jump to navigation

Does Cruz’s defeat mean the end of social conservative influence in the US? May 4, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, paganism, Revolution, scandals, secularism, sickness, Society.

Ted Cruz suspended his campaign after a severe defeat in Indiana last night.  It appears, barring highly unlikely events, that Donald Trump will be the Republican nominee, facing Hilary Clinton.  This leaves essentially no one in the major parties for faithful Catholics to support, to my mind, though I know that some disagree with that assessment.  I will have to see what beliefs the Libertarian candidate holds with regard to moral issues, and whether the Constitution party will be on the ballot in most states.  At this time, the latter seems an open question.

More broadly speaking, some observers are now concluding that the virtual certitude of Trump being the Republican nominee means that the social conservative movement is dead, or at least so moribund as to no longer matter.  That was the opinion voiced by David Frum yesterday in a piece in The Atlantic.  Now, it must be noted that David Frum is not an unbiased observer.  He has long been a liberal Republican, especially on social issues, and has long taken a very critical, one might even say hostile, stand towards making traditional moral beliefs an important part of a party platform.  So when he declares the social conservative movement to be dead, he’s not simply stating an observation, but a deeply held wish.

Nevertheless, his analysis is worth considering, even though I think much of it is wrong, or self-serving:

[H]ere’s something that traditional ideological conservatives will want to consider: Trump rose by shoving them aside. Trump’s rise exposed the weakness of social conservatives in particular. For a third of a century, social conservatives imposed a pro-life litmus test on Republican nominees for both presidency and vice presidency. They pulled the party into confrontations over sexuality and religion that many Republican elected leaders would have preferred to avoid. And then, abruptly, poof: The social conservative veto has vanished. New York values have prevailed, with a mighty assist from Jerry Falwell Jr. and other evangelical leaders. It seems unlikely the religious right will return in anything like its awesome previous form. A visibly conscientious objector to the culture wars easily defeated candidates who elevated the defunding of Planned Parenthood to the top of their agenda. That lesson, once demonstrated, won’t soon be forgotten….

The big internal conservative struggle of 2017 will be the fight to write the narrative of how Trump emerged and why he lost. Anti-Trump conservatives will want to say that Trump lost because he wasn’t a “true conservative.” But 2016 to date is proposing that “true conservatives” constitute only a pitiful minority of the Republican Party, never mind the country as a whole. Why should any practical politician care about them ever again?

Several things.  First, this is a very strange year.  This is a year when a sizable portion of the public has determined they will teach the establishment a lesson, once and for all.  Ted Cruz thought he was the most anti-establishment candidate around, having fought a brutal battle against the Texas Republican Party to get elected to the Senate in 2012 and then standing out as the most reliably conservative Senator, but Donald Trump was able to project an image of being even more of an outsider, and really harm Cruz for his associations with Wall Street bankers (which, you think Trump doesn’t have  even MORE association with them, being a New York financier?!?).

This is an election cycle where emotion has ruled the day and logic has not applied.  This is a cycle where a very large number of people have determined they would only support a perceived outsider, even when that perceived outsider is as inside as they come.  Trump has also made a lot of hay attacking political correctness/cultural Marxism, which I think is a major factor in his rise.  I think people are just about sick of having leftist values shoved down their throat.

Don’t discount the impact of open primary states, either.  Trump has done best in open primary states, where many democrats may be crossing over to vote for him in the assumption he’ll get killed  in a general election.

Another factor is this: I know a fair number of extremely committed pro-lifers/social conservatives who are willing to ignore the past and believe Trump’s present claims that he is strongly against abortion and other social ills.  They are willing to ignore his extremely immoral personal life.  They are willing to do this, because they see that decades of supporting the mainstream Republican party has gotten us very little in return.

Millions are fed up with the political establishment and are willing to support a dark horse candidate who tells them very much what they want to hear, even against all the evidence that the rhetoric does not match the real belief.  I know several folks who openly acknowledge that Trump is probably selling them a line, but at this point, they simply don’t care.  They are willing to chance that this supposed outsider really has changed, because they feel this country is just about gone, anyway, so why not take a gamble?

