IF ONLY THIS COULD BE REPLICATED IN EVERY PARISH IN EVERY DIOCESE IN THE WORLD

Cardinal Burke Post-Traditionis Custodes

 Adrian Alvarado November 15, 2022 0 Comments

  • 1Shares
  • 1

Above: Cardinal Burke celebrates the Latin Mass in Tampa, Florida, for the feast of Christ the King. 

One fateful day, I heard through whispered breath a claim that Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke would be visiting Tampa. Through some digging, I found out he’d be visiting the Epiphany of Our Lord parish. Before making the long, four hour drive to Tampa, I called and asked the pastor, Fr. Edwin Palka, how he felt about the His eminence’s visit to his parish, to which he answered “Are you kidding? The Cardinal is coming to visit! It is a great honor to host the Cardinal.”

In the early light of a beautiful Floridian Sunday morning, I arrived to the parish, and even though I had arrived two hours before the 10:30am Pontifical Solemn High Mass, I saw a line outside the parish that winded around the church. Hundreds of people had arrived to celebrate the Feast of Christ the King with Cardinal Burke. I was taken aback by the attendance, as this mass was not widely advertised, this was all through word of mouth alone. Yet there were innumerable families, people young and old, and all here for this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.

I entered the church, and saw a simple, sweet and modest parish, with a very ornate and beautiful high altar. Slowly, the people began to enter the parish, the pews quickly filling up and the laity dotted with veils, babies and suit jackets. The church couldn’t fit everyone that had arrived and so there were people sitting in overflow areas, or standing where they could fit. Although hundreds had arrived, the air was still in anticipation of the honored guest. The tension was palatable. Suddenly, the Schola began to chant, breaking the stillness, and the acolytes, deacons, priests and finally, the Cardinal himself, processed into the church. In an instant, this humble parish, built in 1962, saw its first ever Pontifical High Mass.

I had never seen so many dedicated men in the sanctuary, all there to assist His Eminence during the highly ornate and regal celebration of the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Young men were torchbearers, there were multiple priests in attendance, and the Cardinal wore ornate vestments as the Schola chanted complex polyphonic chants and the incense rose before the tabernacle and up to heaven.

His Eminence, Cardinal Burke spoke from the seat during his homily, his head covered by a gold-colored Mitre, and holding his Crosier in his hand, a symbol of the Bishop as a shepherd for his flock, echoing the Great Commission that Jesus Christ gave to his apostles. One can’t help but contemplate on Our Lord telling Peter to “go and feed my sheep.”

“Our Lord did not deny his kingship” Cardinal Burke preached, referring to when the Logos incarnate was questioned by Pilate. “It is the reign freeing all mankind from slavery to the deceptions by which Satan would lead us into sin and eternal death.” He spoke about how Christ reigns from the Cross, with His most Sacred and royal heart, and how He is and testifies to the Truth. Christ is the King that brings order to the disordered world in which we live. His Eminence spoke about the divine mystery of the Kingship of Jesus Christ, but how crucial it is to contemplate it and its profound importance for our lives. He quoted Pope Pius XI’s writings to the bishops of the world, in which he explained his motivations for writing the encyclical Quas Primas, by which he established the Feast of Christ the King, “to see that sermons are preached to the people in every parish to teach them the meaning and importance of this feast, that they may so order their lives as to be worthy as faithful and obedient subjects of the Divine King.”

After the Pontifical Mass, the people exited the church and went to spend time together in the yard of the parish, where the Troops of St George had gathered to make food and serve beverages for the pilgrims. At the same time, the Cardinal set up in one of the parish’s rooms, preparing to greet any and all laity who wanted to greet him personally. Once again, the line was immense, and I was shocked that Cardinal Burke was prepared and willing to dedicate so much time to meet all of the faithful. It was truly a sight to behold!

I felt very grateful when I was given the opportunity to ask His Eminence a question on behalf of OnePeterFive:

OnePeterFive“I wanted to ask if you have any statements about the Church post-Traditionis Custodes?”

Cardinal Raymond Burke“Simply that the More Ancient Usage of the Roman Rite is a great treasure in the Church, going back to the time of Pope Saint Gregory the Great and even before. It must be fostered and continued in the Church.

The interpretation of the present legislation that would limit the faithful from having access to this most beautiful form of the Roman Rite must be corrected. I am confident that Our Lord will have that come about. The lay faithful and the priests should not be discouraged, because Our Lord will not permit that this most beautiful form of the Roman Rite be lost. In reality, it is clear that it is desired as the form of our most perfect encounter with Our Lord sacramentally. And it will continue to nurture the faithful spiritually, as you can see here today, with the participation of so many lay faithful –with their families, young people, old people. It’s just beautiful. [You can see] their deep love for the Church, and for the Sacred Liturgy.”

As I left the room, I was grateful to have spoken to Cardinal Burke. He spoke with a soft voice and kind eyes, far from the caricature that is woven by his detractors. I went to go eat a hamburger and I had the pleasure to speak to the choir director Bergmann, who explained to me that Cardinal Burke had learned about the small parish, which is Tampa’s center for the Traditional Latin Mass, when he had come to visit and speak at an event in Tampa for at Legatus (which is a Catholic business professionals organization). Bergmann told the story, “Burke spoke to us about the shrine that he had built in LaCrosse, Wisconsin.”

Pope Saint John Paul II named Raymond Leo Burke as Bishop of the diocese of LaCrosse in Wisconsin from 1995 to 2004, his first diocese that he ever had to serve as a Bishop. In the last year of his post before getting reassigned, then Bishop Burke seemed to leave a parting gift to his diocese by making a beautiful and ornate Shrine to Our Lady of Guadalupe. He would later return in 2008 to dedicate the shrine. Now it is a much loved pilgrimage location in Wisconsin. This episode in the ministry of Cardinal Burke speaks volumes about the dedication he has to his flock, and the lasting and meaningful changes he attempts to make wherever he goes for the betterment of the faithful.

Apparently, while Cardinal Burke was in Tampa speaking about the shrine to the young professionals, he visited the Epiphany parish and liked it so much that he wanted to celebrate a mass there! Another parishioner explained to me that all of the event was possible because “Our relationship with Bishop Parkes has been excellent and should continue to be so.”

As we began to leave the parish, one long-time parishioner and Knight of Columbus remarked,  “I don’t understand Latin, but this is the best parish I’ve ever been able to be a part of!”

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Adrian Alvarado

Adrian Alvarado

Adrian Alvarado is a writer, voice actor, photographer, videographer and Catholic apologist. He has a B.A. in Communication from Florida Atlantic University, and is an MBA candidate with Ave Maria University. A lifelong lover of history and art, he dedicates his time to learning and teaching about the faith. You can find more about him on his YouTube Channel.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on IF ONLY THIS COULD BE REPLICATED IN EVERY PARISH IN EVERY DIOCESE IN THE WORLD

EMERGENCY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Bishop Rene Henry Gracida

I know I’ve asked for more money from you than a crooked tax collector the past couple of weeks for my campaign, but I’m reaching out this time with a different ask. Could you help my friend Herschel Walker? 
RUSH A DONATION TO HERSCHEL WALKER
Right now, he’s fighting for his life down in Georgia to stop his radical Socialist opponent, Raphael Warnock, from turning Georgia as blue as New York City. Herschel’s counting on $25, $50, and $100 donations to give his campaign the necessary resources to win this vital seat. 

Without Herschel, our country comes one step closer to a Socialist takeover. We’ve got to do everything in our power to send someone from Georgia to the U.S. Senate that cares about our conservative values and not whatever Socialist Agenda Nancy Pelosi’s pushing at the moment. 

So, I’ll stop wasting time and get to the point. 

Will you rush an emergency donation below to Herschel Walker for an immediate 5X impact to give him the support he needs to Save Georgia and Save America?! 
RUSH $35RUSH $50RUSH $100RUSH $250RUSH $500
Thank you for helping us protect America by supporting my friend Herschel Walker. 

 

Senator John Kennedy  
Louisiana  



Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on EMERGENCY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

BIDEN LETS SLIP AN ANSWER TO A QUESTION ON ABORTION RIGHTS, THAT HE SURELY NOW REGRETS

President Joe Biden disclosed on Monday that abortion rights will probably not be codified into federal law. But almost immediately he said that he regretted even answering the question about abortion.

Biden talked about this after meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping. He held a press conference and took questions from a pre-determined list of reporters. He said that he had been told there were going to be four questions.

But one reporter, NBC News’s Peter Alexander, was not on that list of four and he shouted a question to the president.

“Mr. President, what should Americans expect from Congress as it relates to abortion rights after the midterms?” Alexander asked.

Biden’s answer was significant, although regretted. The president has spoken a lot about the importance of codifying abortion rights into federal law since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. Biden’s answer indicated that Americans should expect nothing.

“I don’t think they can expect much of anything other than we’re going to maintain our positions,” Biden said.

After he said this, he expressed regret for answering the question.

“I’m not going to get into more questions. I shouldn’t even have answered your question,” Biden said

But then Biden went on to elaborate on the answer he should not have given on abortion rights

“I don’t think there’s enough votes to codify, unless something happens unusual in the House,” Biden said. “I think we’re going to get very close in the House. I think it’s going to be very close, but I don’t think we’re going to make it.”

Last month, Biden made a promise that if Democrats retained control of Congress after the 2022 midterms, he would make it his no. 1 priority to codify abortion rights.

“Here is the promise I make to you and the American people: The first bill that I will send to the Congress will be to codify Roe v. Wade,” Biden said.

But with the GOP likely taking control back in the House, any pro-abortion legislation will not make it past the House. And with Republicans able to filibuster in the Senate, Biden’s agenda is dead in the water there as well.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Man is made for joy in the love of God, a love which he expresses in service. If he deliberately turns away from that joy, he is denying the purpose of his existence. The malice of Sloth lies not merely in the neglect of duty… but in the refusal of joy. It is allied to despair.

Ordo Dei

A site about matters of the Catholic Church, history, philosophy, and literature

“Blessed Be He Who Has Saved a Child’s Heart From Despair”

 hicksonfamily  Catholic ChurchLiterature  November 14, 2022 5 Minutes

Dr. Robert Hickson                                                                         6 November 2022

                                                 Saint Leonard of Limoges  (d. 559)

 Josef Pieper (d. 6 November 1997—R.I.P)

“Blessed Be He Who Has Saved a Child’s Heart From Despair”

Some Reflections from The Diary of a Country Priest (1937) by Georges Bernanos

Epigraphs

“Don’t let your hour of mercy strike in vain.” (The Paperback 1954 Doubleday Edition, page 48)

***

“Blessed be he who has saved a child’s heart from despair.” (Ibid., Page 41)

***

“What is this Sloth which can merit the extremity of divine punishment? St.Thomas’s answer is both comforting and surprising: tristitia de bono spirituali, sadness in the face of spiritual good.” (Evelyn Waugh,Collected Essays, page 573 of the “Sloth” Essay.)

