THE ARCHBISHOP OF DUBLIN, IRELAND, Diarmuid Martin, and Cardinal Gerhard Muller, the Prefect for the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith (The Holy Office) have weighed in on the theological dimensions of Pope Francis’ Post Synodal Exhortation, Amoris Laetitia. The issue as reported earlier by New Era is the integral relationship between Dogmatic and Pastoral Theology.

Archbishop Martin subtly referenced the papal exhortation in a recent homily given to marriage counselors working for the Irish Catholic Bishops’ Conference. The Archbishop began his homily with these words that foreshadowed his concern about spiritual renewal manifest in compassionate but authentic pastoral theology:

“The Gospel of this afternoon’s Mass recalls once again that great figure John the Baptist.  John’s task was to announce the coming of Jesus.   He was called to reawaken a sense of expectation among a people that had grown tired and distant from God.   He was called to bring renewal to institutional expressions of religion which, at the time, had often become fossilised into mere formulae or external ritual.

The archbishop is concerned, as is the pope, about fossilized, legalistic, and judgmental Catholicism, a Catholicism that lacks vibrancy and compassion, a Catholicism out of tune with human misery, of the fact that “the harvest is plenty but laborers are few” (Matt 9:37). Before our Lord spoke these poignant words, He looked on the crowd and had COMPASSION because the vast flock was lost in sin and confusion, because they were suffering:

“And seeing the multitudes, he had compassion on them: because they were distressed, and lying like sheep that have no shepherd.

Suffering, lost and wounded souls need compassion and love, not criticism, rejection, head wagging, and cold or severe judgement. Love is the universal balm, the spiritual ointment that makes the wounded whole. God is wise, God will judge and so must we (1 Cor 2:15), but before all else, GOD IS LOVE and those who deny this do not know Him.

“And every one that loveth, is born of God, and knoweth God. He that loveth not, knoweth not God: for God is charity.(1 John 4:7-8).

Saving souls is a labor of love; it is too easy to sit in an armchair and condemn; it takes work, great work, to get off of your but and get dirty in the work of patiently ministering to wounded humanity lost in sin like sheep without a shepherd (Matt 9:36)..

Since the Lord has appointed the present time to be an “Hour of Mercy” before His final coming as “Just Judge” the Church should be showing a merciful and compassionate face, a face most associated with its pastoral dimension.

“Speak to the world about My mercy … It is a sign for the end times. After it will come the Day of Justice. While there is still time, let them have recourse to the fountain of My mercy.  (Diary 848)

Jesus revealed to Saint Faustina that the present hour is not a time of retribution but a time of compassion, healing and mercy for all:

“I sent prophets wielding thunderbolts to My people. Today I am sending you with My mercy to the people of the whole world. I do not want to punish aching mankind, but I desire to heal it, pressing it to My Merciful Heart.”(Diary, 1588).

He further revealed to Faustina that those who have the most right to His mercy are the most grievous sinners:

“Let the greatest sinners place their trust in My mercy. They have the right before others to trust in the abyss of My mercy. … Souls that make an appeal to My mercy delight Me. To such souls I grant even more graces than they ask”  (Diary of Saint Faustina Para 1146).

 

Jesus has a

“…special compassion for the worst sinners, because they are most in need of His mercy.”

The Hour of Mercy is a time to pronounce, to pronounce the good news, not to renounce.

“For I came not to judge the world, but to save the world” (John 12:47, John 3:17).

The archbishop of Dublin apparently  had all this in mind when he opened his homily on marriage and family life. Although he did not specifically mention the doubts (dubia – perhaps complaints might be better) registered by opposing Cardinals Joachim Meisner, Raymond Burke, Carlo Caffarra and Walter Brandmüller, he did speak about “grey areas” in family life and the inability of clergy to embrace pastoral challenges with love and compassion rather than “black and white” dogmatic pronouncements.

In his homily Archbishop Martin attempted to pull diocesan marriage counselors into the mystery of romance associated with love and marriage and the uniqueness of each couple by reference to “The Jeweler’s Shop”, a literary work of Pope John Paul II:

“As a young bishop, Pope John Paul II wrote a play called “The Jeweler’s Shop”.  It was a simple play in which the principal character was a jeweller who looked out as young couples would stop by his shop window examining the wedding rings on display.”

 

“As he watched them, he began imagining who these different couples, with whom he had never spoken, actually were.  He began to see that each was different and that for each of them their love for each other, their hopes for a future together were unique.”

 

“Like the Jeweler in Pope John Paul’s play, you realise that each couple is different, that no couple is perfect, that there are many who face real challenges as they try to hold on to what remains of an initial dream which seems destined to be on the way to failure.”

From here the archbishop proceeds to Pope Francis and Amoris Laetitia:

“Pope Francis has given the Church that remarkable document his document Amoris Laetitia which is the fruit of the reflections of the world’s Bishops at two Synods as well as the contribution of married couples and experts from every corner of the world.  Pope Francis presents a wonderful kaleidoscope of the teaching of Jesus and the scriptures on the beauty and the joy of marital love.  He stresses the role of the Church to learn to teach that message in a language which will be understandable to the men and women of today.  He stresses the role of the Church in accompanying men and women on the journey of married and family life, even when the initial dreams begin to fade or indeed fail.”

What is important is understanding the men and women “of today”.  Most people today have been inculturated, misled, propagandized and cerebrally maligned without there even knowing it.  Many are lost and bewildered and do not know why. Some are well to do and affluent but lost in materialism and its attendant economic, political or moral liberalism.  Human beings must be encountered where they are at or they will not be encountered at all. This is why St. Paul, perhaps the greatest evangelist, reminds all evangelists to become “”all things to all men with the view of winning them to Christ:

“Whereas I was free as to all, I made myself the servant of all, that I might gain the more. And I became to the Jews, a Jew, that I might gain the Jews: To them that are under the law, as if I were under the law, (whereas myself was not under the law,) that I might gain them that were under the law. To them that were without the law, as if I were without the law, … that I might gain them that were without the law. To the weak I became weak, that I might gain the weak. I became all things to all men, that I might save all.”

To the sinner, I became a sinner (thou not in deed but in acceptance not of their sin, but of them).

For some Pharisaical Catholics the question might be asked: “Are you (plural) trying to win souls to Christ or to win an argument?” If you would endeavor to first befriend repugnant, heretical, schismatic sinners by loving them, withholding judgement, and refraining from didactic instruction, you might then find that the pope is correct; you might find that after laboring as accompanying-compassionate-empathetic pastors that souls become more trusting, pliable and then more teachable.

Following this line of thought, the archbishop becomes very specific:

“No marriage is lived just in clear and abstract black and white realities.  The Church has to understand the grey areas of success and failures, of joys and of disappointments.  Repeating doctrinal formulations alone is not the way to accompany people on a difficult journey. Jesus’ method was that of accompanying.  His method was to show that mercy is more effective than condemnation in changing people’s lives.”

This is the heart of Amoris Laetitia. It does not excuse sin nor does it deny dogma. Rather, it affirms dogma, is always cognizant of its co-primacy, ever ready to share it, while temporarily putting its subordinate principles on hold giving way to the ultimate dogma of LOVE from which all the others flow as do the fruits and the beatitudes. Love is the primordial and eternal motive behind all of creation and the Divine impetus for the Incarnation itself (John 3:16); it is the motive behind the life, death and resurrection of our Lord, Jesus Christ (John 15:13). Love is first; it is at the beginning and it is at the end (1 Corinthians 13: 1-13).

“But in all these things we overcome, because of him that hath loved us. For I am sure that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor might, Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 8:37-39).

As such, a pastor must first see with his heart, putting the dogmatic intellect on ever-ready hold while forming a relationship rooted in mercy and compassion so that the truths of the faith may be planted on fertile soil at an opportune future time, a time recognized by the integral eyes of love and wisdom. “Accompaniment” is before all else pastoral. However, if the path of accompaniment never reaches out to the higher truths, if it never gently (but firmly) corrects sin, if it never gives sage direction, it is a false love, a false accompaniment.  Nonetheless, accompaniment begins with love. Like the Divine Logos who lowered Himself to become man in order to lift all men up, all His pastors must descend to the level of those whom they serve in order to then carry them upwards in the ascent towards the Holy Trinity, to “become all things to all men”, patiently enduring their insults in order to save them.”

After establishing this central idea, Archbishop Martin proceeds to examine men who, like Cardinal Burke and reporters like Raymond Arroyo, men who “do not seem to get it.”

“There are some in the Church (the archbishop says) who are unsettled by the ability of the Pope to place himself in the midst of the uncertainties of people’s lives.  Some, even senior Church figures, seem to feel that the affirmation of certainties in an abstract and undoubting way (here he is referring to the clear truths of dogmatic theology) is the only way (to evangelize or bring soul’s to Christ).”

Nonetheless, this does not mean that the archbishop wants to throw abstract dogmatic certainties out the window. The archbishop and the pope are both aware that accompaniment (pastoral theology) does not mean that the truths of the faith (dogma) are discarded as Cardinal Burke and company want to insist that they do:

“Accompanying is of course not saying that anything goes.  It is being alongside those who are troubled pointing towards – and indeed representing – Jesus who gently leads us beyond the often paralysing doubts that beset us, gently leads us beyond our own limitations and the imperfections of our love.”

Many pastors are comfortable being philosophers and theologians, of sitting in the professor’s seat and teaching college students and seminarians. This is a wonderful ministry, but most priests are called to be pastors, not professors. By the way, even the best professors develop a pastoral dimension to enhance their pedagogy, a dimension that enables them to engage their students outside the classroom, in smokers, at pubs, dinner engagements at their homes, social gatherings, back-packing and various other outings, which further enhance the teacher student bond and the impact their teaching – how much more a “pastor”?

The bottom-line:

“Faith is not about empty formulae or external ritual.  It is about authentically entering into the very life of Jesus Christ himself and witnessing to that life in our daily lives.”

Cardinal Burke and company try to excuse themselves from the above critique by emphasizing that they want to save souls and protect people from sinful actions that harm individuals and families:

“We hope that no one will choose to interpret the matter according to a “progressive/conservative” paradigm. That would be completely off the mark. We are deeply concerned about the true good of souls, the supreme law of the Church, and not about promoting any form of politics in the Church.”

Most devout Catholics would say that they are concerned about the salvation of souls. This, however, is not the question.  The question is how are they going to go about the task of salvation, how are they going to go about the task of saving souls: (1) by telling poor sinners the truth and how wrong they are or (2) by embracing them in their error with love and compassion while patiently (and with great difficulty) bearing with them while slowly leading them onward until such time that they begin to ask questions or they are ready to receive some elements of the faith?

The pastoral approach is not for cowards. No, it is for the strongest, for the prudent, those selfless who deny themselves and make reparation for the sinners they are serving (unil they mature enough to embrace the salvific way of purgation leading to illumination-union), those who are aware that modern men and women, boys and girls, have been heinously, sometimes blindly, conditioned against truth, against the Christian faith; they have been conditioned to plasticity and artificial relationships, to individualism and narcissism, everyone being out for themselves all hidden behind a veneer of niceness.  In this type of environment, it is not cheap words, but genuine love and self-giving that speak volumes.  Modern men and women mistrust melodious words; they are tired of con-games – they have heard it all before, been there – done that; what they rarely witness is authentic love in action. This is something they have not seen, somewhere they have not been. In a pagan environment it is quiet consistent acts of love that bear witness to the faith greater than any theological treatise or display of philosophical brilliance.

“But we entreat you, brethren, that you abound more: And that you use your endeavour to be quiet, and that you do your own business, and work with your own hands, as we commanded you: and that you walk honestly towards them that are without” (1 Thessalonians 4:11-12).

Empty words or too many true words are simply lip service, lip service that is associated with those who teach doctrines from their heads rather than love from their hearts – their hearts are far from God, which is another way of saying that they are far from Love, because God is Love. This type of lip service is rejected by the Lord Himself:

“This people honoureth me with their lips: but their heart is far from me. And in vain do they worship me, teaching doctrines and commandments of men” (1 Matt 15:8-9).

In short, great as wisdom is, love is primary:

“Wisdom which is a gift, has its cause in the will, which cause is charity, but it has its essence in the intellect, whose act is to judge aright, as stated above (Aquinas, Sujuma Theologiae,  Second Part of Second Part, Q 45, Article 2).

