Distinction Matter - Subscribed Feeds

  1. Site: Fr Hunwicke's Mutual Enrichment
    0 sec ago
    Since the Council, an idea has been spreading that Judaism is not superseded by the New Covenant of Jesus Christ; that Jews still have available to them the Covenant of the old Law, by which they can be saved. It is therefore unnecessary for them to turn to Christ; unnecessary for anybody to convert them to faith in Christ. Indeed, attempting to do so is an act of aggression not dissimilar to theFr John Hunwickehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17766211573399409633noreply@blogger.com11
  2. Site: Fr Hunwicke's Mutual Enrichment
    0 sec ago
    S Paul loved his fellow Jews, his 'kinsmen' and believed "the gifts and call of God are irrevocable". He believed that at the End, those among them who had rejected Christ would be brought in to the chosen people. He believed that they were like olive branches which had been cut off so that the Gentiles, wild olive branches, could be grafted in. But, when the fulness of the Gentiles had entered Fr John Hunwickehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17766211573399409633noreply@blogger.com3
  3. Site: Fr Hunwicke's Mutual Enrichment
    0 sec ago
    Lex orandi lex credendi. I have been examining the Two Covenant Dogma: the fashionable error that God's First Covenant, with the Jews, is still fully and salvifically valid, so that the call to saving faith in Christ Jesus is not made to them. The 'New' Covenant, it is claimed, is now only for Gentiles. I want to draw attention at this point to the witness of the post-Conciliar Magisterium of theFr John Hunwickehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17766211573399409633noreply@blogger.com13
  4. Site: Fr Hunwicke's Mutual Enrichment
    0 sec ago
    We have seen that the Two Covenant Theory, the idea that Jewry alone is guaranteed Salvation without any need to convert to Christ, is repugnant to Scripture, to the Fathers, even to the post-Conciliar liturgy of the Catholic Church. It is also subversive of the basic grammar of the relationship between the Old and the New Testaments. Throughout  two millennia, in Scripture, in Liturgy, in her Fr John Hunwickehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17766211573399409633noreply@blogger.com7
  5. Site: Fr Hunwicke's Mutual Enrichment
    0 sec ago
    The sort of people who would violently reject the points I am making are the sort of people who would not be impressed by the the Council of Florence. So I am going to confine myself to the Magisterium from the time of Pius XII ... since it is increasingly coming to be realised that the continuum of processes which we associate with the Conciliar and post-Conciliar period was already in operationFr John Hunwickehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17766211573399409633noreply@blogger.com0
  6. Site: Fr Hunwicke's Mutual Enrichment
    0 sec ago
    In 1980, addressing a Jewish gathering in Germany, B John Paul II said (I extract this from a long sentence): " ... dialogue; that is, the meeting between the people of the Old Covenant (never revoked by God, cf Romans 11:29) and that of the New Covenant, is at the same time ..." In 2013, Pope Francis, in the course of his Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii gaudium, also referred to the Old Fr John Hunwickehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17766211573399409633noreply@blogger.com10
  7. Site: Steyn Online
    0 sec ago
    Programming note: Friday's edition of The Mark Steyn Show airs an hour earlier than during the rest of the week - live on GB News at 7pm GMT/2pm North American Eastern. US and Canadian viewers may find the midnight replay more convenient: that's 7pm
  8. Site: Voltaire Network
    1 hour 33 min ago
    On 24 January 2022, Senator Ron Johnson (R-Wisconsin) was joined in the Senate by a group of doctors and medical experts, including founder of myfreedoctor.com Dr. Ben Marble, to discuss in particular preventable deaths from Covid-19. Dr. Marble testified that his association has given free medical online consultations to more than 150,000 Covid-19 patients. He prescribed to them the outpatient treatment recommended by Doctor Peter McCullough, which was published by the American Journal of (...)
  9. Site: Fr Hunwicke's Mutual Enrichment
    1 hour 33 min ago
    In his early days at Econe, Archbishop Lefebvre recruited the assistance of some talented teachers. One of these was Fr Francois-Olivier Dubuis.Fr Dubuis was an antiquarian almost in the old Anglican Style ... one could imagine him getting on like a house on fire with the great Anglican Cornish antiquary, Canon Doble. At Econe, Dubuis taught patrology and history.Born in 1921, he had begun life Fr John Hunwickehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17766211573399409633noreply@blogger.com0
  10. Site: From Rome
    1 hour 38 min ago
    Author: Editor
  11. Site: Crisis Magazine
    1 hour 41 min ago
    Author: Jason Morgan
    PutinPutin

    In an April 2005 address to the Russian parliament, then (and, now, again) president of Russia Vladimir Putin called the collapse of the Soviet Union one of the “major geopolitical disasters” of the twentieth century.

    It’s not that the former KGB operative wanted to return to bread lines and the other splendors of centralized economic planning. No sane person wants Venezuela. Putin’s meaning was, as he said, geopolitical. It wasn’t the economic system that was great but the land which the Soviet Union encompassed. The ideology was rotten—Putin seems to understand that as well as anyone. But the grand political imaginary which bundled a giant hunk of Eurasia was not something just to throw away on a lark. That is what Putin seems to mean when he laments what the Soviet Union used to be.

    There is some indication that many within the former Soviet Union agree with him. The Kremlin is downplaying this nostalgia now, but protesting a bit too much, I think. The moves make the man. Putin is clearly making a play to recover lost ground.

    This is not an entirely unreasonable thing for a political leader to do, especially the leader of what is essentially a weak shadow of a former behemoth of a realm. A tremendous empire broke up when the Soviet Union came crashing down. Ever since, the region has struggled to regain the clout it once had under what was a nightmarish, but mighty, regime.

    Consider that with the fall of the Soviet regime, Russia lost vast swaths of territory: the Eastern Bloc (including Poland, Yugoslavia, and Czechoslovakia, the latter two of which further disintegrated after the Soviet Union ended), Georgia, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Belarus, and much more.

    Including also, of course, Ukraine, which as I write this is the focus of a rapidly escalating standoff between the West and Moscow. Whether war is in the offing only God knows. But if war is avoided it will not be because many were not trying everything they could to bring it about.

    But in the midst of this latest round of banging on the war drums and vying for supremacy in Ukraine, let us remember what the bigger goals are for which everyone is fighting.

    On the American side, their own empire is on the line. After a humiliating exit from Afghanistan last summer, and a steady erosion of credibility in the Asia-Pacific region concomitant with the rise of China (which Washington has not only failed to stop but positively encouraged), a loss in Ukraine would spell doom for the worldwide system of military alliances and forward deployments which has become the framework for the Pentagon’s lucrative “security” business.

    NATO is the mirror image of the Pentagon in that sense. NATO, too, wants to ensure its continued existence. But because Germany—one of the nations that NATO was ostensibly designed both to rein in and also to protect from Russia’s former iteration, the Soviet Union—has shown itself much more interested in continuing imports of Russian natural gas than in taking part in a war over the Crimea and surrounding region, the NATO gambit in Ukraine looks almost as desperate as Washington’s.

    Ukraine is a different story. Some in Ukraine want to remain separate from Russia, to tip the scales of Ukrainian life toward Europe and the West. Others want to throw in their lot with Moscow. Atop this divided country is one of the most corrupt governments in the world—corruption which Americans glimpsed these past few years thanks to the many American elites (Hunter and Joe Biden, Rudy Giuliani, and Paul Manafort, to name just a few) who have gotten ensnared in the pitfall of Ukrainian politics.

    Then there is Russia. What does Russia want? The question is perhaps more precisely put, “What does Vladimir Putin want?” But this brings us right back to Russia, for Putin seems to want what most Russians seem to want: a return to the Soviet Union. Not the Soviet Union of Brezhnev and Chernenko. Not the failed, decrepit, lurching communist hellhole which swallowed down freedom and material comfort. The Soviet Union as mantle for the former Orthodox Russian Empire.

    Much-touted nostalgia for the Soviet Union, I think, is a stand-in for a much bigger, much older Russian dream. The political imaginary of a Christian empire. The Russian Empire, the Christendom of the East, the Third Rome, the land where the Orthodox Faith was once, and is again today, widely accepted.

    This is not to say that this is what Putin is advertising. Putin is a wily fox and is not going to make something as hard to control as religion a centerpiece of his political showcase. But he has signaled time and again that he is Orthodox, and this quiet witness to faith speaks much louder than the political theater that other leaders have made of their churchgoing bona fides. By many accounts (including his own), Putin is a Christian man leading a Christian people. There is enormous strength that flows from this—geopolitical and, yes, otherwise.

    To put it bluntly, if God will be on some side in the Ukraine mess, then wouldn’t that be the side of the Christian armies?

    Whatever the reader thinks of this admittedly provocative argument—and let us grant pro arguendo that Putin is simply a cynical faker and doesn’t really believe—contrast it with what the NATO side is offering. NATO is a strange, foreign name, and commands little allegiance apart from the at-a-remove allegiance of soldiers fighting for their own member countries. In other words, if war comes, very few people are going to go out to fight for NATO (another big Putin advantage, incidentally). But if you put the pieces of the puzzle together and look at it sidelong, you see something else: a big chunk of what used to be called Christendom.

    It’s not a perfect match, of course. For one thing, Turkey’s in NATO now, and the Ottoman Empire was once very much not part of Christendom. But you get the idea. NATO is Christendom, but secularized. NATO is the Christendom that largely stopped believing in Christ, or in anything really, long ago.

    The United States, for its part, has, in many ways, gone even farther down the post-Christian road than Europe has. If NATO is rejiggered and hollowed-out Christendom, then the globalist-run militarist monstrosity in the Pentagon is a devil that never had religion in the first place.

    This deracinated Christendom tag-teaming with a pentagram-shaped war machine, the pair enervated by nihilism and depravity, and in the thrall of a hateful and destructive ideology, is now proposing to go up against a Christian powerhouse with a score to settle with history.

    [Photo Credit: Alexey Nikolsky/Sputnik/AFP via Getty Images]

  12. Site: Crisis Magazine
    1 hour 50 min ago
    Author: Kennedy Hall
    truckerstruckers

    In our day, and in my country of Canada, the virtue of patriotism seems to be forged in a furnace of hope and despair. It is like a war of attrition between the two sides of the human heart—one telling you to flee or give up and the other telling you to stay and fight.

    The last two years of Covidian tyranny have been an ordeal, and the psychological and spiritual effects have caused me to change in ways I never thought I would.

    At times I have become resentful, nay, even hateful of the men in power in ways that are not conducive to balance in my soul. I think my confessors at this point might be tired of counseling me off a proverbial ledge as I prattle on about the communism that has gripped my nation.

    It is a difficult thing to be a man of principle, especially when you verge on being a platonic form of a choleric temperament. I would be lying if I hadn’t dreamt of having numerous Braveheart moments, riding with my countrymen into battle, taking back my land for my progeny.

    Alas, much of the recent years have been filled with an equally oppressive feeling of hopelessness and a defeatist attitude. In reality, there is almost nothing Canadians can do to live as free men in a nation that wants them to be slaves to Big Pharma. 

    Our constitutional documents are an afterthought to say the least; there is no Second Amendment spirit in these parts, and our national mythology is one of loyalty to government as a source of peace and order. We are not revolutionaries—justifications for revolutions notwithstanding. We are not even rebellious. At times it is as if we are not even awake.

    However, there is more to this country than meets the untrained eye.

    This land was formed by missionaries, explorers, and some of the most industrious men who have ever lived.

    Our forefathers looked out on cold and untamed oceans, only to risk their lives to forge a path into the heart of the Great White North.

    Scurvy, frostbite, death from exposure, and erratic weather were the handmaids of the Canadian experience. 

    French navigator Samuel de Champlain braved the harshest winter imaginable, engaged in battle against the Iroquois in an alliance with the Algonquin, and over half his men died in those first winters. However, he did not abandon ship, even after being shot and forced to leave dead confreres frozen until they could be thawed and buried in the spring. 

    He stayed. For some reason, that God only knows, the man stayed. And then more came, and they stayed too, even though they knew they might die. Then more, then more, and then a nation was formed.

    Battles were fought, lives were lost; lives were forged. Children were born and children died, and a soul of a people was built to withstand the rugged tundra that presented herself as a frozen nemesis to all who dared battle with her wicked winters.

    However, this great people has largely been lost and replaced by a collection of effeminate and soft lemmings who are addicted to welfare checks and creature comforts. Gone are the days when the average Canadian would expect to actually suffer through the elements—save for that brief moment when they roll down their frosted windows to order a Double Double coffee.

    Justin Trudeau is the archetype of what an effeminate man is, and he is the perfect representation of what has happened to the grit and manfully cultivated virtue that was once common in this nation. But it is not all gone.

    This is still the country where our favorite game is to launch veritable rocks at each other with long sticks, while skating and fighting with sharp blades attached to our feet.

    This is still the nation that comes together during national disasters and record-setting snowfalls.

    This is still the nation where Samuel de Champlain, Louis Riel, and Montcalm all spilled their blood as libation for a great people whom they would sire.

    This nation is not dead. In fact, she may just be coming back to life.

    You see, every nation has a national soul, and every soul is a metaphysical thing, a spiritual thing, and therefore an immortal thing. The soul may be cast into Hell to make company with the shades and ghouls, but it does not go away.

    Our nation has been beaten, our nation has been abused, and many have forgotten how to fight. But out of nowhere have come the most unlikely of heroes who are set to stare down Trudeau and his bastardly henchmen in Ottawa.

    Tens of thousands of truck drivers are now riding their unsuspecting chariots in a convoy so long that it looks like it will break previous world records for a convoy by an order of magnitude.

    Justin and his ministers said “take the jab, truckers, even if you don’t want it,” and this has been their response.

    They plan to descend on the capital with hundreds of thousands—maybe more—citizens who have lined highways from coast to coast to cheer on these long-haul heroes.

    I have never seen such unity between so many Canadians. Videos of families and communities preparing food for the drivers and showing up at truck stops nationwide are going viral. Police officers are coming out in support, and even feckless conservative politicians have finally grown a spine and stood up like real boys and girls, trumpeting the cause of the Freedom Convoy.

    The idiots in the Liberal Party, however, are doubling down and show no sign of budging. But it is clear that they do not have the nation on their side. Their policies of vaccine mandates for truck drivers will cause national food shortages, which will be unavoidable. It seems that the morons have forgotten the most important rule of keeping the public peace—do not let the people go hungry.

    Now, the truckers say they will stay parked at Parliament until the mandates are dropped—all of the mandates, not just the ones that pertain to them. But it is more complicated than that. Most of the terroristic governance that has inflicted Canadians has come from the provinces, who will have to strike down their own laws in order to free their people.

    Funny enough, it seems to be working. Premiers know that if they cannot feed their constituents, then they are toast—pun intended—and they are now lobbying the feds to strike down the mandates, even partnering with their American counterparts. 

    They must be careful, however, because once people get a true taste of liberty and communal spirit, they will want more.

    Canadians are ready for a change. They are ready for a nation they can be proud of. They are ready to live in Canada again.

    I do not know how things will turn out, but the hair stands up on the back of my neck just thinking about it. I did not think something like this would happen—a real chance at rebellion, a national movement seeking true liberty. But here we are.

    I am fearful of the hope I have currently for what may come very soon. The undulation of misery and liberty that has enwrapped the hearts of Canadians these past years is almost too much to bear.

    But, whatever happens, it is in God’s hands. Despite what the devils in Ottawa may do, God has carved this great land out of snow and ice with His mighty hands, and it does not belong to some witless fools who dictate from bully pulpits.

    As the national anthem goes: “God keep our land glorious and free.”

    [Photo sources: Twitter]

  13. Site: AsiaNews.it
    1 hour 58 min ago
    After 12 years, the Joint Economic Committee met in the Hellenic capital: a memorandum on strategic sectors was signed, while trade already triplingsince 2005. But the historic divisions between the Turks and the Greeks over Cyprus and the deposits in the Mediterranean remain, as does the issue of migrants.
  14. Site: Rorate Caeli
    2 hours 2 min ago
     Andrea Riccardi, between the Quirinale and the Apostolic PalacesBetween January 22 and 23 the main Italian news agencies and blogs reported that the center-left parties had selected professor Andrea Riccardi as candidate for the presidency of the Republic. News that surprised many, because Riccardi’s name is of no great repute in the university world and his political experience is modest, New Catholichttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04118576661605931910noreply@blogger.com0
  15. Site: Real Investment Advice
    2 hours 20 min ago
    Author: Lance Roberts

    What if the Fed can’t hike rates? It’s an interesting question and one we delved into in Part 1 – “Fed Won’t Hike Rates As Much As Expected.”

    With the January FOMC meeting now behind us, we have much better visibility about the Fed’s intentions.

    “With inflation well above 2 percent and a strong labor market, the Committee expects it will soon be appropriate to raise the target range for the federal funds rate.”FOMC

    The post-meeting statement from the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) did not provide a specific time frame for increasing the overnight lending rate. However, there are many indications that such could happen as soon as the March meeting. As shown in the charts below courtesy of “The Daily Shot.”

    About the Fed’s “Quantitative Easing” program, the FOMC noted its bond-buying program would fall to just $30 billion in February, down from $120 billion a month in 2021. In addition, the Fed will terminate purchases in March consistent with an increase in interest rates.

    Interestingly, there was no specific indication of when the Fed might start to reduce its nearly $9 trillion balance sheet. The most significant risk to equities is the contraction of liquidity from “Quantitative Tightening. Such is what preceded the market rout in 2018.

    However, while the Fed is intent on hiking rates and reducing accommodation, I am reminded of an age-old proverb:

    “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.”

    While the Fed may intend to hike rates and taper their balance sheet, the real question is, “can they?”

    The Fed’s Inflation Trap

    There are two primary considerations for the Fed as we progress into 2022. As noted in part-1, the reversal of liquidity is problematic.

    As recently discussed, “deflation” is the overarching threat longer-term. However, in the short term, the flood of liquidity into the system created, as expected, surging inflationary pressures. With the measure of money in the system, known as M2, skyrocketing, the resulting surge in inflation is not surprising.

    Furthermore, in a previous Bloomberg interview, Larry Summers stated:

    “There is a chance that macroeconomic stimulus on a scale closer to World War II levels will set off inflationary pressures of a kind not seen in a generation. I worry that containing an inflationary outbreak without triggering a recession could be even more difficult now than in the past.”

    As we indicated in part-1, inflation surged almost exactly 9-months after the massive infusions of fiscal policy. So while many, including the Fed, suggest inflation is problematic, M2 indicates disinflation remains the most likely outcome.

    Inflation CPI vs M2

    The current surge in inflationary pressures pushed the Fed to hike rates and reduce its bond-buying program. However, they could be acting precisely at the wrong time. In 1998, Alan Greenspan started aggressively hiking rates to combat an “inflation threat” that never materialized. The resulting consequence was the implosion of the “dot.com” bubble.

    However, such is why inflation isn’t the most significant risk limiting the Fed.

    The Fed “Instability” Trap

    “When it comes to Federal Reserve policy, investors are focused on the wrong question. Investors continue to agonize over when the Fed will trim its $120 billion in monthly asset purchases. A more important question is when will the Fed raise interest rates. More important still: whether the Fed actually can raise rates.” – Joe LaVorgna, Barron’s

    That is a critical question. As discussed previously, the Fed is dependent on “stability” to keep the financial “house of cards” from collapsing.

    With the entirety of the financial ecosystem heavily dependent on debt, the “instability of stability” is the most significant risk to the Fed.

    After more than 12-years of the most unprecedented monetary policy program in U.S. history, the Fed realizes there are significant risks in the financial system. The behavioral biases of individuals remain the most serious risk facing the Fed. 

    The Fed’s actions have repeatedly led to adverse outcomes throughout history despite the best of intentions.

    • In the early 70’s it was the “Nifty Fifty” stocks,
    • Then Mexican and Argentine bonds a few years after that
    • “Portfolio Insurance” was the “thing” in the mid -80’s
    • Dot.com anything was a great investment in 1999
    • Real estate has been a boom/bust cycle roughly every other decade, but 2007 was a doozy
    • Today, it’s real estate, FAANNGT, debt, credit, private equity, SPAC’s, IPO’s, “Meme” stocks…or rather…”everthing.”
    Fed funds, 2-year rates, and S&P 500 index.

    “If easy money is the bedrock of valuations and the Fed is getting ready to shift the bedrock, investors best pay attention to market forecasts and how the Fed ultimately acts.Michael Lebowitz

    With the Fed now reversing monetary accommodation, the question is how long before something breaks.

    Trapped At Zero?

    Looking at the long-term history of the overnight lending rate versus its exponential growth trend, it tells an interesting story.

    Fed funds vs exponential growth trend.

    The rise and fall of stock prices have very little to do with the average American and their participation in the domestic economy. Interest rates are an entirely different matter. As discussed in “Rates Do Matter:”

    In the short term, the economy and the markets (due to the current momentum) can  DEFY the laws of financial gravity as interest rates rise. However, as interest rates increase, they act as a “brake” on economic activity. Such is because higher rates NEGATIVELY impact a highly levered economy:

    • Rates increases debt servicing requirements reducing future productive investment.
    • Housing slows. People buy payments, not houses.
    • Higher borrowing costs lead to lower profit margins.
    • The massive derivatives and credit markets get negatively impacted.
    • Variable rate interest payments on credit cards and home equity lines of credit increase, reducing consumption.
    • Rising defaults on debt service will negatively impact banks which are still not as well capitalized as most believe.
    • Many corporate share buyback plans and dividend payments are done through the use of cheap debt.
    • Corporate capital expenditures are dependent on low borrowing costs.
    • The deficit/GDP ratio will soar as borrowing costs rise sharply.

    The debt problem exposes the Fed’s risk and why they continue to look for excuses NOT to hike rates. (Like “full employment” even though jobless claims are at record lows.) However, given economic stability was not achieved in the last decade, it is doubtful the withdrawal of monetary accommodation will be “risk-free.”

    The evidence is quite clear that surging debt and deficits inhibit organic growth, and the massive debt levels are sensitive to increases in interest rates.

    Economic growth by cycle vs debt

    Wash, Rinse, Repeat

    As we argued in part one, we believe the Fed’s ability to hike rates from the zero bound is minimal before “financial stability” becomes an issue.

    The primary bullish argument for owning stocks over the last decade is that low-interest rates support high valuations.

    If that is the case, higher rates will undermine the financial markets.

    With exceptionally high market valuations, Fed rate hikes historically led to events that devastated investors. Those events created the Fed’s repetitive cycle of monetary policy.

    1. Monetary policy drags forward future consumption leaving a void in the future.
    2. Since monetary policy does not create self-sustaining economic growth, ever-larger amounts of liquidity are needed to maintain the same level of activity.
    3. The filling of the “gap” between fundamentals and reality leads to economic contraction.
    4. Job losses rise, wealth effect diminishes, and real wealth reduces. 
    5. The middle class shrinks further.
    6. Central banks act to provide more liquidity to offset recessionary drag and restart economic growth by dragging forward future consumption. 
    7. Wash, Rinse, Repeat.

    Conclusion

    “Financial markets’ sensitivity to monetary policy has never been higher. The Fed’s balance sheet doubled since the end of the last financial crisis and is now 40% of gross domestic product. By buying massive amounts of bonds, the Fed lowered rates and used asset prices, like stocks, as the primary tool for monetary policy. That’s through the so-called wealth effect, or the tendency for consumers (two-thirds of GDP) to spend more as their assets grow.” Joe LaVorgna

    Therein lies the problem.

    If the Fed tightens, the existing debt pile becomes more expensive to service, and stocks fall, hampering consumer confidence and economic growth.

    On the other hand, if the Fed doesn’t tighten, debt across households, companies, and the government will continue to grow, making it more challenging for the Fed to act in the future

    The Fed has put itself in a box that will be difficult to get out of, especially if economic growth slows, which is almost a certainty.

    As we concluded previously:

    Unfortunately, we doubt the Fed has the stomach for “financial instability.” As such, we doubt they will hike rates as much as the market currently expects.

     

    The post Fed Rate Hikes & Risks Of Financial Instability – Part II appeared first on RIA.

  16. Site: From Rome
    2 hours 20 min ago
    Author: Editor
  17. Site: The Eponymous Flower
    2 hours 48 min ago

     Edit: now the knighted whoopsie will postpone his most recent farewell concert schedule till he’s got the go-ahead from the witch doctors.



    AMDG

  18. Site: Global Research
    2 hours 53 min ago
    Author: Global Research News

    Dear Readers,

    As everyone faces difficult times, the company which deals with the fulfillment of book sales on behalf of Global Research is no longer able to provide its services. We are unfortunately suspending the sale of print books until …

    The post This Week’s Most Popular Articles appeared first on Global Research.

  19. Site: From Rome
    3 hours 1 min ago
    Author: Editor
  20. Site: AsiaNews.it
    3 hours 15 min ago
    Transparency International ranksDushanbe 150th out of 180 countries in the fight against corruption. A problem that affects all the former Soviet republics of Central Asia and the Caucasus. The Tajik authorities are trying to hide the phenomenon.
  21. Site: AsiaNews.it
    3 hours 40 min ago
    Today's headlines: The US bans Chinese hi-tech giant China Unicom;Toyota still the world's top car seller;Burmese diocese of Pathien launches post-couphumanitarian crisis initiative;Missile attack in Yemen kills 5;Uzbek police arrest 30 jihadists on their way to Syria;Georgian Metropolitan of Akhalkala offers "protection" to former president Saakashvili.
  22. Site: From Rome
    3 hours 47 min ago
    Author: Editor
  23. Site: From Rome
    3 hours 54 min ago
    Author: Editor
  24. Site: Voltaire Network
    4 hours 7 min ago
    Mukhtar Ablyazov, the fugitive ex-head of the BTA Bank and founding president of the Democratic Choice of Kazakhstan (QDT) party , was taken in by Russian pranksters Vovan and Lexus (who had also fooled French President Emmanuel Macron in 2019). In the gag, the two Russians pretended to be associates of Alexei Navalny and discussed by videoconference with Mukhtar Ablyazov of their joint alliance for the overthrow of dictatorships in Kazakhstan and Russia, but also in Ukraine and Venezuela. (...)
  25. Site: From Rome
    4 hours 35 min ago
    Author: Editor
    Editor’s Note: This is a most excellent analysis, which exposes the Globalist agenda. A must watch! — The only grave error is Icke’s personal error that there is only one substantial human consciousness.  The Christian Doctrine and the only truth is that we all have a soul which is immortal, and therefore we have a … Continue reading David Icke: What is happening, and Why? in the Covid Agenda →
  26. Site: Global Research
    4 hours 54 min ago
    Author: Global Research News

    Dear Readers,

    As everyone faces difficult times, the company which deals with the fulfillment of book sales on behalf of Global Research is no longer able to provide its services. We are unfortunately suspending the sale of print books until …

    The post Selected Articles: Freedom Convoy Interview with Jamie Lynn: “It’s a Manufactured Crisis” by Trudeau Government appeared first on Global Research.

  27. Site: From Rome
    5 hours 47 min ago
    Author: Editor
    In this video, Br. Bugnolo talks about the chief sin of the Globalists and how, we, as Christians, have let ourselves be infected by it.
  28. Site: The Catholic Thing
    6 hours 48 min ago
    Author: David Warren

    We – by which I mean sane people – are often surprised by a media stunt or sensation. It will be on some matter we considered too trivial, or absurd, to merit our attention.

    But suddenly the ranks of the liberal intelligentsia have formed into a battle group, and are demanding the surrender of some received public position, that had been undisturbed for many centuries, or millennia. Soon they are drafting laws to clinch their victory in the courts – or even if they have no victory in the courts – the sane are told to be quiet.

    There are so many examples of this, especially in America, that I would not wish to waste my space making lists. Let me illustrate with just the story of the “trans-sexual” athletes who are sweeping up awards in women’s swimming meets.

    The idea that biological males should be allowed to contest what was reserved to biological females seemed, at first, to require a smile and a giggle, not a counter-demonstration.

    But the “trans-women” win so easily, that we might add (sotto voce) that men can do anything better than women, including being women. Make this remark in the presence of a transhuman, however, and it probably will not share the joke.

    “Woke” or “leftist” thinking may not have even a trace of sanity for support, but can draw on powerful emotional resources nonetheless.

    This is the secret of our most successful progressive politicians. They know not to waste time making coherent arguments, for a sympathetic audience will not understand them. What wins is the fashionable slogan, and the closer it comes to being self-contradictory, the more it is “cool.”

    Can men choose to be women, and vice versa? Note, my specification of choice. There are genuinely inter-sexual people, or as they used to be called, hermaphrodites (I include only people, and exclude the tunicates, pulmonates, opisthobranches, earthworms, and slugs). Our “boths” defeat traditional medical “gender” assignments by having both XY and XX chromosomes, and perhaps, both sets of gonads.

    Frankly, it would be easier to have been born into one of the species that is intersex by nature, for one would (when nature is kind) find other intersexuals to copulate with. One could have an active sex life with neither “woke” nor “trans” commitments.

    I think it tragic, in a loosely Aristotelian sense, when defenders of “civilization as we have known it” resort to religious arguments on this. They are unnecessary, and the resort is a defeat.

    *

    Or rather, this would appear to be the case, short-term. But I think it would be unwise to make a defense, particularly a violent one. The proposition, that “gender” is something that we choose, will blow over, and the gust that blows it comes from elsewhere.

    That God made man and woman, fine, but that is another question. The controversy is that God exists, and could make anything. On that, I vote a Yes, but men and women were not so subtle as this. They are before our eyes, and for that matter our nostrils. Yes, God created, but what He created in this world can be seen (eventually).

    If you are human, and are afflicted with “gender dysphoria,” whether or not the world sympathizes, you are in for a rough ride. For instance, a high proportion of these dysphorics attempt suicide at some points (I don’t trust official numbers, but they are many times the average for other groups). One may feel sorry for them, but one would be mad to embrace them as heroes/heroines.

    The point is that sex (“gender” to the vocabularists) is among the several things that were not only on government forms, but also exist in fact. By analogy, I also cannot exchange my race, creed, or color. I was born with them. My age is non-negotiable. I could lie, but it could be discovered. I might go as far as to say my talents and abilities are beyond negotiation, and subject to demonstration (like sex) – but most identifiers come with birth.

    If I claimed to be “perfect,” by any imaginable standard, I would likewise be lying – quite ridiculously. For here the confusion is over the categories to include, and what “perfection” means. There is no way home to reality.

    Marxism, for instance, is deeply crazy, and well beyond any conventional notion of what could be rationally analyzed. It is no wonder that every political venture into Marxism has ended in totalitarian dictatorship, and murderous squalor.

    When I, at the outset of this column, identified opponents as “insane,” I meant the term in an objective sense. They choose, as it were, something that is not on the table, and will never be. They propose to accomplish, by force, something that cannot even be accomplished peacefully.

    And when they attack Catholicism, the Christian religion, or any other, for having imposed a definition of sex that is somehow constricting and “unprogressive,” the sane must not rise to the bait.

    Alas, under present circumstances, some do. It is like resistance to the “theory” of the flat earth. Those with a defective science education persist in believing that the ancients believed the world is flat, when they did not. The flat notion was launched only in the 19th century (by Washington Irving). It is unmistakably modern. It is useless to argue with it, for its proponents do not really care for the truth. They only know what they are against.

    It is the same against men “dressed” (surgically, or only superficially) as women (and vice versa). The madness calls forth a madness on the other side, emotion draws out emotion, and we set up a fight between two nutjobs.

    Better to restrict our defense to ridicule. And if we are arrested for ridiculing the ridiculous, take our lumps. It is just our bad luck to live in an asylum.

     

    *Image: The Parrot-Fish by Mark Catesby, c. 1772-76 [The Royal Trust Collection]. Most species of parrotfishes are sequential hermaphrodites.

    You may also enjoy:

    Brad Miner’s Lysenko at the Olympics

    Robert Royal’s From the First Three Minutes to Us

    The post Staying Out of Traps appeared first on The Catholic Thing.

  29. Site: The Catholic Thing
    6 hours 49 min ago
    Author: Karen Popp

    The Vatican on Wednesday strongly defended the former Pope Benedict XVI’s record in fighting clergy sexual abuse and cautioned against looking for “easy scapegoats and summary judgments,” after an independent report faulted his handling of four cases of abuse when he was archbishop of Munich.
     

     

    The post Vatican defends Benedict XVI on abuse appeared first on The Catholic Thing.

  30. Site: The Catholic Thing
    6 hours 49 min ago
    Author: Karen Popp

    Defense lawyers for Cardinal Angelo Becciu often seem to be grasping at straws, but the prosecution is under fire—again—for failing to comply with repeated court orders to provide defendants with witness testimony. Bot sides seem to think they can set their own rules for trial proceedings.
     

     

     

    The post Vatican justice on trial appeared first on The Catholic Thing.

  31. Site: The Catholic Thing
    6 hours 50 min ago
    Author: Karen Popp

    The First. My great-grandfather spoke to Edmund Burke
    In Grattan’s house.
    The Second. My great-grandfather shared
    A pot-house bench with Oliver Goldsmith once.
    The Third. My great-grandfather’s father talked of music,
    Drank tar-water with the Bishop of Cloyne.
    The Fourth. But mine saw Stella once.
    The Fifth. Whence came our thought?
    The Sixth. From four great minds that hated Whiggery.
    The Fifth. Burke was a Whig.
    The Sixth. Whether they knew or not,
    Goldsmith and Burke, Swift and the Bishop of Cloyne
    All hated Whiggery; but what is Whiggery?
    A levelling, rancorous, rational sort of mind
    That never looked out of the eye of a saint
    Or out of drunkard’s eye.
    The Seventh. All’s Whiggery now,
    But we old men are massed against the world.
    The First. American colonies, Ireland, France and India
    Harried, and Burke’s great melody against it.
    The Second. Oliver Goldsmith sang what he had seen,
    Roads full of beggars, cattle in the fields,
    But never saw the trefoil stained with blood,
    The avenging leaf those fields raised up against it.
    The Fourth. The tomb of Swift wears it away.
    The Third. A voice
    Soft as the rustle of a reed from Cloyne
    That gathers volume; now a thunder-clap.
    The Sixtb. What schooling had these four?
    The Seventh. They walked the roads
    Mimicking what they heard, as children mimic;
    They understood that wisdom comes of beggary.

    The post The Seven Sages appeared first on The Catholic Thing.

  32. Site: The Catholic Thing
    6 hours 50 min ago
    Author: Karen Popp

    Pope Francis made that appeal at the end of the Wednesday General Audience, one day before the world dedicates a day to recalling the horrors of the Holocaust, also known as the Shoah. The International Holocaust Remembrance Day is held on the date of the liberation of the Auschwitz-Birkenau death camp on 27 January 1945. The Pope said the world must remember the “extermination of millions of Jews, people of various nationalities and religious faiths.”
     

    The post Pope: ‘Never repeat unspeakable cruelty of Holocaust’ appeared first on The Catholic Thing.

  33. Site: The Catholic Thing
    6 hours 50 min ago
    Author: Karen Popp

    Catholic pastors and scholars are lauding the Archdiocese of Milwaukee’s new document responding to gender theory for its pastoral tone and anthropological clarity, as well as its potential for inspiring other dioceses and Catholic institutions to follow suit. The document cites an increase in the experience of “gender dysphoria and gender discordance,” especially among children and adolescents, as the basis for its response.
     

    The post Milwaukee’s Gender Theory Document Receives High Praise appeared first on The Catholic Thing.

  34. Site: The Unz Review
    6 hours 50 min ago
    Author: Pat Buchanan
    "What do we mean by the Revolution? The war? That was no part of the revolution; it was only an effect and consequence of it. The revolution was in the minds of the people." What did John Adams mean when he wrote this to Thomas Jefferson in 1815, after both had served as president? Adams...
  35. Site: AntiWar.com
    6 hours 50 min ago
    Author: Andrew P. Napolitano

    Secretly and quietly, the Biden administration has continued to use the killing machine crafted by President George W. Bush, expanded by President Barack Obama and employed from time to time by President Donald Trump. These presidents have used drones and other unmanned missiles and projectiles to target persons in foreign countries with which the United … Continue reading "More Presidential Killings"

    The post More Presidential Killings appeared first on Antiwar.com Original.

  36. Site: AntiWar.com
    6 hours 50 min ago
    Author: Ray McGovern

    The eagerly awaited "written response" from the U.S. and NATO to Russia’s security proposals are now in the hands of President Vladimir Putin. And yet there is no sign the West caved in on Moscow’s insistence that NATO rescind its 14 year-old invitation to Ukraine to join NATO. Those who expected the Russians to react … Continue reading "Will Putin Accept Half a Loaf?"

    The post Will Putin Accept Half a Loaf? appeared first on Antiwar.com Original.

  37. Site: AntiWar.com
    6 hours 51 min ago
    Author: Daniel McAdams

    In Washington the global US military empire is a bipartisan affair. With a trillion dollar yearly military budget, there are plenty of opportunities for both the position and the opposition parties to thrust snouts deeply into the trough. While Ron Paul was in Congress and GW Bush was president, we did a good deal to … Continue reading "Bipartisanship: US House Races Massive Ukraine Weapons Transfer to the Floor!"

    The post Bipartisanship: US House Races Massive Ukraine Weapons Transfer to the Floor! appeared first on Antiwar.com Original.

  38. Site: The Remnant Newspaper
    9 hours 14 min ago
  39. Site: Public Discourse
    10 hours 50 min ago
    Author: R.J. Snell

    In the early 2000s I attended a conference in Chicago at which one presenter began his talk with something like the following: “I brought my daughter on the trip with me, thinking she’d be interested in the Art Institute and the Field Museum. Instead, she asked if I would drop her off at the shopping mall. Damn that Duns Scotus!”

    Perhaps the joke seems unfunny, or incomprehensible. But the conference was largely populated by students and readers of Stanley Hauerwas and the Radical Orthodoxy project, which I was then studying. For the leading lights of Radical Orthodoxy, Duns Scotus, the thirteenth century theologian, was peculiarly responsible for modernity’s ills. Their “Scotus Story,” as some termed it, blamed Scotus for an immanentized metaphysics in which God became just another entity in the world, an error which cannot but lead to deism, atheism, secularism, fideism, voluntarism, nominalism, liberalism, capitalism, neoliberalism, and all the other nasty -isms we now suffer. I exaggerate only slightly with my list, and the speaker’s joke was a wry targeting of the excesses of the “Scotus Story.” My daughter wants to go to the mall and consume sugary drinks and purchase cheaply made clothes? Duns Scotus is responsible for all that is wrong: blame him!

    The Intellectual Historian’s Temptation

    As it turns out, there is some truth to the story; Scotism is discernible in certain aspects of modernity. Still, and here’s the warning implicit in the joke, it’s a stretch to think that real history, the way things actually happen, follows a clear linear and logical path as might appear on paper. Intellectual historians are sometimes tempted to assume that the influence of an idea flows like a logical deduction—x necessitates y, and y entails z—such that the way we think in 2022 was all but pre-ordained by a medieval treatise. The temptation conflates influence with causation, as if Thomas Jefferson’s having read Francis Bacon means the Declaration of Independence might as well be ascribed to Bacon. And since Bacon writes about Scotus the Declaration is really Scotism, as all educated people should know. The line from Scotus to Planned Parenthood v. Casey is a direct line (apparently), with Casey implicit in Scotus like a the germ of seed that will inevitably sprout with time.

    A certain type of conservative seems inclined to do intellectual history in this way, perhaps motivated by that nostalgic sense that things used to be better but went wrong somehow. Thinking thus, it’s all but natural to look for causes and find a villain who is the cause. Scotus, Ockham, Hobbes, Locke, Descartes, or Rousseau, one of them must be the linchpin, some nefarious idea of theirs is the poison pill inadvertently swallowed by the Founders, dooming us all.

    Intellectual historians are sometimes tempted to assume that the influence of an idea flows like a logical deduction—x necessitates y, and y entails z—such that the way we think in 2022 was all but pre-ordained by a medieval treatise.

     

    A one-time classic in American conservative circles, Richard Weaver’s Ideas Have Consequences, succumbs to the temptation. It begins: “This is another book about the dissolution of the West. . . . I present an account of that decline based not on analogy but on deduction.” While Weaver notes that “man is free” and the current situation is thus not of “necessity but of unintelligent choice,” he nonetheless favors deduction. Deduction deals with necessity: if the premises are true and the logic valid, a deduction follows necessarily. Indeed, Weaver instantly turns choice itself into something more like a premise than an act of volition:

    Like Macbeth, Western man made an evil decision, which has become the efficient and final cause of other evil decisions. . . . It occurred in the late fourteenth century, and what the witches said to the protagonist of this drama was that man could realize himself more fully if he would only abandon his belief in the existence of transcendentals. . . . from this flowed those acts which issue now in modern decadence. . . . the conscious policies of men and governments are . . . deductions from our most basic ideas of human destiny, and they have a great, though not unobstructed, power to determine our course.

    According to Weaver, it wasn’t Scotus but William of Ockham who “propounded the fateful doctrine” leading to “the train of circumstances which have with perfect logic proceeded” to our current malaise. The key to note, I suggest, is the centrality given to “ideas,” “beliefs,” “world view,” and “doctrines.” It’s all ideas that have consequence, and ideas that proceed with deductive necessity, leading inexorably to the final cause implicit in the origin.

    This is history on paper; history as logic. It’s a bad way to do history, but has become pervasive among conservative intellectuals.

    Some years ago, Richard Rorty, certainly a man of the left, distinguished four genres of “the historiography of philosophy.” I’m interested in one of the genres, “geistesgeschichte,” the history of mind or history of spirit, which tells the big stories of culture, particularly how important philosophers are identified and the canon of philosophy created. Some intellectual history attempts to understand the ins and outs of a philosopher’s arguments; rather than working through the minutiae of the inner workings of, say, Plato on the immortality of the soul, geistesgeschichte provides a sweeping account of Plato’s “image of philosophy.” It accounts for who and what shapes the discipline, and what matters within it. While a scientist needn’t justify his work by linking his experiments to those of Galileo, a philosopher of this sort will link her arguments to Aristotle or Spinoza, thereby justifying that her work occurs within the space of the canon and is thus genuine philosophy. Geistesgeschichte, claims Rorty, grants some thinkers the status of deciding “what is worth thinking about,” what questions “tie us together with our ancestors.”

    Weaver provides a geistesgeschichte, albeit the hall of shame rather than of honor. Ockham, Scotus, Bacon, Descartes, Locke—these are the bad guys, but they are the important bad guys who determined the decadence of our time and the problems we should be talking about. Weaver is hardly alone among conservatives in using this genre, and the current debates on liberalism and post-liberalism reveal an overwhelmingly strong tendency in this direction. There was, it is claimed, some sort of poison pill in the Founding, or in Locke, or Adam Smith. The contagion of transgenderism was built into the logic, as inevitable as the resting place of the pool balls at the moment of the break. If we wish to correct our moment, we must understand the villains of the canon.

    Paper Politics

    On the one hand, there is something genuinely conservative about all this. (I refer to the shape or form of the thought, not the content of the claims.) It assumes a kind of tradition-constituted rationality, it tells a narrative that places arguments within a whole rather than atomistically. It is normative, and is thus far thicker than the watery stuff of instrumental rationality and logic-chopping.

    On the other hand, there is something non-conservative at play. As someone who thinks Oakeshott’s Rationalism in Politics should be required reading, I believe the deductive necessity implied by these conservative narratives of decline smacks of inverted progressivism, the flip side of “right side of history” thinking. If progressivism in its most unsophisticated moments thinks history without a providential God dialectically marches toward progress, and that being on the “wrong side of history” is meaningful, then this kind of traditionalism also views history as determined by choices and policies made in the fourteenth or eighteenth century. These choices, as Weaver put it, “with perfect logic proceeded” to whatever moral horrors we now experience.

    The poison-pill story of America, so prevalent in some circles just now, deserves a sarcastic “damn that Duns Scotus” response. It’s paper politics; the politics of the seminar room where a chalkboard draws straight and unveering lines from Locke to Obergefell and betrays a subterranean rationalism. This politics uses what Oakeshott termed “well trained” rather than “educated” minds, a sort of machine-like understanding of the mind—a geistesgeschichte of history determined by what is logically entailed, on paper, by ideas and beliefs.

    For the conservative theorists of the poison pill, everything becomes about ideas. It is ideas that have consequences, for good or ill, and as their diagnosis is about voluntarism, nominalism, secularism—ideas and systems—so their prescription is also about ideas. If only we had the right understanding of the common good, if only we had a political vision that included God, if only we had a summum bonum expressly articulated, then we could chart a path to recovery with the same logical necessity as the causes of our decline.

    The poison-pill story of America is paper politics; the politics of the seminar room where a chalkboard draws straight and unveering lines from Locke to Obergefell and betrays a subterranean rationalism.

     

    This mania for ideas also misconstrues the plausibility of rebuilding society. Conservatism, as Oakeshott notes, is disinclined to base “the proper organization of a society and the conduct of its affairs . . . upon abstract principles” instead of concrete practices “to be rummaged for,” muddled through long experience. But when the theorists’ proposed solutions are met with skepticism, some insist upon the possibility of rapid improvements based upon their imagined abstractions. Even though the concrete political situation, things as they really are, appears poorly disposed to their ideas’ gaining traction, they ask us to not succumb to the current reality. Big changes do sometimes happen, after all, and we can get busy working on our concrete plans, if only we have the summum bonum in our mind’s-eye. Oakeshott and Burke, who insist on prudence and scorn paper politics, are deemed quaint and defeatist; their followers, it is claimed, will complicitly drift along the currents of history until the illiberal left’s total victory. Burke’s little platoons are replaced by administrators with proper ideas, politicians-as-engineers, who, like all rationalists, impatiently demand perfection instead of the long work of prudence and the politics of reality.

    That is, these conservatives construct paper cities, at times scorning their more cautious friends and allies for their insistence on civil society, the concrete, and prudential politics. Sure, it works in practice, they seem to say, but does it work in theory? Still, ideas don’t work this way; reality does not proceed with perfect logic like it so conveniently does in the textbooks. It has been the genius of conservatives to insist on this point whenever it is obscured: because they are untried and unexperienced, the presumption is against textbook theories, however elegant or intellectually exciting. As Socrates noted after building his perfect city in speech, since “the nature of acting” attains “less truth than speaking,” it is best to make the smallest changes, the most cautious changes, in our attempt to approximate the truth into the actual city. Speech is fine, but it remains just that—speech.

  40. Site: The Eponymous Flower
    11 hours 40 min ago


    Joseph Ratzinger, Archbishop of Munich and Freising for a few months, at his cardinal creation by Paul VI. in St. Peter's Basilica in 1977.

    (Rome) Enmities also last a long time. That's what Benedict XVI is getting to feel. An orchestrated media campaign is once again attempting to dismantle his reputation. And once again, things are not as claimed.

    Benedict XVI will, God willing, celebrate his 94th cradle festival in a few weeks. As of September 2, 2020, he is the oldest pope in history. Leo XIII had this primacy so far. who, however, died in office at the age of 93. Benedict XVI renounced it, not for the benefit of the Church. For almost nine years he has been the first “pope emeritus” in Church history. And although since then he has no longer taken part in the leadership of the church and lives in seclusion in the Vatican Gardens in the Mater Ecclesiae monastery, the hostility of certain circles against him has not broken.


