Translate

15.7.16

Catholic approach to Islamic invasion.

Link

Letter from a Catholic to his priest.

 Dear Father Remi:

I've come close to walking out of mass before, when Deacon Mike was plugging for gun control. I didn't, then, but I resolved that I would walk out if the church again attempted to interfere, even if only by suggestion, with matters of internal politics of the United States or undermining of the Constitution of the United States or undermining of the security of the United States.

This morning, at the early mass, I did walk out after we were intoned to not be afraid of letting in "refugees." I'm not sure what universe the reader lives in. I am not sure what universe the writer of the request for prayers lives in. In the universe I live in, the real universe, those refugees are mostly - no, _overwhelmingly_ - military age males, from a hostile religion, heavily infiltrated by ISIS/DAESH, a slave trading, raping, fanatical, genocidal, and expanding group of that religion. No, the State Department and DHS cannot filter out the maniacs.

Yes, as a matter of fact I do have quite a bit of experience over there.

I will not welcome them. I will not encourage others to welcome them. And I will not support a church that says we should. They are the enemy. They are the enemy of both civilization and Christianity. They are not an enemy to be turned by turning the other cheek. (Indeed, given the sexual proclivities of the region, it is wise to keep all one's cheeks far, far from them.) And those who would let them in are working hand in hand with the enemies of civilization and the Church.

Whether I shall come back to Saint Mary's, find another Catholic Church less politically and suicidally liberal, or join a less effectively anti-Christian Protestant church I cannot say at this time. I am pretty sure that whichever way I decide, God will understand my preferring not to support the ruin of my country, my civilization, or my religion.

Sincerely,

Thomas P. Kratman
------------
From Ex-Army: Me, now, the last time I was in a church was when I got married, I think, several decades ago. I have no hostility to religion or organized religion, I'm just sort of indifferent to its manifestation in public. Just indifferent. I have no grudge against it. If anything, I'm rather biased in favor of Christianity because it's been instrumental in producing the Western Civilization that I value above all other cultures of mankind. And, though I'm not a believer, I usually prefer believers to non-believers. They tend to be better people. I'm a lifelong fan of C. S. Lewis, G. K. Chesterton, and other Christian-oriented writers of that sort. Morality-wise, I find Christianity as good a guide as any religion or philosophy, and superior to the vast majority.

That said, a damn fool is a damn fool, whether he's a Christian or not. Some of my fellow-thinkers among the realist right are hostile to Christianity precisely because of the sort of nonsense that Mr. Kratman describes above. I'm not, or I'm usually not, because the same kind of nonsense can be found outside of the churches and outside of Christianity, among just about every other religion or nonreligious belief system. Indeed, I first encountered it, back in the 60's, with the counterculture movement which was overwhelmingly anti-Christian.

Obviously, Christians don't have to be damn fools, because Tom Kratman clearly isn't. Ir also occurs to me that while Pope Francis is a damn fool in much the same way that the priest addressed is, Pat Buchanan, of the same church, definitely is not.

My attitude in these matters is simple. When someone is correct on the issues of gun control and inviting "Syrian" "refugees" to move in, I respect him for his conclusions whether he's a theist or an atheist or something in between. When he's wrong on those issues, I have zero respect for his opinions on the matters whether he's a peasant, Pope, or punk rocker.

A religious leader is, supposedly, an expert on matters of religion. That's where his authority lies. He has no more expertise in matters of statecraft than does a janitor or a courtesan. Bad advice from a preacher or priest deserves no more respect than bad advice from anyone else.

_________________________________________________________________________________________
My thought on this is: While I think being compassionate is admirable, I can see the point of not letting in people that desire one's demise.
I have written before about my experience in this area but just for now I should just admit that it took a lot of major wake-up calls for me to realize that Muslims really mean business. Just one example out of many. I was going to the small river the Shiloach where King Solomon was anointed king. It is deep, and to get to it one has to go down though a long flight of stairs  about 30 yards. When down there the Muslims at the top started throwing large rocks at me. After being accelerated after a 30 yard drop, if even one had hit me, that would have been the end. And of course that is what they were intending. I prayed to God and said: "I have no army, nor any weapon. But I have You."  And I started up the stairs. There was a lull in the rock throwing. When I got up to the top, there was a whole gang of Arabs. One said to the other "Here he is again." And they started again throwing rocks at me at point blank range. As I walked away I saw the rocks flying at every side of me. But not one hit me. I was shaken and shocked. And I realized then that they were not my friends.


Muslims are to be a problem whenever they get past a certain percentage. When below 10% they are exemplary. Then everyone thinks they are peace loving. Then after the 10% mark things start to get violent. First they send in their children and teenagers to cause trouble and claim they have no control. etc. Bringing in large number in Germany is definitely treasonous.

And people can be fooled. Genes tend to determine a lot. People can marry some black person or Muslim or Tartar and think they are getting a good deal -but then the children revert to form.