Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => General Discussion => Topic started by: InfiniteFaith on December 26, 2012, 12:47:15 PM
-
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2010/06/04/marrying-out/
-
When push comes to shove, people fall in love with and marry who their heart desires so it's not like some outside force is requiring this.
-
When push comes to shove, people fall in love with and marry who their heart desires so it's not like some outside force is requiring this.
More like whomever the media wishes them to be attracted to...it takes years of brainwashing and propaganda.
-
When push comes to shove, people fall in love with and marry who their heart desires so it's not like some outside force is requiring this.
More like whomever the media wishes them to be attracted to...it takes years of brainwashing and propaganda.
and attracting massive waves of illegal immigrants in order to speed up the process.
-
and attracting massive waves of illegal immigrants in order to speed up the process.
Looks like we have a liberal in the audience thumbing down the posts.
Not just illegal immigrants, think of our massive number of LEGAL immigrants.
-
When push comes to shove, people fall in love with and marry who their heart desires so it's not like some outside force is requiring this.
This is true. Thats why we need to deport 90% of illegal immigrants before it is too late.
-
and attracting massive waves of illegal immigrants in order to speed up the process.
and Americans travelling overseas to find a feminine, submissive wife.
The figures are confusing if you fail to differentiate between inter-racial with inter ethnic, e.g. if a Thai man married a Burmese woman, or an Englishman married a French woman, or an American married an Australian, would that be counted in the figures?
Intermarriage has been going on since the year dot. I don't understand why you even ask the question.
-
and attracting massive waves of illegal immigrants in order to speed up the process.
and Americans travelling overseas to find a feminine, submissive wife.
The figures are confusing if you fail to differentiate between inter-racial with inter ethnic, e.g. if a Thai man married a Burmese woman, or an Englishman married a French woman, or an American married an Australian, would that be counted in the figures?
Intermarriage has been going on since the year dot. I don't understand why you even ask the question.
I was asking if you believe the statistics given in the article. It could possibly be inflating numbers in order to make interracial dating/marriage more acceptable. If people see that it is common then they will be more likely to do it. If it wasn't very common then they would be more afraid/reluctant to do it. The article could be falsified in order to get a desired reaction.
As far as Americans going to other countries goes...maybe these are some of the reasons that people start to question their sɛҳuąƖity.
Im not sure if Americans marrying Australians count as interracial
-
Do I believe this? Yes.
I have watched it with my own eyes.
I grew up in the very deep South in the 70s. Race mixing was frowned upon and often resulted in shunning from one's family. Very few people really wanted that. Oh, sure, there was a lot of mixed race dating, but just so teenagers could shock their parents. Absolutely no one was serious about race mixing.
Also, very few people I knew were all that interested in mixed marriages regarding religion or ethnic origins. Italians married Italians. Irish married Irish. Germans married Germans. You could get away with the ethnic thing, though, because of religious values though.
But by the late 70s and early 80s, all of this was dying. By the time I was 25, it wasn't so shocking to see blacks with whites and military men had long been bringing home Asian wives, especially the black ones.
As I look around now, race mixing is no longer a consideration for most people, other than just a preference. You know like "I like vanilla ice cream better than chocolate."
It seems like EVERYTIME I see little babies now, they are mixed race, and many of the mothers are unmarried. This was almost unheard of 30 years ago.
Nowadays, ethnic "pride" is seen as some sort of gang mentality or nationalism and is completely frowned upon unless it is related to Latinos or Blacks. You know---yea, your Cuban! Yea, your Nigerian! What's a Slovak?
It has happened really rapidly.
So yes, I believe it.
Do I believe that it is socially acceptable now? That's a hard one to grapple with, isn't it? But we were told for so long that considering our races and ethnicities was somehow hateful, so we decided to ignore it.
-
That's a hard one to grapple with, isn't it? But we were told for so long that considering our races and ethnicities was somehow hateful, so we decided to ignore it.
Well to quote from Communist literature:
"Nation and race is a bourgeoise prejudice."
Regarding the liberal diatribe about how race doesn't matter, it is exactly that, a lie used by our supposed intellectuals.
Again to borrow from Marxian sources:
"Telling the truth is a bourgeoise prejudice." Vladimir Lenin
-
Regarding the thread I live in the Deep South and see interracial marriage all of the time, especially between black men and white women.
-
Regarding the thread I live in the Deep South and see interracial marriage all of the time, especially between black men and white women.
Yeah right
-
Yeah right
Is that sarcasm or agreement?
-
So what is the big deal about "interracial" marriage? We are all souls made in the image of Almighty God. In baptism, we are all brothers and sisters of Christ. Even St Paul made no distinction... So why should we? As long as we are united in the Faith, nothing else matters.
-
Yeah right
Is that sarcasm or agreement?
Neither. I disagree with what you are saying. I don't believe interracial between blacks and whites is common in the deep south.
-
So what is the big deal about "interracial" marriage? We are all souls made in the image of Almighty God. In baptism, we are all brothers and sisters of Christ. Even St Paul made no distinction... So why should we? As long as we are united in the Faith, nothing else matters.
Right...
Race doesn't matter, which is why blacks commit the majority of crime, even though they are 12 % of the population, while Hispanics are also growing in crime rates, along with the fact that blacks and Hispanics have the majority of the broken families, and the high school drop-outs, along with reading levels when they graduate high school at the ninth-grade level.
That must be why Europe shows a greater culture than the Third World. Because we are all "equal."
Blacks have been taught Christian salvation for 500 years and Hispanics have been converted to Catholicism for 500 years but that does not diminish their violent behavior. Race does matter.
-
Neither. I disagree with what you are saying. I don't believe interracial between blacks and whites is common in the deep south.
This is not the South of the 1950's. Ever since the 60's interracial marriage is becoming more and more common. I live in South Carolina and I see it every time I walk in a store.
-
So what is the big deal about "interracial" marriage? We are all souls made in the image of Almighty God. In baptism, we are all brothers and sisters of Christ. Even St Paul made no distinction... So why should we? As long as we are united in the Faith, nothing else matters.
There is nothing morally wrong with it. But it can be used in ways to do damage. i.e. Jews taking over the world.
I personally would never date a white woman who has been with a black guy because there is the possibility that she might decide that she prefers black men for
biological/taxonomical/physical reasons. Plus I prefer white women. So if a white woman goes with a black guy then she is pretty much taken out of the dating pool for me at least. Now I have less options to choose from.
Not to mention, our culture and way of life is at stake because of interracial.
Those are just some personal reasons. There is a lot of reasons to be against it. Most people would not be willing to accept them however. They want everyone else to believe that there is no difference between the races etc. And those are the same people who are pro-interracial. Personally I just think these are white women who want people to accept them when they end up with a black guy. And black guys who want to upgrade by getting with a white woman.
-
Neither. I disagree with what you are saying. I don't believe interracial between blacks and whites is common in the deep south.
This is not the South of the 1950's. Ever since the 60's interracial marriage is becoming more and more common. I live in South Carolina and I see it every time I walk in a store.
do you see hot white chicks doing it quite frequently?
-
Remember, the original article claimed that the number of whites who married outside their race is 9%. And almost half of that 9% were white men who married asian women.
-
Remember, the original article claimed that the number of whites who married outside their race is 9%. And almost half of that 9% were white men who married asian women.
Yeah I know. Its not just white women but also white men. I don't understand the asian fetish at all. I would rather date a black woman than an asian woman.
Come to think of it...I would rather date a black woman than a white woman who has been with a black guy. If I had kids by her I wouldn't mind my daughter dating a black guy as much as if I had a white daughter.
I really think it just sucks to see your own kind go with another race.
-
Wasn't in-depth conversation about all this covered in that miscegenation thread about a month ago?
http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/Miscegenationracially-mixed-marriages
-
Yeah right
Is that sarcasm or agreement?
Neither. I disagree with what you are saying. I don't believe interracial between blacks and whites is common in the deep south.
If you disagree with Trad Guy, then you ARE being sarcastic. Why deny it? :pop:
-
Yeah right
Is that sarcasm or agreement?
Neither. I disagree with what you are saying. I don't believe interracial between blacks and whites is common in the deep south.
If you disagree with Trad Guy, then you ARE being sarcastic. Why deny it? :pop:
I wasn't trying to be sarcastic about it. I don't know why you say that by disagreeing that I am sarcastic. Everytime one disagrees with another they are sarcastic?
-
Have you seen your psychiatrist lately? You may need a change of medication. :roll-laugh1:
-
Have you seen your psychiatrist lately? You may need a change of medication. :roll-laugh1:
They said the same thing about Jesus Christ...the wicked that is.
-
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2010/06/04/marrying-out/
As someone who married someone of another race and has biracial children, yeah, I can believe it.
-
and attracting massive waves of illegal immigrants in order to speed up the process.
Looks like we have a liberal in the audience thumbing down the posts.
Not just illegal immigrants, think of our massive number of LEGAL immigrants.
I am down thumbing your posts. I am not a liberal. I am a Catholic, who believes what the Catholic Church teaches about race. Namely, that we are all human.
-
So what is the big deal about "interracial" marriage? We are all souls made in the image of Almighty God. In baptism, we are all brothers and sisters of Christ. Even St Paul made no distinction... So why should we? As long as we are united in the Faith, nothing else matters.
How can anyone who holds the Catholic faith disagree wit this statement?
-
So what is the big deal about "interracial" marriage? We are all souls made in the image of Almighty God. In baptism, we are all brothers and sisters of Christ. Even St Paul made no distinction... So why should we? As long as we are united in the Faith, nothing else matters.
How can anyone who holds the Catholic faith disagree wit this statement?
Ask the people who prefer certain races over others for taxonomical reasons. I would say thats one reason why I dont like white women with black guys. They might find out they prefer black guys. Some say they do so there you go. Nobody goes after them for racism. It is racism by the way.
