The Cult of the Omnipotent State

ATHENA
Greek Goddess of Government & Democracy

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: The state is their God. Not so much in their words, but in their actions, they demonstrate their belief that there is no power higher than the state, and all morality is based entirely on state law, which of course can be changed to suit their fancy. Outside of state law there is no morality, and outside of the state there is no god greater than the state. All gods, most especially the Christian God, must be subject to the state. Of course these people are a little timid about enforcing their state-god upon the Muslims, but make no mistake about it, they believe Allah is subject to the state as well, and the same goes for any follower of Mohamed.

So who are these people? Are they the ancient Greeks or Romans? No. The ancient Greeks and Romans were more direct and honest about their intentions. They made no attempt to hide their state sponsored Paganism. Are they the modern Chinese Communists? Not exactly, though they have a lot in common with the Chi-coms, they are not the same people. So who are they?

These are the modern Left-wing Liberals driving the state and cultural entertainment industry in Europe, Canada, the American Left-Coast and New England. Their goddess is the state, and they put all their cares and dreams at her feet. Anyone who puts the government in the place of God is part of this cult. No temples have been built to honor the "cult of the omnipotent state" but there need not be any. Every temple imaginable already exists -- in Washington DC -- the Mecca of Democratic Imperialism. We could say that various idols have been erected in cities across America, to the cult of omnipotent government, but that would be a stretch, for art means different things to different people. No, modern worship of Athen's goddess is embodied more in actions and attitude, than in wood and stone.

We began to see the cult of the omnipotent state arise in New England and the Left Coast during the late 1960s through 1990s. These became the strongholds of modern Athenian worship. This of course was immediately adopted by Washington DC, which seized every opportunity to consolidate power and centralize bureaucracy. Washington DC however, was not the only place where the cult seized power. As I said, all of the West Coast states, along with New England became firmly entrenched in the cult, and now it is spreading into the Rust Belt states and even the Northern Midwestern states. The State of Florida has not escaped it's influence either. We have seen it's national imposition upon all the people of America through the United States Supreme Court with the issues of abortion, religion in public schools, and eminent domain. However, the states are now jumping on the cult's bandwagon concerning the issue of gay-marriage.

THE LIE...

State advocates of gay-marriage assure churches and synagogues that the creation of gay-marriage will have no effect whatsoever on the free exercise of religion. They promise that churches will continue to be allowed to not recognize gay-marriages and not be forced to perform them. They are also assured this will in no way have any effect on their private charitable institutions. THIS IS A LIE!!!! And SHAME ON YOU if you believe it! The evidence is plain for all the world to see. Catholic Charities have already been shut down in Massachusetts, California and Illinois over the gay-marriage issue. This is because these states were attempting to legally require Catholic adoption agencies to adopt children to gay couples, on the grounds that failure to comply amounted to discrimination and therefore a violation of state law. So you see, the cult of the omnipotent state requires that all bow the knee to Athena, including churches, synagogues and Catholic Charities. The next step is hate-crimes laws, wherein pastors will likely be prosecuted for preaching against the sin of homosexuality. Already, a bill has been passed in California, making it officially ILLEGAL to have a Bible on public school campuses. The cult of the omnipotent state marches on.

ISLAMOPHOBIA

Nowhere is the fear of Muslims more evident than among modern worshipers of Athena. Well, at least in America anyway. They're starting to get a little more courageous in Europe these days. American Athena worshipers do believe that Allah and Mohamed are subject to Athena, and they must submit to the state no matter how much state laws violate their religious beliefs. Muslims reading this should take note here. The cult of the omnipotent state makes no distinction between Allah and Jehovah, Mohamed and Jesus, Muslims and Christians. All are subject to Athena -- the omnipotent state -- who through democracy and kritocracy impose all forms of immorality upon the churches, mosques and synagogues. The only reason why the cult of the omnipotent state has not cracked down on mosques in America is because the established worshipers of Athena are still afraid of Muslims. As demonstrated in Europe however, their fear of Muslims will subside eventually, and when it does, Muslim institutions will be forced to recognize gay-marriage too.

American Muslims should fight back (non-violently of course), and there is only one way to do it. Start organizing ritual worship for Muslims schoolchildren in public schools. Tell the school boards and superintendents that if they don't allow prayer rugs and hijabs on campus, than they are violating your religion and your rights. Fight them in the courts, and demonstrate, demonstrate, DEMONSTRATE! We Christians will probably join you since we've been fighting them on this for decades. If you know any Muslim Americans, please make sure they read this article.

CHRISTOPHOBIA

The cult of the omnipotent state has always feared Christianity, perhaps more so than any other religion. But in their fear of Christianity, the worshipers of Athena have lost all fear of Christians. They've been persecuting us for decades you see. They have banned us from praying in public schools, and if the Muslims begin to demonstrate against the state to defend their religious rights, than I'm afraid we have no choice but to join them now, for what the Athenian worshipers are now doing to them, they've been doing to us for decades.

MODERN PAGANISM

The cult of the omnipotent state is nothing new. Variations of it were put forward in ancient Egypt, Babylon, Greece and Rome. The ancient Greek cult of Athena probably best represents modern Pagan Imperialism. This is because Athena was the Greek goddess of war, craftsmen and government. Democracy was born in ancient Athens -- named after the goddess Athena -- and America's founding fathers made sure to model our physical institutions of national government after the architecture of the ancient Greeks and Romans. In times past, America still had a strong Christian society, and so appeals to Greek Paganism in government were simply viewed as a harmless novelty. Indeed at one time they may have been, but today, the secular culture is such that the attitudes and actions of those running the government (both state and federal) are far more "Pagan" than America's Founding Fathers could have ever imagined. Ancient Paganism was far more obvious and honest about it's intentions, and worship of their deities often took on religious ceremonies as well as state laws. Modern Paganism is a different story. As the modern world is infested with notions of atheism and secular deism, the cult of the omnipotent state (Athena) is played out more in actions and laws exclusively, while physical representations of the deity are limited to subjective art.

Why Every Catholic Should Detest The New York Times

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: If you read no other article this weekend, read this one...

(The American Spectator) - The children of Diderot at the New York Times understand the secularist Enlightenment project very well. Its executive editor, Bill Keller, telegraphed this in a 2002 column.

Since he wrote the column before he was promoted to editor, he didn't bother to hide his anti-Catholic bigotry with circumspect throat-clearing. He described himself as a "collapsed Catholic" -- "well beyond lapsed." He affected a false modesty about this, saying that for this reason he claims "no voice in whom the church ordains or how it prays or what it chooses to call a sin." But of course he does claim that voice -- and thinks all should obey it.

He made it clear that he was rooting for "reforms" that would reduce Catholicism to a captive of modern liberalism: "…the struggle within the church is interesting as part of a larger struggle within the human race, between the forces of tolerance and absolutism....

read full story here

The New York Times campaign against the pope (and the Catholic Church in general) is well documented here, here and here.

There is no justifiable reason for anyone claiming the name "Catholic" to subscribe to this blatantly anti-Catholic rag of intolerance and hate toward the Catholic Church and anyone who loves their Catholic Christian faith. I've never had a subscription to The New York Times, but if I did I would cancel it immediately, and publicly burn every paper I continued to receive until the deliveries are finally stopped. I would also tell every Catholic soul I know to do the same.

Catholics ought to cancel their subscriptions to local newspapers as well, if they reprint New York Times articles.

Please pass this message on to every Catholic you know. Here is the link: http://catholicknight.blogspot.com/2010/04/why-every-catholic-should-detest-new.html

Hitler's Pope

(Philadelphia Evening Bulletin) - ...Hitler's Pope has been criticized for its accuracy and dedication to objective history, and Mr. Cornwell admits that since its publication, his views have undergone revision.

"While I believe with many commentators that the pope might have done more to help the plight of the Jews, I now feel, 10 years after the publication of my book, that his scope for action was severely limited and I am prepared to state this," he said....

read full story here

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Ten years after the bombshell book, hyper media criticism, and forty years after the communist propaganda first hit the American public, Pope Pius XII has finally been vindicated....

(ANSA) - Vatican City, September 17 - New research clears controversial wartime pope Pius XII from the accusation that he did not do enough to save Jews, Pope Benedict XVI said on Thursday.

It is the first time the pope has come out publicly to defend the record of his WWII predecessor, who is moving towards sainthood despite accusations of keeping silent about the Holocaust....

.... The pope thanked the Pave the Way Foundation, made up of Catholics and Jews, for uncovering the evidence in favour of Pius.

He voiced the hope that further studies can reinforce ''the historical truth, overcoming all remaining prejudice''. Benedict's statement on the new research - which has not yet been made public - follows last year's assertion by his No.2, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, that people ignore evidence disproving Pius was indulgent towards Hitler.

