jump to navigation

Good but sad – Syriac Christian women fighting ISIS January 19, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, Christendom, disaster, Ecumenism, General Catholic, horror, mortification, persecution, sadness, scandals, Society.
comments closed

Syriac Christian women, tired of seeing their region overrun by fire-breathing mohammadans and exposed to rape, theft, murder, and all the other attendant evils, have taken up arms, forming at least some kind of reserve force in the area.  I’m glad to see anyone defending these ancient Christian communities so under threat, but at the same time, it’s far from ideal for women to ever have to serve in combat:

…….The Syriac Christians Brigade is an all-female fighting force made up of Syrian Christian women and mothers who refuse to submit to ISIS, or Daesh as they like to call them.

The women all speak and pray in Aramaic, the native language of Jesus of Nazareth from the Bible. [Have we really fallen so far that we now have to present Jesus with references, as in that guy from that book from way back when?] In contrast to the suicide bombers some female ISIS recruits aspire to become, the Syriac Christians Brigade hopes to hone their battle skills, with some even desiring to become snipers.

Some of the women were encouraged to become fighters by their husbands who also serve as soldiers. “I’m a practicing Christian, and thinking about my children makes me stronger and more determined in my fight against Daesh (ISIS),” said a female fighter named Babylonia. Her husband encouraged her to fight “against the idea that the Syriac woman is good for nothing except housekeeping and make-up.”

Remembering the massacres in 1915 of Syriac, Assyrian and Chaldean Christians was a good enough reason for some of the females to join the fight against ISIS. Eighteen-year-old Ithraa told AFP that “We are a community that is oppressed by others,” and that she and her female comrades hope to prevent “a new massacre like that committed by the Ottomans… when they tried to erase our Christian and Syriac identity.”

As Western Journalism has reported, ISIS fighters fear being killed by a woman on the battlefield. According to the tradition followed by these terrorists, death at the hand of a female is a one-way ticket to hell.

OH then I have a solution for ISIS in a heartbeat!

acc

+

DF-ST-90-09842

yields

Redwing_Dakota

equals

hell-burning

Normally I oppose women in combat, but this would simply make too much sense and be far too easy.

Or just have a woman press the bomb release button in a B-52.  Whatever it takes.

140922-F-QP609-004

It’s only a measly 100 kt but there should still be dozens in service.

Advertisements

Like Obama, liberal fans of Francis cannot comprehend criticism January 19, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, different religion, disconcerting, foolishness, General Catholic, huh?, Papa, pr stunts, Revolution, scandals, self-serving, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

Even though his administration has been mired in scandal after scandal and failure after failure, and even though more and more Americans now think his presidency has been a highly negative event in the life of the nation, he retains a hardcore of progressive supporters for whom Obama can do no wrong. Similarly, even as more and more mainstream voices find it harder and harder to defend and/or explain away the steadily deteriorating actions of the Franciscan pontificate, he retains a broad base of support among liberals who claim membership in the Church, and especially among court hanger’s on like Andrea Tornielli.

Just recently Tornielli, who has been granted very generous privileges from Pope Francis, gave an interview in which he expressed his amazement at “conservative” criticism of the pope.  He insinuates that the opposition is not based on anything Pope Francis has done, per se‘, but simply stems from ideology and/or an unbalanced, unhappy psychology.  He seems to imply that blogs are the root of Francis’ trouble.  But he provides no evidence or example to support his claims.

Via Eponymous Flower, some interesting excerpt from the interview Tornielli gave with another media fellow-traveler from Argentina, Elisabetta Pique:

Piqué: But in the past few months things have happened that one has never seen before, such as the letter of the 13 cardinals who wrote the Pope during the last Synod, who defied his authority and practically accused him of manipulation. [Where there is smoke…….]

