Why I am not Catholic: Outrageous pronouncements from the Pope

Lumen Gentium Section 16 was bad enough with its universalism and favoring of Islam.  Now we have the new Pope praising atheists and Muslim leaders.

Here is the full story from Christian News, with my commentary on excerpts, below:

Rome, Italy – Pope Francis held his first ecumenical meeting at the Vatican Wednesday, greeting Christian, Muslim and Jewish leaders, as well as those who ascribe to no faith at all.

Ain’t ecumenicalism a wonderful thing.

He then praised the Muslim leaders that had also come for the meeting, remarking that they were men who “adore the one, living, and merciful God and who call upon Him in prayer.”

With all due respect, Pope, this is an exceedingly ignorant, misleading, and dangerous comment.  The Allah of Islam shares NOTHING in common with the God of the Bible.  Muslim leaders around the globe urge the wrath of HELL upon those infidels who believe in the “polytheism” of the Christian God.  And the “wrath of hell” is to be initiated by fellow Muslims, personally, in this life, as opposed to waiting around for God’s justice in the next.  This is, in part, what informs and motivates Muslims worldwide to hate Jews and Christians and promote the killing of us:  Because our God is different from their Allah.  While the Pope may not consider his statement to be a lie, it is not true.  He is being as disingenuously “politically correct” as any atheistic faux Christian politician in the United States.    He is also being unhelpful with regard to his flocks understanding of the nature of the Islamic ideology that is in the process of destroying the Catholic Church.  Having made a statement like this, I would not be surprised if he appointed a Muslim to his inner circle given his perceived “similarities” in their belief systems.

Likewise, while he commented that the “attempt to eliminate God and the Divine from the horizon of humanity” by some has been disastrous for the world, Francis also extended a welcome to atheists and those who ascribe to no particular religion.

This is beyond ecumenicalism.  Here is the clincher:

“I feel close to all men and women who, although not claiming to belong to any religious tradition, still feel themselves to be in search of truth, goodness and beauty,” he said. “[Atheists and nones] are our precious allies in the effort to defend human dignity, in building a peaceful coexistence between peoples, and in carefully protecting creation.”

Precious allies?  Atheists have no moral basis for doing what they do.  Atheists, for the most part, are the very ones who promote abortion, infanticide, gay marriage, and homosexuality.  The Pope might as well enter into a pact with Satan, if he believes in such being, which I am prone to doubt.  Francis, as well as recently minted Catholic doctrine, provide little reason to be Catholic if being Muslim and atheist can be so highly regarded by the head of the Catholic Church.

Reports state that a number of atheists are favorable toward the new pope, mainly because of his humanitarian goals.

This is not surprising given the Pope’s abrogation of historic Catholic distinctions and doctrine.  If the Pope prayed to Mecca he would receive the same accolades from Muslims.

In an article entitled Why This Atheist Has a New Hope in Pope Francis, author Luis Ruuska echoed this sentiment from a personal standpoint.

“As an atheist, I should not have any interest in the matters of the Catholic Church. … But I do,” he wrote. “I care about who is the head of the Catholic Church because similar to the way that one country’s economy can have drastic effects on another’s, what direction the world’s 1.2 billion Catholics take affects the rest of us.”

Luis cares about anyone who compliments atheism.  If the Pope buddied up with abortionists, abortionists would praise the Pope, too.

“If attitudes within Catholicism on women and women’s rights, poverty, and the LGBTQ community change on the global scale starting with the Vatican, then they will gradually change on the country-by-country scale as well,” Ruuska explained. “I do believe the pontiff to be a genuine man when it comes to taking care of the poor and perhaps we will see an increased interest in combating poverty from the Catholic Church.”

“I might not believe in God, but I believe that Catholics and atheists can work together just as all of humanity can work together towards equality and justice when we put the needs of modern people first and the arcane doctrine second,” he concluded. “He might not be the one to approve doctrine condoning same-sex marriage or approve doctrine changing global attitudes towards women and their rights, but Pope Francis certainly has all of the makings to shift the Catholic Church in a progressive direction; that is, if he wants to.”

Yup, this atheist is given hope by the Pope that the Church will come around to support the pop cultural norms of immorality, including homosexuality, equality of outcomes (socialism/communism), same-sex marriage and the rest of human licentiousness that Christianity has abhorred for 2,000 years.  Yes, this Pope does indeed have all the makings to shift the Catholic Church in a progressive direction “if he wants to.”   And given his misdirected and indiscreet ecumenicalism, he may just want to.

What happens if we continue to deny the truth about Islam?

Have you considered what the United States might be going through in five, ten, or twenty years if we, our leaders and media, continue to deny, ignore, or fabricate the truth of Islam, its history, its motives and methods?

Assuming that the Islamophobes are correct and Islam is NOT a “religion of peace” and is in fact out to dominate infidel nations (as they have done to massive extents at least twice since Muhammad terrorized the region around Mecca and Medina), how might that affect you, your kids and grandkids, our government, our freedoms, our culture and our way of life?

Diana West’s latest book, American Betrayal, amply demonstrates how our government ignored and lied about Communist influence in the 30’s, 40’s and 50’s in the same way our current government is ignoring and lying about Islamic influence and intentions today.

The Three Scenarios

Recognizing the reality of government deception, whatever the motive, let’s take a look at several scenarios and outcomes of those scenarios with regard to Islam:

Scenario One:   Denial of Reality of Islam.  This is the path we are on today.  This scenario assumes a continuation on this path.   Faux assimilation  is promoted by our government and media facilitated by ignoring and lying about the truth of Islam, believing it is as benign as any other religion when in fact it is a fascist, supremacist and violent ideology at its core and from its inception.   We continue to blindly and blithely accept the deception of Muslim operatives convincing us that they are here to bestow peace and goodwill , pretending that Muslims from third world Islamic nations will assimilate, Americanize and westernize.  We continue to self-deceive.

Scenario Two:  “Gradual Dawning.”  This scenario involves a gradual dawning, over the next decade or so, upon our leaders and media that Islam is primarily a political ideology and not in our nation’s best interest, and that some Muslims who we consider “moderate” may have seditious purposes.  Awareness evolves slowly over a period of years, with immigration policies, political and academic appointments and other Muslim-enabling policies gradually changing.

Scenario Three:  “Abrupt Awakening.”  This scenario involves a more immediate collective realization that Islam is a fascist, seditious political ideology that must be dealt with in a manner similar to our actions toward the Japanese-Americans immediately following the bombing of Pearl Harbor.  However politically incorrect we believe that to be today was thought to be prudent to save our nation back then.  A cataclysmic event that is clearly the work of Muslims in the name of Islam would be the most likely catalyst.  Why 9-11 wasn’t that catalyst remains a mystery to me.

Likely Outcomes of the Three Scenarios

Now let’s take a look at each of these scenarios, speculating their impact on our nation, culture, and freedoms in five, ten, and twenty years hence.

Scenario One:  Denial of Reality of Islam.  In the short term, our leaders and media continue to pander to Muslim sensitivities and blame outbreaks of violence and acts of terror on everything BUT Islamic ideology.  We continue to support Muslim Middle East nations with our petro dollars.  Our colleges and universities continue to accept hundreds of millions 0f dollars from Islamic nations, e.g. Saudi Arabia and others, for Middle East Studies programs which in reality are Islamic indoctrination, training, and infiltration programs.  The media and churches continue to defend Islam as a religion of peace and become more aggressive in condemning those who speak the truth of Islam and its seditious, fascist ideology in a manner similar to the defamation of Joe McCarthy in the 50’s.  This condemnation is promoted by the massive infiltration of Islamic operatives and useful idiots (Imams, Muslim government appointees, and liberal non-Muslim apologists) already in place in government, media, and academic positions.

Over the next five to ten years there will be a gradual change in our legal system via new laws and court cases facilitating or incorporating Sharia (the set of barbaric Islamic laws prevalent in the Middle East).  These will occur first in areas of highest Muslim concentration such as Dearborn, MI, and Nashville, TN, and will extend to a dozen or more liberal states.  Opposition to these laws will be increasingly viewed as “intolerant” and hateful.  Islam will continue to be viewed as just another religion worthy of protection under the first amendment.  Christian Churches and liberal Synagogues will begin to incorporate elements of Islamic doctrine into their sermons and activities as an outreach to accommodate Muslim sensitivities.  Muslims and their liberal non-Muslim promoters will propose laws that prohibit expressing anything that is offensive about another religion.  Verbiage and enforcement will of course be skewed toward prosecution of those who speak the truth about Islam.  As in civil rights legislation, the minority Muslims will be given a pass, free to discriminate and speak against Jews and Christians, while majority Jews and Christians  are required to remain silent with regard to Islam.  There will be dozens of “no-go zones” throughout the nation where law enforcement will avoid either by pre-arrangement or fear.

Beyond 10 to 20 years, due to continuing lax immigration and border security policies and an especially high Muslim birth rate, Muslim populations will reach critical mass in dozens of urban centers of the nation (critical mass being 20% or more of the populations of congressional districts, for example; this is already exceeded in several parts of the country) where they will become a significant political force.  Just as significant, such concentrations will become a potent physical and psychological intimidation force.  Opposition will be silenced through increases in violence and acts of terror, demonstrations, and legal intimidation.  Free speech will have dire consequences and will become a relic of the past.  Civil unrest and confrontation will begin to be initiated by both sides throughout the nation.

The United States will be a reflection of today’s London, Belgium, Sweden, and France in terms of Muslim populations and influence.  See HERE and HERE for consequences of unchecked failures to assimilate third world and Muslim immigrants.  And the media inexplicably ignore the cause and effect.  Violent Muslim ideology will spread rapidly among ignorant non-Muslim third world immigrants.  The trend will be irreversible short of violent upheaval and drastic measures that today are unthinkable.

Scenario Two: “Gradual Dawning.” 

This is the path that may result from the truth gradually getting through to government officials and the media from such expert informed sources as Robert Spencer, Tom Trento, Eric Stakelbeck, Andrew Bostom, Bat Ye’or, Andrew McCarthy and others.  This scenario will merely slow the process noted in Scenario One. 

As officials and the populace increase their awareness, congressional hearings will be called that span years.  Expert witnesses from both sides will be called and testify, provoking Muslims to the streets as hypersensitivities are triggered.  All the while illegal immigration may be slowed but will continue.  The dawn of truth brightens slowly – the gears of government grind even slower.  It may take decades to expunge ill-intentioned Muslims from academia, the media, the military, and government, if it occurs at all.

The degree to which Scenario One is reversible through the “gradual dawning” process depends on the speed of realization of the problem, the sense of urgency promoted by that realization, and our resolve against the likely mean spirited and violent pushback inevitable from the several million Muslims and their liberal sympathizers in the US who’s seditious plans are felt to be threatened.  And this doesn’t include the increase in extreme “workplace violence” that is likely to occur against our embassies and other interests overseas.

Scenario Three: “Abrupt Awakening.”

“Abrupt Awakening” is the “best case”, most fearsome, and least likely of the three scenarios. 

It is the best case because it involves the truth being known, understood, and acted upon relatively quickly by our leaders, the media and our general population.   This scenario puts an end to our self-deception and lies about Islam, and ultimately protects our nation against transformation into a barbaric third world fascist state.  It takes intolerance of evil to protect the tolerance of good.

This scenario is fearsome because it is most likely triggered by a violent event that overshadows 9-11 many times over.  It is fearsome because it will provoke an increase in violence by domestic Islamic terrorists as well as overseas terror attacks. 

This scenarios is the least likely because it will require testing our freedoms by distinguishing between a so-called “religion”, Islam, and a seditious, supremacist, violent, fascist political ideology, Islam.  This scenario comes down on the side of admitting that Islam is a seditious, supremacist, violent, fascist political ideology and taking steps necessary to minimize its damage to our nation.  It recognizes that our nation has been infiltrated by those who are actively involved in transforming us beyond the “hope and change” sought by our Islam-inspired president.

The “abrupt awakening” will see immediate expulsion of thousands (not all) Muslims who we will come to realize were teaching, training, funding, and motivating seditious or terror acts against our nation.   It will involve holding thousands of others in secure locations until we can agree what to do with them after we achieve a realistic understanding of what we are up against and feel more secure.  Rioting against authority will break out within dozens of Muslim enclaves around the nation.  National Guard and regular military will be called upon to defend our cities and suburbs against the backlash that is sure to ensue.  These events will overshadow the domestic military involvement that was required during the civil unrest of the late 60’s.

These actions will be condemned by both liberals and libertarians as excessive government force and control.  Many will take the side of the Islamic terrorists.  Obama is one.  As Obama said, and I paraphrase, but this is the essence of what he said, “when the SHTF I will come down on the side of the Muslim immigrants”, as will many other ignorant liberals.

Again, this is the least likely scenario.  Given the momentum of public thinking today, the effective deceptive practices of Muslim promoters and the infiltration and ignorance of our leadership and churches, Scenario One, the Faux Assimilation of Muslims, is the most likely course of this nation.

Scandal and oppressive government: What happens when a society loses its moral compass...

Benghazi-gate, IRS-intimid-gate, and pandering to a hostile ideology (Islam) for profit and power are just some of the current federal scandals.  Yes, the Obama administration does finally appear to be unravelling - but don't hold your breath.

Anyone who is following the moral decline of this nation cannot help but conclude that simply exposing scandals will not correct or prevent them.  In fact I have no doubt that while the news cycle and public awareness are focused on these events, there are another dozen equal or worse scandals in the works.  Unfortunately, the "see no Islam" in Islamic terror attacks and violent jihad in mainstream Islamic ideology remain an undiagnosed cancer in our federal goverment and most media.

Why is this happening now?   Yes, we are a self-absorbed society. The time the average American spends in front of the TV watching mind numbing programming, mostly immoral trash, the time spent absorbed in sports or devoted to trivial social networking leaves little time for for mind-building, community-building, or knowing when yor government and elected officials are screwing you over with with scandal and deception.

While we all can share some responsibility in reaching this dismal state, I lay much of the blame on the "feel good" churches of our nation.  When most churches value self-esteem over abstaining from sin, or even acknowleding that there ia such a thing as sin anymore, it is no surprise we get what we got:  An amoral society that believes tolerance of everything BUT morality is the highest value.

From the time I first became a Christian I was suspucious of the "once saved, always saved" belief held by so many conservative Christians.  This so easily leads to a self-serving presumtuousness that too easily excuses repetitive sinning:  The freedom to sin without consequence.  And then there is the liberal version of salvation - universalism - where God is so sweet and sugary and loving that no one will really be punished for anything.  All will be saved and go to heaven because Christ paid it all.

And then we have the Catholics whose doctrine proclaims that ignorance of sin gives a free pass to heaven.  This is moral relativism at it's most aggregious.  And this one is REALLY special:  Since Muslims worship the same God (this is an exceedingly ill-informed undwrstanding of Islam), then Muslims are first in line among all who are ignorant of Christ to be saved.  Yes, this is Catholic doctrine.  Google "Gentium Lumen, Section 16" and read it.

So, is it any wonder why we are in such moral decline in this nation?  The one institution , our churches, and the one group of leaders, our pastors and priests, are out to lunch.  And those few who are in major denominations who know better and wish to speak up are suppressed by their liberal denominations.  There are a very few independent pastors who are a voice crying in the wilderness.  For these I praise God.

Hillary, the cover-up bitch…

These words still echo:

"Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night and decided they’d go kill some Americans," Clinton said. "What difference – at this point, what difference does it make?"

So, that’s what the choices boil down to, Hill?  Islamists “out for a walk” or “decided they’d go kill some Americans…”  How long will it be before ignorant sons of bitches like you acknowledge the truth about Islam and the ignorant rabble that follow that fascist ideology to a “T.”  How many American deaths will it take before your Muslim-pandering cronies (both Republican and Democrat) admit the truth about the motives of your good Islamist buddies?

What difference does it make?  Well, this for starters.  Despite your WORTHLESS declaration that “…it is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator…” you will NEVER figure it out as long as you insist on denying and covering up the truth.  You, Hillary, along with your peach of a husband, have glaring character flaws.  Lying is one of them.  Two freakin’ peas in a pod.

The truth DOES make a difference – which up to now, is missing from your lying, deceitful lips.  What difference does it make?  Without the truth, the problem will escape notice.   In addition to YOU being part of the problem, the problem is identifying our friends and distinguishing them from our enemies.   Your insistence on denying who the enemy is will only invite further murders at the hands of an arch enemy that you and other Pollyanish fools continue to declare is not Islam.  Is the oil money so important to you that you are willing to sacrifice American lives and the nation itself?

The disrespect I have for you, Hill, rivals that which I maintain toward any other mass murderer.

Lord, may the whole truth come out at these hearings and the proper justice be served.

 

Obama: “This is hard stuff”. Yes, denying reality can be hard.

Denying reality IS hard stuff.  It often makes people into psychopaths.    Obama may become one if he is not one already.

My new favorite commentator, Diana West, provides an excellent summation of the “see no Islam” mentality of the Obama, Islam-promoting administration.

Here it is:

Making Islam (not Terrorism) Disappear
May 3

Written by: Diana West
Friday, May 03, 2013 3:45 AM  

The see-no-Islam FBI: On the case against "violent extremism."

This week's syndicated column:

We have met the enemy and he is “self-radicalization.” No, wait: We have met the enemy and he is the Internet. We have met the enemy and he is broadband video?

“But this is hard stuff,” President Obama tried to explain in this week’s press conference. “Because of the pressure that we put on al-Qaida’s core, because of the pressure that we’ve put on these networks that are well-financed and more sophisticated and can engage in and project transnational threats against the United States, one of the dangers that we now face are self-radicalized individuals who are already here in the United States – in some cases, may not be part of any kind of network, but because of whatever warped, twisted ideas they may have, may decide to carry out an attack. And those are in some ways more difficult to prevent.”

More difficult to prevent? Ridiculous. But this is also a disgraceful thing to say under these circumstances. What Obama describes is the Keystone-Cops-case because he decided, as a matter of “Muslim outreach,” to shut his eyes to the motivation of such attacks – Islam, jihad, Allah’s law (Shariah) – and ordered our security agencies and military to shut their eyes, too.

It is a fact that in concert with the Oct. 19, 2011, demands of an array of Islamic advocacy groups, including government-identified Muslim Brotherhood front groups (the Council on American-Islamic Relations and the Islamic Society of North America, for example), the Obama administration subsequently ordered the “purge” of any training materials and trainers still teaching the history and doctrine of jihad at government security agencies and throughout the military. This unconscionable act of eliminating our first line of defense – in effect, shutting down national security’s eyes and ears, and, worse, logic itself – is what accounts for the successful cycle of jihad that marks our era of decline. To be fair, it is not all Obama’s fault. The current administration’s see-no-Islam policy is an extension and amplification of the see-no-Islam policy initiated by President George W. Bush.

When a handful of House Republicans led by Michele Bachmann of Minnesota last summer raised the see-no-Islam “purge” and related issues with justified alarm, these remnant patriots in Congress were crucified as “Islamophobes” and scorned as lunatics. And now? No one in that Bachmann lynch mob (Obama administration, media and, profiles in courage, GOP leadership) wants us to put things together now. They don’t want us to realize that those two vicious bombs that exploded in Boston last month might well have been prevented had Bachmann & Co.’s warnings been heeded.

How? On government order, the FBI doesn’t know – can’t know – that it is actually fighting Islamic jihad and Shariah subversion. The kind of review Bachmann hoped for could possibly have saved fact-based analysis at the FBI and related agencies. To grasp the stupefying impact of the see-no-Islam status quo, imagine the FBI of the Cold War era officially denying and suppressing the role Marxism played in animating subversives. No communist espionage rings would ever have been stopped.

Such blindness is the official rule today. An examination of the FBI’s Counterterrorism Analytical Lexicon, which was published in 2008 at the end of the Bush administration, shows that the words “Islam,” “Muslim,” “jihad,” “Muslim Brotherhood,” even “al-Qaida” – all of which appear in the 9/11 Commission Report – have disappeared entirely from the lexicon of FBI analysis. Instead, agents must focus on the literally meaningless concept of “violent extremism.” As if that’s not mentally paralyzing enough, the FBI definition of violent extremism includes this: “An analytical judgment that an individual is a ‘violent extremist,’ ‘extremist,’ or ‘radical’ is not predication for any investigative action or technique.”

Another way to view such a security shambles is to say, as the president did, that the FBI performed well in the run-up to Boston 4/15. “The FBI investigated that older brother,” he said. “It’s not as if the FBI did nothing. They not only investigated the older brother, they interviewed the older brother. They concluded that there were no signs that he was engaging in extremist activity.”

This makes perfect sense – in the government’s see-no-Islam world. FBI agents, operating by the book, might well have tagged Tamerlan Tsarnaev a “violent extremist,” and then, also operating by the book, done nothing. Ka-boom. Having de-Islamized counterterrorism techniques, Obama could then say: “Based on what I’ve seen so far, the FBI performed its duties, the Department of Homeland Security did what it was supposed to be doing.”

According to U.S. government’s see-no-Islam policy, Obama is correct. In fact, for meritorious achievement leading up to the Boston bombing, special commendations for all U.S. security personnel up to and including Cabinet secretaries from Justice, Homeland Security and the Pentagon are in order. The Obama team effort may not have stopped terrorism, but it sure made Islam disappear.

Mormons are one with Obama in praising Islam…

If you were wondering why Mitt Romney believes that Jihad is no part of Islam and why his foreign policy positions regarding the Middle East were virtually identical to Obama’s, look no further than the beliefs of scholars within the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints – Mormons.

I searched the term “Islam” in one of the official LDS websites called The Mormon Channel.  Up popped a presentation called “Understanding Islam.”  The presentation is given by Dr. Daniel Peterson, Professor of Islamic Studies and Arabic at Brigham Young University.  HERE it is.

As I listened to the interview my jaw dropped.  Here is some of the ignorant misleading, disingenuous, Islam-apologist academic tripe provided by this Mormon professor:

• General gushing over the life of Muhammad and the Islamic “religion”, generally.
• Total silence on Muhammad’s conquests, immorality, and the continuing supremacism. and terror promoted by Islam throughout history and today.
• Emphasis that Islam is a respectable sister religion to Christianity.
• Fascination that Islam has many similarities to Mormonism with regard to its new revelation, post Biblical “sacred” scripture, and a prophet, Muhammad, similar to the Mormon prophet, Joseph Smith.  “Echos of the Joseph Smith story…like Judaism and Christianity before.”
• Claim that Muslims and Christians worship the same God.  He believes that Muslims merely apply the word differently.  He ignores the Islamic distinctions in the characteristics of their “Allah.”  He reminded us that the book of Mormon uses the word Allah throughout.  He obfuscates the distinction of Islam’s use of the word “Allah” vs. the use of the word by Middle East Christians.

This blindness to the evil of Islam and equating that ideology to many of the characteristics of Mormonism is an adequate reason for me to question the legitimacy of the Mormon faith and the honesty of their leadership in addressing the Islamic problem.