic vote in the 2016 election in spite of a progressive pope who almost openly endorsed Hillary Clinton, and despite Catholics’ leftward turn in the two previous elections of 2008 and 2012.

In this light, one may also interpret the recent article in La Civiltà Cattolica (a journal whose content has to be supervised by the papacy for publication) that attacked the allegiance between Catholics and Evangelicals in the United States. The message from the Vatican is clear: according to Pope Francis, good American Catholics should vote for Democrats again. Why is the new papacy so worried that conservative Catholics and Protestants might join forces in politics when it favors “inter-religious dialogue” whenever it amounts to unconditional veneration of Lutheranism?

That the Catholic vote was at stake in the Obama administration’s conspiracy against Benedict XVI is also proved by WikiLeaks’ revelations on Hillary Clinton’s right-hand man, John Podesta. His leaked emails showed that he was planning to foster a “Catholic spring,” a revolution intended to supplant conservative sections of the Church and make progressives take over.

Now, try to read against this background the new papacy’s stances on moral and political issues. The Church is almost silent on abortion, the redefinition of marriage, and euthanasia. And it is astonishing that on the question of migrants, Pope Francis is embracing George Soros’s agenda. Do not forget that Soros is one of Clinton’s most generous financiers, with a $11-million donation for her electoral campaign and a $6-million donation from the Soros Foundation to the Clinton Foundation. Soros came up nearly 60 times in John Podesta’s leaked emails. One may admit that such a triangulation among a leftist presidential candidate, a liberal billionaire accused of several political conspiracies in different nations, undesired by the government of his country, and by Israel as well in spite of his Jewish birth, and the Catholic Church’s pope is, to put it lightly, bizarre.

Now, even if Italian journalist Sandro Magister, on August 3, published for L’Espresso an article where he declares that in fact, Pope Francis is still pursuing friendly relations with Russian Orthodoxy – thereby upsetting Catholics in Poland and Ukraine, who would rather look to NATO countries, especially now that the U.S. is governed by Trump – there seems to be a substantial difference between the Russian policies of Popes Benedict and Francis. The former could at least have been a moral mediator between Europe and Russia for political and economic integration, and he was keen to converge with Russian conservatives as regards religion in society and other moral priorities. Francis, for his part, seems to be moved by concerns for the condition of Christians in Syria, where only Russia has a clear long-term strategy. But apart from formal appreciation from liberal anti-Trump leaders like Angela Merkel and Justin Trudeau, or complete outsiders like Bolivia’s President Evo Morales, Pope Francis is internationally isolated, especially after his ill advised support of Hillary Clinton.

Other commentators have thrown shadows over the Church’s ambiguous connections with American Democrats. On July 4, Piero Laporta published in La Verità an article about Libero Milone, a 67-year-old manager who had been appointed by pope Francis as supervisor of the Vatican’s finances in 2015. His mandate was supposed to last for five years, but in June 2017, he decided to resign after complaining of having his office violated and his computer hacked. However, the true story behind this unexpected resignation might be different. According to Laporta, Milone was nosing around in the ambiguous maneuvers alleged to have brought about an approximately $1-million donation to Hillary Clinton’s electoral campaign, taken from Peter’s Pence. Rumors about it were already circulating in February 2016, when Laporta gathered leaks by a secret source, ironically called “Pretino” (“Little Priest”), who declared that the Vatican was providing Clinton with financial aid but that Trump would win the election thanks to an FBI investigation against Clinton. According to Laporta, it is not by chance that at the same time as Milone resigned, Cardinal George Pell was being investigated on allegations of sexual abuse for events that had occurred forty years ago. Someone was trying to divert attention from the Peter’s Pence story, and at the same time was indirectly reassuring all subjects potentially involved in the scandal that silence would be maintained.

Now, while Laporta claims to be “90% sure” of this report, it is much harder to ascertain whether, or to what degree, Pope Francis was aware of a financial and political operation that, nonetheless, was likely to have been buttressed by the Holy See’s Secretariat of State, and to have required the American Apostolic Nunciature’s mediation. Laporta hypothesizes that during his visit to Rome, in June 2017, President Donald Trump might have had an animated discussion with Pope Francis, as he asked for elucidations on the Church’s aid to Clinton. According to him, the pope’s waxen and scrawny expression in the photographs taken next to the American president was due precisely to their quarrel and to Francis’s embarrassment.