    In recent days, in an orchestrated media campaign, he has been accused of having entrusted pastoral duties to two convicted pederasts as Archbishop of Munich and Freising, a post Joseph Ratzinger held from 1977 to 1982. The media outcry was triggered by a report by a law firm on sexual abuse in the Archdiocese of Munich and Freising, which the media  insists "severely burdened" the former archbishop. In reality, the expert opinion is characterized primarily by morality and not by evidence. DieTagespost wrote on January 20: "The Westphal law firm is attempting the media execution of the emeritus pope". They can be certain of  support by a specific mainstream.


    The report on Benedict XVI. was submitted last Thursday. His secretary, Curial Archbishop Georg Gänswein, published a press release yesterday in which Benedict XVI. corrected himself. Not necessarily a smart move, but one that honors him. 


    In contrast to his statement to the commission of inquiry at the time, he now confirmed his presence at a meeting in 1980. As was to be expected, this correction caused a second wave of scandalous headlines, this time even more hypocritical than before: “Benedict XVI. gave false testimony,” headlined Die Welt. A word that is as strong as it is disproportionate. However, this indicates the direction of impact. It's about discrediting, discrediting the reputation of Benedict XVI. and of course the Church. The latter is apparently accepted with approval by certain ecclesiastical circles in order to advance their agenda. The correction that Benedict XVI. made, which is simply the correction of a footnote, is presented by the media cartel as if the (lack of) evidence had been provided that the allegations of the abuse report were correct. But in reality it is a classic media misrepresentation.


    Benedict XVI had said in his statement at the time that he had not been present at a particular meeting in 1980. The events happened decades ago. The point, however, is that the said session was not about what is being insinuated. The Daily Mail therefore headlined: “No lie, one mistake”.


    Archbishop Gänswein writes in the declaration for Benedict XVI:


    "Even if he tries to read it quickly, he asks for your understanding that the complete review still needs time in view of his age and his health, but also because of the large volume. There will be a statement on the report.”

     

    And further:


    "But he would like to make it clear now that, contrary to what was said during the hearing, he took part in the Ordinariate meeting on January 15, 1980."


    For this it is executed:


    “So the statement to the contrary was objectively wrong. He would like to emphasize that this was not done out of bad faith, but was the result of an error in the editing of his statement. He will explain how this came about in the pending statement. He is very sorry for this mistake and he apologizes for this mistake.

    However, what remains objectively correct, as documented by the documents, is the statement that no decision was made at this meeting about the pastoral assignment of the priest in question. Rather, the request was only granted to provide him with accommodation during his therapeutic treatment in Munich."


    One could also speak of hypercorrectness, since the correction of a marginal event that has nothing to do with the actual question is tantamount to media "suicide" in the heated atmosphere. The prompt relentlessness of the media cartel provides evidence that every little thing is used to discredit.


    Finally, Msgr. Gänswein writes in the statement:


    "Benedict XVI. is close to his former archdiocese and home diocese these days and is very connected to it in his efforts to clarify. He thinks especially of the victims who have experienced sexual abuse and indifference.” 


    So it "fits in time" that yesterday 125 church employees, professors of theology, some priests and other employees "denounced the 'discriminatory' policy of the Church" and confessed to be homosexual, for which they also presented their own website called OutInChurch. AFP, one of the world's three most influential press agencies, also dedicated its own report to the "outing".


    The denunciation of the sexual abuse scandal by clerics, which is above all a homosexual abuse scandal, does not primarily serve the victims or the cleansing of the Church, but Her dismantling. The first goal is to demand changes in Her sexual morals, particularly through the recognition of homosexuality. A contradiction? Not at all. The 1968 scene had a slogan for this: "Destroy what destroys you". An abstruse motto that was developed in the anarchist, neo-Marxist milieu, but has been widely used ever since. The homo movement received its decisive impetus from the 1968 riots: the "liberation of sexuality in a liberated society".


    Text: Giuseppe Nardi

    Image: MiL

    Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com

    AMDG

  41. Site: Fr. Z's Blog
    11 hours 48 min ago
    Author: frz@wdtprs.com (Fr. John Zuhlsdorf)
    On the Institution of the Eucharist (my emphases): “I speak not only to the communicant, but also I say to the priest who ministers the Sacrament: Distribute this gift with much care. There is no small punishment for you, if … Read More →
  42. Site: Call Me Jorge...
    12 hours 15 min ago

     The new evangelization in Florida




    Short sample of this monstrosity...


  43. Site: Home Living
    12 hours 17 min ago
    Hello lovely homemakers.You didn't have to wait two weeks. This time it was only five days, so hopefully I can shorten the time between broadcasts.  We are having very foggy weather.This frozen web looks like a thread crochet piece.Today's View:I read this paragraph from Grammar and Composition I.  I am not sure what grade level it is intended for, but it is about finding "helping verbs." HoweverLydiahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15530969871397361970noreply@blogger.com0
  44. Site: LifeNews
    12 hours 22 min ago
    Author: Mary Margaret Olohan

    Photos and videos show ambulances parked outside a Planned Parenthood clinic in Washington, D.C., where witnesses say a woman in pain was escorted to an ambulance Thursday morning.

    The ambulances apparently were called to aid a patient in distress at Planned Parenthood’s Carol Whitehill Moses Center around 10:30 a.m., eyewitnesses told The Daily Signal.

    Neither Planned Parenthood of Metropolitan Washington nor the Moses Center, which is about three miles from the White House, responded to The Daily Signal’s requests for comment.

    The Moses Center offers abortion pills, in-clinic abortions of unborn babies up to 19 weeks old, and referrals for other abortions, according to the clinic’s website.

    “If your last period was after 19 weeks and 6 days, we can still help,” the website says. “Call us for a referral list of health care providers in your area that offer other abortion services.”

    (Photo courtesy of Cassidy Shooltz)

    A spokesman for the D.C. Fire and Emergency Medical Services Department confirmed to The Daily Signal that a medical call was made from the Planned Parenthood clinic in the same time frame described by the eyewitnesses. But the spokesman would not comment further.

    Two women at the scene told The Daily Signal that originally only one ambulance was at the clinic Thursday morning, but a second one arrived shortly after, apparently called as backup.

    Paramedics helped escort a young woman out of the clinic at 1225 4th St. NE before rushing her to the hospital, the women said.

    HELP LIFENEWS SAVE BABIES FROM ABORTION! Please help LifeNews.com with a donation!

    “A woman walked out and she was wearing a black coat, she looked painful and fearful and she was walking uncomfortably and got into the ambulance,” said Cassidy Shooltz, a pro-life advocate who counsels women going into abortion clinics against having the procedure.

    “You could see Planned Parenthood staff around her. And once she got into the ambulance, they closed the doors and they sat there for a little while, about five minutes, and then they drove away,” Shooltz said. “They used the sirens, so she was not in good condition and they had to get to the ER very quickly.”

    (Photo courtesy of Cassidy Shooltz)

    Lauren Handy, another eyewitness with a pro-life group called the Progressive Anti-Abortion Uprising, said she believes that the clinic messed up an abortion procedure.

    “At 10:30, we were hearing sirens and we were like ‘Oh, please, no,’ and then we saw them pull up,” Handy said of the ambulance.

    Three emergency medical services personnel entered the clinic, which wasn’t surprising, she said.

    “Today’s a later abortion day, so past 12 weeks and up to 20 weeks abortions are performed today, on Thursdays,” Handy told The Daily Signal. “Obviously, the later you are in pregnancy, the higher risk there is of complications.”

    Handy said that two patients who came to the clinic during the incident Thursday morning apparently chose instead to leave when they saw the ambulances on-site.

    “Two people who were going in for abortions today, they left; they didn’t get the abortions,” Handy said. “My guess is that this incident scared them.”

    A Moses Center employee declined to comment on the matter to The Daily Signal and hung up the phone before a reporter could ask more questions.

    Another employee of the Planned Parenthood clinic shut the door of the facility when a Daily Signal reporter attempted to inquire about the incident.

    LifeNews Note: Mary Margaret Olohan is a reporter for The Daily Signal, where this column originally appeared.

    The post Planned Parenthood Abortion Clinic in Nation’s Capital Injures Another Woman in Botched Abortion appeared first on LifeNews.com.

  45. Site: Zero Hedge
    12 hours 25 min ago
    Author: Tyler Durden
    Robinhood Craters To New Record Low After Another Catastrophic Quarter

    Unlike last quarter, we didn't need to look at Robinhood's 606 filings ahead of earnings. We had a feeling that the results would be ugly (as we predicted last quarter), and we were wrong: they were disastrous and absolutely horrific.

    As a reminder, in its dismal guidance last quarter, when the stock imploded, Robinhood slashed its outlook seeing 4Q revenue of just $325M, a huge miss to consensus est. $500.7M, and predicted funded accounts of about 660,000. Well, had RH missed its own guidance, the stock would probably have to collapse to $0. And while it at least managed to come above its own bogey, it once again missed virtually every sellside consensus. Here is what the company reported:

    • Net revenue $362.7 million, missing the estimate $370.9 million
    • Transaction-based revenue $263.9 million, missing the estimate $269.3 million
    • Crypto revenue $48 million, -5.9% q/q, missing the estimate $55.0 million
    • Net Interest revenue $63.4 million, missing the estimate $66.3 million
    • Monthly active users 17.3 million, a slowdown of 8.5% Q/Q, and missing the estimate of 19.9 million

    While crypto trading has been a core strategy of Robinhood, and its zero-commission transactions have helped it enlist new users, making it a major competitor to cryptocurrency exchanges such as Coinbase, this particular revenue stream has imploded. After peaking at $233 million in crypto-trading revenue in Q2 as retail investors plowed into digital assets like Bitcoin, In the third quarter, crypto revenue -- 40% of which was made up from Dogecoin trading -- plunged to $51 million. It has since dropped again to just $48 and if cryptos continue to tumble, it will only get worse.

    But while the numbers were dreadful, the company's own charts - which inexplicably are in green when they should be in red - speak much louder. Starting with MAU, we see that the "growth" company is now slowing for a second consecutive quarter...

    ... going to Assets under custody, which at least flat were flat...

    ... ARPU was an unmitigated disaster, dropping to the lowest level in the past year.

    Fewer users and lower ARPU means just one thing: a continued decline in revenue, which is now less than the price of a Ken Griffin apartment.

    Believe it or not, it actually gets even worse, with the company's transaction based revenue (i.e., what it actually does) down to $264 MM, or almost down 50% from Q2. But wait, because if one excludes $48MM (down from 51MM last quarter) in crypto revenue, one gets just $216MM in total transaction based revenues, basically the lowest in the past year!

    That said not everything was plunging: operating expenses more than tripled, as the company at least took money from shareholders and gave it to employees.

    Some more commentary on what was (once again) the ugliest quarter in HOOD's post-IPO history:

    • Robinhood introduced first trade recommendations to all new customers who have yet to place a trade, helping users get started with a diversified ETF portfolio based on their risk profile and investment objectives.
    • Robinhood launched Automated Customer Account Transfer Service ("ACATS") In a few weeks ago to a small set of customers and has been gradually expanding its availability, with early results looking promising. This feature allows customers to transfer assets from other brokerages into Robinhood and the company will continue to improve the experience and expand the availability to all customers in Q1 2022.
    • Robinhood continued to improve its options experience for customers, introducing Options Alerts, Options Watchlist and making it simpler to roll option contracts.
    • Robinhood made considerable progress on its fully-paid securities lending program, continues to discuss with its regulators, and believes it will be able to launch the program during the first half of the year.
    • Robinhood is close to delivering an even larger window of available trading hours and expects to roll this out later in Q1 2022. This will be one of several improvements the company plans to make to the trading experience this year.
    • Robinhood successfully completed alpha testing on Crypto Wallets and has launched a public beta, which will continue to provide valuable insights as the company prepares for a full launch of wallets in Q1 2022.
    • During the holiday season, Robinhood launched Crypto Gifts, which enables customers to send crypto to family and friends. The company will take learnings from this launch and look to apply them to transfer capabilities beyond crypto.

    Of course, CEO Vlad Tenev tried to spice up the doomsday atmosphere but... he failed:

    “We had a momentous year, nearly doubling the number of customers on the platform and making critical investments in our team and infrastructure to support growth. This year, we'll expand our ecosystem of products that make Robinhood the best place to start investing and build wealth"

    .... for Ken Griffin, he forgot to add.

    But wait, there's much more and yes, it's all ugly: in an echo from 3 months ago when HOOD warned Q1 2022 would be ugly and this time the company's terrible guidance will be taken much more seriously:

    Sees Q1 revenues of less than $340 million, a huge miss to expectations of $447 million: "This implies a year-over-year revenue decline of 35% compared to the first quarter of 2021, during which we saw outsized revenue performance due to heightened trading activity, particularly relating to certain meme-stocks."

    But while revenue is collapsing expenses keep rising: Robinhood expects total operating expenses, excluding share-based compensation, to increase 15-20% year-over-year.

    In light of all the catastrophic numbers above, it is a miracle that the stock is down just a buck after hours, or about 10%, down to the lowest level since the IPO and briefly dipping below $10.

    Traders should have taken our advice from 3 months ago when the stock crashed to a then-all time low of $34.82 to take the money and run. Alas, the smart money always knows better. Which smart money? These guys to start:

    One final point: dear Robinhood PR wizards - the opposite of green is not dark green.

    Tyler Durden Thu, 01/27/2022 - 18:25
  46. Site: LifeNews
    12 hours 28 min ago
    Author: Tierin-Rose Mandelburg

    It’s Episode Twenty-Two of MRC’s newest video series, CensorTrack with TR. This week we talked about how Big Tech promoted pro-abortion posts and censored life-affirming posts.

    The 49th Annual March for Life took place in Washington, D.C., on Friday, Jan. 21. An estimated 150,000 people gathered in solidarity for all life. It’s also important to note the significance that this year holds, as there’s a chance that the Supreme Court will overturn the 1973 Roe v. Wade verdict.

    After the march, Twitter emphasized pro-abortion posts by highlighting “Roe” under their “Politics” category. This tag increases the reach of related Tweets. The Center for Reproductive Rights posted in celebration of the “49th anniversary of #RoevWade,” and Planned Parenthood tweeted that a Roe v. Wade reversal could “erase … our protected rights.” Both posts along with many others touted support of Roe v. Wade.

    LifeNews is on GETTR. Please follow us for the latest pro-life news

    Instagram, apparently not wanting to be outdone by Twitter, went after posts in support of life. Instagram removed a post from my personal Instagram account. I posed with a sign I carried at the March for Life that asked: “If you were inconvenient should we kill you too?” The caption of my post read “63 million murders for convenience is 63 million too many. Let’s make this the last year we gotta march for ALL life! Roe gotta go!”

    Instagam deleted my post and claimed in a removal notice that “some audiences may be sensitive to different things” only six hours after it was posted. Instagram since reinstated my post after I appealed, but the platform’s reasoning still stands out for its ridiculousness. Big Tech censored me for affirming the sanctity of life but had no qualms leaving up celebratory posts about abortion.

    Watch below for the twenty-second episode of CensorTrack with TR! We encourage you to post it and share it across all social media. If you have been censored, contact us at www.CensorTrack.org, and use #FreeSpeech to point out more of Big Tech’s unacceptable bias.

    The post Big Tech Backs Abortion: Instagram Censors Pro-Life Image, Twitter Promotes Pro-Abortion Group appeared first on LifeNews.com.

  47. Site: Zero Hedge
    13 hours 47 sec ago
    Author: Tyler Durden
    Inflation Winners And Losers

    Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

    The clear winners in inflation are those who require little from global supply chains, the frugal, and those who own their own labor, skills and enterprises.

    As the case for systemic inflation builds, the question arises: who wins and who loses in an up-cycle of inflation? The general view is that inflation is bad for almost everyone, but this ignores the big winners in an inflationary cycle.

    As I've explained here and in my new book Global Crisis, National Renewalthe two primary dynamics globally are 1) scarcity of essentials and 2) extremes of wealth/power inequality.

    Scarcities drive prices higher simply as a result of supply-demand. Conventional economics holds that there are always cheaper substitutes for everything and hence there can never be scarcities enduring long enough to drive inflation: if steak gets costly, then consumers can buy cheaper chicken, etc.

    But the conventional view overlooks essentials for which there is no substitute. Salt water may be cheap but it's no substitute for fresh water. There are no scalable substitutes for oil and natural gas. There are no scalable substitutes for hydrocarbon-derived fertilizers or plastics. As energy becomes more expensive due to the mass depletion of the cheap-to-extract resources, the costs of everything from fertilizer to plastics to steel to jet fuel rise.

    This price pressure generates a number of effect. Rising costs embed a self-reinforcing feedback as prices are pushed higher in expectation of higher costs ahead, and these price increases generate the very inflation that sparked the pre-emptive price increase.

    Second, increasing costs either reduce profits or force price increases. Neither is ideal, as higher prices tend to lower sales which then lowers profits.

    Third, prices rise easily but drop only stubbornly, so sharp increases in prices aren't reversed as cost pressures ease: enterprises and workers quickly become accustomed to the higher prices and pay and are extremely resistant to cutting either prices or pay.

    As I've outlined here before, extremes of wealth-power inequality are systemically destabilizing. Extremes generate reversals as the pendulum reaches its maximum and then reverses direction and gathers momentum to the opposite extreme. In terms of wealth-power inequality, the pendulum is finally swinging back toward higher wages for labor and higher taxes for the super-wealthy, and increasing regulation on exploitive monopolies.

    In other words, there is more driving systemic inflation than just "transitory" supply-demand issues. Speaking of supposedly "transitory" cost increases that are actually systemic, global supply chains that were deflationary (i.e. pushing prices lower) for 40 years are now inflationary (i.e. pushing prices higher) as costs rise sharply in exporting economies that are now facing much higher labor and energy costs, and also finally bearing the long-delayed costs of environmental damage caused by rampant industrialization.

    As noted here in The Real Revolution Is Underway But Nobody Recognizes It, labor has been stripmined for 45 years, and now the worm has turned. As much as corporate employers and governments would love outright indentured servitude where they could force everyone to work for low pay in abusive circumstances, people are still free to figure out how to simplify their lives, cut expenses and work less.

    Scarcities of labor are enabling sharp increases in pay, especially in services. Anecdotally, I'm hearing accounts of service workers such as therapists, plumbers, accountants, architects, etc. raising their hourly rates by 20% overnight. In my own little sliver of the economy (writing / editing content), hourly rates are up as much as 30% for experienced independents.

    So let's highlight a few winners and losers in a self-reinforcing inflationary spiral.

    Asset inflation driven by zero interest rates and a tsunami of central bank liquidity will lose steam as rates rise and the liquidity spigots are turned off. As mortgage rates rise, already overvalued homes will become even less affordable as the number of buyers who can afford much higher monthly payments recedes toward zero.

    Local governments dependent on skyrocketing real estate valuations driving higher property taxes will be losers.

    Bonds paying 1% interest are losers once rates click up to 2% or 3%.

    Stocks are a mixed bag, as the relatively few companies with unlimited pricing power may benefit from inflation, but the majority will be pressured by higher labor, materials, shipping and energy costs, plus higher taxes and fees as the claw-back from capital gathers momentum.

    Consumers are losers as costs soar, but service workers with pricing power are winners. The Federal Reserve can print $1 trillion in an instant but it can't print experienced welders, plumbers, electricians, accountants, therapists, etc., and very little of this labor can be replaced by low-level (i.e. affordable) automation / robotics.

    Farmers who have been decimated by decades of low-cost imports might gain some pricing power as adverse weather, higher shipping costs and other factors increase the cost of imported agricultural commodities. Corporations with quasi-monopolies on essential industrial minerals/metals such as magnesium, nickel, etc. will have pricing power due to scarcity and the wide moat around their businesses: it isn't cheap to set up competing mines and acquire rights to the minerals.

    As a general rule, keep an eye on inelastic demand and supply. Elastic demand refers to demand which can ebb and flow with costs--the classic substitution mentioned earlier in which costly beef is replaced by cheaper chicken. Elastic supply is ranchers responding to much higher beef prices by increasing their herds.

    There is always some elasticity in demand and supply as conservation, new efficiencies, recessions, etc. can stretch or shrink supplies and demand. But demand for essentials such as fertilizer, energy and food can only drop so much, and supply can only increase by so much.

    The clear winners in inflation are those who require little from global supply chains, the frugal, and those who own their own labor, skills and enterprises in sectors with relatively inelastic supply and demand. The losers are those who are entirely dependent on global supply chains for essentials, wastrels who squander resources, food, labor and money and those gambling on the quick return to zero-interest largesse and endless trillions in liquidity.

    *  *  *

    My new book is now available at a 20% discount this month: Global Crisis, National Renewal: A (Revolutionary) Grand Strategy for the United States (Kindle $8.95, print $20). If you found value in this content, please join me in seeking solutions by becoming a $1/month patron of my work via patreon.com.

    Tyler Durden Thu, 01/27/2022 - 17:50
  48. Site: PeakProsperity
    13 hours 16 min ago
    Author: phildenn

    Part I: Lessons from the 20th Century

    The biggest lesson from the 20th Century taught to world leaders on the continents of Europe and Asia is to avoid World War III. The European Union itself was formed for this very reason.

    With 40 million deaths in what was then known as The Great War (before they needed roman numerals to distinguish World Wars like Rocky movies and Super Bowls), that turned out to be a family cookout, only a warm-up for the ensuing Act II, an apt doubling of casualties in WWII:

    World War II Casualties

    “Word War II was the deadliest military conflict in history. An estimated total of 70–85 million people perished, or about 3% of the 1940 world population (est. 2.3 billion)… More than half of the total number of casualties are accounted for by the dead of the Republic of China and of the Soviet Union.”

    Over 98% of 120 million deaths across both World Wars were Eurasian, and (even if you more than double Wikipedia’s high-end estimate of casualties), less than 0.5% of those were from nuclear weapons, America’s dropping of atomic bombs “Little Boy” and “Fat Man” on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

    The United States detonated two nuclear weapons over the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki on 6 and 9 August 1945, respectively. The two bombings killed between 129,000 and 226,000 people, most of whom were civilians, and remain the only use of nuclear weapons in armed conflict. In the final year of World War II, the Allies prepared for a costly invasion of the Japanese mainland. This undertaking was preceded by a conventional and firebombing campaign that devastated 67 Japanese cities.

    Can you imagine the death and destruction – 75 years into the future – of World War III today? There are now thousands of much more powerful warheads across more than 40 countries.

    Nuclear Arsenals Today

    “Russia, the United States, the United Kingdom, France, China, India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea possess an estimated total of nearly 14,000 nuclear weapons, most of which are many times more powerful than the nuclear weapon dropped on Hiroshima.”

    Self-preservation of the ruling class

    Before we start singing Kumbaya at the levelheadedness and compassion of world leaders who have thus far kept us out of WWIII, let’s remember, it’s their own self-interest at stake.

    It’s not civilian or military casualties that keep sociopaths up at night.

    While they rarely see third and fourth order consequences, they do understand (a) the uncertainty of outcome (i.e., should there be a conflict, can they maintain power throughout?) and (b) regardless of who wins, wars that need roman numerals have an uncanny ability to destroy capital.

    What good is it to dominate scorched earth through nuclear winter?

    Ahh, the things that keep us safe to tuck our little ones in bed or gather in the morning for coffee with colleagues, bald villains weighing the pros and cons of mutually assured destruction…

    The only real victor in WWII was the USA, supplying the Allied war efforts in exchange for gold, tipping the balance in their favor, holding a position of strength to dictate monetary terms to the world, then supplying rebuilding efforts with the only manufacturing base not left in smoldering ruins.

    FDR sure was a cunning fellow.

    Connecting the dots

    Here in the American public education system, we teach our children about World War I, the Great Depression, and World War II as if these events were unrelated, almost random. Why do we do this?

    Then, we wonder why the education system graduates elect fools and charlatans, and have zero understanding of the money system or Austrian business cycle.

    Perhaps that is exactly why government schools do it…

    If we taught them why everything happened, how it was all connected, can you imagine the cons exposed? I am pretty sure the last 50 years would look much better if we had.

    While these are among the biggest historical events imparted on our children, unfortunately, with them they receive zero context.

    The biggest, fattest line we fail to connect is the tracing of Super Bowl II WWII directly to its predecessor through the Treaty of Versailles.

    Signed at the Palace of Versailles outside Paris on June 28, 1919 – exactly five years after the powder was lit with the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand – the onerous treaty’s “War Guilt” clause forced all blame for the war on Germany and the Central Powers, including loss of land (13%), and massive reparation payments to the Allies led by France, the United Kingdom, and the USA.

    Treaty of Versailles

    “In 1921 the total cost of these reparations was assessed at 132 billion gold marks (then $31.4 billion or £6.6 billion, roughly equivalent to US$442 billion or UK£284 billion in 2021)”

     

    German 10 Mark Coin

    The German (gold) mark seems to have had 0.35838 grams (or 0.01152 ounces) of gold, so right here we see how poorly official measures of inflation undercount its insidious affects.

    Wikipedia reports 132 billion gold marks equate to $442 billion today, but at today’s gold price, the value of the gold itself is $2.75 trillion. Despite recent activities by the Fed and the Biden Administration (continuing a string of Presidencies desensitizing us to big numbers), that’s a, well, very big number.

    German GDP in 1921 was $410 billion in 2017 dollars, meaning if you believe official measures of inflation, reparations were about 90% of GDP, and if (like me) you prefer to trust markets, using a 2017 gold price of $1,260, reparations were $1.9 Trillion, about five times GDP (which dipped to $371 billion in 1923).

    How did anyone expect Germany to dig out of that hole?

    Should we be surprised that it led to the authorities’ excessive printing of money? Should we be surprised that excessive printing of money led to hyperinflation?

    Should we be surprised that hyperinflation led to the rise in power of a megalomaniac who used propaganda effectively to target a scapegoat, and promised to make Germany great again?

    If it wasn’t entirely predictable, it makes perfect sense in retrospect (so much so that we might want to be more careful with the money-printing and scapegoating today, no?).

    We can draw a few more fat lines while we’re at it, from WWI to the credit bubble of the 1920s, and from that (along with a move towards socialist policies) to the Great Depression.

    How much time do you have? This piece – written in 1969 by Ludwig von Mises’s first PhD student in the United States, Hans F. Sennholz (1922-2007) – is a good place to start.

    Great Depression

    “The spectacular crash of 1929 followed five years of reckless credit expansion by the Federal Reserve System under the Coolidge Administration. In 1924, after a sharp decline in business, the Reserve banks suddenly created some $500 million in new credit, which led to a bank credit expansion of over $4 billion in less than one year. While the immediate effects of this new powerful expansion of the nation’s money and credit were seemingly beneficial, initiating a new economic boom and effacing the 1924 decline, the ultimate outcome was most disastrous. It was the beginning of a monetary policy that led to the stock market crash in 1929 and the following depression. In fact, the expansion of Federal Reserve credit in 1924 constituted what Benjamin Anderson in his great treatise on recent economic history called ‘the beginning of the New Deal.’ The Federal Reserve credit expansion in 1924 also was designed to assist the Bank of England in its professed desire to maintain prewar exchange rates. The strong U.S. dollar and the weak British pound were to be readjusted to prewar conditions through a policy of inflation in the U.S. and de­flation in Great Britain.”

    A boom brought about by credit expansion… Where have I heard that before? It concludes as follows:

    “Nothing would be more foolish than to single out the men who led us in those baleful years and condemn them for all the evil that befell us. The ultimate roots of the Great Depression were growing in the hearts and minds of the American people. It is true, they abhorred the painful symptoms of the great dilemma. But the large majority favored and voted for the very policies that made the disaster inevitable: inflation and credit expansion, protective tariffs, labor laws that raised wages and farm laws that raised prices, ever higher taxes on the rich and distribution of their wealth. The seeds for the Great Depression were sown by scholars and teachers during the 1920s and earlier when social and economic ideologies that were hostile toward our traditional order of private property and individual enterprise conquered our colleges and universities. The professors of earlier years were as guilty as the political leaders of the 1930s. Social and economic decline is facilitated by moral decay. Surely, the Great Depression would be inconceivable without the growth of covetousness and envy of great personal wealth and income, the mounting desire for public assistance and favors. It would be inconceivable without an ominous decline of individual independence and self-reliance, and above all, the burning desire to be free from man’s bondage and to be responsible to God alone. Can it happen again? Inexorable economic law ascertains that it must happen again whenever we repeat the dreadful errors that generated the Great Depression.”

    Sounds familiar (and ominous), no? Why they don’t draw connections in school, I will never understand. We raise our children to believe these events completely unrelated, random, and unpredictable.

    With Hitler’s army dominating most of Europe, how and why did the USA get involved? To save the world, and because the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, right?

    But why would the Japanese attack Pearl Harbor? Why wake the sleeping giant?

    FDR wanted to get involved, and when he couldn’t get Hitler to take the bait, he turned his attention to Japan, goading them into attack by blockading the country from oil and iron and leaving Pearl Harbor as a sitting duck. He needed Japan to commit an act of war to get the American people behind it.

    “The Roosevelt administration, while curtly dismissing Japanese diplomatic overtures to harmonize relations, accordingly imposed a series of increasingly stringent economic sanctions on Japan. In 1939, the United States terminated the 1911 commercial treaty with Japan. ‘On July 2, 1940, Roosevelt signed the Export Control Act, authorizing the President to license or prohibit the export of essential defense materials.’ Under this authority, ‘[o]n July 31, exports of aviation motor fuels and lubricants and No. 1 heavy melting iron and steel scrap were restricted.’ Next, in a move aimed at Japan, Roosevelt slapped an embargo, effective October 16, ‘on all exports of scrap iron and steel to destinations other than Britain and the nations of the Western Hemisphere.’ Finally, on July 26, 1941, Roosevelt ‘froze Japanese assets in the United States, thus bringing commercial relations between the nations to an effective end. One week later Roosevelt embargoed the export of such grades of oil as still were in commercial flow to Japan.’ The British and the Dutch followed suit, embargoing exports to Japan…”

    As outlined in the McCollum Memo…

    McCollum Memo

    “The McCollum memo, also known as the Eight Action Memo, was a memorandum, dated October 7, 1940 (more than a year before the Pearl Harbor attack), sent by Lieutenant Commander Arthur H. McCollum, who ‘provided the president with intelligence reports on [Japan]… [and oversaw] every intercepted and decoded Japanese military (though the military code had not been broken) and diplomatic report destined for the White House”[1][unreliable source?] in his capacity as director of the Office of Naval Intelligence’s Far East Asia section. It was sent to Navy Captains Dudley Knox, who agreed with the actions described within the memo, and Walter Stratton Anderson. The memo outlined the general situation of several nations in World War II and recommended an eight-part course of action for the United States to take in regard to the Japanese Empire in the South Pacific, suggesting the United States provoke Japan into committing an ‘overt act of war’. The memo illustrates several people in the Office of Naval Intelligence promoted the idea of goading Japan into war: ‘It is not believed that in the present state of political opinion the United States government is capable of declaring war against Japan without more ado… If Japan could be led to commit an overt act of war, so much the better.”

    Note FDR may have had the best intentions; heavy is the crown that seeks a third and fourth term, right? Here we only note that we are rarely treated to the real story by our government overlords.

    The memo shows they felt the Axis powers would likely turn to war against the United States following a defeat of Great Britain, and that the USA would be better served neutralizing a Japanese threat in the Pacific while Britain’s Navy still controlled the Atlantic if we could get them to strike first.

    However, one glaring miscalculation was the expectation that the neutral Soviet Union would side with the Axis. Between the McCollum memo and the attack on Pearl Harbor, something quite different and pivotal happened: Germany’s surprise attack on the Soviet Union in June of 1941.

    Fighting the Nazi’s may have been necessary at some point, and I don’t mean to play Monday morning quarterback, but Stalin was equally bad. The American people (at the time) would have preferred to keep their boys safe at home and let Stalin and Hitler pound each other to smithereens.

    It was an attack on Pearl Harbor goaded by the administration that changed sentiment. We are mere pawns on a chessboard for those who aspire to political power.

    Let’s be clear though, the Holocaust (and conditions that led to it) was an atrocity. Regardless of how they got there, the Greatest Generation deserves much credit (including two I knew well).

    The next dot? WWII leads to the Bretton Woods Agreement, placing the US Dollar at the center of the world’s monetary system, leading to the “exorbitant privilege” for the USA.

    Called Triffin’s Dilemma, economist Robert Triffin articulates that the country whose currency serves as the global reserve must supply the world with an abundance of it to meet world demand for foreign exchange reserves and trading. What this means is that our biggest export for as long as any of us can remember (or most of us have been alive) has been the US Dollar.

    In 1944, America made a strong case:

    1. We promised to exchange US Dollars for gold – and we had most of it – one ounce of gold for every $35 presented, no questions asked
    2. We had the atomic bomb, and just dropped two of them on Japan – so watch out!
    3. We were the only major developed country with a manufacturing base left standing
    4. We were the world’s largest creditor, and
    5. We were a bastion of liberty, free markets, property rights, and enforceable contracts

    The next dot?

    This led to welfare and warfare, guns and butter, the rise of the Military Industrial Complex, and the fattening of the American populace with handouts (plus processed carbs and prescription meds).

    Vietnam and LBJ’s Great Society programs – whose main goals, BTW, were to end poverty, reduce crime, abolish inequality and improve the environment (how’d we do there?) – led world leaders like Charles de Gaulle to call BS on rampant money-printing, lining up to exchange dollars for gold.

    By 1971, the run on the bank was on, Fort Knox was halved, and “tricky Dick” closed the gold window (temporarily, because, you know, speculators…).

    And thus began the 50-year binge, the great financialization, the hollowing of America (and the world) with debt. Money is now debt and debt alone, and the US can print it by the boatload.

    Guns and butter went into overdrive, globalization, financialization, and bubble economics. The healthcare system became a giant bloodsucking squid, same for banking and Wall Street. Everything the government touched – housing, college, healthcare – became massively inflated instruments of debt.

    Debt that requires interest.

    Debt that requires growth.

    Debt that requires exponential economic growth, on a finite planet.

    Resource extraction, energy consumption, and carbon emissions.

    The Soviet Union collapsed on itself, and the peace dividend was pushed back into the pot for a parlay of sport wars toppling dictators du jour in the Middle East loosely categorized as a War on Terror.

    Conveniently, that came with plenty of new domestic rackets like the TSA, the Patriot Act, and Office of Homeland Security.

    Sufficiently pacified with dollars, drugs and doughnuts, forced to elect leaders that offered only different flavors from the same menu, Americans tried to look away and focus on family.

    And that, my friends, is how we got from here to there, from 1919 to 2022. The most important dots I’ve connected over approximately 100 years, in 2,800 words, none of which they’ll teach in school.

    But where is it going? Join us for Part II, which begins at a pivot point…

     

    About the Author: Phil Denniston joins as contributing author from BadDaddy Publishing, better bedtime stories for free-thinking parents. Titles include “Where does money come from?”, “Good-Debt, Bad-Debt, and the Big Green Blob”, “The Big Bad Business Cycle”, and “The Beautiful Bitcoin Book”. Save 40% and try us risk-free.

  49. Site: Zero Hedge
    13 hours 26 min ago
    Author: Tyler Durden
    Chinese Scientists From Wuhan Discover "Potentially Deadly" New Strain Of Coronavirus

    Here we go again.

    A team of Chinese scientists from Wuhan have discovered a new strain of coronavirus that they fear could make the jump from animals to humans. Shortly after another team of Chinese scientists published new research claiming that the omicron strain may have gestated inside mice, this other team has warned about the "potential bio-safety threat" represented by a new strain of COVID.

    The team of researchers from Wuhan University claimed to have "unexpectedly" stumbled upon the new strain, which they're calling "the NeoCoV strain" (should it become a serious enough threat to warrant a "variant of concern" label, the WHO will grant the mutant strain a new Greek letter name).

    The strain was originally discovered in South Africa and is a "close relative" of omicron.