***

In view of Georges Bernanos’ 1937 spiritual novel The Diary of a County Priest—first published in French, just before the outbreak of World War Two—we now also come to understand better (and often thus savor) a fresh supernatural Beatitude: about saving a child from despair.  Does it not gradually become a binding obligation of our Catholic Faith in its fuller virtue?

That is to say, “Blessed be he who has saved a child’s heart from despair.” Such a Beatitude  comes from, and depends upon, Grace—i.e., the indispensable (and gracious) Order of  Grace.

My German wife, Maike Maria, was immediately touched by this implicit beatitude—and was freshly inspired—by this effectively proposed new Beatitude; and she thus guided me also at the challenging end of my preparatory, mortal temporal life, too. We shall try to convey in this short essay some of these intimate insights.

For example, it will relate how the sacrament of Extreme Unction channels and prepares  a stronger  life of grace with clarity and strength. Moreover, there are two forms of hopelessness: despair and presumption. The Sin of Spiritual Sloth is one of the Seven Capital Sins, and an effective preparation for the Sin of Despair. Other interwoven insights will now follow, especially about growing in Spiritual Childhood and letting the Little Ones come loyally and affectionately to Christ.

Indeed, at the core of these reflections is “the concept and reality of spiritual childhood.” We are to live and die supernaturally alive in sanctifying grace. The Lord also spoke of (and to), the Little Ones –unless you become a little one….!

The Diary of a Country Priest ends with the diarist’s  words as he died:

“Does it matter? Grace is everywhere….” (page 233, my emphasis added).

The priest (Curé) of Ambricourt now thus introduces us to his parish and village:

My parish is bored stiff; no other word for it. Like so many others! We can see them being eaten up by boredom, and we can’t do anything about it. Some day perhaps we shall catch it ourselves – become aware of the cancerous growth within us. You can keep going a long time with that in you.

This thought struck me yesterday on my rounds. It was drizzling. The kind of thin, steady rain which gets sucked in with every breath, which seeps down through the lungs into your belly. Suddenly I looked out over the village, from the road to Saint Vaast along the hillside – miserable little houses huddled together under the desolate, ugly November sky. On all sides damp came steaming up and it seemed to sprawl there in the soaking grass like a wretched worn-out horse or cow. What an insignificant thing a village is. And this particular village was my parish! My parish, yes, but what could I do? I stood there glumly watching it sink into the dusk, disappear…. In a few minutes I should lose sight of it. I had never been so horribly aware both of my people’s loneliness and mine. I thought of the cattle which I could hear coughing somewhere in the mist, and of the little lad on his way back from school clutching his satchel, who would soon be leading them over sodden fields to a warm sweet-swelling byre…. And my parish, my village seemed to be waiting too – without much hope after so many nights in the mud – for a master to follow towards some undreamed-of, improbable shelter.

Oh, of course I know all this is fantastic. Such notions can scarcely be taken seriously. A day-dream! Villages do not scramble to their feet like cattle at the call of a little boyAnd yet, last night, I believe a saint might have roused it….

Well, as I was saying, the world is eaten up by boredom. To perceive this needs a little preliminary thought: you can’t see it all at once. It is like dust.You go about and never notice, you breathe it in, you eat and drink it. It is sifted so fine, it doesn’t even grit on your teeth. But stand still for an instant and there it is, coating your face and hands. To shake off this drizzle of ashes you must be for ever on the go. And so people are always ‘on the go.’ Perhaps the answer would be that the world has long been familiar with boredom, that such is the true condition of man. No doubt the seed was scattered all over life, and here and there found fertile soil to take root; but I wonder if man has ever before experienced this contagion, this leprosy of boredom: an aborted despair, a shameful form of despair in some way like the fermentation of a Christianity in decay.

(Georges Bernanos, The Diary of a Country Priest, translated from the French by Pamela Morris, New York: Doubleday & Company, 1937, 1954, pages 1-2 – my emphasis added)

Despite the many pervasive manifestations of sadness and intimate sorrow, the Curé of Ambricourt touches the heart and affirms almost everyone he meets. For example: experience the betrayed Countess, also young Chantel; and the sensitive French Foreign Legionnaire (and motor-cyclist), and the Curé de Torcy (the faithful mentor of the idealistic and younger priest).

The reader will be profoundly enriched by this text, and he will want to savor its slow wisdom and eloquence—at least more than thrice down the years.

Let there be hope for the Little Ones. And a yearning for sustained Grace.      

                                                             –Finis–      

Share this:

Related

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Man is made for joy in the love of God, a love which he expresses in service. If he deliberately turns away from that joy, he is denying the purpose of his existence. The malice of Sloth lies not merely in the neglect of duty… but in the refusal of joy. It is allied to despair.

THANKS BE TO GOD FOR BIDEN’S MINOR IMPACT (THUS FAR) ON THE IDEOLOGICAL COMPOSITION OF FEDERAL APPELLATE COURTS, BUT IS THAT SITUATION NOW GOING TO CHANGE?

By ED WHELAN

November 14, 2022 12:06 PM

Because Democrats will retain control of the Senate, President Biden will continue to have an easy time getting his judicial nominations confirmed. How different things would be if Donald Trump had gracefully conceded his loss in the 2020 presidential election and not gone on to sabotage the run-off elections for the two Senate seats for Georgia. How different things would be if Trump hadn’t pushed in Republican primaries for terrible MAGA candidates—e.g., Oz, Masters—in winnable races this cycle.

The Senate has already confirmed 25 of Biden’s appellate nominees, and 12 more are pending. That’s a very impressive total. For sake of comparison, the Senate confirmed 30 of Trump’s appellate nominations during his first two years.

Looking at the details, though, I’m struck to see how little Biden’s appointments have affected the ideological composition of the courts of appeals. In making this observation, I don’t mean to suggest at all that the appointments are ideologically insignificant. Among other things, they perpetuate those seats with liberal judges and thus make it all the more difficult for the next Republican president to transform the appellate courts.

Of Biden’s 25 appointments so far, all but four were to seats in which the incumbent was a Democratic appointee. Further, of the four incumbents that had been Republican appointees, one (Helene White) was a liberal Democrat nominated by President George W. Bush in a deal with Senate Democrats, and the three others fell somewhere between moderate and liberal.

There is a similar picture with respect to the 12 pending nominees. Eleven of them are to seats held by Democratic appointees. (The one exception is Biden’s nomination of Cindy Chung to replace Third Circuit judge Brooks Smith.)

To be sure, Trump’s appellate appointments were likewise heavily to seats in which the incumbent had been appointed by a Republican president. If my quick math is right, though, Trump increased the number of Republican-appointed appellate judges from 71 to 96 over the course of his four years. (I’m relying on Russell Wheeler’s Table 2 here, which I have adjusted to include 2020 data.) A good chunk of that increase is due to the ten vacancies that he inherited, thanks to Mitch McConnell, from the Obama administration.

Looking forward, I wonder how many additional appellate seats will open up for Biden to fill. Here is my list of the Democratic appointees who are (or will soon be) eligible to take senior status or retire. (I welcome corrections.)

Kayatta, 1st Circuit

Greenaway, 3rd CircuitCA3

Gregory, 4th Circuit (recess-appointed by Clinton, then appointed by GWB)

King, 4th Circuit

Wynn, 4th Circuit

Graves, 5th Circuit

Stewart, 5th Circuit

Clay, 6th Circuit

Moore, 6th Circuit

Gould, 9th Circuit

Rawlinson, 9th Circuit

Wardlaw, 9th Circuit

Matheson, 10th Circuit

Dyk, Federal Circuit

Taranto, Federal Circuit

This Day in Liberal Judicial Activism—November 14

By ED WHELAN

November 14, 2022 8:00 AM

2003—Demonstrating their particular animus against female nominees whom they regard as judicial conservatives, Senate Democrats filibuster President George W. Bush’s nominations of Judge Priscilla Owen to the Fifth Circuit, Judge Carolyn B. Kuhl to the Ninth Circuit, and Judge Janice Rogers Brown to the D.C. Circuit. Cloture motions on each of the nominations (in Owen’s case, the fourth such motion) fail, as only two Democrats—Zell Miller of Georgia and Ben Nelson of Nebraska—vote in favor of cloture.

In May 2005—more than four years after her initial nomination—Owen is finally confirmed.  Brown is confirmed in June 2005, nearly two years after she was first nominated. Kuhl, first nominated in June 2001, withdraws her candidacy in December 2004. 


This Day in Liberal Judicial Activism—November 13

By ED WHELAN

November 13, 2022 8:00 AM

1980—Days after Ronald Reagan has defeated Jimmy Carter in his bid for re-election and after Republicans have won control of the incoming Senate, President Carter nominates Stephen G. Breyer, then serving as chief counsel to Teddy Kennedy on the Senate Judiciary Committee, to a newly created seat on the First Circuit. Less than four weeks later, the Senate confirms Breyer’s nomination. 

2018—In a statement regarding the denial of certiorari in a death-penalty case (Reynolds v. Florida), Justice Breyer expresses his concern that “lengthy delays [in carrying out death sentences] deepen the cruelty of the death penalty and undermine its penological rationale,” and he proposes that the Court reconsider the constitutionality of the death penalty. Justice Thomas responds:  

It makes a mockery of our system of justice for a convicted murderer, who, through his own interminable efforts of delay has secured the almost-indefinite postponement of his sentence, to then claim that the almost-indefinite postponement renders his sentence unconstitutional…. The labyrinthine restrictions on capital punishment promulgated by this Court have caused the delays that Justice Breyer now bemoans. As “the Drum Major in this parade” of new precedents [quoting Justice Scalia in Glossip v. Gross], Justice Breyer is not well positioned to complain about their inevitable consequences. 

This Day in Liberal Judicial Activism—November 12

By ED WHELAN

November 12, 2022 8:00 AM

1908In Nashville, Illinois, the human fetus to become known as Harry A. Blackmun emerges safe and sound from his mother’s womb. Some sixty-five years later, Justice Blackmun authors the Supreme Court opinion in Roe v. Wade. (See This Day for Jan. 22, 1973.) Somehow the same people who think it meaningful to criticize Justice Thomas for opposing affirmative-action programs from which he putatively benefited don’t criticize Blackmun for depriving millions of other unborn human beings the same opportunity that he was given.  
 
1975Justice William O. Douglas (see This Day for April 4, 1939) retires from the Court—only to be replaced by Justice John Paul Stevens. 