Elucidations are precisely what we need. In the spirit of the letter addressed by The Remnant to Donald Trump, American Catholics should ask their new president to investigate the Obama administration’s involvement in the events that led to Pope Benedict’s abdication. Clarifications would be welcome also on the ambiguous maneuvers between the Holy See and Hillary Clinton during the 2016 campaign. These seem to be much more urgent questions than Russophobic hysteria over Trump’s alleged plot with Vladimir Putin.

Anyway, in this troubled time, we should also be confident that the Church has a certain strength its enemies lack: it is bound to survive in spite of herself.

This article has been updated.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment


st thomas more

As Jesus Christ, according to the words of St. Paul, is eternal and immutable, “yesterday and today, and the same forever,” so the Church founded by Him is destined never to perish. Generations follow and succeed each other with their perennial vicissitudes. But whereas human institutions give way and disappear before the levelling tide of time, and human sciences, reflecting inconstant light, undergo repeated transformations, the Cross of Christ, reared steadfast above the engulfing billows, never ceases to illumine mankind with the beneficent splendour of Eternal Truth.

From time to time new heresies make their appearance and, under the guise of truth, gain strength and popularity; but the seamless garment of Christ can never be rent in twain. Unbelievers and enemies of the Catholic faith, blinded by presumption, may indeed constantly renew their violent attacks against the Christian name, but in wresting from the bosom of the militant Church those whom they put to death, they become the instruments of their martyrdom and of their heavenly glory. No less beautiful than true are the words of St. Leo the Great: “The religion of Christ, founded on the mystery of the Cross, cannot be destroyed by any sort of cruelty; persecutions do not weaken, they strengthen the Church. The field of the Lord is ever ripening with new harvests, while the grains shaken loose by the tempest take root and are multiplied.”

These thoughts, full of hope and comfort, spring up in Our mind as We, in this majestic Vatican Basilica, are about to proclaim briefly the praises of our two new Saints after having raised them to the honours of the altar. They, the bright champions and the glory of their nation, were given to the Christian people, in the words of the prophet Jeremias, “as a fortified city, and a pillar of iron, and a wall of brass.” Therefore they could not be shaken by the fallacies of heretics, nor frightened by the threats of the powerful. They were, so to speak, the leaders and chieftains of that illustrious band of men who, from all classes of the people and from every part of Great Britain, resisted the new errors with unflinching spirit, and in shedding their blood, testified their loyal devotedness to the Holy See.

st. john fisher

John Fisher, gifted by nature with a most gentle disposition, thoroughly versed in both sacred and profane lore, so distinguished himself among his contemporaries by his wisdom and his virtue that under the patronage of the King of England himself, he was elected Bishop of Rochester. In the fulfillment of this high office so ardent was he in his piety towards God, and in charity towards his neighbour, and so zealous in defending the integrity of Catholic doctrine, that his episcopal residence seemed rather a Church and a University for studies than a private dwelling.

He was wont to afflict his delicate body with fastings, scourges, and hair cloth; nothing was dearer to him than to be able to visit the poor, in order to comfort them in their miseries and to succour them in their needs. When he found someone frightened at the thought of his faults and terrified by chastisements to come, he brought comfort to the erring soul by restoring confidence in God’s mercy. Often when celebrating the Eucharistic Sacrifice, he was seen shedding abundant tears, while his eyes were raised to heaven in an ecstatic expression of love. When he preached to the multitudes of the faithful that crowded round to hear him, he seemed neither a man nor a herald of men, but an angel of God clothed in human flesh.

Nevertheless, whilst he was meek and affable towards the afflicted and the suffering, whenever there was question of defending the integrity of faith and morals, like a second Precursor of the Lord, in whose name he gloried, he was not afraid to proclaim the truth openly, and to defend by every means in his power the divine teachings of the Church. You are well aware, Venerable Brethren and Beloved Sons, of the reason why John Fisher was called in judgment and obliged to undergo the supreme test of martyrdom. It was because of his courageous determination to defend the sacred bond of Christian marriage—a bond indissoluble for all, even for those who wear the royal diadem—and to vindicate the Primacy with which the Roman Pontiffs are invested by divine command.

