Charlie Hebdo, publisher of such vile images as God the Father being sodomized by Our Lord Jesus Christ, is part of His Mystical Body.
This according to Jason Jones and John Zmirak (in what order or proportion is anyone’s guess) who recently pontificated on the Catholic Thing blog:
The attack on Charlie Hebdo was an assault on Christendom. Magazines that publish sophomoric cartoons mocking religion are, paradoxically, part of the Body of Christ – if perhaps its lower intestine. In a society formed by the profound Christian notion of human dignity, there is also room for bad Christians and non-Christians, just as there are cells for mystical Carmelites. The broadest vision of a real, earthly, Christian society can be found, not in monastic tracts, but in The Canterbury Tales.
While one might feel compelled, and justifiably so, to reject as unworthy of consideration the opinions of any self-identified “Catholic” whose worldview is admittedly informed more by the stories of Geoffrey Chaucer than the magisterium of saintly popes, such in this case would be unwise.
The unfortunate truth is that the propositions put forth in this article are in some appreciable measure the logical fruit of the Americanist brand of liberty adopted at Vatican Council II, and therefore more widespread than one might care to imagine.
As such, this article merits a closer look.
Before digging in, however, let me state at the outset that it’s not my intention to offer a point-by-point refutation of every laughable idea these writers put forth. For one thing, the sheer number of such remarks would make the task entirely too unwieldy.
More importantly, however, is that the level of ignorance (quite possibly invincible) on display in this article is such that it simply cannot be overcome by a handful of paragraphs; rather, it requires first and foremost that those attracted to such opinions find within themselves a sincere desire to sentire cum ecclesia, along with a willingness to embark upon a thorough examination of the pre-conciliar magisterium.
Evidence for the lack of just such a desire and willingness on the part of Jones and Zmirak litters their entire article. For example:
Attempts to forcibly “purify” Christian societies of dissent and sin always ended in catastrophe – with “heretics” chained to stakes, Jews labeled with badges and artworks piled on bonfires. Such fitful attempts to truncate the Body of Christ of its “impure” members planted seeds of vengeance – which sprouted in France in 1789, and in Spain in the 1930s.
Debates concerning the details and the relative merits of those measures that may have occasionally been undertaken in previous ages with the stated goal of building a Christian society are entirely irrelevant.
One can readily admit that certain of these actions would only serve to undermine the common good in our own day; we might even say that some were condemnable even then.
This, however, in no way justifies consigning to the trash heap, as Jones-Zmirak clearly does, the immutable principles that formed the foundation of the Church’s traditional (and enduring) understanding of the Social Kingship of Christ and the rights and duties of individuals, families and States.
It is noteworthy just how eager these writers are to suggest that blame for the French Revolution lies squarely at the feet of the Catholic State and perhaps even the Church herself, and yet they’re at pains to excuse the activities of Charlie Hebdo while lecturing, “Christianity can bear mockery and assimilate it.”
As to how they imagine Christianity might assimilate mass produced images of Jesus Christ depicted as an incestuous homosexual is anyone’s guess, but the suggestion alone betrays a mind nearly devoid of sensus Catholicus.
As if their arguments in favor of unbridled liberty had not already been advanced beyond the point of absurdity in the brief excerpts provided, the duo goes on to assert:
So the Church and the West, in a sense, need Charlie Hebdo. If France must defend that magazine’s offices with squads from the Foreign Legion, it’s well worth the price – instead of surrendering Western freedoms to the bearded thugs of the banlieues.
With the sort of puerility that one might expect only of the entirely unchurched, Jones-Zmirak here offers an utterly false dichotomy; one that sets unlimited license for the Charlie Hebdos of the world against a society ruled by the might of violent extremists, as if it must be either one or the other.
Just a small taste of the authentic Christian wisdom presented with such great clarity by Pope Gregory XVI is enough to expose the insanity of their position:
Here We must include that harmful and never sufficiently denounced freedom to publish any writings whatever and disseminate them to the people, which some dare to demand and promote with so great a clamor. We are horrified to see what monstrous doctrines and prodigious errors are disseminated far and wide in countless books, pamphlets, and other writings which, though small in weight, are very great in malice. We are in tears at the abuse which proceeds from them over the face of the earth. Some are so carried away that they contentiously assert that the flock of errors arising from them is sufficiently compensated by the publication of some book which defends religion and truth. Every law condemns deliberately doing evil simply because there is some hope that good may result. Is there any sane man who would say poison ought to be distributed, sold publicly, stored, and even drunk because some antidote is available and those who use it may be snatched from death again and again? (Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos)
What on earth would cause otherwise intelligent men to reject such fundamentally logical thoughts as these?
Perhaps we need look no further than the Council; that anthropocentric bloodless coup wherein Christ the King was duly supplanted by man to whom “all things on earth should be related as their center and crown” (cf GS 12).
According to Jones-Zmirak:
At the Second Vatican Council, the Church fully renounced any aspiration to dominate men’s souls through the sword of the state – recognizing that religious persecution is intrinsically evil, just like adultery or abortion.
In spite of the implicit, childish, and entirely unsustainable suggestion that the traditional (and as yet still entirely applicable, albeit ignored) doctrine of the Church relative to religious liberty and Church-State relations was intrinsically evil, one might see in their commentary the threads of a potential insanity defense.
It appears that these men are, at least in some measure, victims of the post-conciliar tidal wave that has been crashing upon the rock of sure doctrine for nearly five decades, rendering it but a pile of sand unworthy of the firm foundation of a truly just society; at least in the eyes of the disoriented.
In any event, I would invite you to undertake the bitter experience of reading the rest of their arguments directly.
What you will discover if you do is the sort of “dynamic language, emotional and high-sounding words” of the French Sillonists who were condemned by Pope St. Pius X for their gross misunderstanding of human dignity “in the manner of some philosophers, of whom the Church does not at all feel proud.”
“The first condition of that dignity is liberty, but viewed in the sense that … each man is autonomous,” wrote the Holy Father in his Apostolic Letter, Notre Charge Apostolique.
“This is the basis principle from which the Sillon draws further conclusions,” he continued, “today the people [must not be] in tutelage under an authority distinct from themselves; they must liberate themselves.”
This was an idea popularized by such 18th century philosophers as those held up for scorn by Pope Pius X, freethinkers like Rousseau and Voltaire, whose prose inspired the so-called “great American experiment,” the ideals of which neo-conservative Catholics like Jason Jones and John Zmirak are all-too-pleased to enthrone in the place of Christ the King.
Seems to me like everyone wants a piece of the Hedbo pie to push whatever it is they’re selling. The merchandise for the “Je Suis” Campaign is doing pretty well I hear! So it’s no surprise ideologues will want to prop Hedbo up as their Cover Girl.
–
It is understandable why Christians support the Americanist principle of Free Speech. After all we also like to gain from it to publish whatever we want. And we don’t want to be censored. In a secular world wherein there is no such thing as ‘Absolute Truth’, unbridled Free Speech makes sense to best facilitate us to get along.
–
But in a Catholic World, there is such a thing as Truth, and that the Truth can be known. Therefore no license should be given to falsities, and Free Speech is untenable. In a Catholic world, all lies are demonic propaganda and should be censored and abolished and its purveyors prosecuted.
–
But we don’t live in a Catholic World. We are Catholics living in a Secular world that has abandoned Christ. So getting on board the Free Speech bandwagon is supposedly to out benefit, if only for a temporary time.
–
But is it really working out as well as we think? There are many kinds of speech that are not tolerated. Some, like questioning the Holocaust, will get you imprisoned in Germany and many might feel this is with good cause. But then again, try speaking out against homosexuality in Canada and see how far that will take you. If you’re in the U.S. try being a journalist or whistle-blower trying to expose government tyranny or corruption.
–
So even in the Secular World, ‘Free Speech’ doesn’t really exist… certain speech is prosecutable! You can’t even display the 10 Commandments any more. Or you can only erect a Nativity Scene so long as there’s accommodation for a Darwin Exhibit and a Satanic Baphomet cuddling children on either side to mock it.
–
Let’s face it, the enemies of Christ set up rules “Free Speech”, then selectively enforce it anyway! So why are we the idiots who continue to play this game?
–
The liberals play the Free Speech game and tolerance until the get into power and then don’t tolerate our free speech.
–
The homosexuals play the Free Speech game and tolerance until the get into power and then don’t tolerate our free speech.
–
The Communists play the Free Speech game and tolerance until the get into power and then don’t tolerate our free speech.
–
The Islamic play the Free Speech game and tolerance until the get into power and then don’t tolerate our free speech.
