Bishop Athanasius Schneider gave an address on 16 May 2019 at the Rome Life Forum on the theme “City of man vs City of God – Global One World Order vs Christendom.” Consider the theme of this Forum: a Global one world order (city of man) vs. the decentralized governance that was an inherent feature of “Christendom” (City of God) – in other words, the European Middle Ages.
Before getting into this address, a brief discussion on the topic: it is an examination of political universalism vs. political decentralization. This distinction is a point of conflict not only in the libertarian world, but in the West more broadly.
The universalists see and value no meaningful difference in culture, yet are known for championing “diversity”; those for decentralization see and value meaningful differences in culture, yet are known for being enemies of “diversity.” I know, it doesn’t make any sense. The universalists look forward to one law for all; those for decentralization understand that this is a wish for global totalitarianism.
On to Bishop Schneider (and for those who find this too “Christian,” keep in mind the context of universalism vs. decentralization):
Ultimately it is the replacement of the kingship of God and concretely of the kingship of Jesus Christ by the kingship of Satan or the kingship of godless or atheist men.
It was the Enlightenment that finally freed man from any connection to God. “God is dead,” as Nietzsche infamously observed, to be replaced by man’s reason. The consequence of this, according to Schneider?
The city of Man contains in its root the impulse to totalitarianism, to a global totalitarianism which will demand total submission and which will not tolerate the reign of the true king of this world and of humankind, who is the Incarnate God, Jesus Christ.
I can see a lot of eyes rolling out there: “bionic has finally fallen off of the deep end.” Hey, I have fallen off of more deep ends than you know, but on this one? I don’t think so. Christianity has proven to be a necessary, but not sufficient, foundation for liberty; this plays out in the dividing line of universalism vs. decentralization or “woke” vs. “deplorable.”
If you had to read that about six times, join the club. It makes no sense to me – the Vatican is attacking a gesture toward the Christian faith. Even the Vatican has declared war on Christianity. Let’s get some details:
The Catholic Italian politician [Matteo Salvini] with whom Pope Francis reportedly refuses to meet because of his immigration stance held and kissed a rosary during a political rally over the weekend and invoked the Blessed Mother…this while Francis has met on repeated occasions with supporters of abortion and other issues in conflict with Church teaching.
The universalist pope vs. the decentralizing politician.
Jesuit Father Antonio Spadaro…issued several critical tweets, spreading the criticism on Facebook as well, saying Christians should be outraged.
Christians should be outraged that a politician invoked Mary? Well, OK, I mean I know this might not sit very well with many Protestants, but still…outraged?
Bishop Domenico Mogavero, of Mazara del Vallo…said Salvini can no longer call himself a Christian…
Invoking Mary – does this make him a Muslim? A Jew?
There are at least a few with contrary views:
Catholic Herald columnist and associate professor of theology for the Catholic University of America C.C. Pecknold…acknowledged a globalist effort to de-Christianize the West via mass migration. [He] noted that Salvini quoted Sarah in his speech, along with G.K. Chesterton, Pope Saint John Paul II, and Pope Benedict XVI.
Quoting any of those three will get you thrown out of polite company.
Returning to Schneider:
Never has it been so capitally important to understand clearly the true foundations of all social life as in these days when humanity, diseased by the poison of social errors and perversions and tossed by a fever of conflicting desires, doctrines, and aims, has become the unhappy prey of a disorder created by itself, and is experiencing the disruptive effects of false social theories that neglect and contravene the laws of God.
If you like, you may replace that last part with “the laws of liberty,” or “the laws of economics”; because the same poison has consumed all three – and all three have their common roots in Natural Law grounded in a Christian ethic and worldview.
Schneider quotes Juan Donoso Cortés, a Catholic Spanish politician, who gave a speech to the Spanish Parliament on January 4, 1849:
“When the religious thermometer is high, the thermometer of political repression is low; and, when the religious thermometer low, the political thermometer—political repression—tyranny is high.”
Something will provide governance: a common culture and tradition or a tyrannical state. There is no third option.
“Today, the way is prepared for a gigantic, colossal, universal, and immense tyrant; everything is ready for it. …there are no moral resistances because all wills are divided and all patriotisms are dead.”
Universalism – whether libertarian or otherwise – is ushering in this tyranny.
I doubt whether Augustine of Hippo raged against universalism in his contradiction between the City of God versus the City of Men. As I understand it, it was above all a document against idealism; in the sense that in the City of Men, with people being what they are, there can be no utopia. Therefore Utopia can only exist in the City of God, which is, of course, an idealized, unreachable place, maybe with the exception of a life after death. But even then, people will have to change significantly. How are they going to know what, when and how to change? With that, it's a testament against utopianism, which is, always has, and probably always will be, the terrain of the young, of students. It's a plea for conservatism, even against libertarianism, you may argue. The current Pope is an idiot. But that's a different subject.ReplyDelete
As I read this, a parable occurred to me that I will call "The Parable of My Grandmother's Soup".ReplyDelete
My grandmother was NOT a good cook. Every Wednesday, she would take all the leftovers from the previous week - mashed potatoes, meat, peas, rolls - EVERYTHING she had in the fridge, put it all in a pot and heat it. Depending on the consistency, it was either soup or stew. Sometimes it was OK but most of the time it left a lot to be desired.
But it occurs to me that once you put all the ingredients into a pot and make soup (or stew), you can't very well use them for anything else - you're pretty much stuck with soup. The individual ingredients are no longer individually useful. If I just want some mashed potatoes and gravy - well, good luck getting them out of the soup. Or stew.
I feel like the people who urge "diversity" are actually doing the opposite of promoting diversity. They are putting everything together into one pot and making soup. Once this is done, it'll all be soup and there will no longer be anything like "diversity".
This homogeneity, I think, is what they are actually striving for - it's right out of Nineteen Eighty-Four:
War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength
Homogeneity is Diversity
Wow, Woody. Talk about cutting to the chase! Thank you. PeggyDelete
Hey! Kudos to your grand-mother. Great soups are made this way. Talking about not letting food go to waste. Spices make a big difference in taste.Delete
Dry bread crumbs and potatoes can be to thicken soups.
But, I do get the metaphor.
Thank you - I'm glad you liked it!Delete
Universalism "diversity, is indeed preparing the serf-minded for a totalitarian world government.ReplyDelete
Along with the other signs, history is approaching its climax. The Beast of Revelation 13 comes ever closer. An embedded chip already is reality, already used in pets and livestock, already gone through more than a few human trials, and already touted by academics, for a decade already used in higher-ups of Mexican government. And around 1998, a security and lighting salesman told me & wife that they had a number of millionaires down south using them in case of kidnappers.