New Documentary About Africa

African pro-life leaders are putting out a new documentary about Africa and aid from the Western World and how it comes with “Strings Attached” in the form of pushing “progressive” Western ideas and ideology about “reproductive health” (i.e. contraception and abortion) and the harm it causes African nations and peoples.

Here’s the trailer:

Advertisements

Abortion & Patriarchy

So you feminists think that those awful pro-lifers marching today are anti-women and all for patriarchal oppression of women?  Think again.  Take a look at this: How the Sexual Revolution Hijacked Feminism

Nationalism and the Pope

Austin Ruse takes a look at Nationalism in Why the Pope is Wrong About Nationalism:

In our own country, we prefer the ability to see our congressman when we redress our grievances and to vote him out of office if he resists. This is clearly not possible in a world of international institutions.

Yet this is the international institutional model Pope Francis seems to favor over “nationalism.”

Nationalism is not a form of government but a way of looking at the human person, the nation-state, and the world. Nationalism presumes a people brought together through a common language and a common religion—though other religions may be accepted—along with a shared history and an agreement to accept the laws of the nation as well as a common defense. Nationalism does not presume isolationism in foreign affairs, as many believe, but does presume not to meddle in the affairs of other peoples.

Israeli scholar Yoram Hazony posits this view in his new book The Virtue of Nationalism (Basic Books, 2018). Hazony argues the choice is not between nationalism and internationalism, but rather between nationalism and empire. He cites many empires over many centuries including the Holy Roman Empire, and he argues that all of them have been coercive. Such empires are born from a belief that peace and prosperity can only come through a particular worldview that is universally applicable. The acceptance of this worldview comes either voluntarily or through coercion, including war.

I can vouch for the coercive empire-building of the UN and the EU, institutions Pope Francis holds in such high regard. Each has a similar leftist worldview including upholding the “universal values” of abortion and sexual perversion. What’s more, they use their power, mostly monetary and legal, to coerce all governments to accept this view.

Nationalism properly understood allows for citizens to love their own country and at the same time recognize a similar love in the hearts of those in other countries. Nationalism does not preclude bi-lateral agreements, nor even multi-lateral agreements, but the decisions rest within the borders of each state. Nationalism does not posit a global worldview that all others must accept.

How does an Israeli Jew like Hazony handle the Hitler question? He argues convincingly that Hitler was not a nationalist. Like all imperialists, Hitler had his own vision, however twisted, for global peace and prosperity that he was willing to impose on all nations by coercion and violence. Recall, he wanted a global Thousand-Year Reich. This is empire, not nationalism.

The Holy Father should remember the empire emanating from the UN is no friend to the Catholic Church. It is the font of population control and the kind of “ideological colonialism” that he condemned at the General Assembly only a few short years ago. He should also remember it was the UN’s Committee on the Rights of the Child that told Holy See diplomats that the Church must change her teachings on homosexuality, contraception, and abortion.

For Children of Divorce Believing in God as Trustworthy Parent May Be Difficult

Having just finished Caryll Houselander’s The Reed of God I was considering reading her autobiography, Rocking Horse Catholic.  Today I ran across this passage from it where she is talking about her reactions after being told by the nanny about her parents’ impending divorce which particularly notes the ability of a child of divorce to continue believing in a loving and trustworthy Father God:

“It is much to my parents’ credit that, though they had long been bitterly estranged, they had never quarreled in my presence; but the suddenness with which the blow struck me did nothing to soften it. My home—the house built on a rock, as I had supposed it to be—was to be swept away, and (as Beatrice took care to tell me) the reason was that my parents had quarreled. My sister and I quarreled very often, and it had always been impressed upon us that we must ‘make it up’ before we went to sleep at night; to let the sun go down upon our anger was considered to be tempting Providence; one of us might die in her sleep, leaving the other to a lifetime of remorse! That grown-up people ever did quarrel was a new and shocking idea, but that, when they did, the quarrel could never be made up at all was something utterly beyond my understanding. It shattered my faith in grown-up people—most of all in fathers and mothers. Emotionally children identify their parents with God. They stand for the things that the idea of God stands for to the human race as a whole—security, home, refuge, food and warmth and light, things taken for granted as unquestioningly as the love which provides them is taken for granted, and with the same innocent egoism of childhood. On the day that a young child learns that his trust in father and mother was misplaced, above all if one or the other has sacrificed him to some other love, emotionally if not consciously his trust in God is shattered. He will not, of course, reflect that circumstances may have overcome his parents; he looked to them for the invulnerability, the unchanging love that belongs only to God. This is why it is important to teach a child’s mind as well as his heart. He needs dogma: the religion that consists of nice feelings, hymns and prayers at Mother’s knee is simply a snare set for his feet. The seeds of revolt against authority had been sown in me even before my home was broken. Now that attitude crystallised. It has complicated my life ever since.”