That is why he was imprisoned and afterwards led to death. Serenely he advanced toward the scaffold and with the words of the Te Deum on his lips, he rendered thanks to God for being granted the grace of having his mortal life crowned with the glory of martyrdom, and he raised up to the Divine Throne a fervent prayer of supplication for himself, for his people and for his King. Thus did he give another clear proof that the Catholic Religion does not weaken, but increases the love of one’s country.

When finally he mounted the scaffold, whilst a ray of sunlight cast a halo of splendour about his venerable grey hairs, he exclaimed with a smile: “Come ye to Him and be enlightened, and your faces shall not be confounded.” (Ps. xxxiii, 6.) Most assuredly the heavenly hosts of angels and saints hastened in joy to meet his holy soul, freed at last from the fetters of the body and winging flight toward eternal joys.

st thomas more
The other star of sanctity that traced a luminous path across that dark period of history was Thomas More, Lord Chancellor of the King of England. Endowed with the keenest of minds and supreme versatility in every kind of knowledge, he enjoyed such esteem and favour among his fellow-citizens that he was soon able to reach the highest grades of public office. But he was no less distinguished for his desire of Christian perfection and his zeal for the salvation of souls. Of this we have testimony in the ardour of his prayer, in the fervour with which he recited, whenever he could, even the Canonical Hours, in the practice of those penances by which he kept his body in subjection, and finally in the numerous and renowned accomplishments of both the spoken and the written word which he achieved for the defence of the Catholic faith and for the safeguarding of Christian morality.

A strong and courageous spirit, like John Fisher, when he saw that the doctrines of the Church were gravely endangered, he knew how to despise resolutely the flattery of human respect, how to resist, in accordance with his duty, the supreme head of the State when there was question of things commanded by God and the Church, and how to renounce with dignity the high office with which he was invested. It was for these motives that he too was imprisoned, nor could the tears of his wife and children make him swerve from the path of truth and virtue.

In that terrible hour of trial he raised his eyes to heaven, and proved himself a bright example of Christian fortitude. Thus it was that he who not many years before had written a work emphasizing the duty of Catholics to defend their faith even at the cost of their lives, was seen to walk cheerful and confident from his prison to death, and thence to take his flight to the joys of eternal beatitude.

Here, Venerable Brethren and Beloved Sons, we may justly repeat the well-known saying of St. Cyprian, Martyr: “O blessed prison which conveys men to heaven! O blessed enchained feet which with salutary steps are directed towards paradise!”

It was supremely fitting that these holy martyrs who shed their blood for the Christian faith and for the defence of the sacred rights of the Roman Pontiff should receive, together with the aureole of sanctity, their due glorification here in the very centre of the Catholic world, close to the glorious sepulchre of the Prince of the Apostles, through the instrumentality of Us who are the heir and successor of St. Peter.

And now it only remains for Us to exhort, with paternal heart, all of you who filled with veneration are grouped around Us, as well as those who, wherever they may be, profess themselves Our sons in Christ. We exhort you to imitate with all diligence the great virtues of these holy martyrs, and to implore for yourselves and for the Church militant their powerful protection. If all of us are not called to shed our blood for the defence of the holy laws of God, all none the less, according to the expression of St. Basil, with evangelical abnegation, with Christian mortification of their bodies, with energetic striving after virtue, “must be martyrs of desire, in order to share with the martyrs their celestial reward.”

We desire moreover that with your ardent prayers, invoking the patronage of the new Saints, you ask of the Lord that which is so dear to Our heart, namely that England, in the words of St. Paul, “meditating the happy consummation which crowned the life” of those two martyrs, may “follow them in their faith,” and return to the Father’s house “in the unity of faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God.”

Let those who are still separated from Us consider attentively the ancient glories of their Church which were at once a reflection and an increment of the glories of the Church of Rome. Let them consider, moreover, and remember that this Apostolic See has been waiting for them so long and so anxiously, not as coming to a strange dwelling place, but as finally returning to their paternal home. In conclusion, let us repeat the divine prayer of Our Lord Jesus Christ: “Holy Father, keep them in Thy name whom Thou hast given me; that they may be one as we also are.” Amen.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment