Conferência dos Bispos dos EUA Recebeu US$ 91 milhões de Obama.

A Conferência Nacional dos Bispos dos Estados Unidos (USCCB) sempre ataca as medidas de controle de imigração do governo Trump, sem levar em conta nenhum aspecto adverso que a imigração pode causar culturalmente.

Mas hoje foi divulgado que a USCCB recebeu US$ 91 milhões do governo Obama para acomodare refugiados.

Pode isso? Pode a Igreja ficar dependente financeiramente do Estado? Isso não pode prejudicar a defesa da Doutrina da Igreja? Isso não prejudica a defesa de um político que defenda a Doutrina da Igreja? 

O dinheiro recebido pode desviar as ações da Igreja para problemas não relacionados aos principais problemas da fé. Pode ocorrer que a Igreja reduza as ações contra o aborto e em favor do casamento tradicional em favor de imigração e questões ambientais. Obama financia muito bem imigração e meio ambiente, mas desprezou a defesa da vida e defendeu o casamento gay.

Trump já aprovou pelo menos duas fantásticas medidas contra o aborto. Não vi a USCCB elogiando Trump publicamente de forma que ele merece nesse aspecto.

Algumas instituições da Igreja se tornaram quase completamente dependentes do governo Obama.

O relato do dinheiro que a USCCB recebeu de Obama para manter refugiados foi descrito pelo site Newsmax, cliquem aqui para lê-lo.

O site LifeNews relacionou o dinheiro que a USCCB recebeu com o silêncio que a instituição fez aos problemas de Hillary Clinton, durante a campanha presidencial. Hillary é defensora ardente do aborto e do casamento gay.

Vejam abaixo texto da LifeNews:

Is the $91 million Obama refugee grant to the USCCB tied to bishops’ silence on Hillary?

by Lisa Bourne

WASHINGTON, D.C., September 8, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) – After leaked documents show billionaire George Soros has been trying to purchase influence with Catholic Church leadership in the United States and Rome to advance his “progressive” agenda, details continue to surface that raise the question of just how successful Soros may have been in his quest. The massive funds coming to the USCCB from the Obama Administration over pet issues such as refugees ($91 million) have some wondering if that is a reason for the bishops' virtual silence on Presidential candidate Hilary Clinton's atrocious record on life and family.

The American Catholic hierarchy is elevating other causes to primacy in place of the life issue, a new report says, “relegating the pro-life ministries to the doctrinal ash heap and committing funds and personnel to promote environmental and migration issues.”

“Migration pays very well,” said attorney and international child rights advocate Elizabeth Yore, “pro-life pays nothing.”

Thousands of federal grants and contracts come from the Obama administration to the Catholic Church, Yore says in the report, but in particular, hundreds of millions of dollars in fiscal year 2016 alone found their way to the USCCB, Catholic Charities, CRS, and the International Catholic Migration Commission (ICMC), “jaw dropping grants to carry out the Obama agenda.”

“We’ve got the most virulently anti-life administration in the history of the United States,” Yore told LifeSiteNews. “And the Catholic Church is propping up the administration.”

“I find it very troubling that the Church is cooperating with the Obama administration,” she said.

Three of the grant recipients comprise an ongoing fiscal relationship between the U.S. bishops and Obama’s administration, Yore said in the report published by The Remnant.

The figures available on the USASpending.gov website show the USCCB garnering more than $91 million for refugee resettlement programs, more than $202 million going to Catholic Charities, which also serves refugees, and the Boston-based ICMC getting more than $17 million in government funds stipulated entirely for U.S. refugee resettlement.

LifeSiteNews did not hear back from the USCCB from an inquiry for comment on Yore’s report.

“The size of these grants is enormous,” Yore told LifeSiteNews.

Catholic observer Deal Hudson, Ph.D, publisher and editor of The Christian Review, echoed Yore’s concern that the nation’s bishops had become too beholden to the Obama administration, stating, “It appears that the bishops' conference has become a virtual vendor of the federal government.”

Hudson had also detailed in his column last month at the Christian Review how the U.S. church is helping the Clinton/Kaine ticket with its silence.

Two weeks later, Hudson lamented the failure of Catholic bishops and clergy to reasonably respond to the Clinton candidacy and pro-abortion Democrat platform, writing, “Yes, there are some bishops and priests reminding Catholics to consider the abortion issue in casting their ballots, but the number is pitifully small, resulting in virtual silence from the Church.”

Yore said things have changed from the days of U.S. Catholic missionary forerunners Saint Elizabeth Ann Seton and Saint Frances Xavier Cabrini establishing charities where the Catholic faith was evangelized.

“That’s not what’s going on,” she stated. “It’s a bureaucracy that’s going on.”

The Obama administration’s agenda with the Syrian refugee crisis has become the Church’s mission, but Yore said Middle Eastern Christians make up only a tiny fraction of the refugees; otherwise, the federal contracts would be in jeopardy.

“Along comes mega-billionaire George Soros as the global architect of an international mass migration policy that fills the Catholic Church coffers and floods Europe and America with Muslim refugees,” Yore said. “Wake up, Catholics! The USCCB and its partners are quietly assisting the Obama administration in resettling into the United States tens of thousands of Muslim Syrian refugees.”

There has been no opportunity for a discussion about this, she continued, and if there was nothing to hide, then Americans should know how many refugees are being settled in the United States. But there are huge numbers and no pictures.

“When in doubt, follow the money,” said Yore, a member of the Heartland Institute delegation to protest the Vatican exclusion of all scientific opinions and reliance on population control experts. “This ecclesial trail is flush with cash.”

Yore said that given the Obama mass refugee resettlement program has been so lucrative for the USCCB, and GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump’s plan to suspend the Muslim refugee migration program into the United States would be quite costly for the bishops, it therefore is no surprise the bishops have been silent on the pro-abortion Clinton candidacy.

