Monday, May 30, 2022

The Evolution Of Hate

 

On May 14, 2022, 18-year old Payton S. Gendron entered a supermarket in Buffalo, New York wearing body armor and toting a  modified Bushmaster XM-15 rifle. He opened fire, killing ten innocent people, and seriously wounding three others. (See apnews.com/article/buffalo-supermarket-shooting-442c6d97a073f39f99d006dbba40f64b). All the victims were African-American, and Gendron wanted it that way as it was racially motivated by his hatred of black people. Immediately, the usual "white people are all racist" crowd began using this tragedy to further their agenda. The alleged need for "Critical Race Theory" nonsense in schools was stressed, and calls for confiscating guns from law abiding citizens ("gun control") was renewed. 

What was passed over quietly was that Gendron self-identified as an eco-fascist, a white supremacist, national socialist, ethno-nationalist, and an antisemite who was politically on the Authoritarian Left. Notice the lack of religious affiliation, and his identification with National Socialism. Likewise on April 20, 1999, Eric Harris donned a shirt emblazoned with "Natural Selection" before heading off to high school. For weeks he had been preparing a special event in honor of Adolf Hitler (April 20th being "the Fuhrer's" birthday). Together with his friend, Dylan Klebold, he planted a bomb in the Columbine High School cafeteria. Harris planned to shoot his fellow students as they fled the explosion. When the bomb failed to detonate, he and Klebold entered the school and opened fire, killing thirteen and wounding twenty-four before turning their guns on themselves.

If we delve into the ideology of Nazis, neo-Nazis, and white nationalists, we find that Darwinism—the view that species have evolved over eons of time through the process of natural selection—plays a fundamental role, shaping their views about race and society. Nazis and white nationalists consider it their mission to advance their own race in this universal racial struggle, even to the point of perpetrating violence against those deemed their racial enemies. In the Darwinian struggle for existence, someone has to die, after all. Atheistic Darwinism is at the core of the hatred and shootings we see today. It excludes God from its warped worldview. 

In this post, Charles Darwin, the man and his theory of evolution, will be investigated. Darwin was far from the "brave man of science" his defenders claim him to be, and evolution has led to the overthrow of God in society, with disastrous consequences. For this post, I have used many sources, especially Thomas Glick, The Comparative Reception of Darwinism (Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press, 1988); Mark Isaak, The Counter-Creationism Handbook (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2005); and Adrian Desmond and James Moore, Darwin; The Life of a Tormented Evolutionist (New York: Time Warner, 1991)---Introibo. 

Life Without Meaning or Purpose
Darwin demanded that evolution must exclude all inference of design or purpose. Everything is here in a stochastic way. This is why any attempt to introduce Intelligent Design Theory (IDT) is met with anger and lawsuits by the scientific community [See Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 400 F. Supp. 2d 707 (M.D. Pa. 2005)]. The fact that evolution teaches life is purposeless except to aid survival is not lost on teachers. Yale psychologists Bloom and Weisberg concluded in a study on why children resist accepting evolution, that the evolutionary view of the world, which the authors call "promiscuous teleology," makes it difficult for children to accept evolution. Children "naturally see the world in terms of design and purpose" and they have to be indoctrinated to see the world in another way.(See Paul Bloom and Deena Skolnick Weisberg, "Childhood Origins to Adult Resistance to Science," Science 316 (2007): 996; Emphasis mine). 

The ultimate purposelessness of evolution, and thus its products including life, was eloquently expressed by Professor Lawrence Krauss as follows: "We're just a bit of pollution. . . . If you got rid of us . . . the universe would be largely the same. We're completely irrelevant." As Oxford Professor Richard Dawkins concluded, although "humans have always wondered about the meaning of life" the fact is "life has no higher purpose [other] than to perpetuate the survival of DNA."[See The Selfish Gene, (1976)]. According to Kenneth R. Miller and Joseph S. Levine's high school textbook, Biology, [fourth edition (1998), p. 161]:

[Darwin knew his theory] required believing in philosophical materialism, the conviction that matter is the stuff of all existence and that all mental and spiritual phenomena are its by-products. Darwinian evolution was not only purposeless but also heartless — a process in which . . . nature ruthlessly eliminates the unfit. Suddenly, humanity was reduced to just one more species in a world that cared nothing for us. The great human mind was no more than a mass of evolving neurons. Worst of all, there was no divine plan to guide us. (First emphasis in original, the rest is mine).

One text taught that humans are just "a tiny, largely fortuitous, and late-arising twig on the enormously arborescent bush of life" and the belief that a "progressive, guiding force, consistently pushing evolution to move in a single direction" is now known to be "misguided."[See Peter H. Raven and George B Johnson, Biology, (2002)]. Many texts teach that evolution is purposeless and goal-less except to achieve brute survival:

[Natural selection is] totally blind to the future. . . . Humans . . . came from the same evolutionary source as every other species. It is natural selection of selfish genes that has given us our bodies and our brains. . . . Natural selection . . . explains . . . the whole of life, the diversity of life, the complexity of life, [and] the apparent design in life (from an interview with atheist evolutionary biologist Dr. Richard Dawkins). [See Neil A. Campbell, Jane B. Reece, and Lawrence G. Mitchell, Biology, (1999)]. 

The same claim of purposelessness that results from evolution is related in the mass media as well. For example, Newsweek relates that Darwin knew full well the consequences of his theory. Mankind was no longer the culmination of life but merely part of it; creation was mechanistic and purposeless. In a letter to a fellow scientist, Darwin wrote that confiding his theory was "like confessing a murder."(See Malcolm Jones, "Who Was More Important: Lincoln or Darwin?" Newsweek (July 7–July 14, 2008): 32). 