Tornielli: Like Paul VI. [NO. Not like Paul VI. Deliberately premeditated, organized resistance to the restatement of constant Church belief regarding contraception was brewing years before HV was published.  And, that was a reaction planned and led by a narrow cabal of self-interested theologians and clergy.  Opposition to Francis, on the contrary, is an organic phenomenon largely flowing from the bottom (us) up. Also, where the Truth lies in each case is rather important, isn’t it?] who published the encyclical Humanae Vitae, there were articles with very severe criticism. But it is true, at the Synod, there was a moment of tension. [Because radical ideas were proposed, and still are being proposed.  So the Church is never to have division?  You haven’t read much Church history] And it seems to me that there is an organized movement, which uses all media, including the Internet, to spread discord and criticism of the Pope. [Really? Because I don’t see much hostility to Pope Francis from the mainstream media, whose voice is dominant compared to little independent blogs.] What amazes me is that they find something to criticize every day.  In this movement, it does not really matter what the Pope  says or does. [Yes it does. It’s just that he does an obscene amount of bad] That surprised me a lot and this perseverance clearly points to a prejudice, because it has not taken into account what he actually says and does, when it does not fit into clichés. [That’s totally false.  The reason there has been so much criticism is because there has been so very much to criticize. And blogs like this one and other much more notable traditional blogs have often been remarkably restrained in their coverage, glossing over many problematic items.  The idea that this “movement” is organized is idiotic.  But let’s take just a few examples from this pontificate: claiming arms manufacturers are evil, purt’ near excommunicate, the hammer and sickle crucifix, the radical speeches in South America, constantly pushing a radical agenda a la Kasper, gravely wounding the Sacrament of Marriage, “who am I to judge,” “make a mess,” “neo-Pelagian idolaters,” “the God of surprises,” Holy Thursday Mass outside church, washing trannie feet, atrocious Masses, resurrecting the careers of hundreds of modernists, the horrible interviews, Laudato Si, Evangelii Gaudium……and that’s just a small sampling.]

Piqué: Can this daily critique of Francis, especially by blogs, who accuse him of being a populist, of being ambiguous,  desacralizing in matters of doctrine and the papacy, hurt him?

Tornielli: If the criticism is not right, but on the basis of prejudice when it is systematic, even ridiculous, because of their insistence and their instability, it turns in the end against those who express them. [Uh huh.  Sounds like wishful thinking to me. Once again, I think most people tried to bend over backwards to give Pope Francis the benefit of the doubt (not all, but most).  And a lot of stuff just slides on by without much comment, as much from exhaustion from the sheer volume of troubling stuff as from a desire to respect the office.]

My takeaway – this stuff is getting through.  Later in the post at EF it is related that Pope Francis is well aware that he has a growing chorus of critics, mostly on the internet.  Not enough is said to know whether he really cares or not. I doubt he’s worried.

But maybe some of the hangers-on are.  Again, Tornielli provided no example, and he also glossed over the nearly 1 million signatures of grave concern that were sent to Pope Francis prior to the Ordinary Synod last fall. That indicates this is not quite a lunatic fringe phenomenon.

Well…….I’ve never cared much for Tornielli,anyway. He’s far too much a press release, party line journalist for my taste.

Patriarch Kiril: sodomy to blame for rise of ISIS January 19, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, different religion, Ecumenism, episcopate, General Catholic, Immigration, manhood, paganism, persecution, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society.
comments closed

No, not this ISIS:

That one’s really lame.  No, he had in mind the other ISIS, the one that likes to burn people and chop their heads off.  In reality, while I’m sure the left wing are clutching their pearls and flying to their fainting couches, Patriarch Kiril is far from entirely off-base in his analysis:

The head of the Russian Orthodox Church has partially blamed an increased acceptance of homosexuality for the rise of Isis.

Patriarch Kirill claimed he was not surprised that some Muslims are flocking to Isis’ quasi-religious state as a way of escaping the “godless civilization” that celebrates events such as Gay Pride[Obviously something is quite lacking in the West these days for at least some native young people to go join an organization as barbarous and cruel as ISIS.  Some are probably sickos, but I think some are just very, very lost in a culture that gives them nothing substantive to cling to (assuming they are thoroughly unchurched).

In an interview published on the Church’s official website, Kirill said: “[Isis] is creating a civilization that is new by comparison to the established one that is godless, secular and even radical in its secularism.” [I still say they are two competing religions, leftism and islamism]

“We can have parades for the sexual minorities – that is supported – but a million French Christian protestors defending family values are broken up by police,” he added. [Sort of.  Or thousands of muslim men can rape and assault on New Year’s Eve with only 183 cops deployed, but when about 3000 men march against mass muslim immigration, almost ten times as many cops are deployed (in Germany).  We get the message, loud and clear.]

Kiril said because the “godless civilization is reaching maturity”, it should come as no surprise that those who are opposed to liberal, secular ideas end up joining terror organisations. [How about orthodox Christianity as an alternative?  Of course the sexular pagan elites have no interest in pursuing that, and even our own Church seems to have largely given up evangelizing over the past 50 years.]