Individual bishops have been critical of Donald Trump, however, and Yore said as well it’s no surprise that the Catholic bishops, under Vatican direction, are promoting the migration of Muslim refugees into the United States.

“It’s no surprise that New York Cardinal Timothy Dolan criticized Trump by writing that “Nativism is alive, well – and apparently popular!” she recounted.

“It’s no surprise that Bishop Kevin Farrell of Dallas condemned what he called the “déjà vu of immigrant bashing,” Yore continued, “reminding his diocesan Catholics of Trump’s words.”

And further, she said, “It’s no surprise that LA Archbishop Jose Gomez opined that Trump’s stance on immigration “is not right.”

“Catholics are witnessing the bureaucratic deconstruction of the pro-life movement in chanceries and the elevation of migration and immigration in its place,” Yore concluded, and instead, “Catholic children are learning about the sin of littering, the importance of tree hugging and sexual hugging in the latest Vatican sex education curriculum.”

It’s expected that the Bishops’ Conference will keep silent about Clinton while also criticizing Trump for his position on Syrian refugee migration, she said, opting to not bite the hand that feeds it. 

“We hear much about ‘vote your conscience,’” Yore said. “This isn’t about conscience, folks. It’s about their checkbook.”

---

E no Brasil? e a CNBB? É dependente financeiramente do governo?

"Papa Francisco Brinca com o Fogo do Inferno, Sendo como Juan Perón."

Juan Perón, que faleceu em 1974, até hoje domina a política na Argentina. Há peronistas de direita e peronistas de esquerda. Outro dia, eu li que tem até peronistas chestertonianos, como se Chesterton não fosse avesso a ideia de "homem forte" na política. Chesterton achava que um país que precisa de homens fortes para dominar era um país fraco. Perón deixou um rastro destrutivo na Argentina que até hoje se faz sentir.

Hoje eu li um ótimo texto de John-Henry Western sobre o peronismo do Papa Francisco, um papa que procura nunca se mostrar como totalmente de esquerda ou de direita, muito pelo contrário. Isto é, alguém que usa palavras para agradar os esquerdistas e também para agradar conservadores, e nunca satisfaz os dois completamente, como fez Perón. Uma pessoa que confunde, não esclarece.

No texto, John-Henry Western diz que conversou com alguns padres de Buenos Aires que trabalharam com Jorge Bergoglio, quando ele era líder entre os jesuítas da Argentina. Os padres revelaram que era comum após reuniões com o futuro Papa Francisco, os esquerdistas dizerem que Bergoglio estava do lado deles e, ao mesmo tempo, os conservadores dizerem que Bergoglio estava do lado deles, exatamente como Perón. Os dois lados ressaltando que Bergoglio não os ia defender publicamente.

Western conta uma anedota argentina. Certa vez, o motorista de Perón estava em uma encruzilhada e perguntou a Perón para onde ir. Perón respondeu: "Dê o sinal para a direita, mas vire à esquerda".

Western conclui, no entanto, que confundir os padres em Buenos Aires é uma coisa, agora confundir os fiéis sendo o Papa é outra totalmente diferente. Ao confundir os fiéis em matéria de Eucaristia e misericórdia, o Papa está brincando com fogo, com o fogo do inferno, onde poderão acabar os fiéis.

Vejam parte do texto de Western abaixo, publicado no Life News:

Pope Francis is playing with fire. Hell fire.

...

But as we’ve laid out above, there is massive confusion in the Church about where exactly the Pope stands on the matter. Even though a thorough assessment clearly shows the Pope backing communion for divorced and remarried Catholics, there are cardinals and bishops who suggest the Pope means the opposite.

For those who knew Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio prior to his election to the pontificate, this is nothing new. I spoke to a few priests from Buenos Aires who worked with Cardinal Bergoglio in different capacities and from them learned that confusion is emblematic of his ministry. One anecdote in particular was very instructive. I was told that people from opposite camps would both come out of meetings with Cardinal Bergoglio believing he supported their position. “He’s with us but can’t say so publicly,” they would relate, as would those who met with him from the opposing camp.

While in an archdiocese this may work for a time, this learned priest told me, in the Vatican where just about everything the Pope says is trumpeted to the world, these kinds of discrepancies become evident more quickly. Francis, the priest told me, is very much a Peronist — named for former Argentina President Juan Domingo Perón. Like Perón, Pope Francis plays with both left wing and right wing factions.  

The priest tells a story about President Peron that helps to understand Francis. Once Peron was in his car and at a fork in the road his driver asked him which way he would like to go, to which Peron replied: “Put the flicker on for a right turn, but go left.” One last note about Bergoglio, related by the priest, is that when pushed, he will go left out of a great apprehension of being labeled a right-winger by the media.

Shortly after the publication of Amoris Laetitia, a forward-thinking critic warned that it would become unworkable for the Church if the bishops in Germany would wink at divorce and remarriage while across the border in Poland it would be mortally sinful. Yet who could have envisioned that we’d see bishops and cardinals voicing opposing opinions on what the Pope himself believes and teaches?

The dichotomy is clear evidence that the Pope himself, in refusing to clarify despite the formal and public request of the four Cardinals and associated pleas by countless other Catholic clergy and laity, is guilty of betraying the entire Church. By letting this charade continue he has sown confusion into the hearts of the faithful. This confusion could lead to mortal sin and thus eternal damnation.

Pope Francis is indeed playing with fire. Hell fire.

Papa Francisco Diz que Paz só é Possível sem Arma Nuclear.

Bom, como eu explico no meu livro Guerra Justa, teologicamente e doutrinariamente falando a paz nunca é possível nessa vida, por conta do pecado humano. Esse ensinamento vem desde Santo Agostinho, pai da teoria da guerra justa, e é repetido por todos os teólogos da Igreja que trataram do tema (São Tomás de Aquino, São Roberto Belarmino, etc).

Também explico no meu livro, que o tipo de arma não determina a paz, pois como disse Cristo a guerra sai do coração dos homens e não fora dele.

Eu trato especificamente sobre a questão da bomba nuclear em várias passagens do livro e sugiro leitura do que disseram Elizabeth Ascombe e Edward Feser. Eles, dois católicos, condenaram o uso da bomba nuclear contra o Japão, mas não a arma nuclear em si.

Trato também da posição dos papas, da Santa Sé e do debate diplomático sobre isso, em que ninguém confia em ninguém, porque a posse de bombas nucleares determina poder militar e político.

Mas o Papa Francisco diz que a "eliminação completa das armas nucleares é um imperativo moral".

Que país que detém armas nucleares começará primeiro a se desarmar?

O Papa Francisco acha que só o "diálogo" trará paz. No livro, eu pergunto se o diálogo conseguiria eliminar o Estado Islâmico.

Vejamos o relato das palavras do Papa para ONU tratando de desarmamento nuclear, que saiu no The Catholic Herald de hoje:

World peace cannot be achieved by maintaining nuclear weapons, Pope tells UN

Today’s threats to global peace and security must be countered through dialogue and development, not nuclear weapons, Pope Francis told the United Nations.

“How sustainable is a stability based on fear, when it actually increases fear and undermines relationships of trust between peoples,” the Pope asked in a letter sent to a UN meeting on nuclear arms.

“International peace and stability cannot be based on a false sense of security, on the threat of mutual destruction or total annihilation, or on simply maintaining a balance of power,” he said in the message, released by the Vatican on March 28. The message was read aloud at the UN by Mgr Antoine Camilleri, Vatican undersecretary for relations with states.

The Pope’s message was sent to Elayne Whyte Gomez, president of the UN Conference to Negotiate a Legally Binding Instrument to Prohibit Nuclear Weapons, Leading Towards Their Total Elimination. The conference was being held at the UN headquarters in New York on March 27-31, with a follow-up meeting on June 15-July 

A number of nations — many of which already possess nuclear arms — were boycotting the negotiations to ban such weapons. These included the United States, France, the United Kingdom and about 40 other nations. Some continue to support the Non-Proliferation Treaty to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology.

US Ambassador Nikki Haley told reporters in New York on March 28 that it was the responsibility of leaders to keep their nations safe.

“There is nothing I want more for my family than a world with no nuclear weapons. But we have to be realistic,” Haley said.

“In this day and time, we can’t honestly say that we can protect our people by allowing the bad actors to have them and those of us that are good, trying to keep peace and safety, not to have them,” she said.

However, Pope Francis said in his message that the strategy of nuclear deterrence was not an effective response to today’s threats to peace and security: terrorism, cybersecurity, environmental problems and poverty.

“Peace must be built on justice, on integral human development, on respect for fundamental human rights, on the protection of creation, on the participation of all in public life, on trust between peoples, on the support of peaceful institutions, on access to education and health, on dialogue and solidarity,” he said.

The world needs “to adopt forward-looking strategies to promote the goal of peace and stability and to avoid short-sighted approaches to the problems surrounding national and international security,” he said.

The complete elimination of nuclear weapons is “a moral and humanitarian imperative” that should prompt people to reflect on “an ethics of peace and multilateral and cooperative security that goes beyond the fear and isolationism that prevail in many debates today.”

Making a total global ban possible will demand more dialogue, trust and cooperation. “This trust can be built only through dialogue that is truly directed to the common good and not to the protection of veiled or particular interests,” he added.

Humanity has the ability, freedom and intelligence to work together to “lead and direct technology, to place limits on our power, and to put all this at the service of another type of progress: one that is more human, social and integral,” he said.

115 Mártires da Guerra Civil da Espanha são Beatificados em Almería. Mortos pelos Comunistas.

No último dia 25 março, a Igreja beatificou 115 mártires de Almería na Espanha.

Dentre os 115 mártires, 95 eram sacerdotes e 20 eram seculares. Entre os seculares está uma cigana, chamada Emília Rodriguez. Temos a primeira cigana beatificada.  Ela tinha sido presa pelos paramilitares "republicanos" (comunistas) mesmo estando grávida, por tentar evitar que seu marido fosse recrutado pelos comunistas. Ela se negou a denunciar quem a tinha ensinado a rezar o rosário e por isso foi levada a uma cela solitária. Ela morreu após dar à luz na prisão.

Os comunistas fizeram todo tipo de atrocidade contra os mártires, incluindo fazer um padre  de 81 anos (padre Luis Eduardi Gascon) a engolir o rosário. Esse é o mais velho dos 115.

O mais novo é Luis Quintas Duran, que tinha 18 anos, e foi afogado e levou tiro no pescoço por se recusar a negar sua fé. O irmão dele, Jose Quintas Duran, foi enterrado vivo e depois de ser obrigado a cavar sua própria sepultura.

É dito que mais de 6.800 clérigos foram assassinados por esquerdistas revolucionários na Guerra Civil espanhola.

A foto abaixo foi publicada pelo jornal inglês Daily Mail mostra os comunistas da Espanha querendo derrubar o catolicismo na Espanha atirando no Sagrado Coração.

Viva Cristo Rei!

Que os mártires nos protejam.

O Calcanhar de Aquiles do Papa Francisco é o Próprio Papa Francisco

William Doino Jr. escreveu um bom texto falando das deficiências do Papa Francisco, e concluiu dizendo que o "Calcanhar de Aquiles do Papa são as próprias palavras que ele diz". O Papa Francisco não se livra da condenação de suas próprias palavras. Ele não segue o que ele defende, especialmente ao ser agressivo e não misericordioso com quem não concorda com o modo que ele conduz a Igreja (cadê a misericórdia tão apregoada por ele?) e também no modo que o Papa conduz o problema dos abusos sexuais do clero. Ele prega severidade contra os pedófilos, mas é bem frouxo nas condenações.

É um bom texto, talvez o autor devesse se estender mais na sua principal tese sobre o Calcanhar de Aquiles do Papa, mas seguramente é um texto que deve ser lido.

Ele aponta 5 fraquezas do pontificado do Papa Francisco. Acho que todAs as 5 fraquezas cabem em uma só: o Papa Francisco é perigosamente confuso, com riscos de ser "intencionalmente" confuso. 

Mas vamos às 5 fraquezas relatadas por Doino Jr.

1) O Papa não apresenta um conceito claro do que chama de Misericórdia.

2) O Papa Francisco não tem ressaltado o risco de se receber Eucaristia estando fora do estado de graça;

3) O Papa não tem defendido seus próprios argumentos feitos na Amoris Laetitia.

4) O Papa não tem atacado a heterodoxia doutrinária dentro da Igreja;

5) O Papa diz uma coisa e faz outra (o Calcanhar de Aquiles do Papa).

Leiam o texto, clicando aqui.

Rezemos pelo Papa Francisco e pela Igreja.

Pesquisa: Quem Mantém Filho Católico é o Pai, não a Mãe

Que pesquisa interessante. Lembrei de vários amigos que abandonaram a Igreja, mas têm mães muito católicas.

A pesquisa, para mim, tem quatro mensagens:

- A Igreja precisa muito de pais para manter a fé de seus filhos. Os pais são os mais responsáveis pela eternidade da fé;

- Para homens, observem a responsabilidade de vocês sobre a alma dos filhos;

- Para mulheres, se vocês querem seus filhos católicos procurem homens bem católicos.

- Claro que a presença do pai não é tudo, há santos que seguiram a Igreja contra a vontade de seus pais e outros que seguiram a Igreja pelo apoio dado pelas mães, mas a ausência dele na vida das crianças pode explicar muito o mundo de hoje;

A pesquisa foi feita pelo governo da Suiça e publicada em 2000, foi assunto no site Christian Post em 2011, e novamente ressaltada no site Roman Catholic Man.

Vejamos um resumo dos resultados da pesquisa:

1) Não importa quão devota é a mãe, se o pai não frequenta a Igreja, apenas 1 criança em 50 será um fiel que vai à Igreja regularmente;

2) Se o pai vai regularmente à Igreja, não importa se a mãe frequenta ou não a Igreja, entre 2/3 e 3/4 dos filhos serão fiéis que vão a Igreja.

3) É o Pai que explica o mundo para as crianças, por isso, se ele vai a Igreja esse é o mundo que deve ser seguido. A mãe explica a vida doméstica.

4) Se o Pai leva a fé em Deus a sério, então a mensagem para os filhos é que eles devem levar Deus a sério;

5) Se ambos, pais e mães, vão a Igreja regularmente 33% dos filhos irão regularmente e 41% irão de forma irregular, apenas 25% não serão praticantes;

6) Se o pai é um praticante irregular e a mãe é fiel regular, apenas 3% das crianças serão praticantes regulares, 59% serão irregulares e 38% abandonarão a Igreja. Isso mesmo, a mãe fiel não consegue manter a fé dos filhos.

7) Se o pai não vai na Igreja e a mãe é fiel regular, apenas 2% dos filhos serão fiéis regulares, 37% serão irregulares e 60% deixarão a Igreja. O pai não sendo nem fiel irregular, enfraquece ainda mais a força da mãe em manter a fé dos filhos.

8) Agora, se o pai é fiel regular e a mãe for irregular ou  não praticante, 38% das crianças serão regulares, se a mãe for irregular, e 44% se a mãe for não praticante. Isso mesmo, não interessa a posição da mãe, basta o pai ser fiel regular e a fé dos filhos está muito mais garantida.

9) Não há substituto para o pai, em matéria de compromisso com a fé.

O site Roman Catholic Man reforça a importância dos pais com um discurso do bispo Thomas Olmsted de Phoenix, nos Estados Unidos. O bispo faz uma linda exortação aos homens de fé.

A exortação se chama Into the Breach, o site colocou um trecho, vejamos:

"Men, do not hesitate to engage in the battle that is raging around you, the battle that is wounding our children and families, the battle that is distorting the dignity of both women and men. This battle is often hidden, but the battle is real. It is primarily spiritual, but it is progressively killing the remaining Christian ethos in our society and culture, and even in our own homes.

The world is under attack by Satan, as our Lord said it would be (1 Peter 5:8-14). This battle is occurring in the Church herself, and the devastation is all too evident. Since AD 2000, 14 million Catholics have left the faith, parish religious education of children has dropped by 24%, Catholic school attendance has dropped by 19%, infant baptism has dropped by 28%, adult baptism has dropped by 31%, and sacramental Catholic marriages have dropped by 41%. This is a serious breach, a gaping hole in Christ’s battle lines …

One of the key reasons that the Church is faltering under the attacks of Satan is that many Catholic men have not been willing to “step into the breach” – to fill this gap that lies open and vulnerable to further attack. A large number have left the faith, and many who remain “Catholic” practice the faith timidly and are only minimally committed to passing the faith on to their children. Recent research shows that large numbers of young Catholic men are leaving the faith to become “nones” – men who have no religious affiliation. The growing losses of young Catholic men will have a devastating impact on the Church in America in the coming decades, as older men pass away and young men fail to remain and marry in the Church, accelerating the losses that have already occurred.

These facts are devastating. As our fathers, brothers, uncles, sons, and friends fall away from the Church, they fall deeper and deeper into sin, breaking their bonds with God and leaving them vulnerable to the fires of Hell. While we know that Christ welcomes back every repentant sinner, the truth is that large numbers of Catholic men are failing to keep the promises they made at their children’s baptisms – promises to bring them to Christ and to raise them in the faith of the Church.

This crisis is evident in the discouragement and disengagement of Catholic men like you and me. In fact, this is precisely why I believe this Exhortation is needed, and it is also the reason for my hope, for God constantly overcomes evil with good. The joy of the Gospel is stronger than the sadness wrought by sin! A throw-away culture cannot withstand the new life and light that constantly radiates from Christ. So I call upon you to open your minds and hearts to Him, the Savior who strengthens you to step into the breach!"

Google é Amigo do Terrorismo

O jornal Daily Mail de hoje acusa o Google de ser amigo do terrorismo, pois o jornal em apenas dois minutos encontrou no Google um manual terrorista de como usar um carro em ação terrorista.

Mas será que o Google não deveria começar censurando o próprio Islã?

Alguém só vai alugar um carro para o terror, porque foi dominado por uma ideologia que apoia isso.

Eu publiquei um artigo no próprio Reino Unido, onde houve o atentando terrorista que fala o jornal, mostrando que o Alcorão exige guerra cruel aos infiéis até que a submissão seja completamente a Alá, em várias passagens.  Meu artigo se chama Trying to Catch the Drluge: Shari'ah, Terrorism And Religious Freedom.

Comentei também muito sobre o Islã, o Terrorismo e a Igreja Católica no meu livro Teoria e Tradição da Guerra Justa, publicado aqui no Brasil.

A própria Igreja Católica, que  sofre do Islã desde o surgimento desta religião, hoje em dia se acovarda em não mostrar o que é o Islã. Se nem a Igreja Católica censura o Islã, porque o Google deve fazê-lo?

O Populismo Feito e Amado pelo Papa Francisco.

O Papa Francisco e muitos líderes europeus de esquerda quando querem condenar Trump usam o termo "populismo". É a velha falácia de rotular (falácia ad hominem) para evitar o debate.

Além disso, o chamado "populismo" sempre esteve ligado ao esquerdismo, pois são eles que procuram elaborar políticas que fornecem dinheiro e bens de graça para os mais pobres. Os esquerdistas é que costumam se assentar em políticas do tipo "bolsa família" ou "food stamp" ou liberar a presença de imigrantes ilegais ou serem menos rigorosos com o uso da lei se a pessoa é pobre.  Esquerdistas é que costumam falar de "povo", em defender o "povo", como uma categoria única de pensamento. São os esquerdistas que dividem as pessoas em classes, segundo os bens materiais. Muitas vezes, eu vejo partidos de esquerda nanicos no Brasil dizer que defendem o povo. Mas em geral o povo mesmo não os apoia.

Ao usar o temo "populismo" contra Trump e afins, eles evitam de dizer que eles são elitistas.  Trump está do lado do tipo de pessoas que está preocupado em manter sua cultura e religião cristã, preocupado com seus empregos, com o terrorismo e com a entrada de muitos imigrantes ilegais. Enquanto os esquerdistas, elitistas universitários, estão preocupados com uma tal mudança climática (que permite que a elite distribua dinheiro aos seus) e descartam o valor da religião cristã.

O populismo da esquerda tem base materialista, os bens materiais definem as pessoas e assim as pessoas devem ser divididas, dessa maneira os esquerdistas distribuem os gastos públicos, ao mesmo tempo que se enriquecem com dinheiro público.  O populismo de Trump e afins é um populismo de defesa cultural e espiritual.

O escritor Samuel Gregg escreveu sobre o populismo do Papa Francisco no site The Federalist, aquele que o Papa defende e protege, o populismo esquerdista, que diz que todos têm "direito" à casa, terra e trabalho de graça fornecido pelo Estado.

Vejamos parte do artigo de Gregg, abaixo

Pope Francis Hates Populism, Except When He Loves It

I suspect I wasn’t the only person taken aback when Pope Francis recently stated in an interview with Germany’s leading liberal newspaper Die Zeit that “Populism is evil and ends badly, as the past century shows.”

The pope didn’t specify who he had in mind. Plenty assumed he was obliquely referring to Donald Trump and European politicians like Marine Le Pen. I’m sure, however, that others thought that the pope’s words verged on the kettle calling the pot black. For whether it’s his rhetorical style or the type of political movement to which he appears to lend his support, Pope Francis seems quite sympathetic to some forms of populism.

But Pope Francis Is All About ‘the People’

Nor are some of Francis’s principal supporters averse to invoking populist language when defending his program for the Catholic Church. Consider, for example, Archbishop Victor Fernández. The Argentine theologian is close enough to the pope that some phrases that appear in Francis’s 2016 apostolic exhortation “Amoris Laetitia” bear an uncanny resemblance to expressions used in articles penned by Fernández in 1995, 2001, and 2006.

Asked in a 2015 interview whether he considered the pope isolated and surrounded by opponents in the Vatican, Fernández answered: “By no means. The people are with him, not his few adversaries. This pope first filled St. Peter’s Square with crowds and then began changing the Church. Above all, for this reason he is not isolated. The people sense in him the fragrance of the Gospel, the joy of the Spirit, the closeness of Christ and thus they feel the Church is like their home.”

“The people.” “Crowds.” “The people.” Such language has very specific meaning in Latin America. When used by figures such as the long-deceased Argentine populist Juan Perón or the more recently departed “twenty-first-century socialist” Hugo Chávez of Venezuela, the purpose of this phraseology is the same. It is to evoke an almost mystical connection between the leader and “the people” as they struggle together against oppression.