What about the Jєωιѕн interracial mixing agenda? You neglect that and continue to race mix? Are you not worried about our culture and way of life? I understand if you fall in love with someone of a different race. I would marry that person too. But at the same time I think we should be working towards limiting that.
-
Race matters. It's not just skin color. It's the ancestry of hundreds of generations.
The asian-American men in this country must really be offended by the manner in which the women of their own race reject them.
-
Although, truth be told, it's not much different than the boat devoutly religious men are in this society with respect to churchy girls, and their parents who would prefer they have develop careers before marriage (and so encourage them to turn away Christian suitors) than to marry and have families, all the while the parents are sticking their heads in the sand.
-
So what is the big deal about "interracial" marriage? We are all souls made in the image of Almighty God. In baptism, we are all brothers and sisters of Christ. Even St Paul made no distinction... So why should we? As long as we are united in the Faith, nothing else matters.
Why is it that white women never date asian guys then? You hear a lot of them say they just aren't attracted to asian guys. On top of it all, they are increasingly voicing about how they prefer black men. If things were so even, then this would not be happening. They would like asian men just as much as black guys and every other race for that matter. Unfortunately, asian men are smaller and less muscular on the average. Not to mention other taxonomical differences. Im surprised they dont get mad when (as telephorus suggested) asian women go with white men. I know I would.
People end up on the poop end of the stick because of interracial dating. Asian men and black women end up empty handed. Guys like me end up single because Im not all that interested in asian women (some I like I will admit) and I refuse to date a white woman who has gone black. Yeah hispanic women can be nice looking from time to time. I like black women sometimes too but they usually have an attitude that is unattractive.
Really the agenda boils down to trying to make things socially acceptable for white women and black guys to be together. Thats about it. White women don't want to be looked at negatively for it, and black guys just want a sexier more feminine women thats easier to get along with.
In the end you end up with some angry white guys who find out that their woman has been blacked. It really just causes problems between white men and white women. Not all the time but a lot of times. A lot of white guys don't like it. Black guys think its funny.
-
IF you may have points to make but you need to find less crass ways of making them.
This isn't Fisheaters.
-
So what is the big deal about "interracial" marriage? We are all souls made in the image of Almighty God. In baptism, we are all brothers and sisters of Christ. Even St Paul made no distinction... So why should we? As long as we are united in the Faith, nothing else matters.
How can anyone who holds the Catholic faith disagree wit this statement?
We are not all souls made in the image of Almighty God. We were once upon a time, but since then there have been those "minor details" known as Original Sin and the Fall. Since then we are made as embarrassingly distorted images of God who are only worthy of His wrath, not his indulgent permissiveness. In baptism we are all brothers and sisters in Christ, but that has nothing to do with personal or racial equality. As Catholics we are equal morally and in death, but not in any other way. St. Paul said we are one in Christ as Romans, no longer as Greeks,Hebrews, male or female, but he never implied that we are therefore personally equal as Romans. He means that as Catholics we are Greco-Romans, Hebreo-Romans, male Romans or female Romans, not that we are interchangeable machine parts in the Great Bolshevik Collective. St. Paul certainly did make distinctions between Romans. He was just saying that as Catholics we are all citizens of Eternal Rome, the one true City of God.
Who is united in the faith? Disembodied immaterial spirits as the apostate Novus Ordo teaches us? Equal Neo-Liberal Marxist cadres ceaselessly ecstatic about the bare existence of money as our Novus Ordo-approved government commands us? We are united in the faith as the created human beings whom the Lord hath made. Hence we are united as different races, sexes, classes, individuals and so on. Yet the Good Lord in His infinite wisdom did not make us to be a dreary mixed-race brown, a unisex, a boorish mindless proletariat. God could have done, but He does not suffer from amnesia and He made us as He most thoughtfully knew best.
So are we to correct God in his ignorant, illiberal, forgetful work of Creation? Do we know better than He? God made the races of man, but we know better and must correct his human biology with an omnipresent muddy brown as quickly as possible. Apparently His Creation isn't good enough for people like us (some sort of immaterial angels?) who are so able to redo Creation right. No doubt the Novus Ordo false religion, namely whichever Marxist faction happens to be currently on top in their incessant power struggles, teaches us that "faith" destroys nature and turns us all into equally useless egalitarian Red Robots.
Of course this self-satisfied ѕυιcιdє is for Catholics and other non-Jews only. Jews must be most carefully excluded from all this "enlightenment." Perhaps Jews are simply "too good" to be mere Roman Catholics like we lesser mortals. But it remains curious how this fiery righteousness stops dead in its tracks the moment Jews come into the picture. Why isn't race-mixing so mandatory for their Chosen Race Highnesses? Morality never applies to those suspiciously helpless Jews, the one and only actual Master Race.
Jєωιѕн Marxist egalitarianism has destroyed the earth, the economy, the family, marriage. It proceeds to destroy every race and nation (except one!) in universal racial and national genocide. "How can anyone who holds the Catholic faith disagree with this?" We can and we do disagree and precisely in the name of the Catholic Faith.
In most cases miscegenation is a mortal sin against the Creation that the Lord hath made.
-
Yet the Good Lord in His infinite wisdom did not make us to be a dreary mixed-race brown, a unisex, a boorish mindless proletariat. God could have done, but He does not suffer from amnesia and He made us as He most thoughtfully knew best.
In most cases miscegenation is a mortal sin against the Creation that the Lord hath made.
This is sick, it is not Catholic, and you have no authority to declare something to be a "mortal sin in most cases." Please cite some authority supporting your position.
-
We are not all souls made in the image of Almighty God. We were once upon a time, but since then there have been those "minor details" known as Original Sin and the Fall. Since then we are made as embarrassingly distorted images of God who are only worthy of His wrath, not his indulgent permissiveness.
I'm pretty sure you're in error.
48. What is man?
Man is a creature composed of body and soul, and made to the image and likeness of God.
(a) The soul and the body are not loosely connected parts of man, they are united in a substantial union to form one complete human nature. The soul is not located in any particular member of the body but is whole and entire in each part.
49. Is this likeness to God in the body or in the soul?
This likeness to God is chiefly in the soul.
(a) All creatures bear some resemblance to God inasmuch as they exist. Plants and animals resemble Him insofar as they have life, but none of these creatures is made to the image and likeness of God. Plants and animals do not have a rational soul, such as man has, by which they might know and love God.
50. How is the soul like God?
The soul is like God because it is a spirit having understanding and free will, and is destined to live forever.
(a) Men are especially like God when they know and love Him:
first, in a merely natural way without the aid of grace;
second, in a supernatural way here on earth, with the aid of grace;
third, in a perfect way in heaven, with the aid of the special] light God gives to the souls of the blessed.
(b) Understanding is the power of the soul to apprehend, to judge, and to reason, and thus to know right and wrong.
(c) Conscience is that judgment by which we decide here and now what we should do as good or avoid as evil.
(d) Free will is that power of the soul to choose either to act or not to act.
(e) Human souls live forever because they are spirits.
(f) The never-ending life of the soul is called immortality.
51. Who were the first man and woman?
The first man and woman were Adam and Eve, the first parents of the whole human race.
(a) The theory of evolution which teaches that higher forms of life develop from lower forms has offered no convincing, scientific proof that the human body developed gradually from that of a lower animal.
(b) If scientific proof of such development of the body of man could be had, it would not be opposed to Catholic doctrine provided that some special action of God is admitted not only in the creation of the soul but also in the production of the body of Adam.
(c) The human soul, being spiritual, could not possibly have developed from a lower, material form of life.
(d) Sacred Scripture teaches that Adam's soul, like every human soul, was created directly by God.
52. What was the chief gift bestowed on Adam and Eve by God?
The chief gift bestowed on Adam and Eve by God was sanctifying grace, which made them children of God and gave them the right to heaven.
(a) Sanctifying grace is a supernatural gift which is a sharing in the nature of God Himself and which raises men to the supernatural order, conferring on them powers entirely above those proper to human nature.
(b) Together with sanctifying grace God gave Adam and Eve the super natural virtues and the gifts of the Holy Ghost.
53. What other gifts were bestowed on Adam and Eve by God?
The other gifts bestowed on Adam and Eve by God were happiness in the Garden of Paradise, great knowledge, control of the passions by reason, and freedom from suffering and death.
(a) These gifts are not supernatural or above all created natures, but they are preternatural, that is, beyond the powers of human nature, though not above all created natures.
(b) If Adam had not sinned, these gifts would have been transmitted to all men as the possession of human nature.
Somewhat related:
Immortality Viewed as a Natural Condition of Man
17. The proposition stated in these words: "Taught by the Apostle, we regard death no longer as a
natural condition of man, but truly as a just penalty for original guilt," since, under the deceitful
mention of the name of the Apostle, it insinuates that death, which in the present state has been inflicted
as a just punishment for sin by the just withdrawal of immortality, was not a natural condition of man,
as if immortality had not been a gratuitous gift, but a natural condition,—deceitful, rash, injurious to
the Apostle, elsewhere condemned
-
Yet the Good Lord in His infinite wisdom did not make us to be a dreary mixed-race brown, ...
God makes "dreary mixed-race brown" people.
God made the "dreary mixed-race brown" St Martin de Porres, for example.
And in His image too!
Is "dreary mixed-race brown" any way to talk about people created in God's image?
-
I am down thumbing your posts. I am not a liberal. I am a Catholic, who believes what the Catholic Church teaches about race. Namely, that we are all human.
Yeah we are all "human" however there is a difference amongst the races. That is a scientific fact. It seems you have been around your Jєωιѕн family members for much too long.
-
God makes "dreary mixed-race brown" people.
God made the "dreary mixed-race brown" St Martin de Porres, for example.
And in His image too!
Is "dreary mixed-race brown" any way to talk about people created in God's image?
So clare how do you like your multi-racial, multicultural Britain?
