Is Pluralism a Threat to Catholic Survival?

With few exceptions, American Catholics have given up on the dream of a Catholic society. Instead, they have come to aspire to a seat at the table: a respected position in public life that lets them bring their insights and values into public discussion within a pluralistic system.

At first glance the aspiration seems sensible. A Catholic social order can’t function if there is no consensus in favor of Catholicism among people who run things. We are a long way from such a situation, so the best we can hope for today is to be able to propose our views in a setting that does not presume we are wrong. “A seat at the table” seems to describe that situation, and if we want a seat for ourselves it seems only right to accept that others get the same.

In fact, though, the arrangement has turned out to mean that the only social and moral outlook that can have any practical effect is pluralism, together with the liberalism of which it is part. “Pluralism” can be used in different senses, some harmless and some less so. In a harmless factual sense it can be applied to any complex and extensive society. The world of the Bible has many religions and cultures, for example, and the position of Jews and then Christians in such a setting is a recurrent concern for the sacred writers. Even after Christianity became the state religion, there were a variety of social and religious tendencies at work, and non-Christians normally had some sort of accepted presence and position.

That inevitable kind of pluralism has been dealt with, well or badly, through negotiation and the balance of power and convenience. The result has sometimes been mutual accommodation, sometimes boundary-drawing, and sometimes, when something basic was at issue on which agreement could not be reached, permanent division or outright hostilities.

Today pluralism has become doctrinal as well as factual. As a doctrine, it claims that separation and hostility can always be avoided if people are minimally reasonable, because there is a principled way to deal with basic disagreements while giving due credit to all sides. The key, it is said, is to give those who hold all views on basic issues a right to equal participation in public life, as long as their views are reasonable in the sense of accepting the pluralist system.

That sounds like a sensible basis for articles of peace in a situation of fundamental disagreement. Nonetheless, accepting it has serious adverse consequences for everyone except pluralist liberals. It means that discussion can’t be about deciding issues, since a decision would deprive opinions that accept the system of their equal seat at the table. Instead, the point of discussion becomes mutual understanding for the sake of maintaining equal self-expression. Free to be you and me is the goal, and to bring that about we all have to celebrate the rainbow.

That too might seem a reasonable way of handling a situation in which agreement can’t be reached. The problem though is that if opposing views relate to basic issues, and every position has to be treated equally, very little can actually be expressed. All that can really be expressed freely are the principles of pluralism, together with views that don’t much affect other people and are presented not as principles but as matters of personal taste. Otherwise, opposing views will confront each other directly on basic matters, and some of them will lose out and become marginalized and subject to at least informal suppression.

The basic problem is that pluralism can’t possibly be pluralist. It proposes a particular form of society with a definite system of law and custom. That form of society bases its unique legitimacy on the claim that all other forms of society, including Catholic society, are at odds with freedom, justice, and the dignity of man, because they suppress and discriminate against reasonable opinions on ultimate issues. In good conscience those who are in charge of such a society must do everything they can to keep such views from affecting social life and thereby causing oppression. They do so by insisting that views such as Catholicism stop being social views and become strictly private opinions. So pluralism turns out to be as unitary and dedicated to suppressing alternatives as any other outlook. The difference is that it believes it can legitimately avoid having to argue for its own particularities by claiming it allows all views to flourish freely.

In spite of the evident problems, there have been resolute attempts by sincere and intelligent Catholics to bring Catholicism within the pluralist system, not simply as a matter of factual necessity and bowing to superior power but as a matter of Catholic as well as secular principle. Not surprisingly, the energy and ability of those favoring such attempts have failed to overcome the innate self-contradictions, and the efforts have gone nowhere.

The more principled attempts did try to maintain a leading role for Catholicism. One leading formulation, for example, called for “the Roman Catholic Church in the United States [to assume] its culture-forming task of constructing a religiously informed public philosophy for the American experiment in ordered liberty.” It was never clear what that would mean. The public philosophy couldn’t be Catholic social teaching, because “American experiment in ordered liberty” meant it had to be religiously pluralist and include at least Protestants and Jews on equal terms. (It was never clear how Muslims, Hindus, and the irreligious would fit in.) Nor, it seemed, could it be natural law. Natural law claims to be a philosophical position that can be developed and defended without regard to religion, so it does not seem to be religiously informed. But if the public philosophy could be neither specifically Catholic nor generally philosophical, and it had to offer equality to a variety of quite different views, then it couldn’t have much content. It could be a system of inherited habits and expectations, but those have dissipated. Or it could be a list of points generally agreed upon, like “abortion is bad,” but not their basis or exact implications. So it would be more like a collection of slogans than a public philosophy.

The project may have seemed more plausible than it was because of the ambiguous status of natural law. Philosophy is not neutral. Ideas about God, nature, and reason depend on each other, and it seems natural that classical natural law is mostly a Catholic tendency and those who come to accept it are likely eventually to become Catholic as well. So a natural law public philosophy might well be viewed as religiously informed, since it evidently has some connection to religion without being explicitly religious. Still, the religion to which it has a connection is specifically Catholic, and that makes it a non-starter in a society that insists on principled pluralism.

So what to do? The West is pervaded by an ideology and method of social organization that is becoming ever more dominant and well-defined, and that rejects God and natural law on principle. If you don’t enthusiastically favor those tendencies you’re considered irrational, oppressive, and a threat to public order. Under such conditions we should be thinking less about a seat at the table and more about survival.

Survival is of course not enough. Life has meaning, and survival is for a purpose. What Catholics today need most of all politically is to start a new discussion based on an understanding of man and the world oriented toward reconstitution of public life on a basis that makes more sense. For Catholics, that basis would be Christianity, and getting that discussion started is what we should be thinking about today.

James Kalb

By

James Kalb is a lawyer, independent scholar, and Catholic convert who lives in Brooklyn, New York. He is the author of The Tyranny of Liberalism: Understanding and Overcoming Administered Freedom, Inquisitorial Tolerance, and Equality by Command (ISI Books, 2008), and, most recently, Against Inclusiveness: How the Diversity Regime is Flattening America and the West and What to Do About It (Angelico Press, 2013).

  • Arriero

    «Is Pluralism a threat to Catholic survival?»

    No. Catholicism is so great than it cannot be undermined by any exogenous shock. The survival of Catholicism is a premise that does not depend on how the world develops,because Catholicism is rooted in divinity. Paraphrasing Nietzsche: «what does not kill you, makes you stronger»; and in the case of Catholicism, the strength is already absolute (insofar as it’s divinely instituted) and the killing impossible (as it does not depend on humanity, just like the institution of the Church didn’t depend on humanity).

    I would better ask a more interesting question:

    «Is Pluralism a threat to Catholic success?»

    Yes. That’s why Catholicism cannot triumph in pluralist societies – as the US, for instance -, understanding pluralism in its post-moderninst meaning: anti-Rational (more even than it has of irrational, it hates Reason), anti-Authority, anti-Truth; ergo, anti-Catholic.

    It’s worth recalling that the first Catholicism spread throughout the Roman Empire burying over mountains of sand all the pagan temples. That the Spanish evangelization of America built churches over the aztec temples. That the Spanish Reconquista ended only when the muslim enemy was completely expelled from the Peninsula and the muslim mosques converted in Catholic cathedrals. Pluralism is a sheer protestant concept, and a premise within the very anti-Catholic protestant liberalism.