This Day in Liberal Judicial Activism—November 11

By ED WHELAN

November 11, 2022 8:00 AM

2014—What could possibly explain notorious liberal activist Stephen Reinhardt’s seemingly amazing propensity to be selected to sit on important Ninth Circuit cases with a strong ideological valence? Buried in a New York Times article is some very surprising news that provides a partial answer.  

For “cases on a fast track, like the marriage case” that challenged Nevada’s and Idaho’s laws, the Ninth Circuit clerk’s office, “[u]ntil recently,” assigned cases “to the available panel with the most senior presiding judge.” As the article notes, “Judge Reinhardt, who was appointed by President Jimmy Carter, is one of the most senior active judges and so was disproportionately likely to be the presiding judge.” 

This news is very surprising for at least three reasons. First, there is nothing in the Ninth Circuit’s rules or general orders that revealed the existence of this practice. Second, it is difficult to discern any justification for this departure from randomness. Third, this practice was not even commonly known among Ninth Circuit judges who had concerns about Reinhardt’s remarkable good fortune in assignments. 

One other peculiarity: According to a letter from the party challenging the assignment of judges in the marriage case, the Ninth Circuit did not in fact use that “recently revealed ‘different procedure’” when it originally assigned a panel to the case. This deviation is consistent with concerns that the clerk’s office has had a great deal of unsupervised discretion in assigning cases—and that its abuse of that discretion may be more broadly responsible for Reinhardt’s astounding good luck in case assignments. 

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on THANKS BE TO GOD FOR BIDEN’S MINOR IMPACT (THUS FAR) ON THE IDEOLOGICAL COMPOSITION OF FEDERAL APPELLATE COURTS, BUT IS THAT SITUATION NOW GOING TO CHANGE?

There is a mentality of narrow views that isolates Vatican II …. There are many accounts of it, which give the impression that from Vatican II onward, everything has been changed, and what preceded it has no value or, at best, has value only in the light of Vatican II.

THE CATHOLIC MONITOR

SEARCH

Latinist Fr. D. Belland: “In the History of Canon Law, until Vatican Council II, the only words used to refer to the Petrine Office were ‘Papatus’ and ‘Munus’” not Ministry

Pope Benedict XVI, as Cardinal Ratzinger, also stated that Vatican II was not infallible:

[T]here is a mentality of narrow views that isolates Vatican II …. There are many accounts of it, which give the impression that from Vatican II onward, everything has been changed, and what preceded it has no value or, at best, has value only in the light of Vatican II. … The truth is that this particular Council defined no dogma at all, and deliberately chose to remain on a modest level, as a merely pastoral council; and yet many treat it as though it had made itself into a sort of superdogma which takes away the importance of all the rest. [https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/vatican-ii-is-not-infallible.html]

If Latinist Fr. D. Belland is correct in saying that in “the history of Canon Law, until Vatican Council II, the only words used to refer to the Petrine Office were ‘Papatus’ and ‘Munus’ not ministry then Steven O’Reilly’s claim that the “weaponized ambiguity” Vatican II’s “Lumen Gentium [new teaching that] teaches a munus is a ministry” is a “good doctrinal interpretation” is problematic. [https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2022/11/oreilly-then-uses-vatican-iis-lumen.html and https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2020/06/steven-oreilly-debates-catholic-monitor.html%5D

The problem is he is not quoting Vatican I or any infallible teachings to back up his claim that “munus is… ministry,” but only Lumen Gentium.

As I stated in my last post on this subect:

Even Francis is definitely pope pundits such a Erick Ybarra and Michael Lofton admit that this could be problematic:

The Ambiguities of Lumen Gentium 16 – With Erick Ybarra and Michael Lofton (Video)…

… In this video, Erick and Michael go over some of the ambiguities found in Lumen Gentium paragraph 16 and discuss how they may be interpreted in an orthodox or an heretical fashion with a particular emphasis on the parts concerning Muslims and Atheists. [https://reasonandtheology.com/2019/02/05/the-ambiguities-of-lumen-gentium-16-erick-ybarra-and-michael-lofton/]

O’Reilly’s close collaborator Bishop Athanasius Schneider says the same thing:

Bishop Schneider Says “There are Ambiguities in Vatican II”

AnotherFrancis is definitely pope pundit Tim Gordon shows the problem with O’Reilly’s thesis of the “weaponized ambiguity” Vatican II being used to claim the collapsed of “whole edifice for Benepapism” because it is a “good doctrinal interpretation”:

This divergence between the two competing forms of Originalism proves especially relevant in the curious case of the Second Vatican Council (1962–1965), whose sacred constitutions threaten, in many progressive-sounding clauses, to contradict previous Catholic Tradition—which would rupture the Faith. Catholics who believe the Church was not vituperated by the revolutionary intent of Vatican Two’s leading periti became practical textualists in 1965 when the Council’s last constitution was ratified.

After all, the strong majority intent at the Council was, undeniably, radically progressive.  The story is well-known even to most non-Catholics. Many revolutionary Council fathers authored the VC2 constitutions with what Monsignor Charles Pope calls “weaponized ambiguity,” constitutional text designed to be radicalized retroactively, as theory turned to practice in the immediate post-conciliar period.

We’ve all watched this catastrophe play out over fifty years. As Edward Schillebeeckx said of his contingent’s tactic: “we knew at the time how we would later interpret the [vaguely written] documents.”

In other words, the sacred constitutions of VC2 prescribed a poison pill of technically sound doctrine to be subsequently fashioned into unsound, unCatholic praxis. The question for Catholics like Vermeule, Arkes, and myself is: does the “real” meaning of Vatican Two reduce to its documents’ intent, or to their ambiguously revolutionary yet (mostly) innocuous original public meaning? Only textualism can capably explain how regardless of the abiding intent of the Council, the result of the actual constitutional documents need not be harmful.

Sacred VC2 constitutions make us think about what a constitution is: a multi-author document expressing the sovereign will of multiple ratifiers at a convention—in this case covenantal agents of the people of God. But a constitution’s meaning is not the vector sum of its authors and ratifiers: its meaning is the binding public signification of its words, as originally ratified. If a constitutional term’s meaning popularly changes a decade after ratification, the ten-year-old meaning of the term remains what was ratified (until formally amended). Ratified meaning is time-stamped and time-sealed.

It is conceivable—as happened at the Second Vatican Council—that a faction of revolutionary authors and ratifiers could embed their revolution within the vaguest clauses of the constitutions as a killswitch to be flipped at a later date. Since the goal of these revolutionaries was heteropraxy and not heterodoxy, little did they care that the (original, public) meaning of their suggestive byplay remained to posterity orthodox, as long as it was received and practiced as the opposite of orthopraxy.

Their benighted progeny two generations later wish that they had articulated the revolution clearly rather than reifying a protection for traditionalists: live by innuendo, die by innuendo. Even an author does not govern the public meaning of his immortalized and ratified constitutional text if it militates against his intent.

Since the close of the Council in 1965, excluding those who welcomed the progressive interpretation, Catholics have divided into two interpretive groups.

The first group, the rupturists, conclude that no continuity exists between the periods before and after VC2. They unknowingly employ the intentionalist jurisprudence, based on the radically progressive intent of the Council’s authorial leftists. Even as they bemoan it, this group runs afoul of the indefectibility of the Catholic Church by announcing the end of a bimillennial doctrinal era and the beginning of a new one. They toil on in dimness and in doubt, believing more or less that the Council constitutions ruptured the One True Faith.

The second group of Catholics (to which I belong) interpreting VC2 concludes that, notwithstanding ostensible tension presented by the Council constitutions, a textualist “hermeneutic of continuity” can counter-weaponize the original, public meaning of even the most troubling, vaguely-penned clauses of the constitutions. “Look at the original, public meaning of the constitutions’ words,” we say, “not the (bad) intents of many of the authors and ratifiers.”

Non-textualists look at VC2 constitutions like Dignitatem Humanae, Lumen Gentium, and Gaudium et Spes, and dejectedly conclude that Roman Catholic indefectibility has been forever broken.

A textualist view of the hermeneutic of continuity duly recognizes ostensible tensions between pre- and post-conciliar Church teaching, then dissolves or collapses that dichotomy by insisting that change cannot be made by mere innuendo: the original, public meaning of the sacred constitutions prevail.

The ruling on the football field (i.e., pre-conciliar tradition) stands unless sufficient evidence to overrule the call (i.e., explicit Conciliar text) has been clearly presented. Cases of opacity and uncertainty—such as unclear VC2 “updates”—must be “lined out” like an arguable challenge to a play-call that fails to meet sufficient evidence to overturn the standing call (i.e. tradition). [https://americanmind.org/salvo/catholicism-textualism-and-republicanism/]

Pray an Our Father now in reparation for the sins of Francis’s Amoris Laetitia.

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Stop for a moment of silence, ask Jesus Christ what He wants you to do now and next. In this silence remember God, Father, Son and Holy Ghost – Three Divine Persons yet One God, has an ordered universe where you can know truth and falsehood as well as never forget that He wants you to have eternal happiness with Him as his son or daughter by grace. Make this a practice. By doing this you are doing more good than reading anything here or anywhere else on the Internet.

Francis Notes:

– Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt the possibility of a heretical pope and what must be done by the Church in such a situation:

“[T]he Pope… WHEN he is EXPLICITLY a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church MUST either deprive him, or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See.”

(The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306)

Saint Robert Bellarmine, also, said “the Pope heretic is not deposed ipso facto, but must be declared deposed by the Church.”

[https://archive.org/stream/SilveiraImplicationsOfNewMissaeAndHereticPopes/Silveira%20Implications%20of%20New%20Missae%20and%20Heretic%20Popes_djvu.txt]

– “If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2020/12/if-francis-is-heretic-what-should.html

– “Could Francis be a Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2019/03/could-francis-be-antipope-even-though.html

 –  LifeSiteNews, “Confusion explodes as Pope Francis throws magisterial weight behind communion for adulterers,” December 4, 2017:

The AAS guidelines explicitly allows “sexually active adulterous couples facing ‘complex circumstances’ to ‘access the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist.'”

–  On February 2018, in Rorate Caeli, Catholic theologian Dr. John Lamont:

“The AAS statement… establishes that Pope Francis in Amoris Laetitia has affirmed propositions that are heretical in the strict sense.”

– On December 2, 2017, Bishop Rene Gracida:

“Francis’ heterodoxy is now official. He has published his letter to the Argentina bishops in Acta Apostlica Series making those letters magisterial documents.”

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church by the bishops by the grace of God.