Frum, in his analysis, seems to totally discount that voters could be willing to take a chance that the lifetime-liberal Trump could have suddenly changed his beliefs.  He seems to assume that the vast, vast majority of voters, including former social conservatives, simply don’t value these issues that much anymore, otherwise, they wouldn’t support Trump.  I think that’s a major flaw in his analysis.

Even more, the number one factor still driving Trump’s popularity is his early very strong rhetoric about stopping the torrent of unrestrained illegal immigration into this country.   That is the top issue for a good 35-40% of Americans and his primary selling point.  I don’t think you can understand the Trump phenomenon, and the willingness of many of his supporters to ignore how his present rhetoric contradicts a lifetime of belief, without taking into account his immigration stand.  To me, it seems Frum practically discounts all of the above, and more.

Having said all that, I fear that Frum is correct in his primary conclusion: that there has been a sudden and severe drop off in the number of committed social conservatives, or at least in the degree of conviction conservatives assign to social/moral matters.  I think this can be seen in numerous areas: the way the entire conservative movement has more or less caved to pseudo-sodo-marriage now that the Supreme Court has ruled, the institutionalization of the pro-life movement and its subsequent ineffectiveness, the increasing tolerance for grave immorality within the Church and many of the protestant sects, the lack of outrage over incidents like the persecution of Aaron and Melissa Klein and the poor Indiana pizza shop.  Far too many Christians are willing to simply go along to get along, meekly changing their beliefs to whatever the cultural Marxists dictate, much more concerned about the state of their career and 401k than they are the state of their souls.

I’m interested to know what you think.  Does Trump’s rise signal a temporary, or final, collapse of the strongly social conservative movement, or is it driven more by other things?  Even if Trump’s rise is not specifically fueled by the collapse of cultural conservatism, do you see cultural conservatism in the decline?  Polls show that Trump is pulling a pretty hefty portion of the cultural conservative vote.  Does that probably temporary support mean those conservatives have forever given up on their primary moral concerns?

I can’t say my own thoughts on this are fully developed.  I’m still of two minds. I’m interested to see how things play out in the general.  I am afraid Trump will get absolutely pummeled by Dems quoting some of his noxious statements, dealings, and past moral failings.  But he’s proven unusually resistant in the past.



1. Paul - May 4, 2016

In my Opinion Yes it does. The younger generation is effectively the Me Generation, me, me, me. What can you give ME. Personally I feel the USA is doomed, I don’t give the USA more than 10 to 15 years until it collapses like Rome. The Out of Control spending by Obama Administration, and the out of control spending in local spending will collapse the economy, and we will se rioting in the street when Societies Takers are getting their Free Stuff.

richardmalcolm1564 - May 5, 2016

The real analogy is not to the fall of the Roman Empire, but the fall of the Roman Republic.

In this respect – yes, that is likely a hint of what’s coming. To reverse Buchanan’s expression, it will be an empire, not a republic – though it may retain some of the outward appearances of republic, just as Augustus’s Rome did.

2. Branch - May 4, 2016

“This leaves essentially no one in the major parties for faithful Catholics to support, to my mind, though I know that some disagree with that assessment. ”

I think faithful Catholics should do whatever they can to keep Hillary out of office as she is certainly the worse of the two. I don’t understand Catholics who will sit on the sidelines and not try to prevent her from taking office.

tg - May 4, 2016

I agree.

Baseballmom - May 4, 2016

Branch, I understand your point. But the question to ponder is this: If the nation is going down a moral sewer (and I don’t think any genuine Catholic can argue otherwise) then do you want to pull the bandaid off slowly or rapidly? It is coming off either way. Trump wins, slow removal, Hildebeast wins, quick removal. It is coming off.

Branch - May 4, 2016

I don’t see why I’d want to do anything to hasten the decline, and instead why I shouldn’t try to do what I can to at least slow it. We know the world’s going to end one day, too. Does that mean, given my desire for the coming of Christ, that I should ruin what is here now?

I read yesterday that Hillary is in favor of sex-selection abortion. I am growing very tired of this vain “Trump isn’t a real conservative” talk. Fine. I’m not really concerned about having a “real conservative” at that point. I’m not into politics. I’m into not offending God and not having my children grow up in any worse of a country than it already is.

Branch - May 4, 2016

Let me put it this way: the “Catholics” who, how shall we say it, “disagree” with the Church on certain things that get debated in election times…does anything think they’re going to refrain from voting because they don’t like their candidate enough? We have to do what we can to neutralize that. I think it’s very simple. We are already fighting the secular humanists of the world who would gladly take a Hillary or even a socialist over a “conservative.” And we’re also up against so-called “Catholic Democrats” who actually think voting for Hillary Clinton is something that can be done in good conscience, despite the fact that the Church has ruled out voting for those who so adamantly oppose Her on the non-negotiables.

It’s the lesser of two evils.

richardmalcolm1564 - May 5, 2016

Both candidates disdain the faith and will work to undermine it once in office. Two heads of the same beast. They’ll just do it in somewhat different ways.

People who imagine that Trump is in any way a possible ally for us will be in for a rude awakening if he’s elected. The evidence is already there to see from this campaign. Just ask Planned Parenthood.

3. oneholyapostolic - May 4, 2016

You need to start viewing this election through the prism of destiny. Like him or not Mr. Trump overcame enormous almost impossible odds to win the nomination. His enemies fell before him. His path has been cleared. Ted Cruz mocked our Lord with his phony “destiny”, lies and deceitfulness. He was exposed. Social conservatism is not dead. Christians have been used by the GOP with the shiny trinket of social conservative values and they never uphold their promises.

richardmalcolm1564 - May 5, 2016

“Social conservatism is not dead.”

It’s not dead, but it is politically defeated and marginalized.

It will likely have to take new forms going forward. Its principal base was evangelical Protestantism. And that is in decline and transformation, too.

Traditional Catholics hardly count, because there are far too few of us to matter politically. There are a few hundred thousand of us in America, tops.

4. Murray - May 4, 2016

Does Cruz’s defeat mean the end of social conservative influence in the US?

No, but things are going to be shaken up for a good while.

The political system is currently undergoing a realignment from left/right to globalist/nationalist. Our elites–including most politicians, think-tankers, media, academics, and the wealthy–are solidly globalist. Obama, Clinton, Bush, Rubio, etc. have far more in common with each other and with global elites–Ban Ki-Moon, Angela Merkel, George Soros, David Cameron and Justin Trudeau–than they do with ordinary citizens of their own countries. These elites share the same values–open borders, free trade, international treaties, and a loathing for local particularism–and when they want approval, they look to each other.

On the other side are people rooted in a particular regional, cultural, or religious milieu, who wish (however inchoately) to preserve the countries and traditions their ancestors built, even if that means forgoing some of the benefits of globalism. They’ve watched their cities and countries being dissolved by immigration, off-shoring, cultural propaganda, and an education system designed to produce rootless, ahistorical units of consumption. We have just seen them forcibly reject the useless quislings of the Republican Party establishment, and much the same thing is happening on the Democratic side, though probably with less success.

In this shakeout, you will see existing party allegiances and boundaries dissolve. A prominent and noisy part of the Republican Party is likely to vote for fellow globalist Hilary Clinton against the nationalist(-sounding) Trump. If Trump does go nationalist, he may end up making a pitch for disillusioned Sanders supporters.

So what does this mean for social conservatives? Flux. I suspect many voters reasoned that the Republicans had long since surrendered on abortion and other social-conservative issues, so it wouldn’t make any difference anyway. And if you don’t have a country, but merely a pit stop in the great global movement of labor, what’s the point? Recover the nation, then we’ll talk about policy.

Or that’s my hunch. It certainly makes more sense than the elite assumption that a large chunk of the Republican Party base are dumb mouth-breathing bigots who don’t know what’s good for them.

Lynne - May 5, 2016

That’s why I’m supporting Trump. He’s a nationalist and maybe his election will be us some time. Paul Ryan, a Catholic, is a globalist. I’m sick of elites who want to flush this country down the sewer.

c matt - May 5, 2016

Murray is spot on. The key is populist sounding. Who knows what Trump is in reality. My biggest concern with him is that he reminds me of all those “pro-life” sounding GOPers who did not really accomplish much of anything. It infuriates me to no end how Demoncrats will commit hara-kiri for abortion, but so-called Republicans will barely make a whimper against it.

5. Murray - May 4, 2016

Argh. Looks like I hit the spam filter again. And I didn’t even put any links in! (It was a little long.)

6. tg - May 4, 2016

I felt sad when Cruz dropped out. However, he had no choice. I didn’t like how angry he would get. If he could have kept his cool and not gotten so angry at Trump, he might have done better. It’s a turnoff to see candidates get ugly with each other. I think that’s why the present occupant won the first time. He never would insult the other candidates. I don’t recall he making a bad comments about Sarah Palin or McCain.

7. Baseballmom - May 4, 2016

Response to Branch went bye bye…

8. cenlacatholic - May 4, 2016

I’m not a Trump fanatic and never was a big fan of Cruz. I can tell you this. In my small suburban neighborhood in a middle-sized city in Louisiana, we have seen 4 Palestinian Mahometan families (all related) move in homes on our street.

My fourteen year old son gets called a “white b!tch” for walking down the street in front of one of these houses by the young male adherents to the religion of peace. My neighbor chants to Allah so loudly in his carport that we can hear it in the house. One 5 bedroom home houses two families–two mothers and, from what we can tell, at least eight kids. Oh, and there’s one man that comes and goes.

Kids run around the street at 9-10-11 o’clock at night shouting and playing like it’s frickin’ Palestine. They block the street during the day when cars are trying to use the street.

If Trump will deport all these damn illegal Mahometans and stop immigration from Mahometan nations; he has my vote.

9. c matt - May 4, 2016

There are a lot of things going on here. I doubt Trump is the rebuke to SocCons that Frum (does anyone even listen to him anymore) dreams of. First, Trump is not necessarily anti-socon – he is not vociferously supportive, but his priority is economic opportunity for middle class voters (hence, his immigration stance, his stance on “outsourcing”, and to some extent his foreign policy positions). This is what resonates with most voters.

Having said that, there is a big question whether Trump truly buys any of what he spouts, and more important, will he follow through?

Cruz’s other weakness is tying the US to Israeli foreign policy – where Trump is “America First,” Cruz comes across as “Israel First.” A lot of voters are tired of that.

cenlacatholic - May 4, 2016

Where’s the like button? I’m one of those who are sick of the evangelical Judaizing. End the billions of tax-payer funded aid to Israel. Israel is the Church, not the nation Lord Rothschild, Lord Balfour, Theodore Herzl and countless company conspired to create.

Anyhow, I doubt Trump will do that; even he panders to AIPAC.

10. skeinster - May 4, 2016


11. skeinster - May 4, 2016

Trump is popular b/c Trump is a populist (or portrays himself as one, if you like.)

Social conservatives were always a small minority to begin with. They were placated with platitudes that were instantly forgotten post election.

The rest of the general public, who are not part of the Takers, have what they think are more pressing concerns that ssm- like a job, healthcare and national security.

Trump does not scold/blame them for wanting those things and he does not hesitate to speak the truth as he sees it. If he overstates things, people who have been blatantly lied to for years are inclined to excuse that.

Our daughter, as you know, works in theater. One of her co-workers sent out a query on FB asking if anyone could seriously explain the appeal of DT. I told him some of the above, and strongly advised him not to underestimate the fury of the average American voter.

So, yes to your question. The tipping point has been reached.

12. skeinster - May 4, 2016

Ate my very excellent comment, as well.
TL, dr?

Tantumblogo - May 4, 2016

All fixed. I’m going to try to change a setting that may fix this. It also might lead to a whole bunch of spam, but at this point I’d rather have that than half the comments getting trashed.

13. Tim - May 4, 2016

I hate to quote lyrics from Sting but they are brutally true: “There is no political solution to our troubled evolution.” Imagine finding a tidbit of truth in a 1980’s Police song. Does anyone REALLY believe that a President Cruz would bring an end to our social ills? GET> REAL. He’s hamstrung from the gate being a protestant heretic and therefore displeasing to God. Reagan(as much as I liked him) couldn’t stem the tide. Then we had Bush-Clinton-Bush-Obama to push it past the point of no return. Could a Trump/Clinton race be part of our deserved chastisement? I think it likely. One Silver lining is the RINO establishment has been severely wounded and that’s a step in the right direction.

Tantumblogo - May 4, 2016

I don’t believe politics are a solution to the crisis afflicting the culture – it’s a spiritual/moral/religious crisis. But that doesn’t mean that one political alternative might not be superior to the other. I doubt Cruz could have won in a general, anyway, he severely lacks charisma, but now we’re stuck with almost no one to vote for, though I understand one of the two libertarians vying for that party’s nomination is pro-life (Austin something or other).

Tim - May 4, 2016

I heard on the Dana show today that this Austin whomever is so libertarian that he is OK with sodo-“marriage”. Cross him off the list. Mundabor’s take on the general election:


Tantumblogo - May 4, 2016

I think that’s very true. I didn’t get to that in my post, but, yes, much of Trump’s support probably comes from people who have felt entirely disaffected from the political process. I alluded to that a bit with my statement regarding political correctness, but it goes beyond that. It goes to economic and political disenfranchisement of the blue collar white class that has been all but ignored and, even more, attacked and derided by both parties. I think that also fuels their willingness to support Trump as a “conservative” or social con or whatever in spite of his background that provides such glaring contrast to his presently stated beliefs. They simply don’t care, their primary issue is immigration/economic disenfranchisement, and whatever other matters they care about pale in comparison. Even though Trump to me looks like a consummate insider, to them, his not having held office is a huge mark in his favor, as tens of millions feels both parties left them long ago.

And that feeling is true. I’m not quite in the economic disenfranchised camp (though I have felt the sting of having my job outsourced to India, twice), but I, too, and I’m sure most all of you, feel some of our most important concerns have been not just ignored, but belittled and mocked by the coastal elites that dominate both parties. To me, the R party is essentially the D party with lower taxes. That’s what they’d like to be, anyway, save for a small number of true conservatives in elected office and the occasional pressure of social conservatives forcing them to take some small action against abortion or some other ill (while always preserving the status quo).

I totally get it. If I had any faith that Trump would not quickly turn tail after elected (which I strongly doubt will happen) and govern as the lib I believe him to be, at heart, I could support him, but I just can’t get over his lifetime liberal beliefs.

And yeah, I just perused the Reason site for about 20 minutes and quickly crossed the libertarians off my list. Some libertarians are better than others, but many are nuts, they’re huge social liberals who favor small government to maximize their lifestyle choices. NO thanks.

Murray - May 4, 2016

In some circles, they’re called LOLbertarians.

As to the question of whether Trump is going to turn around and betray his supporters, I think Vox Day makes a reasonable (if not airtight) argument to the contrary.

In short, Day argues that there’s really no upside for Trump to go turncoat. He’s already rich, he’s showed willingness to endure the vituperation of the elites and the smart set, and having demonstrated that there is a groundswell of support for a mildly nationalist candidate, he has no reason to forsake the affection of the people to win the applause of a tiny group of globalists.

But time will tell.

14. Baseballmom - May 4, 2016

What great comments – thanks TB for bringing up this topic! I probably will go Trump – with a prayer that something good comes out of it… But if he loses. (And likely he will) then I will trust in Our Lord to bring good out of a very difficult situation. A third party vote is a vote for the Hildebeast.

Tim - May 4, 2016

Trump will win and win big.

Baseballmom - May 5, 2016

Interesting that you say that Tim. Sometimes, not often but sometimes, I begin to think that myself… I think it because it does seem that he has wide appeal…why do you think that is so? (More times I think it will be the Hildebeast – the novelty of the first woman will be greater than the novelty of a man who has never held any public office).

Tim - May 5, 2016

See my link above to Mundabor. Trump will pound Hillary on all the Clinton crimes and scandals including Benggazi and the email server (which if we had been involved in even peripherally we would be sitting in prison). Bill’s and the Donald’s philandering will most likely be a wash. These debates will at least not put me into a boredom induced coma. (The first ones since 1992 with Ross Perot making them interesting).Trump will also take it directly to the liberal press and make them an issue and he will not back down to the liberal debate “moderators”. If Hillary gets indited then the wheels come off the demoncrat donkey.
We shall see.

Lynne - May 5, 2016

Yes, because he is not afraid to fight. Some will jump on the Trump Train because they like to back a winner but many of us are backing him because he’s a fighter. New Yorkers can be obnoxious but they know how to fight.

15. wlindsaywheeler - May 5, 2016

Tantumblogo, this primary season is the replay of the 1964 Republican Convention. I urge all and sundry to go to YouTube and google Nelson Rockefeller and the Republican Convention. You can see Rockefeller excoriate Goldwater. Goldwater and Trump are the same–populists, along with Pat Buchanan. The Republican party has always been bifurcated between the populists and the globalists; Rockefeller Republicans were the globalist wing and they called that “conservative”.

If we don’t save this country from invasion of the Third World, all is going to be lost. First, and it is the moral and ethical thing is national preservation of the WASP and the European character of America. That is Pro-Life–stopping the effects of the genocidal 1965 Immigration Act that was started by the Catholic John Kennedy and worsened by his brother Ted Kennedy. Did you hear the Mexican Catholics protesting at the Trump rally with “We have the right to migrate”?

My parents who were Catholics voted for Obama twice and voted for Clinton as well! The majority of voters in the Democrat Party are Catholics. Biden and Pelosi are Catholics. Cuomo is Catholic. It is the Catholic Church that is teaching this “right to migrate”–which is existential genocide for us WASPs. Treason and genocide are higher values that abortion, yet where is the Church? The biggest problem facing America is Liberal Catholics.

Tim - May 5, 2016

Blessed Pope Pius IX said that liberal Catholics are the greatest enemies of the Church. Pelosi, et al, can call themselves anything they like but that doesn’t make them Catholic.

Catholic - May 5, 2016

Guess that means most latino “Catholics” aren’t really Catholic. But then we’ve known that for quite some time, haven’t we. Although the Vatican and the USCCB have told us differently.

For a picture of nice Catholic boys at the Calif. anti-Trump riot see —

More on riot here —

Lynne - May 5, 2016

Paul Ryan is Catholic too and he seems to be going along with the liberal agenda.

richardmalcolm1564 - May 5, 2016

“First, and it is the moral and ethical thing is national preservation of the WASP and the European character of America.”

WASPs are, however, just what the acronym says: White Anglo-Saxon Protestants. And why should we as Catholics be vested in defending a *Protestant* legacy, especially one that is clearly fatally ill?

Tantumblogo - May 5, 2016

Concur. Even though I was born one.

Tim - May 6, 2016

I concur as well. I, however, was a baptized Catholic heathen until my late 30’s when I dragged kicking and screaming to an FSSP Mass which was literally a “road to Damascus moment.” Thank God for the true Mass!

wlindsaywheeler - May 6, 2016

BECAUSE IT IS THEIR ****** country! What arrogance! And what “””Catholic””” country compares to WASP America? Who put a man on the Moon? WASP America! I’ve been around the world and lived in Europe for three years. I’ve been to “Catholic” Mexico with its black rivers, trash everywhere, and pollution, stagnant economy, and corruption everywhere! Hell NO do I want to live in a Catholic Country! I don’t know how Italy survives myself—what about a 145 different governments since the end of WWII?

The virtue of Righteousness demands the preservation and duty to the Fatherland. I was adopted into a WASP family and so my Familial duty—is to my kinsmen! What business is it of Catholics to destroy this country? It’s NOT YOUR country. No wonder the KKK arose to push back the Catholics! As a Catholic, I know see the justification of the KKK and their dislike of Catholics. I thought a “bishop” is a Shepard of all Christians—orthodox and heretic—and the Catholic Bishops in America are orchestrating the destruction of WASP America? Are they “Good” shepherds or Judas goats?

Tim - May 6, 2016

No one alive today has actually seen a truly Catholic country. The former ones in Europe have gone secular and are on their way to becoming islamic. America has never been Catholic and that is why you are seeing her crumble before your eyes. As far as the bishops, the vast majority of them lost the Faith moons ago. They may have the power and the buildings but we have the faith.

A true Shepard would not placate a protestant heretic or a schismatic or a jew or muslim or pagan in their errors. That would go against Charity! We do not have true Shepards for the most part today. They are indifferent to the dangerous situation that these folks are in as they are in false religions that are not salvific. If they were true Shepards than they would work to bring them out of the darkness that they are enveloped in and they would not embrace V2 and its errors:


Christ told his Apostles to go out and convert the world. That is THE mandate from God Himself. He did not say not to placate and ignore the plight of those on the tracks to Hell. So the wonderful WASP’s put a man on the moon? Congratulations, but consider how many souls the WASP mentality has put in Hell. You can have the KKK, I’ll stick with the One, True, Holy and Apostolic Church founded by Christ Himself, not “churches” founded by muhammed, Luther, Calvin, Henry VIII, etc. Let go of your Americanist heresy, it will be your undoing.
God bless you.

