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

Saturday, December 31, 2011

My Presidential Picks

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: I've been getting asked who I would vote for in the upcoming Republican presidential primaries. I've decided to make my picks known to anyone who might be interested. I base this list on fidelity to the Social Doctrines of the Catholic Church and what I view to be the lesser of evils from among the available GOP candidates. So for President of the United States these are my picks....

1st Choice - Ron Paul
2nd Choice - Rick Santorum
3rd Choice - Michelle Bachman
4th Choice - Newt Gingrich
5th Choice - Satan himself !
6th Choice - Mitt Romney
7th Choice - Rick Perry

Catholic Support for Ron Paul


For more information visit RONPAUL2012.com

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT:  I personally believe that modern American democracy is a sham, and it has been for the last 40 years or so. I think I'm about to be proved right once again, perhaps within weeks.  (Please God, prove me wrong!)  Every so often a candidate for president of the United States will arise to the surface that truly represents some American ideals and values.  He may not be perfect.  In fact, he may be flawed in some serious ways, yet nevertheless, he does speak for the heart and soul of the people.  He is in every way a 'representative' of his nation.  Once he approaches the top of the heap, and has a real shot at the nomination for president, the political party machinery kicks in and crushes him.

In 1996 we saw this happen in the GOP with presidential candidate Patrick Buchanan.  For a brief time in the early days of the '96 primaries, Buchanan was the front-runner among GOP presidential hopefuls.  It was at that time the Republican Party leadership met with one agenda in mind -- how to deal with the 'Buchanan threat.'  The GOP then decided to throw the election.  They painted Buchanan as a radical, extremist and anti-Semite, then they put forward their favourite son (and certain loser) as the alternative -- Senator Bob Dole.

Pat Buchanan (left) --  Ron Paul (right)
We all know what happened.  In November of 1996, on the heels of a massive Republican victory in 1994 (the largest ever), GOP presidential candidate Bob Dole was soundly vanquished by Democrat President Bill Clinton who at that time was mired in scandal and low job-approval ratings.  How did this happen?  Simple.  The GOP willed it.  You see, had Patrick Buchanan actually gone on to win the Republican nomination, there is no doubt that he would have destroyed Bill Clinton's presidency, not only unseating him in the November election, but also decimating his legacy by overturning virtually everything he and his predecessor (Republican George H. Bush) had done from 1988 to 1996.  For this, candidate Buchanan was deemed a 'threat' by the GOP, and the powers that be in the Republican Party decided it would be better the throw the election than let Buchanan have a shot at winning.  Who was Pat Buchanan?  He was (and still is) a devout and practising Traditional Catholic, who attends the Latin Mass, and believes in the social encyclicals of the popes.  He opposes American imperialism and supports states' rights.  He is everything the Democrat-Republican ALLIANCE loathes, and history has demonstrated these two parties will work together, even to the detriment of one, to prevent a man like Patrick Buchanan from ever taking a seat in the Oval Office.

Ron Paul surpassed all presidential
candidates in military donations
Now as we approach the 2012 election it appears another similar scenario is about to take place.  Presidential candidate Ron Paul is anything but perfect.  His views on some issues sound foreign to many Americans, but because of his consistent opposition to American imperialism and support for states' rights, he is striking a chord with the American people.  Nowhere is this more evident than in Iowa, were he leads in the polls, and stands a good chance at winning the Iowa caucus, threatening Romney in New Hampshire and possibly creating a bandwagon effect in South Carolina.  If he wins Iowa, performs well in New Hampshire, and just ties another candidate in South Carolina, the pendulum will swing and he will pick up the support of the entire American Southeast (Old Dixieland) as well as the American Midwest.  Ron Paul will become unstoppable and the GOP knows it.  That is why I predict we will soon possibly see a repeat of 1996.  The GOP will decide to throw the election, preferring instead an Obama victory, than allow Ron Paul the nomination and a chance at the Whitehouse.   Instead of allowing Ron Paul to campaign freely, the GOP will work with the national media to smear him, putting forward their favourite son, and certain loser, which will either be Newt Gingrich or Mitt Romney as a 'more realistic alternative.'  Doubt me?  Just watch and see for yourself.  I predict this will all unfold over the next six to twelve weeks.

U.S. Active Military Overwhelmingly
support Ron Paul
What will become of Ron Paul if this happens, nobody knows for sure.  There are those who say that unlike Pat Buchanan, he will attempt a third-party or independent run in the same election year.  Perhaps, but that remains to be seen.  Either way it won't matter, because the GOP will have already decided to throw the election.  The Republican candidate will not (indeed cannot) win, and he will have never been intended to win.  He was selected to be a 'fall guy,' just like Bob Dole, a faithful party man whom they know will 'take one for the team.'  If Ron Paul re-enters the race as an Independent or third-party candidate, he will get many votes (including my own), but he will not win.  The only thing he will accomplish is to focus the wrath of those who still believe in the GOP against him. 

Ron Paul is a medical doctor.  He worked for a Catholic
hospital for $3/hour and never once accepted Medicare
or Medicaid payments.  He is 100% Pro-Life and has
personally delivered thousands of babies.
Who is Ron Paul?  He's a former Episcopalian who currently attends a Baptist church due to disagreements over moral issues with the Episcopal Church (namely abortion and homosexuality).  His children were raised Episcopalian and a couple of them have converted to Catholicism.  He is NOT a Libertarian, as many people believe.  The best way to describe Ron Paul's political ideology is 'moral libertarian' or 'constitutionalist' with a heavy emphasis on states' rights (or 'subsidiarity').  He is perhaps very Jeffersonian (Thomas Jefferson) in his views.  Morally, he is staunchly pro-life, and wants to eliminate the federal government's role in the abortion debate by simply stripping the federal courts of their jurisdiction over matters related to abortion.  The same goes for gay-marriage, and Ron Paul supports the Defence of Marriage Act (DOMA).  This puts him in line with the Catholic Church on domestic social issues more than any other viable GOP candidate.  (Yes, I said 'viable.')   On issues related to foreign policy, he is the ONLY GOP CANDIDATE that is in line with the teachings of the Catholic Church.  (Yes, I said it.  He is more 'Catholic' on foreign policy than Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum combined!)  The only thing that might seem to put him at odds with the Catholic Church is his solution to domestic economic issues, but even then a closer analysis says otherwise.  Ron Paul has nothing against states setting up their own 'universal healthcare' or 'single-payer systems,' he just doesn't believe the federal government should manage it.  As I said, he is not a Libertarian but rather a 'constitutionalist' with a heavy emphasis on states' rights (Subsidiarity).  He is far from perfect, and I don't worry about him getting everything he wants if he ever became president.  Most presidents rarely do.  If he did become president however, and even if he only got 10% of what he wanted as president, it would radically shift the pendulum in America, putting the country on a much more reasonable path that is far more consistent with Church teaching than what exists today.  In this sense, I would say that Ron Paul represents the LEAST OF ALL EVILS among all the GOP candidates and President Obama combined.  While I have said I will not endorse any candidate for president this time around, I suppose you could call this the closest thing to an endorsement you will get out of me.  As a practising Roman Catholic, faithful to the pope and magisterium of the Church, I have no problem casting my vote for Ron Paul for president of the United States, and if given the opportunity, I probably will do so.  Given the options presented to me, this seems like the most 'Catholic' thing to do.

Ron Paul enjoyed a good working relationship with
Ronald Reagan during his presidency.
Should Ron Paul win Iowa, the GOP will certainly turn on him like a snake. If the Republican Party turns against Ron Paul after an Iowa win, it will signal that the GOP has once again decided to throw the election and repeat the events of 1996. At that point Americans will have a choice, and that only choice will be between Ron Paul and Barack Obama.  That choice will exist immediately after the Iowa caucus regardless of what anyone says.  Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich are political losers.  They are fall guys.  They are the favourite sons of the GOP establishment, and their job will be to 'take one for the team' (a political defeat to Obama) should one of them win the nomination.  They are both the Bob Dole of 2012.  If Ron Paul wins Iowa, than the only real choice that faces voters is between Ron Paul and Barack Obama, and that will be a simple choice between big-government statism or limited-government subsidiarity.  It will be a choice between continuing American imperialism at the behest of big corporations, or resuming our place in the world as a nation among nations, leading the world by example rather than military force.  If Americans have truly repented of our arrogance and pride, we will support Ron Paul and he will become our next president, regardless of what the GOP does, because the GOP will lose the support of voters.  If however we have not repented of our national arrogance and pride, we will believe the lies of the GOP, support some other candidate instead (Newt or Mitt), and one of these will go on to political defeat against Barack Obama.  That is the paradigm as I see it, and if Ron Paul wins Iowa, I predict we will have the answer to this question within the next six to twelve weeks.  Has America learned her lesson?  Are we ready to repent of our national sins?  In six to twelve weeks we shall know.

UPDATE 12-20-2011...
It looks like Patrick Buchanan (mentioned in the article above) is poised to give an endorsement to Ron Paul... read more here

Sadly, I have been proved right in less than 24 hours since writing this article. The infamous 'conference' is beginning to happen, and the GOP elites are already kicking around the idea of throwing the election should Ron Paul make a good showing in Iowa and New Hampshire. The Republican governor of Iowa has just told the mainstream national news media to 'ignore' a Ron Paul victory in Iowa and focus on who comes in second place instead.  Next on the agenda will be a direct effort by the GOP to destroy Ron Paul, just as they did Pat Buchanan in 1996, and put forward a fall guy instead -- a GOP party man who will 'take one for the team.'  Make no mistake about it, the attacks against Paul will be personal and vial.  The Republican elites will spare no expense.  They will try to dig up whatever dirt they can about him, and when they find none, they will just resort to lies.  Rumours of election fraud are being circulated as well, but when pressed on the matter, nobody gives any credible details. What they all agree on however is that Ron Paul is a 'threat' and a 'problem.' The 2012 GOP sabotage has just gone into effect. The election is being thrown as you read this. It's 1996 all over again. When will we all learn the GOP and Democrats are working together? When will we learn they are both on the same team? If the Republican Party actually does this again, there may be a serious miscalculation this time. Ron Paul supporters are fed up with the Republican Party already. This kind of unfair black balling their candidate may push them over the edge, and Ron Paul will be under considerable pressure to run either as an Independent or third-party candidate. If that happens, the GOP may suffer more permanent consequences. Especially of Ron Paul decides to run as a Constitutionalist on the CONSTITUTION PARTY ticket. The Constitution Party is America's largest third party. A Ron Paul association would put the Constitution Party over the top as far as exposure goes, energising it, and turn it into a permanent fixture in American politics. The GOP doesn't want to do this. It would spell the end of their two-party dominance with the Democrats that has remained the status quo in America for the last 150 years.

(Politico) -- Conservatives and Republican elites in the state are divided over who to support for the GOP nomination, but they almost uniformly express concern over the prospect that Ron Paul and his army of activist supporters may capture the state’s 2012 nominating contest — an outcome many fear would do irreparable harm to the future role of the first-in-the-nation caucuses.

In spin rooms, bar rooms and online forums, the what-to-do-about-Paul conversation has become pervasive as polls show him at or near the top here just weeks before the January 3rd vote....

....Leading Republicans, looking to put the best possible frame on a Paul victory, are already testing out a message for what they’ll say if the 76-year-old Texas congressman is triumphant.

The short version: Ignore him.

“People are going to look at who comes in second and who comes in third,” said Gov. Terry Branstad. “If [Mitt] Romney comes in a strong second, it definitely helps him going into New Hampshire and the other states.”...

....Paul officials note that they’ve embraced the Iowa way. And even establishment Republicans like Branstad concede that the congressman has done it “the old-fashioned way” and enjoys the best organization of any of the candidates....

read full story here
UPDATE 12/21/2011
The media lynching of Ron Paul is now underway. Right-wing talk radio hosts are beginning to attack Dr. Paul across the board, on every issue imaginable, and they are questioning his sanity. In fact, some are now just calling him 'crazy' outright. This is becoming a full-court press from the right-wing establishment. 'Destroy Paul' is the message from the GOP board room. They are using a similar pattern they used against Pat Buchanan in 1996. They are painting him as a 'racist anti-Semite lunatic' who is 'dangerous.' This can only mean one thing. The GOP is willing to throw the election. In their minds, another four years of Obama is preferable to someone like Ron Paul who might dismantle the military-industrial-banking cartel they've worked so hard to build over the previous decades.

UPDATE 12/28/2011
The GOP onslaught against Ron Paul is now in full gear, as virtually every GOP presidential candidate has now turned their guns on him, and yet he still leads the polls in Iowa. Former Speaker Newt Gingrich has just let the cat out of the bag, signalling that a Barack Obama victory in November of 2012 would be preferable to a Ron Paul victory. Newt (an old party-man) has just sent the signal to the GOP party bosses that Ron Paul must be taken down, even if it means throwing the election. Can there be any doubt now that the Republicans and Democrats are working together? Make no mistake about it. Should Ron Paul win Iowa, the election choice will be between Ron Paul verses Barack Obama. Any other GOP candidate will spell certain (and intentional) failure.

UPDATE 12/29/2011
Tonight I just heard a right-wing radio talk-show host liken Ron Paul to Adolf Hitler, basically saying that anyone who supports Paul is being snookered, just as Hitler snookered the German people. What was the context of this tirade? Zionism of course. The host is apparently a Zionist. He more than implied that Ron Paul is an Anti-Semite because he doesn't unconditionally support the State of Israel.

Friday, December 30, 2011

Attention Iowa Voters....

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT:  Before you caucus this Tuesday, you need to watch this video...


Mitt Romney is a career politician. He will say whatever he needs to get elected. In this video he was pandering to the liberal voters of Massachusetts. Today he is pandering to the conservative voters of Iowa. Keep that in mind. The Late Ted Kennedy was right, and I rarely find myself agreeing with that man on anything. When it comes to issues like abortion, Mitt Romney is neither pro-choice nor anti-choice. He's multiple choice! A careful analysis of the video above, in comparison to where he stands on the issues today, demonstrates a similar pattern across the board.

While I personally believe the best choice in this caucus will be Ron Paul, if you cannot bring yourself to vote for him, than Rick Santorum would be a far superior choice over Mitt Romney. I'm not telling you how to vote. I'm just trying to give you what I believe to be some helpful information. Do with it what you deem best.

If you would be so kind as to pass this blog entry on to other Iowa caucus goers I would be most appreciative. The 'share' icons below may be of some help to you.

Thursday, December 29, 2011

Britain or Rome? In 2012 Americans Must Choose


THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT:  The people of the United States of America are now at the final crossroads in our nation's history. We have a choice. The year 2012 will be the year America chooses her fate. For 2012 marks the year of the END of the American Empire. Due to increasing national deficits and a colossal national debt, staggering trade deficits, the lack of industrial infrastructure, economic stagnation coupled with inflation (stagflation) and a general inability (or unwillingness) to secure our own national borders, our superpower status will end this coming year. We may not see the final results of that for some time, but the decision of HOW our superpower ends will be made this coming year. It comes down to this. The American Empire is going to end -- period. Nothing can stop that now. The choice is this. Shall our empire decline like the British Empire or the Roman Empire?

That's it! That's the choice that faces us. It really is no more or less than that. We can either go the way of Britain or Rome.

When the British Empire became unsustainable, the Brits got smart. It took them a little while, but they did eventually figure it out.  They permitted their colonies to become independent nations (rather than risk a repeat of 1776). They downsized and focused on rebuilding their internal economic infrastructure. They scaled back their military to a more reasonable size that was commensurate with national defense alone. In the process they saved billions of pounds, and gave their nation new life. Today they are no longer an empire, but many of their former colonies have erected constitutional monarchies that still (voluntarily) name the Queen of England as their sovereign -- Canada, Australia, and New Zealand just to name a few.  Today you can go to Britain and still see British society. Their government remains intact. Their queen still reigns from the throne. It's all still there! And in spite of their many national problems, there is no indication that it is going extinct any time soon. We here in the United States can choose this path. We can accept that our international superpower (empire) status is unsustainable. We can scale back, downsize, and save trillions of dollars! We can refocus our efforts toward rebuilding our economic and political integrity, reforming and downsizing the welfare state as well.  We can turn back to our national Constitution, and start following it for a change!

Or we can refuse to accept the unsustainable nature of our empire (superpower status), and ignore all the signs around us. We can move forward internationally into wars and conflicts, increasing our debts, just as the Roman Empire did, and in doing so, we can follow in their footsteps into oblivion.  You see, the Romans refused to accept that their empire was unsustainable and in decline. They chose to hang on to it until the bitter end, exhausting their resources and over stretching their military. We can follow their example right into a fall so great that it results in ripping apart our nation into smaller nation-states, in a European kind of fracture. Yes, there was once upon a time, some 1,500 years ago, when all of Europe was united under one government and one language. Today you can go to Rome and see what's left of that government, in the ruins of the Forum and Colosseum. Today Europe is still divided up into different governments, languages and cultures. Every attempt to reunify Europe in the past has failed, and it looks as if this most recent attempt to economically reunify Europe (The European Union) will fail too.

So there you have it. Americans can either choose a smart decline like Britain, or a stupid suicidal decline like Rome. One way or another, we will decline, and this coming year (2012) marks the year we make our choice.  So America, what's it going to be?

Saturday, December 24, 2011

MERRY CHRISTMAS


THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: No blogging, no comments, no debate, no digital nonsense.  Just a silent night, and sleep in heavenly peace. 

Friday, December 23, 2011

Gay Pride Is Morphing Into KKK

Some Gay Pride Groups Frequently Harass Catholics and their Churches
(Huffington Post) - Cardinal Francis George, the Archbishop of Chicago, this week told a Chicago news station that he agreed with a local Roman Catholic church's objections to the city's recently-adjusted Gay Pride Parade route passing by its doors and warned that the parade could "morph into the Ku Klux Klan....

read full story here
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: I submit to you the good cardinal is on to something here. What we have emerging in the post-modern 'Gay Pride' movement is gradually morphing into a virulent anti-Catholic community on par with the Ku Klux Klan (KKK) of the early 20th century.

I would like to encourage my readers to be on watch, and alert other Catholics, especially priests and civil authorities, to the Klan-like activities of some of these Gay Pride organisations. Clearly, we Catholics are being targeted by these hate-groups for our religious beliefs. Rarely do these Gay Pride hate-groups go after Orthodox Jews and Muslims with the same intensity. Such systematic 'targeting' of a particular religious group is very Klan-like in nature. While the Klan opposes many religious and ethnic groups, one of the historic strategies of the Klan has been to target one group at a time, focusing all their efforts against one class so as to maximise intimidation.

U.S. Anglican Ordinary Named?

Father Jeffrey Steenson
(Virtue Online) -- "It is being noised Jeffrey Steenson, the former Bishop of the Diocese of the Rio Grande in the Episcopal Church, who was received into the Catholic Church in 2007 and is now a priest, will be named Ordinary of the American Anglican Ordinariate on January 1, 2012," the Bovina Bloviator posted under an Ordinariate Buzz header.

Steenson's Anglo-Catholic pedigree comes from being an Episcopal priest for 24 years including stints as the curate and rector at two Pennsylvania parishes -- All Saints' Church in Wynnewood, and Church of the Good Shepherd in Rosemont, before going on to St. Andrew's in Fort Worth, Texas. From there he was elected, in 2004, to be bishop coadjutor for the Episcopal Diocese of the Rio Grande under Bishop Terence Kelshaw. The former Rio Grande bishop has the distinction of being the 1000th Episcopal Church bishop consecrated with his "lappets" stretching all the way back to the first Bishop of Connecticut, Samuel Seabury who was consecrated in 1784. Steenson's consecrators included then Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold, his predecessor Bishop Terence Kelshaw, Anglo-Catholic Bishop Clarence Pope, indigenous Bishop Mark McDonald, and ecumenical Bishop Anthony Burton from the Anglican Church of Canada. Steenson became the eighth diocesan bishop in 2005. He was an Episcopal bishop for two short years before swimming the Tiber.

The Anglo-Catholic Bishop of the Rio Grande shed the purple in December 2007 and was received into full communion with the Roman Catholic Church. This was done in Rome, Italy, at the Basilica of Saint Mary Major during a private ceremony officiated by Bernard Cardinal Law, the former Catholic Cardinal of Boston and then archpriest at a Roman basilica.

The former Episcopal bishop embraced the Pastoral Provision that allows for former Anglican clergy to become Roman Catholics and eventually recoup their priesthood. The Pastoral Provision is the precursor to the unfolding Anglican Ordinariate and will operate along side of it for those converting priests who do not wish to become a part of the Ordinariate yet want to become Roman Catholic....

read full story here
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: I would like to remind my readers that this is all 'unofficial' at this time, as Rome has not actually made the official announcement yet. I provide it here only because the information has already been leaked onto the Internet. It should be considered a highly credible RUMOR. However this information is allegedly confirmed by multiple inside sources, and is being accepted as factual by some who are supposedly 'in the know.' I suppose we will all know for sure on January 1st.

Thursday, December 22, 2011

Novena for the U.S. Anglican Ordinariate

Our Lady of the Atonement
Anglican devotion to Mary -- the Mother of God
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: On January 1st 2012, on the Feast of the Holy Mother of God, Pope Benedict XVI is scheduled to create an ordinariate for Anglicans in the United States of America, and name an ordinary for its leadership. Let us pray a novena for the Holy Father, requesting of our Blessed Mother her intercession, that the Holy Father will receive the grace of strength and wisdom to complete this historic event.

The creation of the U.S. ordinariate for Anglicans will turn the restoration of authentic Anglo Catholicism into an international movement. This will demonstrate Pope Benedict's Apostolic Constitution Anglicanorum Coetibus is truly a prophetic document and now a permanent fixture of the Catholic Church -- literally an authentic fulfilment of the ecumenical vision of the Second Vatican Council according to how the conciliar fathers intended. (Not the liberal ideas of syncretism that developed after the council.)

The U.S. Catholic Church will benefit from the U.S. ordinariate in many ways, helping to coax U.S. Catholics into a more traditional way of viewing the liturgy and sacraments. A door will be opened not only for U.S. Anglicans/Episcopalians, leading to full unity with the Catholic Church, but also for U.S. Lutherans and other liturgically-minded Christians who may wish to be a part of this historic movement. An international means will have been created to preserve the Anglican patrimony, under Catholic orthodoxy, which will certainly outlast the Anglican Communion and the Anglican Continuum.

Please join The Catholic Knight in praying the following Novena December 23 through December 31 of 2011, as we await the historic announcement on January 1st.

This novena is to be said along with a daily rosary...
Our dearest Mother Mary, behold us, your children, in prayer at your feet. Accept this Holy Rosary, which we offer you in accordance with your requests at Fatima, as proof of our tender love for you, for the intentions of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, in atonement for the offences committed against your Immaculate Heart, and for this special favour which we earnestly request in this Rosary Novena: That the Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI, be aided with divine grace in the creation of the U.S. ordinariate for Anglicans.  Amen.

Saturday, December 17, 2011

Catholics Should Be Distributists


THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: A reading of the papal encyclicals on economic social justice reveals this to be true.  Catholics should be Distributists.

I believe we are now entering a time of complete economic and social collapse, which of course will lead to political collapse too, not just for the United States, but for nations around the world. Current trends now being reported in China indicate a massive economic bubble is about to pop in the Chinese housing market. This will likely result in the complete implosion and collapse of the Chinese economy, followed by economies around the world, perhaps delivering the final blow needed to implode the European and American economies as well. This is it! Laissez-Faire Capitalism and State Socialism have failed. The post-enlightenment economic models have left the whole world in financial ruin!

In a desperate attempt to regain control after the inevitable collapse that will soon come, we can look forward to the emergence of big-brother police-states in the Western world, employing strategies of law enforcement similar to those used in Communist China and the old Soviet Union. Even the United States has paved the way for this through recent legislation passed by the Senate, and on its way to be signed by President Obama. The governments of the West are preparing for a soon coming Economic Armageddon! In the midsts of this social upheaval and the police-state to follow, I do not know if 'The Catholic Knight' blog will be able to remain on the Internet. We can pray, and I will certainly try to keep it online for as long as possible. However, when living under a government that fears ideas that contradict the status quo, and has now the legal means to silence those ideas, I do not think it far fetched that Uncle Sam may perhaps shut down this little blogging venture in the not-too-distant future. Should that happen, I want my readers to start thinking about the future. When this is finally all over, we are going to have to rebuild, and I want you to take this idea with you. After the implosion of the economic models given to us by the Enlightenment Era (Capitalism and Socialism), let us all return to the teachings of the Church on economics, because what is economics after all, but morality by another name...
(Wikipedia) -- Distributism (also known as distributionism, distributivism) is a third-way economic philosophy formulated by such Catholic thinkers as G. K. Chesterton and Hilaire Belloc to apply the principles of Catholic social teaching articulated by the Catholic Church, especially in Pope Leo XIII's encyclical Rerum Novarum and more expansively explained by Pope Pius XI's encyclical Quadragesimo Anno.

According to distributism, the ownership of the means of production should be spread as widely as possible among the general populace, rather than being centralized under the control of the state (state socialism) or a few large businesses or wealthy private individuals (laissez-faire capitalism). A summary of distributism is found in Chesterton's statement: "Too much capitalism does not mean too many capitalists, but too few capitalists."

Essentially, distributism distinguishes itself by its distribution of property (not to be confused with redistribution of wealth). While socialism allows no individuals to own productive property (it all being under state, community, or workers' control), distributism itself seeks to ensure that most people will become owners of productive property. As Belloc stated, the distributive state (the state which has implemented distributism) contains "an agglomeration of families of varying wealth, but by far the greater number of owners of the means of production." This broader distribution does not extend to all property, but only to productive property; that is, that property which produces wealth, namely, the things needed for man to survive. It includes land, tools, etc.

Distributism has often been described as a "third way", in opposition to both socialism and capitalism. Thomas Storck argues that "both socialism and capitalism are products of the European Enlightenment and are thus modernizing and anti-traditional forces. In contrast, distributism seeks to subordinate economic activity to human life as a whole, to our spiritual life, our intellectual life, our family life".

Some have seen it more as an aspiration, which has been successfully realised in the short term by commitment to the principles of subsidiarity and solidarity (these being built into financially independent local cooperatives and small family businesses), though proponents also cite such periods as the Middle Ages as examples of the historical long-term viability of distributism....

source

Thursday, December 15, 2011

U.S. Senate Paves Way for American Dictatorship


ORIGINALLY POSTED ON 12/5/2011
(Salem News) - In a stunning move that has civil libertarians stuttering with disbelief, the U.S. Senate has just passed a bill that effectively ends the Bill of Rights in America.

This bill, passed late last night in a 93-7 vote, declares the entire USA to be a "battleground" upon which U.S. military forces can operate with impunity, overriding Posse Comitatus and granting the military the unchecked power to arrest, detain, interrogate and even assassinate U.S. citizens with impunity.

It's being called the most traitorous act ever witnessed in the Senate, and the language of the bill is cleverly designed to make you think it doesn't apply to Americans, but toward the end of the bill it essentially says it can apply to Americans "if we want it to....

read full story here
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: The United States Senate, by an overwhelming margin of 93 to 7, has passed a defence bill that opens the door to military occupation of U.S. states, the suspension of Habeas Corpus, the nullification of Posse Comitatus, and creates a path for the complete suspension of the Bill of Rights. President Obama has promised to veto it. I predict he will break that promise. Let's just hope I'm wrong about that.

This has revealed to us something about the character of the U.S. Senate. A full 97% of United States Senators are traitors! They have betrayed the U.S. Constitution, and made war on the people of the United States. Every single U.S. Senator in office right now (minus the faithful 7) must be noted, and slated for political defeat whenever they come up for re-election, whether that be in 2012, 2014 or 2016. THAT'S IT! POLITICAL PARTY NO LONGER MATTERS. POLITICAL POSITIONS NO LONGER MATTER. THIS IS AN ACT OF WAR ON THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES AND IT MUST BE MET WITH IMMEDIATE POLITICAL RETALIATION. EVERY SINGLE U.S. SENATOR (minus the faithful 7 who voted against it, see list below) IS A TRAITOR AND A THREAT TO THE SAFETY AND FREEDOM OF OUR CHILDREN. THEY MUST BE STOPPED. THEY MUST PAY FOR THIS CRIME AGAINST THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. I AM URGING MY READERS TO SPREAD THE WORD THAT 2012, 2014 AND 2016 BE A 'CLEAN THE SENATE' CAMPAIGN. BE SURE THAT NOT A SINGLE SENATOR IN OFFICE TODAY POLITICALLY SURVIVES THE NEXT ELECTION CYCLE. THIS IS A SCORCHED EARTH RESPONSE. THEY MUST ALL GO DOWN IN POLITICAL DEFEAT. Failure to do this will result in a total dictatorship in the United States, if not today than someday, and it won't matter what your political party or ideology is.  We the people must make examples of them.  If we fail to punish them for this, and punish them harshly, they will think they got away with it, and they will do more in the future.