Election Notes: 

– Intel Cryptanalyst-Mathematician on Biden Steal: “212Million Registered Voters & 66.2% Voting,140.344 M Voted…Trump got 74 M, that leaves only 66.344 M for Biden” [http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/intel-cryptanalyst-mathematician-on.html?m=1]

– Will US be Venezuela?: Ex-CIA Official told Epoch Times “Chávez started to Focus on [Smartmatic] Voting Machines to Ensure Victory as early as 2003”: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/will-us-be-venezuela-ex-cia-official.html

– Tucker Carlson’s Conservatism Inc. Biden Steal Betrayal is explained by “One of the Greatest Columns ever Written” according to Rush: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/tucker-carlsons-conservatism-inc-biden.html?m=1

– A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020:

http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/01/a-hour-which-will-live-in-infamy-1001pm.html?m=1

What is needed right now to save America from those who would destroy our God given rights is to pray at home or in church and if called to even go to outdoor prayer rallies in every town and city across the United States for God to pour out His grace on our country to save us from those who would use a Reichstag Fire-like incident to destroy our civil liberties. [Is the DC Capitol Incident Comparable to the Nazi Reichstag Fire Incident where the German People Lost their Civil Liberties?http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/is-dc-capital-incident-comparable-to.html?m=1 and Epoch Times Show Crossroads on Capitol Incident: “Anitfa ‘Agent Provocateurs‘”:

http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/epoch-times-show-crossroads-on-capital.html?m=1

Pray an Our Father now for the grace to know God’s Will and to do it.

Pray an Our Father now for America.

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of MarySHARE

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on There is a mentality of narrow views that isolates Vatican II …. There are many accounts of it, which give the impression that from Vatican II onward, everything has been changed, and what preceded it has no value or, at best, has value only in the light of Vatican II.

HERESY IS STILL HERESY, EVEN THOUGH JORGE BERGOLIO PRESENTS IT AS AUTHENTIC TEACHING OF THE CHURCH

THE CATHOLIC MONITOR

SEARCH

Why do apparent Francis Enablers get Vatican II Ambiguous when talking about Francis’s “Authentic Magisterium” Teaching of Communion for those Committing Adultery isn’t Heresy?

After all, the strong majority intent at the Council was, undeniably, radically progressive.  The story is well-known even to most non-Catholics. Many revolutionary Council fathers authored the VC2 constitutions with what Monsignor Charles Pope calls “weaponized ambiguity,” constitutional text designed to be radicalized retroactively, as theory turned to practice in the immediate post-conciliar period.

We’ve all watched this catastrophe play out over fifty years. As Edward Schillebeeckx said of his contingent’s tactic: “we knew at the time how we would later interpret the [vaguely written] documents.”

In other words, the sacred constitutions of VC2 prescribed a poison pill of technically sound doctrine to be subsequently fashioned into unsound, unCatholic praxis. – Tim Gordon [https://americanmind.org/salvo/catholicism-textualism-and-republicanism/]

Pope Benedict, when he was Joseph Ratzinger in the Ratzinger report, right? Available from Ignatius Press in November, 1984. He said, actually that ambiguity is the hallmark of the devil. – Dr. Edmund Mazza [https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/10/part-4-of-exclusive-transcription-is.html]

Earlier this year, The Catholic Monitor (CM) was honored to have the publisher of .RomaLocutaEst, Steven O’Reilly, who is a former intelligence officer, visit its comment section in which he and the publisher of CM had a back and forth.

I asked Steve O’Reilly:

“Is Communion for adulterers ‘explicitly a here[sy]’? Answer: yes or no” 

O’Reilly’s answer in The Catholic Monitor comment section was:

My reply, first, “heresy/heretic” can be used in a strict canonical/theological sense, or in a looser sense (i.e., as Lamont suggests). I do believe communion for adulterer is certainly an error — or ‘heretical’ in this looser sense.

Familiaris Consortio 84 repeats the perennial teaching of the Church on the question, and JP II speaks of the non-communion practice is what the Church ‘professes in faithfulness to Christ’ (that’s a loose quote from memory)…so to say or allow the opposite, is to profess an error which is NOT faithful to Christ. So, what does it mean for Francis? John XXII was in error on the Beatific Vision, but as the doctrine up to that point had not been dogmatized…he was not technically a “heretic” in the strict sense. The next pope defined the question.

Might Francis’ case in this sense be analogous to John XXII…possibly. It is for the Church to decide the question, to examine Francis words (or lack of them) in this matter. Lamont might be right, but I’ve seen arguments, such as made by Cardinal Muller, that the Buenos Aires Guidelines in the AAS can be read in an orthodox sense (I think theologian Dr. Fastiggi make similar point to Muller) which would neutralize the AAS controversy — if they are right. Personally, I think Muller has a hard go of it to prove his interpretation.
 [https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2022/04/the-catholic-monitor-aqua-debate-steven.html]

My response was:

Fred Martinez said…

Steve,

Thanks for the questions and your time and effort. As my regular CM readers know, I very rarely get involved in the comment section, but I consider you a gentleman and a friend whom I disagree with on some issues, but respect. I’m working and have a lot on my plate on top of that so I’m probably going to do a post or two on them. I may do a comment post on your comment on Cardinal Mueller’s theory on Communion for adulterers which in my opinion is plainly ridiculous.
 [https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2022/04/the-catholic-monitor-aqua-debate-steven.html]

O’Reilly’s response was:

Steven O’Reilly said…

Fred,

to be clear…I wasn’t saying I agree with Mueller’s theory. My point is, there are divergent opinions on the question, even thought I have a hard time seeing how Mueller can hold his opinion. So, do not suggest I agree with Mueller. [https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2022/04/the-catholic-monitor-aqua-debate-steven.html]

The Catholic Monitor, again, asks O’Reilly:

“Is Communion for adulterers ‘explicitly a here[sy]’? Answer: yes or no” 

Is O’Reilly being ambiguous?

Another apparent Francis enabler seemed to likewise be ambiguous a couple of years ago:

In 2019, the Wanderer’s Fr. Brian Harrison issued a attack on the 19 scholar heroes by first presenting a straw man then showing his argument:

“Pope Francis has indeed said some things I believe to be heretical… the heretical doctrine of annihilation… [but] Francis is notorious for frequently speaking ‘off the cuff’… [was] he/she accurately reported… [but] supposing… [It’s] really heretical opinion… Only if he/she remains stubborn and obstinate can the Church declare him/her to be a formal heretic.”
(The Wanderer, “Why I didn’t Sign the Open Letter Accusing the Pope of Heresy,” May 3, 2019)

It is strange that Harrison says Francis has only “said” some things that may be heretical when he knows the pontiff wrote the Argentine letter that teaches that those committing adultery can receive Communion which was called “authentic magisterium” by the Pope’s Vatican and placed in the Holy See’s Official Acts of the Apostolic See (AAS).

This means the unorthodox interpretation of Communion for those committing adultery is the official teaching of Francis.

How might Francis and Harrison have known for a long time this teaching is heretical?

First, they just have to read the Ten Commandments. One happens to say that God commands that: “Thou shall not commit adultery.”

But, just in case they never heard of the Ten Commandments, way back on December 23, 2016, Dubia Cardinal Walter Brandmuller said:

“Whoever thinks that persistent adultery and reception of Holy Communion are compatible is a heretic and promotes schism.”
(LifeSiteNews, “Dubia Cardinal: Anyone who Opens Communion to Adulterers is a Heretic and Promotes Schism,” December 23, 2016)

In 2017, Francis made it the official teaching of his papacy that those committing adultery can receive Communion by placing the Argentine letter in the Holy See’s AAS.

He did this despite the fact that in 2016 Cardinal Brandmuller said Communion for adulterers is heretical and in that same year three other cardinals joined him to issue the Dubia against Communion for adulterers as well as other issues.

It has now been 957 day since the Dubia was issued.

Many people say Francis never answered the Dubia.

They are wrong.

He answered the Dubia in 2017 when he made the heretical teaching Communion for adulterers his official teaching by placing the Argentine letter in the Holy See’s AAS.

Could he have been anymore “obstinate” in heresy than that Fr. Harrison?

You, Fr. Harrison, say the Open Letter is “disrespectful to the Supreme Pontiff.”

Like Paul was disrespectful to the first pope, Peter, when he rebuked him.

Like the disrespectful Catholics of the Middle Ages:

“[T]he Sorbonne’s Chancellor, Jean Gerson [even] reached the point of threatening [Pope] John XXII with the stake if he didn’t make a retraction” of his heretical teaching on the Beatific Vision.
(Rotate Caeli, “Popes who fell into Heresy,” January 28, 2015)

They would not be like you Fr. Harrison in thinking it is “disrespectful” to call on the world’s bishops to admonish Francis.

Do you believe that Communion for adulterers it is heretical?

Do you believe that the Ten Commandments are infallible teachings?

If you do believe then start acting like St. Paul or the Medieval Chancellor Jean Gerson.

Pray an Our Father now in reparation for the sins of Francis’s Amoris Laetitia.

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Stop for a moment of silence, ask Jesus Christ what He wants you to do now and next. In this silence remember God, Father, Son and Holy Ghost – Three Divine Persons yet One God, has an ordered universe where you can know truth and falsehood as well as never forget that He wants you to have eternal happiness with Him as his son or daughter by grace. Make this a practice. By doing this you are doing more good than reading anything here or anywhere else on the Internet.

Francis Notes:

– Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt the possibility of a heretical pope and what must be done by the Church in such a situation:

“[T]he Pope… WHEN he is EXPLICITLY a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church MUST either deprive him, or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See.”

(The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306)

Saint Robert Bellarmine, also, said “the Pope heretic is not deposed ipso facto, but must be declared deposed by the Church.”

[https://archive.org/stream/SilveiraImplicationsOfNewMissaeAndHereticPopes/Silveira%20Implications%20of%20New%20Missae%20and%20Heretic%20Popes_djvu.txt]

– “If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2020/12/if-francis-is-heretic-what-should.html

– “Could Francis be a Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2019/03/could-francis-be-antipope-even-though.html

 –  LifeSiteNews, “Confusion explodes as Pope Francis throws magisterial weight behind communion for adulterers,” December 4, 2017:

The AAS guidelines explicitly allows “sexually active adulterous couples facing ‘complex circumstances’ to ‘access the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist.'”

–  On February 2018, in Rorate Caeli, Catholic theologian Dr. John Lamont:

“The AAS statement… establishes that Pope Francis in Amoris Laetitia has affirmed propositions that are heretical in the strict sense.”

– On December 2, 2017, Bishop Rene Gracida:

“Francis’ heterodoxy is now official. He has published his letter to the Argentina bishops in Acta Apostlica Series making those letters magisterial documents.”

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church by the bishops by the grace of God.

