|
Post by Alaisdir Ua Séaghdha on Feb 9, 2024 16:23:42 GMT
This is absolutely stomach churning. Can we consider this specimen had a role in the defeat of the Protection of Human Life in Pregnancy Bill in 2001? He was wheeled out with respect at the time. The revelations about his interaction with the NPD later.
Barrett was used by the inner circle of Richard Williamson - Derek Holland, Roberto Fiore and John Sharpe. There were others. He thought he was cleverer than he was and he was a guru in Youth Defence at the time. And then there is his book, which among other things was reviewed positively by Hermann Kelly in The Irish Catholic (and I have to say, when I read that review I thought that Hermann was doing this out of some misplaced sense of obligation to Barrett; I don't think his heart was in it. But Hermann was never the most acute political judge in the world).
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Apr 4, 2024 21:08:12 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Apr 22, 2024 23:01:25 GMT
I suspect OnePeterFive is rapidly jumping the shark. They have just published an article by a Spanish contributor denouncing "American conservatism" as unacceptable because based on liberalism, and basically demanding a return to Catholic confessional states based on absolute monarchy. The reason why I note this here is that the article is headed by a large photograph headed "Ben Shapiro - Jewish leader of American conservatism". Possibly Mr Shapiro was chosen because he has been engaged in some recent controversy over US support for Israel - but given that there are many equally prominent US conservative leaders from a variety of backgrounds, why call attention to Mr Shapiro's Judaism unless to insinuate that "the Jews" are somehow behind it all? Towards the end of the piece the author suggests that Catholics who support American conservatism are "afraid of the Jews". Why the Jews in particular, unless it is being insinuated that they are somehow particularly nefarious? (BTW this misuse of a phrase from ACTS OF THE APOSTLES is also characteristic of E Michael Jones, now lost and wandering in the outer dark of Jew-hatred.) I dislike linking to this poison, but do so for evidence's sake: onepeterfive.com/christ-the-king-vs-american-conservatism/Meanwhile Where Peter Is has picked up on Kennedy Hall's citations of Fr Fahey. Although WPI has some axes of its own to grind, such as its slanderous claim in this piece that trads who wish to revive the pre-1950s Easter vigil are motivated exclusively by anti-semitism, its evidence of how Fr Fahey was calling for Jews to be denied equal citizenship at the very time that Jews were being massacred in droves by the Nazis, as well as of the susceptibility of certain forms of traditionalism to hating Jews, is painful and unanswerable: wherepeteris.com/antisemitism-and-catholic-traditionalism-a-match-made-in-hell/
|
|
|
Post by maguidhir on Apr 23, 2024 3:25:05 GMT
I suspect OnePeterFive is rapidly jumping the shark. They have just published an article by a Spanish contributor denouncing "American conservatism" as unacceptable because based on liberalism, and basically demanding a return to Catholic confessional states based on absolute monarchy. The reason why I note this here is that the article is headed by a large photograph headed "Ben Shapiro - Jewish leader of American conservatism". Possibly Mr Shapiro was chosen because he has been engaged in some recent controversy over US support for Israel - but given that there are many equally prominent US conservative leaders from a variety of backgrounds, why call attention to Mr Shapiro's Judaism unless to insinuate that "the Jews" are somehow behind it all? Towards the end of the piece the author suggests that Catholics who support American conservatism are "afraid of the Jews". Why the Jews in particular, unless it is being insinuated that they are somehow particularly nefarious? (BTW this misuse of a phrase from ACTS OF THE APOSTLES is also characteristic of E Michael Jones, now lost and wandering in the outer dark of Jew-hatred.) I dislike linking to this poison, but do so for evidence's sake: onepeterfive.com/christ-the-king-vs-american-conservatism/Meanwhile Where Peter Is has picked up on Kennedy Hall's citations of Fr Fahey. Although WPI has some axes of its own to grind, such as its slanderous claim in this piece that trads who wish to revive the pre-1950s Easter vigil are motivated exclusively by anti-semitism, its evidence of how Fr Fahey was calling for Jews to be denied equal citizenship at the very time that Jews were being massacred in droves by the Nazis, as well as of the susceptibility of certain forms of traditionalism to hating Jews, is painful and unanswerable: wherepeteris.com/antisemitism-and-catholic-traditionalism-a-match-made-in-hell/I do wonder whether it is worthwhile going to either of those websites at all (or NCR or Church Militant - I hate to even spell it out). I had not heard of Kennedy Hall, and having just looked him up, I wish I hadn't. What do you gain from reading articles from these fringe websites, whose authors twist everything into absurdity, sometimes viciously? Sure, they have followings, but so does Kanye West. Is it simply because they call themselves Catholic media? But anyone can do that. I ask only because I have noticed that you do frequent these websites, which I am unable to do without becoming nauseous. As a side note: I have noticed that even when these kinds of extremist figures are not American (Hall is Canadian), they still flock to the US. Is it simply because that's where the audience is for this tripe, and therefore the money? But these kinds of audiences are practically non-existent elsewhere -- it can't just be about population. Why does it seem that Americans (Catholic or otherwise) are always tending towards one extreme or another (and there are more subtle extremes than that of CM or WPI)? did de Tocqueville answer this question, and I am unaware?
|
|
|
Post by Devotus Immaculatae on Apr 24, 2024 12:25:00 GMT
It's said that wise minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people. So, statistically, as I'm most likely to have a small typical and average mind, like most of us do, I’m going to attempt to avoid and steer away from discussing people and events. Catholicism in America is facing grave challenges, much like elsewhere in the world, internally just as much if not more so than externally. Perhaps these challenges have always existed, but it's only in recent years that I've become acutely aware of the internal fragility of the Church as well as wider society. Can the centre hold? Amidst all this uncertainty, I've come to realise the paramount importance of God's grace in sustaining everything. I struggle these days with the unending prevalent focus on Church and secular politics in most of the Catholic media, often at the expense of much more valuable and pressing spiritual matters.
