St Junipero Serra statue toppled in San Francisco

  • Thread starter Thread starter C.Ray
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
VanitasVanitatum said:
There is controversy surrounding treatment of Indians and that’s the sole cause.
Click to expand...
There is “controversy” over all evangelism efforts. Italy wasn’t originally Christian. France’s “native” origin wasn’t Christianity. Poland lost it’s “authentic indigenous religious culture” when it was Christianized.

There is a worldwide to repeal all evangelism efforts, as evidenced even in the EU, which defined Europe’s history as paganism…then post Christian modern civilization. Skipping Christianity.

They do it in all continents, by idealizing the pre Christian culture, then association of evangelism with imperialism.

Sometimes this is done by glorifying Paganism, by the New Age Movement, in the British Isles for instance. Other places it takes other forms.
 
Last edited:
From Fr George Rutler’s weekly letter
"Many were surprised in 1953 when President Eisenhower warned in a commencement speech at Dartmouth, without notes or teleprompter: “Don’t join the book burners. Don’t think you are going to conceal faults by concealing evidence that they ever existed. Don’t be afraid to go in your library and read every book, as long as any document does not offend our own ideas of decency. That should be the only censorship.” Having considerable experience of war, he had seen the consequences of thought control.

Back in 1821 Heinrich Heine wrote: “Where they burn books, they will, in the end, burn people too.” The destruction of the libraries of Alexandria by Muslims in 640 and Cluny by Huguenots in 1562 had irreparable consequences. This also applies to the mutilation of art in all its forms. This is not a question of taste or optional aesthetic judgment. It is simply the fact that to rewrite history is eventually to resent history altogether, to live in the present without past or future.

The cruelest illiteracy consists in a pantomime education that commands what to think rather than how to think, and that erases from a culture any memory of its tested and vindicated truths. In George Orwell’s “1984” dystopia: “Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.”
 
1ke said:
Most of the statues that are at issue are leaders of the confederate armies, put up during Jim Crow era and the civil rights movement.
Click to expand...
I see no limiting principle at work in the current purge of statues, pancake mix brands, college chants, movies, songs, etc etc. It has gone well beyond Confederates.
.
 
Actually, 1Ke, you came awfully close to calling a lot of white people endemically racist: you said, almost in as many words, “people may believe they’re not racist, and they may say they’re not racist, but they really are, because here are all these anecdotal incidents of racism.” I’m paraphrasing but that’s essentially what you said.

If you want systematic racism, I’ll give you the 2 most powerful words of systematic racism: “affirmative action,” wherein preferences of all sorts are given out on the basis of something other than merit.

If you’d prefer anecdotes, my wife was offered a full scholarship to her college - which offer got revoked when they found out she was white.
 
Last edited:
Misrere, do you really think that helps? Or adds to the discussion? Are we supposed to be impressed?
 
Last edited:
I think it valuable to call pulling down a Catholic-oriented statue “demonic.” It certainly adds more to the discussion than ad hominem attacks or sarcasm.
 
VonDerTann said:
I think it valuable to call pulling down a Catholic-oriented statue “demonic.”
Click to expand...
Barring any other context, maybe. But that doesn’t seem to be the direction of the first post that I can read. It seemed to be addressed at the argument another poster and I made, not at the statue-toppling.

Calling an oponent’s position “demonic” does not seem a valuable contribution in itself. “Demonic” is not a philosophical label or school which can be supported, identified with, or refuted, but an emotional attack to which no rational argument can be made.

Perhaps I should be explicit: The point of my sarcasm on any post is to point out the baselessness of the argument I am addressing. I try to reserve it for statements that are so irrational and emotionally-driven that they cannot be refuted by reason.

EDIT: @Ars_sacra, since you are being talked about here, you can see what is said.
 
Last edited:
MiserereMei said:
Perhaps I should be explicit: The point of my sarcasm on any post is to point out the baselessness of the argument I am addressing. I try to reserve it for statements that are so irrational and emotionally-driven that they cannot be refuted by reason.
Click to expand...
Always good to talk down to others to make a point. That really converts minds and hearts.
 
StudentMI said:
Always good to talk down to others to make a point.That really converts minds and hearts.
Click to expand...
Honestly, neither do facts or reason according to this article.

Could I have presented with more good-will? Sure. I’ll admit that.
 
StudentMI said:
Citing an article to justify condescension. Nice.
Click to expand...
I was quoting the article to justify my statement that people aren’t convinced by facts or reason? And not of my behavior? I said that I admit that I could and should have behaved with more grace. But, whatever. Y’all have at it.
 
The right to protest is something guaranteed under the US Constitution and peaceful forms of protest have been encouraged by the Pope; the members of the Church are imperfect human beings and as Catholics we absolutely haven’t done all that we could and should have done, but nonetheless the Church has been preaching against the evils of prejudice since the apostolic age and it is entirely a rewriting of history to label the movement as a Marxist movement. It is dishonest to highlight instances of vandalism as representative of the protests.



Please watch the video with the Pope and prayerfully reflect on it.

Peace.
 
Last edited:
Exactly, they won’t stop with statues. We know from history exactly what will happen and what they want to accomplish if we don’t condemn this in all its insidious forms; its already happened in Russia, in Mexico, and other nations. They want to tear down the foundations of civilization, a foundation built by the Catholic Church, all under a distorted form of worldly “justice” opposed to God’s will.
 
No, it isn’t dishonest to label the rioting and actions as representative of the protests. Have you read the goals of BLM, AntiFa or any other of these leftist groups? What’s dishonest is claiming that if one doesn’t support BLM or AntiFa or Progressivism/Marxism that they’re prejudiced against other nations/races. It’s also dishonest to align the Pope and the Catholic Church with these groups. This is his opinion, he is not God, and just because the Pope tells us that George Floyd died as a result of “racism,” doesn’t mean its true. I’m not saying Pope Francis is lying, mind you, I’m saying he is misinformed and that his opinion is not infallible, as Catholics should know if they want to use the Pope as an appeal to authority.

 
‘BLM’ as a slogan preceded any formal organization taking the name. People supporting various policies or reforms or budget changes to help the country’s justice system come from a wide variety of backgrounds.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top