Election Notes: 

– Intel Cryptanalyst-Mathematician on Biden Steal: “212Million Registered Voters & 66.2% Voting,140.344 M Voted…Trump got 74 M, that leaves only 66.344 M for Biden” [http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/intel-cryptanalyst-mathematician-on.html?m=1]

– Will US be Venezuela?: Ex-CIA Official told Epoch Times “Chávez started to Focus on [Smartmatic] Voting Machines to Ensure Victory as early as 2003”: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/will-us-be-venezuela-ex-cia-official.html

– Tucker Carlson’s Conservatism Inc. Biden Steal Betrayal is explained by “One of the Greatest Columns ever Written” according to Rush: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/tucker-carlsons-conservatism-inc-biden.html?m=1

– A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020:

http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/01/a-hour-which-will-live-in-infamy-1001pm.html?m=1

What is needed right now to save America from those who would destroy our God given rights is to pray at home or in church and if called to even go to outdoor prayer rallies in every town and city across the United States for God to pour out His grace on our country to save us from those who would use a Reichstag Fire-like incident to destroy our civil liberties. [Is the DC Capitol Incident Comparable to the Nazi Reichstag Fire Incident where the German People Lost their Civil Liberties?http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/is-dc-capital-incident-comparable-to.html?m=1 and Epoch Times Show Crossroads on Capitol Incident: “Anitfa ‘Agent Provocateurs‘”:

http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/epoch-times-show-crossroads-on-capital.html?m=1

Pray an Our Father now for the grace to know God’s Will and to do it.

Pray an Our Father now for America.

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of MarySHARE

SHARE

Comments

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on HERESY IS STILL HERESY, EVEN THOUGH JORGE BERGOLIO PRESENTS IT AS AUTHENTIC TEACHING OF THE CHURCH

USQUEQUO DOMINE?

The Pathetic Democratic Pantheon

Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, 

and Nancy Pelosi are of no use to the Left in 

the midterms because it is their radical ideology 

that was finally enacted and wrecked the country.

By: Victor Davis Hanson

American Greatness

November 6, 2022

Over the last few months the four icons of the Democratic Party—Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Nancy Pelosi—have hit the campaign trail. 

They’ve weighed in on everything from “right-wing violence”and “election denialists” to the now tired “un-American”semi-fascist MAGA voter—and had nothing much to say about inflation, the border, crime, energy, or the Afghanistan debacle. In this, they remind us just how impoverished and calcified is this left-wing pantheon. 

So why should we take anything they say seriously, given their records—and especially given their mastery of projecting their shortcomings upon others as some sort of private exculpation or preemptive political strategy?

Still Hopin’ and Changin’? 

Barack Obama this past week has assumed the role of surrogate president. He is storming the country, while Joe Biden mopes at home or visits shrinking blue enclaves so he can claim post facto, “At least I was out there stumping.” 

Over the last six years, we have become accustomed to Obama’s periodic getaways from one of his three estates. It is always the same. From time to time, he reenters politics to remind us that he did not just cash in on his presidency to become a multi-millionaire. Instead, he is still the Chicago “community activist” of his youth. And so, Obama will not be overshadowed by the Biden crew that is enacting all the crazy things he as president had warned were a bit much even for him. 

At the funeral of the late John Lewis, Obama turned his eulogy into a political rant. He weighed in on the “racist”filibuster, the “Jim Crow relic” that he desperately sought in vain to use to stop the appointment of Justice Samuel Alito. 

At campaign stops, he deplores “divisions” that he, more than any modern figure, helped create. The entire left-wing vocabulary of disparagement for the white lower-working classes (e.g., deplorables, dregs, chumps, irredeemables, etc.) got its start with Obama’s putdown of Pennsylvania voters who rejected him in the 2008 primaries as “clingers.”

In interviews, Obama suddenly now blasts harsh rhetoric—this from the wannabe tough guy who stole the “The Untouchables” line about bringing a knife to a gunfight. Well before crazy Maxine Waters’ calls to arms, Obama advised his supporters “get in their faces.”

Still, on the campaign trail, Obama appears not so much animated as stale. It is as if he has been suddenly stirred from a long coma that commenced in 2008. It’s the same old, same old—sleeves rolled up. He still resorts to scripted outbursts of mock anger. And the nerdy prep school graduate still amateurishly modulates his patois—now policy wonk, now breaking into the Southern African-American pastor accent when an audience needs more preachy authenticity. 

He still tries to rev up his crowds with the familiar attacks: Republican demons will cut Social Security, the MAGA semi-fascists are captives of Donald Trump (as if the Democrats have not ceded their souls to woke hysterics), the Republican fanatics will all but kill women by denying abortions, and extremists unlike himself are dividing the country. 

On and on, Obama shouts about social justice. And then he wraps up and must decide to which of his mansions he will fly home (via private jet)—Kalorama, Martha’s Vineyard, Hyde Park, or soon the Waimanalo estate.

Obama offers no solutions much less hints at his culpability in his sermons. There is nothing about the open border he helped birth. Nothing about Biden’s failed energy policies now bankrupting the middle class that was simply a reification of his energy secretary Steven Chu’s perverse wishes for European-priced gas (“Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.”).

There is nothing about Obama’s old boasts about shutting down coal plants and skyrocketing electricity (“Under my plan . . . electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”). 

Nothing is said about the Skip Gates psychodrama and his blanket stereotyped attack on police, the tossing of his grandmother under the racial bus, the Trayvon Martin racial editorialization, the Ferguson mythologies, and all his efforts to create a binary nation of oppressors and oppressed, as Obama himself determined who is the victim, who the victimizer.

The Role Model Pelosi

After the terrible attack on her husband, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s colleagues are rightly calling for an end to extremist rhetoric. If we follow the Democratic clarion call, what might Pelosi herself do to help us lower the temperature?

Here are a few modest suggestions. 

Contrary to press reports, conservatives deplored the attack on Paul Pelosi. They want his attacker behind bars with no bail until his trial date. And if convicted they wish him to serve a long sentence before parole is even considered. Let us dish out a proper punishment to David DePape; one that can serve as a model to all such thugs who do his kind of devilish work daily against the innocent and weak—but unlike him, are usually exempt from punishment.

Recall that DePape should never have been in the United States. He is an illegal alien who violated his visa and should have had a warrant out for deportation, especially given his prior history of lawlessness. Would that the illegal alien who murdered innocent San Franciscan Kate Steinle had been subject to the likely punishment that now is awaiting DePape.

So yes, we all must lower the temperature. As speaker of the House, Pelosi can do her part in quieting passions, given half the country are her fellow Americans who do not live in the darkness of lies. She might ask Joe Biden to quit calling them semi-fascists and un-American. 

Pelosi herself should never again tear up her copy of the state of the union address on national television. She was attacking the presidency in that congressional forum, not just Donald Trump. Half the voters feel as strongly about Joe Biden as she does about Donald Trump. If, as House speaker, Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) were to follow Pelosi’s precedent and rip up the next Biden State of the Union, would Pelosi find that continuation of her precedent conducive to healing the nation’s wounds?

Pelosi herself should not use any more violent imagery in expressing her anger at a president of the opposite party, much less threatening to use physical violence. 

When she was asked to clarify what she meant in screaming about Trump (“I hope he comes. I want to punch him out. . . . I’ve been waiting for this . . . I’m going to punch him out, and I’m going to go to jail, and I’m going to be happy.”), she scoffed that she could not follow up on her threat only because Trump would never come to Congress to give her the opportunity. 

Whatever one thinks of Trump, Pelosi only lowers the bar when she boasts about feloniously striking a president of the United States. 

That Joe Biden had boasted twice about taking Trump behind the gym to beat him up, and others such as actor Robert DeNiro have echoed such threats (“I’d like to punch him in the face”) was no excuse for her reckless talk. After 2016 it was hard to calibrate all the ways the leftists had shouted ways of slaying Donald Trump—by stabbing, shooting, incineration, or decapitation.

Pelosi should never again delay legislation aimed at protecting Supreme Court justices from the sort of violence that occurred when Justice Brett Kavanaugh was run out of a restaurant, or anti-abortion protesters swarmed his home, or a would-be assassin showed up at his house. 

Why was Pelosi so fearful about expediting such added security? Would prompt action have empowered the factual narrative that the chief threat to Supreme Court justices now arises from radical abortion protestors?

Pelosi might have reminded Democrats to tone down their rhetoric after the near-fatal shooting of Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.). After all, the shooter was a highly political, left-wing activist and former Bernie Sanders volunteer. But she did no such thing.

She could have privately reprimanded her daughter that it was not a funny thing to cheer on the violent attack against Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who suffered broken ribs, a collapsed lung, pneumonia, and had to undergo pulmonary surgery. 

When the younger Pelosi used her family name to gain traction by tweeting “Rand Paul’s neighbor was right,” (if she had used her married last name would anyone have read it?), it sent the message that there was a sort of happiness on the Left that a political opponent had been a target of violence. The Left is furious at Donald Trump, Jr. for crudely mocking the Pelosi assault, but he, unfortunately, followed a precedent long set by others.

She’s Back!

Hillary Clinton is occasionally asked to weigh in on the midterm campaigns, but never in a swing state or hotly contested race. Her presence, like that of Joe Biden’s, would immediately lose the endorser a critical 1-2 points. 

Clinton recently warned that the 2024 election likely will be illegitimate due to Republican-instigated “voter fraud.”

Her outburst can be translated into something like, “The midterm left-wing wipeout may be just a preliminary to a 2024 Democratic disaster.” Hillary preempted Biden who, in his third and latest McCarthyite speech, warned that the “Mega Maga” people are planning devilry years in advance and so, like Hillary, he can now cast doubt on the legitimacy of future elections the Democrats will lose. 

In truth, no one has done more in the last century to impugn the integrity of U.S. elections than Hillary Clinton. She has questioned the 2016, 2020, and 2024 elections on the theory that any election Democrats might lose is an “attack on democracy.”

Her sins go way beyond feloniously destroying subpoenaed emails and devices or leveraging her New York senatorial run by Bill Clinton’s presidential pardons or using her office to enrich her family’s foundation as in the case of Uranium One. 

When we return to sane times, historians will assess her 2016 efforts to destroy her opponent, his transition, and his presidency as the greatest election scandal in modern memory. She used three paywalls to hide her efforts to hire foreign national Christopher Steele (who was simultaneously working with the FBI). 

On spec, she used her contacts such as Charles Dolan to fabricate a phony hit dossier against her opponent and then to seed it within the media and the Obama bureaucracy to smear Trump.

Not content with that failed and likely illegal effort, she then declared the duly elected president illegitimate and the 2016 election all but stolen. 

Her Hollywood friends cut videos begging electors to renounce their constitutional duties, ignore their state tallies, and vote instead for Hillary. Had they gotten their way, the entire federal election system as we know it would have been destroyed.