This rhetoric goes hand-in-hand with tendencies to caricature real or perceived opponents. The speeches of Perón and Chávez are full of ad hominem rants against “enemies of the people.” Francis himself isn’t shy about applying labels. There’s even a blog that has compiled his more memorable phrases: “rigorists,” “fundamentalists,” “Pharisees,” “intellectual aristocrats,” “little monsters,” “self-absorbed promethean neo–pelagians,” to name just a few. The targets range from younger Catholics with a distaste for 1970s liturgy to theologians who insist that coherently preaching the gospel requires a concern for intellectual rigor.

Pope Francis Is Himself a Populist

But Francis’s populist side manifests itself most clearly in addresses he’s given to one particular group that he has clearly supported: an organization called The World Meeting of Popular Movements. The populist edge to Francis’s thought is very evident in, for example, a 2015 speech he gave to this group in Bolivia. At various points, the rhetoric employed by the pope—“tyranny of mammon,” “this economy kills,” “bondage of individualism” etc.—is decidedly charged, even polemical. Some of it isn’t that different from the language used by populist politicians throughout Latin America.

This last point is underscored by the fact that Pope Francis delivered these remarks while seated next to President Evo Morales of Bolivia. A self-described communitarian-socialist, Morales is a quintessential Latin American left-populist. Like all such politicians, he’s steadily removed constitutional restraints on his power in the name of “the people.” Morales’ prominence at the pope’s speech, as one journalist present remarked to me, reinforced the sense that “the whole event had the feel of a deeply political, very left-wing, and somewhat secular rally.”

The pope’s apparent empathy for a type of populism was further underscored when the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences held a conference in April 2016 to mark the 25th anniversary of John Paul II’s encyclical “Centesimus Annus.” The two heads of states invited to speak were none other than Morales and another left-populist head of state, Ecuador’s Rafael Correa. The event was tilted even further in a left-populist direction by the presence of the then-candidate for the Democratic nomination for president of the United States, Sen. Bernie Sanders, who also gave a speech.

...

There’s some evidence this is Francis’s view. In an interview with the Spanish left-leaning newspaper El País, the pope described Latin American populism as healthy because it made “the people . . . the protagonists.” He then associated populism in Europe with the rise of the Nazis.

But does this mean that, from Francis’s standpoint, “the people” crushed by poverty in Latin America are the true bearers of the subcontinent’s destiny (even if their left-populist leaders destroy the economy in countries like Venezuela and trash civil liberties throughout the region), whereas “the people” in Western Europe fed up with unaccountable Eurocrats are closet racists who, sotto voce, want to take Europe back to the dictatorships of the 1930s?

Papa Francisco Diz que NÃO Pretende Dá Eucaristia a Recasados e Pede que Políticos Abortistas NÃO recebam Eucaristia.

Depois daqueles rodapés do capítulo 8 do Amoris Laetitia e de uma carta aos bispos da Argentina no qual parece confirmar que pretende liberar a Eucaristia para divorciados recém casados, os bispos do Chile, após o encontro com o Papa Francisco, disseram que o Papa Francisco NÃO deseja liberar a Eucaristia para recasados, e ainda que deseja que políticos que defendem o aborto publicamente NÃO recebam Eucaristia!

Viva! Salve Rainha, o Papa seria Católico!

Ele bem que podia pelo menos falar o que disse aos bispos chilenos em público e aproveitava e respondia caridosamente a Dubia dos quatro cardeais com palavras ortodoxas. Amém.

Vejam o relato sobre isso do site Info Católica.

DURANTE LA VISITA AD LIMINA DE FEBRERO

El Papa a los obispos chilenos: no a la comunión de divorciados vueltos a casar ni de políticos proabortistas

El presidente de la Conferencia Episcopal de Chile, Mons. Santiago Silva, y el secretario general, Mons. Fernando Ramos, han concedido una entrevista a El Mercurio sobre el encuentro que mantuvieron los obispos chilenos con el Papa en febrero.

21/03/17 9:18 AM

( InfoCatólica ) Entre los temas abordados entre el Papa y los obispos chilenos figuraron el avance de la despenalización del aborto en el país sudamericano. Mons. Ramos lo explica así en El Mercurio :

« El Papa fue muy claro; el aborto entendido como la búsqueda de eliminar un ser humano es siempre un asesinato, y no hay que confundirlo con prácticas médicas aceptadas para salvar una vida».

Y Mons. Silva añadió:

«El aborto es un tema sabidamente principal para Francisco. Siendo Arzobispo de Buenos Aires fue durísimo con el hoy Presidente Mauricio Macri cuando reglamentó los "abortos no punibles" como gobernador, y frenó una "guía médica" que Cristina Kirchner intentó difundir.

Así se lo planteó ahora también a los obispos chilenos y habló en especial de los políticos católicos que votan en favor de las leyes que lo legalizan:

«Insistió en que no pueden comulgar y en que hay que ayudarlos a no seguir cometiendo pecado. El Papa es mucho más fuerte de lo que parece"».

En cuanto a la posiblidad de ordenar como sacerdotes a hombre casados, Mons. Ramos explicó la postura del Santo Padre y del cardenal Stella. Ante la pregunta « ¿es cierto que el Papa estaría pensando ordenar hombres casados? », planteada por la repercusión de la entrevista del pontífice al diario alemán "Die Zeit", el obispo auxiliar de Santiago respondió:

«No, y en la misma entrevista el Papa dice que el celibato voluntario no está en la agenda»,

Y explica que se le preguntó por la posibilidad de que los "viri probati", hombres casados de vida cristiana probada, ayudaran en lugares apartados. El tema también lo abordó con ellos el prefecto del clero, el cardenal Stella, y fue tajante: «No es el camino» .

Ante la cuestión de la comunión de los divorciados vueltos a casar, el obispo explica que el Pontífice negó que su objetivo con el sínodo al que convocó sobre la familia haya sido autorizar la comunión de los divorciados . Les habló de que no hay "moral de situación", dicen otras fuentes."Nos cuesta mucho ver los grises", les habría dicho, cuando contó un caso personal, familiar suyo.

«Tengo una sobrina casada con un divorciado, bueno, católico, de misa dominical y que cuando se confiesa le dice al sacerdote 'sé que no puede absolverme, pero deme su bendición '».

Vídeos do Youtube de Gays e Lésbicas Liberados para Crianças.

O New York Times relatou que o Youtube sofreu pressão gay para que o filtro que a companhia faz para a família (family friendly) liberasse vídeos que defendem gays, lésbicas e LGBT. Liberassem para todos, incluindo crianças.

Isto é, a comunidade gay não quer deixar seu filho e sua filha de fora, quer influenciá-los. Não contem com a liberdade religiosa para protegê-la.

Cristo em Mateus 18:5-6, disse:

"Quem recebe uma destas crianças em meu nome, está me recebendo.
Mas se alguém fizer tropeçar um destes pequeninos que crêem em mim, melhor lhe seria amarrar uma pedra de moinho no pescoço e se afogar nas profundezas do mar."

Rod Dreher, do site The American Conservative, menciona o livro de Erick Erickson e Bill Blankschaen (acima), que deixa claro que os esquerdistas imorais e amorais não deixarão a liberdade religiosa proteger os cristãos e além disso, eles dominarão as mídias que farão "você será obrigado a defendê-los (you will be made to care)"

E como Dreher diz: "uma família cristã é louca se deixar seus filhos livremente no Youtube" Não contém com "filtros" de proteção.

O Café e a Guerra entre Cristãos e Muçulmanos

No meu livro sobre Guerra Justa, desde o Império Romano até o Estado Islâmico, além de teólogos, santos e papas, eu tento mostrar que a guerra entre cristãos e muçulmanos, que se alastra desde o surgimento do Islã, também está presente na literaratura, como em Dante (Divina Comédia) e Cervantes (Dom Quixote).

Hoje, leio também que a aceitação do café pelo ocidente também mostra o problema do Islã. Conta-se que em 1600 não se desejava aceitar o café, porque era uma bebida islâmica. Mas um Papa (Clemente VIII) disse "Essa bebida de Satanás é tão deliciosa que nós deveríamos enganar o diabo e batizá-la".

Leia aqui a descrição da lenda feita pelo site ChurchPop, interessante.

O Anti-Judaísmo do Papa Francisco.

Uma coisa é o anti-semitismo, discriminação contra a raça judia, outra coisa é o anti-judaísmo, discriminação contra a religião judia. Um rabino italiano, chamado Giuseppe Laras, está atacando o Papa Francisco, dizendo que o Papa apresenta um anti-judaísmo. 

Quando eu li o título da notícia, eu pensei: mas o Papa Francisco não é tão amigo de rabinos argentinos?

Acontece que a questão não é de amizade e demonstrações de apreço exteriores.

A questão é o seguinte, o Papa Francisco regularmente ataca com palavras grosseiras teólogos e canonistas em favor do que ele pensa sobre misericórdia. O Papa difama muito a Lei Canônica e a Doutrina em favor da ação pastoral.

Eu sempre achei essas ações do Papa muito estranhas a Cristo, mesmo porque Cristo igualou os fariseus a Moisés e mandou que seus discípulos obedecessem a "tudo o que os fariseus dizem". Vejamos Mateus 23: 1-4

Então, Jesus disse à multidão e aos seus discípulos:
"Os mestres da lei e os fariseus se assentam na cadeira de Moisés.
Obedeçam-lhes e façam tudo o que eles lhes dizem. Mas não façam o que eles fazem, pois não praticam o que pregam.
Eles atam fardos pesados e os colocam sobre os ombros dos homens, mas eles mesmos não estão dispostos a levantar um só dedo para movê-los.

Cristo nunca se comportou diminuindo a lei judaica. Pelo contrário, a reforçou, a aprimorou e disse que Ele veio para completar a lei judaica.

Vejamos o texto do Padre Peter Stravinskas, publicado no The Catholic World Report sobre o que disse o rabino Giuseppe Laras.  O padre Peter lembra que Cristo desprezava mesmo era a seita judia dos saduceus que queria diminuir a lei judaica em favor do mundo e não os fariseus. Apesar de atacar o comportamento dos fariseus, Cristo nunca atacou o que eles pregavam.

Papal Anti-Judaism?

March 14, 2017

We have heard the Pope say over and over again that he is no theologian and that he doesn’t care much for theology, but it is exactly that attitude which has caused so much damage in this pontificate.

Rev. Peter M.J. Stravinskas

A renowned Italian rabbi, Giuseppe Laras, recently wrote an open letter in response to developments within the Italian Biblical Association which he considers extremely problematic in terms of Jewish-Christian relations. In fact, he says that he is “very indignant and embittered.” Most interestingly, he asserts that Pope Francis has aided and abetted this development. We haven’t heard of a Jewish leader accusing a Pope of “anti-Judaism” in decades. What can account for this? Isn’t Pope Francis an intimate friend of an Argentinian rabbi? Don’t most Jews appreciate his open attitude toward them?

Rabbi Laras complains of a strong undercurrent of “anti-Judaism,” which is not synonymous with anti-Semitism. The latter is racial prejudice, while the former is theological prejudice. The rabbi argues that he sees a resurgence “of resentment, intolerance, and annoyance on the Christian side toward Judaism; a substantial distrust of the Bible and a subsequent minimization of the Jewish biblical roots of Christianity.” Further, he sees “the resumption of the old polarization between the morality and theology of the Hebrew Bible and of Pharisaism, and Jesus of Nazareth and the Gospels.” He identifies this trend with the second-century heretic Marcion, who disdained Judaism and even claimed a total disconnect between the God of the Old Testament and the God of Jesus Christ. Laras admits that official Catholic teaching repudiates such positions but then laments: “What a shame that [those official positions] should be contradicted on a daily basis by the homilies of the pontiff, who employs precisely the old, inveterate structure and its expressions, dissolving the contents of the aforementioned documents.” Is this an example of Jewish hyper-sensitivity? Unfortunately not.

As a young seminarian, I became (ironically) the first graduate of the Jewish Academy Without Walls! During my years of service with the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, I worked closely with the three major Jewish organizations in New York: B’nai B’rith, American Jewish Committee, and the American Jewish Congress. Our relations were not always placid, but they were always respectful. A life-long friendship was formed with Rabbi Leon Klenicki of B’nai B’rith – although the relationship began as an intense conflict over Jewish opposition to legislation aiding parochial school children. Rabbi Klenicki and I co-authored books and articles and appeared together at various workshops on Church-State relations. He had a profound respect and even affection for Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI. He prided himself on his Argentinian background and was thrilled when, shortly before his death, Pope Benedict named him a Knight of St. Gregory. The rabbi had far-reaching antennae to detect anti-Judaism; association with him developed that capacity in me as well.

As a result, I cringed when Pope Francis, in his first homily to the cardinals after his election, declared that anyone who does not pray to Christ prays to the Devil! On other occasions, he has replaced “Devil” with “idols”. When has that ever been held in the history of the Church? Indeed, we Christians do not always pray directly to Christ. We may pray to God the Father or to God the Holy Spirit. We Catholics likewise pray to Our Lady and the other saints. The Pope himself very often urges people to join him in praying the “Hail Mary.” So, whence arises the disconnect between papal talk and papal action? It stems from the Pope’s carelessness in speech, for starters. He is possessed of so negative an attitude toward theology that he fails to frame his comments with the requisite precision.

Rabbi Laras’ critique of dichotomous papal presentations of morality is similarly valid. Francis consistently pits “the Law” against “the Gospel” – not unlike Martin Luther (an inveterate anti-Semite). Even St. Paul acknowledges that “the Law” is good and holy. Francis’ allergic reactions to law make him see stark differences where complementarity is more in order. In point of fact, Our Lord’s Sermon on the Mount is one, non-stop exposition of law – a law even more demanding than that of the Judaism of his day. Truth be told, Francis rails against law because of his predisposition against canon law and canon lawyers – as well as moral theologians who represent the consistent trajectory of Catholic morality.

I well remember an event at Princeton Theological Seminary the day after John Paul II revoked the theological license of Charles Curran. When one Episcopalian cleric bewailed his removal as a retrograde action of the Pope, two Presbyterian theologians entered the lists to defend the Pope: Paul Ramsey (perhaps the foremost Protestant moralist of his generation) said, “I would never hire Charlie Curran at Princeton.” Bruce Metzger (an outstanding biblicist and one of the translators of the Revised Standard Version) declared, “Honesty compels me to say that Catholic moral teaching just happens to coincide totally with the New Testament.”

Last but not least, Rabbi Laras took offense at Francis’ constant attacks on the Pharisees. As we know from four years of experience now, this is a genuine papal “trigger”, which he uses against anyone who seems to hold the line on absolutes. However, the Pope appears to be quite ignorant of the Pharisaic movement in the time of Christ, which was a lay reform movement established in reaction to the corrupt Temple priesthood, desirous of worldly approval in preference to following God’s will and law. Without the Pharisees, it is no exaggeration to say that Judaism would have died by assimilation to the pagan culture.

Most importantly, the major positions of the Pharisees – resurrection of the body, the existence of angels, the importance of fasting and almsgiving – were all positions of Jesus himself. If that is so, why were the Pharisees a frequent target of the Lord’s condemnations? For one simple reason: He accepted their theology but rejected their approach. One doesn’t find Jesus in conflict with the Sadducees, whose theology was polar opposite of the Pharisees; he didn’t “waste” his time with them because they were just patently wrong. He confronts the Pharisees because their theology is on-target, and they are worth the effort to correct. It is significant that one of Jesus’ denunciations of the group warns his disciples, “Unless your holiness (righteousness) surpasses that of the Scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the Kingdom of God” (Mt 5:20). In other words, there was genuine holiness and righteousness among the Pharisees, but Our Lord’s followers needed to do and be better.

We have heard the Pope say over and over again that he is no theologian and that he doesn’t care much for theology, but it is exactly that attitude which has caused so much damage in this pontificate. On the Jewish front, someone needs to offer him a tutorial in works like that of Jules Isaac, the Jewish author of Jesus and Israel, and The Jewish People and Their Scriptures in the Christian Bible, produced by the Pontifical Biblical Commission under the headship of Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger. Francis’ uninformed and tendentious statements risk setting Catholic-Jewish relations back decades, if not centuries.

To be sure, being faithful to a Catholic understanding of the Christ-event will never be fully acceptable to Jews (otherwise, they would be Christians!). Catholics, for instance, can never accept the “dual covenant” theory (sadly promoted by a committee of the United States Catholic Conference some years ago but eventually retracted, presumably at the urging of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith), which holds that there is a covenant of salvation for Gentiles, while the former covenant is still valid for Jews. Unnecessary and reckless provocations, however, ought to be avoided. Which is why this Pope should be prevailed upon to vet his comments with theological experts, even if he doesn’t really think very highly of them. That procedure would also save him (and the Church) a lot of problems within the Catholic family as well.

My friend, Rabbi Klenicki, would have been proud that a fellow-countryman had been elected Pope. Having a sizeable quantity of chutzpah, however, he would have demanded an audience with Francis to “re-educate” him.