“If you call non-traditional relationships a sin, as the Bible teaches and you are a priest or pastor, then you risk not only your ability to serve but you may be sent to prison,” he said.

“I could offer more simply frightening examples of how the godless civilization is growing yet here they are drawing attention to young people being converted by extremists,” he added. [Meaning the hypocrisy of the double standard is disgusting as in fact at the root of the problem. So long as the culture is leftist, and continues to wage war against Christianity, then things like radical islam are going to proliferate.]

Look how they [the West] build the world – an unholy world – but we invite you to build God’s world…And they [Isis supporters] respond to that; it is for this they give their lives,” he added[A little messier in logic than I would like. ISIS is not building a holy world or anything like that.  They are manifestly unholy. And yet the Russian Orthodox Church declared Russia’s military intervention in Syria a holy war.  That doesn’t make much sense.  He almost seems to be saying we should make common cause with ISIS against leftism. BAD IDEA]

Kiril also appeared to controversially support Isis’ widely dismissed self-declaration of an Islamic caliphate by claiming that many who have flocked to live under the terror group are “honest” people who did so on “truly religious grounds”……. [I’m sure some just came for the raping and pillaging.]

……..“We face enormous temptations when countries start approving sin and codifying it into law in order to justify it,” he added.

That’s a good quote. As for the rest, while I agree that the sexular pagan leftism destroying the West has played a substantial role in forming ISIS, there is plenty of internal motivation from within islam to account for its growth, as well.  And yet it is known that jihadis abuse hardcore drugs at an astonishing rate and also have voracious appetites for porn and other immoral media.

I tried to find the original transcript of the interview in English but could not.  Either the newspaper butchered Kiril’s intent or he was all over the map, and not really putting forth a cohesive point other than “West = bad.”  He almost seemed to be saying “the enemy of my enemy is my friend,” in which case, he may very much live to regret that kind of thinking.  Islam is no one’s friend but islam’s.  And there are vast swaths of Russia that islam claims as their own.

I’ve often found Orthodox to be confused thinkers. Perhaps this is one more instance.  They do not possess the extremely highly developed reason possessed by the Church through Scholasticism and other theological schools.  Being an inseparable ward of the state also does not help foster theological or moral continuity.  How many communists remain within the Russian Orthodox Church?

Ah, well…….they do have a gorgeous liturgy.

One more in a much more simple setting. I really like the beginning.

What is the significance of the three and two candles?  Beautiful.

Hey prots looks like the Mass of All Ages doesn’t it?  How is it all the ancient Christian Churches believe all the same things about the Eucharist, Sacraments, efficacy of good works, etc?  Johnny come lately’s, your founders just made up a bunch of crap!

Will coddling of islam cause the Church to be caught in the general anti-religious backlash? January 19, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, different religion, disaster, Ecumenism, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, Papa, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, suicide.
comments closed

Reader MFG sent me a link to an article (a bit dated, now) that I think presents an interesting angle.  The Church, from its highest level down through many national conferences and dioceses, has presented a view of islam that dramatically contrasts with people’s practical experience.  It is, in the opinion of many souls, a dramatically false view.  At the same time, we have seen in recent years a marked rise in anti-religious, and especially anti-Christian, persecution, from the sexular pagan culture and from islam itself (which persecution informs many Catholics’ rejection of the official line of islam as a great religion, a religion of peace).

With islam flooding Europe and on the march throughout much of the world, and almost daily reports of atrocities from Stockholm to Islamabad, will the Church’s coddling of islam result in the eventual backlash against religion generally, and defenders of islam in particular?  Writer William Fitzpatrick thinks so (I add emphasis and comments):

……The argument for rejecting all religion is that all religions are essentially the same and, therefore, all religions lead in the same direction—namely, toward bloodshed. That’s a fairly simplistic view of religion, but simplicity seems to be the order of the day…..[I only included this bit to establish where I disagree with the author: almost all atheists are left-wing in nature.  Not all, but most.  And even those that are inclined towards fiscal neo-conservatism but who claim atheism are liberal in their social views.  The key thing to remember is this: atheists are very often not really against all religion, they’re simply violently against any religion but their own, the religion of sexular leftism.  They are militant advocates for a religion far more violent and exclusionary than even the Christianity of their warped fantasies, as proven by the rivers of blood that have flowed wherever leftist atheism is predominate. Having established that, we’ll get to the conclusion I largely agree with, but you should read the whole thing because it’s a very strong article]

If the Church continues to identify with Islam, others will begin to identify it with all that is bad in Islam. There will be a great deal of unfairness in the comparison, but if Church leaders can’t be bothered to emphasize its differences with Islam, the critics of the Church won’t bother either. The first line of critics will be the atheists. The Church leadership’s automatic defense of Islam plays into the atheist contention that all religions march in lockstep. Atheists will argue that the Church protects Islam because it shares the same narrow-minded, supremacist, and misogynist views. Having gotten in the habit of emphasizing the similarities between Islam and Catholicism, Catholics must now face the downside of comparing their faith with the most destructive and oppressive religion on the planet. [And one that is doctrinally, morally, and culturally totally incompatible with Catholicism, and is in fact about the only force in operation on the planet today similarly drenched in blood in comparison to leftism. That’s why I’ve said the Church is being crushed between the immovable rock of islam and the irresistible force of leftism]

And the backlash won’t be coming solely from the atheist amen corner. The Church’s Islam-friendly stance will begin to alienate other Christians (and a great many Catholics as well). [Indeed, it already is]A number of Protestant, Orthodox, and Catholic friends and acquaintances have shared with me their dismay over the Vatican’s Islam policy. Similar sentiments have been expressed by various Christian columnists……Meanwhile, fundamentalist Christians are likely to be even more disenchanted. One of the distinctions Pope Francis does seem willing to make about religion is the distinction between authentic believers and “fundamentalists.”[Even while, paradoxically, Pope Francis has repeatedly demonstrated his enormous respect, almost fealty, towards fundamentalist protestants like Kenneth Copeland and others.  Apparently, his only disdain is reserved for orthodox Catholics]In his efforts to avoid offending mainstream Muslims, the Pope has delivered a back-handed insult to fundamentalist Christians. Judging by his statements, he seems to think that terrorists and Christian fundamentalists belong in more or less the same camp. And judging by other things he has said, the Pope seems to include many orthodox and traditional Catholics in the “fundamentalist” grouping. [This paragraph highlights something I’ve said repeatedly on this blog: the ecumenical/interreligious dialogue project is fundamentally doomed in the sense that it is impossible to come together with all these competing groups holding diametrically opposed beliefs without reducing oneself to total doctrinal indifference (which is the modernist goal all along, but they deny that fact).  Every single ecumenical “advance” with one group or sect means an opposite setback with a competing element. When the Church celebrates protestantism in 2017, and celebrate it will, mark my words, in spite of this, it will offend the Orthodox. When an advance is made with islam, it antagonizes believing Christians. An advance with the Lutherans means a setbacks with the Calvinists, on and on, ad infinitum.  That’s one of the prime reasons I hold the entire ecumenical project in utter disdain.  It’s a perversion of the Truth and fundamentally a project built in lies.]

Critics of the Vatican’s Islam policy don’t necessarily view the Church as a collaborator with Islam, but they see it as increasingly out of touch with reality.[And populated by the same people who seem to long for the destruction of Western Civilization that I described here] The overall objection to the Church’s stance is that it doesn’t comport with the evidence. Ordinary Christians who aren’t stuck with the task of defending a dubious narrative about Islam can see that there is a radical difference between the Christian faith and the religion of Islam. And they know that the blather about Islam being a religion of peace is sheer nonsense.

The result is that many Christians who are otherwise well-disposed toward the Catholic Church are losing confidence in the Church—at least in regard to the Islamic issue. At a time when the Christian world is looking for clear and forthright guidance, the Church’s leadership risks discrediting itself by continuing to identify the interests of Islam with its own interests.

I should say that, overall, I don’t see the institutional Church’s reflexive, progressive-oriented footsie with islam as something that will lead to a direct backlash against the Church generally.  I think the latter bit quoted above is more likely, that this will simply be another way in which the Church hemorrhages her already feeble moral capital away in the eyes of separated Christians and the world at large.  It will mean that Christians normally relatively well-disposed to the Church will become less so.  It also means that conversion, reversion, and all other evangelization efforts will be that much more difficult, when we have a Pope declaring to muslims that they should stay muslim rather than convert.

Incredible, but true.  That is the carnage that faces us in the Church of the Year of Our Lord 2016, due primarily to the progressive cabal now empowered to inflict its false and terrible vision on the Church.