Skip to main content

Why I am Wary of So Called 'Conservative' and Alternative News Sources

 +
JMJ

 

 I mentioned earlier that I see the 'alternative' media as simply the flipside of the 'liberal' media.

This caught my eye today:

Ezra Levant: A heavily-armed SWAT team just took down a Christian pastor heading home from church. Police say he’s charged with “inciting” people to go to church. This is the second pastor jailed this year. 

So, being critically minded I wondered what had happened beforehand ... after all it is important to know the context.

Here's what the Calgary Herald reported:

Artur and Dawid Pawlowski were charged with organizing an illegal in-person gathering.

"... Calgary police said they proactively served the church organizers with the order to ensure citizens attending service on Saturday were abiding by public health orders. In a release, police said the Pawlowskis "acknowledged the injunction, but chose to ignore requirements for social distancing, mask wearing and reduced capacity limits for attendees" and went ahead with the event. ..."

So, the minister was warned that it would violate the law and he proceeded anyway.

So surprise, they arrested him afterwards and decided to avoid a confrontation with the attendee's by arresting him later on. Listening to the exchange and watching the video it turns out that it wasn't the 'SWAT' team (nice try Ezra).  It was the RCMP.  No guns were drawn etc. During the arrest Pawlowski demonstrated contempt to the police officers by calling them various names etc. 

Yep, good example of religion.

So - why is this worthy of a Tradicat post?

Because, hard as it may be, obeying laws is a default point for Catholics.  Even posted speed limits.  If we choose to disobey said laws and get caught by lawful authority, then as Catholics, we have an obligation to either pay the fine etc or follow the legal system.

Pawlowski isn't a hero, he's simply another misguided fool who gives the real enemies the ammunition to push their narrative.

The right way is to band together with other like minded religious leaders and take it to the courts. This way the laws can be amended for the next pandemic.  

I see that some are rationally following that course of action.

P^3

Comments

  1. I want to again preface my comment by saying I appreciate your takes on this, as I too think that the conservative news can go off the rails at times and I think your takes serve as a good counterweight to more mainstream conservative takes.

    With that being said, I think that reductio ad absurdum arguments really do serve as the nail in the coffin for many of your positions regarding application of Catholic principles in cases like these. And I'll provide a few examples to show why I think this is the case. Now, this instance in Canada makes things kind of unclear because of course heretics don't actually have the right to false worship, so we really need hypotheticals.

    Preface: This is an example I've given to you before, and I have your answer on it which is the case of "In a time where a disease is spreading, and the government made a law enforcing that everyone wore a hazmat suit, and then provided everyone a suit, must a Catholic obey?" Your answer in (How many must die for the throne) was "Yes."

    1. Now, I would then ask you: If there was no widespread pandemic, but there were still contagious diseases like the flu which we could completely eliminate the spread of by using hazmat suits, must a Catholic still obey this order?

    -I struggle to see how you could possibly say "no" with the application of principles you take? If you said "yes" I think this is obviously absurd, because you would never not wear a hazmat suit. Therefore there is obviously something wrong with the application of principles. My conclusion? I think you can either conclude that forcing the use of hazmat suits are either outside of the state's sphere of authority, or that in order to enforce their use there must be a grave situation where there is a significant and knowable danger to the person or someone they are coming in contact with. It would have to target specific groups of the population like the elderly, the immuno-compromized, etc. Otherwise, it isn't reasonable and doesn't bind. The parallel to masks is obvious.

    2. If the state mandated that all Catholic masses always and at all times enforce the participants to wear masks, socially distance and limit the mass to a group of 10 people because the state deems this a good method to stop the spread of diseases that can be dangerous to vulnerable groups (The flu, the cold, etc), should Catholics always obey?

    - If yes, this is absurd as this is saying that since the time of Christ, all Catholics everywhere have really been at the State's mercy regarding these limitations and that at anytime the State could basically put us under a form of interdict. Therefore, there is a problem with the application of principles. My solution? Regulations on these things in mass is ether completely outside of the State's authority or, like the hazmat suits, this must be targeted towards a specific group of population that is in seriously and danger and which can be known with a high degree of certainty in danger in order to bind Catholics. Otherwise, it isn't reasonable and therefore doesn't bind.

    I hope my arguments here are clearly made, and I wish I could make one of your great diagrams to demonstrate my argument! I am curious to see if you answer "No" to either of these questions, how you manage to do so without compromising your position? I certainly haven't seen anything put out by Holy Church to make me think my positions on both questions are unorthodox. I think the behavior of the Church in the pre-Christian Roman times and in other hostile nations where the Church disobeyed laws that unreasonably persecuted Holy Church actually vindicate my position. But maybe you have something in particular that you think binds me to believe otherwise.

    God bless you Tradical!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. PS:

      It should be noted that whenever I go to your blog in particular, I get blocked by "Google Safe Browsing" saying your blog has been reported to be a "deceptive site" running a phishing scam. Very odd

      Delete
    2. Hi Murrax,

      Because of other priorities, I'll be pulling your comment into a 'part ii' post and post my thoughts in a week of so.

      P^3

      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

SSPX and the Resistance - A Comparison Of Ecclesiology

Shining the light of Church Teaching on the doctrinal positions of the SSPX and the Resistance. Principles are guides used to aid in decision making.  It stands to reason that bad principles will lead to bad decisions. The recent interactions between Rome and the SSPX has challenged a number of closely held cultural assumptions of people in both sides of the disagreement. This has resulted in cultural skirmishes in both Rome and the SSPX. Since it is the smaller of the two, the skirmishes have been more evident within the SSPX.  The cultural fault-line that Bishop Fellay crossed appears to be linked to two points of Catholic Doctrine: Ecclesiology and Obedience.  The cultural difference of view points is strong enough that it has resulted in the expulsion of a number of members.  It should also be noted that some other priests expelled since the beginning of the latest interactions (starting in 2000) held the same view points and have joined with the l...

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

+ JMJ Along the theme of P^3 (Prayer, Penance, Patience), and for my own reference ... here is a collection of Morning and Evening prayers from the Ideal Daily Missal along with some additional prayers. In this crisis of the Church, I do not think it is possible to do too much prayer, penance and have patience. P^3

Church Militant TV and the SSPX - Again

+ JMJ The old narrative used to be that the SSPX was 'schismatic' and 'excommunicated'. Now the excommunication has been lifted for a number of years and the only ones who think it still has effect are the 'resistors'. That leaves the other opponents of the SSPX with the label 'schismatic'. Make it clear, the conservative Catholics have issues with the SSPX probably because they violate some of their assumptions about the Faith and this crisis of the Church. Church Militant TV is one of these the exists along the Catholic thought spectrum. They like the Traditional Mass but must ensure that they don't get tarred with the same 'schismatic' brush that the liberals use against the SSPX.  So what do they do, they use the same brush against the SSPX. The funny thing is that even when the Church does speak, they don't want to listen and persist in calling the SSPX 'schismatic'. Here's a transcript of the latest s...

The Curious Case of Steve Skojec and the Dangers of Deep Diving into the Crisis Sub-Titled: The Failings of Others

 + JMJ It's been a while now since Steve Skojec sold 1P5 and abandoned the Catholic Faith. I've been a 'Trad' since 1982 and in those 40+ years I seen this death-spiral before with a similar end point. It seems that anyone who jumps into the fray unprepared for the enormous task of righting wrongs will, eventually, become discouraged by not the task but the people who surround them.   I remember when Skojec complained of the treatment his family received from a traditional priest.  This seems to have been the start of the end for him. So what can we learn from the likes of Steve Skojec, Michael Voris (maybe?), Louie Verrecchio, Gerry Matatix and other celebrity Catholics? Probably quite a lot about what not to do. First, don't burn out on the crisis?  When you burn out, on work or anything else, little things assume a more greater importance than they are due.   This is one of my 'canary in the coal mine' signals that I've been stretching myself too th...

The Position of the SSPX on Canonizations by the Saint Factory

+ JMJ I have sometimes been criticized for including 'St' as a title for Pope John Paul II et al. I've given my reasons here  in a discussion with Alex Long. The question is one of prudence in discussions with ntCatholics and in some cases with tCatholics. In discussions with:  ntCatholics, I will use the title in order to continue the discussion and help them arrive at a realistic understanding of the crisis of the Church. tCatholics, I will use the title in order to broaden their perspective on the doctrine of dogmatic facts. This broader perspective is, in my opinion, essential maintaining a realistic understanding of the crisis of the Church. So from a doctrinal position, I have written the article Dogmatic Fact of Fancy  and includes a reference on canonizations. Now, I know the position of the SSPX is that the canonizations are doubtful (see references below) and I also know of at least one non-SSPX theologian who agrees with the level of doubt du...