Boinkie's Blog

I had to laugh: old leftie Bishop Cruz has two short essays on the pope's encyclical on marriage about "love" saying the Pope expresses sympathy for those who had marriages fall apart.link

dirty little secret: Due to poverty many of our women become sex workers.

Pornography, Abuse of Minors:  While the former may be for purposes of earning a living, such remains ethically unacceptable.  Neither is the latter in any way acceptable.

but he notes how the NWO Elites (read Obama) are promoting this:

“Families face many challenges, from migration to the ideological denial of differences between the sexes (Ideology of Gender); from culture of provisional to anti-birth mentality and the impact of biotechnology in the field of pro-creation; from lack of housing and work to pornography and the abuse of minors; from inattention to persons with disabilities to lack of respect for the elderly; from legal dismantling of the family to violence against women.”(Off. Vat. Network)

Culture of Anti-Birth Mentality: The Church upholds Responsible Parenthood. This however in no way means that those who subscribed to the opposite mind frame should be held in disrespect and contempt.

Ideology of Gender: Considering the very essence and nature itself of marriage, the ground reality is that “Same Sex Marriage” is a contradiction in terms. But this gives people no right to belittle all those concerned in its promotion. 

No, let them destroy truth and don't disrespect them?

Link2

There is so much cruelty and suffering.  All these cry for Mercy.  There is so much desperation and hopelessness.  All these plead for Compassion.   And Pope Francis is kindly and readily responding thereto.  He wants fallen Catholics to be once again brought back to the embrace of the Church they left behind for one reason or another.  He wants erring and suffering non-Catholics be given more respect  and understanding.  He wants people – irrespective of race, color and creed – to be more deferential to one another.  He wants, teaches and prays that humanity be eventually reconciled with Divinity such that as the former (humanity) that comes from the Creative Work of the Latter (Divinity), be hereto eventually reconciled through Mercy and Compassion particularly through the pastoral intervention of the Church.

Yes, love and mercy.

Ah, but when does love become the excuse for being an enabler of evil?

So in between the two essays, he puts an essay on anti social personality disorder.



Heh.  In the Philippines the phrase is "without shame" to describe such people. A lot of hypocritical sin is tolerated if you shamefully hide it e.g. corruption, second "wives", but doing it openly shames not just you but your family, and is considered wrong.

c.  Nonchalant self-misrepresentation and deceitproductive of customary practice of falsity, a matter-of-fact lying and a matter-of-course deception of others – these are the standard manifestations of the Disorder.....

and then we have:

----

I laugh in a sad ironic way at all of this, because it is Francis' loving approach (and the Obama/MSM/NWO propaganda) that has made our stepson decide he is gay, and if you oppose what he is doing you are the evil one.

The "loving" Jesus welcomed sinners, but some folks forget that he was pretty good at telling off the really evil people among us.

Those who point out they are sinning, or refuse to cooperate or approve of their sin, are now labled as evil, and Francis, with his emphasis on "love", is essentially telling us to be a patsy and shut up and let evil rule.

As I have said before: Confucius emphasized not "love" (which in the modern world means emotion) but "Duty", even if duty goes against one's personal desires.

 a couple news reports (no links) about Islamicist murders in Bangladesh.

One was interesting because it was a US Embassy employee or USAID employee or former USAID employee who was running a gay magazine.

WTF? Why is the US "aid" (which usually runs projects that help the people pull out of poverty) using it's funds/employees to push "gay rights". Most gay magazines are about one thing: Sex and where to get it.

So essentially the US is pushing pornography in a conservative Muslim country.

This is not new: A lot of the "gay" activism and birth control activism here is by American stooges who get on the social media and act like they are oppressed. In the meanwhile, HIV has started spreading finally in this country, mainly among MSM.

So why now? Even five years ago, the "HIV" Epidemic, which had "Increased" in numbers was being touted so that our teenagers could get "sex education" in schools and condoms could be pushed for heterosexuals. Yes the "increase" was a huge percentage number quoted, but the actual numbers were in the 100s or low 1000s...in contrast, hundreds of thousands in Thailand have HIV, but that country's use of condoms is touted as an example we should follow.

The dirty little secret is that the Obama administration made "human rights" and "women's rights" the propaganda cover to promote promiscuity, divorce, sex in teenagers, gay lifestyles etc. in countries that rejected it.

And you thought that the little covered Saudi project to "purify" Islam by spreading their strict and terror prone sect was a problem.

So where is the church in this?

Duh. The Pope wants us to be "understanding" but didn't get upset when these NWO will use his latest two writings, on ecology to spread green new age ideas that will stop development, or on marriage, which weakens what Jesus (and Malachi for that matter) said about divorce, which alas is too often means women can't rely on husbands.

longer version with rants from my main blog.

Uncle Orson reviews Max, Run All Night, discusses San Andreas special effects and notes that the the thriller London is Falling  was a bit violent for his tastes, but was a good movie.

Ironically, "London" had an opening gross that was higher in China than in the USA. Maybe it's because the reviewers saw it a "xenophobic" because Islamoterrorists were the bad guys.

Overseas, people like movies but they have to be dubbed or subtitled. So it helps if you have a lot of action.

and even in East Asia, most of the bombs that kill people are from Islamoterrorists, not rednecks.

Yes, I know: OKC bombing...but here, a lot of people think McVeigh's partner met with Islamic terrorists in Makati, so that could also have links to Alquada. And enough people in OKC think that the story might be covering up something that Mcnicols didn't get the death penalty

more  movies reviewed HERE.including the Irish film Brooklyn...

----------------------

Prose Edda audiobook is now up at Librivox.

--------------------

Iowahawk twitter of the day





 Follow

David Burge‏@iowahawkblog



Breaking: Treasury throws founder of the Democratic Party off $20 bill, replaces with gun-toting Republican







---------------------------

--------------------

re: The year without a summer (in earlier post). Not only did a lot of poor Europeans decide to flee to America, supplying manpower to the Americann industrial revolution in the North, another result was that a lot of anti slavery New England farmers decided to move into the Midwest, and this was the cause of Bloody Kansas, the constitutional crisis, and eventually the Civil War.

Blame global cooling for the end of Slavery?


-------------------
Anne Althouse has two interesting posts.

First, Trump notes that bathroom laws ignore that common curtesy would work just as well for the average Trans person, who is usually polite, and by putting such things into law, you only increase the expense of busines owners.

Well, duh.

But what upsets women is the possibility of sexual predators/peeping Toms/exhibitionists using the law to prey on women ...And hardly anyone is mentionin that security issues are the real problem.

Of course, the full agenda is to eliminate all separate bathrooms, period: to deny that men and women might not be the same, with the idea that this will eliminate discrimination at all levels.

Her second post is about the start of the "gay libertion" idea. 

But when she links to the story, am I the only one who noticed it was not objecting to gays per se, as much as their behavior that would be considered undesirable in many public places: Bathroom sex and open cruising, i.e. unasked for sexual advances against a stranger?

sounds like disorderly behavior to me, be it gay or straight, not sexual orientation that we are discussing.

But no one wants to discuss this reality.

who are the real "homophobes"? The ones who think gays should act as politely as other men, or the ones who think gays can't control themselves in public, so force the public to accept disorderly behavior?

---------------------------
anti Semitism and Holocaust denial by the UK Left.

As Netanyahu once quipped: They can't forgive Jews that they didn't stop Hitler from killing us.

Father Z has summarized a long analysis on the manipulations used by a small European group to destroy marriage and the church

, edited for public consumption, with my now oft-imitated treatment.  So, crawl back in through the window and off of the ledge… read on:
First, The Big Question: who won the battle?
The question refers, of course, to the battle between the Kasperites and Catholics [note the distinction] over the question of the admission of the civilly divorced and remarried (CDR) to penance and holy communion.  There are some corollary issues (pre-maritally cohabitating couples, same-sex couples, and simple adultery and fornication). But the Big Question concerns CDRs.  Prior to the opening of the 2014 Extraordinary Synod on the Family, none of us knew that the Kasperites were going to use the CDR issue as the thin-edge-of-the-wedge, or, if you prefer, the Trojan Horse, that Archbishop Bruno Forte stealthily snuck into the Synod’s Interim Report after the first week of the 2014 Synod.  THAT was the moment when many of us knew that“homosexuality” was the bigger issue for the Kasperites, who were hoping that the sympathy that could be produced among bishops on behalf of CDRs was more likely to move the synod members to allow access to Communion on their behalf than was the “plight of homosexuals”. It’s like this: once a way had been found to admit CDRs to Communion, the Domino Effect would see to it that opposition to others, including homosexuals, would give way. NB: This is STILL the Kasperite strategy.
In answer to the Big Question, above, Catholics won the battletechnically speaking, but the Kasperites won the battle in real terms.
Explanation: Read sections 297-312 of Amoris Laetitia. Technically speaking, the Pope does not spell out that CDRs can be admitted to the sacraments of Penance or Eucharist.  Try to understand just how important a victory this is for our side. We won.The Pope knows this. Kasper knows this. Heck, even the NCReporter knows this  Just plain forget all the exegesis of footnotes that you may be reading about on the internet. The Pope does not draw a straight line from X to Y. He. Does.  Not.  And he knows that he would have had to that just that in order to change Church doctrine and discipline. In the end, he could not do it and he did not do it. For a long time I feared that he would, and I was not alone.
so far so good. but...
Some of you will rightly insist that this “victory” of ours is only a formal one (in the theological sense of “formal”). I agree. BUT… I’ll take it! Remember:This was NOT the outcome that Pope Francis along with Cardinal Kasper and Friends wanted. Since the Extraordinary Consistory of Cardinals in February 2014, when Pope Francis invited Kasper to address the entire College of Cardinal, Kasper and Friends have wanted to change Church teaching (they maintained they only wanted to change its discipline). They wanted the “Kasper Proposal” – that adopts the Eastern Orthodox practice of admitting “repentant” CDRs to Communion – to be formally adopted by the Catholic Church. Pope Francis made it clear to everyone that he was backing the Kasper Proposal, and Pope Francis knows how to use his absolute power! For example, he personally chose over 1/3 of the voting members of both Synods, he personally chose those who wrote all of the Synod documents, he named as Cardinals a couple of Synod bishops who backed the Kasper Proposal during the 2014 Synod, he demoted Cardinal Burke after the 2014 Synod, thus depriving the Cardinal of an ex officio place in the 2015 Synod. And I could go on. Nevertheless, the Pope was denied this victory twice, first at the 2014 Synod and then at the 2015 Synod. It became clear to Pope Francis that the Kasper Proposal was going to divide the bishops and that the division would be rancorous. So he pulled back.
As I said, we will take this. [Darn tootin’!] It’s not everything we wanted. We wanted the ban on Communion for CDRs that is found in the 1981 Post-Synodal Apostolic Letter,Familiaris Consortio, n. 84, to be ratified. The Pope did not do that either. But … and this is a big but… by not formally retracting the teaching in FC 84, he let it stand.[Re-read that if you have to.]Hence, Catholics can maintain that Church teaching and discipline have not formally changed.]

the bad news: The MSM will spin it, and the bad priests and bishops will do their own thing.

and whenever they say it is your conscience that should guide you, in the modern western world this means follow your egotism or selfish desires, not the conscience of right and wrong.

and yes, I should talk: Lolo was divorced when I married him. He didn't need an annulment since it was a civil marriage and she hated Catholics and hated him, so she never agreed to have the marriage "blessed" in the church, meaning if he had died he would have been in the state of mortal sin, and in those days, excommunicated.

So how did he feel? He once told me he figured suffering with her meant he didn't feel guilty working two jobs and sending a lot of money home to help his extended family (his brother died, so he was the sole support for the children)..

He said if he loved his wife, he would have worked less and given her all his money.

So things worked out fine. And the only reason he even got a civil divorce was for legal reasons, so he could return to the Philippines with his own money...and not have her tag along. I met him several years after this...

PJ Media claims the newest letter by the Pope is merely saying yes to marriage, no to gay marriage and that priests should be nice to people who fail.

Well, duh. That was true back in the pre Vatican II days too.

Hate the sin, love the sinner. Yes, but Jesus didn't say "I forgive you, go your way and do your own thing" but "go and sin no more".

But the part about bishops deciding on how to implement these more compassionate approaches to those who lapse only makes my eyes roll up in exasperation:

Uh, guys: It was this "more compasionate" approach that pressured the bishops to accept "cured" pedophiles back in their ranks (a combination of the Post Vatican II compassion ethic, the sexual revolution, and certai psychiatric trends that are now in danger of being ignored or thrown down the memory hole).

and here in the Philippines, I am sure that the bishop was only being "compassionate" when he allowed our late mayor to be buried with a big church funeral, complete with KofC bodyguard, even though he was under legal indictment for the hits against his political opponant (including our nephew, who was killed in the crossfire).

and I won't even mention the numerous photo ops of the Pope or Bishops with politicians who steal everything in sight. Even the more financially honest Duterte, who cleaned up his town by means that made human rights folks gasp, claims he had the Pope's blessing on his candidacy.

Only the old leftie Archbishop Cruz is a bit more cynical, since this "compassionate" approach is a nice sliding scale into hell.

(concerning the ten commandments)...
They were in effect already written in the human mind as well as felt in the human heart.  They were then but merely verbalized and formalized so that ignorance or uncertainty there could be none.  Their observance was not for the sake of their Giver but for the good of the receivers.  So it was that when duly observed, they made the individuals better, their families  happier, their communities safer, their world peaceful.  So it was that their violators were spurned and their victims were hurt, violated, degraded – and killed even...

but Bishop! Compassion!

even Civil Law adopted the more basic, specific and rational ones – more concretely such as the existence of God (1^st), the significance of parental rule (4^th), the sacredness of human life (5^th), the importance of fidelity (6^th), respect for temporal goods of  others (7^th).  There is one really significant as well as truly relevant in the above cited Divine Mandates, viz., the violation of anyone which causes social disturbance if not downright criminality – with those therein concerned as the losers after all is said and done.  

but Bishop: Compassion!

Actually the good bishop has compassion on the poor who do petty thefts, on the weak who lie or cheat on their wives but repent and try to do the right thing.

The problem is when the rich and powerful use the compasion to get away with murder (here that means literally) but will manipulate Pope Francis' words to justify that they ignore the ten commandments.


A good number of the people of today are still bent in grossly violating the Commandments. They continue living godless lives.  They consider God as but a figment of imagination.  They look at divinity as but a killjoy.



They look down at their elders as irrelevant individuals – with irreverent words and actions. They consider themselves as free from building or destroying their families.  What is pleasurable is what counts.  No killjoy, please.



They kill one another – and how!  And blessed are the countries with the most lethal weaponry. The more they kill, the better. 


the problem is that once you start saying yes there are rules but compassion is more important, you are indeed following Jesus who hated trivial rules.

But the danger is that you are undermining the big rules:
From PJM:

As would be expected, CNN's David Wright reported the more liberal side. "In the letter, the pope urged more common sense and less unthinking following of rules -- what he calls 'discernment' -- and writes, 'by thinking that everything is black and white, we sometimes close off the way of grace and growth.'"
So we ignore the promiscuity and dangerous (to health and body) practices going on in the pits of Makati?

So we accept divorce that allows the divorced spouse and children to live in poverty when the husband has a middle life crisis and wants a new bimbo?

So we pass laws that let greedy or merely exhausted children or caretakers to off those they should be caring for?

And we look away when politicians somehow get rich?

So yes, let us welcome everyone with compassion... things are not black and white....

I don't know: Killing one's political opponant so one can continue milking funds from the city is still sort of a black and white thing.

The argument that pious people with religious beliefs can be punished for obeying their conscience is only starting.

Newsbusters has a long article that shows the nuances of believers (something usually ignored in the MSM) and how it will be spun for propaganda purposes to push an agenda.

Read the whole thing.

What it means is that if you refuse to assist and cooperate with an activity that is legal but immoral you can be punished by the government.


But the problem is that this is only a test run for a larger agenda.

One sees this in the "Little Sisters of the Poor" case, which is about cooperation with an immoral law that forces cooperation with immoral behavior.  (and to make it worse: No, it was not in the Obamacare law. It was added by a committee by fiat after the law was passed).

If this is passed the slippery slope is ready for your health care.

