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

Comparision of the Tridentine, Cranmer and Novus Ordo Masses

+ JMJ I downloaded the comparison that was linked in the previous article on the mass (here) . ... a very good reference! P^3 From: Whispers of Restoration (available at this link) . CHARTING LITURGICAL CHANGE Comparing the 1962 Ordinary of the Roman Mass to changes made during the Anglican Schism; Compared in turn to changes adopted in the creation of Pope Paul VI’s Mass in 1969 The chart on the reverse is a concise comparison of certain ritual differences between three historical rites for the celebration of the Catholic Mass Vetus Ordo: “Old Order,” the Roman Rite of Mass as contained in the 1962 Missal, often referred to as the “Traditional Latin Mass.”The Ordinary of this Mass is that of Pope St. Pius V (1570) following the Council of Trent (1545-63), hence the occasional moniker “Tridentine Mass.” However, Trent only consolidated and codified the Roman Rite already in use at that time; its essential form dates to Pope St. Gregory the Great (+604), in whose time the R...

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...

If Pope Francis is bad - what about Pope St. John Paul II et al?

+ JMJ So here we are on the apparent cusp of yet another post conciliar Papal canonization. This time we have Pope's John-Paul I and Paul VI canonizations to 'look forward' to. This follows, obviously, on the heels of Pope St. John Paul II's canonization? So the first question that I usually encounter is: How is it possible, keeping in mind the doctrine on infallibility of canonizations (note doctrine not dogma), that Pope St. John Paul II is a Saint? First, what does it mean???  According to the doctrine of dogmatic facts - it is the universal opinion of Theologians that canonizations are infallible.  It means that they enjoy the beatific vision.  ... that's it.  That is the doctrine and it is at the level of universal opinion of theologians.  It is called a 'dogmatic fact'. That they made mistakes is obvious.  That the miracles seem to not be very miraculous is also a bit of an issue. Here's something to consider: The rush that surrou...

Spiritual Journey Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre - Extracts

+ JMJ I have posted these two chapters to provide context for the quote of: It is, therefore, a strict duty for every priest wanting to remain Catholic to separate himself from this Conciliar Church for as long as it does not rediscover the Tradition of the Church and of the Catholic Faith. P^3 Courtesy of SSPX.ca Chapter II The Perfections of God We ought to remember during this entire contemplation of God that we must apply all that is said of God to Our Lord Jesus Christ, Who is God. We cannot separate Jesus Christ from God. We cannot separate the Christian religion from Jesus Christ, Who is God, and we must affirm and believe that only the Catholic religion is the Christian religion. These affirmations have, as a result, inescapable conclusions that no ecclesiastic authority can contest: outside of Jesus Christ and the Catholic religion, that is, outsi...

Dogmas of the Catholic Faith (de fide) - Expanded Listing: Answer for Reader

 + JMJ  A reader asked the following question in the 2015 version of the article on the Dogmas of the Catholic Faith (link) : 117: "In the state of fallen nature it is morally impossible for man without Supernatural Revelation, to know easily, with absolute certainty and without admixture of error, all religious and moral truths of the natural order." Where can you find this in the documents of the Church? ( Link to comment )  Here's the reference from Ott: The citation that Ott provided was Denzinger 1786 and the source document is Dogmatic Consitution Concerning the Faith from the First Vatican Council (Papal Encyclicals - link) : Chapter 2 On Revelation, Article 3: It is indeed thanks to this divine revelation , that those matters concerning God, which are not of themselves beyond the scope of human reason, can, even in the present state of the human race, be known by everyone, without difficulty, with firm certitude and with no intermingling of error. Here's ...