It seems we've lost sight of what truly sustains and builds our souls and societies. I suppose it simply doesn't attract readership/viewership, whether in print or online, which speaks volumes about the state of Catholicism today (Again I wonder was it always so?, again perhaps I expect/expected too much?). Popes, Cardinals, Bishops and lay correspondents, all come and go through time by the tens of dozens. Vocations, whether religious or lay, originate within our homes and communities. If we desire serious, real and positive change, we have to begin and persevere there. The solution as ever lies in concerted effort to keep Christ at the centre of our lives. Only by nurturing our faith, hope, charity and mercy within ourselves and our homes and communities, can we contribute to any solution to it all. I don't think we can continually keep looking over at others at “their” problems and the solutions to “their” issues. We cannot change or control a single thing about what others do and say, but we can for ourselves. My vent is now concluded, no it's not about anyone here, or anyone anywhere for that matter. Just in general. Thank you for your patience.
Just another general comment (and also not meant as any type of criticism). Does anyone anywhere know what's currently going on in the Catholic Church in recent years and can make any sense of it? I haven't come across anyone who genuinely does or can. I've come across plenty that claim to, and yet all of them have significantly differing versions. Perhaps it was always so . . . or perhaps not. Am I losing or finding marbles, or a bit of both? I've no idea anymore.
Does anyone else share any of the thoughts I've expressed above ?
Anyways: Faith Hope and Charity, including mercy to one another, and it'll be ok.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Apr 26, 2024 22:09:44 GMT
I suspect OnePeterFive is rapidly jumping the shark. They have just published an article by a Spanish contributor denouncing "American conservatism" as unacceptable because based on liberalism, and basically demanding a return to Catholic confessional states based on absolute monarchy. The reason why I note this here is that the article is headed by a large photograph headed "Ben Shapiro - Jewish leader of American conservatism". Possibly Mr Shapiro was chosen because he has been engaged in some recent controversy over US support for Israel - but given that there are many equally prominent US conservative leaders from a variety of backgrounds, why call attention to Mr Shapiro's Judaism unless to insinuate that "the Jews" are somehow behind it all? Towards the end of the piece the author suggests that Catholics who support American conservatism are "afraid of the Jews". Why the Jews in particular, unless it is being insinuated that they are somehow particularly nefarious? (BTW this misuse of a phrase from ACTS OF THE APOSTLES is also characteristic of E Michael Jones, now lost and wandering in the outer dark of Jew-hatred.) I dislike linking to this poison, but do so for evidence's sake: onepeterfive.com/christ-the-king-vs-american-conservatism/Meanwhile Where Peter Is has picked up on Kennedy Hall's citations of Fr Fahey. Although WPI has some axes of its own to grind, such as its slanderous claim in this piece that trads who wish to revive the pre-1950s Easter vigil are motivated exclusively by anti-semitism, its evidence of how Fr Fahey was calling for Jews to be denied equal citizenship at the very time that Jews were being massacred in droves by the Nazis, as well as of the susceptibility of certain forms of traditionalism to hating Jews, is painful and unanswerable: wherepeteris.com/antisemitism-and-catholic-traditionalism-a-match-made-in-hell/I do wonder whether it is worthwhile going to either of those websites at all (or NCR or Church Militant - I hate to even spell it out). I had not heard of Kennedy Hall, and having just looked him up, I wish I hadn't. What do you gain from reading articles from these fringe websites, whose authors twist everything into absurdity, sometimes viciously? Sure, they have followings, but so does Kanye West. Is it simply because they call themselves Catholic media? But anyone can do that. I ask only because I have noticed that you do frequent these websites, which I am unable to do without becoming nauseous. As a side note: I have noticed that even when these kinds of extremist figures are not American (Hall is Canadian), they still flock to the US. Is it simply because that's where the audience is for this tripe, and therefore the money? But these kinds of audiences are practically non-existent elsewhere -- it can't just be about population. Why does it seem that Americans (Catholic or otherwise) are always tending towards one extreme or another (and there are more subtle extremes than that of CM or WPI)? did de Tocqueville answer this question, and I am unaware? I don't look at OnePeter Five very often because it has got so far off the wall in various respects. (People who think Catholic monarchism will solve all our problems, for example, haven't much awareness of the mixed history of Catholic monarchies.) That said, some sites which are iffy - CRISIS for example, sometimes publish interesting items, e.g on individual saints, and it is often useful to keep an eyee on the latest trends in America because they are copied here with increasing rapidity. It is also a worthwhile exercise to warn against dangers. As an Irishman I feel a certain responsibility for the evils still being done by the work of Fr Denis Fahey (recent events in Gaza have unfortunately given more scope for this continuing harm) just as I feel particular reverence for the Irish saints. I suspect the vogue for oddities in the US reflects a mixture of a more commercial society, a large Catholic audience and a particularly commercialised society.
|
|