New Era World News

GERMAN INVESTIGATORS ARE LABORING  to identify the person(s) who perpetrated the December 19 manslaughter of twelve people and the wanton injury of 48 more. The attack was purportedly carried out by a Daesh operative who used a 25 ton vehicle to maliciously mow down innocent people shopping at a Berlin Christmas market. Police announced Monday that a Pakistani national who had requested asylum in Germany was thought to be the driver of the vehicular weapon, but he was released due to insufficient evidence. The driver’s accomplice was found dead in the passengers seat. Although the suspect has not been found, Daesh claims that it was “their soldier” who carried out the operation.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who made the decision to openly greet asylum seekers, is acutely concerned about the culprit being an apprehended Pakistani seeking asylum. Earlier in July of this year another Pakistani asylum seeker, a Pakistani wielding a knife, attacked German train passengers. These incidents are part of an emerging and apparent pattern of asylum seekers attacking their generous hosts in their hosts own neighborhoods. Merkel should be concerned, very concerned; there is a pro-Traditional Europe, anti-liberal Euro-skeptic movement sweeping Europe. It is readily apparent in Slovakia, Hungary, Moldova, Poland, England, France, Italy Transdniestria, Greece, the Netherlands and Russia in which political parties rooted in Christian values are winning elections and democratically acquiring seats of power.

French voters head to the ballot boxes in the spring of 2017 during which time they are likely to elect a pro-traditional European cultural candidate (either Marine Le Pen from the National Front or the conservative Francois Fillon from the Republican Party), a candidate  opposed to open borders and favoring a rapprochement with Russia. Though Le Pen is the more anti-liberal and “traditional” of the two, regardless who prevails, France will move to amend or abrogate the Schengen Agreement, which created open borders among EU member states.

Following the French elections, Germans will head to the ballot boxes in the fall of 2017 (September-October). In addition to French election results impacting German results, today’s assault will likely add fuel to the already kindled fire that is gaining momentum as it moves across Germany in the form of a new political party that calls itself “Alternative for Germany” (AfD).  AfD is a conservative, Euro-skeptic populist party that seems to be the German counterpart of the anti-liberal front that is raging in Eastern Europe and gaining momentum in the West. In the wake of today’s heinous crime AfD leader, Frauke Petry, denounced Merkel saying that her over-zealous decision to host over a million asylum seekers in is threatening German peace and security. According to AfD spokesman, Ronald Glaser, Germany’s liberal minded leaders seem more concerned about globalism and political correctness than they do about identifying the underlying causes of social problems and doing something about them.

fgf

WHO IS ALTERNATIVE FOR GERMANY?

Originally, the AfD was founded to oppose the euro and Chancellor Merkel’s handling of the euro economic crisis. Since then AfD has adopted a pro-family, traditional values, anti-immigrant platform, a platform that has made them, according to Der Spiegel, a “dangerous party”,

“…a collection of radical-Christian ideologues, arch-conservative military veterans, buttoned-up business professors and disillusioned business owners.”

Interpreted in positive terms this means, a collection of deeply religious men and women committed to their faith and its social cultural expression, virile military veterans committed to upholding Germany’s Christian patrimony and family traditions, and who are in favor of moral values (rather than an unseen hand) regulating the market place. AfD’s leader is “dangerous” because she has brazenly committed political heresy by daring to trample on political correctness and announce what is wrong in Germany:

“…the refugee crisis, problems with the education system, the “premature sexualization of children.”

Nonetheless, AfD continues to gain popularity. The party was founded in 2013, a year in which it surprisingly won 4.7% of the vote barely missing the 5% threshold necessary to sit in the Bundestag (the Lower House of Parliament that represents the people and elects the Chancellor aka the Prime Minister). A year later AfD managed to acquire 7.1% of the vote and 7 of Germany’s 96 seats in the European Parliament.  By 2016 AfD gained MP seats in ten of Germany’s 16 state parliaments and is poised to gain seats in next fall’s federal elections.

Speaking about the 2016 state results in the Eastern state of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, the BBC reported

“Anxiety about immigration dominated the Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania election on 4 September, enabling the AfD to take second place (almost 21%), behind the centre-left Social Democrats (SPD – 30.6%) but ahead of Mrs Merkel’s Christian Democrats (CDU – 19%).”

The Telegraph worded the Mecklenberg results this way:

“Almost exactly a year after Mrs Merkel opened Germany’s borders to more than 1m asylum-seekers, her party was beaten into third place in her own parliamentary constituency, according to preliminary exit polls.”

“The anti-migrant Alternative for Germany party (AfD) surged ahead of Mrs Merkel’s Christian Democrats (CDU) in initial projections with around 21 per cent of the vote.”

“Perhaps this is the beginning of the end for Chancellor Merkel,” Leif-Erik Holm, the AfD’s regional leader, said as the results became clear.”

Reporting on 2016 state elections in the capital, Berlin, Politico reported that Germany’s two leading parties, the Social Democrats and Christian Democrats, both suffered heavy losses while the AfD was catapulted into the state assembly.

According to Politico:

“Berlin’s voters have dealt the embattled chancellor another heavy blow. But what is most remarkable is the fundamental shift in the country’s party landscape and political process that this election heralds. Berlin is Germany’s political and social laboratory par excellence. It is a microcosm where the country’s major challenges play out as if under a microscope. So the stability and consensus that have long been Germany’s political trademark may soon be a thing of the past.

It seems that  Germany’s Euro-skeptic party is on the move making headway promoting a pro-Christian/Humanistic anti radical-Muslim values campaign. In May of this year, AfD adopted an anti-Islam policy that includes a section explaining why  “Islam does not belong to Germany”.

“There is no room for Muslim practices and beliefs that go against “the free, democratic social foundation, our laws and the Judaeo-Christian and humanistic bases of our culture….Moderate (Muslims who accept integration) are valued members of society”, the programme says. But it argues that multiculturalism does not work.”

Like other Euro-skeptic parties AfD advocates decentralization and opposes “Euro-federalism” as a type of centralization. If the trend toward centralization is not reversed AfD leaders have stated that they will move to “pull Germany out of the EU.”

As the result of increasing violence associated with the refugee crisis and the continued acquiescence of Germany to EU stipulations, Merkel’s political future looks compromised.

“Mrs Merkel’s national approval ratings have fallen to a five-year low of 45 per cent, and she is yet to declare whether she will lead her party into next year’s elections. For the AfD, the result is further confirmation that the party has arrived as a force to be reckoned with in German politics.”

jh

LIBERALISM COMING TO AN END IN GERMANY

The developing trend (most advanced in Berlin) but in motion throughout most of Germany is clear: The age of the Social Democratic Party (SPD) and the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) leadership based on liberal European values is being seriously challenged, perhaps coming to an end.

“The AfD’s rightward drift can be seen across Germany, but nowhere is it as clear as in the country’s eastern states. Supporters of eastern German AfD chapters are not looking for a conservative alternative on the political spectrum. They are interested in opposing and resisting the established political system.”

As indicated by the election results in Mecklenburg and especially in Berlin, it seems that in Germany, as elsewhere, liberalism is being questioned. In Germany, according to Politico:

“The political scene has traditionally been dominated by two Volksparteien, the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and the Social Democratic Party (SPD). Each typically garnered around 40 percent of the vote and alternated in leading governments. Sunday’s poll (the Berlin result , however, saw five parties land between 21 and 14 percent, effectively leveling the playing field between the erstwhile dominant CDU and SPD on the one hand, and the Greens, the Left, and the far-right (AfD) on the other…. Two-party alliances, long sufficient to secure necessary majorities to govern, will have to make way for three-party coalitions….Now, with representation in 10 of 16 states, the AfD is here to stay.”

“The recent vote in the German capital was more than a state election. It was a wake-up call to the fact that German politics is undergoing a sea change that will leave its imprint on the country’s federal elections in 2017 and beyond.”

With just four years under its belt, the AfD is now the third strongest party in Germany.  As in the United States, traditional family oriented European men, men tired of the abuse they have suffered under a liberal agenda, an agenda that has robbed them of their cultural patrimony, striped them of paternal authority, and reduced them to politically correct sycophants, these men have had enough.  According to Der Spiegel, Europe’s largest and Germany’s most influential weekly:

‘”There are many conservative, upper middle-class voters — most of them older, white males — who had hoped that the AfD would provide them with a new political home reminiscent of the Helmut Kohl-era Christian Democrats. For these voters, Angela Merkel’s CDU has become too liberal, too unprincipled, too un-Catholic and too multicultural. It is a natural pool of voters for a party to the right of the CDU.”

Although opposed to the AdF, reporters at Der Spiegel are realists able to assess a situation well, even if they despise the result:

“Currently, Chancellor Angela Merkel is governing in a coalition together with the Social Democrats, Germany’s large, center-left party. That means that those who disapprove of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s handling of the refugee crisis (many people) don’t have many choices when it comes to casting a protest vote, particularly given that the Greens are reliably pro-refugee.”

Of course, this means that the AdF is the projected beneficiary. Whether or not the AdF will attain power in the fall remains to be seen; it is more of a long-shot than the National Front in France. But if Le Pen’s National Font pulls out the victory in the spring of next year and Chancellor Merkel’s CDU fails to fix the immigrant problem and address the surge in favor of protecting Germany’s cultural patrimony, AdF might be the beneficiary in more than one way in the fall.

THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS THE WORLD’S largest religion present in nearly every country of the world, despite what statistical yearbooks say about Islam having more adherents.  Those year books often fail to divide Sunni, Shiite and Sufi Muslims, but count them as one body. If Roman Catholics were united with Greek Orthodox and Protestants, the number of Christians would exceed the number of Muslims.  When this is done, there are 2.1 billion Christians and 1.3 billion adherents of Islam.

To make an even more detailed and proper comparison, the largest Christian denomination, Roman Catholicism, should be compared to the largest largest Islamic denomination, Sunnism. When that is done, as it should be if there is to be actually objective data, the Roman Catholic Church is the largest:.  According to the PEW Research Center:

“Of the total Muslim population, 10-13% are Shia Muslims and 87-90% are Sunni Muslims.”

Thus, at a maximum there are 1.13 – 1.17 billion Sunnis Muslims in the world.  According to Religion Facts, there are less than 1.13 billion Sunnis:

“With 940 million adherents out of about 1.1 billion Muslims,  Sunni Islam is the largest Islamic sect. (Shia Muslims make up about 10% of all Muslims worldwide.)

The  “Annuario Pontificio 2016,” released by the Vatican Statistics Office announced that:

“The number of baptized Catholics reached 1.27 billion or 17.8 percent of the global population.” (National Catholic Reporter).

According to the BBC, there are less than 1.27 billion Catholics: “There are an estimated 1.2 billion Roman Catholics in the world.”

Either way, with approximately 1.2 – 1.27 billion Roman Catholics, the Roman Catholic Church is the largest in the world as Jesus said  that it would be:

“To what shall we liken the kingdom of God? or to what parable shall we compare it? It is as a grain of mustard seed: which when it is sown in the earth, is less than all the seeds that are in the earth: And when it is sown, it groweth up, and becometh greater than all herbs, and shooteth out great branches, so that the birds of the air may dwell under the shadow thereof” (Mark 4: 30-32).

With a body this large, it is nearly impossible to keep an eye on everything that is occurring day to day throughout the world. However, there has been an unusually large amount of news coming out of Latin America lately.  The election of Pope Francis as supreme pontiff of the Roman Catholic Church ranks toward the top of the list. The Holy Spirit blows where He wills shaping the global climate from age to age.

vis a visApparatchik Politburo . bending  and acquiescing wherever he could while standing firm in those few doctrinal areas where he must until such time as the Church could weather the storm and be in a better position to advance the Gospel and build the Kingdom of God?

Pope Francis is also called at a particular time and from a particular place to give emphasis to a particular manifestation of the Holy Spirit in the third millennium. The pope sees himself as an Argentine:

“For me, the people of Argentina are my people, you are important.” “I continue to be an Argentine, and I still travel with an Argentine passport. I am convinced that the people are the biggest treasure of our homeland…a people who know solidarity, know how to walk with one another, know how to help, respect,” and don’t take a step back. “I respect, love and carry (those people) in my heart.” (Catholic News Service).

SO WHY HAS THE HOLY SPIRIT CALLED A POPE OUT OF ARGENTINA?

First, there has been an approved apparition of Our Lady there, Our Lady of the Rosary of San Nicolas. On Holy Trinity Sunday, May 22, 2016, The local bishop, Hector Cardelli, approved a series of apparitions that began with the rediscovery of a lost statue of the Virgin Mary and glowing rosaries. The bishop has proclaimed that the apparitions are of supernatural origin and worthy of belief. Read his announcement in English and Spanish.

According to Bishop Cardelli”

“In my twelfth year of pastoring San Nicolas and, having followed with faith and responsibility the Marian events that I have known about since the very beginning, I have reached the decision to recognize them for my diocese.”

“I recognize the supernatural nature of the happy events with which God through his beloved daughter, Jesus through his Most Holy Mother, the Holy Spirit through his beloved spouse, has desired to lovingly manifest himself in our diocese.”

“On the occasion of the Jubilee of Mercy of the pilgrims from the Diocese, I announce this valid decision for the flock which I guide and accompany with it the presentation of a book entitled “SPIRITUAL SCHOOL OF SANTA MARIA DEL ROSARIO DE SAN NICOLAS” highlighting the most important teachings in the messages she gives us for our commitment to everything he tells us because he is the culmination of revelation.

Bishop Cardelli  spoke about the apparitions with Pope Francis when the Argentine pontiff was the archbishop of Buenos Aires, and the future pope approved of his confirming them.

The apparitions began in Buenos Aires after rosaries began to glow in homes throughout San Nicolas de los Arroyos.

On September 25, 1983 The Virgin Mary carrying the infant Jesus and wearing a blue gown and veil appeared (but did not speak a word) to a simple elementary 4th grade educated housewife and mother of two named Gladys Quiroga de Motta, now 80 years of age.

The Holy Mother spoke for the first time on Oct. 13, anniversary of the last Fatima apparition. “Do not be afraid,” She said. She gave Gladys a Bible reference: Ezekiel 2:4-10.

On October 25, the Virgin Mary appeared to Gladys while she was praying in the Cathedral in a town named Rosario. The Blessed Mother handed her a white rosary while saying:

“Receive this Rosary from my hands and keep it forever and ever. You are obedient; I am happy because of it. Rejoice, for God is with you.”

The Virgin Mary asked Gladys to search the church for a forgotten statue that had been blessed by Pope Leo XII.  On November 27, 1983, Gladys found the statue of the Virgin Mary holding the child Jesus in the belfry of the cathedral where it had been placed after being damaged in 1894. Gladys recognized the statue because it resembled the Virgin Mary in the apparitions. Behind the picture were a stained glass window with the Holy Trinity and angels.

On Palm Sunday, 1989, Bishop Castagna relocated the statue from the cathedral to the new Sanctuary of Mary of the Rosary of San Nicolás, which She had requested to be built.

Sanctuary of Our Lady of the Rosary of San Nicholas  – Province of Buenos Aires, Argentina

Gladys has reportedly received stigmata on her wrists, feet, side and shoulder. The many messages she received from Jesus and Mary include topics of penance, peace, return to the sacraments and love of God

Our Lady said,

“Many hearts do not accept my invitation to prayer and to conversion. That is why the work of the devil is growing and expanding.”

“It is up to you to set your eyes and your heart on God.”

“I want to cure my children from this illness which is materialism; an illness which makes many suffer. I want to help them discover Christ, and I want to make it known to them that Christ prevails over everything.”

Jesus told Gladys:

 “If this generation will not listen to my mother, it will perish. I ask everyone to listen to her. Man’s conversion is necessary.”

“Today I warn the world, for the world is not aware: souls are in danger….My mother must be accepted. My mother must be heard in the totality of her messages. The world must discover the richness she brings to Christians.”

“ I want a renewal of the spirit, a detachment from death, and an attachment to life. I have chosen the heart of my mother, so that what I ask will be achieved. Souls will come to me through the means of her Immaculate Heart.”