 

“Hence the wisdom of which we are speaking presupposes charity” (Aquinas, Sujuma Theologiae,  Second Part of Second Part, Q 45, Article 1).

kjl

WHAT DOES CARDINAL MULLER THE  PREFECT FOR THE SACRED CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF FAITH HAVE TO SAY?

Given such a stinging renunciation of dogmatic theology severed from pastoral theology (a strong mind from a pure heart) or of dogmatic theology that claims to be pastoral but is not (see note below), we would expect some conformation from the highest doctrinal authority in the Church.

 According to Cardinal Gerhard Muller, Prefect for the Sacred Congregation of the Faith, the ultimate aim of knowledge about God is salvation:

“Knowledge of God” is ordered to “the ultimate end of man, for man’s salvation.”

Since the end of knowledge is salvation, salvation takes precedence over knowledge; salvation is the telos of knowledge, the end by which the means, (knowledge) is to be judged.  If knowledge is not resulting in salvation, knowledge is not doing its job. As such, at times, (speculative-dogmatic) knowledge might be reduced in the name of prudence (practical knowledge – the realm of pastoral theology), love, and compassion for the sake of salvation. For example, The First Council of Jerusalem dealing with pagans from an anti-Christian culture, reduced the role of knowledge and limited it to a few specifics:

“For it hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us, to lay no further burden upon you than these necessary things: That you abstain from things sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication; from which things keeping yourselves, you shall do well” (Acts 15:28-29).

Many would argue, and have argued, that contemporary society is neo-pagan, a culture just as removed from God as that of the Roman Empire; in such a case, similar rules apply.

Nonetheless, pagan culture or not, Cardinal Muller has clearly indicated that Amoris Laetitia does not permit civilly remarried divorcees to receive Holy Communion and must be interpreted in light of the magisterium:

“The magisterium of the Church still applies to those passages in Amoris Laetitia on pastoral care for remarried divorcees.

Pope Francis himself pointed out the same in his exhortation:

“Priests have the duty to accompany [the divorced and remarried] in helping them to understand their situation according to the teaching of the Church” (para 300).

Further on, he states once again:

“What we are speaking of is a process of accompaniment and discernment which “guides the faithful to an awareness of their situation before God…. This discernment can never prescind from the Gospel demands of truth and charity, as proposed by the Church” (para 300).

In May of 2016 the cardinal, talking about Amoris Laetitia, was quoted by the German paper Die Tagespost, as saying that John Paul II’s teaching contained  in  Familiaris Consortio, and Benedict XVI’s exhortation Sacramentum Caritatis, remain “unchanged.”

According to the National Catholic Register,

“Cardinal Müller argued that if Amoris Laetitia really wanted to “rescind such a deeply rooted and such a weighty discipline, then it would have clearly expressed and stated its reasons.” But he pointed out that the document has “no statement to that effect.”

 

“At no point has the Pope called the arguments of his predecessors into question,” he said. Those arguments, he added, “are not based on the subjective guilt of these brothers and sisters, but on the visible, objective way of life, which is opposite to the words of Christ.”

Since Amoris Laetitia must be interpreted in light of the constant teaching of the Church, clearly the issue at hand is a pastoral one, viz., how to uphold the teachings 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. Each marriage case is unique and must be judged by its relative merits. 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 Muller:

“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 change that.”

 

_____________________
NOTE

Dogmatic theology does not become pastoral theology when it equates pastoral theology with telling people their sins, or by trying to save them with a simple dogmatic fix by way of simple words that might be interpreted as lip service if their is no sincere follow-up a follow-up that costs the speaker some strenuous and unadvertised effort.

“TAKE heed that you do not your justice before men, to be seen by them: otherwise you shall not have a reward of your Father who is in heaven. Therefore when thou dost an almsdeed, sound not a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may be honoured by men. Amen I say to you, they have received their reward. But when thou dost alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doth. That thy alms may be in secret, and thy Father who seeth in secret will repay thee” (Matt 6:1-4).

 

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.

 

THERE SEEMS TO BE SOME EVIDENCE confirming the allegation that Democratic email accounts were compromised by phishing private information such as passwords and usernames. But there is no conclusive evidence that demonstrates the Russian government is responsible. The evidence is derived from independent researchers and private cyber firms such as Crowd Street and Fire Eye.  Unfortunately, the evidence is compromised by the use of qualifiers such as “possibly”, “appears”, “indicates” etc.  The evidence is based on a series of possible suppositions.

Together, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Department of Homeland Security released a joint statement implicating the Russian government. They stated that:

“The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations. The recent disclosures of alleged hacked e-mails on sites like DCLeaks.com and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process.”

According to Sam Biddle:

“If the U.S. Intelligence Community is asking the American electorate to believe them, to accept as true their claim that our most important civic institution was compromised by a longtime geopolitical nemesis, we need them to show us why.”

 

“The U.S. intelligence community must make its evidence against Russia public if they want us to believe their claims. The integrity of our presidential elections is vital to the country’s survival; blind trust in the CIA is not.”

From Newera’s perspective, the Intelligence Community need not produce its evidence; the Intelligence Community along with the Executive Branch are implicated in at least three ways that, in this case will “come back to bite them”.  Recently, almost every foreign policy maneuver has backfired with unintended and disastrous consequences that were not forecasted by the American Intelligence Community. For example, the attempt to nation build in Iraq following the Gulf War led to a foreign policy debacle in which Iran and Iraq became allies much to US consternation creating a crisis in the Middle East, which is still unfolding contrary to American Foreign Projections. A similar thing happened in Egypt when a cuop to overthrow President Mubarek led to an unintended rise of the Muslim Brotherhood when Mohamed Morsi became the first democratically elected head of state in Egyptian history. This was not expected and contrary to American initiatives in Egypt, so Morsi had to go. US foreign policy is backfiring in Iran and in Syria as well.

The accusation that Russia is responsible for interfering in US elections that indirectly assisted Trump will also backfire; it will backfire because the United States is employing outworn intelligence models as explained in “The Necessity of Theopolitics“. The neo-con and neo-liberal expectations and assumptions are no longer working so well because the world is on the cusp of a momentous change as explained in many of our articles.

WHY WILL THE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST RUSSIA BACKFIRE?

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.

First, the CIA and American Intelligence Communities report that America’s cyber security was hacked is devastating, devastating for the executive branch, for President Obama and the Intelligence Community itself. It means that the Russians beat us and are beating us; it means that the nation is not safe under President Obama. Both Secretary of State and presidential-nominee, Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama have failed to keep America safe and secure. The Intelligence community is being out-played, out-maneuvered and out-smarted by the Russians whom we are led to believe, otherwise, are way behind us.  Not so, if the allegations are true.  If they are true, it is an explicit admission of American inferiority and the failure of the Democrats to keep America safe.  It works against the Democrats, not in their favor.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHbDO7aqqwg

[p

Second, If the allegations are true and the Democrats keep raising their voices louder and louder in a crescendo of defiance, it further manifests to Americans increasingly upset with main stream propaganda, with the deceit and misinformation, it further manifests to 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, because American politicians like Hilary Clinton prefer to cover up their nefarious deeds with deceit and falsehoods.  They are content when Americans believe the deceit, when they are fooled, but extremely upset when they see through it or when it is unexpectedly leaked. Simply stated, Hilary Clinton and her legions prefer falsehood to truth and will continue to deceive the American public as long as they can get away with it.

They are upset with the Russians, but they are more upset because they got caught and are trying to deflect their guilt by projecting it onto the Russians.  This is a classical defense-mechanism employed by people blind to their own faults. It is symptomatic of a psychological and sociological or individual and collective hubris,  a symptom of arrogance, pride and concupiscence. The proper attitude for a person convicted of sin and error is sorrow and penitence, not militant obstinacy and unjust covering of culpable blame by projecting it elsewhere. Complaint, denial, projection all conspire to reveal the extent that some politicians love a lie, are complicit in lying, and will continue to prevaricate if they attain office. The worst thing imaginable for such a person or persons is being apprehended; it is not the commission of evil deeds and wrapping them in deceit. The proof is in the response to being caught; the Clinton response is blind in its arrogance – major backfire; the old tricks are not working so well anymore.  America is waking up.

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.  Why did the United States “bomb the hell” out of Syria for years.  The Obama and Clinton administration did not like the results of the Syrian elections, the fact that the Syrian people overwhelmingly preferred Assad to their meddling and re-elected him in 2014.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yetgi-8k0NQ

If the United States could not effect the outcome of an election in Syria by a major military intervention but all the Russians have to do is hack a few computers to send the Democrats to the gallows, what does that say about their allegations?

The United States did far more than engineer cyber leaks, they raised an army of terrorists backed by American military might and proceeded to obliterate a nation from the face of the earth; they did the same in Libya, in Iraq, in Grenada and elsewhere.

According to pro-American and pro-Liberal Washington Post

“The United States does have a well-documented history of interfering and sometimes interrupting the workings of democracies elsewhere. It has occupied and intervened militarily in a whole swath of countries in the Caribbean and Latin America and fomented coups against democratically elected populists.”

 

“The most infamous episodes include the ousting of Iranian Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh in 1953— whose government was replaced by an authoritarian monarchy favorable to Washington — the removal and assassination of Congolese leader Patrice Lumumba in 1961, and the violent toppling of socialist Chilean President Salvador Allende, whose government was swept aside in 1973 by a military coup led by the ruthless Gen. Augusto Pinochet.”

 

“In 1954, Washington unseated Guatemala’s left-wing president, Jacobo Arbenz, who had had the temerity to challenge the vast control of the United Fruit Co., a U.S. corporation, with agrarian laws that would be fairer to Guatemalan farmers. The CIA went on to install and back a series of right-wing dictatorships that brutalized the impoverished nation for almost half a century.”

In 1970 Henry Kissinger opined:

“I don’t see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its own people. ”

According to the Huffington Post;

“Nixon administration documents declassified in the 1990s reveal that under Kissinger’s leadership, the U.S. security and intelligence apparatus aided General Augusto Pinochet’s 1973 military coup that toppled Allende’s government….The Pinochet government detained and tortured more than 40,000 people from 1973 to 1990 and murdered over 3,000, according to estimates from the current Chilean government.”

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).

The collapse of global liberalism is imminent; everything is conspiring against it, it is breathing its last breathes that is why it is in consternation, which means that everything it attempts to advance is nefarious agenda, every lie it once told successfully, is now turned against it and crushing its head.

The Virgin Mary has confirmed this global reality.  In the most recently approved apparition in the town of Rosario, Argentina, the Blessed Virgin Mary told eighty year old Gladys Quiroga de Motta:

“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.”    

The collapse of global liberalism is part of the overall collapse of the Kingdom of Pride to be replaced by a Civilization of Love during an Era of Peace.  The Venerable Mary of Agreda captured the essence of this ontological and social reality very well when she spoke of the fall of Adam and Eve, which was witnessed by Satan.  Unlike Hilary Clinton and the liberal establishment who are covering up their lies, complaining and projecting, Adam and Eve, as all of God’s children, admitted their sin and faults, manifested contrition, and asked for forgiveness.:

“But he (Satan) soon fell from his proud boasting, when he saw, contrary to his expectations, how kindly the merciful love of God dealt with the delinquents (Adam and Eve), and how He offered them a chance of doing penance by giving them hope of pardon and return of grace. Moreover he saw how they were disposing themselves toward this forgiveness by sorrow and contrition, and how the beauty of grace was restored to them. When the demons perceived the effect of contrition, all hell was again in confusion. His consternation grew, when he heard the sentence, which God pronounced against the guilty ones, in which he himself was implicated. More especially and above all was he tormented by the repetition of that threat: The Woman shall crush thy head (Gen. 3, 15), which he had already heard in heaven.”

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 and are upset when the truth about them is revealed. Above all, in their arrogance, they are acting like hypocrites, whom Jesus refers to as “blind guides”, a blindness that disqualifies them from leadership. If they expect forgiveness, they must be contrite, not arrogant; tell the truth, not stifle it; ask for forgiveness, not project their error onto someone else. Since this is unlikely, liberalism will continue to implode as the Queen Mother of God stated: “The prince of evil…sees that he is concluding his sad reign. He has little left, his end is near.”

er

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?

TO BE CONTINUED: UNDERSTANDING POPE FRANCIS

NJKB

OVER FOUR YEARS AGO TERRORISTS FORCES backed by Saudi dollars and Western military assistance overran the free city of Aleppo and turned it into a prison camp for previously free Syrian citizens. Four years later, on December 12, 2016, the Syrian Army backed by Russian air assistance officially declared victory over the terrorists in the battle to free Aleppo.

Despite the fact that Syria is a sovereign nation, a sovereign nation having the right to fight terrorists who are threatening its existence, the western press is painting the fall of Allepo and the defeat of terrorists as a bad thing.  Not only is it a bad thing, Assad is, we are told, a butcher hated by his people.

Senator John MaCain, the neo-con war hawk,  wrote in the Wall Street Journal:

“Assad is perpetuating the wanton slaughter of innocent Syrians.”

“When Mr. Assad, Mr. Putin and their allies have slaughtered all that stand in their way, they will proclaim peace in the bloody sands of the Syrian desert.”

If you happen to follow the Wall Street Journal links, please browse the comments; basically even conservative readers of the Journal have had enough of this bravado and verbiage.

Similarly, in a New York Times article entitled: “Assad the Butcher” it is stated:

“With every new atrocity, calls for military action grow…The best hope of avoiding that is for.. Russia, China and Iran to stop enabling Mr. Assad’s savagery.”

Like wise, the New Yorker opines:

“The commission’s work (Commission established by UN to investigate human-rights abuses) recently culminated in a four-hundred-page legal brief that links the systematic torture and murder of tens of thousands of Syrians to a written policy approved by President Bashar al-Assad, coördinated among his security-intelligence agencies, and implemented by regime operatives, who reported the successes of their campaign to their superiors in Damascus.”

Here is another perspective on the news given by a Canadian Journalist, Eva Bartlett, which seems to make more sense:

yi

https://youtu.be/TjHniRRgOao

kukj

As reported previously, the McCain war-hawk line of approach does not make much sense and can be dismissed as war-propaganda.

“If there was a civil war in Syria, a civil war supported and backed by the United States and a coalition of over fifty nations including the citizens and dissatisfied elements of the Syrian armed forces in addition to an overwhelmingly large cadre of rebels imported from throughout the Middle East, all against Assad, Assad should have been overthrown a long time ago. Yet, after five years he is still president and growing stronger. Given more than ample opportunity and plenty of time, the Syrian people have not risen up in revolt against their president. Instead, they are being held captive by terrorists supported by the United States, and Assad is increasingly seen by the Syrian people as their champion; he is the one who is freeing them from the stranglehold of the terrorists in such places as Aleppo.  Consequently, against all odds and predictions, Assad has the growing support of the Syrian Army, which is ridding the country of foreign sponsored terrorism.”

Aleppo, the industrial center of Syria and its second largest city, is in near ruins. Nonetheless, the ouster of terrorists by the Syrian army marks a decisive milestone in the war to free Syria from ISIL-ISIS, Al Nusra, and Daesh who also occupy other cites such as Idlib and Palmyra.  This is a moment of jubilation for Syrian citizens, a breath of fresh air, and a confidence builder in their fight against terrorism as revealed in the following three short videos. The citizens of Syria back Assad and are cheering for the Syrian army, not against it; these are events not reported by leading media outlets in the West that are committed to ongoing neo-conservative neo-liberal propaganda.

 

https://youtu.be/JzJfefPMbn8

 

https://youtu.be/2KbECuoIppo

 

Given the likelihood that Syrian forces will quickly move to expel the terrorists from other strongholds, President Obama is not cheering, instead, as soon as it became clear that Aleppo would fall, he lifted a previous ban on arm supplies giving the green light for immediate arms shipments to the rebels. Moreover, in 2013 President Obama vowed that he would not put American boots on Syrian ground. Nonetheless, two days before Aleppo fell, when it was imminently clear that the rebel stronghold was about to capitulate, US Defense Secretary Ash Carter announced that the United States is sending 200 additional military personnel to Syria to help defeat ISIL and drive it from its command post in Raqqa.  According to Carter:

“These uniquely skilled operators will join the 300 US special operations forces already in Syria, to continue organizing, training, equipping, and otherwise enabling capable, motivated, local forces to take the fight to ISIL” (NBC News)

NBC News also reports that

“The extra troops will include special operations forces … to recruit, organize, train and advise local Syrian forces to combat ISIS, also known as Islamic State or ISIL.”

Interestingly, “local forces” just assisted the Syrian army to defeat ISIS in Aleppo.  Apparently, someone is not telling the truth here. If what Carter is saying is true, it should be welcome news to the Syrians who have the same goal: to defeat ISIS-ISIL. However, President Assad is sure of the opposite; viz., that the US intends to help the rebels in Raqqa against the advancing Syrian army. According to Assad:

“The question is to whom those armaments are going to? In the hands of whom? In the hands of ISIS and al-Nusra, and there’s coordination between ISIS and al-Nusra. So, the announcement of this lifting of that embargo is related directly to the attack on Palmyra and to the support of other terrorists outside Aleppo, because when they are defeated in Aleppo, the United States and the West, they need to support their proxies somewhere else, because they don’t have any interest in solving the conflict in Syria.”

 According to the Syrian Foreign Ministry:

“The lifting of the ban on arms supplies to Syria by US President Barack Obama is another evidence of Washington’s continuing support for terrorism.”

 

“The United States has provided a new evidence of its notorious role in support for terrorism in Syria by taking the decision to lift the ban on supplying arms to terrorist groups.”

Given the deployment of additional ground troops and an major influx of additional new weaponry, it might be expected that the Syrian Army would now move with earnest rapidity while there is mass confusion on the terrorist side, as new recruits flood their cities and arms flooding in from various directions. The terrorists are in disarray and any attempt to establish central commands in these other locations will necessarily involve days and even weeks of confusion. Consequently, a rapid Syrian advance is likely in areas including Palmyra, Idlib and Raqqa.

Nonetheless, it appears that this might not occur. Speaking at an OSCE (Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe) meeting in Hamburg, Russian Foreign Minister, Sergey Lavrov stated:

“The decision to ease restrictions on military aid for foreign forces and other fighters supporting the US in Syria is unlikely to affect the situation in eastern Aleppo. Moscow is looking for a solution that involves as few casualties as possible.”

 

“I think everyone understands that the militants in east Aleppo are agonizing. We don’t want to support those who would gladly finish off those militants at any cost without any talks. We are ready to solve these problems in a way that would spare us additional casualties and destruction.”

Because, at this point, (following the fall of Aleppo and on-going weakening of the rebels) it would require an all out ground assault by American and coalition forces to topple Assad; it is likely that all sides will come to the negotiating table as Lavrov has indicated.  However, since the decision belongs to Assad, and not to Russia, the question remains in the air. Assad has made this much clear. In an interview with RT he stated:

“Russia never – these days, I mean, during this war, before that war, during the Soviet Union – never tried to interfere in our decision. Whenever they had opinion or advice, doesn’t matter how we can look at it, they say at the end “this is your country, you know what the best decision you want to take; this is how we see it, but if you see it in a different way, you know, you are the Syrian.” They are realistic, and they respect our sovereignty, and they always defend the sovereignty that’s based on the international law and the Charter of the United Nations. So, it never happened that they made any pressure, and they will never do it. This is not their methodology.”

Clearly, the matter is in the hands of Assad.  Today, we will give him the final word on this topic. In his interview with RT he opined:

“The mainstream media with their fellow politicians, they are suffering during the last few decades from moral decay. So, they have no morals. Whatever they talk about, whatever they mention or they use as mask, human rights, civilians, children; they use all these just for their own political agenda in order to provoke the feelings of their public opinion to support them in their intervention in this region, whether militarily or politically. So, they don’t have any credibility regarding this. If you want to look at what’s happening in the United States is rebellion against the mainstream media, because they’ve been lying and they kept lying on their audiences….That’s why I don’t think the mainstream media could sell their stories anymore and that’s why they are fighting for their existence in the West, although they have huge experience and huge support and money and resources, but they don’t have something very important for them to survive, which is credibility. They don’t have it, they lost it. They don’t have transparency, that’s why they don’t have credibility.”

 

THIS IS A  MUST SEE 49:00 FULL BRIEFING OF US PEACE COUNCIL AT THE UN: TRUTH REGARDING SYRIA – “NOT CIVIL WAR, BUT US INVASION”

https://youtu.be/c8JppJyVxYU