Skip to main content

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

Image
By
 +
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

Labels:

Comments

  1. MurraxMay 14, 2021 at 5:09 PM

    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. MurraxMay 14, 2021 at 6:40 PM

      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. TradicalMay 15, 2021 at 2:08 PM

      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. MurraxMay 16, 2021 at 1:54 AM

      This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

"Father, Should I Attend That Mass?" Advice on Attending Non-SSPX Latin Masses

By
 + JMJ I see that the 'resistors' are in a tizzy because Fr. Robinson used them as an example instead of the sedevacantists. What is interesting is that you can apply the exact same reasons against going to a sede mass as that of the 'resistors'. Namely: On the other extreme are those situations where an SSPX priest knows that a certain non-SSPX traditionalist venue is a grave danger to the faith . Frankly, most, if not all, of the Resistance Masses would fall into this category. In many cases, the behavior of these priests has been and continues to be scandalous, by their (A) spirit, their (B) preaching, and their indiscriminate conferral of the (C) priesthood and (D) episcopacy. To attend a Mass with such ongoing scandals poses a serious danger to the souls of the faithful. Yep, looking at A,B,C and D the shoe fits. On this basis the "resistors" = "sedevacantists". P^3 Courtesy of SSPX.org   A companion article to a recent "Questions with ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Correcting Caricatures of the SSPX

By
 + JMJ Introduction First, a little background on the FSSP St. John Vianney Chapel in Mission Hill Kansas.  After the 1988 consecrations and the foundation of the FSSP there was a consistent trend of Dioceses allowing the SSPX to run chapels and churches near SSPX locations. As with any 'organizational change' there were those who didn't agree with the change and no longer sought the sacraments from the SSPX. I heard from friends that in that era there was a lot of anger and tension (on both sides) between the St. Mary's SSPX and Mission Hill FSSP.  Second, there have been caricatures of the SSPX position (some are evident below) in which personal opinions of SSPX priests and laity are taken as the official position or conflated with those of sedevacantists or 'resistance'. Recent Perspectives of the SSPX Position In the shadow of the consecrations a fever pitch accusations and opinions how surfaced - many of which include caricatures of the SSPX positions, of w...
Post a Comment
Read more

SSPX: Why Is the SSPX So Criticized?

By
 + JMJ As long as you are ok with what happens in other Catholic Churches, Traditional Catholics will be left 'alone'.  This is a paraphrase of words spoken by an Archbishop to Traditional Catholics (with a sprinkling of SSPX) who had requested the Traditional Latin Mass under Summorum Pontificum. This reflects that attitude of the Church towards anyone who takes issue with some of the ambiguities of Vatican II and the post-conciliar magisterium.  If you reject the papacy but are ok with V2, the New Mass, and what Rome has stated since 1965 - then you are welcome. Question some of the more abiguous statements and ask for Rome to realise that a circle is not a square - then you are in for a world of hurt. This is where the SSPX exists and has existed from almost its very first moments. Pointing out contradictions with previous magisterium is not acceptable - under any condition. Why? Because it will cause the whole V2 house of cards to fall. I guess only when the contradic...
Post a Comment
Read more

Stories: Early Days of Tradition Part 8 - Convention Centre Chapel

By
 + JMJ I came to Tradition a few years after they had bought a chapel. My wife told me of the earlier years when Fr. Normandin would come to town and Mass would be held in a room at the convention centre.  He'd start by blessing the room and then proceed with Mass. This went on for a while before the one of the faithful found a small hall that would suit just fine. They pooled their money and bought the building.  Then came the work as the retiree's refinished the floor, setup the sactuary. Oh, did I mention that I heard that the hall had been used by a motorcycle gang? The floor needed a lot of work.  I remember seeing pictures of the founders working to make the hall into a fitting place for the Sacrifice of the Mass. That little chapel would be a refuge like many others serviced by Fr. Normandin.  From Thunderbay, Ontrario to Nanaimo, British Columbia - the SSPX chapels are all the results of Fr. Normandin's missionary work in those desperate times. Without h...
Post a Comment
Read more

How many more must die for the throne? or How to combat FUD!

By
 + JMJ How many more must die for the throne? (Movie Quote: Prince Caspian) The Spread of Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt I've seen a lot of FUD spreading across the intergnat on various stats etc.   So let's put this in context ... especially the perspective of those people in positions of authority who need to make decisions to protect the lives of their citizens. Yep, this is going to be that type of post.  Like it or not the leaders of our governments have their authority from God.  So, as Catholics should know, you need to have a very good reason to deliberately disobey the orders of their superiors. This is basic St. Thomas Aquinas ... so don't blame me for discussing things from a Catholic perspective. The leaders of our countries have taken action to protect the vulnerable of our countries.   As much as the young and not-so-young may whine and complain - I have to ask how many more of our elderly have to die? What the armchair virologists and ec...
10 comments
Read more