No, I'm not being paranoid: A teacher gave me an F that would have meant being thrown out of medical school because I refuse to help him with abortions.

Luckily, the Civil rights law of 1964 was around back then. Others were pressured and gave in, but I appealed to the school and won.

But it's not clear if the law protects religious organizations that hire and care for anyone as part of a ministry. Hence the lawsuit even though the Obama administration could have easily made other arrangements for the women.

But will it soon become impossible to get a medical job without cooperating with a pro death government agenda? I fought medical rationing in the IHS all the time: usually I won for serious cases, but for cases that could wait there were often delays or denials. And it was made worse by patients missing appointments, and then being delayed when we asked for a new apointment.

The IHS employees are aware of the vulnerablity of our patients. But what about you?

Read the propaganda: little stories about choosing death as an honorable choice for the old, or for caretakers who kill their children/spouses.

In thirty years, abortion went from being a rare option for 13 year old raped girls who would have a deformed child (as the least bad option) to a legal right that you will cooperate with or get sued ( and if you protest, you are anti woman. Baby not mentioned of course, unless it is Zika, then it is used to push abortion on poor countries. Yes, don't spray DDT you will kill the birds, but abortion? No problem).

coming soon: Abortion, euthanasia, medical rationing, and losing your job if you won't cooperate.

Thirty years ago, when writing letters to the editor against the pro-euthanasia push by the NEJM, I noted that we were losing our moral vocabulary to discuss the problem (in 1980, you could read ethics articles that included faith or natural law arguments. After 1990 these became rare).

Orwell called this NewSpeak.

This would, of course, not prevent heretical statements such as "Big Brother is ungood," but not only would this statement sound absurd in the ears of the politically orthodox, it would also be impossible to elaborate on or specify exactly what the statement means since all concepts and words that can be used to argue against Big Brother (i.e. liberty, rights, freedom, etc.) would be eradicated from the language. The statement would thus be meaningless...According to Orwell, "the purpose of Newspeak was not only to provide a medium of expression for the world-view and mental habits proper to the devotees of IngSoc, but to make all other modes of thought impossible..

Now, Smith says we have already lost the ability to argue because the language has changed.

Yes, all non people who oppose Trump are welcome at Emory...

(for those who are ESL students, the correct grammar is "People of non colour" not "non people",which implies animals or extraterrestrials.

now, would someone tell me why college snowflakes have "safe spaces" but modest women are not allowed a safe space in the toilet?


y

Stacy McCain, who posts about the crazyness of Radical feminism, (i.e. dares to post what they are saying and teaching) has a post on women clergy in the liberal lutherans. LINK

a lot of ths is forseen by the "slippery slope" argument (an argument that is now taboo). The modern version of this is the butterfly effect: where a small change in something that is seen as  not important ends up with a major problem.

With female clergy, the problem is twofold. One, essentially it denies women differ from men, leading to the inability to recognize the importance of biology in marriage, seeing homosexuality as a variation of normal sex, and then, since the male homosexuals who decide to indulge in the gay lifestyle (i.e. not those who try to stay chaste) tend to have their lives evolve around sex and promiscuity, this "contaminates" the idea that faithfulness in marriage means anything.

Since many career women in social studies tend to be indoctrinated in lesbian theory, these women (including those who are lesbian by genes or lesbian because of abuse or just lesbian because they were seduced into it as a cult in college) take over the clergy, and voila, modern liberal churches.
McCain writes:

You can sit around pondering the ancient Hebrew and Greek texts or engage in whatever other approach to scriptural exegesis suits you, but you cannot evade the clear meaning of God’s word here: First, that the division of humanity into male and female was part of the divine plan and, second, that the blessing came with a commandment to procreate — a commandment that has never been rescinded. Obviously, not every man or woman must marry or have children to serve God, but no one who takes the Bible seriously would ever dare to blaspheme by invoking religious authority to attack the created order.
We may watch the fools of the world go to Hell in their usual way, saying in their hearts there is no God (Psalm 14:1), but how will anyone be saved if God’s people no longer speak the truth? When the Church refuses to cling to truth, and instead becomes “conformed to this world” (Romans 12:2), who will stand apart from the world’s sin and folly?