Then her surrogate, Green Party candidate Jill Stein, sued to overturn the election. Clinton bragged of joining #TheResistance in mock-heroic terms. As an arch-denialist, she urged Joe Biden under no circumstances to concede to Trump if he lost the 2020 vote. 

And now she warns us of others who might emulate her denialism? 

What does Hillary fear in 2024? That a Trump or DeSantis will hire a Steele-like fraud to fabricate Democrat-Chinese collusion and smear a Democrat nominee? That the loser will not concede as she once urged, or the winner is illegitimate as she once insisted?

Good Old Joe Is Just Old Joe

Instead of a list of supposed communists, Joe Biden apparently has a roster of “election denialists” whom he says are running for Senate and Congress and whom he fears will win next Tuesday. And he sets the example for others like House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.)—himself a 2004-05 election denialist—who now smears his opponents as Nazis who, he fears, by democratically voting Democrats out of office nationwide will “destroy democracy.”

What will Biden not lie about? The death of his son, the circumstances in which his first wife died in a car wreck, the fantasy congressional vote on his student-loan forgiveness scheme? The number of states (Joe says, 54, Obama used to swear there are 57)? The very century we are now in? Where he went to college? 

Joe, our own Walter Mitty, has variously been a semi-truck driver, an arrested South African street protestor against apartheid, a surrogate Puerto Rican child, a black college enrollee, a Ciceronian populist orator, a coal miner’s scion, an honors student, a blue-chip collegiate athlete, a defender against inner-city Corn Poppers, and ignorant about the Biden family syndicate.

Recall that a noncompos mentis Biden was nominated solely as the thin veneer to a hard-Left agenda whose avatars were unelectable. Biden was to feign being the colorless, stand-in “moderate” who would “unify” the fractured country, tone down the Trump rhetoric, and let the Trump record sort of proceed on autopilot. 

Then when he played out that part and won, the leftist minders in this Faustian bargain took over to push through, on a one-vote senatorial margin, the most radical left-wing agenda in U.S. history. 

Biden, however, took his role too seriously. He reverted to the mean-spirited, pre-senile blowhard Joe—the obnoxious messenger thus now making the noxious message even more toxic. 

A retiring, silenced, good old Joe from Scranton was the script, not a doddering, incoherent, ”get off my lawn” old man shouting for the need for socialist policies that were the exact opposite of his previously supposed convictions. 

The Left got their Biden. And yes, he turned over the reins of government to them. And yes, they got their neo-socialism for two years. And yes, they are destroying America as we knew it. But in doing this, the people had the rare occasion to see fully and experience the nihilist Left. And they are now about to express their loathing for what the Left has wrought. 

The problem with the ossified Democratic Pantheon is that they are of no use to the Left in the midterms because it is their radical ideology over the past two years that was finally enacted and wrecked the country. And all the shrieks about abortion, semi-fascists, and democracy dying cannot put back together what they shattered.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on USQUEQUO DOMINE?

WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE???????

November 13, 2022

Special Edition

WHAT’S NEXT REPUBLICANS?

(PART 1)

By Marvin L. Covault, Lt Gen US Army, retired,

November 13, 2022

For the past six months politicians, pollsters, and prognosticators have been telling us the Republicans would “win” the 2022 mid-term election; it was just a question of by how much.  Would it be a defining moment in American politics?  Would it effectively wipe out all the misery the Biden administration and Democrat-controlled Congress have imposed on the American public over the past two years?  

The consensus seems to be that the results were good for the Republican party but not great. This begs the question, What’s Next Republicans? A good point of departure is the tried-and-true process of an old-fashioned After-Action-Review aka Good-Better-How. Three questions:  

WHAT DID WE (THE REPUBLICANS COLLECTIVELY) DO WELL? 

We came out ahead. The House majority is supposedly Republican. The Senate majority is (at this writing )still TBD. Governor DeSantis, Florida, exposed himself as a top contender for the 2024 presidential race.  

Conclusions: Ho-hum. The 2022 mid-term election was no Red Tsunami by any stretch of one’s imagination. It did not create an insurmountable headwind for the 2024 election. It did not send masses of Democrats to the Republican side despite the misery the Democrats have inflicted on the general public over the past two years.  

WHAT COULD WE HAVE DONE BETTER?  

Short answer, a lot. 

·       Did any Republican leaders (for example, Kevin McCarthy, Mitch McConnell, the Republican National Committee) stand out as articulate leaders and spokespersons for the party? No. 

·       Was there an organized, concerted effort to get every Republican candidate across the country singing from a proactive sheet of music entitled Here-Is-What-We-Are-Going-To-Do? Nope. 

·       Were the Republican arguments too much about blinding glimpses of the obvious (inflation, gas prices, lawlessness, and illegal immigration) and not enough about what the Republican party will specifically do going forward? Absolutely. 

·       For months leading up to the election, poll after poll was telling us that 75-80 percent of Americans believe Biden and the Democrat Congress have us on the wrong track.  

·       Did the Republicans take advantage of that and campaign on a new, different, identifiable, positive track?  No.  

·       Did this election change the U.S. political landscape, effectively having large numbers of Democrats and Independents move into the Republican camp?  That does not appear to be the case.  

Conclusions:  We did not need to campaign on the facts that were so self-evident to every voter every day; inflation, lawlessness, fuel prices, immigration, higher taxes, etc. We needed to make every voter believe the Republican Party is ready and able to change X, Y, and Z by specifically legislating and executing A, B, and C. The Republican Party needs to build trust and respect for the long haul; the midterm campaign did neither.  

HOW DOES THE REPUBLICAN PARTY INSTITUTIONALIZE WHAT NEEDS TO BE CHANGED GOING FORWARD TO GAIN THE TRUST AND RESPECT OF THE GENERAL ELECTORATE AND THEREBY RECRUIT LARGE NUMBERS OF NEW MEMBERS? 

Discussion:  

In a 19 September speech in Pennsylvania, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy presented his (the Republican Party’s) “Commitment to America” speech.  It was a knock-off of Speaker Newt Gingrich’s 1994 “Contract with America” which was instrumental in gaining Republican control of the House of Representatives for the first time in forty years. McCarthy’s “commitment” presented four themes: 

One, the first had to do with safety; complete the border wall, make violence against police a federal crime, and withhold funding to woke district attorneys.  

Two, take on the tech giants with new rules to protect free speech. 

Three, eliminate wasteful government spending that is driving inflation. 

Four, hold government officials accountable for corruption and abuse of power. 

This was a weak effort, six months too late that captured little or no mainstream media interest. Most Americans didn’t even know it happened. Contrast that with Speaker Gingrich’s Contract with America which was a specific list of ten bills they promised to pass in the first hundred days of a new Republican Congress along with a set of rules as to how the House of Representatives was to operate.  

S0, what needs to happen? 

Between now and 3 January 2023 when the 118th Congress is convened, Kevin McCarthy, Mitch McConnell, and/or a Special Action Group, and/or whoever needs to select several critical national issues that impact every citizen, define the problems, prepare solutions, put them on a near-term timeline (first hundred days seems appropriate) and present them in a speech to the nation by one of the Congressional leaders (for this paper, let’s assume the speech will be given by Speaker Kevin McCarthy). This will accomplish the following: 

One upstage the president who said, in a post-election press conference, that he plans to change “nothing” in the next two years.   

Two, put the entire Republican Party on notice to get their act together, cooperate, participate and support the programs.  

Three, provide the Republican National Committee with a starter-set of a 2024 Republican Platform. 

Four, create early momentum for the 2024 presidential campaign.  

WHAT FOLLOWS IS A LIST OF CRITICAL NATIONAL ISSUES TO BE ANNOUNCED, 3 JANUARY, 2023 by Speaker McCarthy (beginning with education, race relations, and immigration reform): 

EDUCATION AND RACE RELATIONS: Speaker McCarthy will begin a speech as follows:  

“Education is the wellspring from which a nation ascends … or the quagmire into which it sinks.”  Michael Russell. 

Education in America is a sinking ship that has been taking on water for the last forty years.  The top-down concept by which our education system operates is fatally flawed and cannot be fixed.  Every president since Carter has come into office with a new idea, hundreds of billions of dollars, legions of federal bureaucrats, and hope for improvement.  Well, hope is not a process. The only way to fix our education system is to start over with a new concept of operations that we have in hand.  

But first, let’s look at how our schools are doing today. The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is the only assessment that measures what U.S. students know and can do in various subjects across the nation, states, and urban districts. Also known as The Nation’s Report Card, NAEP has provided important information about how students are performing academically since 1969.  They grade mathematics, reading, science, writing, technology, arts, civics, geography, economics, and U.S. history for grades 4th and 8th every 2 years and 12th grade every 4 years 

Here are the pre-covid results for reading and math from 2019: Reading comprehension, grade 4, 59% NOT proficient. Grade 8, 66% NOT proficient. Grade 12, 76% NOT proficient.  Yes, 3 out of 4 high school graduates are not proficient in reading comprehension.  

How about their ability to apply mathematics knowledge: In grade 4, 65% were not proficient.  Grade 8, 66% not proficient. Of high school graduates, 63% were not proficient.   

Other subjects were even worse.  Of high school seniors 88% were not proficient in history, 77% not proficient in writing ability, and 78% were not proficient in science.   

These pathetic results also present a national security issue in that over 70% of high school graduates, ages 18-24 are ineligible for military service because of obesity, criminal record, drug abuse, or inability to pass the entrance examination.   

Additionally, we now know that after the Covid shutdown, these numbers are lower. It is time for a complete overhaul of our education system, and that is exactly what we intend to do.  As I mentioned earlier, we have in place a complete concept of operations to do so.  

The Department of Education is a 40-year failed project. Hundreds of billions of dollars, thousands of bureaucrats, and thousands of regulations are a huge part of the problem and have little to do with the solution. No accountability. No standards-based solutions. A top-down fix for education has not been nor will ever be successful. 

Across this nation, about 7000 students drop out of school every day and face an uncertain future. Male dropouts turn to crime; about 80% of criminals did not finish high school. According to the U.S. Census, 37% of non-high school graduates are receiving welfare.  A bad education system is expensive.  

Before getting into the details of how we are going to fix education, let me make an important point about race relations in America. First of all, we disagree with President Biden, his VP, and his Cabinet members when they tell us “Racism is systemic in America.” That’s ridiculous. Babies are not born bigoted, disrespectful, or hateful.  While growing up they learn it at home, in school, on the playground, and in the street.  We can systematically defeat racism simply by changing what they learn. When we look at the tools we will use to fix education, we see they are the same tools we would use to eliminate racism. Two for the price of one.  

It is also interesting to look at the enormity of the K through 12 education landscape in America. There are about 142,000 schools, 180 million adults with children under age 18, 60 million students K through 12, 4.5 million teachers, and over 200,000 Superintendents, Principals, and Education Board members. That is about 245 million Americans, three of every four, who are in some way part of the education organization. 

With all of that preamble, here are the changes that must be made. Bottom-up is the only way to fix education and race relations, and it is not rocket science. We are going to accomplish an education transformation through these eight initiatives: 

One: Reduce the Department of Education to a small agency taking care of grants and other issues that do NOT directly impact day-to-day instruction.  

Two: It’s all about standards and accountability. An organization without standards is a failed organization. Standards are the key to success in education and it is an easy process.  Here is how it should work: during a summer session the Governor will bring in a couple of top-notch elementary school Principals and, three or four outstanding third-grade teachers.  They will agree with what the end-of-year third-grade standards should be.  Then they will outline what needs to be accomplished during each, for example, a six-week,  period all year long. Sitting in on that session will be three outstanding fourth-grade teachers.  Now armed with the standards for third grade, their beginning point, the fourth-grade teachers will go through the same process.  Over one summer this process will determine the end-of-year standards for every grade, every subject from kindergarten through 12th grade.  The Governors are accountable for making standards a critical element of the education equation.   

Three: Fix accountability for the Boards of Education to embrace the concept of standards.  If they don’t. vote them out of office. The point is, parents cannot reach out today to some nameless, faceless bureaucrat in Washington but they certainly will know all the accountable players at their level, nearest the point of execution.  

Four: Hold County/City superintendents accountable for planning and enforcement of standards; replace them if they fail.  

Five:  We are getting closer to the point of execution. Hold school Principals will be held accountable for requiring every teacher every day to teach from a lesson plan that systematically leads toward achieving an end-of-year standard. If a principal is not in the back of at least one classroom every day checking on the teachers’ progress, he/she needs to be replaced. A Principal’s job description is simple; create a safe and secure environment for learning and ensure every teacher is teaching to standards. 

Six: Hold teachers accountable for achieving every end-of-year standard. They must not pass their failed efforts to the next grade. Students who get behind in fourth grade will get further behind in fifth, then sixth, etc. until in high school they are so hopelessly behind they become a dropout statistic with little hope for the future. While they are teaching, how does a teacher know if the student “got it”? The only way is to execute a consistent rotation of teach, test, teach, test, teach, test all year long. If a student gets behind, have an immediate parent/teacher conversation, get a tutor, and send homework to the parents to administer.  (Never let a student get behind ) must become every teacher’s mantra.  

Seven: School administrators and teachers meet with parents with the express purpose of explaining standards, the repetitive teach/test concept that leaves no student behind, and establish some sense of accountability by the parents.  

Eight, last by certainly not least.  Character training works.  It is a proven concept. It is the fuel for all the other techniques and procedures to achieve standards and accountability.  Just imagine sixty million students K through 12, in 142,000 schools across America, every school day for thirteen years, in a homeroom class with the same schoolmates being led in a discussion of character by, most likely, a senior citizen volunteer.  

Let me quickly give you the Character Curriculum:   ACCOUNTABILITY, CITIZENSHIP, COMMITMENT, COMPASSION, COURAGE OF CONVICTIONS, COURTESY, CONFIDENCE, HEALTHY HABITS, HONESTY, HONOR, HUMILITY, INTEGRITY, JUDGMENT, LEADERSHIP, MORALITY, PERSEVERANCE, PUNCTUALITY, RESPECT, RESPONSIBILITY, SELF-RESPECT, SELFLESS SERVICE, SPORTSMANSHIP, AND TRUST. Every student in America will become part of a homeroom “gang” that they can count on, trust, and respect through 13 years of schooling. Life-long highly respected colleagues.  

Let me say it again, character education is a proven concept.  How many of you know or know of a youngster who spent some number of years in Scouts or The First Tee, both of which are youth organizations centered around character development?  Show of hands, please.  OK, how many of those youngsters ended up dropping out of school? 

Zero is almost always the answer to that question.  

One last thought on character development. Why combine improving race relations and education into the same campaign?  Good question; it just so happens that if we were to attack those two problems with separate campaigns, they would both work off the same solution, character development.   

Let’s talk for a moment about the intent of this national initiative.  It is not a political move; I’m hopeful and confident that we can get a significant number of Democrat co-sponsors for this legislation.  The intent is to create new generations of Americans who understand, believe in, and live by a culture of ACCOUNTABILITY, TRUST, AND RESPECT.  Accountability trust and respect; are a powerful unbeatable combination. Why is that important?  Because the existing deep-seated culture of blame and hate is blocking progress and tearing this great nation apart.  We are better than that. An insightful observation, often attributed to Alexi de Tocqueville in 1835, “America is great because it is good; when it ceases to be good it will cease to be great.”   This character education agenda is all about goodness. To illustrate, let me take just a few seconds to go through the subjects:   

ü Accountable students do not resort to blaming. 

ü Students who are steeped in commitment, confidence, perseverance, punctuality, and responsibility do not skip school, fall behind or drop out.  

ü Students who are deeply rooted in trust and respect will strike down bullying and are unlikely to become racially bigoted adults.   

ü Students who are compassionate, courteous, honorable, good citizens, and demonstrate the courage of their convictions do not join street gangs. 

ü Students who have accepted honesty, morality, and integrity as their guiding light will likely be lifelong upstanding citizens.  

ü Students who understand, live, and accept a life of selfless service are unlikely to become self-serving adults.  

ü Students who have an understanding that there is a lot they don’t yet know and even part of what they believe they know might be incorrect, have the quality of humility.   

ü Students who understand self-respect recognize that they are now better than they used to be and can be counted on in times of temptation because they are morally dependable and their homeroom gang has their back.    

With this value base, students across the nation are more likely to exercise good judgment and become great leaders.  

How much new spending will it take for this education and race relations transformation?  None.  How much will be saved? The Department of Education FY 22 budget was $102.8 billion.  

I rest my case for the need to transform education and race relations in America. 

Does anyone have any questions about this initiative?  

Author’s note:  The entire, detailed concept or operations to fix education and race relations is contained in a new book, FIX THE SYSTEMS, TRANSFORM AMERICA, published May 2022; Chapter one. The purpose of this article is not to sell books but to try to get across to folks in Washington D.C. that this nation has some enormous problems and the powers that be treat them as if they can be solved by throwing a few more billions of dollars at it.  There are workable solutions that are within the art of the possible.  We need to find a way to make our Republican Congressmen and women understand and believe this.

Speaker McCarthy continues speaking:  

Moving on, the next Republican Party initiative has to do with illegal immigration.  This will be a shorter discussion because there is a simple solution to the national crises on our southern border.   

Facts bearing on the problem: 

ü During FY 22 the Border Patrol averaged about 6,300 illegal immigrant encounters every day.  

ü Additionally, there were an estimated average of 1,600 so-called “runners” every day. 

ü This is a national crisis and a serious everyday national security risk. 

ü The Border Patrol is overwhelmed by processing, feeding, housing, providing medical care, and transporting 6,300 persons every single day. 

ü Integrating illegal immigrant children into the nation’s school system is a serious problem. 

ü These numbers are a daily strain on our welfare systems. 

ü The annual bill for illegal immigrants is difficult to determine but it is way north of $100 billion per year and continuously increasing. 

Notwithstanding the taxpayer burden, most importantly, those who purposely evade the Border Patrol represent a serious and continuing threat to our country.  They purposely evade detection because this group, estimated to be 1,600 per day, consists, at least in part, of gang members, criminals, drug traffickers, human traffickers, and terrorists from 160 different countries. This has to stop.  

During FY 22 agents seized over six tons of fentanyl at the border, that’s 192,000 ounces (Over 2,7 Billion doses). Two milligrams, a very small fraction of an ounce, can be lethal.  The question is, how many tons successfully passed across the border? Last year, on average, fentanyl killed over 190 Americans every day. This is a self-imposed crisis that must be stopped.  

If we were to brainstorm what an immigration system should do for us, the result would probably include the following wish list:  

One, institute a policy that will shut down the masses of illegals crossing our borders, forever.  

Two, free up the Border Patrol agents to fulfill their intended mission; catch illegals and stop the flow of drugs, terrorists, gang members, and human trafficking. 

Three, create a path to citizenship for the hard-working, law-abiding illegals already in the U.S. 

Four, provide a clear distinction for illegals that ICE should locate, arrest and deport.  

Five, walls work. Walls are a deterrent.  Walls tend to force intruders into restricted areas where Border Patrol can effectively seal the border.  

Six, accomplish all this with a program that pays for itself. 

We have a concept of operation in hand that will do all of this and we intend to pass the legislation immediately and set this in motion. Here are some of the details.  For purposes of discussion and understanding of a doable timeline, let us assume at this point that this legislation can be researched, debated, passed, and signed into law by 30 June 2023.  The timeline and actions required should be treated as time-constrained crisis planning and execution.   

Phase One, 1 July through 30 September 2023:  

The Immigration Reform Act (IRA) will require every state to set up Illegal-Immigrant-Identification-Card (IIICard) processing sites.  The logical solution is to add positions to each existing DMV office.  

Every law enforcement agency in the United States will forward information to the FBI on every felony committed by an undocumented inhabitant (who, what, when, and where).  The FBI will establish and maintain a continuously updated national database of these cases which allows for an immediate check against an application for an IIICard.  

The IRS will set up a special division to handle income taxes for illegal immigrants who have an IIICard.   

Every undocumented inhabitant in the U.S. will be invited to report to an IIICard registration site in the state where they reside by a published alphabetical schedule (last name beginning in A, B, C, or D report starting on 1 October 2023.   

At this point, some of you are thinking something like inviting the illegals to report to the DMV, are you out of your mind?  Please stay with me. They will be required to report to the DMV.   

Phase two, 1 October 2023 through 31 March 2024: 

Before appearing at the IIICard registration site, each applicant must download a Federal Form, Employer’s Statement of Employment, fill it out and have it signed by their employer. No employer signature, no IIICard.  The form must contain a statement of strong penalties for any employer signing a false statement. There will be special rules for those who are self-employed. The registration fee for the IIICard is $50 per year which is the first step in fulfilling the objective of immigration reform without taxpayer dollars.    

 The DMV will check into the FBI felony database and if the applicant has a felony conviction, that person will be taken into custody, deported, and will NEVER be eligible for an IIICard.  This is an example of the specificity of the language that must be in the Immigration Reform Act, IRA; one strike and out.   

The IIICard will have a number for each individual; for example, if issued in North Carolina the identification number will be NC123-45-678. The card will include a photo, height, weight, hair color, issue date, termination date (one year), and the number of dependents (spouse and children).     

Data from every card issued by a state DMV will be forwarded to the IRS registry. 

When Phase Two ends it will never have to be repeated.  Let me say that again, it will never have to be repeated because every illegal immigrant in the U.S. as of 31 March 2024 will be categorized as either a legal holder of an IIICard or they are deportable.  On 31 March 2024 we will know how many employed illegal aliens there are, where they live, where they work, what they do, and how many direct family (spouse and children) members they have.     

Phase Three, 1 April 2024 through 30 September 2024. 

This is the phase that begins to change behavior and thereby solve the dual problems of tens of millions of undocumented inhabitants and continued unsecured borders.  

On 1 April 2024 the day following the initial six-month registration period, any employer who employs an undocumented worker (no IIICard) will be subject to a first-offense fine of $25,000 for each worker and $50,000 for each worker, second offense. No exceptions, and no excuses. No employer is going to risk their livelihood over the employment of an illegal immigrant. Laws change behavior and, for the first time, immediately add accountability of all employers into the immigration solution.     

This simple act of requiring illegal aliens to carry an IIICard will have four positive and immediate results:  

First, employers will protect themselves from potentially heavy fines by only hiring inhabitants who have a valid IIICard.  

Second, undocumented inhabitants who choose not to apply for an IIICard or were denied an IIICard will be unable to find an employer who will take them on.  They will be unemployable, will be constantly liable for deportation if detained for any reason, and will likely return to their country of citizenship.  

Third, and this gets us to the wish list to shut down the masses of illegals crossing our borders, forever. Foreigners contemplating illegal entry into the United States to work will soon learn that no employer is going to hire them and illegal entry will be a futile effort. This inevitable behavior change will, by default, reduce illegal immigration to a manageable trickle. Stated another way, as we get into Phase one, July 2023, foreigners contemplating illegal entry will realize that under this new concept of operations they do not have enough time to make the trip to and through Mexico, cross the border, process, find a home base in the U.S., get a job and secure a signed job certification from an employer by 1 October 2023 when the IIICard application process begins.  This open border nightmare could be within a few months of being shut down.   

Fourth, this will provide Border Patrol agents the opportunity to concentrate their efforts on the illegal entry of drugs, terrorists, gang members, criminals, and those just looking for a life of government handouts.     

Phase Four, 1 October 2024:  

This phase begins the twelve-month reissue of IIICards; $50 fee.  The IIICard color will change each year.  ONLY those inhabitants holding an IIICard can receive a new card.  Additionally, they will be denied renewal if they have been unemployed and made less than $5000 or if they have been convicted of a felony, or if they failed to pay their 10% federal tax.  Once denied, they will be detained, deported, and never receive another card. Any IIICard that is not renewed by the annual renewal date will automatically be moved to the government’s deportation list.  

To fund the Immigration Reform Act, a provision in the law will require IIICard holders to pay 10% Federal income taxes on gross income.  Employers must issue a 1099 using the individual’s IIICard number to identify them to the IRS.  The IRS will establish a National Registry of Card numbers and the database will list earned income and taxes paid for the previous year. 

During the IIICard renewal process, the DMV registration center will access the IRS database to determine if the applicant has been employed, made at least $5000, and paid taxes.  No tax records, no renewal, and the applicant will be detained and deported.  The Federal Government will retain 2% of the tax revenue to fund four national databases for The Immigration Reform Act. The remaining 8% will be returned to the States in proportion to the number of IIICard holders.   

Any IIICard holder convicted of a felony will have his card pulled, be detained, and deported.  That person’s file and IIICard number will be annotated at the national registry to ensure that any future attempts to reapply will be denied.  

To assist law-abiding, hard-working illegals towards citizenship, the Department of Labor will establish a website that can assist an individual who has lost their job.  Any cardholder can get on the Labor Department website and provide their name, location, and skills.  Employers will be encouraged to check this website when they have job openings 

An IIICard holder will have the following four privileges:  

One, they may apply for a state vehicle operator’s license and will be tested in English. A provision of the law will be that every state must also prominently display the individual’s IIICard number on the State Driver’s License.  Additionally, every applicant must show proof of auto insurance.  

Two, a current IIICard will authorize the holder to legally cross U.S. borders.   

Three, legal holders may apply for an IIICard for their immediate family members using the sponsor’s IIICard number with a suffix, for their spouse and children (no extended family members).  If granted, the sponsor will be authorized to escort the dependents across the U.S. border. 

Four, after legally holding an IIICard for five consecutive years, that person is eligible to apply for U.S. citizenship for themselves and their immediate family (spouse and children).  

Any questions on the Immigration Reform Act proposal? 

Thank you for your attention, I will be here tomorrow, same time, to present additional legislative initiatives for the 118th Congress to consider as soon as possible.  

That closing statement by Speaker McCarthy should grab the attention of mainstream media and the general public.  Game on.  

 NOTE: The entire, detailed concept or operations for immigration reform is contained in, FIX THE SYSTEMS, TRANSFORM AMERICA, Chapter two.  

 Author’s note.  I have in mind several critical national issues that somehow must get fixed if we are to move forward (voter fraud, size and scope of the Executive Branch, federal deficit spending, dysfunctional Congress, term limits, universal service, and world aggression).  For each, I will present a concept of operations and a solution. The timing is such that I also believe it could be advantageous for the Republican leadership to present them as a new version of a Contract with America, that will successfully carry us into the 2024 presidential campaign. To that end, Rip has graciously agreed to publish these articles as PART 1 (above) followed by PART 2, etc. as I get them put together.  One final note, if any of you agree with what I have proposed in PART 1, and if you have contact with any movers and shakers in Washington, please provide them a copy.  Thank you.  Marv 

Marvin L. Covault, Lt Gen US Army, retired, is the author of VISION TO EXECUTION, a book for leaders, and a new book May 2022, FIX THE SYSTEMS, TRANSFORM AMERICA as well as the author of a blog WeThePeopleSpeaking.com. 

If you do n
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE???????

BRAVO FATHER PHILIP G.BOCHANSKI, SHAME ON CARDINAL JEAN-CLAUDE HOLLERICH, S.J. AND CARDINAL REINHARD MARX

By CNA Staff

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Apr 6, 2022 / 09:25 am

Editor’s note: Two of the most influential Catholic prelates in Europe have advocated publicly in recent months for the Church to change its teaching on homosexuality. 

In February, Cardinal Jean-Claude Hollerich, S.J., the archbishop of Luxembourg who serves as president of the Commission of the Bishops’ Conferences of the European Union and relator general of the Synod on Synodality in Rome, said in an interview that the Church’s teaching that homosexual sex is sinful was “wrong,” arguing that the “sociological-scientific foundation of this teaching is no longer correct.” More recently, in an interview published on March 31, German Cardinal Reinhard Marx, speaking on these same issues, said that the Catechism of the Catholic Church is “not set in stone” and “one is also allowed to doubt what it says.”

The following “open letter” to Hollerich and Marx was written by Father Philip G. Bochanski, executive director of Courage International, a Catholic apostolate for those who experience same-sex attraction and are seeking to live chaste and faithful lives.

Your Eminences,

As a priest engaged for many years in pastoral ministry to people who experience same-sex attractions, I read your recent public comments about Catholic teaching on homosexual acts with serious concern.

You suggested, Cardinal Hollerich, that “the sociological-scientific foundation of” the Catholic doctrine that homosexual acts are immoral “is no longer correct,” and you called for “a fundamental revision of Church teaching” and “a change in doctrine.” You took the same stance on this issue, Cardinal Marx, and justified your position by remarking that “the Catechism is not set in stone” and that “one may also question what it says” on this important moral teaching.

Yet the paragraph of the Catechism to which you refer presents this teaching in a remarkably firm way. That is, it notes that the teaching is clearly based on Sacred Scripture and consistently taught by the tradition of the Church (no. 2357). This invocation of Scripture and Tradition is unusual in the Catechism, but appears often when the Church explains the charism of infallibility. Its use here clearly means that this teaching, which flows from the anthropological fact of the nature of sexed human bodies, is an infallible teaching of the ordinary universal magisterium.

When each of us was preparing for ordination, like all of our brother deacons, priests and bishops, we made a public Profession of Faith and swore an Oath of Fidelity. When we took that oath, we swore in regard to such teachings that we would “hold fast to” the Church’s doctrine, “faithfully hand it on and explain it, and … avoid any teachings contrary to it.” We invoked the Holy Trinity and the holy Gospels to witness to our honesty and sincerity.

Your Eminences, I beg you, please be faithful to your oath.

To violate your oath over this teaching would do great harm to the very people you sincerely want to help. “Neglect of the Church’s teaching prevents” these brothers and sisters of ours “from receiving the help that they need and deserve,” as the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith wrote in 1986. To claim that this definitive teaching can change raises false hopes among our brothers and sisters, and is sure to leave them feeling more overlooked and resentful each time the Church faithfully restates it. By reinforcing this misunderstanding of the divine ordering of sexuality, you encourage them to seek happiness in relationships that ultimately cannot satisfy, rather than to seek fulfillment in chaste friendships.

To violate your oath would also wound our brothers and sisters who strive to live chastely in harmony with the Church’s teaching, or to encourage their loved ones to do so, at the cost of great personal sacrifice. They look to the bishops of the Church as their spiritual fathers, and seek from you affirmation and support for the commitments to chastity they have made, as faithful Catholics. When they hear you suggest that such commitments are unnecessary, they feel unseen and disrespected by the very people whose love and care they seek the most.

To violate your oath would certainly harm the moral credibility of the Church, in the eyes of the faithful and in the opinion of the world. On the eve of His Passion, Our Lord’s sincere prayer was for unity among his apostles, “so that the world may believe” (Jn 17:21). You stand in the place of those apostles and have undertaken the awesome responsibility of closely advising the successor of Saint Peter. Your public dissent from the Church’s teaching can only create confusion and division among the faithful, and be a scandal to the secular world.

To violate your oath would, I fear, also create great harm for you. As a brother priest and collaborator in the sacred ministry, may I be so bold as to remind you, with great respect and fraternal concern, of the solemn significance of the oath we have taken? To break an oath is to commit the sin of perjury, and to deliberately persist in such a grave sin puts one’s eternal salvation in jeopardy.

It has been my privilege for almost half of my life to serve Christ’s Church as a priest, and an immense joy for more than half of my priesthood to serve Catholics who experience same-sex attractions and their loved ones. It is a great consolation to carry out this ministry with the support and encouragement of the universal Church and its eminent pastors.

Your Eminences, I beg you, please be faithful to your oath.

With sincere respect,

Father Philip G. Bochanski

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on BRAVO FATHER PHILIP G.BOCHANSKI, SHAME ON CARDINAL JEAN-CLAUDE HOLLERICH, S.J. AND CARDINAL REINHARD MARX