These texts all clearly teach worldviews, not science. An excellent example is a textbook that openly ruled out not only theistic evolution but any role for God in nature, noting that Darwinism threatened theism by showing that humans and all life "could be explained by natural selection without the intervention of a god":

Evolutionary randomness and uncertainty had replaced a deity having conscious, purposeful, human characteristics. The Darwinian view that . . . present-type organisms were not created spontaneously but formed in a succession of selective events that occurred in the past,contradicted the common religious view that there could be no design, biological or otherwise, without an intelligent designer. . . . In this scheme a god of design and purpose is not necessary. . . . Religion has been bolstered by . . . the comforting idea that humanity was created in the image of a god to rule over the world and its creatures. Religion provided emotional solace, a set of ethical and moral values. Nevertheless, faith in religious dogma has been eroded by natural explanations of its mysteries. . . . The positions of the creationists and the scientific world appear irreconcilable. (See Monroe W. Strickberger, Evolution, third edition, (2000), pgs. 70-71). Note well, that by "creationists," they are not talking about Protestant fundamentalists who insist on a literal six days of creation lasting 24 hours each, but anything other than atheistic evolution. I was a New York City science teacher for five years before going to law school. I wrote a paper submitted to a journal for science teachers showing that design can be found in nature, and it nearly cost me tenure and my job. This was in the 1980s. Today, you wouldn't have any chance to survive as a science teacher unless you tow the Darwinian line. 

Darwin: A Disturbed, God-Hating Sadist
Lest anyone claim that by attacking Darwin, I'm committing the ad hominem fallacy, let me be clear that science doesn't tell us anything, scientists do. The scientific method may be objective, but how the results are tabulated, presented, how information may be omitted, etc., is the product of scientists. Are they without bias and agendas? If you think so, you weren't paying attention during COVID-19. 

So why was Darwin so insistent that his theory must exclude God? I offer three reasons:

1. The death of his daughter Anna. 
According to Randal Keynes, in his book Darwin, His Daughter and Human Evolution (2002), Darwin saw in the death of his ten-year old a universe that couldn't have a loving God. Keynes wrote that Darwin was at a loss to understand why most naturalists at the time thought they saw evidence of ubiquitous, benevolent design in a world so full of pain, death and disease. "There seems to me," he wrote, "too much misery in the world" for a loving deity to have designed it that way. He had witnessed genocide of the Indians in Argentina and the torture of slaves in Brazil. He had written of wasps whose larvae devour a living caterpillar from within, leaving the beating heart for last. With the slow death of Annie, the misery became personal. So too, his hatred of any idea of God.

2. His lukewarm religious upbringing.
Darwin's father, Robert, his brother Erasmus, and his grandfather Erasmus, all well-known students of science in their own right, were agnostics. Darwin would later declare himself agnostic. He had no use for God in his life.

3. His circle of friends.
Darwin's ideas on religion were also partly a reflection of his upper-class British social milieu. His views for the most part were not all that radical or highly original in his social circle; his achievement was primarily to elaborate and publicize them through his best-selling books. Darwin's family and social network included many liberal Unitarians, agnostics, and atheists.

Darwin's mental state.
Darwin suffered from severe depression; insomnia; incapacitating anxiety; fits of hysterical crying; depersonalization; vision alterations (such as seeing spots and other visual hallucinations); malaise; vertigo; shaking; tachycardia; fainting spells; shortness of breath; trembling; nausea; vomiting; dizziness; muscle twitches, spasms, and tremors; cramps and colics; bloating and nocturnal flatulence; headaches; nervous exhaustion; dyspnea; skin problems (including scalp blisters and eczema); tinnitus; and sensations of loss of consciousness and impending death. (See Clifford A. Picover, Strange Brains and Genius: The Secret Lives of Eccentric Scientists and Madmen (1998), p. 290). Darwin suffered severe anxiety disorder, which he attributed to his tyrannical father. English psychiatrist Dr. Rankine Good claimed that, "If Darwin did not slay his father in the flesh, then he certainly slew the Heavenly Father in the realm of natural history," suffering for his "unconscious patricide" which accounted for "almost forty years of severe and crippling neurotic suffering." (See Ralph Colp, To Be an Invalid: The Illness of Charles Darwin, (1977), pg.32). 

Darwin's Sadism.
Darwin glorified death and loved torturing animals. He beat a puppy to death as a young boy and trembled with excitement. He loved guns and hunting, watching with pleasure to see his prey die slowly. He liked to make lab animals die as painfully as possible. Darwin clearly viewed death and destruction as an engine of evolutionary progress, as we see in the penultimate sentence of The Origin of Species: "Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death, the most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the production of the higher animals, directly follows." To escape any guilt or fear of punishment, God must be jettisoned. 


 Social Darwinism
When Darwin's ideas are applied to society, the survival of the fittest means that the physically and mentally handicapped must not be allowed to reproduce and—-in extreme cases, like Nazi Germany--must be euthanized. Here in the United States, the Supreme Court decision in Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927), upheld a statute instituting compulsory sterilization of the unfit "for the protection and health of the state." The 8 to 1 decision, had Oliver Wendell Holmes as the author of the majority opinion. He wrote:

We have seen more than once that the public welfare may call upon the best citizens for their lives. It would be strange if it could not call upon those who already sap the strength of the State for these lesser sacrifices, often not felt to be such by those concerned, to prevent our being swamped with incompetence. It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes...Three generations of imbeciles is enough. (Emphasis mine).

The sole dissenter was Associate Justice Pierce Butler, a devout Catholic. Afraid of Protestant harassment, he declined to write a dissenting opinion. 

If God doesn't exist, and life is about survival, racists of all colors, will want to stamp out the other races for "genetic purity" and to make this ephemeral life better by promoting the advancement of evolution. Darwin himself was racist and exulted in the European extermination of the “lower races,” which he integrated into his theory of human evolution. Many other scientists likewise promoted racism on the basis of their understanding of evolutionary theory. If the Nazi perspective was a misinterpretation of Darwinism, it was a misinterpretation fostered by the Darwinian biologists themselves, not by non-scientists or fringe publicists. 

Conclusion
Atheistic evolution, shoved down the throats of the young, has had its intended effects.  According to a 2014 Pew research survey of atheists, only 9% were age 65 and older, compared to 14% of those ages 50-64, 37% of those ages 30-49, and 40% ages 18-29. (See pewresearch.org/religion/religious-landscape-study/religious-family/atheist). The Vatican II sect tells us (via Bergoglio) that atheists can go to Heaven; a clear implication beliefs are unimportant--even belief in God Himself.

God has been banished from public life, and "St." John Paul the Great Apostate helped facilitate it by promoting Vatican II's heretical religious liberty. The time is ripe for Darwinian ideas to seep in deeply once more. The Church combatted the Communists and Nazis--the Vatican II sect does nothing. Children are told that science says there is no purpose, no God, and no meaning. Life is for the survival of the fittest. Those deemed unfit get picked on and want to strike back, while those who think they are superior believe in a right to eliminate the inferior.

So the next time you hear of a shooting spree, don't blame Trump, guns, or anything else the mass media is selling. Blame a world that has grown up without the true Faith, and fed a steady diet of Darwinism. 

 









81 comments:

  1. Darwinism is a false theory, but it is good material for the atheistic world in this time of the Great Apostasy. However, it seems to me that it is easy to answer it by citing a few examples, such as planes or cars, which did not appear by chance from nothing but which were invented and evolved by the action of human being. If this is true for material things, then why couldn't the universe, life and man have been created by a superior Being? And if mind is produced by matter, then why don't the most complex supercomputers think for themselves?

    I stopped being interested in science when I realized it hadn't made the world a better place. Material living conditions may be better than a hundred years ago, but morally the world is sinking into darkness as it celebrates sexual perversions and calls for more abortion clinics. Ecology religion has replaced true religion, and this is being pushed by the V2 sect and its antipope, who does not want the world to convert to Catholicism but to Ecology, as if this temporary world will last forever.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Simon,
      The days are indeed evil, my friend! You're always in my prayers. May we persevere until the end.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  2. The "greatest scientist" was mentally ill? 🤔

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon4:50
      It's not incompatible for someone to be BOTH highly intelligent (even a genius) AND have mental illness. The book I cite is called, "Strange Brains and Genius: The Secret Lives of Eccentric Scientists and Madmen." Darwin fit squarely into that category.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. OK, that is weird, but I get it

      Delete
  3. "God doesn't exist bc of evil"
    "O, lets torment this beagle bc "Da Science!"

    ReplyDelete
  4. Introibo, Linked topic - Noah's Nations Table, Curse of Ham, Shem, Japhet's blessing etc. Would love to see a blog on that. Because 'His Holiness Boniface X', a Feeneyite layman who thinks the Papacy is up for grabs by any Catholic layman when all electors are gone (without even bothering about the sham election like Benns or Palmarians) put out an "encyclical" or summat.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mary's Vagabond,
      Could you send me a link? That would be very helpful.

      Thank you!

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. The curse of of Ham and Japeth's blessing are never covered by anyone other than Brother Nathanael.
      -Andrew

      Delete
    3. Sadly for 'brother' (as in the lodge) Nathanael, he's not a true Christian but a Palamite (probably marrano), so what he has to say is of even less interest to me than what Confucius had to say. It has been covered amply by Catholics like Fr. Thein, Pottgeisser and Bishop Knecht minus the heresy.

      Delete
    4. Introibo,
      The link to Boniface is romancatholicism.org.

      Delete
    5. Mary's Vagabond,
      Thank you.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    6. Brother Nathanael is Kremlin P.R. However,a broken clock is correct twice a day and his take on Japeth's blessing and the curse of Ham is easy to understand. No one else is doing it and White people are lost as a result .
      God bless -Andrew

      Delete
    7. From “How Christ Said the First Mass” (1906) by Fr. James Meagher, pp. 95-96:

      “The Holy Ghost drew back the curtain hiding the future and revealed the Crucified when Noe blessed and cursed the nations — the races —in his three sons. The mighty movements of mankind then begun have continued till our day.
      “Noe, the second Adam, father of mankind, high priest and image of Jesus Christ, planted a vineyard, pressed the grapes and made wine.
      Not knowing its effect he took too much, lay naked in his tent, an image of our High Priest stripped of his garments, crucified, dead on the cross. Ham, Noe’s second son mocked his father as the Jews mocked the dying Christ. His two other sons, Sem and Japheth with a cloak, covered their father's nakedness.
      “Rising from his sacrifice, Noe blessed and cursed, as Christ was to rise from the tomb after his sacrifice and bless his followers with the gift of the Holy Ghost, while the curse of his blood rested on the Jewish nation. ‘Cursed be Canaan, a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.’ He could not curse Ham, for God had blessed the three sons and the curse rested on Canaan's children. Ham's sons settled Palestine, which they cursed with the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah. But Ham's tribes settled Africa, and find their vocation as slaves and servants waiting on the white men. Cursed in the passion their father mocked in Noe, the African race love to serve as servants to the other races. Living since in deepest degradation, among them never rose religion, literature, invention, genius, or progress. The other races will not receive on an equality one in whose veins fows their tainted blood.
      “Prophetic words the Holy Ghost pronounced through Noe on
      the sons who covered him. ‘Blessed be the Lord God of Sem, let Canaan be his servant.’ Thus he determined that the ‘Lord God,’ Jesus Christ would be
      born of Sem's race, the Jews. Christ's genealogy shows him as son of Sem.
      He is the glory of the Jewish Semites.
      The other Semitic nations settled Asia, where they have remained stagnant, conservative, unprogressive, hardly improving since the patriarchs, for they were not blessed with the grace of change.
      “To Japheth: ‘The enlarging’
      or ‘The white man,’ Noe said ‘May God enlarge Japheth, and may he dwell in the tents of Sem, and Canaan be his servant.’ The Hebrew has here for ‘God’ the word ‘Shekina,’ the
      Holy Ghost, who spoke through Noe and gave Japhet's sons, the white races, that colonizing instinct, civilization, progress, advancement, invention, superiority — the unrest
      of bright minds which down the ages lifted them to the highest prosperity, culture and refinement. This is the
      reason the white men are so superior to the other races. God foresaw the Jews would reject Christ, that the white
      men would receive him, and thus he prepared them for their mission to receive the Gospel and carry on the
      Church.
      “Before this blessing Moses always mentioned these three brothers according to their age, Sem first and Japhet last; after the benediction the last is given first as the leader of the others. God later blessed the Jews through Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and the patriarchs, gave them the instinct of money-making that they might use the power of wealth in missionary labors.
      They rejected the call to Christianity when they killed Christ. But God works
      without repentance, the blessing still rests on them while the white races receive and administer the Church they
      refused.”

      Delete
  5. Unrelated, but have you seen this?

    https://youtu.be/0uLuKpKja1c

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon9:14
      Yes! I have the one of the original VHS tapes! I was there when it was filmed on Sunday, June 22, 1986 with my parents. I was just 21 years old. The person posting it cut out the long segment of Fr. DePauw giving out Communion to the Congregation. There's a "cameo appearance" of myself and my father going up to receive Communion!

      It was the first of its kind. It became so popular a Vatican II sect group called "Keep the Faith" (sic) tried to get one made. The valid priests were so rusty after having given up the True Mass for the Novus Bogus (stumbling over the Latin and forgetting the rubrics), they gave up and put out an old film on VHS of Bishop Fulton Sheen (then a priest) offering Mass at St. Patrick's Cathedral in NYC circa 1946.

      That filmed Mass brings back such good memories for me. Thank you for sharing!

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. Introibo,

      I stumbled upon this video a few months ago, what a gem! Hearing Fr. DePauw utter the sacred words of consecration with such reverence was, may I say, quite otherworldly.
      If there's only one video left out there on the entire Internet I want it to be this one.

      God Bless,
      Joanna S.

      Delete
    3. Joanna,
      I've never experienced the reverence and devotion Fr. DePauw generated when offering the Most Holy Sacrifice with any other Traditionalist priest or bishop. His sermons were just as incredible. I was blest to have been with him from 1981 until his holy death in 2005. I really miss him.

      In the sacristy, he had a plaque he brought over from Belgium to the United States that he read every time before going out to offer Mass. It read (in English): "Priest of Christ: Offer this Mass as if it were your First Mass; your Last Mass; your Only Mass." Words he lived by his entire 63 years in the priesthood.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    4. The Ave Maria CTM website was one if my first introductions into the Traditional Mass. This was right before Fr. DePauw went to his eternal reward. I never met the man but have read a lot about him over the years. You are blessed to have known him, Intoibo.

      Tom A

      Delete
    5. Tom,
      Yes, indeed. I don't know how my life would have turned out had it not been for Fr. DePauw! God rest his soul.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete

  6. To Christians and right-thinking Scientists, Darwin's materialist, bogus theory is mad and ridiculous. But as I see it, even the most ridiculous God-hating theories have a helper in Government-Education-Entertainment.
    Evolution was a controversial topic with the public until Hollywood filmed "Inherit The Wind".
    The subject matter was risky, but with Spencer Tracy, great liberal and charismatic star, in the lead role as Clarence Darrow, advocate for Evolutionism in the sensational "Scopes Monkey Trial", the studio felt it'd be a financial and ideology-shaping success. The movie idol sold the goods, and the public began to soften it's attitude.
    Advertising has: "Perception is Everything" as a motto. It knows human nature all too well.

    -Jannie

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jannie,
      Popular entertainment is insidious. Movies, TV, and music are all Satan's messengers. I'm sure you remember my series "Singing For Satan." Bad messages are everywhere. You are 100% correct about "Inherit the Wind."

      God Bless,
      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. We should identify all the books and films that are bad, as you did with the music. But it's a huge task, there are so many bad movies and books ! The Church had the Index to protect us from all this, but the abominable Montini abolished it. He too is a messenger of Satan. And he had the audacity to speak of the “smokes of Satan” as he brought them into the Church.

      Delete
    3. I remember your fine series, Intro.
      I saw a recent video by 'Catholic Family Podcast' in which the host, a devout true Catholic, gave his analysis of the 70's rock anthem "American Pie".
      He said he was inclined to believe that Don McLean who grew up Catholic, wrote the song because he rued the loss of the Mass due to V2.
      He pointed to lyrics such as: "drove my Chevy to the levee but the levee was dry", "them good ol' boys was drinkin whiskey and rye" as meaning the Mass offered no spiritual nourishment anymore, and the priests were no longer consecrating the Blood of Christ (drinking whiskey and rye). The host referred to phrases in the song: "the book of love" and "faith in God above", "a pink carnation..." (to offer Mary), along with the song's caustic comments about the devil to bolster his case. I was pleasantly intrigued at first by the idea of a rock song in "code" that defends the Catholic Faith, but it is probably wishful thinking.
      McLean has never explained his lyrics to interviewers and prefers they be interpreted by listeners as they see fit.
      His life hasn't exactly been a shining example of Catholicity, either - divorced twice, he currently has a domestic partner young enough to be his granddaughter; though to be fair, his current situation doesnt necessarily indict his past.
      What is your opinion of that song, Intro?

      -Jannie
      I

      Delete
    4. Jannie,
      That's an interesting spin the podcaster gave to "American Pie." I read a Vatican II sect website which tried to make the lyrics about his ENDORSEMENT of the new sect! McLean has refused to tell the meaning of the song. While true that he was raised by a Catholic mother in the Catholic Church (his father was Protestant and died when McLean was 15), you rightly pointed out all that is wrong with his lifestyle.

      I researched this song in the past (but not so much on McLean), and the best explanation to me (given by those closest to him at the time) was that it was about the history of rock and roll, and he blasphemously referred to his three musical heroes, JP Richardson, Ritchie Valens, and Buddy Holly (who all died in a plane crash in 1959) as the "Father, Son, and Holy Ghost" [making them "gods" of rock and roll]. "The day the music died" refers to the plane crash.

      McLean was arrested and pled guilty to the domestic abuse of his second "wife" and his children have accused him of "cult-like behaviors"--whatever that means. The "good Catholic cryptically denouncing Vatican II" is, in my opinion, a falsehood.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    5. Novus ordos always try to argue rockstars are cryptically endorsing Catholicism

      Delete
    6. That song was written in 1971/1972 when the Apostasy was in it's infancy. It's possible that song has connotation to V2 etc.. -Andrew

      Delete
  7. Anything by Scorcese

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon5:54
      I agree--but there's so much more, as Simon points out above!

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  8. I wonder how many Atheist/Agnostic animal lovers who happen to be Darwinist, know of Darwin's love of torturing animals? Somebody ought to contact PETA and maybe he'll get canceled.

    The Buck Vs. Bell 8-1 case of 1927 was a classic manifestation of what has always been wrong with the justice system. Nevertheless, Oliver Wendell Holmes is portrayed as a good guy in public history class. INDOCTRINATION INDEED.

    Notice how he says, The principle that sustains compulsory VACCINATION is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes...Three generations of imbeciles is enough.

    The masks, vaccinations, and lock-downs are based on not science but scientism which has is roots in Atheistic Darwinism.

    These people sicken me to no end.

    Lee

    ReplyDelete
  9. Very good post. I have been following your blog for two years now and I can say that it is one of the best Catholic blogs I know. By the way, I am a Sedevacantist from Croatia, since 2019, which I became by God's grace after the shameful and satanic Amazon Synod. My question is, since Austria is too far for me to go there for Mass, which Missal do I have to use to pray St. Mass? Until recently, I used the one that uses FSSPX, not even knowing that it was the Missal of the fake Pope Roncalli. Is there somewhere the Missal of Pope Pius XII. on the internet, or of former popes? At least I haven't found him yet. God bless you all, Grešni carinik (that is in Croatian name for St. Matthew, the former tax-collector Zacchaeus)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hello Grešni carinik!

      Here's the most-widely used Latin-English daily Missal, known as St. Andrew's Daily Missal - this is the 1925 edition (pdf download):

      https://archive.ccwatershed.org/media/pdfs/21/02/16/05-35-23_0.pdf

      Greetings from Poland!
      God Bless You,
      Joanna S.

      Delete
    2. Gresni carinik,
      Thank you for the kind words my friend! I agree with Joanna that St. Andrew's Missal is outstanding. If you can find a Fr. Lasance Missal (1945) or a St. Joseph's Missal (1958), they are also excellent!

      Thanks for the link Joanna!

      God Bless you both,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    3. Thank God for your conversion to the true Catholicism, Grešni carinik !

      Delete
    4. Joanna S., Introibo, Simon, thank you very much, my dear brothers and sisters in Christ. Special thanks to you for these great Missals, thank you for the one from St. Andrew, and on that of Fr. Lassance, I found him. God's blessing to you all!

      Delete
  10. I have a question for you Introibo.

    A person who I have had to break friendship with who had been attending my SSPX chapel(he does not go there now) told me some strange things.He went to the SSPX Masses but did not hold to the True Faith.He only liked the Mass but would also attend other "churches" like the Anglicans,etc.He told me the other day in the local library that he listens to his two "spiritual guides" from the other side.I told him straight to go away and leave me in peace.You have lost the plot.

    Have you ever heard this " spirit guide" garbage before.I have no doubt it is demonic.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon6:27
      Yes, I know about alleged "spirit guides." If not the product of mental illness, they are demonic and "guide you" to Hell. According to theologian Jone, "Spiritism claims to be able to communicate with the spirit world and endeavors to establish such commerce with it. Although spiritism is for the most part fraud, still the intention alone to enter into communication with spirits is gravely sinful. Therefore, it is mortally sinful to conduct a spiritistic seance or to act as a medium." (See Moral Theology, pg. 100).

      For a detailed account of my (thankfully) brief encounter with evil, please see my post:

      http://introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2020/06/imaginary-friends.html.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. Thank you for your sound advice.He once told me that he spend time with a group called the Liberal Catholic Church who claim orders from the Old Catholic Matthew line.How he could believe all these strange evil ideas and go to Holy Communion at the SSPX is just beyond words.

      I expect you would suggest not to buy and read books from the late Ed and Lorraine Warren.I printed off your writing about them.

      What Sacramentals should one have in your home besides holy water.

      Delete
    3. @anon9:54,
      Re: Sacramentals, please see my post:

      https://introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2018/05/sacramentals.html

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  11. Last week Intriobo you said if there was a change in the CSPV after bishop Kelly dies towards the valid Thuc bishops there would be a break with Fathers Jenkins and Greenwell in Norwood,Ohio.I think most faithful would stay with Bishops Santay and Carroll.Father Jenkins and Greenwell would have to start another chapel.Bishop Santay whom I most admire comes from Cincinnati.

    Did you ever read the fine study on Mount Saint Michaels and the CMRI by Father Daniel Ahern that is available online(it was published back in 1994)?Did you note that there was no refutation by Bishop Kelly like his silence on Mario Derksons writing on the Thuc bishops.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. For me it's been dismaying to see these Materialiter-Totaliter squabbles among trad/sede clergy turning into angry public fights. The Thesis or lack of one doesn't impact the Catholic Faith, anyway, so a lot of it just strikes me as ego. Why this is all happening now I don't know, but, as always, the devil can see an opportunity to cause trouble and is seizing on it here to try to spiritually harm those who want to practice the True Faith and the clergy who want to provide the true Sacraments.
      There are sede groups and bishops that have stayed out of this type of controversy. Bishop Pivarunas, for one (and happily not alone in his thinking), has taken a wise course, stating he doesn't see the good in "pick[ing] fights".
      As far as the old disagreements between SSPV and the Abp.Thuc adherents, I notice that Fr. Jenkins is now referring to Bishop Sanborn and the late Bishop Dolan as "Fathers". Scandal is beginning to brew.
      Let's pray that these differences don't spark the start of a new Arian type split within the ranks of the Catholic Restoration, leading souls to ruin as a result.
      -Jannie

      Delete
    2. Hi Jannie

      Fr Jenkins has always called Bishops Sanborn and Dolan "Fathers"

      What did you think of Mario Derksons study on the Thuc Bishops.He took the view of Bishop Kelly,etc to pieces.

      God bless

      Delete
    3. @anon10:44
      Yes, I agree Frs. Jenkins and Greenwell would need to start a new chapel. The refutation by Mario Derksen remains unassailable. That's why Bp. Kelly and the SSPV have said nothing. Virtually everyone agrees that Thuc consecrations are valid EXCEPT Bp. Kelly and Fr. Jenkis (probably Fr Greenwell too).

      Jannie,
      I agree with your analysis. Traditionalists need to stop starting needless fights!

      God Bless you both,


      ---Introibo

      Delete
    4. @Jannie,
      Amen! Agree 100%,we need to pray for traditional Catholic unity + STOP the infighting.
      None of the 1970's traditional Catholics took part in this, including Bishop Lefebvre.
      It's so disheartening to hear a good sermon online only for it to end with Priest's trashing the Thuc line,CSPV,or Resistance-SSPX.
      God bless -Andrew

      Delete
  12. Did you know Introibo that Father Ahern(before he left SSPV) arrived to say Mass at the SSPV chapel in Trasverse city and discovered the locks at been changed on the door.Father Kelly had ordered this to be done.It is so hard to believe that Bp Kelly and Fr Jenkins have done so much harm.It is just evil.

    Did you take note by Fr Cekada of his debate back in 2002 with Fr Jenkins,that he fr Jenkins had a folder containing only blank paper where Fr Cekada had quotes,etc of the Church Fathers,canon law,etc.

    What did you think of Bp Mendez.He was a man of scandal in my thoughts.How the SSPV can say he was a traditionalist is beyond words.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon5:25
      There has been harm from all Traditionalist clergy in fighting each other. They do much good in keeping the One True Faith alive. Being human, many are not without fault.

      While I'm not defending the actions of Bp. Kelly, Fr. Cekada is not without fault. Fr. Cekada wrote several things about Bp. Mendez that were not true--as I spoke to someone who knew the bishop personally, and his story is much more credible. Bp. Mendez was not a Fr. DePauw, but he was an unquestionably properly trained and validly consecrated Bishop who gave an unquestionably valid episcopal consecration to Fr. Kelly and the SSPV (and even Fr. Cekada begrudgingly admitted it years after his attack on Bp. Kelly's consecration). Let's be grateful for that.

      Let's not forget that Fr. Cekada was an opponent of the so-called "Una Cum" Mass. I disagree, as did real canonists and theologians such as Fr. DePauw and Fr. Stepanich. His stance was so extreme that he claimed a Traditionalist in danger of death, who only has a valid SSPX priest from whom to receive the Last Rites, must nevertheless forego receiving Holy Viaticum because It was somehow "off limits" due to being Consecrated at the Una Cum. I hope no such individual was on their death bed and did so. He also claimed Fr. Jenkins was always "faking illness." When I challenged him, asking how he knew his illnesses were "fake," and not real --did he ask Fr. Jenkin's doctors to violate HIPPA laws, or was he medically qualified to make such a decision, he never replied.

      Fr. Cekada defended the morally indefensible; the murder of Terri Schiavo. That was scandalous.

      Fr. Cekada publicly insulted me on his blog "Quidlibet" over the Una Cum issue, and commented on this blog excoriating me. This is verbatim how I replied:

      (Continued Below)

      Delete
    2. Fr. Cekada,
      Glad to see you read my blog! It’s interesting that you think you know the motives of Bp. Kelly and Fr. Jenkins (Whom I know personally). I know Fr Jenkins to be a good priest, wrong on the Thuc issue, but I believe him to be sincere. You even know the details of his health.

      I try and follow the evidence where it leads. I defended you and Bp. Dolan against the attacks of “Pistrina Liturgica” and “Lay Pulpit” when they called into question the validity of Bp. Dolan’s Consecration on unsubstantiated and faulty grounds. They clearly just had an axe to grind against both of you.

      I think you are an intelligent cleric who has contributed much to the Sedevacantist cause. Nevertheless, I’m sad to say that you’re every bit as prideful as Bp. Kelly. He will not admit he was wrong on Thuc.

      If you’re really concerned about those good Catholics being denied Sacraments, do you really think they will change their minds based on your calling them “cult leaders” and the boorish remarks? Wouldn’t a dispassionate discussion of the issue do better? You will just anger them into digging in their heels, much like you do.

      One SSPV priest and I were speaking. I told him I disagreed on Thuc. I asked if that “disqualified me” from Communion. His response was he wouldn’t become the “Mass police” and would give Communion to me even if I went as long as I didn’t “broadcast it.” He’s a young priest, too. When he reads your article calling his Society a “cult,” I wonder if he will still be so amenable.

      You must face your own cooties. You advertise a “BUGnini free” Holy Week which implicitly denies the papacy of Pope Pius XII. After all, if (for example) genuflecting for the Jews on Good Friday was wrong, it was ALWAYS WRONG and it’s ridiculous to suggest it “became wrong” over time. However, if it was always wrong, it was wrong when promulgated in 1955. But the Church cannot give that which is evil, so Pius could not have been pope.

      Your the one who has written extensively on Una Cum. I’m not obsessed nor is it irrelevant. You will refuse Communion to Good Catholics who attend SSPX. Not only that, you tell people they can’t receive Holy Viaticum which is “tainted” by the Una Cum cootie. What if someone in danger of death is so put off they don’t call the only priest available (SSPX for some) and die without the Last Rites? Have you thought about that?

      Your attack was uncalled for, counterproductive, and hypocritical.

      I don’t hate you Father, even if the feeling isn’t mutual. I try to practice what I preach. I think you have done much good, and can do greater things.

      In order for that to happen worry less about King Charles Head, and concentrate on the Sacred Heart Of Jesus Christ. Let’s advance Christ’s Kingship, and have more unity against the One World V2 sect.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Traditionalists who disagree on unsettled issues should be civil to each other. Disagreeing with someone doesn't call for hating them.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  13. Thank you for your sound advice and reply.Let us pray for unity.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Okay,what about all the facts about Bishop Mendez in the 1995 notes by Father Cekada.Bishop Sanborn said the facts were true.

    Have you noted that the SSPV/CSPV have not opened any new missions/chapels for years but the CMRI are opening one almost every one to two years.What does that tell you.I do know that Bishop Pivarunas is working for unity.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon7:42
      The CMRI is great--I don't dispute that at all. As to Bp. Mendez, he certainly was not like Bishop Kurz, Abp. Thuc, Abp. Lefebvre, but he performed a needed consecration of a Traditionalist bishop. It is for that fact I laud him.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. Agrees! BISHOP Mendez performed a traditional Episcopal Consecration and 2 traditional Ordinations.
      We need more like him.
      -Andrew

      Delete
  15. You did not answer my question.Why is the CMRI growing with new Mass centers but the SSPV/CSPV have no new Mass Centers since at least 1988?They only are growing at their larger churches.

    Have you made a study of the theis of the late Bishop Guerard des Lauriers?What is your view?

    Bishop Sanborn has just made the comment in his newsletter that the Traditional Movement is plagued with untrained clergy.Who are these men.Someone should write a list of them as a warning to us faithful to keep away.I am sure Father Gommar de pauw would not be impressed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bishop Sanborn needs to stop acting like he has jurisdiction.
      It never stops,constant back biting and trashing other traditional Catholic groups.
      When is the last time he asked all Sede and Resistance-SSPX Bishops and Priests to have a general meeting,pray together and pray for traditional Catholic unity?
      God bless -Andrew

      Delete
    2. Anon 4:57,

      Compared to the SSPV/CSPV, the CMRI are growing probably because the priests are more lenient on lay people regarding Mass options when they aren't available, money issues, and just their general approach/first impressions with people.

      I personally don't agree with the CMRI on going to an Una Cum Mass if nothing else were available because I don't want to be associated with clergy/ people who aren't honest about the Magisterium. If a priest can't get that most crucial issue right, then who is to say he can get anything right, especially if he is suppose to be my confessor.

      I agree 100% with them on how they are for Pope Pius XII's holy week changes. All the other groups refuse to obey Pius XII and blame Bugnini, hindsight, the changes themselves etc. as "leading" to evil which are reasons implicating that Pius XII gave the Church something harmful. Impossible!

      As far as the unfit clergy Bp. Sanborn speaks of, there are many that Bp. Slupski ordained and consecrated who were either never trained or had very little training with some being heretics such as Bp. Webster (a Feeneyite). There are exceptions but the general problem comes from most of these clergy.

      Lee

      Delete
    3. @anon4:57
      I am in agreement with Lee as to why the CMRI is growing, and I agree with them on Una Cum as well. You can disagree (as Lee does) because there is no authority to settle the matter.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    4. Traditional Catholics are the,in worldly terms,an extremely irrelevant nonexistent group.
      Trash talking other Bishops and Priests only ads to our problem of extreme dysfunction and disunity.
      God bless -Andrew

      Delete
  16. We too laud Bp Mendez for his consecration of Bp Kelly.

    We feel sick to the stomach that Father Cekada would not advise someone to receive the last Sacraments from a SSPX priest.This is just pure evil.Most SSPX priests are good men.The una Cum isue is only an opinion aong with sedevacantism.

    What is your thoughts on the consecration of Bp Joseph Pfeiffer of the SSPX resistance by Bp Neil Webster?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I hold the Sede opinion and find the "una cum" issue non-existent.
      We need Catholic unity amongst all Sede + Resistance-SSPX groups.
      If we could all acknowledge each other as Catholic so Clergy and Chapels could work together instead of everyone driving 100 plus miles to separate chapels.
      The modern Left is 100% united in their hatred of Catholicism and the social reign of Christ the King
      God bless -Andrew

      Delete
    2. @anon5:46
      Webster is a Feeneyite heretic. Moreover, he botched the essential words of the form (recorded on video), thereby rendering the consecration invalid. Webster is bad news and I wouldn't associate with him or the clergy that he leads/ordains/consecrates.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    3. "No Bishop Pfeiffer: Feeneyite Fails at Attempt to Consecrate Bishop for SSPX-Resistance"

      https://novusordowatch.org/2020/07/neal-webster-fails-at-joseph-pfeiffer-consecration/

      Delete
  17. Last Sunday was Pentecost?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon10:05
      No, today, June 5th.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  18. I agree with the above comments from Andrew.Which part of the States do you live?

    My friend the late Fr Joseph Collins broke with Bp Dolan,etc and worked with CMRI a few years before He died.He said their refusal of the Sacraments to folk who went to the SSPX was not right.

    Introibo,Have you ever met Fr Marin Skerkia?I once went to his Mass in Great Falls,MT.In his sermon all he did was trash CMRI and theThuc bishops.I thought it was scandal.Please God,may there be unity among all traditional bishops,clerics,etc.Satan is laughting but he will not win.

    God bless everyone.Have a blessed feast of Pentecost.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon5:34
      I know Fr Skierka’s priest-nephew. Very nice. Never met the priest-uncle (Martin). We definitely need more unity.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  19. Lee,can you give us names of other bishops/clerics besides Webster who we should keep away from.There should be a list.Perhaps,Introibo could do one if he has the time.This is important.

    Do you know anything about "bishop" Joseph Macek?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon6:12
      I know nothing of alleged “Bp.” Marcek. Making a list of invalid or heretical bishops just won’t be feasible with my time constraints. Someday, I might attempt such.
      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    2. Anon. 6:12,

      Bishop Joseph S. Macek was ordained conditionally by Bishop Patrick C. Taylor on December 18, 1998 in Beckley, WV. His episcopal consecration was on November 18, 1999, by Bishop Patrick C. Taylor, SVM (same location). Then on November 27, 2001 Bishop Merill Adamson, SOLG conditionally consecrated Bishop Macek & Bishop Taylor in San Francisco, CA. Is he okay to go to? I don't know.

      As far as the list of other bishops, here is a website that is a little out of date but somewhat useful http://www.tboyle.net/Catholicism/Thuc_Consecrations.html

      Keep in mind there have been many bishops that have been consecrated since that link was created. I don't know many of these men and I would hate to tell you not to go to them if in fact it is probably okay to attend their Masses and receive their sacraments or vice versa. I'm afraid you'll have to figure that one out yourself.

      Here are the ones I avoid for sure:
      Bps. Webster, Bruno, Duarte Costa line (excommunicated by Pius XII), Palmarians, SSPX, David Bawden ("Pope" Michael)

      Those I avoid not because they are not trained (they are very well trained) but because they have issues that I have a serious problem with (although I do not have a problem if others need to go to them): Bp. Vezelis (died 2013) those who succeed him Bps. Giles Butler and Madrigal, SSPV (only because they would refuse me sacraments if I told them where I went).

      Those I'm not sure about: Bps. Squetino, Urbina Aznar, Argueta Rosal (all from Mexico), William Green (Miami, Florida), Anton Trinh, Thomas Sebastian, Joseph Macek.

      Lee

      Delete
    3. What's wrong with Bishop Trihn? He was conditionally Ordained by Bp.Fellay and conditionally Ordained and then Consecrated by Bp.Slupski.
      Bp.Fellay refused him and Ordination certificate so he had to have it done again. He has Seminary training.
      I'm going to the SSPX today because we have nothing else in our City.
      All 1st wave 1970's Trad Catholic Priests stated a valid Sunday Holy Mass was more important than our opinions and an obligation.
      -Andrew

      Delete
    4. Who Ordained & Consecrated Bp.Adamson?
      -Andrew

      Delete
    5. Andrew,
      I honestly don't know. Maybe a reader who knows can supply the information.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    6. Andrew,

      According to the link I provided above it says this about Bp. Adamson:

      Ordained a priest on xx/xx/1990 at San Francisco, California, by Thaddeus Alioto, a bishop of xxxx.
      Consecrated a bishop on 09/04/1999 at Sonoma, California, by José Urbina, a bishop of the xxxxx Church, assisted by xxxx, a bishop of xxxxx.

      I didn't say there was anything wrong with Bp. Anton Trinh. I just said I'm not sure about him, although I will say if he was consecrated by Bp. Slupski watch out. May Bp. Slupski rest in peace (died 2018).

      Lee

      Delete
    7. Bp's Adamson Alioto and Urbina-Aznar look to descend from Thuc - Dattessen line.
      Info on Bishop Dattessen is clandestine.Other than 1 pic and his 2 yr enrollment in Econe,his bio and life after the conditional Ordination/ Consecration by Bp.Thuc is impossible to find.
      God bless -Andrew

      Delete
  20. Hello Introibo.

    I have a question for you.Were you on the mailing list years ago for The Bulletin from Oyster Bay?My mom gave me all the copies that she had from 1990 to 2010.Do you have in your library at home copies of those before this period?If you do,please keep them safe.I asked several years ago Bp Santay but he made the claim they are not available.It is a real shame that someone did not keep copies of those newsletters,etc of the Traditional Movement back in the 1970's.A very blessed and grace-filled Feast of Pentecost to you and your family.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon7:55
      I have no pre-1990 bulletins unfortunately. I attended with Fr DePauw exclusively from 1981 until his holy death in 2005.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  21. Different subject but, in the latter case, ASSUMING he remained a Catholic priest and that V2 never happened, would you think it'd be proper to call Ngo Dinh Diem and Fr. Mychal Judge (a priest who was a 9/11 victim) as martyrs of the Faith? Thanks

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon5:03
      Without a Magisterium to make a binding determination, I can only offer a layman's opinion. As to Mychal Judge (assuming a valid priest and Vatican II never happened) he displayed heroic virtue, but does not meet the qualifications for martyrdom. The Church does not bestow the title of martyr upon those heroic priests, nuns, and layman who have persistently attended to the suffering in times of pestilence. St. Aloysius, whose death was brought on by such a labor was not canonized a martyr. These deaths were not the result of the assertion of religious truth against the enemies of religious truth. They laid down their lives for Christ's sake, but not for Christ's quarrel. This, I believe would apply to Judge.

      As to the brother of Abp. Thuc, the call is harder to make. Was he killed simply because he opposed Communism (like many non-Catholics), or was their a specific hatred towards his Catholic Faith? The Church means, by martyrdom, death undergone at the hands of those who hate the True Catholic Faith, for the sake of the True Catholic Faith; and undergone, in the case of adults, deliberately. On the part of the enemies of Christ, a certain odium fidei ("hatred of the Faith") is necessary.

      I don't think Ngo Dinh Diem met this requirement of dying for the Faith, nor am I certain he was killed by the Communists BECAUSE of his faith, or Because of his position IN SPITE OF his Faith.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. He was ordained in 1961 for the Franciscans, if I'm not mistaken. I do know Ngo Dinh Diem tried to convert his country to the Faith but good point, we don't have information specifically if he was killed in odium fidei. Kind of like Louis XVI of France.

      Delete
  22. What would you say about these criticisms of Cmris and bp pivarunass stance on the so called 'brain death'?
    http://www.christorchaos.com/NotUnderAnyCircumstances.html

    ReplyDelete