Other important messages include:

• “The demon acts ferociously, do not be astonished. He attacks without compassion surrounding everything what he can touch. Pray my children, prayer fortifies. You are called by Jesus Christ to pray. The prince of evil spills today his poison with all the forces, because he sees that he is concluding his sad reign. He has little left, his end is near.”
• “In these times in which the poison of the evil one seems to contaminate everything, the Lord becomes evident for the salvation of souls.”
• The enemy is defying me very ruthlessly, is openly tempting my children. It is a fight between the light and the darkness. It is a constant persecution to my dear Church.
• “It is in fact this time, a precious time that does not have to be wasted but to be taken advantage of. The Redeemer is offering to the world the way to face the death that is Satan; is offering as He did from the Cross, His Mother, mediator of all grace.”
• “The soul must unite itself to Christ each day, and for that, there is nothing better than Holy Communion: the Food of the soul for life.”

Gladys received many of these apparitions in the Cathedral at Rosario, which is the object of hatred captured in an article entitled “Feminist Protestors Assault Catholic Cathedral in Argentina”  portrayed in the following video:

 

In times such as these when liberalism is experiencing its last hurrah and spewing its fury at the Church, Jesus refers all Christians to His Mother whom He refers to as “my Ark.” He said:

“In the past, the world was saved by the Ark of Noah. Today my mother is the Ark. It is through her, that souls will be saved, because she will lead them to me. He who rejects my mother, rejects me.”

Mary spoke several times about a coming victory, it will not come without a spiritual struggle, but “Jesus Christ will win the great battle, my child…”  Blessed are those who make reparation for the grave offences which my Son receives.

Finally, Jesus said: “My Heart wishes the salvation of all souls and loves them, even those who are in sin.”

Although it is easy to get angry and demand justice for such gross violations and sacrileges, the message here is not anger and hatred but, as at Fatima, REPARATION and, as with Divine Mercy, LOVE and COMPASSION, which is the message of Pope Francis. Those men (and women) being spit upon are praying the rosary, and since it is at the cathedral where Our Lady appeared as Our Lady of the Rosary, they are presumably making reparation for those spitting upon them.  Reparation means to make up by your own good deeds for the evils committed by others, especially those committed against God such as the blasphemies, outrages, and sacrileges committed by these radical feminists lost in hatred and shouting slogans such as:

“Take your rosaries out of our ovaries,” “O let’s swear to burn down the Church”, and “Church, trash, you’re the dictatorship.”

CRUX also reports that:

“Several dozen of the Oct. 7-10 workshop participants had gathered in front of the Cathedral of Our Lady of the Rosary and staged a parody, which included topless women dancing around a man dressed as Pope Francis while they sang for the legalization of abortion.”

On the contrary,

“In Argentina, life is constitutionally protected from “its conception until natural death.” Argentine President  Mauricio Macri, as his predecessors before him, has said on several opportunities that he doesn’t plan on legalizing abortion, even praying for the protection of life when closing the XI National Eucharistic Congress earlier in the year.”

Argentina’s Constitution does not allow for abortion; it was strengthened in 1994 by a series of international agreements such as the Pact of San José that declares a right to life, “from the moment of conception.” In 1995, Argentine President Carlos Menem marked the Annunciation, March 25, as the “Day of the Unborn Child.” Under Menem, Argentina announced its complete rejection of abortion and contraception and declared that the defense  of life was a “priority of Argentina’s foreign policy.”

With the election of Nestor Kirchner in 2003, relations between Church and state were somewhat strained as Kirchner’s administration clashed with the Church over abortion, sex education, and contraception.  In 2007, Kirchner was succeeded by his wife Cristina who, like her husband, supported a host of left-wing moral issues including same-sex marriage, which was legalized in 2010 leading to massive protests spearheaded by Catholic and Protestant evangelical groups.  At that time Pope Francis was the Archbishop of Buenos Aires. In this position, he called on legislators to opposes the bill referring to it as  “a move by the father of lies to confuse and deceive the children of God“ (sound like a liberal pope to you?).

The Archbishop also came out against same sex marriage.:

“According to an article in…L’Osservatore Romano, Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio, the Archbishop of Buenos Aires and Primate of Argentina, has said that if a proposed bill giving same-sex couples the opportunity to marry and adopt children should be approved, it will ‘seriously damage the family.’”

At stake, he stated is

“… the identity and survival of the family: father, mother and children. At stake are the lives of many children who will be discriminated against in advance, and deprived of their human development given by a father and a mother and willed by God. At stake is the total rejection of God’s law engraved in our hearts.”

To fight the bill, he called on the nation’s Carmelites for “their prayers and sacrifice, the two invincible weapons of Santa Teresa.” (Does it get more conservative than this?)

In spite of the Kirchner battles, ties between the Catholic Church and Argentine state have remained quite strong.

lo

SO WHY ARGENTINA

In addition to a highly relevant apparition of Our Lady for our time, another reason Argentina is a place to watch is its confrontation with neo-liberalism. Will Argentina be for Latin America what Poland was for Eastern Europe? That is, can Argentina be the vanguard against the many headed behemoth of liberalism controlled by Washington neo-cons and neo-liberals that Poland was against the behemoth of Muscovite Communism, and will Pope Francis and the Virgin Mary have some unique role to play as did the Virgin Mary and Pope John Paul II, until such time as the Church can weather the storm and be in a better position to advance the Gospel and build the Kingdom of God.

jk
ARGENTINA SINCE 2010

Today Argentina is experiencing a populist resurgence that is eroding liberal democratic institutions in search of a new way toward the future. Scenes as those in the above video,  serve only to reinforce national Catholic values and increase disdain for liberalism much as the so-called Trump-Effect is having in America. In Argentina, as elsewhere in Latin America, Argentines are

“…defining a chosen “enemy of the people” (businessmen, foreign and domestic – but especially foreign; the pantomime-devils of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank.”

Argentina also has a new president, Mauricio Macri, leader of the coalition “Let’s Change”.  Macri  was elected in November 2015. Although identified as a pro-market conservative, the political ramifications of this brand of conservatism

“…escapes the analytical simplifications suggesting a straightforward ‘conservative restoration,’ or a return to the ‘old’ 1990s’ neoliberalism. There is, no doubt, the birth of a new 21st Century’s Right-wing politics in Argentina, as well as in Latin America more generally, electorally competitive and which the nature of Right-wing politics is yet unfolding” (International Policy Digest).

In short, Argentina is experiencing a climate of change away from neo-liberalsim and intent on retaining its Catholic patrimony. (92% of Argintines are Catholic; Argentina has seven Catholic universities and hundreds of elementary and secondary schools funded by the government.

” In Argentina, the connections between the Catholic and the political, the political and the Catholic, pervade, broaden and filter into many different spaces, worlds and spheres.”

Thus, in September 2010, “thousands of (liberal) Argentines marched in Buenos Aires to protest the perceived corporate structure of the state and its corrupt ties with business interests, the military, and the Catholic Church. The march’s organizer, university professor and political activist Luis D’Elía, proclaimed it “a disgrace that Catholic schools received state subsidies.”

Note: “Historically, the Argentine church has positioned itself as a non-partisan political advocate, clashing with the government over education, marriage and sexual issues. Tension between church and state reached a high point during the government of Juan Perón, who intervened in religious schools and tried to legalise divorce and prostitution. Many of Perón’s supporters suspected the church’s hand in the 1955 coup that toppled him, which was carried out mostly by staunchly Catholic military officers” (The Economist).

Argentina, is now undergoing a bout with neo-conservatism and neo-liberalism (the World Bank and IMF) that might spearhead change throughout Latin America. Will Argentinians play a role vis a vis liberalism that Poles played vis a vis Communism or will they contribute to the Church in some other way being revealed in the pontificate of Pope Francis?

THE ISSUE OF THE APOSTOLIC EXHORTATION, Amoris Laetitia is still in the air.  However, this morning it took a sharp turn towards closure; it did so for two reasons. One, Pope Francis punctuated his push for pastoral theology both clarifying his intent and strengthening its dynamism by tying it to the issue of “authority”, authentic Christ-like authority. The linking of pastoral theology to authority by the pope was complimented by Cardinal Mueller, the Prefect for the Sacred Congregation of Faith, who also spoke out clearly, two days earlier, on the doctrinal message and pastoral dimensions of the document, Amoris Laetitia.

AA

PASTORAL THEOLOGY AND CHRIST-LIME AUTHORITY

This morning January 10, 2017 Pope Francis gave a homily on authority during morning Mass at Casa Santa Martain in which he stated

“Authority, if true, will enter hearts, like Jesus’ did. But if it’s just formal, it won’t ….”

THE PASTORAL DIMENSION OF AMORIS LAETITIA

To grasp Amoris Laetitia, it must be interpreted in this light, in the light of pastoral theology deeply rooted in the wisdom and truths of the faith, in the constant teaching of the Church, as Francis points out twice in paragraph 300 of Amoris Laetitia“

“Priests have the duty to “accompany [the divorced and remarried] in helping them to understand their situation according to the teaching of the Church”

“This discernment can never prescind from the Gospel demands of truth and charity, as proposed by the Church.”

Clearly, the issue at hand is a pastoral one, viz., how to uphold the teachings of the Church in the modern world, a world void of a sense of the sacred, a world in which divorce and remarriage are common place, a world in which the sons and daughters of the Church have been inculturated without their awareness of its effects. Since the whole process is about salvation and pastoral accompaniment during an Hour of Mercy, pastors are being nudged into being more pastorally minded. This is clear to the Archbishop of Dublin, to the Prefect for the Sacred Congregation of the Faith, and to many other cardinals and bishops who stand with the pope in opposition to Cardinal Burke and the misinformed lay men who have lined up to bat for him against the pope.

“Now I beseech you, brethren, to mark them who make dissensions and offences contrary to the doctrine which you have learned, and avoid them. For they that are such, serve not Christ our Lord, but their own belly; and by pleasing speeches and good words, seduce the hearts of the innocent. For your obedience is published in every place. I rejoice therefore in you” (Romans 16:17-19).

Men causing dissension are all misreading the document, which is clear enough to many others, and to the New Era staff. Thus, according to Cardinal Mueller:

“It is a misreading” of the Pope’s exhortation to say it has been the cause of polemics.”

 

“The Church has no power to change the Divine Law”…not even a pope or council can do that.”

Some, like those at Church Militant and The World Over, like to point out that there is confusion and therefore implicitly (in Arroyo’s case – explicitly) take the side of Cardinal Burke.  It must be admitted: Yes, there is confusion, but that does not mean that Cardinal Burke is correct in his assessment of Amoris Laetitia and that the pope must answer in some way to him.

There is confusion because men like Mr. Arroyo, and ultra-traditionalist or liberal bishops are manufacturing confusion. In a response to New Era’s third article on the issue (Attack on Pope Francis: Supposed Loyal Catholics Distort Information Defame Pope), Dr. Marzak pointed out that there is always confusion where there is disobedience and pride, when people pursue their own path rather than submit to legitimate magisterial authority in humble obedience. He pointed out that it is liberal bishops and schismatic seda vacantists who are causing the confusion; they are often supplemented by well meaning but over-zealous laymen who misunderstand pastoral theology and the relationship between the practical and speculative intellect as examined in Article One. In response to a comment pertaining to Article Three in the series on Amoris Laetitia, Dr. Marzak stated.

“Watch what will happen this year when Cardinal Mueller begins to deal with them (those liberal and ultra-conservative bishops causing confusion). Now that the Church is fully aware of their aberrant polices the CDF (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) will act – let’s watch and see.

 

“It is just not liberals causing confusion, how do you account for pious sedivacantists who ordain their own bishops contrary to what the Church teaches; they are causing confusion too (and most of it).”

 

“Nonetheless, it is not confusion that is the issue, it is pride leading to willful disobedience which the self-righteous perpetrators then try to mask in confusion to cover their errancy by instead attacking the papacy as if they were some type of holy body constituted to lead the church instead of the See of Peter.”

In this regard, Cardinal Mueller has spoken out, and spoken out clearly. In a January 8, interview with tgcom24, Cardinal Mueller objected to Cardinal Burke and those “Princes of the Church” who publicly challenged the pope by questioning the doctrinal accuracy of Amoris Laetitia. According to Cardinal Mueller, the Church’s highest ranking doctrinal official, the prefect for the Sacred Congregation of the Faith, according to Cardinal Mueller: Amoris Laetitia is “very clear”. This has been New Era’s position form the beginning of the controversy, so much so that the staff here has been in a continual quandary over Cardinal Burke and Raymond Arroyo’s failure to “get it” speculating that the problem might be either a clerical error having to do with authority or a failure to appreciate the fine differences between the intellectual work of pastoral theology vis a vis dogmatic theology. Now that Cardinal Mueller has vociferously supported the clarity of the document, the staff here is relieved.

Highlighting the pastoral dimension of Amoris Laetitia, Cardinal Mueller stressed that it is Pope Francis’ desire that priests take time

 “…to discern the situation of … persons living in an irregular union — that is, not in accordance with the doctrine of the church on marriage — and asks for help for these people to find a path for a new integration into the church according to the condition of the sacraments (and) the Christian message on matrimony.”

Cardinal Mueller clearly understands the difference between pastoral and dogmatic theology and how they intersect; consequently he sees clarity in the document:

“In the papal document, he said, “I do not see any opposition: On one side we have the clear doctrine on matrimony (dogmatic), and on the other the obligation of the church to care for these people in difficulty (pastoral).”

Cardinal Mueller evidently understands Amoris Laetitia is a “call for the pastoral accompaniment of people who are divorced and civilly remarried or who are living together without marriage.

Concerning the doctrinal clarity of the document, Mueller told the Italian television network:

 “A possible fraternal correction of the pope seems very remote at this time because it does not concern a danger for the faith.”

 

“Amoris Laetitia is very clear in its doctrine and we can interpret (in it) Jesus’ entire doctrine on marriage, the entire doctrine of the Church in 2000 years of history.”

We hope this is clear enough.  According to the highest ranking doctrinal official in the Catholic Church; AMORIS LAETITIA DOES NOT CONCERN A DANGER FOR THE FAITH.”

Further, in response to a query which asked are the divorced-and-remarried in some cases permitted to receive the Eucharist “without the need to change their way of life” Cardinal Mueller responded:

“If Pope Francis’ exhortation “had wanted to eliminate such a deeply rooted and significant discipline, it would have said so clearly and presented supporting reasons,”

Cardinal Mueller is not confused, nor are score of other bishops, nor is the staff at New Era. As Dr. Marzak has previously pointed out, the confusion is being caused, on the one hand, by disobedient liberal bishops such as the one in San Diego and, on the other hand, by far right leaning bishops and churchman nearing schism or already in schism. Confusion emanating from diverse poles of the theological spectra helps generate more confusion among the larger body of sheep and lambs. The confusion is not coming from either Pope Francis or Amoris Laetitia; the confusion is rooted in clericalism, intellectual arrogance, liberal moral weakness (concupiscence and irascibility) that blinds and, above all else, it is rooted in disobedience and pride.

No where does the document Amoris Laetitia admit people living in mortal sin to receive the sacraments.  What the Pastoral Exhortation does encourage, as Cardinal Mueller correctly points out is:

“A process of (pastoral) discernment, (that), might eventually lead to a determination that access to the sacraments is possible.”

If its detractors better understood and appreciated the pastoral dimensions of theology and the extreme difficulties, sacrifice and self-giving  pastoral theology demands; if they understood what Francis means by “authentic authority”, they might “get it”.  Some seem more intent on running the Church like a police state, a state in which they can comfortably sit back and play the judge as if God were some type of task master watching closely every day to espy and root out all errors rather than a God of LOVE who humbles Himself, who abases Himself to become little like his flock in order to tenderly serve, love and nurture them by knowing their names and sharing their lives, their pains, joys, sorrows and tribulations and by confirming His life to the doctrine of His Cross (coherence).

It is too easy to play the judge; it costs nothing but an easy arm-chair accompanied by good cuisine and an ever watchful eye always ready to catch a sinner and even a pope in error. In this they feel self-satisfied and accomplished. This might be dogmatic theology, but without love and authentic authority it fails even at that and it is certainly not pastoral theology, the theology of the Good Shepherd” who lays down his life for his sheep. This is the type of shepherd Francis is endeavoring to be, the type of shepherds he is calling the priests of the Catholic Church to become.

 

 

 

 

ON FRIDAY JANUARY, 6 THE OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE (ODNI) released their highly vaunted cyber report: “Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections based on data gathered by the CIA, NSA, and FBI. The Report was billed as conclusive evidence that Russian backed operatives hacked DNC computers and disrupted the political process in America. Finally, the New Era staff thought, a substantial report buttressed by ample evidence to support the pervasive allegation of a Russian cyber attack.

Result: Expecting a stuffed butterflied filet, the collective palate was fed an unsatisfying cuisine of saltine crackers. The Report, based on unsubstantiated common sense hunches, suffers from a dearth of substantial evidence.  It is so unconvincing that it constitutes another egregious embarrassment to the United States and the US Intelligence Community.

Earlier, (three weeks prior to the release of the January, 6 Report)  New Age Intelligence Projected that:

“The allegations, even if they are true, and for sake of a strong case, let’s presume they are true, will falter for at least three reasons.”

1. “The CIA and American Intelligence Communities report that America’s cyber security was hacked is devastating…. It means that the Russians beat us and are beating us at cyber security; it means that the nation is not safe under President Obama.”
   ll
2. “It further manifests to honest Americans the extent to which Democrats prefer lies to truth.  They prefer that Clinton gets elected to Americans being told the truth. They are upset because the truth about Hilary could not remain hidden, that Americans actually learned the truth about her…. It is a lamentable day when Americans have to learn the truth from the Russians because their own politicians lie to them.
   .l
3. “Finally, the third reason that trying to implicate the Russians will fail is the hypocrisy of it all. By this point, most people are aware that it is common US foreign policy to interfere in the elections of other countries. For the Democrats to raise a tremor about presumed Russian interference indicates the height of arrogance and their blind hypocrisy.  “

In Short, according to Peter Kornbluh Director of the National Security Archive,

“The United States is only getting a taste of its own medicine.” The United States is guilty of a “long pattern of …manipulation, bribery and covert operations to influence the political trajectory of countless countries around the world.”

This is hypocrisy. Hypocrites cannot lead a nation. Hypocrisy disqualifies persons from leadership because hypocrites are “blind guides.

“Woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; because you go round about the sea and the land to make one proselyte; and when he is made, you make him the child of hell twofold more than yourselves. Woe to you blind guides”  (Matthew 23:15).

If what neo-con and neo-liberal globalists are saying about the Russians is true, they have left America unsafe, have been defeated in cyber wars, and have compromised American security; they prefer lies to truth prefer that Americans believe lies and are upset when the truth is revealed, upset not because they lied but because they were caught and being stripped of power. Above all, they are acting like hypocrites, whom Jesus refers to as “blind guides”, a blindness that disqualifies them from leadership.

With the release of the highly advertised intelligence report, the Neocons and Neoliberals have moved from hypocrisy to embarrassment; their situation just keeps getting worse, one distorted and finely concocted report after another.  Expectations were high for a quality report; what has come forth is an embarrassment.

hg

WHAT DOES THE REPORT  SAY?

The “Intelligence Report”, released by the ODNI, was ordered by President Obama.  Prior to its release it was billed as a “declassified” version of its “top secret” counterpart, a counterpart that is supposed to prove that the Russians conspired to support Trump in the recent presidential election. New Era doubts that the “top secret” version (the one being conveniently withheld from public scrutiny) is robust; its robustness is doubted because the declassified version is little more than flim-flam dressed up in professional garb to impress specious observers.

Without providing any evidence to the public, the public is expected to believe that the Russian operatives, under direct orders from President Vladimir Putin, hacked DNC computers, lifted private and defaming information, and then filtered it to Wiki Leaks who then purportedly transformed the hacked data into public news to “denigrate” Hilary Clinton and propel Donald Trump into the White House.

fgb

MOTIVE

According to the Report:

“We (The Intelligence Community) assess with high confidence that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election, the consistent goals of which were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely to win the election, the Russian influence campaign then focused on undermining her expected presidency.”

 

“We also assess Putin and the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump’s election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has moderate confidence.”

 

“In trying to influence the US election, we assess the Kremlin sought to advance its longstanding desire to undermine the US-led liberal democratic order, the promotion of which Putin and other senior Russian leaders view as a threat to Russia and Putin’s regime.”

 

“Putin publicly pointed to the Panama Papers disclosure and the Olympic doping scandal as US-directed efforts to defame Russia, suggesting he sought to use disclosures to discredit the image of the United States and cast it as hypocritical.”

 

“Putin most likely wanted to discredit Secretary Clinton because he has publicly blamed her since 2011 for inciting mass protests against his regime in late 2011 and early 2012, and because he holds a grudge for comments he almost certainly saw as disparaging him.”

No one needed the collaborative efforts of virtually an entire intelligence community to tell them that the Russians prefer Trump to Clinton (Point One). Nor is it a crime for anyone any where in the world to prefer one candidate over another. The fact that Russian news agencies were used to discredit Clinton is basically meaningless (Point Two).  Any press agency operating in the United States has the first amendment freedom to speak its mind. Certainly, a foreign press publishing material on the internet is protected by the same freedom and even more so; they operate under their own laws.

Nor should it come as any surprise that Russia is opposed to the liberal global agenda (Point Three) and favors Trump who has indicated some aversion toward liberal global hegemony.

Point Four must be a jest – it is a mere inference from an unrelated incident suggesting a tit for tat approach to intelligence gathering and projection. Finally, Point Five is another mere probable scenario. Putin “most likely” wanted to discredit Secretary Clinton. Of course he did – the two do not get along – so what?  Not to be outdone by the tit for tat approach, the Intelligence Community now use grudges as supposed evidence.  Grudges and tit for tat arguments suggest that there is no conclusive evidence and that any evidence that does exist is inconclusive or irrelevant unless made to look relevant because it is basically all that exists as seems to be the case illustrated below.

But before racing to this conclusion. The Report does provide motive, which is necessary for a crime. The question becomes: what type of evidence exists to support a plausible but hypothetical motive?

DSAD

EVIDENCE

According to the ODNI Report, the Russian General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU) chose Wiki Leaks as the outlet for hacked DNC data.

“We assess with high confidence that the GRU relayed material it acquired from the DNC and senior Democratic officials to WikiLeaks….Moscow most likely chose WikiLeaks because of its self proclaimed reputation for authenticity.”

It takes more than a presumption to know this. How does anyone know, without evidence, that Russia hacked the data and filtered it through WikiLeaks? The reader is expected to accept this verbiage because the ONDI verbally assures them that such a statement is made, with “high confidence”.  Then, with the same bravado, they announce that Moscow “most likely” chose Wiki Leaks.  Most likely is only a probability scenario – no evidence has been presented to support the claim that Russia hacked the DNC and passed the data to Wiki Leaks.  If there was evidence, the report would not have to preface the assessment with a “most likely” statement. No one with an objective mind is in the business of accepting allegations because someone else carries a title and presents a professionally looking report based on “most likely”  and probability suggestions inferred from unrelated actions. Objective observers require evidence, not mere probability statements. If Russia is behind the hacking, what is the proof to support the allegation.  New Era was under the impression that such proof would be abundantly supplied in the Report, instead we were fed with probability statements about the Russian government, statements that were and are exacerbated by contrary statements  that are verified by solid evidence, made by Wiki Leaks Director Julian Assange, who asserts that: “Our (Wiki Leak’s) source is not the Russian government.”

https://youtu.be/bP3wPbbFQ6k

“Our Source is not the Russian Government” (39 second mark).

According to Vox Press

“Whether or not that interpretation is right, it’s quite clear from the report that US intelligence believes the Russian military intelligence service is WikiLeaks’ source. This was always the most likely scenario, and now we’ve got the ODNI report to back it up.”

Russian military intelligence might be a hypothetical “most likely scenario”, but their is no demonstrated evidence to back the assertion.  Moreover, the director of WikiLeaks denies any connection with the Russians. Thus, Vox’s conclusion that, “now we’ve got the ODNI report to back it up”, is fallacious and bogus – as weak as the Report itself.

Thus, according to Whistleblower William Binney, a cryptanalyst-mathematician and former National Security Agency official:

“The various ways in which usually anonymous spokespeople for U.S. intelligence agencies are equivocating – saying things like “our best guess” or “our opinion” or “our estimate” etc. – shows that the emails alleged to have been “hacked” cannot be traced across the network. Given NSA’s extensive trace capability, we conclude that DNC and HRC servers alleged to have been hacked were, in fact, not hacked.The evidence that should be there is absent; otherwise, it would surely be brought forward, since this could be done without any danger to sources and methods. Thus, we conclude that the emails were leaked by an insider – as was the case with Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning. Such an insider could be anyone in a government department or agency with access to NSA databases, or perhaps someone within the DNC.

 

“In order to get to the servers, they [hackers] would have to come across the network and go into the servers, penetrate them, and then extract data out of the servers and bring it back across the network,” Binney explained. “If it were the Russians, it would then go to Russia, and it would have to go from there across the network again to get to WikiLeaks.

 

“My point is really pretty simple. There should be no guessing here at all, they should be able to show the trace routes of all the packets, or some of them anyways, going to the Russians and then from the Russians to WikiLeaks,”

FDFF

SO WHAT DOES THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY PROVIDE AS EVIDENCE?

The only hard core evidence that the Intelligence Community has, has nothing to do with hacking, but rather, it has to do with “trolls” and foreign publications, in this case “Russia Today” (RT) and “Sputnik“.

“Moscow’s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that blends covert intelligence operations—such as cyber activity—with overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media (RT and Sputnik), third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or “trolls.”

The ODNI Report’s strongest evidence has to do with RT and thus the Report gives major emphasis to this Russian press agency. For example, according to the ODNI, RT is a propaganda arm of the Kremlin that leads the world in You Tube viewers:

SOURCE: Vox News

If this is true, it means that the Russians are winning the media war with the Americans under Obama and Clinton. It is also a tacit admission that other governments besides Russia are engaged in alternative media operations, governments such as the UK and Qatar as indicated in the above graphic. The BBC, Al Jazeera (Qatar-US ally) and CNN may engage in propaganda, and along with Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty seek to subvert foreign governments, but no one else can.  The Russians can engage in alternative news all they want – it is up to the viewer to decide. It is the fault of the American government and the American mainstream press corp (not of the Russians) that people are loosing, and in many cases, have lost, confidence in their veracity. Apparently, many American viewers are beginning to think that it is the liberal American Press that is engaged in subversion and “fake news”.  As a direct result, many Americans are looking for an alternative news source. RT just happens to fill the bill;  they are challenging what they refer to as the American “surveillance state'”, “civil liberty abuse”s, “drone use”, as well as the US economic system, American Greed, and the overwhelming debt accumulated by all levels of government.  It is apparently a sin for a foreign government or media outlet to question the faux pas of the American Government.  Thus, according to the Report:

“RT’s criticism of the US election was the latest facet of its broader and longer-standing anti-US messaging likely aimed at undermining viewers’ trust in US democratic procedures and undercutting US criticism of Russia’s political system. RT Editor in Chief Margarita Simonyan recently declared that the United States itself lacks democracy and that it has “no moral right to teach the rest of the world” (Kommersant, 6 November).

 

“RT’s reports often characterize the United States as a “surveillance state” and allege widespread infringements of civil liberties, police brutality, and drone use” (RT, 24, 28 October, 1-10 November).

 

“RT has also focused on criticism of the US economic system, US currency policy, alleged Wall Street greed, and the US national debt. Some of RT’s hosts have compared the United States to Imperial Rome and have predicted that government corruption and “corporate greed” will lead to US financial collapse” (RT, 31 October, 4 November).

These allegations prove nothing more than a foreign news agency is reporting on America; if the news is unflattering, perhaps many Americans are involved in unflattering business, perhaps the government is involved in unflattering foreign engagements. That  is not RT’s fault.  If RT is making the “stuff” up, it is doing nothing different than any other government engaged in psy-ops and information wars.

However, the issue of Hilary Clinton’s poorly protected private server is another question.  For some reason, the Secretary of State imprudently decided to take her sensitive information from behind a presumed government secure wall to be placed on her own server. John Podesta, a high ranking officer in her organization, was daft enough to give out his password to a phishing request. His password was the word “password”; even Huma Abedin, Clinton’s right-hand lady had access to Clinton’s emails. Clinton’s cavalier treatment of American security data is the real crime, along with any other indictable information that surfaces as a result of her carelessness.  Clinton was so careless that, according to Assange, “a fourteen year old could have hacked into her server.”  The Russians did not have to hack Hilary’s server, she was giving the information away.

According to the Daily Wire

“The ongoing attempt to blame Russia for the leaked DNC emails has also clearly irritated Assange, who blasted the campaign for it on NBC News. “In order to divert attention from proof that we (WikiLeaks) published that the (Bernie) Sanders campaign was subverted within the DNC,” he (Assange) said, “the Clinton campaign tries to take attention away from a very serious domestic allegation  about election interference (that Hillary interfered in the election process herself!) and try and bring in foreign policy (The Russians did it).”

Similarly, in her January 2013 testimony before Congress for the Benghazi debacle, Clinton, under oath, denied having knowledge of weapons procured for Syrian rebels. Assange, however, claims that Wiki Leaks possesses a series of emails proving Clinton not only knew about weapons supplied to rebel forces operating in Syria, but that she in fact “pushed” for weapons to be supplied to “jihadists within Syria, including ISIS.”  In an interview conducted by Democracy Now Assange stated:

“Those Hillary Clinton emails, they connect together with the cables that we have published of Hillary Clinton, creating a rich picture of how Hillary Clinton performs in office, but, more broadly, how the U.S. Department of State operates. So, for example, the disastrous, absolutely disastrous intervention in Libya, the destruction of the Gaddafi government, which led to the occupation of ISIS of large segments of that country, weapons flows going over to Syria, being pushed by Hillary Clinton, into jihadists within Syria, including ISIS, that’s there in those emails. There’s more than 1,700 emails in Hillary Clinton’s collection, that we have released, just about Libya alone.”

Assange told ITV  that the information his group had obtained on Clinton could “proceed to an indictment.” Because Wiki Leaks has become such a problem for the mainstream media and American Foreign Policy, it appears that the liberal propaganda machine is now learning from the Russians and reeving up its propaganda campaign under the guise of its own version of “alternative news.”  Operating under the name of “Political Insider“, the globalists posing as right wing conservatives are attempting to undo Assange and the authentic alt-right news services that are benefiting from Wiki Leaks. For example, the people at Political Insider refer to the people at Democracy Now quoted above as “far left morons.” and to ISIS as “terrorist scumbags“

According to Political Insider, “Julian Assange of Wikileaks says that they will be soon dropping a bombshell that will absolutely devastate Hillary Clinton, and it has to do with her aiding the terrorist scumbags of ISIS!!!”  So of course, according to the “Insider“

“There’s a lot of reason to believe that Wikileaks is just a Russian espionage operation, which raises even greater concerns about the integrity of our elections.”

Ironically, the mainstream media is not questioning the veracity of the Wiki Leaks.  According to Sean Hannity:

“For ten years Wiki leaks has never been proven wrong. Not one single time”  (9:37 in above video).

No, the globalists and their mainstream outlets are concerned that people are finally getting the truth. Thus, the so-called ODNI Intelligence Report on alleged Russian cyber-hacking might impress the President who ordered it and the sundry players on the global squad, including media and press agents, bureaucrats and high level adepts, but the people are waking up to the chicanery. With reports such as this one, it is the intelligence agencies that are in danger of being exposed as manipulators and deceivers.

The US Intelligence Community claims to have evidence that Russian operatives hacked Clinton’s emails but insist that they cannot disclose the information. Who, under current circumstances, trusts such a claim – believe us because we say you should. You know we prevaricate – Hilary’s undisputed e-mails prove this – but trust us anyway.

The only substantial evidence put forward in the Report is the evidence that Sputnik and RT are pro-Russian news media. It is not surprising or appalling that news media operating out of Russia might be loyal to their mother country.  What does one expect from the BBC – does the BBC vilify the Queen? Nor is it surprising that Sputnik criticizes materialism, hedonism and sexual immorality rampant in the West; our own philosophers and statesmen do that and much more. People around the globe want the truth; they are tired of being lied to.  They are now so accustomed to it, that seeing through so-called Intelligence Reports has become easy sport for any eyes that want to see.

Theopolitics is a Broad Attempt to understand and extrapolate political action through the multidimensional lens of geopolitics[1] and theology. Theopolitics, like geopolitics, includes analysis of geographical, historical, and cultural characteristics that influence political behavior. Theopolitics, unlike geopolitics, extrapolates political action based on further philosophical and theological premises that God exists and acts in human history.

Geopolitical intelligence services increasingly provide inaccurate projections due to (1) the lack of a theological perspective or (2) a sociological tendency to subordinate religious ideas to political ideas. This interpretive tendency is accelerated by ongoing secularization of the public-political forum, which over the long run reduces the impact of religion and tends to subordinate religion to the long-recognized sociological function of cultural legitimization.

Secularization of the sacred has occurred to such an extent in the modern world that the values expressed in the secular temporal sphere have so influenced the spiritual sphere that over-time the two have become less diverse and increasingly difficult to distinguish. That is, religious beliefs have become less and less distinguishable from political beliefs. Religion has been so gradually secularized that the modern acceptance of political-economic-cultural liberalism first advanced in the public domain has, overtime, become normative in the religious domain[2].

This diffusion of the secular into the sacred and the subsequent sacralizing of the secular[3] (whereby religious institutions morph into, or become congruent with, economic-political institutions) results in aggressive forms of nationalism justified by belief in a sacred or “Manifest Destiny” for one’s own nation leading to the conviction that it is endowed with a sacred mission among nations. In the historic process, secular economic interests and political values are transformed into sacred spiritual ideals that serve as the foundation for a crusading foreign policy. When this happens, it becomes increasingly difficult to distinguish religious perspectives from political perspectives. For example, the confusing neoconservative tendency to view America as “God’s Country”, the “City set on a hilltop”, or the equally confusing tendency to present secular American cultural-economic-political values (liberal left or conservative right) as Christian initiatives (human dignity, liberty, tolerance, rights, peace) and the subsequent promotion of American foreign policy as the light to the nations and the means of their liberty.

As a result of this confusion of church and nation, secularist ideology has both eroded authentic religion (which rightly transcends culture) and become as pervasive (wide-spread) as any religion. Consequently, secularism, or secular values are often presented as sacred values and accepted as religious ideas that represent the “will of God”. This transformation and deification of secular cultural values, ideas, sentiments and beliefs into religious values, sentiments, ideas and beliefs has advanced to such an extent that the United States Supreme Court is able to refer to “secular humanism” as a “religion”:

”Among religions in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, Secular Humanism and others” (note 11, Torcaso v Watkins,1961).

The sacralizing of secular values gives rise to what sociologists refer to as “Civic Religion” – the spiritualization and subsequent reification of prevailing cultural-political beliefs and ideas (by means of regular public praise and avowal through such things as statues, commemoratives, memorials, monuments, national documents, songs and holiday celebrations etc.) until they become so pervasive and commonly shared that they are accepted on face-value as sacred and deserving of religious respect until they morph with religion itself, a religion commonly referred to as secularism or “secular humanism”.  Secular humanism is a humanism crafted without God but accepted as if coming from God and therefore used to justify wrongheaded foreign and domestic policy decisions because purely secular beliefs, values, traditions, political institutions etc. have been made to appear sacred. President Abraham Lincoln provides an exhilarating example of America’s “Civic religion”.

“Let every American, every lover of liberty, every well wisher to his posterity, swear by the blood of the Revolution, never to violate in the least particular, the laws of the country; and never to tolerate their violation by others. As the patriots of seventy-six did to the support of the Declaration of Independence, so to the support of the Constitution and Laws, let every American pledge his life, his property, and his sacred honor;–let every man remember that to violate the law, is to trample on the blood of his father, and to tear the character of his own, and his children’s liberty.”

gk

“Let reverence for the laws, be breathed by every American mother, to the lisping babe, that prattles on her lap–let it be taught in schools, in seminaries, and in colleges; let it be written in Primers, spelling books, and in Almanacs;–let it be preached from the pulpit, proclaimed in legislative halls, and enforced in courts of justice. And, in short, let it become the political religion of the nation; and let the old and the young, the rich and the poor, the grave and the gay, of all sexes and tongues, and colors and conditions, sacrifice unceasingly upon its altars”.[4]

The sacralizing of secular political-economic-social beliefs occurs on both the right and the left; it is the sacred political and cultural patrimony of the nation. Vestiges of the national ethos are evident in both the zealous liberal political commitment to liberty, which is opposed by many conservatives, and by the equally zealous conservative political commitment to free-market capitalism opposed by liberals – although they differ, each carries its own version of and commitment to the secular-religious agenda of the nation known as liberalism, which has become a “civic religion” with its various sects and denominations. Although they differ one from the other, all are committed to political and cultural ecumenism that revolves around the basic tenets of liberalism or secular humanism. Although they are at odds with each other over cultural, political, economic and religious ideas, they are in agreement about such things as rule by the people, popular sovereignty, separation of church and state, secular constitutional law, liberty, the separation of powers, and American exceptionalism et al.

Therefore, both believe in and promote an active foreign policy that advances the exportation of American ideas abroad as if the secular values of the United States are some type of sacred patrimony necessary for the emancipation and development of mankind. Some are unable to realize that the United States is not an arm of the Church; its secular values are not the sacred patrimony of mankind nor are they the standard by which they are to judge the social dogma of Christianity or any dogma at all. The Secretary of State is not mandated by God to spread liberal ideas (cultural, political, and or economic) throughout the world, nor is America endowed with a God given destiny to replace His Church as the “city set on a hilltop” to be the “light of the nations” (Matt 5:14). These words were addressed to the Apostles and to their successors not to the Founding Fathers or the leaders of the Democratic, Republican or Libertarian parties whose ideas are subject to the scrutiny of the City that is the light of the world; it does not work correctly in converse.

It is the Church that is the teacher of the United States and of all states, especially of those peoples who profess to be “Christian”; it is  not the state who is the teacher of the Church.  The Holy Trinity did not commission the State Department to teach the nations, but They did commission the Church to do so:

The eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had ordered them….Jesus approached and said to them, “All power in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you.  And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age.”(Matt 28: 16-20)

The Necessity of Theopolitics for Accurate Global Analysis

Because the United States and Great Britain have been undeterred global leaders for nearly three centuries, the liberal values shared by these sister-nations have increasingly dominated international discourse and the outcome of political events for nearly three hundred years. As such foreign policy initiatives, geopolitical global analysis, and intelligence projections have been able to count on the dominance and consistency of Western liberal ideas and values when crafting insightful intelligence reports and successfully projecting future trends. This long-term dominance of Western liberal ideas and economic interests can no longer be counted upon. In fact, because Western intelligence agencies continue to count upon this fading historical dominance, they have entered into a new phase of confusion, which is becoming increasingly evident. Because of their high accuracy in the past, they have continued to depend on what has always worked before. They, and most other political-economic actors in the West, continue to act from an increasingly outdated mindset seemingly unaware of the signs that we are living at the dawn of a new era, a new time period of authentic Christian renewal. Consequently, they have entered a new phase of mistaken analysis and faulty projections, which, in part, helps explain the ongoing confusion of American foreign policy.

We are living at a pivotal moment of modern human history in which the backward relationship between the secular and sacred, discussed above, is being slowly reversed. That is, the spirit of nationalism (that reifies secular values, imbues them with a sacred identity, and thereby diminishes the voice of the Spirit) is being corrected by an authentic outpouring of the Spirit.  In the process, the temporal public square, rather than being increasingly secularized, as it has been for two hundred years, is being increasingly sacralized, but few people are aware of this ongoing reality due to the secular and anti-Christian commitment of media outlets committed to an opposition agenda.

Nonetheless, unreported world events indicate that a significant change is underway.

For example, have you heard of this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hakb6S0IpgY

RGGT

The above video is only one of a vast array of accounts that are occurring around the globe and that are regularly reported in our Daily World News and detailed in our Weekly Intelligence Reports.  As promised at Fatima, an Era of Peace is underway; Russia is being converted and a moment of Christian renewal is occurring around the globe as previously secular, liberal, and anti-Christian propaganda is being called into question and openly challenged by men and women who are beginning to realize that something is seriously wrong and that it is time to do something about it. The Catholic Church has elevated devotion to God’s Divine Mercy granting this devotion its highest approbation by placing it on the universal liturgical calendar to be celebrated as “Divine Mercy Sunday”, the first Sunday after Easter and by canonizing Sister Faustina, the nun to whom Jesus entrusted the message of His mercy for the Modern World. Jesus confided His fondness for Poland to Saint Faustina and the special role Poland will play in preparing the world for His coming:

“I bear a special love for Poland, and if she will be obedient to My will, I will exalt her in might and holiness. From her will come forth the spark that will prepare the world for My final coming” (Diary, 1732).

The red and white of Polish flag is an icon of the water and blood, the red and white rays that flow as a font of mercy for mankind from the heart of Jesus opened on Mt. Calvary. Out of Poland will come the spark that will prepare the world for His “final coming’ The fire has already been lit by this Divine Spark. Failure of the previously reliable Intelligence Community to understand or to seriously account for this spiritual and political verity (occurring daily before all eyes that are able to objectively discern world events) is the cause of their increasing inability to correctly forecast political events with much accuracy. American foreign policy is in a state of confusion. Around the world, people are expressing discontent with the liberal agenda of the American State Department, which is having a difficult time accepting the fact that many people do not share America’s values or its “good guy” vision of itself.  America is not the judge and jury of sovereign nations. Many people do not appreciate the political and economic agenda of liberalism or its idea of freedom, nor do they appreciate interference and political manipulation of their countries sovereign affairs by the circumspect infusion of foreign aid that, in the name of freedom, works against freedom by enslaving unsuspecting people in debt and the bondage of cultural perversion contrary to their own national, cultural and spiritual patrimony.

Liberalism has been unceasingly at work for two hundred years gradually reaching a crescendo that is resounding throughout the world.  Because liberalism has reached the crescendo stage, its take on political, economic, and moral ideas such as unregulated free enterprise, rule by secular law and irresponsible freedom are manifesting the fruit by which they are known.  What once sounded good and appeared innocent to many people no longer sounds so good to so many.  Not in third world countries only, but also in the newly emerging democracies of Eastern Europe and in major countries of Western Europe, Christian men and women and those with a sense of morality, Christian and non-Christian, are waking up to the alarming reality that they have been asleep too long and are beginning to rise in opposition. Before this can happen to any great extent, it is predictable that liberal forces will first work to oppose the unexpected turn of events and to keep them out of the news. When this is no longer feasible, it will attempt a race to the finish line to complete its agenda before the opportunity slips away.

Just as the forces of anti-Christian, anti-Muslim and anti-Jewish liberalism were planning their victory maneuvers in the name of “Liberty”, just when a liberal victory seemed at hand, Russia removed itself from the Western camp and began to reassert its Christian patrimony. It is the first country to recognize and understand the damage being done in the false name of freedom, mammon and God; they are incompatible (Luke 16:13). Fully aware of the political game and knowing how to manipulate it, Russia has become the vanguard of resistance to the liberal revolution.

The Russian turn-around was unexpected by everyone except the intelligence community of the Catholic Church. These men and women who understand scripture; who are well versed in philosophy and theology, social science and culture; who are in tune with the Fatima Message and to the hand of God working in history expected a Russian turn around, expected that Russia would be converted. That moment has arrived and it is changing everything.

Intelligence forecasters, if they are to be of any value, must adopt a valid, that is an empirically verifiable theological perspective and accept the consequences of factoring this perspective into their reports or they will continue their downward trend until they fail miserably.  They can either discern and tell the truth or, like the prophets of Baal, remain committed to the power and economic benefit that makes them political sycophants of their overlords. Political correctness, and the intelligence community that supports it, work well when the Hand of Providence permits the implementation of their agenda and concurrently, when there are no men and women like Elijah to challenge them with the truth. Elijah saw the hand of God at work, a hand that the prophets of Baal failed to discern because they were not serving God and were providing intelligence to men interested in such things only to the extent that it served as a front to advance their own agenda. Intelligence forecasters such as these when unchallenged by the Spirit of Elijah are usually correct in their analysis, not because they possess any extra-special insight, but because the combination of Divine permissiveness, military power, economic might, and media control make forecasting a somewhat easy business.

This is a situation that is rapidly changing. The divine hand of the Trinity appears to be providing a prophesied moment of grace, what some call a “New Evangelization, others an “Hour of Mercy”, and what the Mother of God at Fatima referred to as an “Era of Peace”. The Orthodox Church in Russia, various Protestant denominations in America and the Catholic Church throughout the world are in spiritual and social motion. There is a discernible spiritual energy in the air. Throughout the world societies are being affected by religious renewal, but, not as previously, by churches and religions that have become secularized, nor by a form of secular humanism that has become sacralized, but by authentic Trinitarian Christian renewal.[5]  Although imperceptible in the West, this trend is increasingly evident in the East and is becoming more evident in Europe and throughout the globe.

Failure to take this ever increasing religious factor into account is the “Achilles Heel” of the contemporary intelligence community. Theological analysis, which factors in ongoing spiritual renewal coupled with traditional geopolitical analysis is needed. Theopolitical Intelligence (Theopolitcs) is the intelligence of the future, the only intelligence that can be trusted for accuracy because it endeavors to discern the Hand of God at work in political, economic, social, and cosmological current events, the “signs of the times”.

END NOTES
______________________________

[1] Geopolitics studies the interaction of states based on geography (including topography and climate), which shape culture and impact political decision making.  Because geography is stable, it is presumed that political reactions are predictable recurring events. These presumptions help the observer to understand political actions and to predict conflict and probable response patterns between and among nations.

[2] For example, the Protestant tendency to equate capitalism with Christianity (conservatism) or of various denominations which at one time defended life in the womb but increasingly support a right to abortion: Quakers (American Friends Service Committee); Lutheran Church in America; Presbyterian Church; Reorganized LDS; Unitarian Universalist; United Church of Christ; United Methodist Church; the Episcopal Church; the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) and the Moravian Church in America. SOURCE: Protestant Churches and Abortion, http://www.life.org.nz/abortion/abortionreligiouskeyissues/christian-religions/

The same could be said about feminism and female clerics, sexual orientation, and, in extreme cases, American Foreign Policy, and the quasi-religious myth of American exceptionalism (i.e. the City on a Hill motif).

[3] By sacralizing the secular, we mean that secular values becomes pervasive and increasingly sacrosanct, the standard by which even religious matters are judged.

According to Grondelski, December 2015, “The Danger of Theocratic Majoritarianism”:

“In the end, the decision to embrace secularism is as much a faith choice as is embracing a particular religion.  Secularism after all, makes certain assumptions about the person, society, and the world out of which flows a certain axiology, a certain set of value judgments”.  In short, overtime, the secular becomes sacred.

[4] Abraham Lincoln, July 27, (1838) The Perpetuation of Our Political Institutions: Address Before the Young Men’s Lyceum of Springfield, Illinois. http://www.abrahamlincolnonline.org/lincoln/speeches/lyceum.htm

[5] For example, according to Patriarch Kirill Primate of Moscow and All Russia:

“It is very important that all healthy forces of the society today unite for the true revival of Russia. The Church, science, art, culture, education, sport – all these things should work for strengthening spiritual foundations of our person.”

“The things which define the true revival are connected with the person’s spiritual life.”

Likewise, according to the President Putin, “First and foremost we should be governed by common sense. But common sense should be based on moral principles first. And it is not possible today to have morality separated from religious values.” (http://content.time.com/time/specials/2007/personoftheyear/article/0,28804,1690753_1690757_1695787-3,00.html)

“We stand against legalization and legal justification of homosexual ‘marriages’ and other outrages in the sphere of ethics” (Interfax, Dec. 9).