Tantumblogo - May 6, 2016

Not saying this to anyone in particular, but while these topics can become heated, let’s keep our reason and charity about us. The issue of this election and Trump has inspired a lot of heated conflict in many many places.

I’m as WASPy as they come. My father’s family has been in this country since the 1640s and came straight from England. A Scot snuck in there somewhere but my family is all white Anglo Saxon protestants. I have pride in much of what they did, including leaving the South after being there for 200 years because they never owned slaves and weren’t going to fight a slave-owner’s war. So they moved to Illinois in the 1840s and then Iowa and fought for the North during the Civil War.

For all the perceived good the US has accomplished – and it is not inconsiderable – there is a very legitimate Catholic critique of this nation and its founding. The entire idea of religious liberty or freedom is one that is frankly hostile to the traditional Catholic understanding of the right ordering of society. The entire concept of religious liberty was dreamed up by men to consciously put religion in its place – not as the basic organizing influence of a culture, but as a private hobby engaged in and kept distinctly out of the public sphere. The US founders were not terribly radical in that regard, compared to some of their peers on the Continent, so they compromised. They didn’t go full-on Hobbes and try to all but banish religious influence on society, but they also refused to make the US a formally Christian state (and that would have been disordered anyway if they had, as it would have been protestant). That may sound like a small thing, but that fundamental decision led inexorably to where we are at today. Catholics had a chance to fight for a properly ordered society with Jesus Christ as its visible Head and granting due obeisance to the Church when Catholic numbers exploded in the late 19th century, but far too many were happy to simply go along to get along in this place where they were finally at least not horribly persecuted for their beliefs (though they were persecuted some). Any nation not founded with Jesus Christ as its visible head and organizing principle is doomed to fail. Things made by men do not last. Only Christ is eternal, which is probably a major reason why Byzantium lasted over 1000 years.

This deep, complex, and highly controversial stuff. I can’t get into the details in a comment but if you search the blog for Liberty God Failed you can see more on the subject.

W. Lindsay Wheeler - May 7, 2016

Tim, I’m talking demographics, the turning of the WASPs who built this country into a minority that the Roman Catholics John Kennedy and Ted Kennedy facilitated with the 1965 Immigration Act. I’m talking about the genocide of the WASPs as a people. I’m NOT talking about their religion.

Jesus said of Judas, “It would have been better had he never been born”. Why is that? He betrayed. Betrayal is the opposite of Loyalty a virtue. Judas is going to the depths of hell because of his betrayal—not because of breaking any of the Ten Commandments.

I am also very aware of the Masonic foundations of America so I know of where “Americanism” comes from and I reject that. But it seems that it is the American Catholic Church that has adopted Americanism in that most Catholics subscribe to rebuilding the Tower of Babel and have adopted Thomas Jefferson’s heresy of gnosticism with “All men are created equal”. The Catholic Church has adopted wholesale Cultural Marxism/Masonry with its Brotherhood of Man dogma. Just today the Pope called Europe to break down walls and the Vatican teach “the Right to migrate” which the Mexicans were chanting at the Trump rallies. There is no right to migrate. I’m talking about the Natural Order of race and nation and the WASP nation of America as a racial unit! Not their religion. The 1965 Immigration Act is a law that commits treason and genocide! And Catholics participated in that, and the Church has NOT said anything to teach against this which clearly attacks the Natural Order. The Church is NOT fighting against Masonry but has adopted wholesale the teachings of Marxism/Masonry in its race-mixing ideology. Has any Roman Catholic Bishop told the Mexicans and all those illegals to return home? The Roman Catholics, with their political correctness, social justice, destroying WASP America; it is Existential Genocide—and you people have NO salvation. How do you have love when you commit Treason against your kinsmen? Neither Kennedy was corrected in their sin.

16. News Link Roundup: May 5, 2016 | Magnificat Media | Creation and production of engaging educational content - May 5, 2016

[…] I think so. And so does, I think, the blogger at A Blog for Dallas Area Catholics. His essay, “Does Cruz’s defeat mean the end of social conservative influence in the US?” is essential reading. Additionally, the comment box provided these most insightful […]

17. MFG - May 5, 2016

Social conservatives will hit the reboot button. Instead of focusing on Supreme Court and elections they’ll begin to try and reverse the tide at a local level-both spiritually and logistically.