Eventually, should the bill be signed into law, and it ever by implemented, they will be able to take you in the middle of the night, imprison you, and hold you indefinitely without even filing a single charge against you.  The day will come when people who speak out against the government will just start to disappear and nobody will know what became of them.

Now to understand what is going on, we have to look at the big picture.  This was all done under the guise of 'protecting the American people from terrorism,' but the real agenda is to protect the political and business elites from Americans.  They know their time is up.  The crash came in 2008-2009, and everything they've been doing since then is to artificially prop up the economy and postpone the inevitable.  This is to buy time.  Why?  To save themselves!  They are now restructuring our laws in such a way that they can turn the U.S. military against U.S. citizens so as to protect themselves from the inevitable chaos that will soon result when they can no longer artificially prop up the economy.  When (not if) the crash comes, it will bring every American city into ruin.  There will be riots, demonstrations, chaos and civil unrest.  However, that's not what they're afraid of.  What they are afraid of is the outrage that will be turned toward Washington DC and Wall Street when all that happens.  They are terrified of what will happen when we the people finally figure out what they did to us.  They are preparing to use our own military to defend themselves from us!  That's the story behind the story here.  IF OBAMA SIGNS THIS BILL HE SHOULD LOSE THE ELECTION TO ANYONE WHO RUNS AGAINST HIM.  It won't matter who the GOP candidate is, because if you love freedom than he should win.  I don't say this because I believe a GOP candidate is any defender of freedom.  I do not believe that at all.  Rather, I say this so that this new president will get a clear message from the voters that if you don't want to end up like the last guy, you better work toward getting rid of that law he signed.  (That is if he signs it.)  REGARDLESS IF OBAMA SIGNS THE BILL OR NOT, EVERY SINGLE U.S. SENATOR (minus the faithful 7) MUST GO!!!  This is no longer about politics.  This is about survival as a people.  The time to start organizing is now.  Figure out who your U.S. Senator is, and support his/her most viable opponent, regardless of who he/she is, because at this juncture, it really doesn't matter any more.  We have just crossed over into the threshold of political survivalism.  We may not be able to save the Republic, but we sure can send a loud and clear message to the U.S. Senate.  THIS KIND OF LEGISLATION IS UNTHINKABLE AND WILL NOT BE TOLERATED!!!

The following is a list of the faithful seven, those who voted against the Defence Bill in favour of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.  These seven Senators are the only seven that deserve to retain their seats in the Senate.  All others must go!  If your Senator's name is not on the list, it's time to support his/her opposition, no matter who that is....

Tom Coburn (R-OK)
Tom Harkin (D-IA)
Mike Lee (R-UT)
Jeff Merkley (D-OR)
Rand Paul (R-KY)
Bernie Sanders (I-VT)
Ron Wyden (D-OR)

These are the ONLY Senators who deserve to stay in office.  Everyone else must GO !!!!

Please share this article using the 'share' icons below. Please pass it on to as many people as possible.

UPDATE 12/15/2011
As I predicted on this blog ten days ago, President Barack H. Obama has broken his promise to veto this bill and decided instead to sign the legislation.  America is now firmly on its way toward dictatorship, and Barack Obama will forever go down in history as a main contributor toward that end. Obviously, this means Obama must be removed from office as well. So we should support his opponent in 2012, no matter who that is.

Tuesday, December 13, 2011

Rick Santorum Attacks Teachings of Pope and Bishops

GOP Presidential Candidate Rick Santorum
(Iowa Caucuses) -- The nation’s Roman Catholic bishops are wrong by calling for comprehensive immigration reform that includes an earned path to legalization, former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum said today.

The Pennsylvania Republican, who is seeking his party’s nomination for president, said in an interview with Des Moines Register political columnist Kathie Obradovich that the United States is a country of laws and it must enforce those laws.

“If we develop the program like the Catholic bishops suggested we would be creating a huge magnet for people to come in and break the law some more, we’d be inviting people to cross this border, come into this country and with the expectation that they will be able to stay here permanently,” said Santorum, who usually attends Latin Mass with his family at a Catholic church in suburban Washington, D.C.

read full story here
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: I guess it's time we have a frank talk on immigration, especially since a second-tier Catholic Republican candidate for president has thought it necessary to educate the pope and bishops on their teaching.

To be fair I think I should give Rick Santorum some brownie points here. First, he is a Traditional Catholic and regularly attends a Latin mass. That's a big plus! He is also consistent on the Church's reproductive teachings, as he has seven children. Add another big plus! He's been a Catholic a lot longer than Newt Gingrich - big plus - and his public policy on abortion and euthanasia is 100% consistent with the Church -- plus, plus & plus!!!

On the flip side he's done some pretty weird things. For starters he once endorsed and campaigned for the pro-abortion candidate Senator Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) against the pro-life Rep. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) in the GOP primary. Why? That one puzzles a lot of people. He's also a total Zionist, pledging his unwavering (and possibly unconditional) support for Israel. He has openly stated his eagerness to bomb Iran pre-emptively, which is particularly disturbing, and very VERY un-Catholic. Now this...

Santorum has decided to lecture the pope and the US Catholic bishops on immigration policy. Anyone can see why he's doing it. He wants to score some conservative Republican votes in Iowa, and he knows this is his last shot to knock out Newt Gingrich before his campaign effectively goes defunct. Gingrich supports a policy that is closer to the bishops' teaching on the matter.

Now please don't mistake this as an endorsement for Gingrich, because its not. Gingrich is a big government Republican who looks up to both Teddy and Franklin Roosevelt as his role models. Gingrich is also a total Zionist and doesn't even acknowledge the Palestinian right to exist as a people -- a position that flies in the face of what the pope has said. So Gingrich is a big part of the problem in Washington DC.

On the subject of immigration though, it's time to be frank, and The Catholic Knight has been very frank with my readers for the last couple years on this one. Look, I have a bitter pill for you to swallow and it's called "truth." You can either take the pill or kick me in the teeth, but the truth doesn't change regardless.

The truth is the United States has a huge demographics problem. Native-born Americans simply don't make enough babies. That's a fact, like it or lump it. Now granted, Santorum is a good Catholic in his personal life, and has produced seven children. He should get credit for that. In this respect he is certainly NOT part of America's demographic problem. Bully for him! We should look to him as an example here. However, that does not give him the right to criticise the pope and bishops on their teachings regarding immigration.

What are the teachings of the pope and bishops?  This is one of the pope's instructions on the matter...
Venerable John Paul II, on the occasion of this same Day celebrated in 2001, emphasized that "[the universal common good] includes the whole family of peoples, beyond every nationalistic egoism. The right to emigrate must be considered in this context. The Church recognizes this right in every human person, in its dual aspect of the possibility to leave one’s country and the possibility to enter another country to look for better conditions of life" (Message for World Day of Migration 2001, 3; cf. John XXIII, Encyclical Mater et Magistra, 30; Paul VI, Encyclical Octogesima adveniens, 17). At the same time, States have the right to regulate migration flows and to defend their own frontiers, always guaranteeing the respect due to the dignity of each and every human person. Immigrants, moreover, have the duty to integrate into the host Country, respecting its laws and its national identity. "The challenge is to combine the welcome due to every human being, especially when in need, with a reckoning of what is necessary for both the local inhabitants and the new arrivals to live a dignified and peaceful life" (World Day of Peace 2001, 13).
From Castel Gandolfo, 27 September 2010
BENEDICTUS PP. XVI 
 In regards to the U.S. Catholic bishops, the following resolution has been passed....
I. Persons have the right to find opportunities in their homeland.
34. All persons have the right to find in their own countries the economic, political, and social opportunities to live in dignity and achieve a full life through the use of their God-given gifts. In this context, work that provides a just, living wage is a basic human need.

II. Persons have the right to migrate to support themselves and their families.
35. The Church recognizes that all the goods of the earth belong to all people. 15 When persons cannot find employment in their country of origin to support themselves and their families, they have a right to find work elsewhere in order to survive. Sovereign nations should provide ways to accommodate this right.

III. Sovereign nations have the right to control their borders.
36. The Church recognizes the right of sovereign nations to control their territories but rejects such control when it is exerted merely for the purpose of acquiring additional wealth. More powerful economic nations, which have the ability to protect and feed their residents, have a stronger obligation to accommodate migration flows.

IV. Refugees and asylum seekers should be afforded protection.
37. Those who flee wars and persecution should be protected by the global community. This requires, at a minimum, that migrants have a right to claim refugee status without incarceration and to have their claims fully considered by a competent authority.

V. The human dignity and human rights of undocumented migrants should be respected.
38. Regardless of their legal status, migrants, like all persons, possess inherent human dignity that should be respected. Often they are subject to punitive laws and harsh treatment from enforcement officers from both receiving and transit countries. Government policies that respect the basic human rights of the undocumented are necessary.

39. The Church recognizes the right of a sovereign state to control its borders in furtherance of the common good. It also recognizes the right of human persons to migrate so that they can realize their God-given rights. These teachings complement each other. While the sovereign state may impose reasonable limits on immigration, the common good is not served when the basic human rights of the individual are violated. In the current condition of the world, in which global poverty and persecution are rampant, the presumption is that persons must migrate in order to support and protect themselves and that nations who are able to receive them should do so whenever possible. It is through this lens that we assess the current migration reality between the United States and Mexico.
Strangers No Longer Together on the Journey of Hope
A Pastoral Letter Concerning Migration from the Catholic Bishops of Mexico and the United States
Issued by USCCB, January 22, 2003
read full statement here

Now to be balanced and rational, neither the pope nor the bishops have advocated a libertarian-style open border policy.  On the contrary, both the pope and bishops have acknowledged a state's right to protect it's own borders and national sovereignty.  That's why a comprehensive policy must be found in America that both seals the porous border with Mexico, and simultaneously creates a way for Mexican immigrants to enter the United States legally and be documented and tracked, while those already in the United States must apply for permanent residence visas or face deportation.  Citizenship should not be an option for those who enter the United States illegally, unless of course they leave for a short time and return legally. In that case they can go to the back of the line just like everyone else.

Americans do not produce enough babies - period - and because of that we need immigrants to shore up the safety net and the economy. Americans do no produce enough children to do either. So if we don't take the Mexicans in, to counter our own lack of fertility, than we are going to end up taking in the African and Asian Muslims just like Europe did. I'm not willing to go down that road. So I say, until the day comes when they finally outlaw abortion and "the pill," bring in the Mexicans by the truckload, document them and assimilate them into American culture. Do the same with those who are already here, but put them at the back of the line, since they tried to cut in front by crossing the border illegally, and then deport only those that will not comply with this new and generous policy.

Rick Santorum is wrong to lecture the Catholic bishops on this.  That of course does not make him ineligible for the presidency, as previous presidents and presidential candidates have done far worse, but he should be called out on this.  Santorum is wrong.  The pope and bishops are right.  Period.

Saturday, December 10, 2011

BREAKING: Newt Gingrich Denies Legitimacy of ISRAEL

Newt Gingrich:  "Remember there was no Israel as a state. It was part of the British Mandate. And I think that we’ve had an invented Israeli people, who are in fact Europeans, and were historically part of the European community. And they had a chance to go many places."

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Actually that's not what he said at all. It was quite the opposite really. Here is the video clip...

“Remember there was no Palestine as a state. It was part of the Ottoman Empire. And I think that we’ve had an invented Palestinian people, who are in fact Arabs, and were historically part of the Arab community. And they had a chance to go many places.” -- Newt Gingrich
So it's not the legitimacy of Israel Gingrich denies, but the legitimacy of Palestine. This is Zionism, plain and simple, and it's a double standard. The State of Israel was CREATED by a UN mandate. It is just as much an artificial state as Palestine, if not more so. Gingrich's position is also intellectually dishonest, and in my opinion, it is designed to gain Jewish votes while Obama is losing them.

Let's be intellectually honest about this. If the UN can mandate the State of Israel, than it can also mandate the State of Palestine, and if it cannot (or should not) mandate Palestine, than what do we say of the State of Israel?

Thursday, December 8, 2011

Her Immaculate Heart Prevailed

The Soviet Union Was Dissolved on December 8th, 1991
The Feast of the Immaculate Conception
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT:  On this day, 20 years ago, the Soviet Union was dissolved.  Just as she foretold to the three Fatima children, in the end, her Immaculate Heart would prevail.  On the 8th of December in 1991, leaders from across the USSR came together and signed a treaty officially ending the 69 year-long regime.  The ceremonial end of the USSR came with the resignation of Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, and the lowering of the red Soviet flag from the Kremlin on December 25th, 1991.  I believe this was just the first of her victories.  I also believe we will likely see the completion of her victories very VERY soon!

Tuesday, December 6, 2011

U.S. Bishops Snookered By Obamacare

President Obama Signed the Healthcare Bill on March 23, 2010
(EWTN News) — President Barack Obama has not kept his promises about conscience protections for abortion opponents, and those who trusted him to exclude abortion from the health-care bill seem to “have been played,” Archbishop Thomas Wenski of Miami said.

“His administration is running roughshod over conscience-protection provisions’ long part of the law that find their justification in the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of religion, a foundational human right,” the archbishop wrote in a Dec. 2 essay in the Miami Herald.

“It is one thing for an administration to support and promote an agenda; it is quite another to force those who disagree with it to violate their moral and religious principles.”

read full story here
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: You were warned your excellency. You and your brother bishops were all warned. We Catholic bloggers told you this day would come. We yelled it from the top of our lungs. YOU CANNOT TRUST PROGRESSIVE LIBERALS!!! YOU CANNOT TRUST BARACK OBAMA!!! YOU CANNOT TRUST THE LIKES OF NANCY PELOSI!!! (My God! Is she still in the Church? Have you not excommunicated her yet!?! What does this woman have to do to be excommunicated???) WE WARNED YOU. YOU DID NOT LISTEN. WHERE IT NOT FOR YOUR SUPPORT, OBAMACARE WOULD HAVE NEVER PASSED. BUT YOU DID SUPPORT IT, AND YOU TRUSTED THOSE WHOM YOU KNEW WERE NOT TRUSTWORTHY. NOW WE MUST ALL PAY THE PRICE!!!

The first to pay will be Catholic healthcare workers. Doctors, nurses and technicians will become the first martyrs of your naivety. Next it will be you! I do hope your excellencies will lead us now by example in martyrdom. I do hope you would not permit your sheep to be fined and jailed before you. I do hope you have not left us, the laity, to fight for the faith in your place. You led us into this situation, and since you cannot now lead us out of it, we do hope you will at least lead us into martyrdom.

In HIS Majesty's Service,

The Catholic Knight

(PS - I work in healthcare. I am prepared to be martyred for this. If I'm lucky, I may only lose my job. If necessary however, I am prepared to face fines and a prison sentence for following my conscience. It's just too bad my kids will have to go into poverty should it come down to that. Maybe you could help them out when the time comes?)

Who is Santa Claus?

Saint Nicholas
(St. Nicholas Center) - The true story of Santa Claus begins with Nicholas, who was born during the third century in the village of Patara. At the time the area was Greek and is now on the southern coast of Turkey. His wealthy parents, who raised him to be a devout Christian, died in an epidemic while Nicholas was still young. Obeying Jesus' words to "sell what you own and give the money to the poor," Nicholas used his whole inheritance to assist the needy, the sick, and the suffering. He dedicated his life to serving God and was made Bishop of Myra while still a young man. Bishop Nicholas became known throughout the land for his generosity to the those in need, his love for children, and his concern for sailors and ships.

Under the Roman Emperor Diocletian, who ruthlessly persecuted Christians, Bishop Nicholas suffered for his faith, was exiled and imprisoned. The prisons were so full of bishops, priests, and deacons, there was no room for the real criminals—murderers, thieves and robbers. After his release, Nicholas attended the Council of Nicaea in AD 325. He died December 6, AD 343 in Myra and was buried in his cathedral church, where a unique relic, called manna, formed in his grave. This liquid substance, said to have healing powers, fostered the growth of devotion to Nicholas. The anniversary of his death became a day of celebration, St. Nicholas Day, December 6th...

read full story here
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: While some of my readers may object to this, please know I'm not telling you what to do on this matter. I'm simply conveying what my wife and I did. We chose not to tell our children about the Christmas myths concerning Santa Claus, the flying reindeer, the chimney, the elves or the toy shop at the North Pole. No, we keeps our stories of Christmas limited to the Nativity, and we told them about the REAL St. Nicholas.

One day, when my 7-year old son was playing outside, some older neighbour boys (pre-teen) began teasing him about Santa Claus, asking him very sarcastically if he had been a 'good boy this year,' and if Santa was going to bring him presents. My son, being a very conscientious young man, was careful not to let on that these myths meant nothing to him. Then he came into the house, closed the door behind him, laughed and shook his head saying 'Ha! They still believe in Santa Claus!'

We never told our kids that the Santa myths were not real.  We never had to.  We simply took them to department stores and let them sit on Santa's lap.  We showed them the Christmas specials about Rudolph the Red Nose Reindeer, Frosty the Snowman, etc.  Then one day the questions came.  'Mommy, Daddy, is Santa Claus real?'  To which we simply answered 'Well, what do you think?'  In every case, our kids said something to the extent of 'No, probably not'  or 'I don't think so.'  So that's where we left it.  We neither confirmed nor denied.  We simply let our own kids figure it out, with no help or hindrance from us.  They came to their own conclusion at about age 4. 

Now I have no objection to parents who want to tell their kids the Santa myths.  If that's your family thing, than have at it.  However, when the time comes to tell them the truth, I request you please stock up on the real information about the real Saint Nicholas, so when the time comes to burst their bubble, you'll be ready to re-inflate it with something more meaningful.