–
And we’re the only ones supposed to obey the rules??? Pfffft!!!!
–
I see no reason why Catholics shouldn’t play the Free Speech game and tolerance until we get into power and then don’t tolerate their free speech. I think that would be akin to being as wise as serpents as our foes. But since we are to be innocent as doves, we cannot abide by such deception, which is why Pope Gregory XVI and others put their words where their mouth is and openly exposed the illusion of ‘Free Speech’ as the deception is actually is. Something that can never be achieved fairly for all, that will only poison the well with numerous lies for which responsible men who believe in absolute truth ought never to allow freedom to reign, and for which our enemies will use deceptively to their advantage!
–
Sure, sure, I’ll exercise my Free Speech to my benefit and make it known that given the fact that Free Speech is indeed hypocritically limited by the Secular State, that obviously everyone agrees there is a precedent that says that not all speech is tolerable. So who calls the shots? The secularists who hold that there is no truth despite their hypocrisy and selective enforcement, or Jesus Christ who is the Truth?
–
The Teachings of the Church, so scandalous to the confused Catholics today, stand the test of time and expose the reality of the world for what it really is. If I have to spend time protesting and laying my life down for something. It won’t be for Free Speech or ‘Western’ values, an ever-changing thing, but for God and His Christ!
–
What we are witnessing is the divine providence of God, allowing the American/Enlightenment experiment to fail so that history may record its descent into chaos and note its errors for future generations to come. The ones who’ll survive this anyway…
Zmirak is a notorious right wing cafeteria Catholic. He has long accused 19th and 20th century popes of being ignorant of his so-called “laws” of economics so this latest screed is hardly surprising.
Dear Johnno,
It seems to us what you suggest we are witnessing God allowing,
is true, but it is only a part of the results of the failure of the Church to be the light to all nations-America included.
–At Fatima Our Lady warned: … If my requests are not heeded, Russia will spread her errors throughout the world, causing wars and persecutions of the Church. The good will be martyred; the Holy Father will have much to suffer; various nations will be annihilated.” and promised, ” In the end, my Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to me, and she shall be converted, and a period of peace will be granted to the world.”
___
The world already had a chance to absorb the horrors resulting from ignoring the Church’s condemnations of Atheistic Communism and socialism, lasting through a second world war and the Iron Curtain Dictatorships and massacres. That failed “experiment” was recorded in history, and yet the next generation–, still groping blindly in the dark due to the silenced voice of the Church– hell-bent on man-made efforts of diplomacy and ecumenism, (while its catechesis failed and the ancient Liturgy which could have taught it was for all purposes suppressed ,) embraced the socialism we see all around us today, including in France, the “eldest daughter” .
__
Without the Heavenly help we can only expect these errors and blindness to keep getting worse. With it, we can expect a miraculous conversion of the world, with a time of peace, based on Faith in God through His One True Church. It seems God is letting everything fall apart as predicted at Fatima, until Our Lady’s requests are finally heeded. (“late”).
@Ganganelli: What is your full opinion about the quote reproduced above by Mr. V:
–
“Attempts to forcibly ‘purify’ Christian societies of dissent and sin always ended in catastrophe – with ‘heretics’ chained to stakes, Jews labeled with badges and artworks piled on bonfires. Such fitful attempts to truncate the Body of Christ of its ‘Impure’ members planted seeds of vengeance – which sprouted in France in 1789, and in Spain in the 1930s.”
–
Just wonderin’.
@Cyrian
–
I would say it is a load of bull. When Martin Luther wrote his book “Against the Jews and their lies”, he complained about the existing Catholic order that allowed Jews and Muslims to practice their faith. He wanted synagogues that had been protected by Catholic popes for hundreds of years burned to the ground.
–
Zmirak is a capitalist first, an Americanist second, and apparently Catholicism falls somewhere down the list.
Jones and Zmirak remark: “So the Church and the West, in a sense, need Charlie Hebdo. If France must defend that magazine’s offices with squads from the Foreign Legion, it’s well worth the price”.
This repugnant statement shows a strong similarity to one that appeared in the October 2005 edition of First Things. The context for the latter statement was a letter to the magazine written by Marianne Linane of the National Association of Pro-Life Nurses. Linane was responding to an article by one Robert T. Miller titled “The Legal Death of Terri Schiavo”, which had appeared in the May edition. Linane writes, in conformity with the moral law:
“According to Miller, the judges involved followed current law in refusing to defend Schiavo. Apparently none of them found it unconscionable that Schiavo should be put to death in this manner. Could they not have followed the voice of conscience that so many other judges claim to hear when they override laws passed by the representatives of the people, as activist judges have been doing for the past thirty years?”.
Perhaps Jones and Zmirak had Miller’s reply in mind, which in reads in part as follows (emphasis added):
“In a case like Terri Schiavo’s, the temptation to ignore the law is strong, but we need to keep our heads and remember that the fundamental principles of our system of government serve very large interests, interests larger even than the life or death of a single individual. This, incidentally, is why men have been willing to die for these principles.”
To any Catholic who may feel seduced by these abominable ideas, perhaps because it appears that, with “a genuine modernist” in the Vatican, only McCain/Palin or Romney/Ryan can “beat Obama” and effect real change, I would reply: do not waste your life. Do not waste this life that has been given to you by God as a test of your obedience to His eternal wisdom and make yourself a slave to the transient concoctions of the American system of government.
For some reason, the above link to First Things is not working. Here is the full address:
http://www.firstthings.com/article/2005/10/an-actual-buddhist
The Church’s “fitful attempts” at purification resulted in the French Revolution and the Spanish Civil War? Probably caused the Bolshevik Revolution as well. Looks like I’ll have to hit the history books again, missed that one.
YES!! AMEN!!! We must resist this kind of revisionist history with all our strength. If we truly believed that Jesus Christ is Our Lord and Saviour, and our King, we really would ‘do something’ about all the evil that is spewing over our world. And our ‘shepherds’ would be leading the charge. O for the Crusades!
So law trumps the Truth? What a perversion. A bad law is no law. In America people still argue over this kind of thing, in Canada there is a warm, fuzzy blanket over our whole country – stifles any word that is Truth.
—
Americans, with all your troubles please pray for Canada. We have no voice.
I could have done without the verbal image at the beginning of the article, which now sticks in my head. Simply saying the rag blasphemed the Trinity would have been enough.
This just spotted on Mark Styne’s page:
—-
“U.S. President Barack Obama will invite allies to a Feb. 18 security summit in Washington to try and prevent violent extremism, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said on Sunday after meeting his European counterparts in Paris…
“Cazeneuve said the Internet needs to remain a space for free expression, but that Europe should fight against abusive use of the web to spread hate speech, anti-Semitic messages and the recruiting vulnerable young people for violence.
“We need to work more closely with Internet companies to guarantee the reporting and if possible removal of all content that amounts to an apology of terrorism or calls for violence and hatred,” he said.
—-
Hey, Louie, better watch what you say from February on. How long do we think it will be before plain talk about Truth will be considered ‘calls for violence and hatred’?
—-
Truth-speakers are hunted down and persecuted already, and it won’t be far down the road before blogs and com-boxes will be stopped.
—-
But, hey, we’re all about free speech right?
According to Fr. Paul Kramer:
–
Vladimir Putin had asked Pope Francis for the Consecration of Russia.
–
Pope Francis cut him off replying, “We will not discuss Fatima!”
–
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WehqTwn600Q
A couple more points:
–
1. Like the fall of the Roman Empire and the end of the Romanovs, the causes of the French Revolution are much debated. Two obvious causes Zmirak and Jones don’t mention: The anti-Christian Enlightenment relentlessly attacked the Church and the King. And Louis XVI bankrupted his treasury supporting the American Revolutionaries against King George III.
–
2. Blasphemy was illegal even in many states in Protestant America through the 1950s.
–
3. Last week, the French secularist regime Zmirak and Jones seem to think is so exemplary in its tolerance arrested 54 people for “hate crimes.”
It’s also risible that Zmirak and Jones paint St. Louis IX (not labeled a saint by them) as building “the free space where such rascals can ply their trade.” This is from a contemporary account of the 1263 anti-blasphemy statute the saint issued when he returned from the Holy Land:
–
“The king had so deep a love for our Lord and His sweet Mother that he punished most severely all those who had been convicted of speaking of them irreverently or of using their names in some wicked oath. Thus I saw him order a goldsmith of Caeserea to be bound to a ladder with pig’s guts and other viscera around his neck, in such quantity that they reached up to his nose. I have also heard that, since I came back from overseas, he had the lips and nose of a citizen of Paris seared for a similar offense.”
I’m sorry, Louie, just one more point on the Zmirak-Jones foolishness. I looked up the book they cited as proving, “In 1940, cynical right-wing generals decided to stop defending the corrupt Third Republic, embracing the German victory as a ‘divine surprise,’ and installing their crony Marshal Petain as the nation’s ‘savior.’” The book is “France 1940: Defending the Republic,” by Philip Noyce.
–
The book isn’t even out until April 28! So we can’t check out what it actually says.
–
The summary reads: “In this revisionist account of France’s crushing defeat in 1940, a world authority on French history argues that the nation’s downfall has long been misunderstood….In this revisionist account of France’s crushing defeat in 1940, a world authority on French history argues that the nation’s downfall has long been misunderstood.”
–
Except that America had 2.5 years to prepare for D-Day. And by June 6, 1944, most of the Wehrmacht had been chewed up on the Russian Front. Whereas in 1940, Stalin still was allied with Hitler, whose Blitzkrieg and Third Generation War methods surprised the French and the BEF, who were expecting a replay of World War I trench warfare.
–
All this can be debated. And revision is important as part of the debate. But for Zmirak and Jones to cite an unpublished book no one can check out is sloppy and irresponsible. It would be interesting to compare Nord’s book with “The Collapse of the Third Republic,” the classic account by William Shirer, who was there. But we can’t do that till April, can we?
I accidentally double quoted one passage describing the Noyce book. Here’s what I also wanted to include, from the Amazon.com description: “Instead, he reveals that the Third Republic was no worse prepared and its military failings no less dramatic than those of the United States and other Allies in the early years of the war. What was unique in France was the betrayal by military and political elites who abandoned the Republic and supported the reprehensible Vichy takeover. Why then have historians and politicians ever since interpreted the defeat as a judgment on the nation as a whole? Why has the focus been on the failings of the Third Republic and not on elite betrayal? The author examines these questions in a fascinating conclusion.”
Well done Johnno:+) I’m sick of the abuse of the word “free”…the real word is LICENSE. Freedom isn’t “I will do and say whatever I want…good, evil doesn’t matter”…that is license and we do not have the RIGHT to do so. True freedom is knowing the difference between right and wrong and being able to do what is right. And per the ridiculous crap that these two authors wrote…like Louie said…where do I begin? A) the French had NOTHING to do with the Church cracking down on evil it had to do with the massive starvation of the people due to Louie XVI bankrupting France b/c of his funding of the American War against England. B) Bring back burning at the stake! Cont’d——–
Burning at the stake was reserved for Christians alone. Those who were formed in the faith yet purposely lied and murdered eternal souls. Eternal murder is infinitely worse than temporal. It was also used as a tool to help the heretic repent and make reparation for their crime. Spain LOVED the Inquisition…it kept people and society in check, in harmony. And like noted, Jews and Muslims were utterly left alone. There is not one instance in Church History where just persecution of spiritual murderers did not strengthen and grow the society. We have the right and duty to persecute people who willfully inflict eternal murder and cause societal chaos. It is there actions that condemn them, not ours. God bless~
When I say that there is no instance in Church History where just persecution did anything but help society, please don’t take that as Gospel truth. I am only recalling what I learned from the presentations I have listened to over the years on Church History, the Inquisition and the Crusades.
It all comes down to the lie of “dignity of man/human person” junk. It’s the deification of man and the excuse they use to allow words and actions that actually destroy man’s dignity, a dignity that comes from God alone. God bless~
@ #10 above–Dear Johnno,
We’d noticed Putin coming out more and more as the world’s ‘defender of Christian values’, and wondered if it is a step in his plan to retain power. Our research has us believing it is. There’s a LOT of propaganda – mostly coming from Russia. So we recommend extra caution regarding this band-wagon.
— Example: “One practical example of church-state harmony -included Putin dodging the constitutional two-term limit on the presidency by using Dmitry Medvedev as a placeholder. In Sept. 2011, after Medvedev announced he would not seek a second term but instead step aside for his benefactor, Archpriest Vsevolod Chaplin, head of the Moscow Patriarchate’s Department of Public Relations, hailed the development as a “peaceful, dignified, honorable, friendly transfer of power” that other nations should envy. That Russian voters had yet to ratify the “transfer of power” was clearly a minor detail.
======
In your link Father Kramer’s only source of information about Putin’s conversation with the Pope, is Father’s unrevealed “connections” within the Vatican.
-When he first claimed that Benedict had resigned under coercion, he also said he “had “inside” information confirming that as fact.”
-Shortly before THAT, it was reported- Nov. 29. 1913, that he had declared the Holy See was vacant, but changed his mind and decided Benedict was still the reigning Pope, due to information from those “sources”.
___
Pope Emeritus Benedict responded to a letter from Italian journalist Andrea Tornielli, who specifically asked about the alleged pressures and conspiracies some believe to be behind the resignation. Benedict wrote “There isn’t the slightest doubt about the validity of my resignation from the Petrine ministry,” “The only condition for the validity is the complete freedom of my decision. Speculations about the invalidity of my resignation are simply absurd.”
He also said there was no dual government in the Church” and his “only purpose” is to pray for his successor.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/religion/benedict-rejects-rumors-on-why-he-resigned-as-simply-absurd/2014/02/26/445f27ee-9f03-11e3-878c-65222df220eb_story.html
=========
Reading Fr. Kramer’s opinions over many years, in Fr Gruner’s publications, we’ve seen evidence of hot-tempered, impulsivity and an inclination to believe what confirms his suspiciouns, very readily. His vascillations on- the chair of Peter, (not sure if what he believes right now) leave us skeptical about this latest claim.
He refers to Putin as- “possibly the last Christian Ruler left”. That’s Putin, the builder of the play-Palace, who divorced his wife and so often has himself photographed with his shirt off doing macho activities or surrounded by adoring models and actresses. The same man under whose rule so many journalists who dared oppose him publicly have been shut down and/or inexplicably executed KGB style.
___
We recommend folks check the (too-numerous to list)- articles on the New Russian Government love-affair with the Orthodox Church.
Here are a few quotes:”The irony should not be lost on anyone who remembers the extent to which Soviet evildoing was chalked up to godlessness.
-columnist Andrei Kolesnikov: “religion’s true role in contemporary Russia is perhaps best summed up by none other than Karl Marx, who in his 1852 pamphlet The 18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte described it as “the domination of the priests as an instrument of government.”
–columnist Konstantin Eggert, Orthodox Christianity is “a new ideology to replace ‘the moral code of the builder of communism’
–Roman Silantiev, an official in the Church-sponsored Russian People’s Assembly, “Just as they used to say ‘anti-Soviet’ meaning ‘Russia-hater,’ they are now saying anyone who hates the Russian Orthodox Church hates Russia,”
___
In 2001, when George W. Bush first met with Vladimir Putin, the two presidents bonded over Putin’s heartwarming tale about a cross he had supposedly received from his mother and worn his entire life, and which had miraculously survived a fire at his summer cottage. .. it illustrates the extent to which God-talk was becoming part of Russia’s official discourse, and not just for foreign consumption.
___
When Putin restored the old Soviet anthem with brand-new lyrics in 2000,”the victory of communism’s deathless ideas” gave way to “a land watched over by God.”
10 years later, Nashi, the “patriotic” youth movement mobilized to whip up loyalist fervor and browbeat the opposition, had an “Orthodox division” and high-level officials spoke of the Orthodox faith as the “kernel” of Russian identity.
— In a televised debate during the 2012 presidential campaign, filmmaker and Putin-crony Nikita Mikhalkov questioned whether one of Putin’s rivals, Prokhorov, was fit to lead Russia since he was an avowed nonbeliever. “Orthodoxy is the majority religion and the Orthodox believe all authority comes from God.”
–a number of commentators noted that religion has become the Russian state’s new ideological prop, a “national idea” to fill the post-communist void.”
–” Not surprisingly, this religion-as-ideology often seems more political than spiritual–an aggressively statist creed perfectly aligned with Putin’s worldview.”
— Last February, at a meeting with religious leaders hosted by the Patriarch, Putin mused that “the primitive understanding of the separation of church and state” should be jettisoned in favor of “cooperation.” And indeed, the church was cooperating at that very moment by serving as the state’s cheerleader in the face of rising popular discontent.
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Putin+goes+to+church%3a+Russia's+unholy+new+alliance+between+Orthodox…-a0310741402
Dear All,
A few bites of a sermon by a Sainted bishop, that make a nice prayer
-for bloggers and all others who seek truth:
__
“I am well aware, almighty God and Father, that in my life I owe You a most particular duty. It is to make my every thought and word speak of You.
You have conferred on me this gift of speech, and it can yield no greater return than to be at Your service. It is for making You known as Father, the Father of the only-begotten God,and preaching this to the world that knows You not, and to the heretics who refuse to believe in You.”
__
“..call us into partnership in the Spirit, with the prophets and apostles…may we grasp precisely what they meant to say, taking each word in its real and authentic sense. For we are about to say what they have already declared as part of the mystery of revelation. We must not proclaim a change in truth..”
__
“Impart to us the meaning of the words of Scripture, and the light to understand it, with reverence for the doctrine, and confidence in its truth. Grant that we may express what we believe.. May we have the grace, in the face of heretics who deny You, to honor You as God, Who is not alone, and to proclaim this as truth.”
–Hilary of Poitiers (feast Jan 13) (source: Liturgy of Hours VIII p.1301)
Are you still seriously spouting nonsense about Vladimir Putin?
–
‘That’s Putin, the builder of the play-Palace, who divorced his wife and so often has himself photographed with his shirt off doing macho activities or surrounded by adoring models and actresses.’
–
And you will find in the interview about his divorce, disagreeable as it may, was on the grounds of it not being of Church, but a secular marriage. So often? The only images encountered of him is when he is either swimming, or on horse back.
–
‘The same man under whose rule so many journalists who dared oppose him publicly have been shut down and/or inexplicably executed KGB style.’
–
You and I had this debate before, and it was concluded there was no evidence to tie it to Vladimir Putin, if you keep making that accusation without sufficient evidence, you are thus committing a sin.
–
For some reason, you have an aggressive attitude to the very notion that Russia is experiencing a Spiritual Resurrection, albeit Orthodox. You cite quotations that label Orthodoxy as a new ideology (even though it’s existed since the schism) and criticism of the very fact that the Church and State are unified!
Dear Christopher,
To answer your first question, no, we’re trying to prevent unwarranted trust in him. After people thought Russia was consecrated, and the Berlin Wall coming down was “proof”, abortion went on being promoted and paid for by the Russian government, until the day the Armed forces found the population so decimated they couldn’t fill their recruit quotas. The policy suddenly shifted to “restricted abortion”, due to reality hitting where it hurt, rather than any public remorse for the “sins that cry out to God for vengeance.”
___
Our strong objections- which you’ve encountered before, are voiced when someone promotes Putin as converted, (and BEFORE the consecration), while so many such reasons as that, exist to seriously question the idea.
– You seem to be convinced we are against conversion or Faith in Russia, when we’d just like to see people hold back on believing it’s happening prematurely–because a Communist who headed the KGB, but was raised around Orthodox people, would find it very easy to fake conversion.
– That’s just common sense. Calling him “possibly the last Christian leader around” as Father did, is exactly how a fake would want to be perceived by a anyone with influence. And as we said, Father’s judgements have been questionable, along with his “inside” information.
___
If Putin is a believer, even as late as this past year- is it not fair to ask why he only attends Church on some Major Holidays? or why, he didn’t simply have his marriage validated in the Church? Or why he opposes homosexuality with such vehemence that he is outlawing their “driving”, but still alows abortions to go on being performed, limiting it’s being advertised, etc, when his Church says it’s murder? Yet he lectures the world on morality and Russia being superior, when Russia was the first country in the world to legalize abortion with no restrictions from conception to birth, -by the Revolution;the average Russian woman has 7 of them in her childbearing years, and it is still legal.
___
His divorce didn’t shock most Russians, they say, because it was so widely accepted that he was having an affair which had produced two “love-children” with a famous Russian gymnast, Kabayeva, and had her living in his “palace”. In 2008 whe Moskovsky Korrespondent newspaper printed a story claiming Putin was about to divorce his wife of almost 30 years. “Lyudmila for Kabayeva” it said. A few days later the paper was shut down by its owner Alexander Lebedev, a former KGB agent who also owns Britain’s The Independent and the London Evening Standard. But a short while later, Putin admitted he and his wife had separated, and they announced their divorce shortly before their 30th anniversary.
__
You claim “the only images encountered of him [with women or with his shirt off ] ” are when he is either swimming, or on horse back.”
This one was labeled “Putin and gymnast” (from the above-mentioned paper that was shut-down a few days later)
http://zohrachariyeva0795.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/kabaeva-i-putin-1.jpg
And this one is neither fishing or swimming, (although we have no way to detect photo-shop work).
http://i1.ce.cn/intl/intlpic/gjss/201203/19/W020120319359606652925.jpg
____
You say:”You and I had this debate before, and it was concluded there was no evidence to tie it to Vladimir Putin, if you keep making that accusation without sufficient evidence, you are thus committing a sin.” We agreed the evidence on both sides was hard to prove, but disagree that it’s sinful to make what is published as a reason to doubt newly-produced, claims implying certitude where no evidence whatsoever is produced- by a priest relying on trusted, anonymous “insiders”, who has changed his own mind several times recently about serious matters he publicized.
___
And Christopher, you’re wrong if you think we’re against the “very notion of Russia experiencing a Spiritual Resurrection, just because we cited some quotes that label Orthodoxy as a new ideology and criticize that the Church and State are unified” We cite those, just as we cite criticisms of Pope Francis’ attempts to unite his socialist “ideologies” in the name of the Roman Catholic Church, with those of the O’bama administration- regarding Communist Cuba.
Does Francis represent the true Church which existed even before the schism on these issues? Not as far as we can tell. They condemn Communism and Socialism. So it’s likewise possible that those supporting Putin’s political actions, are not accurately representing the Orthodoxy practiced even before the Russian Revolution.
___
If it’s true despite all these reports, that he is converted or even slowy converting, when we see more evidence we will be thanking God for it, we assure you.
It it’s not true, it’s dangerous to give him support right now, as he’d likely be delighted to make us of the Fatima story, for increased popularity.
I am familiar with the facts that Putin has been using loopholes to extend his terms. Though this is not so different than politics in the Western World. Our lesbian premier here in Ontario wasn’t elected, but awarded the position when the previous man retired. There was never a vote, and even on critical issues there is a lot of foul play. The same can be said of the United States where we see family dynasties, whether Bushes or Clintons or coincidental cousins awarded the Presidency, whereas candidates people actually want are tossed for the establishment approved candidates. So frankly if Putin is using similar measures to gain power, we’re hardly anyone to point fingers. If you ask me, the idea of democracy at the levels of government far out of reach of the monitoring and control of the general people, doesn’t exist and never did. If it ever did it was short lived.
—–
With regards to what Fr. Kramer said, it is indeed his own word for which we have no other confirmation. And it would be prudent to not jump on everything he says, but I can believe this latest report as being plausible. Even giving the most cynical motives to Putin, Moscow has everything to gain from having the Holy See on their side in terms of diplomatic relations and even to extend the image of Puting being the “last Christian ruler.” Frankly it does indeed seem that way, and if you can pick better candidates for the title who are as high as Putin on the world stage, feel free to share them… Other than the Pope, that is… though Francis makes one wonder sometimes…
—-
I don’t believe anyone claims Putin is an impeccable man who isn’t a sinner and who doesn’t share some corruption as far as your dime-a-dozen politicians go. Certainly nobody is claiming he is a Roman Catholic, so it wouldn’t be surprising to see him prop up Russian Orthodoxy and limit the freedom given to the Roman Catholic Church. Were the roles flipped, we would instead be praising Putin as a good Catholic. But as far as rhetoric and even actions practical go, Putin is far closer to the Christian ideal leader than anyone else. And as far as our purposes and the Consecration f Russia go, do we really need him to be anything more to be useful for the cause? Was the Emperor Constantine any kind of amazing example of a Holy Christian Leader? Constantine didn’t convert until on his deathbed, but he still advanced the cause of Christ. Similarly Putin does not need to have perfect motives nor be perfect to be in the role of a useful pawn in God’s scheme.
—-
With regards to Putin’s ‘Play-Palace’ there isn’t concrete evidence other than that he is associated with people for whom the area has changed hands, and also it is known that he was previously slandered by an opponent of having purchased a million dollar villa in France, whom Putin sued for slander in court and won.
—-
That the President of Russia is occasionally photographed with actresses or in photo-ops that present him in a certain way to gain the appeal of the people is really, really not anything worth bothering with as par for the course in terms of political PR campaigns. So I don’t see what if anything that has to do with the discourse and only feels like petty nit-picking to highlight the fact that Putin isn’t a monk. The same goes for his divorce, which again, nobody is arguing that Putin is a living-saint.
—-
As for other sorts of skull-duggery, there is spurious evidence that Putin is involved in the deaths of journalists that didn’t like him. But let’s for the sake of argument assume that he was. Is this any different than when journalists and whistle-blowers end up dead or fleeing for their lives from the United States Government? And have you looked into whether or not said journalists had any ties to the CIA, who is openly known to have agents within many international press agencies who are paid to slant stories or present talking points critical of individuals who are not useful to the the Americans? As I asked you before, given this is the case and it is well known, how much can we really trust and whom? And in a world this evil, wouldn’t it make sense that any man in power of a nation, whether it be the U.S. or Russia would be default have to get their hands dirty with regards to matters of national security and other cloak and dagger espionage? Is anyone that naive to believe there isn’t something of the sort going on and that it is only Hollywood fantasy?
—–
Finally, given the Russian Orthodox Church has always been under a cloud of Ceasaropapism, that they could get intertwined with the State is not a surprise. Frankly that is how it ought to be, with the Church as the absolute moral authority overseeing that of the State which minds its own business, but with the Orthodox it has always been the opposite as they require some authority given they’ve rejected the Pope. And again, since I know you have been paying attention to how the Catholic Church in the U.S.A. cozies up to the Obama administration and how corruption runs through every facet of the Church from Catholic Hospitals, Catholic Charities, Catholic Universities etc. can anyone really point a finger at the relationship between Russia and the Russian Orthodox?
—-
Ask yourself, is it better that Pope Francis cozy up to Putin? Or the American Leftists? Ideally it should be neither, and he should just consecrate Russia and make Putin and the nation his. The Church could use a ‘Christian Ruler’ and a standing powerful army with a nuclear deterrent just as it once did. Given the global situation it is likely nigh time for another crusade. The only thing the commies and Islamists understand is the threat of violent extermination to keep them in check.
I too agree that it is quite an exaggeration to call Putin a “firm believer” but I didn’t see Fr. Kramer’s title as the ‘last Christian ruler’ as a stamp of orthodoxy and faithfulness, but rather that Putin is the only one who does still stand up for Christians and some semblance of Christian morality and that’s something in a world where 99% of politicians are Masonic and anti-Christian. So it came off to me as an ironic phrase and one that requires us to scrape near the bottom of the barrel to find Putin. But for that, Putin comes off no differently in the various things you level against him than we could against Constantine or other Kings and Emperors whose personal lives are filled with debauchery, but who still represented and even fought and protected Christendom. If you’re waiting for an impeccable perfect ruler to usher in the Christian Empire, then you’d best keep waiting for the Second Coming.
–
And it would be grossly unfair to ask why Putin hasn’t already banned abortion. If you stopped and thought about it, and you were in his role, even assuming he was you and fully orthodox, it would be a daunting task to just up and change the laws and earn the flood that would result from daring to do so. By that logic we ought to charge Pope Pius XII for ‘not doing enough’ to save the Jews if he really believed in his faith. Or accusing earnest Pro-Life groups of achieving only half-victories that only restrict abortions if they really believed abortion is a crime. C’mon now… And indeed if you’ve been paying attention, Russia indeed is making moves towards a total abortion ban. You can find the latest on LifeSiteNews. Of course, there is opposition in Russia, for, surprise, Putin isn’t a monarch in charge and even he will be impeded by opposition parties who are pro-abortion, and the will of the Russian people themselves who so far as polls indicate are still not on-board with a total ban. Welcome to democracy!
—-
And as for newspapers and the controversy of scandals involving politicians, again, this is absolutely no different than what occurs in any other country. IN fact rumours abound that Obama is cheating on Michelle and that she will divorce him once he’s out of office for she has agreed to maintain the image of their marriage for PR purposes on the administration’s behalf. This is not confirmed absolutely and there has been pressure to keep many things on the down low with regards to the personal life of Obama and his temper and other juicy things, and we won’t know until later how much is true, but again, this is nitpicking and nobody is holding up Putin as a saint, but rather as one of the few who yet still defend and promotes and calls for the defence of Christians and Christian values and traditions. One can freely suspect he has some other ulterior motives but that’s just that…
In this case I’ll also add that if Putin asked or inquired about Fatima and the Consecration of Russia, even for his own PR ends, then this is still a good thing as nobody really cares what series of events lead to the Consecration happening so long as it does according to the instructions of the Blessed Virgin.
–
If Putin imagines it’s just a useful gesture that will ingratiate Catholics to believe in him and defend him and his nation, then he’s in for the surprise of his life!
–
Frankly the idea that Putin himself would be asking on behalf of himself, Russians and the Russian Orthodox Church, only means the Vatican has fewer excuses to continue delaying the inevitable to their own demise.
Dear Johnno,
All the things you’ve gone through here, seem to leave you asking the question–is this any different from…and then listing many other rulers who may not have evidenced the Faith, but didn’t hinder or even helped the Church.
That was our point. There is not evidence of an overall “conversion” by miracle, regarding Putin, which yes, we DO expect will be spectacular, when it occurs.
Our Lady didn’t promise her triumph until after the Consecration is done.
So we have no reason to expect Putin or Russia to be miraculously converted right now. We do pray for them daily, as many others do, so it’s not unreasonable to hope to see changes that lean in that direction. But our take on what we found and learned over the years, is that there is more reason to distrust him at this point. That, is what our cautions center on.
Since the commenter prior to you said it was sinful to bring up things that could not be proved, we wondered why Father Kramer was not then being accused by him of sinning against Pope Francis, for publicly saying the Pope had refused to even talk to Putin about Fatima, but providing nothing but his claims of having “inside information” that remained anonymous, as reason to believe him–and that, after several serious vacillations regarding the Papacy earlier on.
–Regarding abortion. We pointed out the King/dictator-like powers Putin exercised recently regarding homosexuals, even regarding being licensed to drive, and asked why he hadn’t done the SAME with abortion, since it was all claimed to be required by the Russian moral codes.
Hope this helps clarify.
‘because a Communist who headed the KGB’
–
Again, he never headed the KGB. Slander #1
–
‘would find it very easy to fake conversion.’
–
Before his first ever role as President? His conversion was 1996 and his first Presidency was 2000. It even predates his role as Prime Minister in 1999.
–
‘That’s just common sense. Calling him “possibly the last Christian leader around” as Father did, is exactly how a fake would want to be perceived by a anyone with influence. ‘
–
Or how about you and I leave his inner most thoughts to God who only knows the hearts and minds of men?
–
‘If Putin is a believer, even as late as this past year- is it not fair to ask why he only attends Church on some Major Holidays?’
–
Ask him?
–
‘or why, he didn’t simply have his marriage validated in the Church? ‘
–
All that is known is that his marriage was a secular marriage that predates his conversion. The Orthodox are most unusual, and if you wish to understand Putin, you need to understand the Orthodox.
–
‘ because it was so widely accepted that he was having an affair which had produced two “love-children” with a famous Russian gymnast, Kabayeva, and had her living in his “palace”. In 2008 whe Moskovsky Korrespondent newspaper printed a story claiming Putin was about to divorce his wife of almost 30 years. ‘
–
Of which there is no evidence.
–
‘his one was labeled “Putin and gymnast” (from the above-mentioned paper that was shut-down a few days later)
http://zohrachariyeva0795.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/kabaeva-i-putin-1.jpg
And this one is neither fishing or swimming, (although we have no way to detect photo-shop work).
http://i1.ce.cn/intl/intlpic/gjss/201203/19/W020120319359606652925.jpg‘
–
The first one I cannot comment upon, I do not know the context, the second one he is wearing a vest.
–
‘We agreed the evidence on both sides was hard to prove, but disagree that it’s sinful to make what is published as a reason to doubt newly-produced,’
–
No, there was no agreement that evidence on both sides was hard to prove, I assessed the claims made, and they were insufficient because they were not evidence. It is sinful to make claims that have been repudiated, such as above how Putin is apparently responsible because he has rule and therefore is automatically an all seeing eye to every behaviour under him. Bit by bit of the evidence given before was refuted, and there is still no new information that links him to the murders. Therefore without that new information, and relying upon the old which is proven to be the result of various factions within Russia is slander, that is bearing false witness, that is a sin. It also ignores the reality that Russia has factions within it’s government: Communists, Nationalists, Orthodox, Capitalists, Private Interests; and focuses upon the idea that Russia is somehow a hive mind in which no one moves unless Putin tells them to. Russia is no different from America in how factions play out.
–
‘no evidence whatsoever is produced- by a priest relying on trusted, anonymous “insiders”, who has changed his own mind several times recently about serious matters he publicized.’
–
With all due respect to Fr. Kramer, I hold his information in question. He is unreliable as a source.
–
‘still alows abortions to go on being performed’
–
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/russian-parliamentarian-proposes-near-total-ban-on-abortion-but-will-it-pas
–
‘Does Francis represent the true Church which existed even before the schism on these issues? Not as far as we can tell. They condemn Communism and Socialism. So it’s likewise possible that those supporting Putin’s political actions, are not accurately representing the Orthodoxy practiced even before the Russian Revolution.
–
Are you suggesting that the Communist Revolution completely eradicated all Orthodox Tradition so that the Orthodox today are disconnected from the Orthodoxy of pre-1917? That’s a huge claim to make, and requires a lot of research.
–
‘It it’s not true, it’s dangerous to give him support right now,’
–
Sure, there’s the possibility of being wrong, but the evidence does not seem to lead to fallacy.
Other reply is awaiting moderation, however I thought I would address something that was not focused on: ‘Or why he opposes homosexuality with such vehemence that he is outlawing their “driving”’. It seems you are buying into Western Propaganda. The issue with Vladimir Putin outlawing Homosexuals with driving licenses isn’t just with Homosexuals, it’s with the mentally ill. As it happens, Vladimir Putin has assigned Homosexuality, and that LGBT nonsense as what it actually is, and it also happens that anyone else with other mental illnesses beyond that category is also affected. Please be careful of what you read.
Dear Christopher,
We hadn’t missed Putin’s inference that homosexuality should be re-classified as mental illness, regarding the drivers’ license issue, (aware that the psychiatric profession had previously and for many years, classified it as such).
-Our point was that since Putin obviously was willing to go to such lengths to reverse that modern attempt to redefine it as “normal” but different; pushing through such extreme changes- that would greatly impede the everyday mobility of that group of Russian citizens, and despite the protests it evoked in Russia and elsewhere, it was worth asking why he had not done the same to reverse the modern re-definition of abortion as a woman’s “right” to what the Church rightfully has always called it; murder.
p.s.
Our focus is on the overall issue of whether Putin’s actions should be taken as proof of the deep religious convictions many people have begun attributing to him, (which he obviously has been mentioning more and more publicly) or whether the known facts about him, either don’t prove that, or lend themselves to the opposing view, that he is connecting the Orthodox Faith with Russian national fervor, in an attempt to increase his popularity and therefore his support base and power, among the Russian people, using religion as a tool.
___
It’s obviously your contention, that much of what’s “out there” is propaganda, and therefore untrustworthy. If that’s true, then it would affect both sides of his issue. So why promote him so forcefully as genuine, given his past credentials and position of head of KGB operations? Why not maintain a wait-and-see attitude about it all, until the Consecration gets done?
Please sign the petition to demand Prolife heroine Mary Wagner be released from jail, where she is unjustly incarcerated, in Canada. http://vivificat1.blogspot.ie/2015/01/canadian-pro-life-activist-mistreated.html?m=1
It is egregiously scandalous that pope, bishops and priests are generally not leading the protests against the worst cases of persecution of men and women doing their moral duty in fighting the evils of the legalised murder of innocents and legalisation of buggery and other sexual perversion, pornography, etc.
Read & signed it. Former Canadian Prime Minister Diefenbaker told an interviewer years ago that a nation governed by Human Rights Commissions would soon lose its freedoms. Prophetic. I would prefer to see this addressed by the Pope rather than an encyclical on the environment.
‘that would greatly impede the everyday mobility of that group of Russian citizen’
–
Which the homosexuals are caught in the crossfire of the limitations of the mentally ill to drive. Again the LGBT have hijacked the issue to make it centre on them (as usual). But your previous statement did not acknowledge that issue, it was as if Putin was obsessed with Homosexuals that he then prohibited them to drive.
–
‘it was worth asking why he had not done the same to reverse the modern re-definition of abortion’
–
Putin is assaulting abortion. that issue was address in a prior post which is in moderation:
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/russian-parliamentarian-proposes-near-total-ban-on-abortion-but-will-it-pas
–
‘It’s obviously your contention, that much of what’s “out there” is propaganda’
–
Much of what is out there, yes.
–
‘and therefore untrustworthy. If that’s true, then it would affect both sides of his issue.’
–
That’s why you balance the sources, and when you balance them, Putin’s image is not like what the Western media wants you to think his image is. And that’s just from looking at the sources and doing balances. For example, you keep insisting that Putin headed the KGB, he never ever headed the KGB. He worked in the KGB with something of a desk job, intelligence gathering. That’s it.
–
‘So why promote him so forcefully as genuine, given his past credentials and position of head of KGB operations? Why not maintain a wait-and-see attitude about it all, until the Consecration gets done?’
–
Well I do not promote him as forcefully genuine, but I guess that is the conclusion that might be drawn when rebuking errors about him that Putin is thus completely the opposite image. I do not know what Putin’s personal life is like, I do not know the man. I do know however something of his background, his biography, and I do know for safety that you simply cannot accuse him of something that you have no evidence of whatsoever. Again, he never even headed KGB operations, and I humbly implore you to look further into Putin’s background, not from Western sources, but Primary Sources, Biographies. Look at the laws enacted, hear his speeches. Not just purely abstract theory that there is some conspiracy against the LGBT because the mentally ill are to be prohibited from driving.
–
I’ll try and repost the original response and see if it can be quicker than moderation by refining the words.
Condensed version of post (also newer information)
Putin never headed the KGB, before his first ever role as President, his conversion was 1996 and his first Presidency was 2000. It even predates his role as Prime Minister in 1999. Only God knows the thoughts and hearts of men. When it comes to Putin’s Church attendance, you’ll have to ask him on that one. Why did he not validate his marriage? Do not know. The affair with Russian gymnast Kabayeva and having children is rumour only, there has been no concrete evidence as of such. The woman in the photograph (http://zohrachariyeva0795.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/kabaeva-i-putin-1.jpg) does not look like Kabaeva see ( http://ftw.usatoday.com/2014/02/vladimir-putin-girlfriend-olympics-opening-ceremony-alina-kabaeva/olympics-opening-ceremony-9#main and http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/vladimir-putin/10104682/Vladimir-Putin-marriage-break-up-was-the-Russian-gymnast-to-blame.html ) With no offense to that women in the initial picture, she does not look athletic. The photograph of him in a vest, he’s in a vest.
No, there was no agreement that evidence on both sides was hard to prove, I assessed the claims made, and they were insufficient because they were not evidence. Thus the refutation of your evidence means Putin is put back to a neutral state of assessment at least, and his Christian enactments at a positive. It is sinful to make claims that have been repudiated, such as above how Putin is apparently responsible because he has rule and therefore is automatically an all seeing eye to every behaviour under him. Or that he headed the KGB. Therefore without that new information, and relying upon the old which is proven to be the result of various factions within Russia is slander, that is bearing false witness, that is a sin. It also ignores the reality that Russia has factions within it’s government: Communists, Nationalists, Orthodox, Capitalists, Private Interests; and focuses upon the idea that Russia is somehow a hive mind in which no one moves unless Putin tells them to. Russia is no different from America in how factions play out. Fr. Kramer’s information is unreliable, agreed. The Russian Parliament is proposing a near total ban on abortion ( https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/russian-parliamentarian-proposes-near-total-ban-on-abortion-but-will-it-pas ) Are you suggesting that the Communist Revolution completely eradicated all Orthodox Tradition so that the Orthodox today are disconnected from the Orthodoxy of pre-1917? That’s a huge claim to make, and requires a lot of research. Sure, there’s the possibility of being wrong, but the evidence does not seem to lead to fallacy.
Dear Christopher,
We’ll take your word for it that you normally don’t promote Putin forcefully, as we realize the false impression such discussions which try to defend an issue, can create. Please conversely, remember we were also initially responding to Father Kramer’s statements, which gave an elevated opinion of Putin’s moral stature, base on what still appears to us to be an unproven view, and who further did not reveal his sources.
__
So when we pointed to Putin’s actions regarding homosexuals, for instance, we were not claiming ANY moral supriority for the West’s view, just trying to demonstrate why we don’t see enough “proof” that Putin’s moral-looking stances are due to his personal convictions, as opposed to a “role” he has taken on, for other purposes. . It does seem he initially made international news with restrictions on adoption (which we also envy) that got the ball rolling on the issue, so when it came down to including it in mental illness once again, it, automatically made big news -so your claim that the LGBT people “made it their own” seems to be accusing them of something with occurred naturally
__
You wrote of “balancing the sources”, since we agree there’s a lot of propaganda likely on both sides of these issues. . But can you see how your statement appears to attempt to unbalance the discussion, when you dismiss such an important part of it, -which speaks to the man’s underlying character and trustworthiness,- by writing-, “I do not know what Putin’s personal life is like, I do not know the man? End of discussion? What happened to your attempt to balance the sources?
__
It appears you attempt to dismiss his KGB background, as “something of a desk job” and claim he was never in charge. In fact, he resigned from it the day before an attempted coup; with the rank of lieutenant colonel, and was made head of it’s “in name-only replacement, the FSB, which people often use as interchangeable terms:
” on New Year’s Eve 1999, when Mr Yeltsin resigned and, despite his views about the KGB, handed over the reins of power to Mr Putin, the man he had put in charge of the FSB in 1998 and made prime minister a year later.”
___
Then you claimed that when you balance the sources, Putin’s image turns out exactly the way -you are arguing it is. We simply disagree. So it looks like we’ve hit a point of impasse, would you agree with us on that?
____
In case you’re interested in reading something we considered well-written and informative regarding the KGB and Putin, we offer this link:
http://www.economist.com/node/9682621
And if you care to return the favor with something you think of equal value, we’d be glad to have a look at it. Fair enough?
God Bless 🙂 🙂
The “Human Rights” Commissions, and their establishment legislation is one very effective means of imposing a new evil tyrannical ideology, inventing false, evil “human rights”, whilst denying true human rights. Dear Lord, send us some holy bishops and priests to lead us and strengthen us in the fight against diabolic tyranny and persecution, which so many bishops and priests are colluding with.
Indignus famulus January 19, 2015 6:39 pm
It seems like my previous posts have still not gone through, lost in moderation limbo it seems. That first picture you demonstrated, Putin hugging a woman who is supposedly Kabaeva, is actually not Kabaeva.
‘So when we pointed to Putin’s actions regarding homosexuals, for instance, we were not claiming ANY moral supriority for the West’s view, just trying to demonstrate why we don’t see enough “proof” that Putin’s moral-looking stances are due to his personal convictions…’
–
What of his biographies? His own personal (not public speeches). Surely you will conclude that it’s merely propaganda? A decision that has already been made prior to investigating his sources?
–
‘automatically made big news -so your claim that the LGBT people “made it their own” seems to be accusing them of something with occurred naturally’
–
Oh come now, seriously? Our gracious host Louie Verrichio demonstrated how the LGBT were willing to hijack the image of the Crucifix for their self-centred nefarious purposes. In England, they tried to hijack Richard I ‘Lionheart’ without a shred of evidence, to prove him to be a sodomite. Sorry, but they clearly hijacked the issue.
–
‘ But can you see how your statement appears to attempt to unbalance the discussion, when you dismiss such an important part of it’
–
The unbalancing of the discussion comes from the fact that it is objectively provable that the accusations you have made in certain areas are clearly false, whether it comes to murder trials, connections, even basic arguments that Putin headed the KGB, which is again false. Thus then when those arguments that you put forward are rebuked and are dismissed, the dynamic of the debate suddenly shifts into an area where it seems the completely opposite image is advocated.
–
‘which speaks to the man’s underlying character and trustworthiness,- by writing-, “I do not know what Putin’s personal life is like, I do not know the man? End of discussion? What happened to your attempt to balance the sources?’
–
When I state I do not know what Putin’s personal life is like, I mean on the basis of what he does everyday outside of his own sources. For example you asked why he did not bless his marriage, I do not know. Why does he not attend Church every Sunday in the Orthodox community, I do not know. I can only know the man through the sources, and that’s the context of the statement. That is frankly the end of that part of the discussion, but not the discussion as a whole, because that is territory unknown to both of us, and our authority of interpretation in that area is absent.
–
‘It appears you attempt to dismiss his KGB background, as “something of a desk job” and claim he was never in charge. In fact’
–
Vladimir Putin worked in East Berlin if I recall correctly, as an intelligence gather for the KGB (a desk job). One significant move within his career as the KGB as to rally support for Gorbachev.
–
‘ he resigned from it the day before an attempted coup; with the rank of lieutenant colonel, and was made head of it’s “in name-only replacement, the FSB, which people often use as interchangeable terms:’
–
Odd, because when he finished the KGB, he went back to University. KGB ended in 1991, the FSB formed 1995.
–
” on New Year’s Eve 1999, when Mr Yeltsin resigned and, despite his views about the KGB, handed over the reins of power to Mr Putin, the man he had put in charge of the FSB in 1998 and made prime minister a year later.”
–
Yes, the FSB. And most of his work in the FSB was reorganisation. Hardly a thug.
–
‘Then you claimed that when you balance the sources, Putin’s image turns out exactly the way -you are arguing it is. We simply disagree. So it looks like we’ve hit a point of impasse, would you agree with us on that?’
–
Because your arguments and evidence are failing, the image of Putin is shifting from how you’re perceiving Putin naturally to the opposite. Again, read the sources. There is no impasse, because every bit of evidence so far has been refuted, even the image above which turns out not even to be the Russian athlete because that’s not even her. A quick search will reveal the athelete, a brunetteish red, thin.
____
‘In case you’re interested in reading something we considered well-written and informative regarding the KGB and Putin,
And if you care to return the favor with something you think of equal value, we’d be glad to have a look at it. Fair enough?
God Bless 🙂 🙂 ‘
–
Even greater value:
1) ‘Putin First Person An Astonishingly Frank Self-Portrait by Russia’s President’ by Vladimir Putin; 2) The War Against Putin: What The Government Media-Complex isn’t telling you about Russia by M. S. King; 3) ‘Vladimir Putin’s Christian Faith In His Own Words’ Youtube; 4) ‘Putin – Defender of the Faith’ Youtube; 5) Vladimir Putin’s Speech at the Valdai Club’s Plenary Meeting’ Youtube; 6) Watch Brother Nathanael on Youtube, he also gives quite alot of information.
–
Any more information, I will greatly provide. Some of them however are books and can be purchased on Amazon. If you wish to continue the discussion on Putin in the forum, please let me know, and I’ll happily co-operate.
–
God Bless.
A few things about your article:
1) ‘Mr Khodorkovsky, Russia’s richest man, ‘ was arrested for embezzlement ( Criminal Inquiry Into Russian Oil Company Is Renewed By STEVEN LEE MYERS, NY TIMES )
–
2) Boris Berezovsky, aired an audio recording of Putin being angry because of the sinking of the Russian Submarine ‘Kursk’ which 118 men died, 28 likely due to a failed rescue attempt. His exile is due to that. (People All Around Exiled Oligarch Boris Berezovsky Have Wound Up Dead, Linette Lopez, Business Insider)
–
3) Mr. Gusinsky had been jailed on embezzlement charges. Then Gazprom began to demand repayment of its loans. After a bitter court battle, Gusinsky was forced to relinquish control of his media holdings, and he left the country for exile in the Spanish resort of Sotogrande. NTV was placed under new management; Itogi and Segodnya were closed down. The Russian government subsequently charged Gusinsky with money laundering and fraud and demanded his extradition. Vladimir Gusinsky
Written by: The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica (Encylopedia Britannica.
–
Seems like a few problems with the article, that A) they are not listing sources, which if you class as reliable, you need to rethink what is reliable. You need sources, if they do not provide them, be critical. B) They have failed to mention the criminal acts as mentioned above of the individuals, it has already failed a balance test and is portraying the said names above as victims rather than people guilty of criminal offenses.
Dear Christopher,
We looked at all your latest arguments, and it appears to us that you aren’t willing to accept very much if anything we provide as factual, dismissing things as false while providing no proof of your own. –, and taking Putin’s own words as proof that he’s honest, from an autobiography?. That’s like trying prove Bill Clinton didn’t lie about Monica Lewinski, by asking him, before he got caught.
Time will tell about Mr. Putin, character. And that will have to do, as you have no wish to use the reports about his personal life. apparently which question his character. With so many contradictory propaganda pieces around on both sides, we think it’s best to hold back on trusting him, and wait for the consecration. So we’ll end here, before we fill up any more of Louie’s blog with this stuff that get’s nowhere.
God Bless You.
Nevertheless, whether Putin is a true convert or not, my concern is to do with the role of Russia and the annihilation of nations. We can probably agree on several things though…
–
Thus far, on the stage of world leaders, it has only been Putin who has been defending the heritage of Christianity, condemning the slaughter of Christians in the Middle East specifically, and who has stood by his decision to defend Russians from homosexual propaganda, and this he even said in an interview as being no different from that of the Holy See.
–
It has been Russia who have been making moves to limit the spread of homosexual indoctrination and even to ban abortion, even totally if they can.
–
It has been Russia and Putin who’ve made the right moves in the geopolitical chess game to limit wars, to ease tensions whether with regards to the Middle East or the Ukraine. It is clear that the U.S. wishes to ignite another World War to escape the coming economic collapse and institute a New World Order and use a State of Emergency to control its citizens under Martial Law. So in fact it has been Russia that has been desperate to prevent a scenario that leads to the annihilation of nations.
–
It is true however that Putin remains a globalist committed to the idea of the U.N., a rival Eurasian Union, an alternate banking system that is just as vulnerable and controlling as the current failing one.
–
Russia likewise, despite positive moves, are still not converted and won’t be until the Consecration to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, and remains strongly anti-Catholic and limits the Church’s influence, though given the current V-II climate, it may be for the better until they are consecrated.
–
But such positive moves are in my estimation a sign that the ground is being made fertile for the inevitable consecration. Much as with Our Lady of Guadalupe, the native Mexicans were already being prepared, lost from fallen belief in their prior gods and left to wander, with even their own lost religion prophesying of the age where she would appear. Just as the MesoAmerican pagan religion was filled with symbolism, making them ready to receive the coming of the Holy Woman who is the Mother of all; I see the circumstances of Russia today fertile for the Consecration event which will bring things to fruition.
–
It is from this hopeful perspective that I see Putin and Russia. Stepping stones for what is going to occur.
Final comments:
–
‘We looked at all your latest arguments, and it appears to us that you aren’t willing to accept very much if anything we provide as factual, dismissing things as false while providing no proof of your own.’
–
Sorry, have you not read the references of the Business Insider, New York Times? Which falsify the notions provided by your source above? For some reason, your well referenced source has no sources and failed to demonstrate that those supposed ‘valiant heroes’ were nothing more than oligarch crooks, embezzlers, and political opportunists. I have demonstrated that that woman was not the Russian gymnast that the link claimed her to be, like the previous arguments, they just do not hold water.
–
‘, and taking Putin’s own words as proof that he’s honest, from an autobiography?. That’s like trying prove Bill Clinton didn’t lie about Monica Lewinski, by asking him, before he got caught.’
–
So he’s automatically a liar before you even engage the sources, guilty before even assessing his work? You read the biography, then you match the biography with other information, and you balance the sources. For example, you failed to mention the fact that Putin worked in East Germany with the KGB to rally up support for Gorbachev, of which afterwards in accordance with his biography, he returned to University.
–
‘Time will tell about Mr. Putin, character. And that will have to do, as you have no wish to use the reports about his personal life. apparently which question his character.’
–
Bring them forward, I have no problem about reports about his personal life. The problem is however, those reports that he has supposedly had a child with the Russian gymnast (which again is not her in that photo, which means the url link lies) has no foundation. Where is his child, where are the photos? You should not base information upon rumour.
–
‘With so many contradictory propaganda pieces around on both sides’ measure it with primary sources, secondary sources, close accounts. Not sure if you still do, but you accused him of basically killing off every opposition, which there is no evidence. So at best, you should cease those claims, for as I have demonstrated even with more arguments that you have put forward, they are false, without the necessary need to put forth an argument in favour of Putin. Any more proposing of information which has been rebuked is simply slander, and is a sin.
–
God Bless
Dear Christopher,
We are responding (hopefully for the last time) to your last accusations of sinful behavior. Please review any Catholic Church definition of the sin of slander, and note that they all include as necessary– deliberate malice, which is completely absent in our presentations, and stated as such, repeatedly.
___
We seek truth, and look for evidence within stories online that can be corroborated easily, –such as the wedding bands the press claims Putin and the gymnast have each been wearing since their “alleged” wedding. Our aim, as we explained to you, was to help balance the conjectures being circulated as if proven fact, that Putin is a devoted Orthodox man of deep Faith, which is what motivates his recent public claims of the moral superiority of Russia. The issue of whether he can be trusted, relates directly to his keeping or breaking his marriage vows. Whether or not he was married in the Church, a 29 year union that produced now-grown children, was broken apart.
___
You have produced no evidence to contradict what we presented–, that he does not even attend Church except on rare holidays, and has divorced his wife, amid over 5 years of rumors of his affair with a woman gymnast 30 years younger, and with no links for either of them, to anyone else.
___
And you wrote: “I have demonstrated” that that woman (in our linked photo)was not the Russian gymnast that the link claimed her to be”.
Did we miss your demonstration? If so, please cite any alleged proof you provided to support your statement that it was not her. –other than denials from Putin and his friends, of course, which are highly suspect, due to the many reports to the contrary.
___
The photo we linked was listed online with the subtitle identifying her; which was used in the article claiming she was the reason for Putin’s coming divorce announcement, which came from the newspaper that had been shut down the next day by the friend of Putin who owned it. That shut-down is confirmed by other reports which mention it as public fact.
___
There are also numerous reports that since the day of Putin’s secret marriage to the gymnast, when all the roads to the monastery in Valdai Hills where they were said to have married, were suddenly closed to the public by the Federal Guards Service with no explanation; both Putin and his ” gymnast friend Kabayeva” have been wearing wedding rings in public. Putin notably took his off the day he and his wife announced their divorce, before exiting the Opera, and had not worn one since. (The press notes Russians wear wedding rings on their right hands)
http://www.liveforgossip.com/vladimir-putin-married-alina-kabaeva/
____
The reporter noted “Reporting on Mr Putin’s personal life has been effectively taboo for Russian media since the tabloid Moskovsky Korrespondent was closed down after reporting similar marriage rumours about the president and Ms Kabayeva, in 2008.”
____
Just after the publicly announced divorce of the Putins, and shortly before the alleged “secret wedding” Miss Kabayeva stated openly during a TV interview:
in which reporters described her as “the young Olympic gymnast at the centre of speculation over Vladimir Putin’s marriage breakdown, Alina Kabayeva, 30, who was first named as the Russian president’s mistress five years ago” that she has indeed met a man ‘whom I love very much”’. ‘Sometimes you feel yourself so happy that you even feel scared that you are so happy,’ she said. Her mannerisms – coquettish laughter and hand nervously brushing through her hair, she said she had”found her Mr Right.” Asked who she wanted to marry, she giggled and replied: ‘life is such a thing that you live and everything is fine with you and then you see a person you like. Everything about him you like. This will be the kind of person I will marry.’ Asked had she met this person? ‘Erm’ (laughing) yes I have (laughing more and now beaming with happiness).’ The young audience broke into applause, with few viewers not aware of the name no one appeared brave enough to mention.”
___
” Many Russians believe it is only a matter of time before Miss Kabayeva is gradually unveiled at his side, which would
enable her formally to take her place as Russia’s youngest first lady since Tsarina Alexandra, the ill-fated wife of the last royal monarch, Nicholas II.
____
There have been no announcements that Putin and his wife have reconciled or re-married- which might explain his wearing a new ring. . In fact she is said to be living far from Moscow, and possibly in a convent.
____
We hope you will leave it at this, and cease the slander accusations.
God Bless.
““The first condition of that dignity is liberty, but viewed in the sense that … each man is autonomous,” wrote the Holy Father in his Apostolic Letter, Notre Charge Apostolique.”
.
## That gave me a nasty shock, until I read further. It is Satanism for man to regard himself as autonomous. The only true liberty is to be the slave of Christ, like St Paul. To be autonomous, fully so, without any restrictions, is:
.
(1) totally impossible to a creature
(2) rebellion against God & His Messiah
(3) a delusion of the devil
(4) a perversion of the order of creation
(5) a denial of the Universal Kingship of Christ
(6) a denial that man is created by God for God, and not for himself
(7) An assertion that man is either his own end, or, that he exists for no end.
.
Gregory XVI was totally correct in calling religious liberty a *deliramentum* – the idea is so utterly false, such an egregious lie, that it’s hard to know where to begin. It comes from an atheistic anti-Christian notion of man, for a start. A lie more full of evil consequences for individuals, groups & society alike, is hard to imagine. With the greatest respect to St Pius X, I think it is a thousand times worse than Modernism, because it strikes at the very root of what man owes to God, & why. It is a lie vomited from Hell.
Yet again, Abp Lefebvre thought like a Catholic in rejecting this pestilential doctrine. And God be Blessed that he and soe others, did !
.
I love freedom & hate tyranny as much as the next man – but not this lying freedom, for it is the worst kind of slavery, from which Christ came to set us free.
He is then a Neo Catholic.
Especially NOW, when the son of a Prime Minister is PM.
Miller’s is an absurd argument – it is even internally non-consistent. It is relativism and positivism according to the dictates of an evil elite, to which persons are just part of an amorphous mass with no moral essence.