We can compare the Catholic Church to the European Union. A super-national super-organization, a hungry beast that always has to be fed and grow. It's like with Robert Michels' iron law of oligarchy. All organizations degenerate, especially large and complex organizations, regardless of how well it worked initially for its original purpose. And the representatives no longer represent their mandators and their interests, but instead only themselves and their own interests. The organization will no longer work for its original purpose, what it was originally designed to defend and promote, but instead for the organization itself. We end up with an organization representing nothing but the organization itself, its elite and its eternal expansion.
Today the European Union no longer represents Europe, it represents the European Union and its commission and its many politicians who profit from it. It's a hungry beast that need to be fed, that needs to grow, so that's why it considers Turkey being such a juicy steak. Likewise with the Catholic Church. It is already predominantly a Third World organization, and therefore in all aspects already represent those interests. As an open border lobby group for more mass immigration from the Third World. Urging its adherents to do good Christian deeds with regards to the "poor" and "vulnerable" illegal immigrants. All in all, as bad as any other universalist NGO we know about.
We can compare Catholicism to Sweden. Both well-greased machineries that worked excellently in the old days when the leadership worked for substance and success, and not for civilizational suicide as today. Why did it work? Because of--in spite of other superficial differences--the very authoritarian mentality of the organizations. Strictly hierarchical, where the people at the bottom never question the decrees of the elite. Why does it fail so miserably today? For the very same reasons. The suicidal commands of the elite is followed just as blindly as they followed the good leadership in the old days.
We can compare Catholicism to George W. Bush. In both cases we have the phenomenon of anecdotal conservatism. Bush takes a "courageous" stance against stem cell research, while pushing for national suicide by mass invasion of Mexicans into the U.S. Only having the cognitive capacity to understand miniature issues such as stem cell research or abortion, but not a single clue about how to rule a country; the importance of enforcing the law and upholding the national sovereignty. Not a single clue. Anecdotal conservatism is the ideology for political illiterates, an ideology which literally strain at the gnats and swallow the camels. And since 99% of the people on this planet are political illiterates, this kind of anecdotal conservatism is also what they perceive as real conservatism. Most people never seriously asked themselves the question "How to rule a country?". They think that politics is about personal attitudes, image and fashion. The think of politics in relation to their person, and not in relation to a country and how to rule it--they are the political illiterates.
Catholicism is perfectly another example of anecdotal conservatism, only taking firm positions on miniature issues, such as birth control, while being completely blind on the capital conservative issues, such as enforcing the law, upholding national sovereignty, defending our civilization. And just as Bush they are worse than blind. Once the perversion has gone as far as to strain at gnats and swallow the camels, perversion becomes the ruling principle. And therefore the Catholic Church, quite as Bush, effectively act as the enemies of our civilization. The combination of clinging to miniature issues combined with universalism, makes them use their miniature issues as a battering ram to break our nations. As when Bush says "family values do not stop at the Rio Grande". Or the Vatican's position against use of birth control, which has no effect in Europe, but only makes the population explosion in the Third World get worse; and of course by embracing Islam, and being maybe the most influential open borders lobby.
Challenging the obvious, Steven claims that the Vatican is not into politics. And I'm sure this is a true axiom in the Catholic mental universe. This is all captured in what Pope Benedict said to Erdogan when visiting Turkey: "We are not political but we wish for Turkey to join the EU". Catholicism is as much in denial about being political, as America is in denial as being an empire. But it is political; by pushing for open borders, by lobbying for Third World interests, by adding to the injury of the population explosion in Africa, by encouraging its adherents to break the law by helping illegal aliens "out of Christian charity", by embracing Islam, by encouraging Turkey's entry into the E.U., by advocating multiculturalism and political correctness, and giving speeches against "racism", "xenophobia" and "exaggerated nationalism".
But by being in denial about being political, the Catholic Church has never articulated a single serious political thought. Therefore the disastrous effects of its actions. In the old days, before the age of the French Revolution, political leadership worked, European civilization was not suicidal. The Vatican, then as now, was only concerned with miniature issues. But then it worked, and could at best lead to a perfect symbiosis between the political leadership and the Church. It appears that the Catholic Church never had a clue of what conservatism is; what is the substance of our civilization. When the West turn left, the Church turned left too, and as I pointed out before was even the vanguard in pushing for culturally leftist positions (it's inherent in the Christian ethics), such as multiculturalism.
But the sad part is that the Catholic Church is equally clueless about simple family matters, what is often referred to as "family values". If they would care about the birth rates in Europe, they would not put the emphasis on taking a position against birth control, but instead focus on the issue of the unbearable situation for European couples to have children. By being over-taxed, over-stressed, both have to work, rampaging feminism, etc. it becomes too expensive and too stressful to have as many children as desired.
But the Catholic Church of course never ever cared about birth rates in Europe (and here Steven is completely misguided). It's simply a dogma of Catholicism that it's a sin against life as preventing a human child from coming into the world. There no thought behind it, whatsoever. It's just a dogma that is followed blindly. The Catholic Church does not care the least for the survival of European civilization and if the births take place in Europe. At the same time they are happy to encourage and add to the injury of the very problematic exponential population explosion in the Third World. The Catholic Church wants as many souls in its organization as possible, it doesn't care the least where they are coming from. Christian values is behind one of the worst disasters of the time we live in: the exponential population explosion in the Third World. It's not until we leave Christian ethics, that we will be able to deal with it.
But it doesn't end there. Pope John Paul II, in his book The Gospel of Life, equated immigration restrictions with the sin of preventing a human child from coming into the world, both practices of what he calls the "Culture of Death". David Simcox wrote:
Papal pronouncements here and in Rome, such as the Papal Letter on the "Gospel of Life" early in 1995, increasingly imply a morel equivalence between immigration restrictions and practices of what the Pontiff calls the "Culture of Death;" abortion, contraception, capital punishment, euthanasia and assisted suicide.
And Lawrence Auster summarized it as:
the insane dictum of the late pope that to prevent an illegal alien from coming into your country is as grave a sin against life as preventing a human child from coming into the world.
Anyone who still wants to claim that the Vatican is not political? Surely the Catholics deny that their positions of Christian charity and Christian goodness are political. But it doesn't stop it from having an immense political effect. And Catholicism is worse than suicidal liberalism, since it is suicidal liberalism made into a religion. And if you ask me, the origins of suicidal liberalism is found in Christian ethics. I'm not at all surprised that the Catholic Church was the vanguard in pushing for a culturally leftist agenda of the destruction of European civilization.
And we see this materialized in how Catholic Senators overwhelmingly vote for national suicide. We see it represented in the comments of Steven, cluelessly rallying for banning birth control as the way to save European civilization. And when it comes to the kill-America-by-mass-immigration bill, his only comment is "poor America becoming a bit too Mexican". Poor America, by not enforcing its laws and by being flooded by tenths of millions of Mexicans, and yet more tenths of millions to come, is losing its national sovereignty, and is ceasing to be America. What Steven hasn't understood is that the issue is not about Mexicans. Whenever the issue is brought up, all he talks about are Mexicans. This makes it abundantly clear to us that Steven does not understand the nature of the issue. The issue is about America. But to Steven, as with other liberals, America, as a nation, does not exist in his mental world. This suggests to us that Steven never seriously thought about the question of "How to rule a country?". This is a white area in his mental map, so he will always gravitate away from it. As for other liberals and Catholics, the only things that exist are sacred individuals and super-national NGOs. Nations do not exist in their mental universe--so how would they ever phrase the question "How to rule a country?"
A position I share with Fjordman and Lawrence Auster is that the way to stop the civilizational suicide is to shift from the mentality of "saving the world" into "saving ourselves". We cannot reform Islam, and its not our responsibility. We can only separate ourselves from it, or defeat it. The "save the world" mentality leads to false paths such as global warming activism, open border policies, and providing Third World people with Western money and medicine to facilitate their exponential population explosion. All against the common good for this planet. The "saving the world" mentality leads in the opposite direction from the issues about saving ourselves, such as national sovereignty, law enforcement and civilizational defense.
It's clear that we have to stop saving the world, and start saving ourselves. But the concept of "saving the world" is hardwired into the Catholic Church. It seems itself as a universal organization (by name and by nature) with its purpose to save as many individual souls around the planet as possible, i.e. to make the Church grow in power by numbers. There is no ourselves for the Catholic Church, so it is an impossibility for this organization to do the shift from "saving the world" to "saving ourselves". Protestantism and Orthodox Christianity are differently politically organized, so they stand a chance. Especially the Orthodox Church with its national organizations, but also American Christianity, with its vitality, stand a chance. But Catholicism is doomed to forever being a dead branch of European civilization, at least unless the Second Vatican Council is fully repudiated.
This was my last post of my series about Catholicism. Here are the other posts of this series:
Catholicism—Vatican II embracing Islam
Catholicism—the open borders lobby
Catholicism—birth control and birth rates (part I)
Catholicism—birth control and birth rates (part II)
Read further...