    Keep in mind, this isn't the first new strain to emerge since omicron was first discovered by a team in South Africa. The world has already faced down "deltacron", a mutant with attributes of both strains, that caused a splash in global press when it was first discovered.

    But the fact that a team of scientists from Wuhan has zeroed in on this strain certainly doesn't bode well.

    The new strain "can efficiently use some types of bat Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and, less favorably, human ACE2 for entry."

    SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID, was first discovered in Wuhan before it spread throughout the world as millions of Chinese traveled for the Lunar New Year holiday. The timing of the latest discovery comes amid this year's holiday.

    While the strain presently targets bats, the scientists said it has the capability to infect humans as well. And should that happen, it appears the new strain "could not be cross-neutralized by antibodies targeting SARS-CoV-2 or MERS-CoV" meaning natural immunity and vaccine-induced immunity would likely be powerless to stop it.

    Although NeoCoV "remains enigmatic," the scientists warned of a "potential bio-safety threat" for humans "with both high fatality and transmission rate."

    Interested parties can read the pre-print about the discovery below:

    2022.01.24.477490v1.full (1) by Joseph Adinolfi Jr. on Scribd

    Tyler Durden Thu, 01/27/2022 - 17:25
  50. Site: Edward Feser
    13 hours 32 min ago

    We’ve been talking about Balthasar’s view that we may at least hope that all human beings are saved.  Now, Balthasar was a Catholic theologian who was careful to try to avoid contradicting definitive Church teaching on the subject.  That is why he does not endorse the universalist view that all mustand therefore definitely will be saved, which is heretical (as is shown hereand here).  But it is also significant that in the title of his famous book on the subject, he is careful to frame his question: “Dare we hope ‘that all men be saved’?”  In other words, he’s asking about whether all human beings might be saved.  He’s not asking whether all creatures with intellect and will, including fallen angels, might be saved.  Indeed, in the book he says, of demonic powers:

    Let it be said at the outset that theological hope can by no means apply to this power.  The sphere to which redemption by the Son who became man applies is unequivocally that of mankind[O]ne cannot agree with Barth’s claim that the angels had no freedom of choice and that the myth of a “fall of the angels” is thus to be rejected absolutely[T]he doctrine of a fall of the angels, which is deeply rooted in the whole of Tradition, becomes not only plausible but even, if the satanic is accepted as existent, inescapable. (pp. 113-14)

    To be sure, Balthasar then goes on to speculate about whether the concept of “person” would still apply to a fallen angel – on the grounds that persons typically exist in a way that involves relationship with other persons, and those who have permanently opted for evil have thereby locked themselves into a selfishness that prevents a proper relationship with others.  Now, this is pretty woolly metaphysics.  For one thing, persons fixed on evil cannot enter into healthy relationships to other persons, but that doesn’t mean they cannot enter into any relationships at all.  For another thing (and as Balthasar seems not to deny), demons would still retain intellect and will even if they no longer had any relationships even of a defective kind with other persons.  That would suffice to make them persons, certainly on a Thomistic analysis.  Anyway, however we choose to characterize them, Balthasar does not seem to deny that demons are forever lost, so that we cannot hope for their salvation.

    The reason, no doubt, is that that too is something required by Catholic orthodoxy.  As the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) teaches:

    He will come at the end of time to judge the living and the dead, to render to every person according to his works, both to the reprobate and to the elect.  All of them will rise with their own bodies, which they now wear, so as to receive according to their deserts, whether these be good or bad; for the latter perpetual punishment with the devil, for the former eternal glory with Christ.

    Even if you were to argue that this does not entail that there will in fact be any human being who suffers perpetual punishment (as opposed to entailing the mere possibility of this happening), it cannot reasonably be denied that it entails that the devil suffers perpetual punishment.  Similarly, the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that “there is no repentance for the angels after their fall,” so that the demons’ choice against God is “irrevocable” and their sin “unforgivable” (393).  This teaching is found also in scripture:

    Then he will say to those at his left hand, “Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.” (Matthew 25: 41, 45-46)

    And the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulphur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night for ever and ever. (Revelation 20:10)

    So, no Catholic can, consistent with orthodoxy, claim that hell is empty.  At the very least, the fallen angels are in hell and there is no hope whatsoever for their repentance.  Even Balthasar admits this.  At least for the Catholic, this constitutes an absolute boundary beyond which orthodox speculation on the subject of hell cannot go.  It’s not just that it cannot be affirmed that all creatures must and will be saved.  It’s that it must be affirmed that some are damned – the demons, at the very least.

    What does this tell us about whether any human beings are damned?  Quite a lot.  For one thing, it undermines the main ground for the Balthasarian hope that at least all human beings might be saved.  The argument is that God willsall human beings to be saved, as is affirmed in passages like 1 Timothy 2:3-4.  If God wills it, then, it is argued, that gives us good grounds to hope that it will happen.  But God also obviously willed that all the angels would be saved, and yet it is certain that some are damned anyway.  So, why would God’s willing that all human beings be saved make it any more likely they will all in fact be saved?  (In Book XXI, Chapter 17of The City of God, St. Augustine makes the related point that it is absurd to appeal to divine mercy as an argument for the salvation of all human beings, while conceding that the demons are lost forever despite God’s mercy.)

    If anything, it is a priori far less likely that all human beings will be saved than that all angels will be.  Angels have far more powerful intellects and wills than we do, and being incorporeal, they lack the passions that can blind the intellect and overwhelm the will.  They cannot fall into the kind and number of errors that lead human beings into sin, and they cannot be distracted from the good by feelings of anger, lust, craving for alcohol or drugs, etc.  So, if even many angels are nevertheless damned, it is a priori extremely improbable at best – and, really, practically impossible – that no human beings are damned. 

    That much alone should make any Catholic wary of putting much stock in the suggestion that there is any hope that all human beings will be saved.  But much more can be said.  I noted in my previous post that Bl. Pope Pius IX, in The Syllabus of Errors, condemned the following proposition: “Good hope at least is to be entertained of the eternal salvation of all those who are not at all in the true Church of Christ.”  But what about those who are in it?  Well, Pope Pius II, in 1459, condemned the proposition “that all Christians are to be saved” (cf. Denzinger 717b).  Of the human race in general, the Council of Quiersy in 853 taught that “omnipotent God wishes all men without exception to be saved, although not all will be saved” (cf. Denzinger 318).  Note that the council explicitly says that in fact not all will be saved even though God desires that they be saved

    Such doctrinal statements are perfectly in line with what scripture clearly teaches, in passages like these:

    Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is easy, that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many.  For the gate is narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life, and those who find it are few. (Matthew 7:13-14)

    And some one said to him, “Lord, will those who are saved be few?” And he said to them, “Strive to enter by the narrow door; for many, I tell you, will seek to enter and will not be able.”  (Luke 13:23-24)

    Many, many more passages could be cited from both scriptureand tradition.  The blindingly obvious implication is that some human beings will in fact be damned – indeed, Christ’s own statements, made in response to a direct question about the matter in the case of the passage from Luke’s gospel, imply that most people will be damned. 

    And yet Balthasarians tie themselves in logical knots trying to find loopholes in these various statements by which a hope for the salvation of all might squeak through on a technicality.  This is an absolutely bizarre way to do theology.  It’s comparable to a doctor who, looking at the grim statistics on pancreatic cancer, notes that it is nevertheless at least possible to survive it, and then chirpily tells his patients: “We can at least hope that all pancreatic cancer patients will survive!”  After all, if it is possible for some, isn’t it possible for all?

    In the case of pancreatic cancer, though survival is possible, a number of things have to go right in order for this to happen, and because it is in most cases highly improbable that they will all go right, there is simply no realistic hope at all that the possibility of survival will be realized in every case.  But the same thing is true with respect to the salvation of souls.  It’s not enough to note that, in the abstract, any particular soul could be saved.  We also have to ask what, specifically, has to happen in order for the salvation of a soul to occur, and how probable it isthat it will occur in every single case.  Once we do that, the notion that we can hope for the salvation of all can once again be seen a priori to be laughably unrealistic.

    Here’s what the Church says has to go right.  If you are a Catholic guilty of mortal sin, you must repent of it with a firm purpose of avoiding such sin in the future, you must have at least imperfect contrition (that is to say, sorrow for sin because you fear divine punishment or abhor the ugliness of sin), and you must in the case of imperfect contrition actually receive absolution in the sacrament of confession.   If you have not received such absolution, then you can still be saved if you have perfect contrition (that is to say, sorrow for sin out of love of God) and at least the intention to go to confession and receive absolution.  Without meeting these conditions, you cannot be saved.  For example, if you lack perfect contrition, never go to confession, and die, you will not be saved.  If you are outside the visible boundaries of the Church, then you can still be saved, but only if you have perfect contrition and at least an implicit desire for baptism.  If you lack these upon death, you cannot be saved.

    Now, there is, of course, more to be said about these criteria, and various qualifications to be made.  For example, what counts as perfect contrition, or as an implicit desire for baptism?  I would argue for a fairly broad interpretation of these concepts.  For instance, I would argue that one might have, through no fault of his own, many false beliefs about the divine nature yet still plausibly be said to have perfect contrition or sorrow for sin out of love for God. 

    But by no means does anything go.  For example, a person whose entire live is devoted to making money and partying, and who treats morality and religion as matters of complete indifference or even scorn, can hardly be said to have perfect contrition even if in some banal sense he’s a “nice guy.”  Hence, if he suddenly dies, it is hardly likely that he will be saved.  Is it possible, for some particular person like this, that there is a deeper side to him that the world does not see?  Sure.  Maybe there are recesses of his soul that only God sees, in which perfect contrition is evident, so that his death does not entail his damnation.  But is it remotely likely that every singleperson who lives like this is really perfectly contrite deep down, and thus might be saved – even though not even all the angelsare saved?  The very idea is preposterous.  And here I am talking about immoral lives of just the everyday, ordinary kind.  When we factor in far more morally depraved people (murderers, rapists, drug dealers, etc.) it is even more absurd to suppose that every single one of them might die in a state of perfect contrition.

    Scripture itself indicates even of some specifichuman beings that they are lost.  Revelation 20:10, quoted above, indicates that the beast and false prophet of the last days will be damned.  Jude 7 states that “Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise acted immorally and indulged in unnatural lust, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.”  Christ says of Judas that “it would have been better for that man if he had not been born” (Matthew 26:24) and “I have guarded them, and none of them is lost but the son of perdition” (John 17:12). 

    Here too some people resort to mental gymnastics to try to get around the clear meaning of these texts.  None of these efforts is credible, and there is no point in even attempting such creative reinterpretations unless one is operating with the background assumption that it is plausible that all might be saved.  Once we see that (for the reasons I’ve been spelling out) this is not plausible, any residual motivation for straining to see in these texts anything but the implication that the people referred to are damned drops away.

    All the same, I expect that many will prefer to cling to false hope.  Christ himself could appear to them and say: “Listen very carefully and read my lips: Some people are in hell,” and they would respond: “Lord, you mean that just as a warning that some might go to hell, right?  Or maybe you mean ‘people’ in some unusual sense.  And what exactly does ‘hell’ mean, anyway?  Come to think of it, ‘some,’ ‘are’ and ‘in’ could mean all sorts of things too.  Lord, you sure speak in mysteries, but I trust that some day you’ll reveal to us what all this means.  Anyway, until then we can hope!”

    Or perhaps they would accuse Christ of wanting people to go to hell, as theologians and churchmen who warn about hell are routinely accused of doing.  This is as irrational as accusing the doctor who warns of the low survival rate of pancreatic cancer of wanting people to die from it.  No Catholic wants anybody to go to hell; certainly I don’t.  And I submit that those who warn of it are more compassionate, not less, than those who preach false hope.

    Related posts:

    How to go to hell

    Does God damn you?

    Why not annihilation?

    A Hartless God?

    No hell, no heaven

    Speaking (what you take to be) hard truths ≠ hatred

    Hart, hell, and heresy

    No urgency without hell

    Scripture and the Fathers contra universalism

    Popes, creeds, councils and catechisms contra universalism

    Geach on Hell

    A fallacy in Balthasar

Pages

Subscribe to Distinction Matter - Subscribed Feeds