I needn't respond to the forum's resident modernist shill, of course. If anything, the mere fact of his being opposed to me does credit to my position.

Now be a good fellow and update everyone on your latest dalliance with fried chicken, black-eyed peas, chitterlings, and collard greens, all bathed in butter and roux.

Sooo, is Jesus committing a "sin" against charity here?
This was a woman from a different tribe/race/ethnicity begging Jesus for help.. Jesus  not only ignored her, but actually referred to her as a dog.
Now, if I didn't know any better and according to your judaized version of Christianity, I'd say Christ was very uncharitable here at one point and with his elitist reference to his own ethnicity, possibly a "racist".
Matthew 15:21-28 New International Version (NIV)
The Faith of a Canaanite Woman
21 Leaving that place, Jesus withdrew to the region of Tyre and Sidon.22 A Canaanite woman from that vicinity came to him, crying out, “Lord, Son of David, have mercy on me! My daughter is demon-possessed and suffering terribly.”
23 Jesus did not answer a word. So his disciples came to him and urged him, “Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us.”
24 He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.”
25 The woman came and knelt before him. “Lord, help me!” she said.
26 He replied, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.”
27 “Yes it is, Lord,” she said. “Even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table.”
28 Then Jesus said to her, “Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted.” And her daughter was healed at that moment.

Very well said. Thank you
I completely agree. I am of the view that in our world, the utopian vision of those who believe that multiculturalism, miscegenation, and egalitarianism are the way to progress is greatly misguided.
Human nature is what it is and we cannot change that reality. Being Catholics we can certainly temper our natures, but we cannot completely destroy it.
Races are by nature of different abilities, temperaments, and natures.
Seeing this reality is not racist at all. Nor is the desire of a people to live under one nation with their own race/ethnicity. I believe that is better for everyone in the long run.
While I do not believe, as the Church also teaches, that mixed race marriages are inherently evil, I do believe that they are generally a very bad idea and that one should marry from his/her own people and culture. Unique individual situations may exist where it may be possible, but such a rare occurance cannot be generalized.
Lastly, I do believe that certain races are inherently prone to certain virtues and vices as males and females are prone to certain virtues and vices as well. I do not think this as racist or sexist.

Simply reality.

I needn't respond to the forum's resident modernist shill, of course. If anything, the mere fact of his being opposed to me does credit to my position.

Now be a good fellow and update everyone on your latest dalliance with fried chicken, black-eyed peas, chitterlings, and collard greens, all bathed in butter and roux.

You are unable to respond because you know that I am right. For one group of people to treat another group of people in a manner similar to the way in which Hitler treated the Jєωιѕн people, the handicapped, and the other ethnic minorities and by extension the way that other nations have mistreated their ethnic minorities is inherently unfair which is a sin against the virtue of justice, one of the cardinal virtues. This mistreatment is contrary to what is taught by the Catholic Church. If you want to be a proponent of this evil philosophy as a Protestant or a Jew or some other religion then that is what we might expect of those people. However we as Catholics are called by God to be a witness of the Truth. Racial hatred and the promotion of anything that excuses or incites others to follow is a sin against Truth and also against the theological virtue of charity.

Demonstrate where I have advocated mistreatment or hatred, you innuendo-spewing liar.

In giving the interpretation that you did with respect to that chapter of Mit Brennender Sorge you opened the door to the advocacy of mistreatment and hatred. That was a part of the policy of the nαzι regime.

I gave no "interpretation," you liar. I quoted it.

You're familiar enough with this passage, having spammed it thousands of times:


8. Whoever exalts race, or the people, or the State, or a particular form of State, or the depositories of power, or any other fundamental value of the human community - however necessary and honorable be their function in worldly things - whoever raises these notions above their standard value and divinizes them to an idolatrous level, distorts and perverts an order of the world planned and created by God; he is far from the true faith in God and from the concept of life which that faith upholds.

You're imputing to the encyclical - and by extension to Pope Pius XI - your own Marxist-Jєωιѕн idealization racial indifferentism. It's not there, however. It condemns idolatrous exaltation of race (such as how the Jews exalt their own race above even the Son of God and His Church), while simultaneously recognizing race as a "fundamental value of the human community... necessary and honorable (in its) function in worldly things."

There are posters here with basic reading comprehension, Poche. You chose to spam that passage ad nauseum. Don't start lying and calumniating just because it plainly says something you don't want it to say.