lunes, 30 de junio de 2014

Résistez et soyez fermes dans la foi et la charité, comme Pierre et avec lui. La face de la terre changera mais vous conserverez la face du Christ.





Voici la fin de 'l'homélie de ce jour prononcée par le père abbé de Triors, Dom Hervé Courau :


"[...] Le Magistère pétrinien, c'est à dire la parole de Pierre, est habilité à déclarer la doctrine révélée par Dieu. Et ce privilège lui vient de la charité de Dieu dont il doit vivre pleinement, et du martyre violent ou de l'épreuve permanente qui y équivaut, cette caractéristique de l'histoire des papes. Grâce à quoi l'Histoire de toute l’Église est un long, mais beau chemin de croix, de lumière et d'amour.

En ces jours où la présence visible de l’Église de Jésus est menacée de disparaître de la carte du Proche-Orient, son propre berceau géographique, relisons ces lignes d'un grand moine et penseur libanais du XIX° s. voyant en cette alerte endémique le mystère profond de l'Histoire de l’Église. S. Charbel Maklouf s'adressait ainsi à ses contemporains (Paroles de saint Charbel, Artège 2014) :

"Le chemin de votre calvaire dans ce coin du monde est long et la croix du Christ dans cet Orient, vous la portez sur vos épaules. Vos ennemis sont nombreux parce qu’ils sont ceux de la croix ; mais ne les prenez pas comme ennemis ; parlez-leur toujours avec le langage de la croix, même s’ils vous sont hostiles à cause d’elle. Les mois et les années à venir seront très difficiles, très durs, amers et aussi lourds que la croix. Supportez-les en priant. Que votre prière émane de votre foi, que de votre patience naisse l’espérance, que la croix fasse grandir votre amour ».

Puis élargissant son propos, il voit en cette loi qui met en effroi notre nature timide, une loi pour tous dans l’Église de Jésus, autour du pape :

"La violence régira toute la terre. La planète sera poignardée par les couteaux de l’ignorance et de la haine. Tous les peuples qui vous entourent chancelleront sous le poids de la souffrance ; la peur s’abattra sur toute la terre comme la tempête ; la tristesse débordera du cœur de tous. Des hommes ignorants et hostiles présideront au destin de tous leurs peuples, les entraînant dans les voies de la misère et de la mort, à cause de la rancune aveugle qu’ils surnommeront « justice » et à cause de l’ignorance lugubre qu’ils appelleront « foi ». La rancune et l’ignorance prédomineront aux quatre coins du monde. Résistez et soyez fermes dans la foi et la charité, comme Pierre et avec lui. La face de la terre changera mais vous conserverez la face du Christ. Des frontières, des communautés et des régimes seront effacés et retracés, des peuples chancelleront sous le poids du feu et du fer, mais vous conserverez votre amour sans frontières. Sauvegardez votre communauté ecclésiale et que votre régime soit l’Évangile ».

À Fatima il y a moins d'un siècle, Notre Dame parlait comme ce saint solitaire. Mettons bien notre foi dans l'Église au diapason de notre espérance, encouragé par son dernier mot : À la fin mon Cœur Immaculé triomphera, amen."

France: le gouvernement socialiste ne compte pas moins de sept ministres millionnaires.


De la fortune de nos élites politiques



Ils ont juré sur l’honneur et s’il advenait qu’ils aient dissimulé ou menti sur leur déclaration de patrimoine, il encourrait trois ans d’emprisonnement et 45.000 euros d’amende, sans préjudice d’une interdiction possible de leurs droits civiques. Vertueux et dociles, nos ministres de la République se sont donc soumis à cet exercice de transparence financière en donnant la dite déclaration aux membres de la Haute autorité de la transparence de la vie politique.

Vous avez-dit transparence ? Déjà Jean-Marie Le Guen, secrétaire d’Etat chargé des Relations avec le Parlement, (et mis en cause pour le scandale de la MNEF) a déjà tenté de sous-évaluer son patrimoine immobilier. Il a dû réécrire, fissa, sa copie pour éviter de se retrouver dans une position inconfortable et peut-être passer sous les fourches caudines de la Justice. Manifestement, l’affaire Cahuzac n’a pas encore porté tous ses fruits.

Cela étant, grâce à cette rectification impulsée par François Hollande, Jean-Marie Le Guen se trouve propulsé deuxième personnage le plus riche du gouvernement avec un patrimoine de plus de 3,2 millions d’euros, loin derrière Laurent Fabius avec 5,3 millions d’euros. Ce dernier aurait même perdu, par rapport à sa déclaration de 2013, quelque 1,3 million d’euros ! Mauvais placements financiers et décote de certains biens mobiliers ? On n’en sait guère plus. La crise sans doute ! On apprend aussi que notre Premier ministre s’est appauvri de plus de 80.000 euros. Que voulez-vous mon brave Monsieur, c’est vraiment la crise… Foin de plaisanteries. Ces déclarations sont tout de même riches (sans jeu de mots) d’enseignements.

Elles nous apprennent que le gouvernement ne compte pas moins de sept ministres millionnaires : Laurent Fabius, Jean-Marie Le Guen, André Vallini, Michel Sapin, Ségolène Royal, Marisol Touraine, et Christian Eckert. La totalité des ministres a fait (une solide) carrière dans la politique et/ou la haute-fonction publique !

.................

Si rien n'est fait, Notre-Dame deviendra mosquée avant le XXIIe siècle


Non Manuel Valls, l’Islam n’est pas
 une chance pour la France


Notre cher Premier Ministre vient de prononcer un discours proprement hallucinant pour peu que l’on veuille défendre la culture française. C’était le Jeudi 26 Juin, à l’institut du Monde Arabe à l’issue de sa visite de l’exposition « Hajj, le pèlerinage à la Mecque ».

Sans aucune prospective de ce qui attend la France dans 20 ou 30 ans, c’est à dire rien moins que le grand changement de civilisation, le Premier Ministre a conclu ce long discours à la gloire de l’Islam et de l’amitié franco-arabe par cette belle envolée :
« Lors du repas de rupture du jeûne du mois sacré de ramadan, j’adresserai aux musulmans de France un message de confiance. Un message qui souligne combien la France est une terre de liberté qui respecte les croyances de chacun et qui considère que le fait que l’Islam est la deuxième religion de France est une chance pour la France ».

Mais le pire c’est que Manuel Valls avait osé montrer la grande attirance et assurément la préférence qu’il a pour cette religion :
« Au-delà des musulmans de France, c’est toute une nation qui reconnaît, ici, la grandeur, la finesse et la diversité de l’Islam. C’est toute une nation qui dit aussi que l’Islam a toute sa place en France, parce que l’Islam est une religion de tolérance, de respect, une religion de lumière et d’avenir, à mille lieues de ceux qui en détournent et en salissent le message ».

Que l’Islam ait sa place en France, en dix ans, il est évident qu’elle a envahi l’espace avec ses presque 3000 mosquées, les femmes voilées voir « niqabées » qui avant 2001 étaient si discrètes qu’on ne les voyait pas, et les drapeaux étrangers qui envahissent les manifestations y compris lors de l’élection d’un président comme ce fut le cas pour Chirac et Hollande.

.................