    When someone tells you about pluralism, recall the old greek expression: «διαίρει καὶ βασίλευε, diaírei kaì basíleue» (divide ut imperes, Divide and rule). Pluralism only wants to avoid a Catholic world; that is to say, to dilute the Truth embedded in the only True religion.

    • Sidster

      Nice job, Arriero.

    • Catholicism didn’t survive in North Africa. The current regime in the West is less violent but theoretically less tolerant than Islam and it has a more extensive and elaborate apparatus of social control. So to my mind it does make sense to think of survival as an issue.

      • Arriero

        Because were they who expelled us, and not we who expelled them. Yet, if Spain is a Catholic nation is because it expelled muslims (1492, Surrender of Boabdil). If France is a Catholic nation is because it didn’t allow muslims to penetrate (732, Battle of Tours). If Spain is a Catholic nation, and not a protestant one, is because protestantism was never allowed to penetrate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestantism_in_Spain ).

        The US is a falsely pluralistic nation; everybody is well aware of the implicit hate among the different «factions». If a Catholic does not care about a mosque being built next to his house due to some cheap metaphysical concept of «freedom of religion» (which has nothing of Catholic, but that’s is another topic), then he is either a Catholic with very few understanding of the word or a pure -and harmful – hypocrite. In fact, the concept of «pluralism» is another French Revolution late invention, very much related with the great philosophical invention – and the main difference between the American and the French Revolutions – coming from the French Revolution, which was the concept of «Nation» (or the atomization of society in their elementary particles: the citizens). It’s worth noting that the French Revolution fought against the Throne and the Altar, which is by definition the «classical right», which was opposed by the «classical left» borned back then (that’s why all the left is a direct heir of the French Revolution, including nazional-socialists and fascists, who were nothing but or neo-marxists).

        Muslims very well understand that pluralism goes against them.

        «Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters», said Jesus (Luke 11:23)

        Some pseudo-historians like to talk about Cordoba under muslim government, where christians, jews and muslims lived together and in peace. That, of course, is utter nonsense coming from anti-Catholic (mainly anglo-saxon Spanish haters) historians.

        There was no peace in Spain til the day the Spanish Catholic Kings expelled the last muslim or forced them to convert.

        It’s also worth recalling that the muslims who fought against Spaniards during the Reconquista regarded catholics as politeists. For them, the only monoteist religion was Islam, because they despised the Trinity as a blasphemy punished at their stakes. Islam is theoretically and in practice less tolerant than «the West». The West is still, despite what you can hear or see, Christian. But we don’t want the West to be Christian, but Catholic. We’ve already witnessed the decadence of misunderstood Christianism.

        A Catholic Church above every pagan temple.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_pagans_in_the_late_Roman_Empire

        PD- Thanks for your response. Have a very nice day.

  • I have come to the belief that the “American experiment in ordered liberty” is neither American, nor ordered, nor liberty. It is instead European, disordered anarchy, and license to sin against one’s neighbor.

    The only place I still see freedom is in the monasteries and native reservations. And the only place I still see America, is among the Native Americans.

  • Pingback: A Note on the “Natural” of “Natural Law Theory” | After Aristotle()

  • Pingback: Socrates, Techno-Speak, and Similar Issues | The Orthosphere()

  • hombre111

    I can remember as a young man clinging to the ideal that our task was to make the whole world Catholic. Now I understand the measure of the task in the midst of the flow of history. For better or for worse, Catholics have entered what Rahner called a new diaspora.

    • The piece was less about the flow of history than the importance to of distinguishing fact and standard. Christendom as a public reality may be out of reach at present, but if so it’s a mistake to adopt existing fact (in Rahner’s view, the “new diaspora”) as the standard for how things should be.

      Further, pluralism as a reality is very different from pluralism as an ideal standard. In the latter sense it’s not just a new diaspora for Christians but a new caliphate. The difference is that the pluralist caliphate has no theoretical tolerance for the social existence of any Christianity that does not understand itself as a purely personal mythology strictly subordinate to pluralism and its implications.

      • hombre111

        Thanks for the reply. I don’t think Rahner was adopting the new diaspora as the new standard. It was more like, ,”Here we are in the middle of a desert. The first thing we need to do is admit we are in the middle of a desert and find the best way out.” A pluralistic society does present its problems for any monotheistic religion which stands on revelation, be it the Tanak, the Bible, or the Koran. n

  • The USA is the armpit of the world. Believing the reality you are in without any experience outside of it… sadness.

    • Art Deco

      The USA is the armpit of the world. Believing the reality you are in without any experience outside of it… sadness.

      Irony is dead.

      • Paul Schumann

        I was gonna go with, uhh maybe Bulgaria? Or maybe Uzbekistan or Nigeria.
        Somehow I never figured on the USA. Must be something wrong with me.

    • TheAbaum

      So you’ll be expatriating? Putin’s new Russian Empire, perhaps?

      • I hear North Korea is lovely this time of year.

  • Dick Prudlo

    Someone please tell me just what is Catholicism? Would it be familiar, say, to your Grandfather? Would it, perhaps, be familiar to your Mom? I no longer recognize Her, do you?”

    • Art Deco

      Religious orders and dioceses go through cycles of corruption and reform. My grandfather died in 1966, same year as Evelyn Waugh. Without a doubt, Waugh would look on contemporary liturgy with disgust.

      • Dick Prudlo

        It is not just the Holy Mass that I ask this question. It is the whole human element in the Church today that lacks.

        • As Mr. Deco said, there have always been these cycles of corruption and reform. The 1940’s were a high point, but there were plenty of low points before that.

          • musicacre

            It’s hard for any of us to have a total picture of how the Catholic church and her greatest defenders have fared in the last 100 years or so, but even the 40’s was a time when a Catholic priest could go only so far before being shut down by the highest powers of the state. Look at Father Charles Coughlin.

  • Sidster

    Pluralism can’t be pluralist. How right James Kalb is. Thank you, for such a brilliantly composed thesis. Unfortunately, while Mr. Kalb deftly lays out and defines the problem, he reverts to tepid hand-wringing for the solution, and diverts us from the true one.

    Anybody carefully studying the underlying founding apparatus of the American regime probably could have seen this coming miles away, as the American constitutional order is studded with a host of lapses and errors that put it profoundly at odds with Catholic truth.

    But no, Mr. Kalb, we do not need another new discussion to try to reconstitute a rotting corpse. It would fail just like all the others have, because there is no place here for discussion and dialogue. The Church is the mother of humanity, not it’s drinking buddy or golf partner. The Church was not founded to discuss and dialogue, it was founded to define, assert, affirm, command, and demand.

    James Kalb, you’re too good for this. Time to consign Weigel, Neuhaus, Novak, George and fatuous fictions of ordered liberty to the dustbin of Catholic history where they belonged all along.

    You should get back out to Italy and fully and firmly make common cause with Rao, Ferrara, Matt, Vennari, McCall and company to work for the fullness of Catholic truth, which entails a Catholic society, and which entails a Catholic confessional state model.

    • Art Deco

      which entails a Catholic society, and which entails a Catholic confessional state model.

      Good luck with that.

      and fatuous fictions

      Irony is dead.

    • TheAbaum

      “entails a Catholic society, and which entails a Catholic confessional state model.”

      Oh yes, and let’s have a Catholic hereditary sovereign.

      Woops, tried that-Henry Tudor.

      • Confessional states aren’t necessarily monarchies. I think part of the point this article was trying to make is that we already have a confessional state, we just pretend otherwise.

        • TheAbaum

          Unless you’ve changed your pseudonym, you’re new here. There are those who posted here in the past who would a assert a monarchy is preferred, if not the only authentic Catholic polity.

          So before you get a a Catholic confessional state model, you’ll have to get everybody to agree on the specifications.

          Me personally, I don’t trust the state. Mexico was officially Catholic, it ended up killing priests. Ditto for England.

          • Thaddeus J. Kozinski

            My book provides the philosophical argumentation for why a confessional state is inevitable, and therefore it’s either Catholicism or something less true, good, and beautiful.

            http://www.amazon.com/o/ASIN/073917987X?tag=pctwix-20

            • Sidster

              Thank you, Prof. Kozinksi, Great to hear from a staunch traditional Catholic perspective.

            • TheAbaum

              Interesting that you peddle your books on Amazon, which supports SSM.

              • windjammer

                Your liberalism is showing.

        • Sidster

          Bravo!

      • Sidster

        Liberal play-time is over.

        With this ‘logic’, we should do away with the institution of marriage, seeing all of the failed ones out there.

        A brief catechetical refresher.

        Christ has full authority on earth, and that includes governments. All governments have an obligation to be some form of a Catholic state and to formally recognize CAtholicism as true, to support and protect it to the exclusion of other faiths, and to conduct its policies congruently with the Church’s teachings.

        While monarchy is not, strictly speaking, required, it certainly is a licit option, and one that the Church traditionally has great respect and regard for.

        Any Catholic who has nothing but scorn and contempt for Catholic monarchy would appear to be a liberal rogue who ultimately has far more regard for the secularized wasteland of American ideology than for the deposit of Catholic truth.

        • TheAbaum

          What “Catholic Monarchy” do you have in mind?

          Henry Tudor’s perhaps?

          What’s over is PHO fantasy time.

          • Sidster

            Please, enough with the rote liberalism already. Why do liberals thinking chanting “Henry Tudor, Henry Tudor, Henry Tudor” regarding monarchy is any less inane than chanting “Liz Taylor, Liz Taylor, Liz Taylor” regarding marriage?

            A discussion about Catholicism should be rooted in the fullness of Catholic truth drawn from the ages, its doctrines and implicit norms and values gleaned from the impeccability of the Holy See’s classical official acts.

            The Church has never condemned monarchy and clearly holds it in high regard, even if it’s not doctrinally required. Numerous saints, doctors, popes, and confessors looked reverently upon it; so should we.

            As recently as a century ago, we had a wonderful model from Blessed Karl, Emperor and King of Austria/Hungary. Outside of the strict monarchial model, we also have Garcia Moreno, Dollfuss, Franco, and other great Catholic statesmen.

            When we talk about truth, we stick to the fullness of Catholicism. Not smuggling in an insidious liberal agenda under the guise of a patchwork of makeshift Catholicism that seeks to corrupt and undermine those elements of tradition that clash with liberalism.

            It seems to be no accident that your writings are devoid of classical Catholic teaching and thought, though replete with sneers and jeers for that which is Catholic but calls into questions the modern liberal errors of our time.

            • TheAbaum

              You are a fraud, and nobody appointed you judge.

              Get lost.

              • windjammer

                “When you can’t argue the facts..you resort to personally shooting the messenger”.

                • TheAbaum

                  Like this?

                  “You can always depend on Liberals revealing themselves.”

            • windjammer

              Noticed Abaum’s reply to you below. Take heart, you really punched a few buttons. You can always depend on Liberals revealing themselves. They can’t help it. It’s an involuntary reflex…to wit:…”When you can’t argue the facts..you resort to personally shooting the messenger”. Spot on!

    • We’re at the bottom of a large pile of rocks. My suggestion is to start by proposing the right standards and living by them. That involves talking to people, making issues clear, answering objections, and so on. With regard to politics I note that the right standard is Christendom and not ideological pluralism, which I say contradicts itself and in any event is obviously at odds with Catholicism.

      You seem to have a problem with that but I’m not sure what it is. Should I have ended the piece like this?

      “What Catholics today need most of all politically is to infiltrate the
      highest levels of the military so they can stage a coup d’etat and
      install someone who’ll show everybody what’s what.”

      • Arriero

        «What Catholics today need most of all politically is to infiltrate the highest levels of the military so they can stage a coup d’etat and install someone who’ll show everybody what’s what».

        Actually, that already happened in Spain in 1936.

        First was this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Terror_(Spain) and this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martyrs_of_the_Spanish_Civil_War

        Then some thought that the massacre should be stopped: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martyrs_of_the_Spanish_Civil_War

        And the Catholic Church very well knew in which faction was the evil that should be eradicated: http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iglesia_cat%C3%B3lica_y_Guerra_Civil_Espa%C3%B1ola . The Spanish Civil War was regarded by Spanish bishops as a «Crusade» against evil and destruction.

        After the last democratic elections of 1936 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_general_election,_1936 ), the situation looked very much as a new Red Revolution was going to set up a new communist regime in Spain.

        The question then remains the same, what should faithful Catholic done under such circumstances? Was there an alternative?

      • Sidster

        No, Mr. Kalb, I’m not talking about any coup d’etat. I’m not sure why my post is so mystifying.

        What I was saying is that deliberation about this subject is wholly incomplete and will stop short of true solutions until the full traditional teaching of the Social Reign of Christ is unashamedly embraced.

        No more time to waste dialoguing with the adversary and their Catholic enablers on their secularized soil. Time to start evangelizing society to prompt a massive wave of converts to Catholicism – full, true traditional Catholicism. From there we work peacefully toward the end of secularized constitutionalism and the emplacement of a Catholic confessional state.

        • Art Deco

          Well, you’ve had 400 years.

          In the interim, the rest of us have to live here on some terms.

          • Sidster

            I don’t think Catholics have been consistently, fervently seeking to convert Americans for the past 400 years, given that the country itself is less than 250 years old.

            Finding so-called terms to live on doesn’t entail jettisoning elements of the faith to desperately seek to win some mess of secularized pottage. The much-ballyhooed coming to terms itself tends to be the compromised capitulating of faith before the powers that be.

        • I agree that if very large numbers of people become dedicated orthodox Catholics lots of problems will disappear. Evangelization is not specifically political though and my comment had to do with what Catholics should be doing in the specifically political realm.

          In that realm it seems to me that our biggest problem is that our concerns are generally not comprehensible to influential people because their understanding of the point of politics is so different.

          On that issue you don’t want to use force. You also seem to have a big problem with discussing why Christianity makes more sense than pluralism as a basis for public life (which was my proposal for getting things moving). I’m not sure what that leaves as a strategy — a public reading of Quas Primas with no questions allowed?

          • Sidster

            Mr. Kalb,
            Christianity cannot be a true, stable, basis for public life, short of having a Catholic confessional state.

            In the meantime, while we can make a natural law case for certain stances on certain issues, we cannot expect a wholesale true just state or transformed society to materialize short of the Social Reign of Christ.

            Actually, while I had not thought of it, public readings of Quas Primas [and let’s throw in Mirari Vos, Quanta Cura, and Immortale Dei] is actually a pretty good idea!

            But who said we could not or should not respond to questions?

      • Valentin

        There aren’t enough Catholics to start a proper coup anyways.

    • windjammer

      Spot on. Well said!

    • C.Caruana

      ‘a Catholic confessional state model’? Setting aside nostalgic daydreaming, what we practising Catholics should brace ourselves for is not the assumption of any state power, but the coming of persecution, at first veiled but increasingly more hostile and tyrannical. What we should do is invoke the Holy Spirit to strengthen our faith and that of our religious leaders in order to keep speaking truth to power, even if we are fast becoming Pope Benedict’s minority Church. The fullness of Catholic truth will only triumph through Christ’s cross, through sanctity and unremitting evangelisation, in our readiness to witness to the Gospel in and out of season, even to the point of martyrdom if necessary. Without this, all talk of political strategy and Catholic factionalism is idle chatter.

      • Valentin

        unfortunately you are right that aren’t nearly enough Catholics in this country for us to take over either politically or with a revolution. That doesn’t mean however that we can’t effect things on a local scale.

  • Pingback: Is Pluralism a Threat to Catholic Survival? | Crisis Magazine | oogenhand()

  • tamsin

    Did we sign up for a cruise on the SS America that is taking us someplace we don’t want to go?

    I see the movement from “abortion is bad” to “abortion is good” as less the inevitable collapse of Catholic voices within a regime of liberal pluralism, and more the colonization of the coercive heights of that regime by one specific voice, using every trick in the book, to proclaim abortion is good, and to silence other voices through anti-discrimination laws and hate-speech laws.

    It’s less Pluralism, more Powers and Principalities.

    Same for the movement from “gay marriage is impossible” to “marriage equality”. It is precisely those who wave the rainbow flag who not only want a decision made in favor of gay marriage, but also an end to all further discussion, public or private. They think “we discuss until I win then I change the laws to prevent further discussion to ever revisit this decision.” That’s not liberal pluralism.

    “No true Liberal Pluralist…” 🙂

    But I guess what I’m hearing here, as elsewhere, is that Pluralism is the means for Powers and Principalities.

    • TheAbaum

      The participants in the first pseudonogamous contract attempted to dissolve it my county, and I see the eminent Episcopal Bishop Eugene Robinson is going to splitsville.

  • thebigdog

    Apart from radical Islam, the greatest threat to the survival of Catholicism would be Democrats. How long will it be before Catholic Churches will be accused of hate crimes for not allowing gay marriages?

    • cpsho

      How long will it be before Catholic Churches will be accused of hate crimes for not allowing gay marriages?
      Not too long i am afraid. It is the Mark of the Beast.
      (cf Revelation 13 v 16-18)
      http://www.prophetamos3m.com/6.html

  • Pingback: Calling Men to Be Icons of God the Father - BigPulpit.com()

  • JP

    The plight of Catholicism in the social and cultural order of things mirrors the plight of reason. Catholicism in general can operate within a democracy such as ours as long as there exists a rational order of things. Our Constitution as originally designed allowed Catholics and their religious beliefs to function peacefully. No, it was by no means perfect; but, humans are not perfect either. The Federalism of our early years allowed local states and towns to govern themselves without interference from a Central Authority. Yet, that Central Authority would be called in whenever local authorities over-stepped their legal bounds. Morally and culturally, Catholics could worship, marry, educate, and raise their children per their religious beliefs.

    However, the late social thinker Allan Bloom believed that the Founders went a step further. He believed that the Founders tipped the scales in favor of new civic culture that was designed to not only absorb religious zeal, but to also weaken our religious instincts. Informed by the writing of De Tocqueville, Rousseau, and Nietzsche, Bloom argued that pious immigrants no matter what confession would be so caught up in commerce and civic affairs that orthodoxy would weaken from within. Radical Egalitarianism, demands for equality, and the more mundane aspects of life in the bourgeois society over time would undermine and eventually make religion no different than the egalitarian people who made society. Especially in a nation like ours, where there is no institution like the aristocracy to act as brake to cultural egalitarianism, orthodox religion is doomed.

    If Bloom were alive today he would say pluralism acts to undermine Catholic belief. And today, with the kind of post-modern anti-intellectualism that thrives in our culture, I would say Catholicism faces a 2 front assault.

  • Samuel Maynes

    If you are interested in some new ideas on religious pluralism and the
    Trinity, please check out my website at http://www.religiouspluralism.ca, and give me your thoughts on improving content and presentation.

    My thesis is that an abstract version of the Trinity could be
    Christianity’s answer to the world need for a framework of pluralistic
    theology.

    In a constructive worldview: east, west, and far-east religions present a threefold understanding of One God manifest primarily in Muslim and Hebrew intuition of the Deity Absolute, Christian and Krishnan
    Hindu conception of the Universe Absolute
    Supreme Being; and Shaivite Hindu, Buddhist, Taoist apprehension of the
    Destroyer (meaning also Consummator), Unconditioned
    Absolute, or Spirit of All That Is and is not. Together with their
    variations and combinations in other major religions, these religious ideas
    reflect and express our collective understanding of God, in an expanded concept of the Holy Trinity.

    The Trinity Absolute is portrayed in the logic of world religions, as follows:

    1. Muslims and Jews may be said to worship only the
    first person of the Trinity, i.e. the existential Deity Absolute Creator, known
    as Allah or Yhwh, Abba or Father (as Jesus called him), Brahma, and other names; represented by Gabriel (Executive Archangel), Muhammad and Moses (mighty messenger prophets), and others.

    2. Christians and Krishnan Hindus may be said to worship the first person through a second person, i.e. the experiential Universe or “Universal” Absolute Supreme Being (Allsoul or Supersoul), called Son/Christ or Vishnu/Krishna; represented by Michael (Supreme Archangel), Jesus (teacher and savior of souls), and others. The Allsoul is that gestalt of personal human consciousness, which we
    expect will be the “body of Christ” (Mahdi, Messiah, Kalki or
    Maitreya) in the second coming – personified in history by Muhammad, Jesus Christ, Buddha (9th incarnation of Vishnu), and others.

    3. Shaivite Hindus, Buddhists, and Confucian-Taoists seem to venerate the synthesis of the first and second persons in a third person or appearance, ie. the Destiny Consummator of ultimate reality –
    unqualified Nirvana consciousness – associative Tao of All That Is – the
    absonite* Unconditioned Absolute Spirit “Synthesis of Source and Synthesis,”** who/which is logically expected to be Allah/Abba/Brahma glorified in and by union with the Supreme Being – represented in religions by Gabriel, Michael, and other Archangels, Mahadevas,
    Spiritpersons, etc., who may be included within the mysterious Holy Ghost.

    Other strains of religion seem to be psychological variations on the third person, or possibly combinations and permutations of
    the members of the Trinity – all just different personality perspectives on the Same God. Taken together, the world’s major religions give us at least two insights into the first person of this thrice-personal One God, two perceptions of the second person, and at least three glimpses of the third.

    * The ever-mysterious Holy Ghost or Unconditioned Spirit is neither absolutely infinite, nor absolutely finite, but absonite; meaning neither existential nor experiential, but their ultimate consummation; neither fully ideal nor totally real, but a middle path and grand synthesis of the superconscious and the conscious, in consciousness of the unconscious.

    ** This conception is so strong because somewhat as the Absonite Spirit
    is a synthesis of the spirit of the Absolute and the spirit of the Supreme,
    so it would seem that the evolving Supreme Being may himself also be a
    synthesis or “gestalt” of humanity with itself, in an Almighty Universe
    Allperson or Supersoul. Thus ultimately, the Absonite is their Unconditioned Absolute Coordinate Identity – the Spirit
    Synthesis of Source and Synthesis – the metaphysical Destiny
    Consummator of All That Is.

    After the Hindu and Buddhist conceptions, perhaps the most subtle expression and comprehensive symbol of the 3rd person of the Trinity is the Tao; involving the harmonization of “yin and yang” (great opposing
    ideas indentified in positive and negative, or otherwise contrasting terms). In the Taoist icon of yin and yang, the s-shaped line separating the black and white spaces may be interpreted as the Unconditioned
    “Middle Path” between condition and conditioned opposites, while the circle that encompasses them both suggests their synthesis in the Spirit of the “Great Way” or Tao of All That Is.

    If the small black and white circles or “eyes” are taken to represent a nucleus of truth in both yin and yang, then the metaphysics of this symbolism fits nicely with the paradoxical mystery of the Christian Holy
    Ghost; who is neither the spirit of the one nor the spirit of the other,
    but the Glorified Spirit proceeding from both, taken altogether – as one entity – personally distinct from his co-equal, co-eternal and fully coordinate co-sponsors, who differentiate from him, as well as mingle and meld in him.

    For more details, please see: http://www.religiouspluralism.ca

    Samuel Stuart Maynes

  • Pingback: Rethinking Property in the Digital Era - God & Caesar()

  • windjammer

    U.S. founded and built by Protestants aka heretics. It’s taken several centuries to arrive at this pitiful state. However it was not unforeseen and or warned about by Popes prior to Vatican 2. The liberal, progressive, modernist won the battle at Vatican 2 with predictable results to the Church over the last 50+ years. “Disaster” is not too strong a word to use which is especially evident by the empty Catholic Churches in the West. What is essentially left of the Church in America is more akin to “Episcopal Catholicism”. Although we call ourselves “Catholic” our personal beliefs are more attuned to “Protestant”. Our individual “private judgement” is the norm. We don’t like dogmas/doctrines/rules? No problem. We ignore them and either leave or remain in the pews if it suits us. The Truth has been hollowed out in the name of “ecumenism”, “collegiality”, “pastoral concern” and “freedom of religion”….all of which were historically condemned by pre V2 popes but championed by liberals and Freemasonry. “Pluralism” is just another word for “surrender”.

    • Nomo-Phylax

      Curse the upstart knavish pirates of Masonic demagoguery! The supposition of DEITY attributed to the American “framers” is madness and superstitious materialistic regression. CURSE THE CONSTITUTION, CURSE THE FOUNDERS SO POPULARLY REGARDED AS DEMIGODS, AND CURSE AMERICA IN ITS SODOMITE EVILNESS.

      Wipe out the entire liberal-humanist, “discussion”-beholden, pseudo-conservative bourgeoisie-degraded American political class – militarization of individually morally mandated agents of extra-formal vindication is now upon the last upholders of the sacred deposit. Suspended is the law of Sodom; reinstated is the LEX PRIMORDIALIS.

      Thomistic tyrannicidal super-ordinate law now overtakes the monopoly of sovereignty abusively befouled in misprision, the power of government raped and blackened by the HOLLOW-CHESTED executioners of the sense of GOD in the human entity, entrenched so luxuriously… The tribunes of American degeneracy insatiable in lust for petty egotistic power… The entirety simply to be expunged by OUR new MARINES… The malfeasance-encrusted “officialdom” of legalistic authority, liquidated.

      Your tribunals and plebeian tribunes are naked in emptiness of corruptness and illegitimate usurpation, American herd-animals and infra-human satyrs.

      Retribution and restoration of authentic ORDER is presently not optional but obligatory as individual ethical duty, logically derivative of classicist tyrannicidal theory… A grave matter of decision given to the final battalion…

      Sodomite barbarian hordes of apelike “radical individualists” beset the decent of heart, the upright of heart – what are the vestigial dissidents and transmitters of the faith, supposed to do, self-infatuated, solipsism-blinded “progressive”, “humane” ideologists and Bacchic celebrants of “pluralistic” milksop effeminacy? Are we bound, as your own forefathers, are we obliged to succumb as willfully suicidal Albigensian Manichean heretics, to acquiesce to self-immolation and dishonorable self-offering of our basic human dignity to the rabblement of possessed minds…? Are we to offer up our lives and heritage and children to the neo-Sodomite hell-hounds barking at our existential and literal gates, eager to infect and cannibalize and run amok, subject ourselves and our loved ones to moral viciousness of inexpressible nature, to rapaciously rip innocent souls apart in shards, scissor apart the limbs of spiritual self, glorying in pure, orgiastic terrorist licentiousness, the “American-style liberty” of inflicting Sadistic lust upon the helpless..the delusive liberty of antinomian lawlessness of the ANTI-CHRIST…?

      The rite of collective, enforced ENDURA of neo-Gnostic Manichean Albigensian surrealism of irrationality…OR…MANNING UP; returning to the RADICAL ROOTLESS ROOT; – and armored and equipped as metaphysical, neo-Templar paladins of Thomistic tyrannomachy, when middle things are gone, the innocence of souls depends upon the daring, counter-subversive Vehmic “vigilantes”, internally battle-ready to bring iron and fire upon the villains of ill intention in the crepuscular epoch of Nihilistic abomination…?

  • Valentin

    The major problem with pluralism is the notion that people shouldn’t reach a genuine agreement but rather do what people call ‘agreeing to disagree’ which in a passive way denies us Catholics to convert people in many ways because people call it ‘prosteletising’ which goes against pluralism..

  • Don Schenk

    “Pluralism” is a threat to Catholic survival–when the government uses it as an excuse to ban Catholicism.

  • Ximenes

    The ready acceptance of “pluralism” by American Catholics was once known as Americanism, and it was condemned by Pope Leo XIII. That was in the 19th century. Unfortunately what has transpired since then is that the popes have embraced the errors of Americanism and applied it to the rest of the world, while Americanism in America continued unabated and has apparently emerged triumphant.

  • Socrates

    Here’s where pluralism leads when unchecked by Catholic authority (and power, where necessary and prudent).

    Call the Cops at Your Peril

    Paul Craig Roberts

    “Live free or die” is the motto of the state of New Hampshire. I hope the residents are
    prepared to die, because living free is not what they do. NH is merely a cog within the
    Amerikan Stasi State, but I am referring to what goes on within NH itself, not the police state existence imposed by Washington. On May 5 attorney William Baer was arrested at a school board meeting at which he went over a 2-minute speaking rule while trying to get some explanation from the Gilford, NH, school board for assigning sexually explicit reading material to his 14-year old daughter’s English class. The evasiveness of the school board angered Mr. Baer, and he spoke out again in support of another parents protests, and was promptly arrested by a goon thug cop.http://www.dailypaul.com/318393/fox-news-to-interview-william-baer-father-arrested-in-new-hampshire-for-going-over-two-minute-rule-in-school-board-meetin

    The school board chairman, Sue Allen, who has no legislative power nevertheless managed to create a law backed by police violence. After all if Bush and Obama can create laws by edict, why not a school board chairman? Under Allen’s edict, if a parent violates the 2-minute rule that Allen imposed, she has the parent arrested. The goon thug cop wasn’t embarrassed to arrest a parent for making a legitimate complaint during the public comment period of a school board meeting.

    Remember, we “freedom and democracy” ‘mericans have free speech and protest rights. Actually, don’t remember that, because you no longer have any such rights.These rights are dangerous. They enable terrorists and extremists such as those dangerous people who don’t believe The Government.

    This is Amerika today. Mr Baer offered no resistance, but nevertheless was lucky that the goon thug cop did not taser him, pepper spray him, and call for a backup SWAT team to beat him senseless or even murder him.

    Last month wedding guests at at the San Luis Hotel in Galveston, Texas, were set upon
    without reason by 34 crazed goon thug cops. The guests, including the father of the bride and the bride’s brother were brutally beaten and maced along with many guests including 13 who were arrested for asking, “what is going on?” The brother was so badly injured by the goon thugs that he had to be rushed via helicopter to a hospital.

    The mayhem resulted from an off-duty goon thug witnessing a guest walk outside with an alcoholic beverage, thus violating the city’s “open container” law. Instead of advising
    the guest of the open container law and recommending that he step back inside, the goon thug called the cops who arrived on the scene in mass and enjoyed themselves by beating up the wedding party.
    http://www.policestateusa.com/2014/galveston-wedding-beatdown/

    No charges have been filed against the goon thugs for gratuitously beating up wedding guests. The right of cops to beat and murder the citizens who pay their salaries is now a perk of the job. It is necessary in order to keep us safe from criminals and terrorists, descriptions that are ever expanding.

    Don’t expect courts to put any restraint on police and prosecutors. Dave Lindorff and Molly Knefel have given accurate accounts of the frame-up of Cecily McMillan by a corrupt prosecutor and a corrupt goon thug. McMillan was convicted on the false charge of assaulting a police office when the goon thug seized her breasts from behind. The judge, Ronald Zwiebel, enabled the conviction by preventing the defense from showing the evidence. The gullible and very stupid jurors made certain that injustice was perpetrated. Now a young woman who was sexually assaulted faces a seven-year prison sentence for “assaulting” a goon thug.http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article38424.htm
    http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/05/07/kangaroo-court-convicts-occupy-protester/

    This is Stasi Amerika today. And it gets worse. In Aliquippa, Pennsylvania, Eileen Battisti, a 53-year old widow, had her $280,000 home seized by Beaver County officials and sold at auction for $116,000 because of an unpaid $6.30 interest fee on the late payment of her school district taxes. A corrupt judge did not insist upon justice for the widow but instead upheld the robbery that benefitted both the county and the purchaser at auction of her home, S.P. Lewis. Lewis offered to sell the widow her home back for $250,000. http://www.policestateusa.com/2014/eileen-battisti/

    To see what cops are really like, read this: http://www.policestateusa.com/2014/justice-for-arzy/

    Whatever you do, never call the cops. However bad you might think the situation is, it
    will be much worse once the goon thugs arrive: http://www.policestateusa.com/2014/candy-middleton/

    And do not show any compassion for animals. Showing compassion for animals is proof that you are an animal-rights extremist which lumps you in with terrorists. In Albion, Michigan, extremists who feed a stray cat are fined and locked away for three months. Mary Musselman, an 81-year old Alzheimer sufferer was locked away for 90 days for feeding stray cats on her own property. When you see a starving animal, turn your back and walk away. Your inhumanity will be rewarded but your humanity will be severely punished. http://www.policestateusa.com/2014/albion-michigan-cat-feeding/

    Just keep in mind that “we have freedom and democracy” and we are “the exceptional and indispensable people.” Our president told us so. This designation removes you from any responsibility to other humans, much less animals. Don’t lose sight of the fact that Amerikans are so exceptional and indispensable that we have murdered seven entire countries in the new 21st century, and we are just getting started. As it is perfectly acceptable for Amerika to murder countries, how can it possibly matter if a goon thug cop murders you, your pet or your wife or husband or daughter or son?

    What is so discouraging is that this article could be hundreds of thousands of pages long. I could sit here writing this article for the rest of my life, adding one incident after another, and not get beyond the tip of the iceberg.

    The inhumanity of which Americans are capable and indulge in every day must scare Satan himself.

    Parents arrested for protesting the assignment of pornographic reading material to 14-year olds by school boards, elderly and ill people imprisoned for feeding starving animals, pets murdered by police who are supposed to protect the citizens but instead mace them, beat them, body slam them, and shoot them and their pets gratuitously for the thrill of committing violence against life are the reason the public sector is in disrepute.

    The worst people in the country are in our public institutions. This is why there is so little sympathy for the public sector unions now under attack by the Republicans. Americans look at their county commissions, their city councils, their criminal justice (sic) system, their governors, state legislatures, Congress, and the White House, and all that they see is evil and corruption.

    There is nothing else there.

    Americans who trust the criminal justice (sic) system are completely stupid. A case of
    mass wrongful conviction that I wrote about years ago finally came to trial last November. Annie Dookham, a Massachusetts state chemist who falsified drug tests, thus sentencing thousands of innocent people to years in prison, destroying their lives and the lives of their families, was sentenced to 3 to 5 years in prison. Dookhan sent thousands of innocents to prison in order to aid prosecutors in attaining high conviction rates and in order to achieve her own rise as a highly productive state employee. The judge noted that Dookham had cost the state millions of dollars in settling wrongful convictions and had shaken to the core the integrity of the criminal justice (sic) system. http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/2013/11/22/annie-dookhan-former-state-chemist-who-mishandled-drug-evidence-agrees-plead-guilty/lhg1mwd9U3J8eh4tNBS63N/story.html

    State officials say that Dookhan’s fake evidence could have tainted 40,000 cases. Ask
    yourself, what kind of person would destroy so many people in order to advance herself? And progressives think that the public sector is the answer.

    You can ask the same question about the New York State Police and the Texas police who dropped little bags of ground up wallboard in cars stopped at random, conducted illegal searches, and arrested the occupants for drugs. Hundreds of innocents were convicted until finally one brave public defender demanded presentation of the alleged drugs and had the evidence tested. It came back: wallboard. All other public defenders had accommodated the conviction scheme and arranged plea bargains for their clients. You can read about these and other atrocities in my book, coauthored with Larry Stratton: The Tyranny of Good Intentions.

    It only gets worse: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article38446.htm

    Psychopaths and bullies are naturally attracted to the police by the privilege of using essentially unaccountable force. The proclivity to violence is heightened by police training. The emphasis is on killing suspects, not on capturing them. CBS Miami reports that 23 goon thugs fired
    377 rounds at two men trapped inside a car. http://miami.cbslocal.com/2014/05/06/police-shooting-frenzy-raises-concerns/
    On May 8 a goon thug in Hearne, Texas murdered 93-year old Pearlie Golden. The elderly woman was shot five times in her front yard. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/texas-shoots-death-93-year-old-woman-answering-911-complaint-article-1.1783289

  • Simone Weil

    USA insulting world’s intelligence

    Sat May 10, 2014 4:40AM GMT

    By Kevin Barrett

    Related Interviews:

    ‘Nuland warning to Russia outrageous’

    ‘US isolated in sanctions on Russia’

    “They must really think we’re stupid.” That is what people all over the world are saying about the American government and media’s portrayal of world events.

    Several weeks ago, an interviewer said to Russian President Putin: “NATO claims the missile shield was not built against you but against Iran.” Putin broke out laughing. When the laughter finally subsided, Putin said: “You really make me laugh. God bless you because it’s almost time to finish the day… indeed it’s already time to go to sleep. At least I get home in good humor.”

    No sane person could seriously assert that NATO’s missile shield circling Russia is intended to protect the West from Iran. Yet, that is exactly what NATO – the imperial American occupation army in Europe – tells the world. How stupid do they think we are?

    Governments lie. Imperial governments construct vast empires of lies. But in the past, most official lies carried at least a thin veneer of plausibility. Today, the US government and its media echo chamber do not seem to care whether their lies are even slightly credible.

    The Ukraine crisis has been a non-stop festival of American lies, each one more ridiculous than the last.

    First they told us that the protestors against Ukraine’s legitimate president, Viktor Yanukovych, were heroes who love democracy and hate corruption. In fact, the protestors were an oversized rent-a-mob led by Nazi thugs and Zionist crime oligarchs, bought and paid for by the five billion dollars the US spent undermining Ukraine’s democracy.

    Then they told us that the “heroic protestors” were being gunned down by Yanukovych’s forces. In fact, it was NATO’s Operation Gladio snipers who were doing the false-flag shootings.

    They claimed that Yanukovych “fled” the presidency. In fact, he was overthrown by a typical CIA putsch while traveling; since he never stepped down, Yanukovych is still the legitimate, democratically-elected president of Ukraine.

    They claimed that Putin was “intransigent” for refusing negotiations. In fact, the US insisted that Russia recognize the illegitimate Nazi putsch government in Kiev as a precondition for negotiations – which would have made negotiations moot.

    They claimed that Putin was an aggressor in Crimea. The truth is that the people of Crimea voted by a 97% landslide to join the Russian Federation – as was their right under the principle of self-determination, a cornerstone of international law.

    They claimed that the anti-Kiev protests in Eastern Ukraine are some kind of Russian plot. The reality is that the people of Eastern Ukraine are up in arms because they have no desire to be governed by an illegitimate regime of NATO terrorists, IMF austerity looters, Zionist crime oligarchs, and Nazi thugs.

    They claimed that the anti-Kiev forces were forcing Jews to register themselves. In fact, the “Jews must register” leaflets were another Operation Gladio style false-flag provocation by NATO.

    They claimed that last week’s Odessa Massacre was somehow Russia’s fault. In fact, NATO’s neo-Nazi thugs chased pro-Russia protestors into the Trade Unions Building, burned them to death, and strangled survivors trying to escape – the result, intentional or not, of another Operation Gladio false flag provocation.

    Here is how the New York Times concealed the truth about the Odessa Massacre: “Violence also erupted Friday in the previously calmer port city of Odessa, on the Black Sea, where dozens of people died in a fire related to clashes that broke out between protesters holding a march for Ukrainian unity and pro-Russian activists.”

    As an English teacher at three major American universities, I always instructed students to begin sentences with a specific subject and verb that clearly express “who does what.” In this case, “NATO-backed Nazi thugs” are the who, and “chased pro-Russian protestors into a building and burned and strangled them to death” are the what.

    Instead, the New York Times begins its sentence with an abstraction, “violence,” that just somehow “erupted.” We are told that “dozens of people died in a fire,” but we are not told who killed them, simply that the fire was “related to clashes.”

    George Orwell, author of “Politics and the English Language,” must be rolling over in his grave.

    Does anyone in the world really believe anything John Kerry and the US mainstream media are saying about Ukraine? Expressions like “credulous dupe” do not even begin to describe the type of person who would be taken in by such brazen falsehoods.

    Fortunately, there are signs that the world is not as stupid as the American establishment thinks it is. The people of Eastern Ukraine are united in their refusal to kowtow to the criminals in Kiev, and much of the world supports them. At the end of the day, the most economically advanced and strategic part of Ukraine is likely to become a fervently anti-NATO, anti-New World Order bulwark.

    US-NATO lies are failing in Ukraine just as they failed in Syria, where President Assad is expected to win re-election on June 3rd and preside over an ever-more-united, ever-more-peaceful nation. The turning point in Syria was the failure of the al-Ghouta false flag in August, which the US and its Zionist lobby unsuccessfully tried to blame on Assad. More recently, another false flag plot by Turkish leaders, who were scheming to attack their own country and blame it on Assad, was exposed.

    As in Ukraine, the American narrative about Syria has completely collapsed. The US and its puppets always insisted that the Syrian opposition was peaceful, democratic, and committed to human rights, while Assad’s government was the source of all atrocities. But as the smoke clears, it has become apparent that Syria, like Ukraine, was destabilized by NATO and its Operation Gladio minions.

    The trouble in Syria began in the same way as in Ukraine: A mob of NATO hirelings and their deluded followers was sent into the street to be shot at by Operation Gladio false-flag snipers. The shootings were falsely blamed on the government; civil war was incited; and NATO-backed thugs and extremists went to war against the legitimate government – all according to plan. This is what the CIA has been doing all over the world since it overthrew Iran’s Mossadegh in 1953 and Guatemala’s Guzman in 1954.

    Today, more and more people around the world are waking up to the manipulations and deceptions of the mainstream US narrative. Yet rather than reining in their falsehoods – the sane response to today’s interconnected hyper-mediated world – our US-NATO imperial masters keep pumping up the lies till they explode.

    They must really, REALLY think we’re stupid.

    Then again, if they can convince us that 19 debauched pseudo-Muslims led by a terminal kidney patient in a cave in Afghanistan could outwit the world’s most advanced air defense systems and blow up three buildings with two planes, they have good reason to think we are stupid enough to believe almost anything.

    KB/NN

    Dr. Kevin Barrett, a Ph.D. Arabist-Islamologist, is one of America’s best-known critics of the War on Terror. Dr. Barrett has appeared many times on Fox, CNN, PBS and other broadcast outlets, and has inspired feature stories and op-eds in the New York Times, the Christian Science Monitor, the Chicago Tribune, and other leading publications. Dr. Barrett has taught at colleges and universities in San Francisco, Paris, and Wisconsin, where he ran for Congress in 2008. He is the co-founder of the Muslim-Christian-Jewish Alliance, and author of the books Truth Jihad: My Epic Struggle Against the 9/11 Big Lie (2007)and Questioning the War on Terror: A Primer for Obama Voters (2009). His website iswww.truthjihad.com. More articles by Dr. Barrett

  • Guillermo Gini

    First, I want to express my admiration (and a bit of envy) at the chance you (in the USA) have to read an article like this published an discussed so thoroughly with the participation of the readers and the author. Second, with the risk of being looked at as a mild middle grounder, I want to say that today, as always, the Spirit distirbutes different charismas because the Church needs them. The same way the church needs the piarists to teach and the benedictines to pray for us, maybe Mr. Kalb and some others have been called to discuss and other comentators have been called to develop the Social Chrisitan doctrine, others to influence on local issues, etc. Its not competitive but collaborative work, St. Domingo Guzmán and St. Francis of Assisi are a good model. As Kreeft noted in one of his books, the only way win this fight is becomeing saints.

  • Hyperborean Templar

    “Pluralism” is merely Cynical statecraft of oligarchic managerial minds, demented and softened and necrotic in servility to the ethos of entropic nihilism.

    Straussian esoteric relativist Machiavellian trash fills the void of ontological basis of the American polity.

    Anarchist-Gnostic currents of figurative Satanism are fully reawakened… The Cainites, Ophites, Carpocratians, etc., are all alive today in America… Libertine pandemic formlessness of nihilism is mistaken for liberty of humankind. We are self-reduced ape-icons of soul-gutted bestiality.

    Our God is sheer NOTHINGNESS, nihilism of abysmal infinitude.

    America is prophetically perceptible as the “NAMELESS BEAST” and abundantly embodies, unrivaled, the terminal progressive degeneration of the anarcho-nihilistic resurgent revolutionary dominion of dissolute neo-Gnosticism… The Anarch of Stirner versus the beneficent safeguarding “KATECHON” of Voegelin and Schmitt, here in America the new Gomorrah, the final duel shall unfold…

    Metaphysical belligerency is the path. The pillars of Order, the authentic remnants of the Catholic West within modernized, emasculated “proletarian Catholicism”, must inwardly reintegrate and unsheathe swords of Bernardine MALECIDE, once again… Catholic counter-revolutionary ultra-militant Templar spirit – OR NOTHING!

    Can you save your self, when chained from the beginning, fallen child, America? Your jurists must cleanse and purge and transfigure, what is the debris of enthusiastic ideology, separating out and sublimating the traces of nobility within your RADIX, American brat-face child of hubris…

  • Thaddeus J. Kozinski

    What does it mean to say that Christ is Lord? Surely this is no mere private opinion. If twelve apostles could inaugurate the conversion of Rome and beyond–surely thousands of courageous and orthodox (and non-Americanist) Catholics can do better than resign to–or, God-forbid, celebrate- the pluralist tyranny under which we suffer!

  • Samuel Maynes

    If you are interested in some new ideas on religious pluralism and the
    Trinity, please check out my website at http://www.religiouspluralism.ca. It previews my
    book, which has not been published yet and is still a “work-in-progress.” Your
    constructive criticism would be very much appreciated.

    My thesis is that an abstract version of the Trinity could be Christianity’s answer to the world need for a framework of pluralistic theology.

    In a constructive worldview: east, west, and far-east religions present a
    threefold understanding of One God manifest primarily in Muslim and Hebrew
    intuition of the Deity Absolute, Christian and Krishnan Hindu conception
    of the Universe Absolute Supreme Being; and Shaivite Hindu, Buddhist,
    Taoist apprehension of the Destroyer (meaning also Consummator), Unconditioned
    Absolute, or Spirit of All That Is and is not. Together with their
    variations and combinations in other major religions, these religious ideas
    reflect and express our collective understanding of God, in an expanded concept
    of the Holy Trinity.

    The Trinity Absolute is portrayed in the logic of world religions, as follows:

    1. Muslims and Jews may be said to worship only the first person of the
    Trinity, i.e. the existential Deity Absolute Creator, known as Allah or
    Yhwh, Abba or Father (as Jesus called him), Brahma, and other names; represented
    by Gabriel (Executive Archangel), Muhammad and Moses (mighty messenger
    prophets), and others.

    2. Christians and Krishnan Hindus may be said to worship the first person
    through a second person, i.e. the experiential Universe or “Universal”
    Absolute Supreme Being (Allsoul or Supersoul), called Son/Christ or
    Vishnu/Krishna; represented by Michael (Supreme Archangel), Jesus (teacher and
    savior of souls), and others. The Allsoul is that gestalt of personal human
    consciousness, which we expect will be the “body of Christ” (Mahdi,
    Messiah, Kalki or Maitreya) in the second coming – personified in history by
    Muhammad, Jesus Christ, Buddha (9th incarnation of Vishnu), and others.

    3. Shaivite Hindus, Buddhists, and Confucian-Taoists seem to venerate the synthesis
    of the first and second persons in a third person or appearance, ie. the
    Destiny Consummator of ultimate reality – unqualified Nirvana consciousness –
    associative Tao of All That Is – the absonite* Unconditioned Absolute Spirit
    “Synthesis of Source and Synthesis,”** who/which is logically expected to be
    Allah/Abba/Brahma glorified in and by union with the Supreme Being –
    represented in religions by Gabriel, Michael, and other Archangels, Mahadevas,
    Spiritpersons, etc., who may be included within the mysterious Holy Ghost.

    Other strains of religion seem to be psychological variations on the third
    person, or possibly combinations and permutations of the members of the Trinity
    – all just different personality perspectives on the Same God. Taken
    together, the world’s major religions give us at least two insights into the
    first person of this thrice-personal One God, two perceptions of the second
    person, and at least three glimpses of the third.

    * The ever-mysterious Holy Ghost or Unconditioned Spirit is neither absolutely
    infinite, nor absolutely finite, but absonite; meaning neither
    existential nor experiential, but their ultimate consummation; neither fully
    ideal nor totally real, but a middle path and grand synthesis of the
    superconscious and the conscious, in consciousness of the unconscious.

    ** This conception is so strong because somewhat as the Absonite Spirit is a
    synthesis of the spirit of the Absolute and the spirit of the Supreme, so
    it would seem that the evolving Supreme Being may himself also be a
    synthesis or “gestalt” of humanity with itself, in an Almighty Universe
    Allperson or Supersoul. Thus ultimately, the Absonite is their Unconditioned
    Absolute Coordinate Identity – the Spirit Synthesis of Source and Synthesis
    – the metaphysical Destiny Consummator of All That Is.

    After the Hindu and Buddhist conceptions, perhaps the most subtle expression
    and comprehensive symbol of the 3rd person of the Trinity is the Tao;
    involving the harmonization of “yin and yang” (great opposing ideas identified
    in positive and negative, or otherwise contrasting terms). In the Taoist icon
    of yin and yang, the s-shaped line separating the black and white spaces may be
    interpreted as the Unconditioned “Middle Path” between condition and
    conditioned opposites, while the circle that encompasses them both suggests
    their synthesis in the Spirit of the “Great Way” or Tao of All That Is.

    If the small black and white circles or “eyes” are taken to represent a nucleus
    of truth in both yin and yang, then the metaphysics of this symbolism fits
    nicely with the paradoxical mystery of the Christian Holy Ghost; who is neither
    the spirit of the one nor the spirit of the other, but the Glorified Spirit
    proceeding from both, taken altogether – as one entity – personally distinct
    from his co-equal, co-eternal and fully coordinate co-sponsors, who
    differentiate from him, as well as mingle and meld in him.

    For more details, please see: http://www.religiouspluralism.ca

    Samuel Stuart Maynes

  • Yankeegator

    USA is a land where The King of kings is dethroned and brought to the level of buddha, islamic allah, hindu gods, wicca goddeses, and even fallen angels… It is a pluralistic wonderland where most worship themselves…

MENU