Pius was the victim of a ''black legend'', said Bertone, the Vatican Secretary of State....

read full story here

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

(CWNews.com) - The Vatican has confirmed the existence of a directive from Pope Pius XII, asking Catholic clergy and religious to shelter Jews from the Holocaust.

Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone (bio - news), the Vatican Secretary of State, acknowledged in short April 19 announcement that Pope Pius XII issued instructions for all religious institutions to open their doors to Jewish people. The catacombs of Rome were also made available for shelter....

read full story here

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

(CNA).- A former high-ranking officer with the KGB claims that the Kremlin and the Russian intelligence agency in the 1960s were set on executing a smear campaign against the Catholic Church, and the main target was Pope Pius XII.

In a recent issue of the National Review Online, Lt. General Ion Mihai Pacepa, who eventually defected from the former Soviet bloc, recounts how the KGB and the Kremlin designed the deliberate campaign to portray the Pius XII “as a coldhearted Nazi sympathizer.”

“In February 1960, Nikita Khrushchev approved a super-secret plan for destroying the Vatican’s moral authority in Western Europe,” writes Pacepa. “Eugenio Pacelli, by then Pope Pius XII, was selected as the KGB’s main target, its incarnation of evil, because he had departed this world in 1958. ‘Dead men cannot defend themselves’ was the KGB’s latest slogan.”

The code name for this operation against Pope Pius XII was “Seat-12.”

read full story here

There was no "Hitler's Pope." The whole thing was a fabrication, a lie, invented by the Soviet KGB, in a plan called "Seat 12," devised for the sole purpose of undermining the moral authority of the Catholic Church over the western world. It was enthusiastically embraced by the enemies of the Catholic Church on both sides of the political spectrum. The Secular Left loved it! The Religious Right used it. (I even had a Jehovah's Witness at my door preach it to me.) Oh how eager so many where to believe the lie! Even some Catholics jumped on the bandwagon. The criticism from the Left-wing biased media was unending. We heard it from all the major television and cable networks. After Cornwell's 'Hitler's Pope' was published, literally dozens of knock off books followed. The television preachers, oh how many television preachers, included it in their sermons. Some Evangelical authors included it in their own books on apologetics and eschatology.  Millions upon millions of unsuspecting Evangelicals were subjected to this lie, many of whom still believe it, because they trust the television preacher who told them. (I can't even count the number of times I've been confronted about it by misinformed Evangelicals.) It was perhaps one of the greatest lies of our time - the whopper of the century!

We can learn a lot about those who enthusiastically embraced it, who went out of their way to spread it around, and took every opportunity to rub it in the face of any Catholic who would dare defend the Church on anything. Shall we call it "prejudice?" Perhaps "bigotry" might be a better word. So what are we to say of those Catholics who actually embraced it, using it as an excuse to rationalize their opposition to the Church on this issue or that? What shame! What scandal! What embarrassment! Shame on all those who engaged in this nonsense! Dishonor and disrepute upon those who eagerly embraced such a lie, that so seriously defamed the Church, without even questioning it!

So what are we to say of the mainstream news media? Do we see primetime retractions in their news broadcasts? Do we get so much as an inkling of regret for having slandered the Church for so many years? No. Not a peep out of them. How about the Secular Left-wingers out there? Any apologies? None. There is nothing but silence. What about the Religious Right-wingers? I'll give them credit. At least some have apologized.  A few (especially those who understand what it's like to be slandered) never believed it to begin with.  To them I give thanks. 

Don't get me wrong. I'm not holding a grudge here, and I wouldn't advise that any of us do. Rather, I would like to use this whole thing as an object lesson for Catholics, Protestants and non-religious people alike. Prejudice can just as well be defined as eagerly embracing bad news about somebody (or some people) without ever questioning the validity of the news itself, or even the credibility of the source who reported it.

The fabrication of "Hitler's Pope" is the epitome of this. The KGB introduced this lie to the western world in 1963 via a German author and playwright named Rolf Hochhuth. The play, entitled "The Deputy," was introduced as fiction. The pope in the play was never mentioned by name. The incriminating accusations against the pope were made by suggestion and insinuation. Hochhuth himself was raised in Nazi Germany and was a member of Hitler's Youth. While that itself is not incriminating, since service was compulsory, his refusal to talk about it, combined with his defense of those who deny the Holocaust, does tarnish his reputation a bit. It is not known if Hochhuth was directly hired by the KGB to write the play, or if the KGB simply used his material as an opportunity. Only two things are known as fact. The first is that the KGB was authorized by the Soviet Kremlin to smear the reputation of Pope Pius XII after his death in a plan named "Seat 12." The second, is that Rolf Hochhuth wrote the play that started the job. Beyond that we can surmise that Soviet involvement helped to promote the ideas of the play throughout Europe and North America, eventually coming to a climax in John Cornwell's 1999 bombshell book "Hitler's Pope." It can be reasonably assumed that Cornwell was simply operating on the momentum of the propaganda itself, and was probably not working for the KGB, since the Soviet Union fell almost a decade earlier. By this time the KGB's lies had taken on a life of their own, that outlived those who originally promoted them. Cornwell might be considered a victim of this by some, but the obvious distortions in the book causes 'The Catholic Knight' to question his culpability. It would seem to me that Cornwell may have been a victim of Soviet propaganda, but it was his own prejudice that caused him to write his book the way he did. Just to cite a small example of this, the cover of the book features a black and white photo that appears to show the image of Pope Pius XII being saluted by a Nazi officer. In fact, the photo is doctored. A comparison of the original photo with the book cover, reveals that the supposed Nazi officer is actually a civilian cab driver. Deception begins even before the book is opened, while the fables and inaccuracies written therein have been exposed and rebuffed by many historians. Cornwell is responsible for his own libel against Pius XII. Thankfully, for his sake, he is finally starting to admit his error.

Soon Pope Pius XII will be canonized as a saint, and when he is, all of this will be drudged up again for a public to see. This time, however, they'll be given the other side of the story, the whole story, and the world will see just how low the enemies of the Church will sink to slander the name of a good man in the hopes of tarnishing the Church's moral authority. A word to the wise for critics of the Catholic Church, especially those in the mainstream media. You've been played! You've been suckered! Nearly half a century ago a lie was concocted by communists on the other side of the world, and you bought it! They used you. You fell for it, and now it's come out that you unwittingly cooperated with communists to spread KGB propaganda. Are you feeling a little sheepish now? You should. If you don't, you should be worried about yourself. So the lesson is this. Next time you hear a supposed "fact" about the history of the Catholic Church, you might want to do a little research before you believe it. Maybe you ought to check the sources. Maybe you should allow a little skepticism to enter your mind, the next time somebody tells you a "scandalous" tale about the world's largest Christian organization.  It's just a little friendly advice.  Take it for what it's worth.

Media Continues To Attack Governor Palin, Working Mothers & Christian Values

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: The above covers of US magazine are just an example of how bad it can get. The mainstream media is clearly rooting for Obama in this election, and they'll stoop to whatever lows it takes to get him elected. US magazine certainly wasn't the first media outlet to throw its support behind Obama, and it certainly won't be the last. Left-Wing media bias is no secret. During the 1990s, surveys of the political views of major media outlets revealed that over 80% of all those polled voted for Bill Clinton in 1992 and 1996, while the former president received less than 50% of the vote in the general population. Clearly, the media is not representative of how most Americans think and feel. So this should come as no surprise to us.

Attacking Governor Palin so ruthlessly might be excusable, if Senator Obama were not given such a free ride on virtually identical issues. But to attack Governor Palin's experience, when she clearly has more than Senator Obama, is worse than biased. It's degrading! To attack Governor Palin's family, and her ability to manage a job and children, while not even questioning the family lives of Obama or Biden, is worse than biased. It's sexist! To attack Governor Palin's religious beliefs, and call Obama's off limits, is worse than biased. It's bigoted! There is no question that the only reason why the media is doing this is because they know Governor Palin is a threat to their liberal agenda. Why? Because they fear strong women, who are not liberals, and Conservative Christians in general.

Where are the feminists in all this? They are strangely silent. Why? I dare say it's because the American Feminist Movement isn't really about women. It's about pushing a liberal political agenda. Should a conservative woman ever come under public attack by degrading, sexist bigots, they'll just close their eyes and look the other way. If they really cared about women, all women, they would put a stop to all this nonsense, and force the media to focus on the issues, rather than the tabloid mudslinging.

So prepare for it to get worse, much worse, and just remember this. If you're a woman who comes under the attacks of degrading, sexist bigots who try to smear your good name, and you happen to be a conservative too, then don't expect any help (or support) from ANY feminist organization throughout the United States. You're on your own baby!

If your a Christian (a Catholic or Evangelical), then just keep in mind that the media attack on Governor Palin is really on you and your beliefs. Watch closely at the depths they will sink to slander the good name of anyone who would dare use the power of government to defend the unborn. Remember, they would slander you just as well (if not worse) should you ever rise to prominent position.  The mainstream media wants to keep Pro-Life religious people where they think they belong - out of politics entirely.

Media Zeros In On Palin For Hatchet Job

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: As I predicted, the Christophobic Leftist media is attempting to zero in on Governor Sarah Palin for a hatchet job against her character and her family. Immediately after the announcement of John McCain's selection of her for vice presidential nominee, MSNBC pounced into action...

(WorldNetDaily) - From the very first moment that John McCain's selection of Sarah Palin for his Republican running mate was announced, the MSNBC news network was engaged in a deliberate attempt to smear the Alaska governor, according to Fox News host Bill O'Reilly.

During Friday night's edition of "The O'Reilly Factor," the Fox anchor displayed MSNBC's "breaking news" graphic, which ran the message, "How many houses does Palin add to the Republican ticket?"...

read full story here

Then, that very same afternoon, Alan Colmes, a liberal commentator on FoxNews, posted an entry on his blog in which he accused Palin of having a shotgun wedding twenty years ago to avoid an illegitimate child (read source here). He titled the post "Conservative Family Values," in what was an obvious jab at her Evangelical Christian beliefs. Colmes' theory turned out to be total bunk, and his reputation was further tarnished because of it, but this little episode was just a tiny foretaste of what would come over the weekend. With Colmes' Christophobic attack on Palin, the initial salvo defaulted to that classic "family values" line, in which Leftists attempted to muddy the Palin name on moral issues (which they care little about to begin with), for the sole purpose of trying to turn conservative Christian voters away from Sarah Palin.

Colmes may not have intended it, but his blog post sent a political shockwave into the Internet blogosphere. It was a shockwave that other Liberal bloggers took as a permission slip to do whatever they wanted. They sprung into action immediately, concocting a complete fabrication about the legitimacy of Palin's fifth child, Trig, who was born just four months ago. The fabrication was probably developed around some rumors these bloggers may have heard from Alaska. Rumors that centered around Palin's seventeen year old daughter, Bristol, who either is, had been, or might be, pregnant. Rather than investigating these rumors, the leftist bloggers simply filled in the details with their own imagination. By the time they were through, four month old Trig was now Bristol's son, and Bristol's alleged "pregnancy" had been hidden by Sarah Palin herself. The Alaska governor was accused of faking her own pregnancy, and then passing Bristol's child, Trig, off as her own! Most sensible folks would dismiss this sort of stuff as the tabloid ramblings of frustrated political hacks. But it wasn't long before our mainstream press was looking into the matter and asking questions. As word of this got out, the Palin family decided to release some personal family information, which was no secret in Alaska, and was already well known by the McCain campaign during the vetting process that eventually led to Palin's selection as McCain's running mate. The press release read as follows...

(Washington Post) - "We have been blessed with five wonderful children who we love with all our heart and mean everything to us," said Sarah and Todd Palin in a statement. "Our beautiful daughter Bristol came to us with news that as parents we knew would make her grow up faster than we had ever planned. We're proud of Bristol's decision to have her baby and even prouder to become grandparents. As Bristol faces the responsibilities of adulthood, she knows she has our unconditional love and support."

read full story here

As news of this broke, liberal bloggers on the Internet were humiliated but defiant. Now the truth was out and they looked like idiots. There was no cover-up, no baby-switching, and no fake pregnancy.  The real story of Bristol Palin's teen pregnancy is not quite as scandalous, but nevertheless something for the Leftist Christophobic media to sink their teeth into. Unlike media Leftists, people who really understand Christianity know that this sort of thing happens in all families - including Christian families. While this is not the ideal situation based on Christian morality, the real test of one's Christian faith comes in how one deals with it once it happens. The Christian response is to accept responsibility for one's actions, not run away from it, as so many Liberals advocate through their sacrament of abortion-on-demand. In the Palin teen pregnancy story, what we have is an example of how Christians are supposed to deal with the problem when teenagers commit the sin of sexual impatience. They own up to their actions, acknowledge their faults, and take responsibility for the consequences. Bristol Palin is going to keep her baby, and marry the father. She and her new husband will make whatever sacrifices they must to raise their newborn child, and in doing so they will give testimony to the sanctity of human life as well as the practical maturity provided by their Christian faith. People who don't understand Christianity, (most of the Liberal media and Leftist bloggers for example), will point fingers at the "bastard child," and the "fornication" of two "religious hypocrites" in the Palin family. In doing so they only prove that they don't have a clue, and they have no concept of what the Christian religion is really about. A "practicing Christian" is by no means a "perfect Christian." If one were already "perfect" then one wouldn't need to "practice." The definition of a "practicing Christian" is one who takes the teachings of Christianity seriously, and is attempting to live by them, in spite of one's faults and mistakes. By definition, "practicing Christians" don't attempt to redefine Christian morality to fit their own sinful habits, nor do they try to "lower the bar" of Christian standards just because they can't seem to meet them. Rather, a "practicing Christian" just keeps trying to get it right, over and over again, until eventually he (or she) is successful. The duty of Christian families is to provide love and support to their family members, even when they fail, while at the same time encouraging them to take responsibility for their failures, and to keep reaching upward toward the ideal standard. The Palin family has done just that. It is a perfect example of how Christians deal with personal failings, and how their faith helps them recover without lowering the standard.

The reason why 'The Catholic Knight' brings this to you is threefold. I wish to first call your attention to the insidious and shameful way some Christophobic left-wingers will think nothing of fabricating complete lies if they believe it might help them politically. Second, some members of the mainstream media will gladly sacrifice their objectivity, and therefore their credibility, for the purpose of political gain. Third and finally, prepare for it to get worse -- a lot worse.

It's the third point I want to touch on the most, because I want to prepare my readers for the next logical step. The Leftist mainstream media is incredibly Christophobic. By that I mean they fear Christian political involvement, and especially a political alliance between conservative Evangelicals and practicing Catholics. They know that any such social alliance on political matters will seriously threaten their Leftist political agenda. The fact that Obama hasn't done nearly as well in the polls as he should be doing at this time is making them nervous. For the first time this election year, it looks as if it is possible McCain might actually win, and that simply will not be tolerated. The media will go after Sarah Palin ruthlessly on the national level, just as they did in Alaska during her election bid for governor of that state in 2006. Palin is McCain's biggest political asset right now, so in order to hurt McCain, the media must attack Palin. Right now they're just going after her personal family baggage. As soon as they realize that this isn't working, they'll take it to a different area of her life, and one in which they feel far more comfortable attacking -- her religion.

The purpose of a religious attack on Palin is very specific. The Leftist media is going to attempt to crack a social alliance between Evangelicals and practicing Catholics. The idea being to make Palin the focus of controversy between these two groups, and "hopefully" break a Republican political stronghold.

It is the opinion of this blogger that in a very short time, Sarah Palin's church will come under media scrutiny, and as soon as they think they have the dirt they need, they're going to take it right to the public, but it will be especially directed toward Catholics. I believe the media will try to do the exact same thing it did last year with Governor Mike Huckabee. They will try to pit Christian voters against each other. My guess is they'll find some obscure quote from the pastor of Palin's Evangelical church that appears to contradict the teachings of the Catholic Church in some way. Then they'll present it to the world as something like "Palin's Church Hate's Catholics." The stories they publish will question the role of religion in Palin's life and label her religion as "extreme," with the hope of polarizing the practicing Christian vote enough to turn Catholics against Evangelicals and vice versa. Beware of the coming attack, and whatever you do, don't take the bait. It is designed to manipulate us.

San Francisco Declares War On Catholicism - Calls Upon Catholics To Abandon Church

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: The City of San Francisco has officially declared war on the Roman Catholic religion via a legal resolution calling upon Catholics to abandon their religion. Legal proceedings will begin shortly in a lawsuit against the City of San Francisco for blatant violation of the first amendment by using the institutions of government to condemn a particular religion. This is the very definition of "homofascism" in action, whereby homosexual activists in the city government are so hell bent on pushing the homosexual agenda, that they're willing to trample on everybody else's civil rights to do it - especially Catholics...

(WorldNetDaily.com) - A San Francisco city and county board resolution that officially labeled the Catholic church's moral teachings on homosexuality as "insulting to all San Franciscans," "hateful," "defamatory," "insensitive" and "ignorant" will be challenged tomorrow in court for violating the Constitution's prohibition of government hostility toward religion.

Resolution 168-08, passed unanimously by the City and County of San Francisco Board of Supervisors two years ago, also accused the Vatican of being a "foreign country" meddling with and attempting to "negatively influence (San Francisco's) existing and established customs."

It said of the church's teaching on homosexuality, "Such hateful and discriminatory rhetoric is both insulting and callous, and shows a level of insensitivity and ignorance which has seldom been encountered by this Board of Supervisors."

As WND reported, Resolution 168-08 was an official response to the Catholic Church's ban on adoption placements into homosexual couple households, issued by Cardinal William Levada of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith at the Vatican.

The board's resolution urged the city's local archbishop and the Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of San Francisco to defy the Vatican's instructions, concluding with a spiteful reminder that the church authority that issued the ban was known 100 years ago as "The Holy Office of the Inquisition."

The resolution also took a shot at Levada, the former archbishop of San Francisco, saying, "Cardinal Levada is a decidedly unqualified representative of his former home city, and of the people of San Francisco and the values they hold dear."...

read full story here

Is Calvary Chapel Anti-Catholic?

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: In a word, "yes." Calvary Chapel (www.CalvaryChapel.com) is anti-Catholic. Now the good folks there would deny it. They would tell you they love Catholics, but hate the "Roman Catholic religious system." That's all well and good, but being anti-Catholic isn't about hating, or even disliking, Catholic people. Being anti-Catholic, by its very definition, means being against the religion of Roman Catholicism. Try as they may to dodge the issue, Calvary Chapel is an anti-Catholic organization.

In the broad sense, we could argue that all Protestant churches are anti-Catholic to some small degree, simply by virtue of the fact that they are Protestant. Historically, this would be true. However, while most Protestant and Evangelical groups try not to stress this anymore, some organizations have surfaced in recent years that are far more anti-Catholic than others. I believe Calvary Chapel would definitely fall into this category. Though I am not aware of any official documentation of Calvary Chapel's anti-Catholic positions, one can easily find most Sunday sermons latent with them. A good example of this comes from Pastor Chuck Smith, founder of the Calvary Chapel affiliation. The nice thing about Calvary Chapel is that most sermons are taped and archived, so if one has the time to do the fishing, the evidence of blatant anti-Catholicism is not too difficult to find. Now remember, these are sermons of a pastor to his congregation. One would think a pastor would be concerned with preaching the gospel, and applying the teachings of New Testament to the day to day lives of his congregation. Instead, this is the sort of thing one can easily find in Calvary Chapel sermons....

On tape 5176, Pastor Chuck Smith said:

The dogma that was developed in the Catholic church of the perpetual virginity of Mary, is sheer poppycock. It is the invention of men who have thought to elevate Mary to the status of deity. The obvious fact is here, "And knew her not 'till'" It is clear that afterward, they did have normal husband-wife relationships with each other, or else the other sons and daughters that were born of Mary were also virgin-born, and that throws the whole story in disarray. The gospel of Mark names the brothers of Jesus as James, Joses and Simon, and mentions his sisters, so to declare perpetual virginity of Mary is not a scriptural truth. It is a Catholic dogma, without scriptural foundation, as are most dogmas. Paul said, "Beware of dogs"(Phil. 3:2,) I say, "Be wary of dogmas!"

On tape 5189, Smith said:

For one is your father, which is in heaven." So the title of father was prohibited by Jesus. In my associations I have become acquainted and friends of many ministers within the Episcopalian Church, and also within the Catholic Church. And I have extreme difficulty in knowing how to address that. Because for the life of me I can not call them father so and so. Because Jesus said not to. And so, to me it creates a difficult thing, as to how to address them, because they are usually introduced,' this is father so and so,' and I just have a hang-up with this, but I just can't address a man, father, in a spiritual sense. I don't know, do what you want, but I just have problems.

On tape 5209, Smith said:

The Protestant reformation came as a protest against the evil practices that had arisen within the Catholic Church. Especially the selling of indulgences. For the Pope was desirous to built a great Cathedral in Rome, St. Peters. And the money wasn't coming in, fast enough to build this glorious monument, that he was desiring to put up, as a symbol for Christianity. And so someone in the counsel came up with a bright idea. Everybody likes to sin, why don't we sell them forgiveness for sin's. And they can buy an indulgence, before they ever indulged. So as they indulging, the thing is covered, because they've already buyed (sic) their forgiveness. So you want a little escapade on the side. You want to go out and get drunk? fine, go down and buy your drunk indulgence. You want to have an affair? go down and get an adultery indulgence. And they started selling the indulgences to the people. And this so incensed Martin Luther, that he took his 95 thesis, his objections, to the practices that had developed within the church, and he taged them on the door, and he protested. And thus the name Protestant. Beginning of the Protestant reformation.

On the same tape, Smith also said:

It is a sad error of the Catholic church to declare that Peter is the foundation upon which the church was built.

On tape 5202, Smith said:

There is sometimes within the Protestant circles perhaps a backlash to that position that the Catholics have sought to place Mary in as the intercessor, and even some today, the coredemptress, and there is that backlash among Protestants often times to sort of put Mary down.

On tape 5315, Smith said:

And we see it in the Catholic church where the priest says, "You come and confess your sins to me and I will remiss your sins and I will go to the Father and I will take care of things for you. It is putting a man between you and God. We will see the system develop when we get to the church of Thyatira but at least the church of Ephesus says 'I hate it and the Lord says I hate it too.

Later on the same tape, Smith said:

And these are the dominant issues of the Roman Catholic church; their love and their service and their faith and their patience and their work. And this they have a lot of - a lot of good works and there are some marvelous people in the Catholic Church, highly admired. Mother Theresa, such an unusual person. Marvelous. It's not saying things against those individuals because God has his overcomers. It is just talking about the system.

Later, Smith said:

And I gave her space to repent of her fornication; and she repented not. Behold I will cast her into a bed, and those that commit adultery with her into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds" Here is now first of all, the indication that the Catholic Church would exist right up to the coming of Jesus Christ and the rapture of the church, because he talks about them being allowed to go into the great tribulation.

These are typical examples of Calvary Chapel sermons, which can easily be found anywhere, by multiple Calvary Chapel pastors throughout the country. In the later quotes above, Smith is comparing the Catholic Church to the worst form of churches written of in the Book of Revelation. While of course, Calvary pastors typically equate their own brand of Christianity to some of the better churches written of in the Book of Revelation. In my own experience, at a Calvary Chapel ran by one of Smith's direct pupils, it seemed that there was at least one small dig at Catholicism every week.

One can also find special books and audio series, made by Calvary Chapel pastors, specifically designed for the purpose of attacking Roman Catholicism. In part, I believe this is due to an unusual number of Calvary Chapel pastors who are themselves former Catholics. The affiliation began in Southern California, a heavily Catholic region of the United States, and as a result the pews are regularly filled with former Catholics who've converted to the "Gospel According to Calvary Chapel." A small percentage of these disaffected converts went on to become pastors for the affiliation.

You may be wondering why I am bothering with this particular Evangelical-Protestant group. There are, after all, hundreds of different anti-Catholic organizations in America. So what's so special about this one? Well, I'll tell you. I used to be a "member" of Calvary Chapel. In fact, I even became a teacher there. All of this was before my conversion to Catholicism of course. I can personally testify that I regularly heard, with my own ears, large volumes of anti-Catholic rhetoric. Yes, as a Calvary Chapel teacher, I even preached it. I've personally witnessed a very popular Calvary Chapel pastor in Southern California actually call the Catholic Church the "Whore of Babylon" and the pope the "Antichrist" on more than one occasion. These happened before a large audience, many of whom were former Catholics. I can personally testify that Catholic doctrines are taken out of context, represented falsely, and then maligned on a regular basis in Calvary Chapels throughout America. Sometimes it seems that it's rare to even get through a single sermon, on any given week, without hearing at least one small jab at Catholicism.

As a former Calvary Chapel teacher, I have mixed feelings about this organization. On the one hand, I must give credit where credit is due. Having been raised in a non-practicing Protestant home, Calvary Chapel helped me a great deal when I was struggling with my faith as a young person. Calvary Chapel helped me better understand basic doctrines of the Christian faith. Calvary Chapel also helped me sort out the sinful habits in my life, and set me on a path of greater obedience to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. In addition to that, it was through my pastoral studies at Calvary Chapel that I came to knowledge of Church history, a knowledge that would eventually lead to my Catholic conversion. So on the one hand, I am grateful to Calvary Chapel, because without it, I would probably have never found Christ and later converted to HIS One, Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. On the other hand, I am frustrated with this organization, because it misleads people about Christ's Catholic Church. Those who do not take the time to do the study, and there are many, are forced to simply trust what Calvary Chapel pastors tell them about the Catholic Church. A good number of those things are wrong, and most of it doesn't even originate within Calvary Chapel. In fact, the majority of anti-Catholic material, used by Calvary Chapel pastors, comes not from the organization itself, but from outside sources that specialize in anti-Catholicism.

If you're a Catholic who attends a Calvary Chapel, or has been approached by somebody from Calvary Chapel, as a former Calvary Chapel teacher, I have some good advice for you. Stop and do your homework! There are lots of things Calvary Chapel pastors say about Catholicism that just aren't true. Many of these pastors are former Catholics themselves, and one would think they should know better. Yet you would be surprised to discover just how little these supposedly "educated" men actually know about Catholic beliefs and the Catholic Church. I would suggest you do a little reading on this topic list HERE, where will find one of the most exhaustive Catholic apologetic resources available on the Internet. If on the other hand, you're a non-Catholic who attends Calvary Chapel, I would encourage you to do the same, so that you might have a better understanding of Catholicism "straight from the horse's mouth," rather than relying on the second-hand information spouted by some disgruntled Catholics, who later became Calvary Chapel pastors. Many of whom got their information from sources not even affiliated with Calvary Chapel. I would also encourage you to take the The Ultimate Protestant Challenge. I think that's good advice, and you owe it to yourself to hear both sides of the story, weigh the evidence, and learn the truth.

********** Update 12/1/2010 **********

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: So it's been over three years since I wrote this original blog entry on Calvary Chapel's anti-Catholicism, and nothing has changed. (Not that I really expected it to.) In between jumps to my snowbird hideaway down South, I returned home briefly to keep the Knight's armory running well. On the way home from one of my errands in town today I decided to tune into a local Calvary Chapel radio station broadcasted via satellite syndication. (I'm not sure what possessed me to do it.) Anyway, the station manager had just gotten Chuck Smith on the air for some questions from callers. One caller mentioned that his girlfriend is Catholic, and he occasionally attends mass with her. He had a question about the apparition of "Our Lady of Guadalupe." It wasn't five minutes into the show, but Chuck Smith had plenty to say.

First, he proclaimed that "Our Lady of Guadalupe" is nothing more than a demonic spirit, and the apparition itself is a deception of the devil. He advised the caller to avoid anything to do with it. Second, he then went on, as if that weren't enough, to accuse the Catholic Church of idolatry and apostasy. He did this in his usual soft-spoken gentle manner, (you could almost hear the smile on his face), which I used to think was charity. Twelve years after having left Calvary Chapel, it's now starting to sound a little creepy. Anyway, he used the classic strawman fallacy. He blatantly misrepresented Catholic teaching, claiming the Church places Mary above Christ. Then he proceeded to tear down the strawman by saying that anytime someone (i.e. The Catholic Church) puts someone or something above Christ, we know that can't be from God. Of course the caller was gushing with gratitude for Pastor Smith's pontification, and the station manager then proceeded to advise him, and anyone else listening, to stay away from the Catholic mass and go to Calvary Chapel instead.

The more things change, the more they stay the same, especially when it comes to the anti-Catholicism coming out of Calvary Chapel. I'm pleased that this particular rant against the Church came from the top Calvary Chapel pastor himself - Chuck Smith - the man who started the whole chain. It demonstrates what I've been saying all along in this blog entry. The founder of Calvary Chapel is a raving anti-Catholic, and the apples never fall far from the tree. The way the founder goes, so do the followers. This type of anti-Catholicism can be found among Calvary Chapel pastors from coast to coast. Some are more virulent than others, but virtually all of them look to Pastor Chuck Smith as their example and teacher. He is, after all, the closest thing to a "pope" there will ever be in the Calvary Chapel network.

Pastor Chuck Smith's dishonest dealing with Catholic doctrine is inexcusable. He is an educated man who has been in ministry for decades. He's the virtual "head" of an international nondenominational-affiliation. He has missionary outreaches in Latin America and Rome. You cannot tell me this man is ignorant of authentic Catholic Church doctrine. He knows full well the Catholic Church DOES NOT place Mary above Christ in any way. He knows the Church teaches that Mary is subordinate to Christ, and that everything she is comes directly from Christ. His opinions about Marian apparitions are his business, but to tell people they are demonic is to be disingenuous to say the least. No demonic spirit leads people to Christ, and if "Our Lady of Guadalupe" was supposed to be some Satanic deception, than it was a miserable failure on the devil's part, because it resulted in over a million people (Native Americans) accepting Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. It has since inspired the Christian faith of tens of millions. If it was supposed to be a lie of the devil, than it sure backfired on him. Of course we know the truth. Mary appeared to Saint Juan Diego to bring his people to her Son - Jesus Christ - and that she did in the most startling and miraculous way.

So why the strawman fallacy? Why would an educated man, who surely knows what the Church teaches in regards to Mary, deliberately twist and distort Church doctrine in such a way so he could easily tear down the strawman he created? Well, I can't get inside Chuck Smith's head, so I really don't know with absolute certainty why he did it. But I do have an opinion, and I think it's a fairly educated one with some inside information. You see, Calvary Chapel started in Southern California which is a heavily Catholic portion of the United States. Most of the people who attend Calvary Chapel are former Catholics. I don't have an exact percentage, but I would say that at least half would be a fair guess. Most of them left the Catholic Church during the turbulent times of the 1970s through 1990s. It was during this time that Chuck Smith, and his ministry disciples began their anti-Catholic propaganda, and WOW did it take off! They brought scores of formerly Catholic "members" into their affiliations with this nonsense, combined with their apocalyptic teachings on current events and typical altar calls for instantaneous salvation. It was (and still is) a formula that works. Every Sunday in Southern California, Calvary Chapels are packed to standing room only. Smith and his ministry disciples have now taken their "Gospel according to Calvary Chapel" into Latin America, and they've even been so bold as to bring it to Rome as well, under the very shadow of the Vatican. The formula works. It draws away Catholics, and turns them against Rome in the most virulent way. It also fills the pews at Calvary Chapels, as well as the collection plates. You see, in my opinion, the reason why Chuck Smith doesn't change is because he can't change. If he ever admits that he was wrong about something the Catholic Church teaches, it would threaten his whole organization. In Southern California alone, at least half of his ministry is to former Catholics. An admission of error, especially after having preached this stuff for so long, would cause the Calvary Chapel faithful to begin questioning the whole Calvary Chapel system, and that is something that neither Chuck Smith nor his ministry disciples can risk.

British Anti-Catholicism Rears It's Ugly Head Again

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: It's been 300 years for heaven's sake! Official policies like this have got to go!

(CNA).- Peter Phillips, the Queen of England’s eldest grandson, may have to give up his place in the line of succession for the throne because his fiancée is Roman Catholic.

This past week Buckingham Palace announced the engagement between Peter Phillips and Autumn Kelly, a Canadian management consultant, but no mention of a date for their marriage was made.

Even more interesting, is the fact that Autumn Kelly is Catholic. Ms. Kelly’s Catholicism brings to the light of day the 1701 Act of Settlement which bars any member of the Royal family from becoming or marrying Catholics. If Mr. Phillips has to renounce his rights to inherit the throne, it would be an embarrassment to the royal family and to the government.

Catholics have repeatedly called for a repeal of the act but thus far attempts to change the law have failed. Under the act, Mr. Phillips will be required to renounce his right to the throne -- he is 10th in line at present-- or Ms. Kelly will have to formally renounce her Catholic faith...

read full story here

Here's a little history lesson on British Anti-Catholicism from Wikipedia.com...

Anti-Catholicism in England has its origins with the English Reformation under Henry VIII. The Act of Supremacy of 1534 declared the English crown to be 'the only supreme head on earth of the Church in England' in place of the Pope. Any act of allegiance to the latter was considered treason. It was under this act that saints Thomas More and John Fisher were executed.

Although the Act of Supremacy was repealed in 1554 by Henry's daughter, Queen Mary I, who was a staunch Roman Catholic, it was reenacted in 1559 under Elizabeth I.

Anyone who took public or church office was forced to take the Oath of Supremacy, and there were penalties for violating that oath. Attendance at Anglican services was also made obligatory. Those that refused were fined as recusants.

In the time of Elizabeth I, the persecution of the Protestants during the reign of her half-sister Queen Mary I was used as anti-Catholic propaganda in the hugely influential Foxe's Book of Martyrs. The Convocation of the English Church ordered in 1571 that copies of the "Book of Martyrs" should be kept for public inspection in all cathedrals and in the houses of church dignitaries. The book was also exposed in many parish churches alongside the Holy Bible. The passionate intensity of the style and the vivid and picturesque dialogues made it very popular among Puritan and Low Church families down to the nineteenth century. The fantastically partisan church history of the earlier portion of the book, with its grotesque stories of popes and monks contributed much to anti-Catholic prejudices in England as did the story of the sufferings of those Protestants burnt at the stake by Mary and the notorious Bishop Bonner.

In 1570, Pope Pius V sought to depose Elizabeth with the papal bull Regnans in Excelsis, which declared her a heretic and purported to release her Roman Catholic subjects from allegiance to her. This rendered Elizabeth's subjects who persisted in allegiance to the Roman Catholic Church politically suspect.

The failed invasion of England by the Spanish Armada has been cited as an attempt by Philip II of Spain to put into effect the Pope's decree, and to enforce a claim to the throne of England he held as a result of being the widower of Mary I of England.

Elizabeth's persecution of Roman Catholic Jesuit missionaries led to many executions at Tyburn. Those priests who suffered there are accounted martyrs by the Roman Catholic church; and, more recently, a convent has been established nearby to pray for their souls.

Later episodes that deepened anti-Catholicism in England include the Gunpowder Plot, in which Guy Fawkes and other Roman Catholic conspirators attempted to blow up the English Parliament while it was in session. The Great Fire of London in 1666 was blamed on the Roman Catholics and an inscription ascribing it to 'Popish frenzy' was engraved on the Monument to the Great Fire of London, which marked the location where the fire started (this inscription was only removed in 1831). Later, the "Popish Plot" involving Titus Oates further exacerbated Anglican-Roman Catholic relations.

The beliefs that underlie the sort of strong anti-Catholicism once seen in the United Kingdom were summarized by William Blackstone in his Commentaries on the Laws of England:

As to papists, what has been said of the Protestant dissenters would hold equally strong for a general toleration of them; provided their separation was founded only upon difference of opinion in religion, and their principles did not also extend to a subversion of the civil government. If once they could be brought to renounce the supremacy of the pope, they might quietly enjoy their seven sacraments, their purgatory, and auricular confession; their worship of relics and images; nay even their transubstantiation. But while they acknowledge a foreign power, superior to the sovereignty of the kingdom, they cannot complain if the laws of that kingdom will not treat them upon the footing of good subjects.

— Bl. Comm. IV, c.4 ss. iii.2, p. *54

The gravamen of this charge, then, is that Roman Catholics constitute an imperium in imperio, a sort of fifth column of persons who owe a greater allegiance to the Pope than they do to the civil government, a charge very similar to that repeatedly leveled against Jews. Accordingly, a large body of British laws, collectively known as the penal laws, imposed various civil disabilities and legal penalties on recusant Roman Catholics. These laws were gradually repealed over the course of the nineteenth century with laws such as the Catholic Emancipation Act of 1829.

In spite of the Emancipation Act, however, anti-Catholic feeling continued throughout the nineteenth century, primarily as a response to the influx of Irish immigrants into England during the Great Famine.

Even now, however, a member of the British Royal Family automatically gives up any chance of succeeding to the throne if he or she joins the Roman Catholic Church or marries a Roman Catholic.

source

Sex-Abuse of Minors Higher in Protestant Churches

(Chicago Sun Times): The three companies that insure the majority of Protestant churches in America say they typically receive upward of 260 reports each year of young people under 18 being sexually abused by clergy, church staff, volunteers or congregation members.

The figures offer a glimpse into what has long been an extremely difficult phenomenon to pin down -- the frequency of sex abuse in Protestant congregations.

Religious groups and victims' supporters have been interested in the figure ever since the Roman Catholic sex abuse crisis hit five years ago. The church has revealed that there have been 13,000 credible accusations against Catholic clerics since 1950 -- 228 a year...

read full story here

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: There you have it folks. Annual sex-abuse in the Catholic Church = average of 228 cases a year. Annual sex-abuse in Protestant churches = average of 260 cases a year. Protestants got Catholics beat by an average of 32 reported cases a year.

"Protestants Beat Catholics in Sexual Abuse of Minors"

But you won't read that headline in the New York Times -- not tomorrow, not the next day, not ever. Now the purpose of posting this story is not to gloat. The difference between Catholics and Protestants on this issue is only an average of 32 reported cases a year. When you consider that both groups average over 200 cases a year, that's nothing to be proud of. It's a tragedy! And the difference between the two groups is just a drop in the bucket.

However, Protestants can breath a sigh of relief, because they are not the target of my rant today. I have no intention of maligning my Protestant brothers and sisters in Christ over this matter. Not only for the sake of Christian charity, but also for the fact that those who live in glass houses should not throw stones. Anyone who would use this kind of data to slander an entire religion is a scoundrel to say the least. Which brings me to the target of my rant -- the mainstream media.

In 2002 evidence of widespread sexual-abuse surfaced in the Catholic Church. To make matters worse, evidence suggested that a cover-up was going on in some large US Catholic diocese. The problem was large. But just how large? As the news broke, the numbers started to pour in. What was found as that over the last 50 years, some 3% of US Catholic clergy were in some way involved in sexual-abuse and cover-up. However, those same statistics revealed that 97% of US Catholic clergy were NOT involved in it. So out of 100 Catholic clergy, 3 were abusers, and the other 97 were not. But did we hear this on the news? No we didn't. Instead we were treated to hours upon hours of generalizations, vague associations, and grandiose speculations. This happened in the print media, the radio media, and especially in the television media. Real numbers and statistics were never given. The problem was not once put into proportion. Instead it was hyped, to the point were it looked like virtually all Catholic clergy were involved in it. By the time it was all over, many Catholic priests in this country were afraid to wear their clerical collars in public, due to the excessive pointing and whispering. Some priests were threatened with bodily harm. So for a couple years anyway, the clerical collar virtually disappeared from America, as priests tried to discretely hide who they were while in public. This in spite of the fact that 97% of priests did absolutely nothing wrong. All of this I attribute to the mainstream media, which recklessly and intentionally, tried to bring down America's largest religious institution.

Now we have the same problem in Protestant churches, but what does the media say -- virtually nothing. I doubt CNN will be doing a week long special on the "Sexual Crisis in Protestant Churches," as we were treated to similar titles during 2002. I doubt you'll see televised trials of sexually abusive Protestant ministers, as we were treated to when former Catholic priests took the stand.

What I'm pointing out here is an inconsistency. I'm pointing out an omission, which by itself, reveals far more than any kind of persistent smear campaign. The fact that the mainstream media went wild on Catholic sex-abuse, but virtually ignores a greater incidence of Protestant sex-abuse, proves one thing beyond the shadow of a doubt. The mainstream media is not really all that interested in tawdry sex-scandals involving minors. No, that's just the bait to get you watching and listening to them. What they're really interested in is an agenda, and that agenda involves deconstructing organized religion in America entirely. To do this you must first deconstruct, slander and destroy the largest Church in the United States. That would be the Roman Catholic Church. Once the "big boy" Church (Catholicism) is knocked down, the rest of the "little boy" churches (Protestantism) will scatter to the wind. If it was really about the sex and the ratings, the mainstream news media would be all over this Protestant sex-abuse story. But they're not that interested in it. They pound the Catholic Church over and over again, but then they virtually ignore Protestant churches with the same problem. Why? Because if you just take down one Protestant denomination, it won't effect much. Other denominations will step in where the first once stood. But if you can manage to take down the Catholic Church, the largest organized religion in America, it will send shock waves throughout all of American Christianity. That's what they want.

The mainstream media isn't going to waste much of their time on sex-abuse stories that don't further their insidious agenda. Though sexual abuse of minors is far more prominent in public schools than any church, we won't see much reporting on this sweeping crisis. Instead the media will focus in an a few anomalies here and there. They'll report about the pretty teacher who sleeps with teenage boys, with the focus of their story centering not on her perversion, but on "how complicated these things are." Meanwhile sex-abuse of minors runs rampant in our public schools, mostly by teachers not so pretty as those featured on television, as much of it is covered up by school administrators, abusive teachers are transferred, and families of victims are bought off in legal settlements. (Your tax dollars hard at work there.)

The moral to this story is this. Sexual abuse of minors is not a "church problem." It's not a "religion problem," and it's certainly not a "Catholic problem." Sexual abuse of minors is a SOCIETY PROBLEM -- it's our society that's the problem! When you have a society problem, it effects all the institutions of that society, including schools and churches. Our society is a decadent society fixated on sex. Our kids are bombarded with sexual images in advertising, television, magazines, and the Internet. Our clothing and fashion trends reflects the attitudes of an over-sexed people -- less is more and tighter is better. Everywhere we turn we see sex -- more and more of it. In the United States, pornography is a protected industry. Couples are paid high dollar to engage in sexual activities while on camera, and somehow that's NOT considered prostitution? Couples living together, without marriage, is the status quo. While homosexuality is considered "normal." Children are "educated" in how to use a condom in public schools. Abortion of unwanted pregnancy (a consequence of reckless sexuality) is a sacrosanct "right" guaranteed by our nation's Supreme Court. Gay men kiss in public, and this is socially allowed. Straight couples make out in the parks -- and that is considered okay. And somehow in the midst of all this sexual PERVERSION, we are surprised when a small segment of our society goes off the deep end and turns into sexual predators? Somehow, after we've allowed perversion after perversion to take place, we are shocked when the perverts we helped create turn on our children? Oh, but rather than blame our own lax attitudes, and the permissive behavior of our society, we instead look for the scapegoat, somebody else to blame. So when the sexual perversion of our society finally hits the Church, we blame the Church, rather than our society. At least that's what the media would like us to do. They play on our refusal to take responsibility for ourselves. They report the sexual abuse in the Catholic Church, as if the Catholic Church invented sexual abuse! They blame the priests and the bishops, even though only 3% were responsible, and cast a shadow of suspicion over the whole Catholic religion. The public buys into it, because it's easier to blame a Church than to blame ourselves. But I submit to you that the media's real agenda is to discredit organized religion in general, and that means the Catholic Church simply must be taken down. Why? Why would they want to do this? I think the reason becomes self-explanatory when you look at statistics of those running the mainstream media. They are nearly 80% Liberal. Most of them are Secular Humanists? And a majority of them don't believe in organized religion. Enough said.

What It Means To Be Catholic In Today's World

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Anti-Catholicism is on the rise in a very BIG way. Some of the trials Catholics face are old ones. They've been around for generations. Others are relatively new, but make no mistake about it, to be a Practicing Catholic (meaning a Catholic who believes all of what the Church teaches, and tries to practice it) is to be hated, ridiculed, despised and persecuted. Jesus warned us that if they (the powers of this world) would do it to him, they will do likewise to us. Yes, being a Practicing Catholic means being a target. I suppose that might be one reason why so many Americans are Cafeteria Catholics. Perhaps they think they can duck what it means to be Catholic if they just don't believe or act like one.

Click on the links below to read, learn and understand what it means to be a Practicing Catholic in today's world...

• http://catholicknight.blogspot.com/search/label/Anti-Catholicism


• http://catholicknight.blogspot.com/search/label/Anti-Catholicism?updated-max=2007-04-12T10%3A34%3A00-05%3A00&max-results=20


• http://catholicknight.blogspot.com/search/label/Anti-Catholicism?updated-max=2006-10-20T17%3A19%3A00-05%3A00&max-results=20


• http://catholicknight.blogspot.com/search/label/Anti-Catholicism?updated-max=2006-06-27T14%3A52%3A00-05%3A00&max-results=20


• http://catholicknight.blogspot.com/search/label/Anti-Catholicism?updated-max=2006-02-21T23%3A03%3A00-06%3A00&max-results=20

Statement of Protestant Leaders against Anti-Catholic Bigotry

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Isn't it encouraging how a little bit of persecution forces Christians of various denominations to start doing what we should have been doing all along. In the wake of widespread anti-Catholic bigotry, incited by so-called "liberals" on the political Left, some Evangelicals are calling upon all Protestants to stand with their Catholic brethren and condemn this kind of vile prejudice. The Statement reads as follows...

May 6, 2007

As Protestant Christians and as Americans, we condemn the grotesque anti-Catholic bigotry that is now on display as a result of the Supreme Court's recent decision upholding the constitutionality of the federal law prohibiting partial-birth abortion.

We denounce as particularly odious a cartoon published by the Philadelphia Inquirer depicting the five justices who formed the majority in the case wearing Catholic bishops' mitres. Scarcely less offensive were the comments of law professor, and former University of Chicago Law School Dean, Geoff Stone identifying the Catholic religious affiliation of the justices forming the majority and accusing these distinguished and honorable jurists of imposing their religion rather than faithfully interpreting the Constitution.

We believe it is our particular duty to condemn the bigotry we are now witnessing in view of the history of anti-Catholicism in our nation. It is a stain on the Protestant Christian conscience that at one time many of our people accepted the vile teachings of Paul Blanshard in his book American Freedom and Catholic Power, and supported the anti-Catholic agenda of the group founded by Blanshard and others that now styles itself "Americans United for Separation of Church and State" (formerly known as Protestants and other Americans united for Separation of Church and State).

Just as Pope John Paul II acknowledged past injustices committed by Catholics, or committed in the name of Catholicism, against Protestants, Jews, and others and pledged to work against any revival of these injustices, we acknowledge past Protestant prejudices against Catholics and pledge to fight against the anti-Catholic bigotry we are now witnessing. Our Catholic brothers and sisters will not have to wait to hear our voices forcefully raised against the bigotry now directed against them.

Because evil begets evil, we are not surprised that bigotry would emerge among those who have placed themselves in the service of the moral abomination known as partial-birth abortion. For our part, we praise any judge, statesman, or citizen-irrespective of religious affiliation-who steps forward to tell the truth about the injustice of this horrific practice, or to expose the lie that baby-killing is somehow protected by our Constitution.

We call on our fellow Protestant Christians of every denomination-including those denominations that do not share our view that the life of the child in the womb must be honored and protected by law-to join with us in condemning the new anti-Catholicism that has, in the aftermath of the partial-birth abortion decision, reared its ugly head. We hope that no Protestant Christian will bring shame on himself or herself and on the great tradition of Reformed Christianity by participating in this appalling bigotry or remaining mute in the face of it.

We also call on groups that present themselves as enemies of prejudice, including "Americans United for Separation of Church and State," to join with us in condemning the Philadelphia Inquirer cartoon and other manifestations of anti-Catholic bigotry. This is a time of testing for them. Are they selective opponents of prejudice? Do they regard anti-Catholicism as an acceptable form of bigotry? Are they content to see Catholics treated in ways that they would be the first to condemn if the victims were members of other religious traditions or minorities? By responding or failing to respond to our plea to them to join us in condemning the injustice being suffered by our Catholic fellow citizens, we will soon know whether their claim to oppose prejudice and bigotry is an honest one or mere hypocrisy.

SOURCE

The Philadelphia Inquirer published this cartoon by Tony Auth

Democrats Sponsor Bill To Persecute Christians Here In America!

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: It's time to wake up folks. The Congressional Democrats have finally crossed the line and shown their true colors. In order to pander to their homosexual constituency, they are willing to sell the Constitution down the river, and pass a bill that authorizes GOVERNMENT CONTROL of churches and religious institutions. Yes, that's right. Congressional Democrats want to tell priests, rabbis, ministers and pastors what they're allowed to teach behind the pulpit, making it a crime for them to teach that homosexuality is a sin, or even to read various portions of the Bible that condemn homosexuality. This is the face of the new Democratic Party. It has become a party willing to sell out the religious freedoms of the American people -- all for a few votes from their gay constituents....

A fast-tracked congressional plan to add special protections for homosexuals to federal law would turn "thoughts, feelings, and beliefs" into criminal offenses and put Christians in the bull's-eye, according to opponents.

"H.R. 1592 is a discriminatory measure that criminalizes thoughts, feelings, and beliefs [and] has the potential of interfering with religious liberty and freedom of speech," according to a white paper submitted by Glen Lavy, of the Alliance Defense Fund.

"As James Jacobs and Kimberly Potter observed in Hate Crimes, Criminal Law, and Identity Politics, 'It would appear that the only additional purpose [for enhancing punishment of bias crimes] is to provide extra punishment based on the offender's politically incorrect opinions and viewpoints,'" said Lavy.

The proposal has been endorsed by majority Democrats on the committee, and already has 137 sponsors in the full House, making it possible it could be voted on in a matter of days or weeks...

...Secondly, it unfairly restricts the expression of fair opinion by Christians, he told WND. "If anything, gays are getting undue deference awarded to them by the courts. That's why we have the same-sex marriage fight and that kind of thing."

Rev. Louis Sheldon, director of the Traditional Values Coalition, which represents 43,000 churches across the nation, told WND that the Democrats sponsoring and supporting the issue "have sold out to the homosexual agenda."

He said churches need to awaken to the dangers of having pastors, lay leaders, or even those sitting in the pews sent to jail for their biblical views. "When they [realize they] could go to jail for preaching the Word of God, they'll be concerned," he told WND....

read full story here

Church To Sue Ron Howard and Dan Brown?

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Can you say "libel?" Can you say "slander?" Some Church officials are calling for a massive lawsuit against Dan Brown for his fictional book "The Di Vinci Code." The fictional novel implies that some of its background information is factual, and therein lies the basis of a potential lawsuit. Much of this background material accuses the Catholic Church, and Opus Dei, of a massive cover-up involving murder, genocide, and conspiracy to commit crimes against persons and people. In addition, this same background material implies that Christianity itself is a lie, and that Jesus Christ was anything but the the Son of God. The same are calling for a similar suit against Ron Howard for failing to provide a disclaimer on his film by the same name, which is based on Brown's novel. Surly, if the subject of the novel was Microsoft, instead of the Catholic Church, there would be legal hell to pay. Maybe it's an idea who's time has come. Perhaps it's time Christians start flexing a little legal muscle. This following story will elaborate...

Cardinal urges legal action against Da Vinci Code

In the latest Vatican broadside against "The Da Vinci Code", a leading cardinal says Christians should respond to the book and film with legal action because both offend Christ and the Church he founded.

Cardinal Francis Arinze, a Nigerian who was considered a candidate for pope last year, made his strong comments in a documentary called "The Da Vinci Code-A Masterful Deception."

Arinze's appeal came some 10 days after another Vatican cardinal called for a boycott of the film. Both cardinals asserted that other religions would never stand for offences against their beliefs and that Christians should get tough.

"Christians must not just sit back and say it is enough for us to forgive and to forget," Arinze said in the documentary made by Rome film maker Mario Biasetti for Rome Reports, a Catholic film agency specializing in religious affairs.

"Sometimes it is our duty to do something practical. So it is not I who will tell all Christians what to do but some know legal means which can be taken in order to get the other person to respect the rights of others," Arinze said.

"This is one of the fundamental human rights: that we should be respected, our religious beliefs respected, and our founder Jesus Christ respected," he said, without elaborating on what legal means he had in mind.

A transcript of the documentary, due to be screened in Rome later this month just before the release of the film version of the best-selling book at the Cannes Film Festival, was made available to Reuters.

The book, written by Dan Brown, has sold more than 40 million copies.

The novel is an international murder mystery centered on attempts to uncover a secret about the life of Christ that a clandestine society has tried to protect for centuries.

The central tenet of the book is that Jesus married Mary Magdalene and had children.

BLASPHEMY

"Those who blaspheme Christ and get away with it are exploiting the Christian readiness to forgive and to love even those who insult us. There are some other religions which if you insult their founder they will not be just talking. They will make it painfully clear to you," Arinze said.

This appeared to be a reference to protests by Muslims around the world over cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad.

Last month, another broadside against "The Da Vinci Code" was launched by Archbishop Angelo Amato, the number two official in the Vatican doctrinal office which was headed by Pope Benedict until his election last year.

Amato urged a boycott of the film and Arinze, like his fellow cardinal, also blasted the credibility of the book.

"'The Da Vinci Code' presents (Christianity) wrongly ... any film produced on the basis of that book is already in error from the word go, no matter how interesting it might appear," Arinze said.

Catholic group Opus Dei has told Sony Pictures that putting a disclaimer on the movie stressing it is a work of fiction would be a welcome show of respect toward the Church...

read full story here

The New Anti-Catholicism

An anti-abortion demonstrator rallies in front of the U.S. Supreme Court Oct. 31 after President George W. Bush nominated Judge Samuel Alito Jr., a Catholic, as a justice of the Supreme Court. If confirmed, Alito would replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. (CNS photo from Reuters)...
{Read Full Story Here}

Alito would be fifth Catholic on Supreme Court
By Jerry Filteau

WASHINGTON (CNS) -- If Judge Samuel Alito Jr. is confirmed as a U.S. Supreme Court justice, it would be the first time in history that the majority of justices on the nation's highest court are Catholic.

President George W. Bush Oct. 31 nominated Alito, a former U.S. attorney in New Jersey and for the past 15 years a judge on the Philadelphia-based 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. He is widely regarded as a strong conservative on an appellate court that is considered among the most liberal in the country.

The 55-year-old judge is likely to face strong Democratic opposition because on the appellate court he opined that it was constitutional to require wives to notify their husbands before having an abortion. That opinion came as a minority dissent in Planned Parenthood vs. Casey, a landmark case contesting Pennsylvania's 1989 Abortion Control Act....

{Read Full Story Here}

Welcome to 21st century America! My how things have changed! In the early 20th century American Catholics were discriminated against in the workplace, looked down upon in society, and viewed as a threat to the American political system. Among the most militant anti-Catholics were Protestant Fundamentalists, who saw the pope as the Antichrist, and the Church itself as an anti-Christian "cult." Catholics were viewed as nothing more than whitewashed pagans, both ignorant and amiable. Fundamentalists worried that Catholics in high government offices might be too easily influenced by the pope and the teachings of the Catholic Church.

Now it's a full century later. America still has it's old anti-Catholic Fundamentalists, but they are a dying breed, forced by progress into the attic of irrelevancy. Today, Catholics dominate the mainstream of American politics. But in the 21st century, a new form of anti-Catholicism has risen to the mainstream. It's not based on the old sectarian differences between Catholics and Protestants. Rather, it's based on the ideological differences between conservatism and liberalism. Now we live in a world where Catholics can be good Catholics, or they can be good liberals (Democrats), but never both as the same time. That's because the liberal establishment has created a mindset within the Democratic Party that when it comes to politics, the only good Catholic is a bad Catholic, meaning a Catholic who doesn't practice the teachings of the Church.

Liberal Democrats generally don't have a problem with Catholics, so long as they deny the Church's teachings on moral issues like abortion, euthanasia and homosexuality. Catholics have no problem ascending to the highest ranks of the Democratic Party so long as they are good liberals and bad Catholics. Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, Mario Cuomo and Nancy Pelosi; are examples of this. Their religious beliefs are considered untouchable by the mainstream liberal establishment. But when it comes to good practicing Catholics, like Supreme Court nominees John Robers and Sam Alito, their faith is "fair game." Consider the following remarks about John Roberts by liberals in the mainstream media and the Democratic Party...

Larry King (CNN, 8-4-2005): "Anyone have a problem on him being a devout Catholic?"

Bill Press (Sun-Sentinel, 8-2-2005): "It is absolutely essential to explore Roberts' religious beliefs as part of the confirmation process."

John MacArthur, publisher of Harper’s Magazine, (Providence Journal, 8-2-2005): "The Roberts couple seem to be very well-educated; I wonder whether in their high-minded socializing with Clarence and Virginia Thomas (at the College of the Holy Cross) and Robert and Mary Ellen Bork (at the lay Catholic John Carroll Society), they find time for informal book chat…."

Dahlia Lithwick, legal analyst for Slate, (NPR, 8-2-2005): "And I wouldn’t underestimate the influence of his religion, that Scalia and Thomas, one of the reasons they may not have drifted leftward has a lot to do with very, very strong religious views that pull them to the right. And I think that probably John Roberts will fall into that camp in that sense."

Christopher Hitchens (Slate, 8-1-2005): "If Roberts is confirmed there will be quite a bloc of Catholics on the court. Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas are strong in the faith. Is it kosher to mention these things?"

Frances Kissling (NPR, 8-1-2005): "If this pope will intervene in the ways he has already in Europe, it certainly raises questions for us in the immediate sense in terms of whether he thinks he can tell John Roberts how to vote when he gets on the Supreme Court."

Mario Cuomo (Meet the Press, 8-7-2005): "Are you (John Roberts) going to impose a religious test on the Constitution? Are you going to say that because the pope says this or the Church says that, you will do it no matter what?"

Tony Harris (CNN, 7-24-2005): "Roberts is a Roman Catholic and a political conservative. This week on our ‘Faces of Faith’ segment we’re going to examine how his faith might influence his profession."

Nina Totenberg (NPR, 7-23-2005): "Don’t forget his wife was an officer, a high officer of a pro-life organization. He’s got adopted children. I mean, he’s a conservative Catholic."

Brian Mitchell (Investor’s Business Daily, 7-21-2005): "The left has other reasons to fear Roberts. Roberts is a Catholic. His wife Jane is a former executive vice president of Feminists for Life."

Jonathan Mann, (CNN, 7-20-2005): "He is a Catholic. His wife…is involved with a group called Feminists for Life, it’s an anti-abortion group."

Barbara Walters (ABC, 7-20-2005): "John Roberts is a, a Roman Catholic. How important to him is his religion? Do you think that it might affect him as a Supreme Court justice?"

We can expect more of the same on Supreme Court nominee Judge Sam Alito. Already the fossilized CBS reporter Mike Wallace snidely referred to Alito as a "nice Catholic boy" on Larry King Live (10-31-2005). To be sure, liberals will be more guarded on their comments this time around after being called on the carpet for their careless remarks on Judge John Roberts. But after all is said and done, they just won't be able to stop themselves from leaking their true anti-Catholic feelings from time to time. Make no mistake about it. The liberal template of the mainstream media and the Democratic Party is as follows. When it comes to politics and high government office, the only good Catholics are bad Catholics -- those who deny the teachings of the Catholic Church.