We’ve wasted 40+ years trying to reverse things nationally and politically when that path was mostly a farce.

Texas proves that prolifers have more success at local level.

One side benefit of a Trump presidency is it makes it easier for conservative states to withdraw from the union. Politically that may be the only way to escape Roe v Wade. This time the divide won’t be north v south but east vs west. Trump won most states east of the Mississippi. Anti-Trump (Cruz) won most states west (with exceptions).

People can still be converted

18. MrT - May 6, 2016

Q: Does Trump’s rise signal a temporary, or final, collapse of the strongly social conservative movement, or is it driven more by other things?
A: Social conservatism seems to change over the decades but never goes away.
Q: Even if Trump’s rise is not specifically fueled by the collapse of cultural conservatism, do you see cultural conservatism in the decline?
A: I see a long slow moral decline in Christendom over centuries that accelerated with the protestant revolt and became essentially fatal during WWI.
Q: Polls show that Trump is pulling a pretty hefty portion of the cultural conservative vote. Does that probably temporary support mean those conservatives have forever given up on their primary moral concerns?
A: It would seem so.

19. Tim - May 7, 2016

W. Lindsay Wheeler…..I do not support genocide and don’t have any thing against W-white(I am one) or AS folks. However, P….protestant folks, some of which I have as friends and collegues, I have no desire to harm and wish them well, but protestantism is a problem. It is a satanically inspired false religion who’s main goal is to commit genocide against the One, True Faith. Luther hated the Catholic Faith as do all of his offshoot sects. You speak of betrayal, it is in reality that protestants betrayed the Catholics and God Himself with their heresy. I owe nothing to any heretic as error has no rights. When you speak of political correctness and social justice and Roman Catholics you are mistaken. They that pursue those ideologies are not true Catholics, they are modernist heretics, just as erroneous as protestants. True Catholics reject those errors.

The truth is actually the reverse. The protestants have always worked to wipe out Catholicism. In the US the prime example is the public school system. Destroying Catholic culture was and is its main objective.

You are correct that the pope and bishops are wrong on immigration…it is not a right, but a privilege and comes with rules. So

So you declare that Catholics in America have NO salvation because of the decline in WASP culture….that borders on insane.

A question…On the sin of treason….did your WASP forefathers commit it when they rebelled against the legitimate government in England composed of their relations and kinsmen during the American Revolution? And if it’s OK for them to do it to their King, why isn’t it OK for someone to rebel against them? Revolution against legitimate authority begets more revolution.

The Traditional Catholic Faith is the only road to sanity and salvation.

God bless you.

wlindsaywheeler - May 8, 2016

Yes, the WASP committed suicide when they left the Catholic Church under Henry VIII. I believe Protestantism was instigated by Jews to break up Christendom; it is a Judaizing heresy inspired by the Kabbala which teaches that primitivism, (and Protestantism is returning to a “pure New Testament Church) is right.

And again you’re right. I’m a monarchist myself and would have been a loyalist at the time of the American revolution.

But, it is our job to stop the destruction. It is our job to convert them back–but then convert them to a Church that is engaging in treason and genocide itself? Britain is being turned into a Islamic country. The British worldwide are being led into destruction.

Our job is to stop the destruction and genocide. “Any Church that commits Treason, is not a religion.” Are not all bishops engaged in Political Correctness/Social Justice which is Cultural Marxism? Are not the SSPX bishops also Politically Correct? Can you tell me what Catholic bishop anywhere stands up for race/nation and for preserving them? Who? Any bishop push back against the call of “racism”? Which bishop is a nationalist? Are there any?

Tim - May 8, 2016

SSPX bishops politically correct? I’ve never heard it. One bishop…….Williamson……most think he is nuts…..”in an insane world the sane man must appear insane”……Mr. Spock. ….leave it to a fictional extraterrestrial to hit the bulls eye. You are correct that we must stop genocide and convert all to Christ. We have leaders who gave betrayed Christ, that is why we must resist and do our duty despite the dereliction of duty of our bishops and priests. Pray for them, their souls are in grave danger.

Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: