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

What is Tradition?

By
 + JMJ What Is Tradition? The basic premise, from my perspective, is that what was taught before cannot be contradicted by the 'present' magisterium, only deepened and expanded upon. I recall the Roman theologians called the SSPX protestants while the SSPX called them modernists.  I believe this was all surrounding the concept of Traditon. SSPX's Understanding of Tradition One accusation made against the SSPX is that they don't have a correct understanding of 'Tradition'.  This is how the SSPX understands Tradition: I finally profess that Tradition is not a dead memory, but the living transmission of the doctrine received from the Apostles. It remains living, in distinction to Revelation, which is closed. It is so both in the activity of the Magisterium of the Teaching Church and in the profession of Faith of the Church Taught, of which the sentire cum Ecclesia is the result of the teaching of the Magisterium. Tradition may be called ‘living’, not in the sense t...
Post a Comment
Read more

SSPX.ca: What is the position of the SSPX on Vatican II???

By
 + JMJ With all the mis-information about the SSPX rejecting the Second Vatican Council, I thought it would be useful to publish an article that focuses on the real issues that the SSPX has identified. Update: Why Did the SSPX Consecrate Bishops? ( Neither Schismatic, Nor Disobedient link ) In the linked document the SSPX outlined the key motivation and core issues with Vatican II and the post-conciliar magisterium (see above link for full document): 4. The Society Acted Precisely Because of the State of Necessity in Which the Faith Finds Itself  In the present situation of the Church, if the Society of Saint Pius X had not carried out the consecrations of July 1st, it would have found itself facing an inevitable alternative: either to disappear gradually, or to accept, at least in fact, the new liturgy as well as the false doctrines of Vatican II and the post-council. Without the consecrations of July 1st, the Fraternity would have found itself, in a few years, without bishop...
1 comment
Read more

Thoughts on: Finding Common Ground Between Rome and the SSPX

By
 + JMJ In the ramp up to the consecrations the noise floor in the intergnat grew to a constant din.  This was one of the few the peeped its signal over the noise. https://crisismagazine.com/opinion/finding-common-ground-between-rome-and-the-sspx The key issue is contained in this paragraph: In the lead-up to the planned July 1, 2026, episcopal consecrations,  the SSPX rejected Rome’s offer  of doctrinal dialogue on the grounds that “we both know in advance that we cannot agree doctrinally, particularly regarding the fundamental orientations adopted since the Second Vatican Council.” Fr. Pagliarani also said that his previous attempt at dialogue in 2019 was shut down by Rome because of an assumed irreconcilability. It seems that, from the Society’s perspective, and perhaps from Rome’s too, their positions are incompatible. If memory serves, Rome killed any opportunity for an open discussion by stating that Vatican II was not up for debate. So it was a still-birth and ...
Post a Comment
Read more

The News is an Addiction ...

By
 + JMJ People seem to be mesmerised by train wrecks.   They just can't turn away as the disaster creeps forward along train tracks towards the crossing where a car, truck, bus, trailer awaits its destruction. Trads have been watching the train wreck that is this crisis of the Catholic Church for decades. The trade war between the Canada and the US has reminded me that the news is addictive.   The first time I was addicted what from 2009 to  2014 when I was closely following the Rome / SSPX discussions.  I was at work watching a live-stream as Bishop Fellay disappeared into the Vatican. The lead-up to this moment had been intense as the 'resistance' got freaked out and the cultural cracks between doctrine and conspiracy theory widened. In the decade since then other things have emerged, wars, rumours of wars, conspiracies, celebrity Catholics etc. Now we have a new addiction and its name is Trump. Lately, no matter how much I try, I find myself wonderin...
Post a Comment
Read more

Thoughts on the Thoughts of a former SSPX priest

By
 + JMJ Well Gary Campbell, former SSPX Priest and now laicised has posted a new article on WherePeterIs. https://wherepeteris.com/thoughts-of-a-former-sspx-priest-on-the-july-1-consecrations/ These words stuck out: Heck, they have built a five-star hotel, wine bar, and Walmart on the opposite bank of the Rubicon! They are not in danger of entering a state of schism, for they are  already  in a state of schism. I believe he doth protest too much. All the actual facts indicate that the SSPX was not in a state of schism before July 1st and an examination of the decree of excommunication highlights the either ineptitude of those in charge or a desire to leave the barn door open. The chasm between an act of disobedience and act of schism remains just what is has always been - an inconvenient barrier that person(s) in Rome seek to bridge but appear incapable of succeeding. The SSPX re-stated that they recognize the Pope as the Vicar of Christ and feel obliged by conscience...
Post a Comment
Read more