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

Friday, August 20, 2010

Toward A Modern Christocracy

"I have been alternately called an aristocrat and a democrat. I am now neither. I am a Christocrat. I believe all power... will always fail of producing order and hapiness in the hands of man. HE alone who created and redeemed man is qualified to govern."
- Benjamin Rush, Signer of the U.S. Constitution

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


(WND) - When was the last time you heard a "conservative" leader with a high media profile speak out against what can only be described as the pervasive glorification of the homosexual culture in our schools, media, entertainment industry, Madison Avenue and, of course, government in all of its forms?

There are a few, to be sure – Pat Buchanan and Michael Savage come to mind. Any others?

Meanwhile, the oldest and most prestigious "conservative" weekly in the nation is owned by a corporation run by an activist homosexual.

Ann Coulter is gleeful about speaking to a group called GOProud, which bills itself as a "conservative" Republican homosexual organization that supports same-sex marriage and open homosexual service in the military.

GOProud was accepted as a sponsor of the last annual Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, D.C.

Maybe she was persuaded to speak to that group by "conservative" leader Grover Norquist who sits on the board of GOProud.

"Conservative" icon Glenn Beck, in a conversation with Bill O'Reilly, said basically he doesn't care about the attack on traditional marriage. Asked if the California ruling will harm the country in any way, he responded: "No I don't. Will the gays come and get us? I believe that Thomas Jefferson said: 'If it neither breaks my leg nor picks my pocket what difference is it to me?'"

Rush Limbaugh, the iconic leader of American conservatism, hired the noted homosexual singer Elton John to perform at his wedding. He has not aired one of his bitingly satirical "gay community updates" in years.

"Conservatives," it seems, are on the verge of not only accepting homosexuality's domination of the culture, but embracing it.

Not me – another reason I would prefer not to be considered or labeled as a "conservative."

Personally, I can't even imagine a world in which same-sex marriage becomes accepted, either by judicial force, or routine, through society's capitulation to pressure. It simply won't be the same world we have known throughout our lives. The natural order of things will be irrevocably altered and broken.

I can't even count how many times I've written in books and columns about why I am not a "conservative."

No matter how many times I do, I am still saddled with the label by friends and adversaries alike.

It seems everyone must be a conservative or a liberal in America today.

Today I write with a new reason: "Conservatives" don't recognize sin when they see it. Nearly the entire "conservative" establishment, such as it is, fears even mentioning this word or acknowledging its existence. And, I'm afraid, without that recognition, this is a movement that is hopelessly lost.

Let's take the issue of homosexuality.

In the Judeo-Christian biblical worldview, there can be no doubt that homosexual behavior is a sin – even a particularly grave sin in God's eyes, one He characterizes as "an abomination." God's Word is unequivocal on that point – New Testament or Old.

"Speechless: Silencing the Christians," by Don Wildmon, lays out determined strategy of coalition of liberal secularists, homosexual activists and Fortune 500 companies

Yet, increasingly it seems, American "conservatives" are shy about calling this sin what it is. They also seem oblivious to the societal costs of affirming homosexual behavior as acceptable, normal and morally and legally equivalent to heterosexual behavior – sexually transmitted diseases, gender confusion among children, the breakdown of traditional marriage and the family unit, child molestations, military cohesiveness, the spread of moral relativism and, as history has shown, cultural decay.

When was the last time you heard a "conservative" leader with a high media profile speak out against what can only be described as the pervasive glorification of the homosexual culture in our schools, media, entertainment industry, Madison Avenue and, of course, government in all of its forms?

There are a few, to be sure – Pat Buchanan and Michael Savage come to mind. Any others?

Meanwhile, the oldest and most prestigious "conservative" weekly in the nation is owned by a corporation run by an activist homosexual.

Ann Coulter is gleeful about speaking to a group called GOProud, which bills itself as a "conservative" Republican homosexual organization that supports same-sex marriage and open homosexual service in the military.

GOProud was accepted as a sponsor of the last annual Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, D.C.

Maybe she was persuaded to speak to that group by "conservative" leader Grover Norquist who sits on the board of GOProud.

"Conservative" icon Glenn Beck, in a conversation with Bill O'Reilly, said basically he doesn't care about the attack on traditional marriage. Asked if the California ruling will harm the country in any way, he responded: "No I don't. Will the gays come and get us? I believe that Thomas Jefferson said: 'If it neither breaks my leg nor picks my pocket what difference is it to me?'"

Rush Limbaugh, the iconic leader of American conservatism, hired the noted homosexual singer Elton John to perform at his wedding. He has not aired one of his bitingly satirical "gay community updates" in years.

"Conservatives," it seems, are on the verge of not only accepting homosexuality's domination of the culture, but embracing it.

Not me – another reason I would prefer not to be considered or labeled as a "conservative."

Personally, I can't even imagine a world in which same-sex marriage becomes accepted, either by judicial force, or routine, through society's capitulation to pressure. It simply won't be the same world we have known throughout our lives. The natural order of things will be irrevocably altered and broken.

It's a very big deal, and, sadly, "conservatives" are letting it happen. They aren't fighting. They are capitulating. They are compromising. They are becoming part of the problem, not the solution. Their standards are being destroyed.

Just exactly what is it that "conservatives" are trying to "conserve"? Free enterprise? Why? Because it works? So does traditional marriage. It's been proven for 5,000 years. It's the building block of any self-governing society. Without it we have chaos – sexual anarchy. I like free enterprise, too. But I know it's best because private property is affirmed by the Bible. So is marriage between one man and one woman. That's my standard....

read full story here
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: This recent column by Joseph Farah is timely. It comes at the cusp of an electoral revolution this November when "Conservatives" and Christians will turn out to the polls in record number. Presumably, the Republican Party will be the big winner that day, with perhaps some moderate local victories for up and coming Constitution Party candidates. It's an encouraging sign, but will it be enough? Not likely. As Mr. Farah points out in his article, the so-called "Conservatives" are caving in all around us. All of the icons we've come to know and trust over the last two decades are falling, one by one, to the seductive allure of sexual relativism. It's becoming painfully obvious that what primarily drives these "Conservative" personalities is economics. For them it has little to do with the moral collapse that is eroding the very foundation of our society, culture and civilization. All of the "Conservative" economics in the world won't save us if our moral compass is spinning wildly out of control.

As of the date of this writing, less than three months out from that fateful election, Christians in this nation are left with a startling realization. American "Conservatism" is not the type of Conservatism we thought it was! Of course, some of us (yours truly included) have known that for a while. Now however, the bomb has been dropped, and simultaneously so have the jaws of the rest of you out there. American "Conservatism" has really nothing to do with Biblical Christianity at all now does it.

That is one reason why I'm a card carrying member of the Constitution Party. In the narrow political sense I guess you could call me a "Constitutionist," but a quick glance at the platform of the Constitution Party will reveal a lot more than just an adherence to a strict constructionist ideology. There is more, much more. The platform reveals a strong traditional Christian approach to good government that would be most appealing to any traditional Catholic or conservative Evangelical. Why? Because it relies on the basic Christian moral standard of the last 2,000 years. In a broader sense, the platform of the Constitution Party is not only constructionist, but also very Christ centered. It embodies what Benjamin Rush called the marriage of Christianity and Democracy - a "Christocracy" if you will - in which he labeled himself a "Christocrat." I wonder of this is the term Joseph Farah is looking for? Perhaps.

The idea of Christocracy does have a strong undercurrent on the Internet, and various movements do appear to be coming to a convergence. Creating a "Christocratic Party" would be very foolish at this point in history - probably a miserable failure too. Far better it would be to go along with what the Constitution Party has done, creating a platform based on strict constructionist and Christocratic ideals, but at the same time leaving the identity of the party open enough to attract non-Christians as well.

So in a broader sense, I am more than a Constitutionist. I am also a Christocrat, and the general term "Conservative" really has no meaning to me anymore. For the Conservatives of today are little more than the Liberals of yesteryear.