It's official. The Catholic Knight is retired.  I'm hanging up the helmet and passing the torch. There will be no more articles, no more commentaries, no more calls to action. THIS BLOG IS CLOSED. I've spent a very long time thinking about this, I believe the time has come, and is a bit overdue.  I want to thank my readers for everything, but most especially for your encouragement and your willingness to go out there and fight the good fight. So, that being the case, I've spend the last several weeks looking for bloggers who are fairly active, and best represent something akin to the way I think and what I believe.  I recommend the following blogs for my readers to bookmark and check on regularly. Pick one as your favourite, or pick them all. They are all great..... In His Majesty's Service, THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT

Monday, November 23, 2009

BREAKING! Catholic Bishops Call For Civil Disobedience !!!

( - A formidable coalition of 150 Catholic, Orthodox and evangelical leaders are calling on Christians in a new manifesto to reject secular authority – and even engage in civil disobedience – if laws force them to accept abortion, same-sex marriage and other ideas that betray their religious beliefs.

On Friday, these leaders released a 4,700-word document – called the "The Manhattan Declaration: A Call of Christian Conscience."

The document was signed by leaders ranging from evangelical leader Chuck Colson to two of the leading Catholic prelates in the U.S., Archbishop Donald Wuerl of Washington, D.C. and Archbishop Timothy Dolan of New York, and calls on Christians to engage in civil disobedience to defend their doctrines....

read full story here
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: It's sad that it's finally come to this. We have finally reached the point when American Christians must choose between obedience to God or obedience to American government. While the bishops, and other Christian leaders, would not specify what they meant by "civil disobedience," I think it's safe to say they didn't mean anything "unChristian."

I think some possible examples of what they might have meant was something like health care workers refusing to participate in state mandated abortions or euthanasia, even if it violates federal mandates. Catholic hospitals and medical facilities might refuse to provide contraceptives, even if it violates healthcare "reform" laws. Public school teachers might refuse to teach certain immoral curriculum, even if it gets them fired. Private businesses may refuse to acknowledge same-sex marriage, even if it violates anti-discrimination laws.

I suppose we could take it further than that. It might mean a public school teacher wearing a cross, and having a Bible or rosary on her desk, even if it supposedly "violates federal law." It might mean saying "Merry Christmas" when either the government or your employer has told you not to. It might mean continuing to call sodomy (homosexuality) a sin even when the state classifies that as a "hate speech."

Basically I think it just means being a stubborn Christian, and refusing to change, in spite of what the law says. For a law that is immoral is no law at all - on the contrary - it is lawlessness. I think this is what the bishops, and other Christian leaders, mean when they say "civil disobedience." To interpret it as anything more than that is to interpose a non-Christian message on a clearly Christian document. This stunning and timely manifesto can be viewed HERE.

I would like to take this to the next level. While the founding fathers of the United States may have been Masonic Deists, with their own agenda to usurp the Christian monarchs who once ruled this land, they would have never dreamed it would eventually come to this. In fact, I would dare say that what our federal government has already become, and threatens to become in the very near future, would be nothing short of a nightmare to them! I suspect they would run back to the king of England, and swear their unwavering allegiance to him while kneeling before his throne, if they thought it might prevent what has become of the United States today. Of course, there was no way they could have known that back then, and of course, there is no guarantee that remaining part of the British Empire would protect us from the oppression we must now face.

So I would like to propose a new idea. Should the elections of 2010 and 2012 fail to produce results that bring us back to a more constitutional form of government, then it will have become obvious that our nation has outlived it's governing document, and our government is now broken beyond repair. Few are aware that a movement has been bubbling beneath the political vitriol for decades. For years now, there has been a push for another constitutional convention. Quietly, states have been passing resolutions calling for one, and we are now only two states away from that becoming reality. The stated purpose of this constitutional convention is just to add a few amendments to the constitution itself, but we all know the federal government doesn't need a whole constitutional convention just to do that. This can be done through the normal amendment process outlined in the constitution. So there are those who suggest that something more sinister is afoot. Maybe they're right. Maybe the powers that be are planning to completely rewrite the U.S. constitution. Who knows if the conspiracy theories are correct, but after all is said and done, it may not matter. Because if a constitutional convention is held at some future date, it creates an opportunity for each state to examine the ties that bond us together into one "perfect union." It may come to the point where unity is no longer the most important thing. When you examine everything that is going on, and the unlawful "laws" various population centers in the Northeast and West Coast would like to impose on the rest of us, the time may be right to start over from scratch. The time may have come for state secession and the establishment of new nations on the North American continent. Yes, the time may have come to dissolve the Union. A constitutional convention can do this in a peaceful and orderly way. It can happen either inside the convention itself, or else it can happen through the ratification process when certain states refuse to ratify the final document.

What can emerge are groups of states that bind together to form countries, and these new countries can be built on respect for the practice of Christian religion and the morality that comes from it. Granted, this may seem radical right now, but if the upcoming elections don't produce a favorable effect in a few years, it may not seem so radical after all. In fact, it may be the only reasonable solution to governing such an rebellious and stubborn people as the citizens of the former United States.