Les sentiments et les pensées qui élèvent son regard de la terre vers le ciel sont maintenant pour la plupart des gens absolument incompréhensibles


Dans quel monde vivrons-nous ?

par Anthony Esolen

Durant la deuxième guerre mondiale, un jeune Italien nommé Eugenio Corti se battait sur le front russe, où il a découvert quelle sorte de monde était celui où les hommes oublient Dieu - quand les nazis et les communistes, tels des monstres de l’abîme, rendus brutaux par leur athéisme, se dévoraient l’un l’autre ainsi que les millions d’innocents se trouvant sur leur chemin.

Ce que Corti a vu, ce qu’il a souffert, ce qu’il a entendu de ses camarades soldats, ce qu’il a corroboré par ses recherches, a donné matière à son roman Le Cheval Rouge. C’est une épopée, le "Guerre et Paix" italien. C’est également une saga chrétienne évoquant Le Fiancé de Manzoni — et pas seulement parce que les jeunes protagonistes sont originaires de la même région vallonnée au nord de Milan. Corti, comme Manzoni, veut nous montrer à quoi ressemblait autrefois son pays catholique, ce qu’il pourrait de nouveau être, si les hommes acceptaient de se convertir et de se détourner de leurs conduites démentes et meurtrières.

................



Une poignée de généraux qui dirigèrent l’armée française dans une période difficile ...


Le général de Castelnau 1851- 1944, 
Le Soldat, l’Homme, le Chrétien
Auteur: Patrick De Gmeline 

par le colonel Roux



Cet ouvrage imposant, composé par notre camarade Patrick de Gmeline, est autant une biographie qu’un album de photos avec des légendes très détaillées.

Ce livre complète les biographies de cette poignée de généraux qui dirigèrent l’armée française dans une période difficile, et réussirent à emporter la victoire militaire malgré des pertes énormes et des lacunes initiales graves, ce qu’écrit, en juillet 1914, le général de Castelnau qui perdit lui-même trois fils au combat.

Lieutenant puis capitaine en 1870, à 20 ans, officier aussi brillant que consciencieux, ce qui n’est pas si courant, devenu général malgré sa catholicité affichée dans la décennie 1900, le général de Castelnau devient illustre dans les combats de la Lorraine en août 1914, en particulier au Grand Couronné qui protège Nancy. En 1915 il coordonne la deuxième offensive de Champagne, échec encore discuté par les historiens, et en 1916, comme adjoint direct de Joffre, il agit au début de la bataille de Verdun où il précède Pétain.

Ensuite il est mis dans un placard, relatif, et entre le premier à Colmar libéré, mais son courage intellectuel lui valut de ne pas être élevé à la dignité de Maréchal de France ce que l’auteur explique en détail.

A la fin de sa longue vie, entouré de sa nombreuse famille, il se consacre à la Fédération Nationale Catholique qui regroupera jusqu’à trois millions de membres. Cet album se lit et se regarde par chapitre, tout y est instructif.

Il est bon qu’un des grands chefs de 14-18, véritable symbole des vieilles familles françaises, soit ainsi présenté dans toute son ampleur.

Colonel Alain J. ROUX

pour l’UNOR

USA - La Corte Suprema resuelve a favor de la libertad religiosa el caso Hobby Lobby

USA: TRIUNFO PRO-VIDA CONTRA EL OBAMACARE.

Fuentes: Propias; Life Site y Life News. 

Por Juan C. Sanahuja

La Corte Suprema resuelve a favor de la libertad religiosa el caso Hobby Lobby

En la mañana del 30-06-14, la Corte Suprema decidió que la empresa Hobby Lobby no puede ser obligada a pagar seguros para sus empleados que cubran contraceptivos y drogas que potencialmente inducen el aborto. La decisión fue tomada por 5 votos contra 4.

La administración de Obama estaba tratando de obligar a Hobby Lobby y a miles de empresas y organizaciones cuyos dueños son pro-vida, a que cumplieran con el “mandato contraceptivo”, que obliga a las empresas a pagar seguros para sus empleados que incluyan anticonceptivos y drogas abortivas.

Dice la Corte que la Religious Freedom Restoration Act de 1993 (RFRA) permite a las corporaciones como Hobby Lobby mantener su perspectiva religiosa y a la vez hacer negocios. "Los términos de la RFRA son claros. El Congreso no discrimina contra los hombres y mujeres que desean manejar su negocio con fines de lucro en la forma requerida por sus creencias religiosas”.

El presidente del Tribunal Supremo John Roberts y los jueces Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas y Anthony Kennedy, votaron a favor de la libertad religiosa en los casos Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores Inc. (antes Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores Inc.) y Conestoga Wood v. Burwell. Votaron por la minoría, contra la libertad religiosa: Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, Stephen Breyer y Elena Kagan.

La cadena Hobby Lobby, con más de 500 sucursales en 41 estados, se enfrentó a una multa de 100 dólares por día por empleado o sea 1.3 millón de dólares en multas diarias por violar el “mandato contraceptivo” (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services -HHS- mandate in the Affordable Care Act).

La decisión sobre Hobby Lobby sólo se aplica a las empresas, como Conestoga Wood Specialties, la cual tenía en la Corte Suprema un caso similar. Los grupos sin fines de lucro, como Sacerdotes por la Vida, todavía están esperando una decisión sobre su derecho a optar por el mandato.

Las empresas, sean con o sin fines de lucro, consideran que la ley sólo les da a elegir entre elevadas multas o “ser cómplices de algo intrínsecamente malo”. FIN, 30-06-14

Ver entre otros:

-USA: La oposición al mandato contraceptivo

-USA-OBAMA: El Presidente más abortista de la historia

-USA: Preocupa el futuro de la libertad religiosa



-Why is the Hobby Lobby HHS Mandate Battle So Important to Pro-Lifers?

-Hobby Lobby Battle Against HHS Mandate May Define Future of Religious Freedom

-Hobby Lobby to Supreme Court: Protect Us From $1.3M in Fines a Day Over Obamacare

______________________________

NOTICIAS GLOBALES es un boletín de noticias sobre temas que se relacionan con la PROMOCIÓN Y DEFENSA DE LA VIDA HUMANA Y LA FAMILIA. Editor: Pbro. Dr. Juan Claudio Sanahuja; E-mail:noticiasglobales@noticiasglobales.org ; http://www.noticiasglobales.org ;

Citando la fuente y el nombre del autor, se autoriza la reproducción total o parcial de los artículos contenidos en cada número del boletín.


NOTICIAS GLOBALES, Año XVII. Número 1109, 14/14. Gacetilla n° 1224. Buenos Aires, 30 junio 2014.

The key to understanding why the Venezuelan government would promote a crime pandemic lies in examining Marxist theories


Venezuela’s Criminal Gangs: 
Warriors of Cultural Revolution



When mass protests against the government erupted in Venezuela early in February, murder rates in the country were already shocking—close to twenty-five thousand people dead in the previous year, with ninety-seven percent of cases going unsolved. They would soon get worse, as motorcycle gangs in civilian clothes began attacking and shooting unarmed citizens, particularly youngsters, with the security forces standing by.

Known as colectivos, these paramilitary groups emerged during the presidency of the late Hugo Chávez to guard his revolutionary program. Officially, they are community organizations, but according to Roberto Briceño, the director of the Venezuelan Observatory on Violence, they act as “guerrillas protected by the government.” Widespread reports and extensive film evidence show them killing and beating protesters, destroying vehicles, sacking homes and businesses, and apparently also attacking pro-government forces, presumably in an effort to tarnish the image of peaceful demonstrators, escalate the conflict, and justify strong-arm tactics.

Although rampant crime is not typically allowed by an authoritarian government,colectivos and criminal gangs have enjoyed widespread impunity in Venezuela. Bárbara González, a six-year veteran of the country’s intelligence service (SEBIN) who deserted last February, affirmed over Colombian radio that the “urban guerrillas” are mostly criminals armed by the government and coached by the Colombian terrorist group FARC, and that all security forces, including police and SEBIN, have orders to give them free rein. A former Cuban intelligence agent who served in Venezuela, Uberto Mario, reported that Cuba recruits criminals from poor neighborhoods for the tupamaro, a radical Marxist group that predates Chávez and is now considered part of the colectivos. They are trained to destabilize Venezuelan society and contain opposition and unrest. Mario affirms that Cuban agents recruit them and that, after receiving instruction in Marxism-Leninism in Caracas, they are sent to Cuba to learn how to “kill and repress.”

................




China Center Special Briefing Paper: Re-Estimating Chinese Growth


Study Finds Chinese Economy a Third Smaller Than Claimed



In a report released on June 20th, the business research organization Conference Board recalculates Chinese gross domestic product going back to 1952. Economist Harry Wu estimates that China from 1978 to 2012 grew an average of 7.2 percent a year. Beijing’s National Bureau of Statistics reports 9.8 percent average annual growth during that period.

Wu believes that official numbers for 1952 to 1977 are generally accurate, at least when considered over the period as a whole. China’s figures, therefore, have become less reliable over time.

The discrepancy in the 1978–2012 period, which roughly conforms to the so-called “reform” era, is largely the result of Beijing’s inadequate adjustment of nominal results to account for price changes. Recently, many economists, most notably Christopher Balding of Peking University, have come to similar conclusions, that Beijing underestimates inflation when it calculates what is known as “real”—i.e., price-adjusted—GDP.

Wu’s work supports that of others who see a Chinese economy that could be a third smaller than Beijing claims. His findings, therefore, can affect our notions of which Asian nation grew the fastest or which is now the world’s second-largest economy. Hint: the Conference Board is about to become very popular in Japan.

Yet Wu’s work has implications that are far broader. Yes, an economy’s size matters, but perhaps more important is volatility. Analysts have long suspected that Beijing has smoothed results, reporting less growth in robust periods and more in down times, similar to what some corporations are accused of doing with their earnings. Wu’s calculations show far more volatility than official estimates, “suggesting,” he writes, “that the Chinese economy is more vulnerable to external shocks than the picture painted by the official GDP estimates.”

.................




The clash between atheism and religion has become the defining battle of the 21st century.


The sad business of trying to disprove God

by Charles Moore 


Atheists: The Origin of the Species


Charles Moore reviews 'Atheists: The Origin of the Species' by Nick Spencer

You often meet them for the first time at secondary school. The typical teenage atheist is more likely a boy than a girl, stronger on science than the arts, and at the high-ish end of the academic spectrum. He tells you that he has studied the nature of matter, the universe etc, and can prove that God does not exist.

Already, you are plunged into the thick of the problem, which is one of category. The teenage thinker treats the existence of God as a scientific matter, but it isn’t. Science can certainly disprove some claims that believers make about their God – or, to be more exact, it can prove that these claims are incompatible with science – but it can have nothing to say about something that lies outside its realm.

A few atheists realise this, and so, while trying to devise concepts of a good society without God, they give the subject of God's existence a wide berth. Charles Darwin followed this cautious approach. For the most part, however, they devote themselves to the wearisome and surprisingly difficult business of trying to prove a negative.

Who are atheists, and where did they come from? Nick Spencer is research director of the (excellent) “religion and society think tank” Theos, and so he views the subject with a quiet Christian scepticism. But it is not his purpose to attack atheism. Instead, he wants to tell its history as it has developed, chiefly in Europe, in the past 500 years.

He points out that atheism often starts in disputes about authority. In a thoroughly Christian society – and indeed, in some Muslim societies today – rejection of God was seen as a threat to public order. Quite recently, a British judge said that the law of England has nothing to do with Christianity. He may wish that to be true, but, historically, it isn’t.

......................

Read more: www.telegraph.co.uk



domingo, 29 de junio de 2014

Les partis politiques actuels doivent se positionner clairement par rapport aux sujets de civilisation




Béatrice Bourges, porte-parole du Printemps Français, déclare au quotidien Présent

Extrait :


"Manuel Valls vous a qualifié de « femme la plus dangereuse de France ». Rappelez-nous dans quel contexte.

J’ai pris ça pour un compliment. Au début je n’ai pas bien compris. Puis j’ai réalisé que nos actions étaient extrêmement subversives. Le danger c’était la vérité. Rien de plus. J’ai pour moi d’être assez détachée de ce que l’on peut penser de moi. J’ai appris ça. Ce qui m’intéresse c’est la vérité. Et je pense que ce qui gêne le plus ce gouvernement qui nous manipule et qui nous enfume, qui vit dans le mensonge permanent, c’est que quelqu’un arrive et dise : c’est un mensonge et voilà la vérité. L’effet est très subversif. La vérité est subversive. Le Printemps Français est dangereux pour le gouvernement. Il a raison de s’en inquiéter. Il est en train de se passer un truc insaisissable que le gouvernement n’arrive pas à maîtriser.

Vous avez réussi à redonner le goût de l’action publique à une catégorie de jeunes qui ne descendaient plus dans la rue et que l’on n’avait pas vus manifester depuis des années. Le mouvement n’est-il pas en train de retomber ?

Le mouvement ne retombe pas mais il se transforme. Ce qui s’est passé l’année dernière est en train de bouleverser complètement la politique française. Les mouvements sociétaux nés l’année dernière ont des conséquences politiques colossales. Ils révolutionnent le paysage politique et les partis politiques ne s’en sont pas encore rendu compte. On va voir ceux qui s’en rendent compte les premiers. Tant sur le fond que sur la forme, c’est tout à fait révolutionnaire pour nous, gens de droite. Sur le fond, les gens sont descendus dans la rue par instinct de survie. Ils se sont dit : la civilisation est en danger. Ils sont descendus en quelque sorte avec leurs tripes et pas avec leur tête. Les gens n’ont pas bougé pour un corporatisme ou pour la défense de droits acquis mais pour défendre des valeurs. Des valeurs de civilisation. Et ça c’est nouveau. Sur la forme, les générations ont renoué ensemble dans un même mouvement. Mai 68 c’était : « on met les vieux au rancart », la Révolution française : « du passé faisons table rase ». Là, on a retrouvé une notion de verticalité entre les générations : grands-parents, parents, enfants, petits-enfants. Véritablement ensemble dans la rue. Et dès qu’il y de la verticalité c’est encore plus solide. Et c’est quelque chose de nouveau aussi. On a renoué entre les générations.

Croyez-vous encore en une solution démocratique, politique, par les urnes ? Comment renverser la situation sinon ?

Je ne vais pas dire que je ne crois en aucun parti. Et j’ai la France chevillée au corps. Je me bats vraiment pour mon pays, car je pense qu’on est en train de tuer l‘âme de nos enfants. Mais je pense que les partis actuels doivent se positionner clairement par rapport aux sujets de civilisation. La frontière va se situer là. C’est-à-dire d’un côté le nihilisme : libéralisme, hommes producteurs-consommateurs, mondialisme, etc. Et puis de l’autre côté, l’homme dans sa transcendance. Je pense que c’est ça qui va fonder la politique de demain et qu’actuellement dans les partis politiques, ça ne se dégage pas encore suffisamment. Qu’est ce qui est vraiment important pour demain ? C’est l’homme avec un grand H. Quelle civilisation veut-on transmettre à nos enfants ?Les solutions pratiques, économiques, sociales, sociétales me paraissent découler de la vision que l’on a de l’homme. Et pour moi l’homme est un enfant de Dieu. C’est en temps que tel que je le respecte dans sa liberté et sa responsabilité. Ce sont en réalité des principes très concrets et pas des vues de l’esprit dont on peut décliner alors une politique cohérente. Je pense que nous devons repositionner le combat dans l’espace spirituel."


La vraie question est : Aimez vous suffisamment la vérité ?


Insupportables mensonges 


Assez !

C’est insupportable, tous ces mensonges !

Que d’horribles accusations contre tous ces jeunes, notre chance pour la France !

Vous faites fausse route, car jeudi soir c’était une belle soirée :

  • » …au moins 30 véhicules incendiés sur la presqu’île » : On ne vous dit rien pourtant, avec vos feux de la Saint Jean !
  • » …des hurlements incessants jusqu’à 3h du matin dans les rues de Lyon » : Quels rabats-joie vous faites, mettez donc des bouchons d’oreilles !
  • » …beaucoup de mobilier urbain détruit » : Maintenant, il y a plus de places de parking !
Et vous geignez quand ils crient « Allah Akbar ! » : Ne nous cassiez-vous pas les oreilles dimanche dernier avec votre procession pour la Fête-Dieu sur les berges du Rhône ?

» Ils ont brûlé tous les scooters de Sushi Shop, à Bellecour ! » : Ils voulaient simplement vous prévenir des méfaits du poisson cru sur l’organisme !

Vous pleurez » plusieurs vitrines brisées » : Les commerçants n’ont toujours pas été indemnisés des émeutes de 2010, alors vous savez, une de plus ou de moins…

« … lancers de projectiles sur la police » : si on ne peut même plus s’amuser.
Bilan : 7 gardes à vue sur toute la capitale des Gaules et une Algérie qualifiée !
Cessez donc vos quolibets, à la fin. La vérité, c’est qu’il ne s’est rien passé.

Je vous trouve franchement culotté de déverser tout ce fiel sur eux, alors que vous – oui vous – lorsque vous manifestez c’est un million et demi de personnes à chaque fois. 

Bloquant la circulation de grandes villes qui en deviennent paralysées ; 
  • vous bousillez la pelouse du Champ de Mars sans état d’âme ; 
  • vous scandez de violents slogans tels que : « Un papa, Une maman, pour tous les enfants « ; 
  • vous louez de dantesques camions qui polluent et font un vacarme de tous les diables ; 
  • votre jeunesse se tient très mal en défilant masqués le torse tatoué au feutre noir ; 
  • vous criez « Vive la France« , les femmes sont en jupes et les hommes en pantalons, 
  • vos enfants s’appellent « Pierre » ou « Marie », ils rient et sont gentils avec tout le monde.
Vous rangez tout derrière vous, et ne laissez aucune trace de votre passage. Insupportable !

..................

70 millions de martyrs chrétiens ...

70 millions de martyrs chrétiens depuis 33
  • Le magazine américain Histoire Chrétienne, en partenariat avec l’association Voix des Martyrs USA, a, dans la dernière publication du journal, proposé le chiffre de 70 millions pour le nombre de chrétiens martyrisés pour leur foi depuis les premiers temps du christianisme. 
  • Les chiffres, sans appel, montrent le rôle prépondérant joué dans cette persécution par deux types de régime : les régimes matérialistes athées, et les pays sous domination islamique. 
  • Un état de fait qui, comme le relève le magazine, est encore trop ignoré, volontairement ou non, par beaucoup de chrétiens vivant dans les pays occidentaux, tandis que l’un des contributeurs du magazine suggère l’idée que c’est une « guerre globale » qui est menée contre la chrétienté depuis l’aube de son existence.

Make no mistake — ISIS does not just pose a threat to Iraq


ISIS is a threat beyond Iraq, 
with Shariah as worldwide aim

By Brigitte Gabriel


There is a great deal of confusion and ignorance about the jihadist organization ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) which has been waging a terror campaign in those two nations for some time now, culminating most recently in the seizure of Iraq’s second largest city, Mosul.

ISIS isn’t acting out of anger over borders or “politics” as the West understands the term. ISIS has a specific goal in mind and that is the formation of an Islamic state ruled by Shariah.

This is very important to understand because this is a common goal of all the major jihadist organizations across the world. It is shared by al Qaeda, Hamas, Lashkar e Taiba, Abu Sayyef, Jemaah Islamiyah, Boko Haram, Al Shabaab and others. The shared goal transcends any disagreements over borders and pure politics.

For instance, Israel could evaporate tomorrow and the overriding goal of the formation of Islamic states ruled by Shariah would not change a bit. It’s based in their thousand-year-old doctrine, which is far more fundamental and overarching than mere political ideology.

If we ever hope to win this war against radical Islam we better understand that the goal of establishing an Islamic state ruled by Shariah is based on doctrine and not just ideology.

Islamic doctrine is not derived from the thoughts or ideological vision of a man or woman brought to the fore in recent years. Islamic doctrine is based on the Islamic trilogy, the Koran, the Hadith and the Sira.

....................


Read more: www.washingtontimes.com




sábado, 28 de junio de 2014

The concept of religious liberty can be confusing and complex ...



by Jordan Lorence

Common sense can tell us whether particular citizens should be exempt from certain government policies for religious reasons. Codifying such instinctive judgments into formal statutes is more difficult.

The concept of religious liberty can be confusing and complex, but it becomes clearer when we think about it in an intuitive sense. There are good cases in which the religious person should win, bad cases in which the religious person should lose, and difficult cases that fall somewhere in the middle. The challenge is how to codify such instinctive judgments into formal, statutory language applied by courts of law.

That’s what the broad coalition that supported the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) attempted to do in 1993. A large majority of Congress voted for RFRA, and President Bill Clinton signed the bill into law. Many of the same questions and concerns we hear today came up at that time. Back then, most people, whether on the right or the left, religious or secular, agreed that it was important to protect religious liberty and conscience rights. The challenge was how to do it—how to protect the litigants in the good cases and not protect them in the bad cases, and how to address the difficult cases in the middle.

To better understand the challenges of crafting formal legal protections for religious liberty, consider the following “Intuitive Guide to Religious Liberty Law.” It illustrates what Congress and the supporters of religious liberty were trying to do by passing the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act in 1993, and the various state RFRAs that have been passed since then.

The Bad, the Good, and the Complicated

Here are three situations. Use your common sense to determine whether the people in these cases are truly engaging in the exercise of religion that society should protect, or not.

The first case is made up. The other two actually happened. In the first case, the police arrest an adherent of the Aztec religion and charge him with murder for killing another person with a knife. The Aztec adherent says he should not be charged with murder because he was exercising his religion by conducting a human sacrifice. What is our intuitive response to this case? Human sacrifice results in the death of innocent human beings, which is a pretty bad thing, so the Aztec adherent should lose this case. No religious liberty protection for him.

The second case took place in a public high school in Illinois in the late 1970s. School policy required all students to attend co-ed gym classes, and to wear uniforms, something like white T-shirts and red gym shorts. Some young women from a local Pentecostal church asked if they could wear more clothes in gym class than the mandatory uniforms, because their religious beliefs required them to dress modestly. The school responded by suspending the young women. The students filed a lawsuit, asking that the school accommodate their request to wear more modest apparel. Commonsense suggests that the young women should win, that the school should accommodate their request because the government interest looks pretty insignificant here and dressing more modestly wouldn’t compromise it, and that the school overreacted by suspending the students. In this case, the girls and their religious liberty should win.

The third case involves Amish people living in Minnesota who drive horse-drawn buggies on the roads. Minnesota law requires slow moving vehicles to place orange fluorescent triangles on the backs of their vehicles so that faster moving vehicles can see them from a distance. This sign requirement includes the Amish buggies, so that drivers in cars can see them and not plow into the slower-moving buggies.

The problem is that certain Amish communities regard the orange triangles as too flamboyant, exhibiting sinful pride that violates the precepts of their faith. The police arrested a number of Amish men for driving their buggies without the orange triangles. The Amish argued in court that the sign requirement violated their rights to free exercise of religion. The government argued that traffic safety is important to prevent people from being killed or injured on state roads. Who should win this case?

We understand that the state interest in road safety is significant. But the Amish also have strong beliefs. Is there any way we can accommodate them without putting people at risk on the highways?

The Minnesota Supreme Court looked for a way to fulfill the government’s interest in road safety without forcing the Amish to violate their religious beliefs. The justices found that the Amish were willing to place reflective silver duct tape on the edges of their box-like black buggies and use glowing kerosene lamps while on the road. The Amish should not be arrested, the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled, if they took these precautions.

The Court’s resolution of this case was reasonable; it simultaneously protected people driving on state roads and preserved Amish people’s right to free expression of their beliefs.

Translating Common Sense into Law

So how do you translate such common sense judgments into a formal legal standard that protects religious liberty? How do you write laws that ensure that plaintiffs in bad cases lose, in good cases win, and that cases in the middle are resolved through alternatives that further important governmental interests while also protecting the religious beliefs of conscientious objectors?

..............




The prophetic nature of Giovanni Battista Montini, Paul VI


The Prophetic Papacy of Paul VI

“Eight days ago I went to Fumona to pay my respects to Celestine V. You know his story. He was a very simple man who mistrusted himself. At the moment of [his] election the Apostolic See had been vacant for twenty-seven months: there were only twelve cardinals left and they could not agree among themselves. Those were terrible times. Pietro di Murrone, a holy hermit, was elected and invited to ascend the chair of Peter. After having hesitated, he accepted from a sense of duty, and made his entry into Aquila on a donkey, like our Lord. But he found there two kings waiting for him.”
“He abdicated,” I responded. “Is that exemplary for a Father? Paternity cannot be renounced.”
“But,” the Pope said, “Celestine found himself duped by his attendants. He had accepted out of duty. The same sense of duty brought about his resignation, not from cowardice, as Dante said, if Dante’s words really refer to Celestine V.”**

The above conversation may easily mislead some to be a story told by Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI in one of his interviews, especially in light of his resignation that stunned the world in February 2013 and after he placed his pallium on the casket of Pope St. Celestine V in 2009.

Actually, it’s Pope Paul VI and Jean Guitton in 1966, recounted in Guitton’sDialogues avec Paul VI (The Pope Speaks). Benedict XVI was not the only pope to pray at the tomb of the tomb of Celestine V—Pope Paul visited the tomb on September 1, 1966 and his tribute address details the story of the election, resignation and exile of “the holy hermit,” who displayed, in Paul’s words, “ma per eroismo di virtu, per sentiment di dovere”—by virtue of heroism, and a sense of duty.

The duty theme would surface more than forty years later when Benedict confided to Peter Seewald in Light of the World: “If a Pope clearly realizes that he is no longer physically, psychologically, and spiritually capable of handling the duties of his office, then he has a right and, under some circumstances, also an obligation to resign.”

The approval by Pope Francis of the promulgation of the decree for the cause of beatification of Pope Paul VI was announced this past May. On the one hand, this latest move by Francis to raise his papal predecessors to the altars clearly marks a recent papal renaissance: from 1903-2013 there have been nine popes, three of whom are saints (Pius X, John XXIII and John Paul II), one whose potential sainthood has been debated for decades (Pius XII), and another who is on the path towards it (John Paul I). Paul VI’s beatification in October 2014 is only the latest testimony to the papal prowess of the last century.

On the other hand, the pending beatification offers an opportunity to reintroduce the world to the prophetic nature of Giovanni Battista Montini, Paul VI. While the word “prophetic” is sometimes used to describe his final encyclical, Humane Vitae, there are five other areas aside from the Church’s moral teaching found in Humanae Vitaein which Paul VI unlocked the many questions and mysteries surrounding the papacy, its nature and mission in the modern world—the world of the 1960s and 70s, no less. Not only did it fall to Paul to complete and promote Vatican II, it was he who shouldered defining and exemplifying Church teaching and tradition in a world increasingly hostile and alien to it.

Here’s five areas how he did it.

1) The Pilgrim Pope

When Paul VI set course for the Holy Land in the first few days of January 1964, it likely marked the first time a pontiff stepped outside Europe since St. Peter—who, 1900 years earlier, himself came from Jerusalem to Rome. This particular trip to Israel, which today appears rather traditional and expected of a pope—precisely because of Paul VI—caught the world’s attention 50 years ago, the first of numerous instances in which Paul upturned the pervading mentality that the Bishop of Rome was prisoner behind Vatican walls.

So impactful was Paul VI’s journey to the land of Christ, especially his exchange with the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople Athenagoras II that commemorating the 50th anniversary of their meeting was the primary purpose of Francis’s Holy Land pilgrimage in May 2014. “Fifty years ago, two great church leaders, the late Pope Paul VI and Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras, cast out fear; they cast away from themselves the fear which had prevailed for a millennium, a fear which had kept the two ancient Churches, of the West and East,” declared Patriarch Bartholomew with Pope Francis at his side.

By 1970, Paul had ventured into India, the United States, Portugal, Turkey, Colombia, Switzerland, Uganda, West Asia, Oceania and Australia. While John Paul II’s global expeditions remain astounding, the pontiff as “pilgrim pope” was made possible by Paul VI. At the United Nations in New York in 1965, his “no more war, war never again” plea remains both prophetic and a testament to the turmoil of the time, as Vietnam and Cold War threats loomed in the minds of many.

2) Modernizing the Papacy

Volumes and volumes have been written about the changes that transpired in the 1960s both in and outside the Church. As for recognizing the need to update the Vatican and the Church to the changing needs of the times, one may cite any number of liturgical reforms Paul implemented, but a unique example may be in what he did with the venerable papal protection forces.

In The Pope’s Army: 500 Years of the Papal Swiss Guard, author Robert Royal details how Paul VI directed his secretary of state, Cardinal Jean Villot, “to eliminate or to restructure virtually all of the existing papal security forces, with the sole exception of the Swiss Guard.” His intent, as he describes in his own words, was to return to the essential mission of the Church and “ensure that everything that surrounds the successor of Peter should clearly manifest the religious nature of his mission.”

The Swiss Guard, however, remained at the Pope’s side. They had been defending the pope since 1506 and while their function was threatened with extinction after the fall of the Papal States, Paul knew certain traditions were to remain intact—and thevalues the guards embodied were too valuable to abandon. In Paul’s own experience their presence was vital when he survived an attempt on his life in the Philippines in 1970, 11 years before Ali Agca aimed to gun down John Paul II in St. Peter’s Square.

3) The Interview

Waves have been made of Pope Francis’s interviews that he has freely given to the press, such as the Jesuit interview “A Big Heart Open to God” published in September 2013. And while Benedict made book-length papal interviews a literary genre with his Peter Seewald triptych and John Paul’s Crossing the Threshold of Hope was received with wide acclaim in 1994, it was Paul VI who as both pope and simple priest held ongoing conversations with French thinker and philosopher Jean Guitton chronicled in The Pope Speaks.

In these conversations with his longtime friend, the human aspect of Pope Montini emanates. While not technically the question-and-answer style we have grown accustomed to (and indeed have welcomed as a more personal approach to lofty topics), they nevertheless served as a precedent for future interviews between pope and a collaborative journalist. These chats between Montini and Guitton, read in the context of what would evolve in the decades that ensued, reveal a cultural thinker keenly aware that the changing world around him was not the rustic peace he had known growing up in northern Italy, but that joy and hope were needed to build a “civilization of love.”

At the center of Paul’s interviews is the root of what would become the New Evangelization (a focus capped in 1975 with his own exhortation Evangelii Nuntiandi), best summarized by Montini himself to Guitton in 1950: “One has to be at the same time ancient and modern, to speak according to tradition and also to speak taking into account our sensibilities. What purpose would be served by saying what is true, if one does not make it comprehensible to men of today?”

4) The Evil One

“The demons know very well what the Creed says, and they know it is the truth.”

This line comes from a February 2014 homily by Pope Francis in one of his numerous morning sermons at Casa Santa Marta where references to the work of the Evil One are not uncommon. Such language has surprised some of Francis’s admirers, though it remains quite hidden in mainstream reports about him.

In 1972, Paul VI devoted a November General Audience to the existence of evil, “a whole mysterious world, convulsed by a most unfortunate drama about which we know very little.” In this address, the 75-year-old pontiff displays a textbook-style grasp of theology, classical literature and Scripture, but does not hesitate to speak about the “very obvious signs of the Evil One.” Nine years already into his papacy, having survived a tumultuous decade of cultural revolution and upheaval, the aging pontiff seemed unafraid to do battle one more time:
People are afraid of falling back […] into frightening deviations of fancy and superstition. Nowadays they prefer to appear strong and unprejudiced to pose as positivists, while at the same time lending faith to many unfounded magical or popular superstitions or, worse still, exposing their souls—their baptized souls, visited so often by the Eucharistic Presence and inhabited by the Holy Spirit!—to licentious sensual experiences and to harmful drugs, as well as to the ideological seductions of fashionable errors. These are cracks through which the Evil One can easily penetrate and change the human mind.
More than 40 years later following the delivery of Paul’s General Audience, it is one thing to note Francis’s steady references to the presence and power of the Evil One as “interesting” or “surprising.” It’s another thing to take serious what he is preaching and warning about, especially in light of the similar words spoken by the man he will beatify in October.

5) Resignation

..............




THE SMOKE OF SATAN RETURNS

by William Doino Jr.


In 1972, on the feast of Sts. Peter and Paul, Pope Paul VI delivered a sermon that startled the world. Describing the chaos then consuming the post-conciliar Church, he lamented :
“From some fissure the smoke of Satan has entered the temple of God.”

Paul’s words were a warning to all who, taken with the “spirit of Vatican II””rather than the Council’s actual teachings”had fallen under the sway of dark spirits. But Catholic dissidents didn’t want to be criticized, much less told they might be assisting the devil. So they struck back”with sarcasm, ridicule and contempt. One of Paul’s biographersdescribes their reaction:
Cartoonists refurbished their stock of clichés, producing cloven hoofs, long sinuous tails, ugly contorted faces and terrifying implements of torture. For the cartoonists Paul VI was definitely not a modern man.

Neither, as we’ve come to learn, is Pope Francis”if by “modern” we mean an abandonment of the supernatural, and a flight from Christianity’s most challenging teachings. Like his venerable predecessor , Francis has made it a point to draw the world’s attention to the wiles of the devil. But whereas Paul waited nearly ten years to speak so dramatically about Satan, Francis took only a day.

Within twenty-four hours of being elected, the new pope declared : “When one does not profess Jesus Christ”I recall the phrase of Leon Bloy”‘Whoever does not pray to God, prays to the devil.’” The following day, Francis continued : “Let us never give in to pessimism, to that bitterness that the devil tempts us with every day.” 

In his homily for Palm Sunday , he spoke of problems which appear insurmountable: “In this moment the enemy, the devil, comes, often disguised as an angel, and slyly speaks his word to us. Do not listen to him!”

In July, Francis consecrated Vatican City State to St. Michael , the Archangel, who “defends the People of God from their enemies, and above all from the arch-enemy par excellence, the devil.” And in early October, Francis powerfully rebuked those who deny the existence of Satan, warning against relativism, deceit, and “the seduction of evil.”

Striking as his words are, they are not surprising. During his formation as a Jesuit, Jorge Bergoglio adopted the intense spirituality of St. Ignatius , who always recognized the reality of spiritual warfare. In On Heaven and Earth , his 2010 book with his friend, Rabbi Abraham Skorka, the then Cardinal Bergoglio spoke of the devil in the starkest terms: “He is the tempter, the one that looks to destroy the work of God, he that brings us to self-sufficiency, to pride. Jesus defines him as the father of lies.”

Contending with the devil, he continued, “is precisely man’s battle on earth.” That same year, Cardinal Bergolio rose to publicly challenge Argentina’s move to redefine marriage:
At stake is the total rejection of God’s law engraved in our hearts. Let us not be naïve: this is not simply a political struggle, but it is an attempt to destroy God’s plan. It is not just a bill (a mere instrument) but a “move” of the father of lies who seeks to confuse and deceive the children of God.

President Cristina Kirchner, who pushed hard for the radical legislation, responded : “Bergoglio’s position is medieval.” But truth is objective and not time-conditioned, so Bergoglio’s defense of marriage stands.

During the pontificates of John Paul II and Benedict XVI, the devil was by no means downplayed: John Paul’s Catechism highlights his presence , and Benedict was inveighing against Satan long before he became pope, notably in the Ratzinger Report . But Francis has taken the subject to a new level. He has three very clear ideas about humanity’s struggle against Satan.

........................




Mientras masacran a decenas de miles de civiles desarmados (casi todos musulmanes), ansían una unidad para todo el islam y el fin de las divisiones internas


El espejismo del califato baña en sangre
 al mundo islámico

por Riccardo Redaelli 


Marx no querría que parafraseáramos su famosa frase, pero la verdad es que “un fantasma recorre Oriente Medio: el fantasma del califato”. Y en este caso se trata propiamente de un fantasma de la historia, puesto que el califato es la forma política por excelencia del islam desde sus orígenes.

Muerto el profeta Mahoma, la umma (la comunidad de los creyentes) decidió, tras duras discusiones, confiarse a un Vicario (khalifa en árabe, para nosotros califa), que debería guiar el imperio árabe-musulmán naciente, tanto desde el punto de vista político como religioso, aunque privado de poderes sobrenaturales o teológicos. Un hombre normal, en definitiva, que tenía la tarea de dirigir a los combatientes y guiar la oración.

La historiografía islámica considera el periodo de Muhammad y de los cuatro califas “rectamente guiados” (622 -661 d.C.) como la edad de oro del islam, aunque hay quien señala –con cierta malicia– que de aquellos cuatro guías, tres terminaron siendo asesinados. El último fue Ali, primo y yerno de Mahoma, casado con su adorada hija Fátima. Por defender el derecho exclusivo de Alí y de sus descendientes a suceder al Profeta como imán, los chiítas se separaron de la mayoría suní, generando una división que aún hoy sufre el mundo islámico.

Después de Ali, vinieron los califatos Omeya (661-750) y el larguísimo periodo Abasí (750-1258), cuyo califa más famoso, Harun al-Rashid, aparece en los cuentos de “Las mil y una noches”. Pero antes de su desaparición a manos de los mongoles, que eliminaron a los últimos abasidas durante el saqueo de Bagdad, el califato se había convertido en una cáscara vacía, sin un poder real. Desde entonces no volvió a haber una guía unitaria, ni siquiera formal, de la umma.

No fue hasta después de la Primera Guerra Mundial cuando Mustafa Kemal Ataturk pensó en convertir al depuesto sultán otomano en el nuevo califa, transformando así su poder político en guía religiosa o, según una interpretación más cínica, para encontrarle una ocupación al depuesto soberano. Pero fue un experimento fallido en pocos años.

Un siglo de nacionalismos fracasados


Durante todo el siglo XX, el califato fue tan solo una hipótesis académica, privada de cualquier perspectiva política. Por lo demás, ese fue el siglo de los estados nacionales y del crecimiento, a veces perjudicial, de un nacionalismo celoso de sus fronteras y lleno de sospechas hacia cualquier idea supranacional (como bien sabemos los europeos). Oriente Medio se rediseñó malamente en 1918 con la creación de estados frágiles que debían servir para saciar los apetitos coloniales de Francia y Gran Bretaña, más que para encontrar soluciones racionales a la maraña de personas, etnias y religiones de aquella región.

No es de extrañar, por tanto, que la idea de estado-nación diera a luz guerras, golpes de estado, movimientos independentistas, sin que Oriente Medio pudiera hallar su estabilidad. La decepción que siguió a la independencia de las potencias coloniales y el fracaso de muchos regímenes revolucionarios, militares, socialistas, panarabistas, que nacieron y cayeron en varios estados regionales favorecieron el emerger de los movimientos islamistas, que se encontraron en una situación paradójica: por un lado, según la tradición, rechazaban la idea de nación, percibida como una contaminación europea; por otro, se encontraban actuando dentro de estados propios, adoptando agendas políticas cada vez más nacionales. Es el caso, por ejemplo, de la Asociación de los Hermanos Musulmanes, el famoso movimiento del islam político, nacida en Egipto en 1928 y luego difundida por todo el mundo árabe. Como se ha demostrado en estos últimos años con las Primaveras árabes, los Hermanos Musulmanes se mueven como partidos políticos que actúan a nivel nacional, tratando de gestionar el poder en los estados. De hecho, se han adaptado a la idea nacional.

El retorno del mito califal


Quien, por el contrario, ha rechazado siempre esta lógica ha sido el activismo islámico violento, que propugnaba la yihad global, interpretada primero por la Al-Qaeda de Osama Bin Laden y luego por la multitud de grupos yihadistas inspirados en el al-qaedismo. Rechazando toda contaminación occidental y favoreciendo una lucha total contra los enemigos del islam, la dimensión nacional era para ellos evidentemente contraproducente, tanto más porque estos movimientos viven del apoyo de voluntarios que proceden de todo el mundo (no solo islámico, dado el creciente peso del yihadismo europeo y americano).

La vieja idea del califato ofrecía así una solución pacífica fácil y no comprometedora: permitía deslegitimar a los líderes a combatir, ya fueran presidentes laicos como Hosni Mubarak en Egipto o Bashar al-Assad en Siria, o monarcas como los “jeques de los petrodólares”. A nivel doctrinal, el califato respondía perfectamente a la obsesiva necesidad de varios ideólogos del yihadismo de retornar al verdadero islam de los orígenes. Además, políticamente comprometía a poco, puesto que anhelar la reunificación de toda la umma islámica, de Marruecos a Indonesia, pasando por Europa y África central, era un sueño tan alejado de la realidad que no suscitaba tensiones entre las distintas etnias ni discusiones políticas.

Un proyecto que va de Iraq a África

La historia de estos últimos años parece relanzar esa visión transnacional.

............................

J’ai fait partie des experts qui ont mis en garde contre le caractère islamiste de la rebellion en Syrie. Je n’ai eu droit qu’à l’épithète de « pro-Assad »


Entretien avec Frédéric Pichon

Réalisé par Gabrielle Cluzel

L’Occident s’est complètement trompé en Syrie, on le dit enfin !

Dans un éditorial du Point daté du 26 juin dernier, Franz-Olivier Giesbert, révèle, s’appuyant sur des travaux d’expert, qu’en Syrie, seuls les rebelles djihadistes ont pu perpétrer l’attaque chimique de Ghoutta. Il accuse ouvertement le Monde, le gouvernement français et les services secrets américains d’avoir montré du doigt, sans preuves, le régime d’Assad, pour justifier les frappes à venir. Cet éditorial aurait dû l’effet d’une bombe, non ?

Si FOG, qui connaît tout le monde à Paris, écrit cela, c’est que désormais, ce thème commence à faire consensus : on peut en parler. Mais cela illustre comment fonctionne notre système médiatique. Les informations ne sortent que quand le système lui-même l’autorise. Et toujours en différé. A présent, cela n’intéresse plus personne. Il s’agit pourtant d’une véritable forfaiture. Fin août dernier, nous avons assisté à une campagne internationale qui, en France, s’est traduite par un vrai déchaînement de la part de certains journaux. En particulier Le Monde, dont la ligne fut incroyablement partisane, comme elle le fut récemment lors de la crise ukrainienne. Le problème c’est qu’en France, c’est ce journal qui donne le la.

A la fin du mois d’Août 2013, il était très difficile d’aller en sens contraire. J’ai été très sollicité à cette époque : j’ai remarqué que les médias étrangers étaient beaucoup plus disposés à accueillir un discours prudent. En France, je me souviens très bien que le fait même de ne pas acquiescer, d’attendre des preuves, de résister à l’emballement médiatique dont on voyait bien qu’il faisait les affaires du gouvernement était suspect. C’était pourtant la seule position tenable pour le chercheur que je suis et cela aurait du être le cas pour la presse.

...........................................

The State is a result of sin and an expression of sin. Like sickness, death and all the tribulations of this world


Early Catholic Social Teaching: 
The State as Robber



Today, many Christians feel it natural to adopt a brand of social conservatism when it comes to politics and public policy. Not only do we see them hold public demonstrations against what they view as social vices, they also usually call for legislation to regulate, control, and ban these activities. The same religious zeal (which is not a problem per se), which brought alcohol prohibitionin the 1920s is still here today. Numerous governments around the world have laws that criminalize peaceful and consensual sexual activities between those of the same sex. Christian leaders and movements have policies.

Norman Horn “these Christians have no means of harmonizing these thoughts in a political and cultural climate that presents us with seemingly only one option. The disconnect is their theology of the State and of law. It causes them to make a mistake in reasoning that the State needs to solve this problem (with more legislation, more regulation) and the church just needs to fall in line.”[1]Simply put, in the face of social vices, they are drawn to whatever government-initiated public policies that are being perpetuated to curb them.

This assumes a rather optimistic view of the ability and authority of the State to combat sin and its effects. Ironically, this stands in stark contrast to that of St. Augustine, the renowned Christian theologian and philosopher, who takes a prominent place in Church and Western history. His influence as a thinker was arguably unrivalled in the early history of the Church.[2]

In the City of God, Augustine explains that humankind is divided into two groups: one belonging to the City of God, the other to the earthly city. The City of God is made up of those who love God above all else, but the earthly city is constituted of those who love themselves and, is animated by the lust for power:
The two cities were created by two kinds of love: the earthly city was created by self-love reaching the point of contempt for God, the Heavenly City by the love of God carried as far as contempt for self. ... In the former [the earthly city] the lust for domination lords it over its princes as over the nations it subjugates; in the other, both those put in authority and those subject to them serve one another in love, the rulers by their counsel, the subjects by obedience. [14: 28]
Following this distinction, he argues that true justice, which is to “love serving God only, and therefore ruling well all else,” is simply not present on earth, due to the sinful nature of mankind populating the earthly city. All political states as they exist on earth are therefore devoid of true justice.
With this in mind, Augustine likened the State to a criminal band of thieves and robbers

..................

Read more: mises.org



There is no human concern that does not find its way into Dante's poem.


Anthony Esolen on Common
 Core, Dante, and more




We've known Dr. Anthony Esolen for quite some time, since he spoke at our 2008 conference in Houston, Texas. Noted author of 10 Ways to Destroy the Imagination of Your Child and Ironies of Faith, and translator of Dante's Divine Comedy, Dr. Esolen has long been a committed defender of the classics and of classical education. And in recent months he has turned his attention to the new Common Core standards which have quickly become so controversial and of which he vehemently disapproves.

Dr. Esolen was kind enough to take part in our Words of Wisdom interview series to explain why he believes Common Core is such a mistake and why Dante deserves our attention.


You have been fairly outspoken in your opposition of the new common core standards. In your opinion, what is their worst feature?


The worst feature of the Common Core is its anti-humanistic, utilitarian approach to education. It mistakes what a child is and what a human being is for. That is why it has no use for poetry, and why it boils the study of literature down to the scrambling up of some marketable "skill," and why, in more than 200 pages of blood-clotting verbiage, their promoters use the word "beauty" only once, tangentially, and why the standards pay NO attention whatsoever to the need to impart to students a knowledge of their literary heritage, and why it never occurs to them that you don't read good books to learn about what literary artists do, but that you learn about literary art so that you can read more good books and learn more from them. It is as if Thomas Gradgrind had gotten hold of the humanities and turned them into factory robotics.

What should classical educators do to combat Common Core?


IGNORE THEM ALTOGETHER. REJECT THEM ROOT AND BRANCH. SEE WHAT THEY ARE DOING, THEN GO AND DO PRECISELY THE OPPOSITE -- which is what you will already have been doing, if you are taking a classical approach to education.

On a separate: you are a noted translator of Dante's Divine Comedy, a trilogy which many classical educators teach in their schools or homes. What, in your opinion, makes Dante so fantastic?


There is no human concern that does not find its way into Dante's poem. He is a consummate artist, not only of the individual line, but of the tercet, the speech, the episode, the canto, the set of cantos, the canticle, and the whole Comedy. Everything is a masterpiece in itself, in a constellation of other masterpieces, making up the entire glorious work of art. He is comprehensive in his learning, yet deeply and tenderly and sometimes fiercely human in his affections. He can summon up an unforgettable personality in just five or six lines (e. g., La Pia in Purgatory 5). I like what Eliot has to say: Shakespeare and Dante divide the world between them; there is no third.

When teaching the Divine Comedy, where should teachers start?

At the beginning! Without preparation.

You are also a college professor. In what ways is our current educational climate failing to prepare our students for higher education?

Pretty much in every conceivable way. I've begun to notice that some of my freshmen -- usually from private or Catholic schools -- have actually read Virgil, Dante, and so forth. But I've also begun to notice that most of the rest, and they are in the majority, and they include even some students who have gone to a Catholic high school, do not even recognize the NAMES of the greatest writers in English and in the western world. Who's Milton? They've never heard of him.

........

Así es vivir en ... con un gobierno al que el nuestro y la izquierda, jamás critica y en cambio aplaude.


¿De qué país se trata?


1- Les niegan los pasaportes a la gran mayoría de las personas y les "sugieren" a los consulados que no otorguen visados.
2- Los funcionarios que viajen al exterior por trabajo deben dejar a la familia de rehén. 
3- No se puede cambiar de labor sin permiso del gobierno. 
4- Prohibido publicar cualquier cosa sin permiso del gobierno. 
5- Puede tener una computadora personal pero los servidores están en manos del gobierno. Una antena parabólica es delito. 
6- Internet está estrechamente controlada y vigilada por la seguridad del estado. Solo el 1.7 % de la población tiene acceso. 
7- Todas las escuelas son del gobierno comunista. 
8- Se prohíbe pertenecer a cualquier organización independiente de carácter nacional o internacional, con excepción de las comunistas.
9- Prohibido ver o escuchar emisoras de radio y televisión privadas o independientes. Todas son propiedad del gobierno. 
10- Leer libros, revistas o periódicos, con excepción de aquellos aprobados/publicados por el gobierno. 
11- Recibir publicaciones del extranjero o de visitantes (punible con cárcel según la Ley 88).
12- Comunicarse libremente con periodistas extranjeros. 
13- Tampoco visitar o quedarse en hoteles, restaurantes, playas, y complejos para turistas a no ser que tengan dólares o euros. 
14- Aceptar regalos o donaciones de visitantes extranjeros.

Sigue....

...............

Leer más aquí: www.elpais.com.uy