The Wall: Catholic Approved or Not?

I’ve enjoyed some of Monsignor Pope’s writing in the past, but he goes a little wrong in this piece or perhaps more accurately he just doesn’t go far enough (which I suspect is deliberate and I can’t say I blame him): Is There a Catholic View on the Border-Wall?

He is correct in pointing out what the Catechism actually says in this portion:

In the current debate about “the wall,” I think that the Church should limit herself to speaking to her basic principles on immigrants and immigration. The Catechism of the Catholic Church (2241) lays out two principles, which are meant to balance each other:

The more prosperous nations are obliged, to the extent they are able, to welcome the foreigner in search of the security and the means of livelihood which he cannot find in his country of origin. Public authorities should see to it that the natural right is respected that places a guest under the protection of those who receive him.

Political authorities, for the sake of the common good for which they are responsible, may make the exercise of the right to immigrate subject to various juridical conditions, especially with regard to the immigrants’ duties toward their country of adoption. Immigrants are obliged to respect with gratitude the material and spiritual heritage of the country that receives them, to obey its laws and to assist in carrying civic burdens.

So, the Catholic view is that a prosperous nation such as ours should be generous in receiving immigrants, especially refugees and the poor, but that there are legitimate limits the nation can apply. In particular, the receiving nation has a right to expect things of immigrants: that they follow its laws, respect the country’s way of life, and contribute to the shouldering of civic responsibilities. (A nation also has the right and duty to defend and promote the common good of its citizens — see CCC 1910.)

I am personally very upbeat about immigrants in this country, most of whom come from Central and South America. I have found them to be hardworking, skilled (especially in the building trades) and largely Catholic with strong family ties. I think that they are a blessing to our nation and that we should admit a large number of them annually.

I also understand, though, that our borders cannot simply stand open. There are legitimate concerns for security at the borders and immigration must be well-managed in order to promote the safety and general welfare of all: Americans and immigrants.

Where I think he goes wrong is in his optimism for immigrants in this country, which  I think is vastly misplaced based on the facts (Perhaps readers will remember our previous post cataloging of just a few of the murders committed by immigrants?).  I have no doubt that a portion of immigrants are just as Monsignor describes (especially those who have entered our country LEGALLY), but there are plenty more who absolutely do NOT hold up their end of the bargain to respect with gratitude the material and spiritual heritage of the country that receives them, to obey its laws and to assist in carrying civic burdens.” 

There is another place where I think he makes a mistake: our country is not as prosperous as he thinks it is or in as sure a place to offer generous aid to others.  Our prosperity is an illusion that could any moment be dissolved into chaos, poverty and collapse.  How many of our OWN citizens suffer terrible poverty and violence?  Should we not care for them first?  What of our Nation’s crushing and unsustainable debt load?  It IS going to catch up with us some day?  An individual’s worth is figured not just by looking at assets but by subtracting liabilities.  The USA has substantial liabilities to reckon with.  This is not to say that our country resembles a third world one — yet — since even our poor have smart phones, but even that is a symptom of terribly mismanaged charity.

One comment on Msgr. Pope’s post succinctly summed up the interpretation of the Catechism: “no country is required to beggar itself in the name of false charity, or to rob its people of the fruits of their work and for their posterity.”

Another passage from the Catechism that may apply to this situation is 2266: “The efforts of the state to curb the spread of behavior harmful to the people’s rights and to the basic rules of civil society correspond to the requirement of safeguarding the common good.  Legitimate public authority has the right and the duty to inflict punishment proportionate to the gravity of the offense…”

I don’t think storming another nation’s border and demanding entry qualified as respecting the citizens’ rights or of following the “basic rules of civil society.” If you break a Nation’s laws (unless they are legitimately immoral to follow), you are liable to punishment by said Nation.

And in case anyone needs convincing that shutting down illegal border crossings will benefit even those trying to cross, take a look at just one example of the horrible cost to women and children who cross the border, by choice or force: National Security Is Worth Wall .

 

Take Your Kids Out Now

There is a new book out about the public school system.  Read a review of it here.

So many of us have heard indirectly and anecdotally that our public school system is a nationwide wasteland that does harm to children and has wrought havoc upon our culture, values, and sense of history.

But has anyone taken the time and energy to examine this catastrophe at its root? Perhaps not until now. Regnery Publishing has this year provided a definitive, careful, and well-researched exposé of the corruption at the core of the public school system, titled Get Out Now: Why You Should Pull Your Children from Public School Before It’s Too Late.

Co-authors Mary Rice Hasson, J.D., and Theresa Farnan, Ph.D., daughters of the renowned Notre Dame law professor Charles Rice, are far from alarmists in a panic about an overblown issue. Rather, they have combined to present an incredibly rich and detailed overview of a pervasive and devastating problem that has for too long overwhelmed our young people and threatens to undermine both reality and truth, not to mention God’s perfect plan for human flourishing.

The authors lay out their dramatic case in three parts. Part one comprises three chapters on the corrupting and game-changing “gender crusade” that seeks to brainwash our children into accepting the false ideologies of gender and sexual “orientation.” The second part has six chapters covering multiple other issues at work in public schools: atheism and secular humanism, the loss of our American identity in favor of forming young “activists” rather than patriots, the way in which parents are rendered powerless by the system, the “social-emotional” learning affecting our kids’ psychological makeup, fake and failing education, and the inevitable hard truth that parents can’t “fix” any of this.

Readers should by no means overlook the substantial third part of this work—an appendix of insightful follow-up questions, acknowledgments, and a true treasure of about 100 pages of endnotes that provide thorough and hard documentation supporting the accounts and claims presented in the nine chapters. No one—particularly advocates of this failing educational system—could seriously challenge the well-researched content, typically based upon the sad and often-tragic accounts of real parents with real kids in real schools that have turned authentic education and human formation upside down. In the effort to accommodate an ever-widening liberal cultural agenda that is robbing our kids of the integrity of their intellects and wills, public schools of every kind across our nation are willingly sacrificing our children on the altar of evil agendas that should be denounced rather than protected.

The Destruction of the Innocents

This article written for the Feast of the Holy Innocents, those little children massacred by Herod after the birth of Christ, looks at the “Herods” destroying the innocents of our day.

History repeatedly is rocked by the Herods among us, and innocent children are always their victims. We are shaken by stories of child sacrificechild laborMengele’s experiments on twins, and the child sex trade from Kenya to Thailand. Modern-day massacres of innocents include the Nazi Holocaust, the genocide in Rwanda, and the ISIS slaughter of Christian children in Syria. Though Americans know surprisingly little about such things these days, it seems less because of active suppression than because of passive disinterest.

Yet the liberal media does suppress facts about illegal immigration and child trafficking, the MS-13 sex trade, and the 14,000 unaccompanied minors in protective custody at the border. They prefer to dramatize the story of children caught in a tear gas response to border violence, or mask the fact that dehydration and illness not properly attended by their guardians, not border control, caused the tragic deaths of two migrant children. The Left thinks they are purveyors of mercy and social justice, and any story portraying child victims serves their “hot commodity,” which is, of course, political narrative. They want to be known as the party of inclusivity and tolerance. Stories of child abuse that serve this purpose are spread far and wide. Those that don’t? Not so much.

Contemporary massacres of innocent children to the gods of the social justice warriors are completely ignored or, worse, celebrated. And I’m not only talking about the annual 56 million abortions worldwide. I’m talking about the many ways SJWs today use children to advance their anti-Judeo-Christian, anti-traditional family agenda; an agenda that glorifies and normalizes adult sexual deviance and experimentation.

Read the whole thing here.