-
Although, truth be told, it's not much different than the boat devoutly religious men are in this society with respect to churchy girls, and their parents who would prefer they have develop careers before marriage (and so encourage them to turn away Christian suitors) than to marry and have families, all the while the parents are sticking their heads in the sand.
It's either one way or another. Families either want their daughter to have a career or to be attracted to a rich man with a nice career.
-
So what is the big deal about "interracial" marriage? We are all souls made in the image of Almighty God. In baptism, we are all brothers and sisters of Christ. Even St Paul made no distinction... So why should we? As long as we are united in the Faith, nothing else matters.
Right...
Race doesn't matter, which is why blacks commit the majority of crime, even though they are 12 % of the population, while Hispanics are also growing in crime rates, along with the fact that blacks and Hispanics have the majority of the broken families, and the high school drop-outs, along with reading levels when they graduate high school at the ninth-grade level.
That must be why Europe shows a greater culture than the Third World. Because we are all "equal."
Blacks have been taught Christian salvation for 500 years and Hispanics have been converted to Catholicism for 500 years but that does not diminish their violent behavior. Race does matter.
The term Hispanics includes South Americans of 100% European blood, therefore, there is an error in what you wrote, since they are European, just like Italians, French, Spanish, Portuguese and, the Irish, etc.
A more accurate description would be Indian/Mestizo South Americans.
Therefore, in the future, you should be more accurate and say:
Race doesn't matter, which is why blacks commit the majority of crime, even though they are 12 % of the population, while Indian/Mestizo South Americans are also growing in crime rates, along with the fact that blacks and Indian/Mestizo South Americans have the majority of the broken families, and the high school drop-outs, along with reading levels when they graduate high school at the ninth-grade level.
That must be why Europe shows a greater culture than the Third World. Because we are all "equal."
Blacks have been taught Christian salvation for 500 years and Indian/Mestizo South Americans have been converted to Catholicism for 500 years but that does not diminish their violent behavior. Race does matter
You will notice that both the Black Africans, and the Indian/Mestizo South Americans, are both primitive cultures, "converted savages". It does seem like their have not been enough good willed European examples to teach by example the ways of Our Lord Jesus Christ, and be able to remove the wildness in these peoples, as they seem to constantly be falling back to savagery. The enemies of God want it this way.
You will find that the same happens to the European lower classes. The young tatood to the hilt, toothless at 30, American blond hair blue eyed trailer types, come to mind as an example.
-
Yeah right
Is that sarcasm or agreement?
Neither. I disagree with what you are saying. I don't believe interracial between blacks and whites is common in the deep south.
Then you obviously don't live in Atlanta. I see it all the time. Plenty of strapping, good-looking white guys with their lives in order and these white women dating "gangsta" black guys because MTV says it's cool.
-
Yeah right
Is that sarcasm or agreement?
Neither. I disagree with what you are saying. I don't believe interracial between blacks and whites is common in the deep south.
Then you obviously don't live in Atlanta. I see it all the time. Plenty of strapping, good-looking white guys with their lives in order and these white women dating "gangsta" black guys because MTV says it's cool.
Since when are Atlanta and South Carolina the "Deep South" ?
-
God makes "dreary mixed-race brown" people.
God made the "dreary mixed-race brown" St Martin de Porres, for example.
And in His image too!
Is "dreary mixed-race brown" any way to talk about people created in God's image?
So clare how do you like your multi-racial, multicultural Britain?
You do know that most of the immigrants to Britain are Indo-Europeans from Pakistan or Indians from northern India or Eastern Europe, right ?
-
Since when are Atlanta and South Carolina the "Deep South" ?
Um South Carolina and Georgia are indeed considered a part of the Deep South.
-
[quote from Mr. bowler] You will notice that both the Black Africans, and the Indian/Mestizo South Americans, are both primitive cultures, "converted savages". It does seem like their have not been enough good willed European examples to teach by example the ways of Our Lord Jesus Christ, and be able to remove the wildness in these peoples, as they seem to constantly be falling back to savagery. The enemies of God want it this way.
You will find that the same happens to the European lower classes. The young tatood to the hilt, toothless at 30, American blond hair blue eyed trailer types, come to mind as an example. [/quote]
In my lowly opinion it's very important that we try to be honest and "real" about the most difficult topics like race. The above quote from Mr. bowler is unpleasant, but he is also simply having the charity to say things as they truly are.
Many great Catholics (among whom this writer can not be included!) have noted that our typical Catechisms are too vague about the true effects of the Fall on mankind. We also usually fail to mention the key role of Kingship in Adam's role as the much-loved Founder of the Human Race. Hence there were no humans before Adam, but there were hominids before Adam. In Adam's Divine Kingship our ancestors all became humans for the first time in the hierarchic and radically non-egalitarian inequality that is the very essence of our humble yet also exalted humanity. So Adam and Eve were truly the first humans, but they were not then the only humans because they were most noble monarchs who first established a hierarchic human race capable of being described as such.
This has everything to do with the white Indo-Europeans! Catholic Eternal Rome is the supernatural unity of humanity, but this is only possible because the white Indo-Europeans are the naturally universal race that is alone able to unite humanity under its leadership on the natural level. Sometimes we have led unwisely (remember the apple) but only the best and most noble of us white folk are able to be the actual effective leaders of the human race. The Bible says this quite often and our entire history is a most vivid evidence of the truth of my statement.
My numerous critics like to demand that I quote Canon Law to support my controversial thesis that miscegenation is normally a mortal sin against children. Catholic Canon Law supports the marriage laws of Catholic States and those marriage laws have always most strictly restricted marriage among Catholics to the lawful subjects of our historic Catholic Holy Roman Empire and its associated National Monarchs. Illegal aliens are, according to our historic laws, not legally marriageable! Historically non-white persons have NEVER been accepted into citizenship or subjecthood in any of our Roman Catholic States or Empire. Negroes and Jews have also always been most strictly excluded from our Roman educational institutions as well. The normal strict racial segregation of Jews and Negroes in our Catholic Christendom is so well known that it shouldn't require any special proof by this writer here.
Why then did our beloved Catholic ancestors so carefully exclude Jews and Negroes from citizenship or legal membership in our Catholic Empire and Nations? Why were they always so carefully excluded from eligibility for legal marriage? Because Catholics should respect the hierarchic Creation as Our Lord has freely decided to make it. Because it is not for us to dictate to God how He ought to have made the human race and then try to remake the human race according to the misguided false notions of the anti-Catholic French and Russian Revolutions.
Truthfulness is not uncharitable. On the contrary. To be an inferior Roman Catholic human being is no small honour. Obviously we are all of us personally both superior to many and inferior to many. That is the very essence of our human condition and the reason that compassion is such an important virtue among us. We should gratefully follow the lead of our betters and be kind and considerate towards our inferiors. To pretend that as humans we are somehow really all the same "under the skin" is the height of envy and dishonesty. Such enviousness ought to be the last thing we should want as truly charitable Roman Catholics.
Let us rejoice in our wonderful human inequality and not ungratefully deny the most essential hierarchic truth of God's Creation.
-
The term Hispanics includes South Americans of 100% European blood, therefore, there is an error in what you wrote, since they are European, just like Italians, French, Spanish, Portuguese and, the Irish, etc.
A more accurate description would be Indian/Mestizo South Americans.
Therefore, in the future, you should be more accurate and say:
You will notice that both the Black Africans, and the Indian/Mestizo South Americans, are both primitive cultures, "converted savages". It does seem like their have not been enough good willed European examples to teach by example the ways of Our Lord Jesus Christ, and be able to remove the wildness in these peoples, as they seem to constantly be falling back to savagery. The enemies of God want it this way.
You will find that the same happens to the European lower classes. The young tatood to the hilt, toothless at 30, American blond hair blue eyed trailer types, come to mind as an example.
Yes of course, Indians or Mestizos south of the border.
I do agree about the white trash types as well although living in a trailer or apartment by itself does not make you "white trash."
-
You do know that most of the immigrants to Britain are Indo-Europeans from Pakistan or Indians from northern India or Eastern Europe, right ?
You can call them whatever you like, they aren't British and are coming into Britain in record numbers. Gypsies are also not of the same ethnic origin as French or Italians for instance.
-
In my lowly opinion it's very important that we try to be honest and "real" about the most difficult topics like race. The above quote from Mr. bowler is unpleasant, but he is also simply having the charity to say things as they truly are.
Many great Catholics (among whom this writer can not be included!) have noted that our typical Catechisms are too vague about the true effects of the Fall on mankind. We also usually fail to mention the key role of Kingship in Adam's role as the much-loved Founder of the Human Race. Hence there were no humans before Adam, but there were hominids before Adam. In Adam's Divine Kingship our ancestors all became humans for the first time in the hierarchic and radically non-egalitarian inequality that is the very essence of our humble yet also exalted humanity. So Adam and Eve were truly the first humans, but they were not then the only humans because they were most noble monarchs who first established a hierarchic human race capable of being described as such.
This has everything to do with the white Indo-Europeans! Catholic Eternal Rome is the supernatural unity of humanity, but this is only possible because the white Indo-Europeans are the naturally universal race that is alone able to unite humanity under its leadership on the natural level. Sometimes we have led unwisely (remember the apple) but only the best and most noble of us white folk are able to be the actual effective leaders of the human race. The Bible says this quite often and our entire history is a most vivid evidence of the truth of my statement.
My numerous critics like to demand that I quote Canon Law to support my controversial thesis that miscegenation is normally a mortal sin against children. Catholic Canon Law supports the marriage laws of Catholic States and those marriage laws have always most strictly restricted marriage among Catholics to the lawful subjects of our historic Catholic Holy Roman Empire and its associated National Monarchs. Illegal aliens are, according to our historic laws, not legally marriageable! Historically non-white persons have NEVER been accepted into citizenship or subjecthood in any of our Roman Catholic States or Empire. Negroes and Jews have also always been most strictly excluded from our Roman educational institutions as well. The normal strict racial segregation of Jews and Negroes in our Catholic Christendom is so well known that it shouldn't require any special proof by this writer here.
Why then did our beloved Catholic ancestors so carefully exclude Jews and Negroes from citizenship or legal membership in our Catholic Empire and Nations? Why were they always so carefully excluded from eligibility for legal marriage? Because Catholics should respect the hierarchic Creation as Our Lord has freely decided to make it. Because it is not for us to dictate to God how He ought to have made the human race and then try to remake the human race according to the misguided false notions of the anti-Catholic French and Russian Revolutions.
Truthfulness is not uncharitable. On the contrary. To be an inferior Roman Catholic human being is no small honour. Obviously we are all of us personally both superior to many and inferior to many. That is the very essence of our human condition and the reason that compassion is such an important virtue among us. We should gratefully follow the lead of our betters and be kind and considerate towards our inferiors. To pretend that as humans we are somehow really all the same "under the skin" is the height of envy and dishonesty. Such enviousness ought to be the last thing we should want as truly charitable Roman Catholics.
Let us rejoice in our wonderful human inequality and not ungratefully deny the most essential hierarchic truth of God's Creation.
I do agree that different races are created unequal as are different individuals in the same peoples. Let's face it we are not meant to be equal and never will be.
-
Since when are Atlanta and South Carolina the "Deep South" ?
Um South Carolina and Georgia are indeed considered a part of the Deep South.
To my knowledge, I always thought South Carolina and Atlanta, GA are the "Deep South".
Alabama and Mississippi and Louisiana too!
-
It all goes back to my first post about people falling in love with and marrying who they will.
-
Since when are Atlanta and South Carolina the "Deep South" ?
Um South Carolina and Georgia are indeed considered a part of the Deep South.
Maybe in South Carolina and Georgia they are considered to be part of the Deep South, but people in the Deep South (Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana) certainly don't think so.
-
Since when are Atlanta and South Carolina the "Deep South" ?
Um South Carolina and Georgia are indeed considered a part of the Deep South.
To my knowledge, I always thought South Carolina and Atlanta, GA are the "Deep South".
Alabama and Mississippi and Louisiana too!
Those places are commonly called the "Old South," the Deep South being the places now known as the States of Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana.
-
Love goes where it will...
If someone is strongly against marrying outside their race, then they should by all means not do it.
Like that old song from the sixties... Love grows where my rosemary goes and nobody knows but me... or something like that.
:cool:
-
Love goes where it will...
If someone is strongly against marrying outside their race, then they should by all means not do it.
Like that old song from the sixties... Love grows where my rosemary goes and nobody knows but me... or something like that.
:cool:
And if we got rid of most of the illegal immigrants people would be falling in love with other people of their own race. There is absolutely nothing wrong with either of the 2. People wouldn't know the difference.
-
Love goes where it will...
If someone is strongly against marrying outside their race, then they should by all means not do it.
Like that old song from the sixties... Love grows where my rosemary goes and nobody knows but me... or something like that.
:cool:
Right because one should be praising the 1960's aspects of sɛҳuąƖ revolution...
Where would we be without sɛҳuąƖ freedom right? Lord help all of those before who had such "rules" about "love" as if a child even knows what that means (by child I mean our adult "children" as well). It should be noted however that the 1950's was full of sɛҳuąƖ immorality too so the "stuffy" 50's is a myth.
-
Okay.
Y'all got that?
1. Non-whites are less than human, blacks, particularly are the least human of them all.
2. Non-whites should not be educated with or in the same manner as whites.
3. Non-whites, since they lack the glory of whites, are least capable of getting to Heaven when compared with whites.
4. Somewhere in the Catechism, we can discern that mixing with anyone outside our own race is a mortal sin. Therefore, if you have a mixed child, you should immediately go to confession and regret the child until your death.
5. Mixed children are a morlock race that somehow God accidentally allowed to come into existence, and mixed children never ever occurred in history before the American sɛҳuąƖ Revolution--never.
6. One day, with hard work, diligence, and the use of revolutionary force, we can create a white utopia absent of all non-white races and mixed-race morlocks, and that ought to be our goal in this world.
7. This fondness for the white race and the world's inequality to this exclusive white race has absolutely no resemblance whatsoever to the Jєωιѕн utopian idea of a racially pure Jєωιѕн state that excludes all gentiles.
-
Making scarecrows Laramie? Who are you addressing?
-
Since when are Atlanta and South Carolina the "Deep South" ?
Um South Carolina and Georgia are indeed considered a part of the Deep South.
Maybe in South Carolina and Georgia they are considered to be part of the Deep South, but people in the Deep South (Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana) certainly don't think so.
I guess Georgia's state title "Empire State of the South" isn't deep enough for trailer park southerners to the west of Georgia. Georgia is Dixie, Georgia was the one of the original 13 colonies, it literally is the south par excellence. If you don't think Georgia is deep south then you need to stop smoking meth with those people who live in the poorer southern states who have nothing better to do than watch Maury all day on TV and buy ingredients to make meth at walmart.
Most people who say that are just sports freaks who want to rag on UGA and GA Tech.
-
Okay.
Y'all got that?
1. Non-whites are less than human, blacks, particularly are the least human of them all.
2. Non-whites should not be educated with or in the same manner as whites.
3. Non-whites, since they lack the glory of whites, are least capable of getting to Heaven when compared with whites.
4. Somewhere in the Catechism, we can discern that mixing with anyone outside our own race is a mortal sin. Therefore, if you have a mixed child, you should immediately go to confession and regret the child until your death.
5. Mixed children are a morlock race that somehow God accidentally allowed to come into existence, and mixed children never ever occurred in history before the American sɛҳuąƖ Revolution--never.
6. One day, with hard work, diligence, and the use of revolutionary force, we can create a white utopia absent of all non-white races and mixed-race morlocks, and that ought to be our goal in this world.
7. This fondness for the white race and the world's inequality to this exclusive white race has absolutely no resemblance whatsoever to the Jєωιѕн utopian idea of a racially pure Jєωιѕн state that excludes all gentiles.
What on earth are you babbling about?
-
Okay.
Y'all got that?
1. Non-whites are less than human, blacks, particularly are the least human of them all.
2. Non-whites should not be educated with or in the same manner as whites.
3. Non-whites, since they lack the glory of whites, are least capable of getting to Heaven when compared with whites.
4. Somewhere in the Catechism, we can discern that mixing with anyone outside our own race is a mortal sin. Therefore, if you have a mixed child, you should immediately go to confession and regret the child until your death.
5. Mixed children are a morlock race that somehow God accidentally allowed to come into existence, and mixed children never ever occurred in history before the American sɛҳuąƖ Revolution--never.
6. One day, with hard work, diligence, and the use of revolutionary force, we can create a white utopia absent of all non-white races and mixed-race morlocks, and that ought to be our goal in this world.
7. This fondness for the white race and the world's inequality to this exclusive white race has absolutely no resemblance whatsoever to the Jєωιѕн utopian idea of a racially pure Jєωιѕн state that excludes all gentiles.
Sant Agustino, Ora pro nobis
Santa Monica, Ora pro nobis
Sant Martino de Porres, Ora pro nobis
:incense:
-
Making scarecrows Laramie? Who are you addressing?
Who am I addressing? Let's review the start of the post:
Okay.
Y'all got that?
Apparently, I'm addressing "y'all."
- - - - -
What on earth are you babbling about?
Merely organizing the collected thoughts on this topic into one single post. ...your babbling, basically.
Apparently, someone doesn't like the fact I organized it in this manner. I assumed you'd appreciate the convenience of it.
-
Laramie,
No one said non-whites were less human than whites.
You're injecting your own emotions into this conversation.
There's no inherent sin in pointing out the lack of achievement of other races. It can't all be based on bad luck.
So, Laramie, please refrain from the rash judgements, ok?
-
I think interracial mixing really took off with the invention of speedy transport available to the masses. Trains, cars, and then there's planes, of course.
One image that comes to mind is all those wild west movies where I see a railroad in Arizona being put together by a crew of black men and those fellows from Ming's China.
-
I think interracial mixing really took off with the invention of speedy transport available to the masses. Trains, cars, and then there's planes, of course.
One image that comes to mind is all those wild west movies where I see a railroad in Arizona being put together by a crew of black men and those fellows from Ming's China.
Mass waves of illegal immigrants to speed up the process.
-
Laramie,
No one said non-whites were less human than whites.
You're injecting your own emotions into this conversation.
There's no inherent sin in pointing out the lack of achievement of other races. It can't all be based on bad luck.
So, Laramie, please refrain from the rash judgements, ok?
I have disagreed with you a bit so far, but you hit the nail on the head here. No one said non-whites were "less than human." I'd like Laramie to find a post where I siad that.
-
Laramie,
No one said non-whites were less human than whites.
You're injecting your own emotions into this conversation.
There's no inherent sin in pointing out the lack of achievement of other races. It can't all be based on bad luck.
So, Laramie, please refrain from the rash judgements, ok?
I have disagreed with you a bit so far, but you hit the nail on the head here. No one said non-whites were "less than human." I'd like Laramie to find a post where I siad that.
You could be right.
I'd like to go back for edit, but I think the opportunity's gone.
Instead of "less than human," I would instead summarize it as "less human."
I think that'd be more accurate.
-
You could be right.
I'd like to go back for edit, but I think the opportunity's gone.
Instead of "less than human," I would instead summarize it as "less human."
I think that'd be more accurate.
I did not say non-whites were "less human" either. I said they were not equal, which is a scientific fact, and show less culture than Europe, which is a historical fact.
-
Laramie,
Don't be dishonest. No one said that either.
If you have a differing opinion then go ahead and express it. If you have a case then make the case.
-
If you have a differing opinion then go ahead and express it. If you have a case then make the case.
My thoughts are on another thread.
Wasn't in-depth conversation about all this covered in that miscegenation thread about a month ago?
http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/Miscegenationracially-mixed-marriages
-
The "Hispanic" label is very misleading. The countries of Central and especially South America are very diverse. They had periods of massive immigration similar to the US.
My wife is from South America, we both come from Italian ancestry. My people came to the US, hers to South America. But she is considered a different race than me??? Crazy !!
I believe White men look overseas for women mainly because American women are not very feminine. Although White women tend to be more feminine than black Americans, hence Black men tend to look at white and Asian women.
I tell my children that marriage is hard enough on its own, throw in race/cultural differences makes it that much tougher. With that being said, I wouldn't be against my children marring outside their race along as the person they are marrying is a practicing, faithful Catholic.
-
The "Hispanic" label is very misleading. The countries of Central and especially South America are very diverse. They had periods of massive immigration similar to the US.
My wife is from South America, we both come from Italian ancestry. My people came to the US, hers to South America. But she is considered a different race than me??? Crazy !!
I believe White men look overseas for women mainly because American women are not very feminine. Although White women tend to be more feminine than black Americans, hence Black men tend to look at white and Asian women.
I tell my children that marriage is hard enough on its own, throw in race/cultural differences makes it that much tougher. With that being said, I wouldn't be against my children marring outside their race along as the person they are marrying is a practicing, faithful Catholic.
very good input
-
Laramie,
No one said non-whites were less human than whites.
You're injecting your own emotions into this conversation.
There's no inherent sin in pointing out the lack of achievement of other races. It can't all be based on bad luck.
So, Laramie, please refrain from the rash judgements, ok?
I have disagreed with you a bit so far, but you hit the nail on the head here. No one said non-whites were "less than human." I'd like Laramie to find a post where I siad that.
Ditto. There is absolutely nothing "wrong" with human inferiority. EVERYBODY among us is greatly inferior to all sorts of others. Respecting and appreciating our inequalities is what genuine human humility is all about. Every superiority a man might have only obligates him all the more to everyone else. True human superiority is nothing if not a clarion call to Roman Catholic suffering.
Our greatest Catholic heroes never lack for tragedy. If we want to be superior to others, we had best be careful what we wish for. God just might take us at our word...
-
Laramie,
No one said non-whites were less human than whites.
You're injecting your own emotions into this conversation.
There's no inherent sin in pointing out the lack of achievement of other races. It can't all be based on bad luck.
So, Laramie, please refrain from the rash judgements, ok?
I have disagreed with you a bit so far, but you hit the nail on the head here. No one said non-whites were "less than human." I'd like Laramie to find a post where I siad that.
You could be right.
I'd like to go back for edit, but I think the opportunity's gone.
Instead of "less than human," I would instead summarize it as "less human."
I think that'd be more accurate.
Not to be a stickler but.....
Isn't the word "Human" derivitve from meaning "white man"?
hue1 /hyu or, often, yu/ Show Spelled [hyoo or, often, yoo] Show IPA
noun
1. a gradation or variety of a color; tint: pale hues.
2. the property of light by which the color of an object is classified as red, blue, green, or yellow in reference to the spectrum.
3. color: all the hues of the rainbow.
4. form or appearance.
5. complexion.
And ;
man1 /mæn/ Show Spelled [man] Show IPA noun, plural men, verb, manned, man·ning, interjection.
noun
1. an adult male person, as distinguished from a boy or a woman.
2. a member of the species Homo sapiens or all the members of this species collectively, without regard to sex: prehistoric man.
3. the human individual as representing the species, without reference to sex; the human race; humankind:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/man
Thus the term" Hue-man" literally meaning "white-man" was probably an antiquated term used to describe the human races of lighter complexion usually of the European stock.
So, under that context, you could logically say nonwhites are in fact "less human".
My .02 here in this thread, carry on. :cool:
-
Laramie,
No one said non-whites were less human than whites.
You're injecting your own emotions into this conversation.
There's no inherent sin in pointing out the lack of achievement of other races. It can't all be based on bad luck.
So, Laramie, please refrain from the rash judgements, ok?
I have disagreed with you a bit so far, but you hit the nail on the head here. No one said non-whites were "less than human." I'd like Laramie to find a post where I siad that.
Ditto. There is absolutely nothing "wrong" with human inferiority. EVERYBODY among us is greatly inferior to all sorts of others. Respecting and appreciating our inequalities is what genuine human humility is all about. Every superiority a man might have only obligates him all the more to everyone else. True human superiority is nothing if not a clarion call to Roman Catholic suffering.
Our greatest Catholic heroes never lack for tragedy. If we want to be superior to others, we had best be careful what we wish for. God just might take us at our word...
Not sure if I even agree with this.
-
Not sure if I even agree with this.
Human equality is impossible.
-
Isn't the word "Human" derivitve from meaning "white man"?
hue1 /hyu or, often, yu/ Show Spelled [hyoo or, often, yoo] Show IPA
noun
1. a gradation or variety of a color; tint: pale hues.
2. the property of light by which the color of an object is classified as red, blue, green, or yellow in reference to the spectrum.
3. color: all the hues of the rainbow.
4. form or appearance.
5. complexion.
And ;
man1 /mæn/ Show Spelled [man] Show IPA noun, plural men, verb, manned, man·ning, interjection.
noun
1. an adult male person, as distinguished from a boy or a woman.
2. a member of the species Homo sapiens or all the members of this species collectively, without regard to sex: prehistoric man.
3. the human individual as representing the species, without reference to sex; the human race; humankind:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/man
Thus the term" Hue-man" literally meaning "white-man" was probably an antiquated term used to describe the human races of lighter complexion usually of the European stock.
So, under that context, you could logically say nonwhites are in fact "less human".
My .02 here in this thread, carry on. :cool:
We went over this before here (http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=topic&t=20036&min=140&num=5):
... humus, to do with the earth, as in humiliate (be brought down to earth), humility, and humans being made of the slime of the earth.
which seems more likely.
http://www.english-for-students.com/human.html
-
Not sure if I even agree with this.
Human equality is impossible.
I hope thats not being used as an excuse for inequality. Shouldn't we strive for equality?
-
Not sure if I even agree with this.
Human equality is impossible.
I hope thats not being used as an excuse for inequality. Shouldn't we strive for equality?
Define equality. Do you mean legal equality? Do you mean using social constructs (such as equality) to be used as a battering ram for the advancement of marxism? Do you mean the destruction of differences and molding people into one big group? Do you mean the destruction of diversity?
-
Not sure if I even agree with this.
Human equality is impossible.
I hope thats not being used as an excuse for inequality. Shouldn't we strive for equality?
Define equality. Do you mean legal equality? Do you mean using social constructs (such as equality) to be used as a battering ram for the advancement of marxism? Do you mean the destruction of differences and molding people into one big group? Do you mean the destruction of diversity?
No I really just mean giving everyone a fair chance at success, and treating everyone respectfully. There is not much we can do about the taxonomical differences and such.
-
I hope thats not being used as an excuse for inequality. Shouldn't we strive for equality?
Trying to create Heaven on earth is what the Marxists do. We should realize equality is impossible.
-
No I really just mean giving everyone a fair chance at success, and treating everyone respectfully.
That doesn't happen under affirmative action.
-
So what is the big deal about "interracial" marriage? We are all souls made in the image of Almighty God. In baptism, we are all brothers and sisters of Christ. Even St Paul made no distinction... So why should we? As long as we are united in the Faith, nothing else matters.
How can anyone who holds the Catholic faith disagree wit this statement?
Ask the people who prefer certain races over others for taxonomical reasons. I would say thats one reason why I dont like white women with black guys. They might find out they prefer black guys. Some say they do so there you go. Nobody goes after them for racism. It is racism by the way.
What about the Jєωιѕн interracial mixing agenda? You neglect that and continue to race mix? Are you not worried about our culture and way of life? I understand if you fall in love with someone of a different race. I would marry that person too. But at the same time I think we should be working towards limiting that.
Let me get this straight. You don't want white women to date black men because you think you can't compete? You can't possibly expect me to take this seriously.
I married my wife, loved her, and had children and created a Catholic family with her because God gave me this gift, not becasue some supposed Jєωιѕн conspiracy told ne to.
-
So what is the big deal about "interracial" marriage? We are all souls made in the image of Almighty God. In baptism, we are all brothers and sisters of Christ. Even St Paul made no distinction... So why should we? As long as we are united in the Faith, nothing else matters.
Why is it that white women never date asian guys then? You hear a lot of them say they just aren't attracted to asian guys. On top of it all, they are increasingly voicing about how they prefer black men. If things were so even, then this would not be happening. They would like asian men just as much as black guys and every other race for that matter. Unfortunately, asian men are smaller and less muscular on the average. Not to mention other taxonomical differences. Im surprised they dont get mad when (as telephorus suggested) asian women go with white men. I know I would.
People end up on the poop end of the stick because of interracial dating. Asian men and black women end up empty handed. Guys like me end up single because Im not all that interested in asian women (some I like I will admit) and I refuse to date a white woman who has gone black. Yeah hispanic women can be nice looking from time to time. I like black women sometimes too but they usually have an attitude that is unattractive.
Really the agenda boils down to trying to make things socially acceptable for white women and black guys to be together. Thats about it. White women don't want to be looked at negatively for it, and black guys just want a sexier more feminine women thats easier to get along with.
In the end you end up with some angry white guys who find out that their woman has been blacked. It really just causes problems between white men and white women. Not all the time but a lot of times. A lot of white guys don't like it. Black guys think its funny.
This is boorish nonsense. as Telesphorus rightly points out, it complete obscures and actually point you might have. There is nothing even remotely Catholic about it.
-
Yet the Good Lord in His infinite wisdom did not make us to be a dreary mixed-race brown, a unisex, a boorish mindless proletariat. God could have done, but He does not suffer from amnesia and He made us as He most thoughtfully knew best.
In most cases miscegenation is a mortal sin against the Creation that the Lord hath made.
This is sick, it is not Catholic, and you have no authority to declare something to be a "mortal sin in most cases." Please cite some authority supporting your position.
I would also be very interested in a Catholic source for this idiocy.
-
I am down thumbing your posts. I am not a liberal. I am a Catholic, who believes what the Catholic Church teaches about race. Namely, that we are all human.
Yeah we are all "human" however there is a difference amongst the races. That is a scientific fact. It seems you have been around your Jєωιѕн family members for much too long.
Actually, I was around my Filipino wife and my biracial children.
-
Part of woman's fallen nature is to be attracted to base characters.
This is just reality.
You want to shame devout men for being incensed at the degenerate behavior of blacks in a society in which "gangster rap" is promoted.
That is tantamount to betrayal of basic values of decency. Not all cultures and societies are equal. Different groups have different abilities and temperament.
When white men are told to be virtuous, devout, but are essentially disarmed from dealing with the belligerent, disgusting, fatherless culture of the blacks and hispanics.
We're supposed to follow all the rules and then to avoid being called racist white men are expected to put their daughters in situations where they can be taken advantage by those animals.
This leftist "racial egalitarianism" is in reality a form of aggression against the basic values of family and of civilization itself. To pretend it is part of the religion is a betrayal of the religion - it is a betrayal of the natural order.
It is suicidal and it is submission to evil. Multi-cultural marxism, embraced by whites, is a death wish.
-
Okay.
Y'all got that?
1. Non-whites are less than human, blacks, particularly are the least human of them all.
2. Non-whites should not be educated with or in the same manner as whites.
3. Non-whites, since they lack the glory of whites, are least capable of getting to Heaven when compared with whites.
4. Somewhere in the Catechism, we can discern that mixing with anyone outside our own race is a mortal sin. Therefore, if you have a mixed child, you should immediately go to confession and regret the child until your death.
5. Mixed children are a morlock race that somehow God accidentally allowed to come into existence, and mixed children never ever occurred in history before the American sɛҳuąƖ Revolution--never.
6. One day, with hard work, diligence, and the use of revolutionary force, we can create a white utopia absent of all non-white races and mixed-race morlocks, and that ought to be our goal in this world.
7. This fondness for the white race and the world's inequality to this exclusive white race has absolutely no resemblance whatsoever to the Jєωιѕн utopian idea of a racially pure Jєωιѕн state that excludes all gentiles.
Sant Agustino, Ora pro nobis
Santa Monica, Ora pro nobis
Sant Martino de Porres, Ora pro nobis
:incense:
Amen.
-
Strictly for informational purposes only, isn't there a Church docuмent, dating back to the Spanish Conquest, condemning racial discrimination and permitting Spaniards and other Europeans to marry South American natives? I seem to recall such a docuмent being described but that was many years ago.
-
Think I'll contact a former business associate of mine with strong ties to Mongolia. We can all chip in and send Frank a mail-order bride!
He sure needs somethin'
:cool:
-
It should be pointed out that race-mixing creates more racial stratification, not less.
In Latin America and India, this is reflected in their films and television.
The types of people that serve as the models for the rest are racially distinct from the majority of the population.
It is very bad for social order.
-
Think I'll contact a former business associate of mine with strong ties to Mongolia. We can all chip in and send Frank a mail-order bride!
He sure needs somethin'
:cool:
It is noticeable the nerds and eggheads all over can't even find a woman in their country so they have to go get some Asian mail-order bride who will "bow" to their weakened manliness.
-
It should be pointed out that race-mixing creates more racial stratification, not less.
In Latin America and India, this is reflected in their films and television.
The types of people that serve as the models for the rest are racially distinct from the majority of the population.
It is very bad for social order.
This is a very interesting angle, do you have any other thoughts on this aspect you'd like to share?
-
This is a very interesting angle, do you have any other thoughts on this aspect you'd like to share?
Race is objective, not subjective. Race is a value that non-whites respect, and if they resent whites who speak openly of the value of their race, it is similar to resentment of those who speak of intellectual subjects, or of wealthy men who speak of certain kinds of goods.
Many non-whites prefer white women or white men because of this value, that they perceive. You will find black-haired girls with amerindian ancestry preferring blond men. That is because they value race.
There needs to be a balance when speaking of race. Whites should respect the value of their race, and also respect the sensibilities of others. However, we don't need to give up our race, just as rich men don't need to give up their money and intelligent men don't need to give up their intellectual pursuits. That being said, rich men do best not tastelessly deride those poorer than themselves, intellectuals would be wise not to despise simple people.
When confronted by marxism, the deliberate dumbing down of society, and the promotion of immorality, the proper attitude is to resist strongly, with invective. And when confronted by aggressive, culturally marxist "multiculturalism" that calls all opposition to its agenda "racism" - we have to point out the the truth about the degeneracy and social degradation they wish to inflict on our civilization, a civilization made by whites.
-
So what is the big deal about "interracial" marriage? We are all souls made in the image of Almighty God. In baptism, we are all brothers and sisters of Christ. Even St Paul made no distinction... So why should we? As long as we are united in the Faith, nothing else matters.
How can anyone who holds the Catholic faith disagree wit this statement?
Ask the people who prefer certain races over others for taxonomical reasons. I would say thats one reason why I dont like white women with black guys. They might find out they prefer black guys. Some say they do so there you go. Nobody goes after them for racism. It is racism by the way.
What about the Jєωιѕн interracial mixing agenda? You neglect that and continue to race mix? Are you not worried about our culture and way of life? I understand if you fall in love with someone of a different race. I would marry that person too. But at the same time I think we should be working towards limiting that.
Let me get this straight. You don't want white women to date black men because you think you can't compete? You can't possibly expect me to take this seriously.
I married my wife, loved her, and had children and created a Catholic family with her because God gave me this gift, not becasue some supposed Jєωιѕн conspiracy told ne to.
Its not about what me its about the white woman. Some white women say they prefer black men for various different reasons. A lot of black guys would rather be with a white girl than a black girl. This is not a good thing. Most white guys would rather be with a white woman than a black woman. We are losing our white women to black guys...do the math. It has nothing to do with me. And yes I do think agenda plays a role in it. Black guys are being hyped right now and white women are flocking their way because they think its cool and acceptable. We should make it unacceptable. I guarantee if we deported 90% of illegal immigrants they would knock it off real fast.
-
Sant Agustino
Santa Monica
Do you actually think Berbers and Romans were black? :rolleyes:
Did you read the title? This topic is not about blacks, but about racially mixed marriages.
-
Strictly for informational purposes only, isn't there a Church docuмent, dating back to the Spanish Conquest, condemning racial discrimination and permitting Spaniards and other Europeans to marry South American natives? I seem to recall such a docuмent being described but that was many years ago.
I also remember there being a docuмent encouraging the Portuguese to enslave natives.
Well, according to feminαzι dogma, marriage IS enslavement.
-
I also remember there being a docuмent encouraging the Portuguese to enslave natives.
Can you give a reference for that?
-
Yet the Good Lord in His infinite wisdom did not make us to be a dreary mixed-race brown, a unisex, a boorish mindless proletariat. God could have done, but He does not suffer from amnesia and He made us as He most thoughtfully knew best.
In most cases miscegenation is a mortal sin against the Creation that the Lord hath made.
This is sick, it is not Catholic, and you have no authority to declare something to be a "mortal sin in most cases." Please cite some authority supporting your position.
I would also be very interested in a Catholic source for this idiocy.
"A Catholic source for this idiocy" would be the historic Roman Catholic ARISTOCRACY. To intentionally reduce or damage the biological/genetic quality of one's own offspring is pretty far along in the direction of ill-will, malice and mortal sin. Historically there were those who would intentionally breed freaks for the circus. Miscegenation is all too often only a variation on that immoral theme. Would men tolerate this with expensive race horses? With quality cattle? Men shouldn't do to their own children what they would never do to their purebred horses or cattle. Since humans are superior to animals (or in certain cases ought to be!) we should be much more strict about human breeding standards than about our animal breeding standards.
Our historic Roman Catholic aristocracy has been nothing if not hyper-aware of maintaining the highest possible racial breeding standards among their own. Over the centuries they also strongly directed their peasants in the direction of good breeding as well. We don't find mulattoes or mestizos among our historic mainstream Catholic nobility or priesthood and that was not simply by chance. The Roman Catholic literature, educational system and civilization strongly supported European Catholics intermarrying among our own and the exceptions were due to crisis situations, like in Mexico after most of the native population had died from recently-introduced diseases against which the Catholic natives had no resistance. Then Spaniards had to marry native women to prevent the extinction of the Mexicans and the collapse of what was then known as New Spain.
Saying good breeding is not Catholic is like saying that our historic Roman Catholic aristocracy and peasantry weren't Catholic. The biological well-being of Catholic children has always been an important concern in Catholic marital match-making. It's one of the reasons that historically Catholics thought that lords and parents ought to provide some guidance in the marriage choices of those subject to their authority. If that wasn't racial selectivity, then what might be? If race-mixing is a Catholic virtue, then why aren't we already all monochrome brown folk? We've had many millennia to bring in non-whites into Europe and marry them. Why was that never done before the recent establishment of brutal Marxist tyrannies in the Western World?
If race-mixing is a Catholic idea, why did it have to be imported from the Jєωιѕн Russian Revolution on the bayonets and firearms of the Red and American Armies and only be accepted after said anti-Catholic militaries had butchered tens of millions of innocent Roman Catholics and Protestants in the American South, Europe and Latin America? Race-mixing has been and still is brutally inflicted on the Catholics by Marxist mass-murderers commanded by anti-Catholic Marxist Jews! There is nothing Catholic about it.
-
Herr Franz, please stop trying to hijack the Catholic Faith for your deranged theories about Aryan blood castes, Wagnerian tragedy, romantic nationalism, esoteric sympathy for Protestants, and all other kinds of crypto-occultist syncretist neo-pagan nonsense. If you are yourself an example of this "aristocracy" you always talk about, well, that's a strong argument against it.
Don't misunderstand me. I do believe that there is a natural hierarchy between men and that there are natural aristocracies that develop amongst nations, that certain races are more gifted than others, and that our contemporary world is beholden to both immediate and, of course, ancient causes. But all that is utterly beside the point, and I mean what I said in different sense than you might. Brotherfrancis75, either stop posting or at least give others the courtesy of more frankly announcing your intentions and your beliefs. Surely you must be "hyper-aware" of the need for this, since, as you surely know, your persona on this forum is quickly turning into camp.
-
Yet the Good Lord in His infinite wisdom did not make us to be a dreary mixed-race brown, a unisex, a boorish mindless proletariat. God could have done, but He does not suffer from amnesia and He made us as He most thoughtfully knew best.
In most cases miscegenation is a mortal sin against the Creation that the Lord hath made.
This is sick, it is not Catholic, and you have no authority to declare something to be a "mortal sin in most cases." Please cite some authority supporting your position.
I would also be very interested in a Catholic source for this idiocy.
"A Catholic source for this idiocy" would be the historic Roman Catholic ARISTOCRACY. To intentionally reduce or damage the biological/genetic quality of one's own offspring is pretty far along in the direction of ill-will, malice and mortal sin. Historically there were those who would intentionally breed freaks for the circus. Miscegenation is all too often only a variation on that immoral theme. Would men tolerate this with expensive race horses? With quality cattle? Men shouldn't do to their own children what they would never do to their purebred horses or cattle. Since humans are superior to animals (or in certain cases ought to be!) we should be much more strict about human breeding standards than about our animal breeding standards.
Our historic Roman Catholic aristocracy has been nothing if not hyper-aware of maintaining the highest possible racial breeding standards among their own. Over the centuries they also strongly directed their peasants in the direction of good breeding as well. We don't find mulattoes or mestizos among our historic mainstream Catholic nobility or priesthood and that was not simply by chance. The Roman Catholic literature, educational system and civilization strongly supported European Catholics intermarrying among our own and the exceptions were due to crisis situations, like in Mexico after most of the native population had died from recently-introduced diseases against which the Catholic natives had no resistance. Then Spaniards had to marry native women to prevent the extinction of the Mexicans and the collapse of what was then known as New Spain.
Saying good breeding is not Catholic is like saying that our historic Roman Catholic aristocracy and peasantry weren't Catholic. The biological well-being of Catholic children has always been an important concern in Catholic marital match-making. It's one of the reasons that historically Catholics thought that lords and parents ought to provide some guidance in the marriage choices of those subject to their authority. If that wasn't racial selectivity, then what might be? If race-mixing is a Catholic virtue, then why aren't we already all monochrome brown folk? We've had many millennia to bring in non-whites into Europe and marry them. Why was that never done before the recent establishment of brutal Marxist tyrannies in the Western World?
If race-mixing is a Catholic idea, why did it have to be imported from the Jєωιѕн Russian Revolution on the bayonets and firearms of the Red and American Armies and only be accepted after said anti-Catholic militaries had butchered tens of millions of innocent Roman Catholics and Protestants in the American South, Europe and Latin America? Race-mixing has been and still is brutally inflicted on the Catholics by Marxist mass-murderers commanded by anti-Catholic Marxist Jews! There is nothing Catholic about it.
Why don't Russian asians and whites mix with each other for that matter?
-
I also remember there being a docuмent encouraging the Portuguese to enslave natives.
Can you give a reference for that?
If I knew for sure what it was I would have said it. I think maybe Dum Diversas.
The papal bull Dum diversas of 1452 authorised perpetual servitude for the Saracens, pagans, and other infidels in the context of a war, which was itself authorised to address the problem that these people were "enemies of Christ" who were always trying to destroy the orthodox Faith. In the particular instance that pertains to the Bull, Pope Nicholas V is authorising war against the aggressive Moroccan Mohammedan Abdalhaqq II. Upon the establishment of the peace of Christendom against the heathens who trust in their own strength, the conquered can justly be reduced to perpetual servitude as punishment for their infraction against the tranquility of order and their impious attack on the Kingship of Christ; as such, all of their goods can be seized and disposed of accordingly. Chattel slavery, however, rather than just servitude, is strictly forbidden.
How this has to do with racial mixing or the slave trade is unclear.
-
Well, according to feminαzι dogma, marriage IS enslavement.
Feminαzι? You've been listening to too much Rush Limbaugh nonsense for I've never heard of such a stupid label. Feminism comes from Marxism, and is the Marxian class warfare doctrine applied to the genders.
-
Part of woman's fallen nature is to be attracted to base characters.
This is just reality.
You want to shame devout men for being incensed at the degenerate behavior of blacks in a society in which "gangster rap" is promoted.
That is tantamount to betrayal of basic values of decency. Not all cultures and societies are equal. Different groups have different abilities and temperament.
When white men are told to be virtuous, devout, but are essentially disarmed from dealing with the belligerent, disgusting, fatherless culture of the blacks and hispanics.
We're supposed to follow all the rules and then to avoid being called racist white men are expected to put their daughters in situations where they can be taken advantage by those animals.
This leftist "racial egalitarianism" is in reality a form of aggression against the basic values of family and of civilization itself. To pretend it is part of the religion is a betrayal of the religion - it is a betrayal of the natural order.
It is suicidal and it is submission to evil. Multi-cultural marxism, embraced by whites, is a death wish.
Unfortunately the majority of white men act like infant children as well. But yes if we were to warn our daughters about the rape and crime statistics of blacks and immigrants that would be "racist."
Let's face it the culture of today is leftist and we are in the minority.
-
Feminαzι? You've been listening to too much Rush Limbaugh nonsense for I've never heard of such a stupid label. Feminism comes from Marxism, and is the Marxian class warfare doctrine applied to the genders.
Did your Jєωιѕн family members tell you to thumb me down Sigismund? :wink:
-
Ironically, as I'm reading this, I'm seeing lots of ads for Chinese dating services.
-
Feminαzι? You've been listening to too much Rush Limbaugh nonsense for I've never heard of such a stupid label. Feminism comes from Marxism, and is the Marxian class warfare doctrine applied to the genders.
Did your Jєωιѕн family members tell you to thumb me down Sigismund? :wink:
I thumbed you down, this is pathetically petty criticism, and is probably rooted in the need to defend a certain ideology. Taking jabs at posters family members is also base and classless.
-
I thumbed you down, this is pathetically petty criticism, and is probably rooted in the need to defend a certain ideology. Taking jabs at posters family members is also base and classless.
I am talking about the original post I made, where I said feminism comes from Marxism and, I might add specifically in this country, from Jєωιѕн women. My response to Sigismund comes from that post. Also religious tolerance for Jews is a liberal idea. Ironic that you have an avatar about conspiracy theories...
Oh and what ideology need I defend? :rolleyes:
-
I am talking about the original post I made, where I said feminism comes from Marxism and, I might add specifically in this country, from Jєωιѕн women. My response to Sigismund comes from that post. Also religious tolerance for Jews is a liberal idea. Ironic that you have an avatar about conspiracy theories...
Oh and what ideology need I defend? :rolleyes:
Oh okay now I see what you're saying. Nevertheless, it wasn't petty criticism, I was telling Anthony that feminism is left-wing which is true.
-
I thumbed you down, this is pathetically petty criticism, and is probably rooted in the need to defend a certain ideology. Taking jabs at posters family members is also base and classless.
I am talking about the original post I made, where I said feminism comes from Marxism and, I might add specifically in this country, from Jєωιѕн women. My response to Sigismund comes from that post. Also religious tolerance for Jews is a liberal idea. Ironic that you have an avatar about conspiracy theories...
Oh and what ideology need I defend? :rolleyes:
Yes I know. I also know where feminism comes from, as well does the vast majority of this board. Or don't you read the posts? In fact your reminders about Marxism are about as necessary as our Holy Father's reminder that our God isn't confined to the host or tabernacle -- completely not needed, and denoting an ulterior motive. Why so many come on to one of the remaining trad forums and feel the need to evangelize everybody to the evils of Jєωιѕн Communism is beyond ridiculous, as well as insulting. As if we don't already know, and as if we haven't already been hurt by Communism/Liberalism in various ways.
Religious tolerance is a Liberal idea, to confine intolerance of false religion to a single false religion is unacceptable. I hope you apply your same standards toward family members who might be Atheist Humanist, Protestant, or any other false religion, lest you end up being just as hypocritical as the Jews you would supposedly shun. In all honesty, your post appears to be in response to the fact he might've used the word nαzι in a negative connotation, and not at all an attempt to warn us as to the origins of feminism. Again, as if we don't already know.
-
Well, according to feminαzι dogma, marriage IS enslavement.
Feminαzι? You've been listening to too much Rush Limbaugh nonsense for I've never heard of such a stupid label. Feminism comes from Marxism, and is the Marxian class warfare doctrine applied to the genders.
Oh, my! :faint:
Well, yes, along with millions, I did hear Rush use the term back in the 90s - when I USED to listen to him. However, I haven't continued the practice in years.
It has become commonplace enough to utilize, if only for its sarcastic properties, so I did.
You do happen to be correct about the origin of de-feminization-ism, however. And I note that you did not wish to extend your overwhelmingly impressive critical clout to the actual point I did make.
Thus, relieved as I am - perhaps bordering on giddyness - that Your Correctness has spared me the indignity of being thwarted outright!, altogether! and most shamefully! in my lowly effort to provide the merest of observations, I make bold to suggest that, back in the good old days, Sr. Umbrage of the Flying Ruler would very likely have frog-marched your pint-sized, palpitating personage to the blackboard to write, one hundred, times:
"I will never again write 'genders' when I ought to have written 'sexes', thus not succuмbing to the neological innovations of politically correct, Marxist-inspired 'inclusive language'."
-
Herr Franz, please stop trying to hijack the Catholic Faith for your deranged theories about Aryan blood castes, Wagnerian tragedy, romantic nationalism, esoteric sympathy for Protestants, and all other kinds of crypto-occultist syncretist neo-pagan nonsense. If you are yourself an example of this "aristocracy" you always talk about, well, that's a strong argument against it.
Don't misunderstand me. I do believe that there is a natural hierarchy between men and that there are natural aristocracies that develop amongst nations, that certain races are more gifted than others, and that our contemporary world is beholden to both immediate and, of course, ancient causes. But all that is utterly beside the point, and I mean what I said in different sense than you might. Brotherfrancis75, either stop posting or at least give others the courtesy of more frankly announcing your intentions and your beliefs. Surely you must be "hyper-aware" of the need for this, since, as you surely know, your persona on this forum is quickly turning into camp.
Pere Joseph, Thank you for doing me the honor of responding to my highly wrought poetic prose. In fact whether we like it or not, the two of us are in our way a bit like the "Sancho Panza" and "Don Quixote" of CathInfo. All the more reason for us to understand that neither of our attitudes is going away anytime soon, or ever. Both my high-flying Catholic Romanticism and your ground-hugging Catholic Realism are here to stay.
It is the "romantic" aspect of Catholicism that continually keeps getting us into scrapes, thrills and spills. But we need to understand that Our Lord's enemies will quarrel with us no matter what we do and we will do best if we are somewhat prepared for that inevitability. In truth every Catholic is an example of both our awesomely Romantic Catholic nobility and our awesomely Realistic Catholic peasantry and common people. It's often been said that in social terms our common people represent the Holy Ghost on earth, our clergy God the Father and our noble warrior class Our Lord Himself. Remember also that in our religion every priest is of noble rank so that in social terms our entire "noblesse de sang" shows forth Christ among us in that way too. Our noble priesthood leads our entire military class in representing the Son of God on earth. Our incomparable noble Catholic heritage that every Catholic shares is not something to be dismissed lightly.
The many natural virtues of our pre-Christian heritage are something for our Catholic warrior class to use as they see fit, Good Pere Joseph, your language about my alleged "paganism" is too loose and perhaps itself somewhat more dangerous to us than any contemporary sickly Paganism can be. The Catholic Roman ancestral pride of blood is not any kind of Hindu caste system; however romantic my nationalism may be it is Catholic Nationalism and not anything other than that; my natural sympathy for our Protestant blood relations is charitable and Catholic, not "esoteric" and Pagan.
Although this writer must recognize the importance of polytheists like Rene Guenon and Julius Evola, they are not in any way my models or teachers. Whereas Herr Mozart, Herr Wagner and other such great Romantic masters of our Roman civilization should command the respect of every Catholic man worth his salt. However realistic we may be, we ought to avoid behaving like insolent peasants too good for our social betters. As Roman Catholics we are scarcely in a position to look down our noses at great Catholic men like Mozart and Wagner. (Wagner was a classic German convert to Catholicism. My good Frenchman, please get over it.)
Good Pere Joseph, when you bash this writer as "nonsense," what can be said? Camp? Foppery? No doubt guilty as charged. But German Catholic Roman Romanticism still has a very long way to go. We have only just begun! And you are right that this writer needs to be more frank about his beliefs. My Germanic fondness for thick fogs, endless analysis, dithering and indirection is indeed the bane of every German's existence: Thank you for pointing it out. Perhaps this writer should more often refer to "Roman Romanticism" and "Wagnerianism." Although probably not too often. In any event a high-flying Romanticism is the very essence of the history and heritage that is Roman Christendom so we had best not deny that most glorious inheritance of ours anytime soon.
As is said, our past is frequently our prologue too.
-
Wagner was a megalomaniac, Hitler's favorite composer, a vicious bigot and a wife-stealer who went to great lengths to undermine the reputations of certain fellow composers he detested.
What in the name of Sam Hill makes him deserving of the "respect" of ANY Catholic man?
Get a grip.
-
Get a grip.
And get over yourself, Frank. Stop being a pompous nincompoop and derailing the topic.
-
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-OJrSntbTtSE/T3-k0jOJkjI/AAAAAAAAAcM/uepfcrLmSXc/s1600/NicholsonCover.jpg)
Of course this begs the question, did The h0Ɩ0cαųst actually occur, as it has been described to us?
The Controversy Over Richard Wagner
"The entire argument about playing Wagner in Israel does not, in reality, centre around the quality of his music. The question is not whether Wagner's music is of high or low quality, nor is the argument about how deep-seated was his antisemitism really relevant. There is no doubt that there have been other composers who were no less antisemitic. While it cannot be maintained that Wagner was directly responsible for German national socialism, there is no doubt that he was a powerful symbol in the nαzι era, and his music held a singular importance in the nαzι psyche. Thus, for Jєωιѕн survivors of the nαzι horrors, Wagner's music represents a vivid reminder of that regime. The argument that music must be separated from politics is not cogent in general, and certainly not in this case. If anybody introduced politics into music, it was Richard Wagner himself."
http://www.Jєωιѕнvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/anti-semitism/Wagner.html
-
Feminαzι? You've been listening to too much Rush Limbaugh nonsense for I've never heard of such a stupid label. Feminism comes from Marxism, and is the Marxian class warfare doctrine applied to the genders.
Did your Jєωιѕн family members tell you to thumb me down Sigismund? :wink:
No. The racist and un-Catholic content of your posts was sufficient reason for that. :smile:
-
Given some of the other comments since TraditionalGuy made the above post, let me say that I think he meant the post about my Jєωιѕн relatives in good fun. At least that is how I took it, and certainly how I meant my response.
-
Feminαzι? You've been listening to too much Rush Limbaugh nonsense for I've never heard of such a stupid label. Feminism comes from Marxism, and is the Marxian class warfare doctrine applied to the genders.
Did your Jєωιѕн family members tell you to thumb me down Sigismund? :wink:
No. The racist and un-Catholic content of your posts was sufficient reason for that. :smile:
Where did he make a racist un-Catholic comment?
-
I think true racism is believing that race/ethnicity/ancestry/blood doesn't matter. However, we are constantly told that is racism! As I recall, one goal of psychological warfare is to confuse your enemy. They seem to have accomplished that.
-
Sigismund,
Are you bearing false witness against your neighbor by accusing him of making racist un-Catholic comments?
-
Well, I would be if they were not racist and un-Catholic. They are both becasue of their exultation of the white race as somehow superior to others.
Please note my post immediately above the post in which you first asked this question, however.
-
The radically egalitarian idea that all races/ethnicities/ancestries/blood lines are equal, seems obviously false. However, our strange rulers hold it up as one of life's greatest truths.
-
Well, I would be if they were not racist and un-Catholic. They are both becasue of their exultation of the white race as somehow superior to others.
Please note my post immediately above the post in which you first asked this question, however.
ah so you were just joking then.
-
Well, I would be if they were not racist and un-Catholic. They are both becasue of their exultation of the white race as somehow superior to others.
Please note my post immediately above the post in which you first asked this question, however.
Alas, we come to the rub. How does having a different political or scientific opinion from oneself make others not Catholics? Does sanctifying grace truly come from our sacraments, or does it really only come from the political faction that through its cable and other media channels happens to reflect our own political bias? Is salvation essentially something spiritual and religious or is it essentially political in nature?
Which is it, God or Mammon?
Catholics are those who share our sacraments with us. Just because their politics or their opinions about science or history rub us the wrong way has no bearing on their being our fellow brothers and sisters in Christ with us. Our Church forbids Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ, Marxism and those political and scientific factions that truly represent those evils. But beyond that our Church is and has always been remarkably flexible about politics and every effort to impose politics on the sciences. The notion that failure to conform to the racial theories of Franz Boas somehow disqualifies membership in the Roman Catholic Church is, to put it mildly, a bit odd.
Are we now supposed to put the loathsome egalitarian pseudo-science of the Communist Manifesto above the Creed?
One humbly dares to suggest NOT. Catholics should piously desire the "exultation" of EVERY race without exception. Certainly including our own most beloved white European race too. We should honor our own fathers and mothers. As we say: "Charity begins at home."
-
Brother Francis wrote:
Although this writer must recognize the importance of polytheists like Rene Guenon and Julius Evola, they are not in any way my models or teachers.
It is wonderful for you to continue the Romantic Tradition, properly understood, and perhaps someday you may tell us about Schlegel. Nevertheless, one cannot be an anti-realist and be Catholic, since it is the Church that assures us about what is real. This is all the more so because of those Germanic philosophers, like Kant, for example, who denies that we can know the real. Without that assurance, we would not know about the Real Presence (e.g., like your Protestant "brothers") nor about all those invisible things mentioned in the creed.
It is also necessary to be factual. I am not promoting Guenon and Evola, but to be fair, I have to point out that they were not polytheists. Guenon was a Catholic before converting to Islam. Evola was raised a Catholic and then rejected it even while wishing Her to reclaim the glory of the Middle Ages.
As for the facts regarding Wagner: on what grounds can anyone assume he was a Catholic? Did not his Catholic wife, the daughter of a man of the Third Order, convert to Lutheranism?
And, yes, if you have an agenda, it would be fair for you to be more frank about your beliefs, as you promised.
-
Well, I would be if they were not racist and un-Catholic. They are both becasue of their exultation of the white race as somehow superior to others.
Please note my post immediately above the post in which you first asked this question, however.
ah so you were just joking then.
Mostly, yes. Just as I think TraditionalGuy was mostly joking about my Jєωιѕн relatives. :wink: