(USA Today) - U.S. consumers face "serious" inflation in the months ahead for clothing, food and other products, the head of Wal-Mart's U.S. operations warned Wednesday.
The world's largest retailer is working with suppliers to minimize the effect of cost increases and believes its low-cost business model will position it better than its competitors.
Still, inflation is "going to be serious," Wal-Mart U.S. CEO Bill Simon said during a meeting with USA TODAY's editorial board. "We're seeing cost increases starting to come through at a pretty rapid rate."
(CNBC) - There's more than just a whiff of inflation in the air, especially if you're standing outside a Hershey chocolate factory or shopping in a Walmart. Hershey Wednesday announced a nearly 10 percent price increase across its line of candy products to cover rising raw material costs, fuel and transportation.
(Wall Street Journal) - The president of the Minneapolis Federal Reserve Bank said Thursday the Fed may need to increase short-term interest rates by year's end if underlying inflation rises as he anticipates.
In a interview, Narayana Kocherlakota said he expected "a big upward movement" in core inflation—inflation excluding volatile food and energy prices—from about 0.8% late last year to about 1.3% by year-end.
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: I hate to say I told you so, but nearly EVERYTHING I've predicted on this blog concerning the economy is beginning to come true. Actual unemployment in the USA is near 20%, though the government's cooked books show it at 9.5%, the national debt is skyrocketing, and now inflation is beginning to set it domestically, after it's already caused food riots internationally. Our chickens are coming home to roost -- as the saying goes. Our nation has sown to the wind, and now we must reap the tornado.
I seriously doubt the Federal Reserve will be able to get a handle on this inflation problem. I suspect the Fed will increase interest rates much too slowly, and indeed may not be able to raise them fast enough at all, when you consider how many trillions it's already pumped out in funny-money to buy U.S. Treasury bonds. Every single time in history a "slow and controlled devaluation" of a currency has been attempted, it ends up spiraling out of control in the end. There is no reason to believe the same won't happen this time, except now it's the U.S. dollar we're talking about!
America's economy suffered a mortal wound in September of 2008, but at that time we still had a chance. We could have made the deep cuts necessary, allowed the economy to fall into a short depression (maybe 3 to 5 years) and then let things recover naturally on a solid foundation with a federal budget surplus and shrinking national debt. That didn't happen though. Instead we had a weak president (George W. Bush) who would not allow the market to correct naturally, and pushed forward an economic bailout package that took us out of the frying pan and threw us directly into the fire, effectively postponing the inevitable depression and setting us up for a deeper correction later. Then we had a presidential election in November of 2008, and though neither front-running candidate was particularly desirable, the American people chose the worst one possible (Barack H. Obama). With that national choice, and the Democrat-controlled congress, the nation went full speed in the wrong direction, increasing the federal deficit and national debt by leaps and bounds, printing trillions of US dollars in funny-money based on nothing to back it, increasing taxes, and embarking on an unrealistically ambitious nationalized healthcare plan that will cost trillions of dollars. It was quite literally the worst thing to do, at the worst possible time, setting us up for the worst possible consequences. Those consequences are about to be realized in the months (not years) ahead. The year 2011 will mark the beginning of the end for the US economy and the US dollar. We are looking at a minimum inflation level of 10% -- that's a minimum! It could get worse -- much worse. Some estimates put it as high as 20%, but that's in a "controlled devaluation" of the dollar. As I said above, "controlled devaluations" usually spiral out of control in the end.
So what do we do? First as foremost, there is no need to panic. Trying to secure your wealth this late in the game is pointless. Do what you can, if you know how, but don't expect any miracles. Most of the multi-millionaires in this country left two years ago in 2009. If you're still here stateside, like me, you're in it for the long haul. So fasten your seat belts. Over the last two years many people have been stockpiling food rations, water jugs, gasoline and ammunition. That's nice if you're expecting a nuclear war, but that isn't going to help you for very long in a deep economic depression. While it's always good to have a small food pantry and water for short-term emergencies, keep in mind that no man is an island. No matter how much you stockpile, sooner or later you're going to run out. So the most important thing to do is network. That's right, it's time to figure out who you're going to trade and barter with. Start setting up trading networks within your local parishes. Get your parish pastor involved in helping you if you can. Perhaps he can set your trading groups up with a space in the church building where weekly swap meets can happen. Now when I say swap meets, I mean REAL swap meets involving REAL swapping - trading of goods and not just money. Homeshoolers are already well equipped for this sort of thing, whether they realize it or not. They have excellent networks already established. These people may very well become the backbone of a new trading economy.
I cannot help but recall how the holocaust of abortion has exacerbated this problem for us. Over the last forty years we've aborted approximately forty-million unborn children. That's forty-million potential commercial consumers that are not with us today. Forty-million consumers could turn this economy around. A fairly large number of forty-million consumers would be taxpayers. Some of those forty-million would be employers. It makes one wonder what America's economy would be like with an extra forty-million people to make it go. Alas, I guess we'll never find out. We've got a long economic depression ahead of us now, so lets make due with what we've got. It's time to start thinking about gardening and canning your home-grown produce. If you don't know how, learn how, just Google it. The very first thing we need to do is get the cost of food down. This can be done by gardening and canning. The surplus you create can be traded with your neighbors and/or networks. Trading these canned groceries will have an immediate effect on lowing the bills for those in your network, and a cumulative effect over time of getting grocery stores to drop their prices on groceries. Remember it's all about supply and demand. If your neighbors and network friends don't need to buy groceries because they've just traded with your home garden, then the grocery store effectively has more to go around, and that inevitably results in lower prices.
We can do our part to get gas prices down too. It's called carpooling. Again, it's a supply and demand thing. Less cars on the road means less gas consumed, which in turn means more gas available, and you guessed it, that means lower prices. Lower gas prices has an effect on lowering the cost of everything over time. When (not if) it costs $10/gallon to fill up your gas tank, you'll see the wisdom in my words here.
Now I'm not big on "going green" but to save on electricity we may all be forced to buy florescent light bulbs. Conservation is going to become a way of life, not for the sake of the environment, but for the preservation of our bank accounts.
Yes, we will get through this, and somehow in the end we will be stronger. However, when I say "stronger" I don't mean wealthier. America's wealth is gone. We've traded it away for paper money that is based on nothing and is worth practically nothing. If the United States ever regains its power and prestige again, it won't be in this generation. For now, we have "forty years" of national penance to do.
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: I have received word from a reliable unnamed source that various leaders within the nationwide grassroots TEA Parties are now preparing a "Plan B" in the event the Republicans fail to deliver on their promises for a balanced budget, repeal of Obamacare, smaller government and tax reform. What is this "Plan B?" Click Here to find out.
(CatholicCulture.Org) - Military intervention in Libya, in the judgment of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), “appears to meet” the just-cause criterion of Catholic teaching on just war. The USCCB, however, cautioned that it has “refrained from making definitive judgments” in light of “many prudential decisions beyond our expertise.”
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: The more the USCCB speaks on political matters, the more respect I lose for this bureaucratic body. So let me see if I understand this. In 2002-2003 a Republican president made the case for a just war against Iraq using virtually the same criteria as the current president used to justify his recent actions in Libya. In fact, I would dare say the Republican president made a much better case in 2002-2003 against Iraq, citing humanitarian reasons, evidence of ethnic cleansing, harboring terrorists, and making weapons of mass destruction. Furthermore, the Republican president made his case before Congress first, acquired congressional approval, gaining a UN Security Council approval in addition to the old one he already had, and acquiring a coalition of the willing, all while making his case to the American people. He did this all PRIOR to taking military action, giving the Iraqi dictator plenty of time to make amends by stepping down. He even offered an exit plan for the Iraqi dictator, promising to secure a safe place for him and his family outside the country. Yet in all of this the Republican president's actions were questioned and ultimately condemned by the USCCB as engaging in an unlawful war without just cause.
Now let's fast forward to 2011. In this case we have a Democratic president who made a couple flip comments leading up to his bombing campaign of the Libyan dictator, saying something to the extent of "he's gotta go." He then began a US bombing campaign in Libya WITHOUT gaining congressional approval and BEFORE making his case to the American people. He gave the Libyan dictator little warning, and as far as we know he never offered an exit plan for the dictator and his family. Yes, this cruel dictator was attacking his own citizens who were rebelling against his cruel regime, but this is no different than the Iraqi dictator who did the EXACT SAME THING with just as much cruelty if not more so. However, when reviewing this case, the USCCB makes a statement saying that this may very well meet the criteria of a "just war."
WHAT A CROCK!
The USCCB is playing politics here. Apparently, according to the USCCB, the unprovoked bombing of another country is an unjust war when a Republican is in the Whitehouse, but when a Democrat is in the Whitehouse, it is likely a "just war" with good cause. GIVE ME A BREAK! How can I possibly take this ecclesiastical body seriously? How can anyone take it seriously?
The Catholic Knight would like to take this moment to remind his readers how ecclesiastical authority really works in the Catholic Church. First things first, the USCCB is not an authoritative Church body. It is not the same as the Vatican. It has no real authority of it's own. It is merely a coordinating body, permitted under canon law based on very restrictive criteria, with no ability to make it's legislation stick without having it first rubber-stamped by the Vatican. Individual American bishops are not required to follow the guidelines of the USCCB, and may at will, discard the USCCB's recommendations in their own dioceses. The purpose of the USCCB is to promote cooperation and coordination among American bishops, so that US Catholics can expect reasonable similarities in the way things are run from one diocese to another. That is all. The USCCB is not a "mini-Vatican." It never has been and it never will be. Real authority in the Catholic Church works like this. (1) Local priests answer to the local diocesan bishop. (2) The local diocesan bishop answers in part to the regional metropolitan archbishop, and directly to the pope and his prefects in the Vatican. (3) All bishops and archbishops answer directly to the pope and his prefects in the Vatican.
You will notice the USCCB does not factor into this threefold authority structure. That's because the USCCB is not a governing body. It is a coordinating body and nothing more. With a proper understanding of where the USCCB stands in relation to Church governance, we can begin to appreciate the full gravity of the statements it makes on political matters - which is zero gravity. The USCCB has no authority to make political statements and I dare say it has not the competence either.
Now lest my readers think I am taking political sides myself, I am not. I've had many years to reflect on the actions of George W. Bush, and I've decided that Pope John Paul II was right. The American led war against Iraq was unjust, just as the war against Serbia was unjust. So now in CONSISTENCY I say the American led war against Libya is unjust. It doesn't matter to me whether it is a Democrat or a Republican in the Whitehouse. If John McCain were the president bombing Libya right now I would say the same thing. The same goes for any other Republican presidential hopeful back in the 2008 election. My only regret is that it took me almost a decade to see the light on this. Sadly, it would appear the USCCB has not yet learned the same lesson. For my readers I'll outline the conditions of a "just war" below. It doesn't take much more than a third-grade education to understand that these criteria were not met in any of the recent wars conducted primarily by the United States in Serbia, Iraq and Libya...
Principles of the Just War From the Catechism of the Catholic Church
2309 The strict conditions for legitimate defense by military force require rigorous consideration. The gravity of such a decision makes it subject to rigorous conditions of moral legitimacy. At one and the same time: - the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain; - all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective; - there must be serious prospects of success; - the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power of modem means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition. These are the traditional elements enumerated in what is called the "just war" doctrine. The evaluation of these conditions for moral legitimacy belongs to the prudential judgment of those who have responsibility for the common good.
Disclaimer: The Catholic Knight does not endorse the ministry of Pat Robertson or CBN. This video is provided for the story contained therein.
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: It would appear that World War III is on the horizon, and the principle players will be Iran in Israel, not the United States and Russia as has been the conventional wisdom for the last half century. While the two superpowers will likely play a supportive role, Russia with Iran and the United States with Israel, so it would seem this will be a war of surrogates and the people of the Middle East will be made to suffer.
What we have here are two extremist ideologies set to clash in the not-too-distant future. The first ideology is Zionism and it is the primary cause of this conflict. In the early 20th century, European and American powers grew friendly to the idea of "recreating" the Biblical Holy Land inhabited by Jews. The unChristian notion of Anti-Semitism (what Pope Pius XI referred to as the "superstition of race") was growing throughout the West during that time, and so support for "resettlement" of Jews in Palestine seemed like a logical solution to many. For the most part Jews and Arabs got along well initially. However in 1948, with the establishment of "Israel" as a sovereign Jewish state, the Muslim Arab world erupted with rage. Multiple Arab-Israeli wars followed, with countless acts of terrorism thereafter. The State of Israel is in a perpetual state of national defense both internally and externally, with no possibility of peace in sight. Israel, and thus the Zionist agenda, is supported both politically and religiously by the United States.
Politically, the United States sees Israel as an "ally" in the Middle East. It's very presence prevents Arabs from uniting the region into an Islamic superstate, and keeps the old British district lines alive and well. The Israeli peace accords with Jordan and Egypt help to drive a deeper wedge into Islamic unity. This allows the United States to exploit oil reserves in the Arabian peninsula and Europe to exploit similar reserves in Northern Africa (primarily Libya). The Arab dictators and monarchs in North Africa and the Middle East serve as oil puppets for the West, while the real threat of Islamic unity is kept contained to the north in Iran and Syria. When the southern Arab dictators and monarchs fail to comply with European and American interests, their regimes are toppled either with CIA sponsored uprisings or Western invasions. Such was the case with Saddam Hussein in Iraq and Hosni Mubarak in Egypt. Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi has likewise been slated by the CIA for regime change. It is likely we will see other governments toppled in the region as well. All of this is designed by the CIA, and European intelligence agencies, to gain more control over the region via the creation of more Western-style democracies.
The nation of Israel is also supported primarily by the United States in a religious sense and this is through Zionism. Now Zionism is the idea that the Biblical nation of Israel should be "recreated" in the Holy Land (i.e. "Zion"). Zionism was originally a political idea, promoted by certain liberal Jewish rabbis and Protestant Freemasons in the United States and Europe during the last century. Gradually it came to be embraced by American Evangelical Christians. The largest Zionist supporters now exist in the United States, among Evangelical and Conservative Protestant churches. Zionism has two religious components which are considered extremist by traditional Christian and Jewish theologians. The Jewish idea of Zionism is the rebuilding of "Zion" (the State of Israel) with Jewish supremacy over the region, and the reconstruction of the Temple Mount, which will usher in the return of the promised Jewish Messiah who will lead the Jewish people into peace and safety among the nations, and lead the world into worship of the God of Abraham and obedience to the Seven Nohide Laws. Of course this also involves the re-establishment of the animal sacrifices in the rebuilt Jewish Temple and the re-institution of Torah Civil Law. From an Evangelical Christian perspective on Zionism, the support of these goals is only superficial, in that it is believed that once the Jews in Israel are successful in this endeavor, it will usher in the prophesied events of the apocalypse and the supernatural return of Jesus Christ. As I said, both views are considered extremist and heretical in traditional Christian and Jewish theology. However, these extremist heretical views are very popular and they are doing their part to drive events in the Middle East. Every time the nation of Israel builds a new illegal Jewish settlement on Palestinian territory (i.e. "theft"), and American Evangelicals blindly support it, we can see both Jewish and Evangelical Zionism on display.
Saddam Hussein welcomes Donald Rumsfeld to Iraq in 1983.
Shortly after the establishment of the Nation of Israel in 1948 the Arab Muslim world reacted viscerally with an extremist interpretation of the Koran not used in a thousand years. This barbaric interpretation, which has been dubbed by the West as "Islamist" is best represented in the radical views of the mullahs who run the Islamic Republic of Iran. Shortly after their coming to power in 1979, the United States sought to contain the Iranian radicals by propping up a Secular Iraqi thug named Saddam Hussein. He did America's bidding for a decade by making war against Iran, while the United States supplied him with the weapons he needed to do it. Later, Hussein discovered the United States was also supplying weapons to Iran (the "Iran-Contra Scandal"), in an attempt to keep the two powers contained in perpetual warfare. So Hussein changed his mind, made peace with Iran, and immediately turned around to attack America's interest in the oil puppet state of Kuwait. In response, President George H. Bush ("papa-Bush") ordered the invasion of Iraq and the liberation of Kuwait in what has come to be called the Gulf War. A decade later, his son President George W. Bush ordered the job complete with total regime change in what is now called the Iraq War. These events had the effect of galvanizing Islamist powers in their resolve to overturn Western influence in the region, and have caused many oil puppet regimes to question their relationship with the United States and Europe. In 2006-2007 the oil puppet states went along with all the members of OPEC and decided to reduce the production of oil. Gasoline prices surged around the world, and the United States economy, artificially inflated by the government-created real estate bubble, found itself in a very vulnerable position. American homeowners, overstretched by rising mortgage payments and high gasoline prices, began defaulting on their home loans, This caused the housing real estate bubble to collapse in 2008 during the middle of a U.S. presidential election. Of course, this enraged the Bush administration, and so according to diplomatic cables released on Wikileaks, G.W. Bush ordered the CIA to begin work on toppling the regimes of the Arab powers responsible for this. The CIA, along with European intelligence agencies, infiltrated Arab universities and education centers to provoke and encourage riots and demonstrations calling for regime change. Again, according to Wikileaks, the Obama administration continued the plan started by G.W. Bush, and was aware the riot-revolutions would begin in January of 2011. Barack Obama did nothing to stop it, and indeed expressed his support for it at every turn. His latest action, using American forces to bomb Libya, began when Gaddafi attacked the rioting demonstraters instead of resigning like Mubarack did in Egypt. This demonstrated beyond the shadow of a doubt that Barack Obama and G.W. Bush are on the same page in this. The objective here is for the the Muslim people of the Arab world to overturn their regimes (which have displeased the United States and Europe) and install new regimes that will hopefully be more friendly to American and European interests. The United States government, and European powers, believe they can control the chain of events now unfolding to produce a desirable result. There is only one problem with this plan. The ideology that fueled the Iranian Islamic revolution in 1979 has been unleashed throughout the Middle East and many of the people the CIA have been working with are now turning to extremist organizations (Hamas, Hezbollah, the Muslim Brotherhood and Al-Qaeda) instead. The supreme rebel leader in Libya has just admitted that he fought alongside the Taliban during the American incursion into Afghanistan and that most of his rebel fighters are connected to Al-Qaeda. These are the people we are helping with the NATO bombing of Libya!?! What we have here is a tremendous miscalculation on the part of American and European intelligence which has resulted in us helping our sworn enemies overthrow the dictators and monarch we originally propped up in the Arab world. As bad as these tyrants are, at least they owed a debt to the West for their power. Now that we're trying to topple them from within, they owe us nothing. The end result is, the Islamist genie is now out of the lamp and our CIA sponsored revolution is being hijacked by Islamic radicals.
As President Barack Obama attempts to explain to the American public tonight why he decided to use American military forces to help radical Islamists overthrow a cruel dictator, let us keep in mind that he is only continuing a strategy employed by both Republican and Democrat administrations over the last two decades. It is a strategy of intervention that has backfired on us at every turn. This sort of thing might work well in Latin America or even Southeast Asia, but it doesn't work well in the Arab world. The problem with the Arab world is that a radical ideology has been unleashed that infects the minds and hearts of millions of Arabs. It's an ideology over a thousand years old, resurrected to deal with the emergence of Zionism, and it is a cruel and barbaric mindset that is SURE TO SUCCEED so long as the West remains hostile to it's own Christian heritage. The last time this radical ideology was employed by the Arab world it manifested in centuries of jihad against the Christians that once owned the region. These jihads carried on into Europe where the were met by a force of retaliation they never encountered before - CRUSADES! The crusaders defeated the jihadists at their own game, and pushed them back as far as the Holy Land, even occupying Palestine for some time, before finally retreating back to Europe. The Islamic threat was effectively contained for a time - about 1,000 years. The bloody and barbaric jihadism would not be known again until the 20th century, when the West abandoned it's Christian heritage and Zionists became entrenched in the Middle East.
So what is likely to come now? It would appear the Islamist zealots running Iran have seen the end game on the horizon. They are interpreting the CIA sponsored uprisings in the oil puppet states as a "sign" that their time has come. Their prophesied "12th Imam" or "Al-Mahdi" is seen as making his appearance sometime in the near future. While mainly a Shiite belief at this time, it would appear the Iranian government is using current events to convince Sunni Muslims of it as well. I suspect they will have marginal success. Regardless of that, the unification of the Muslim world is coming, in some form or another, and that will result in greater hostility toward Israel and the United States. It certainly doesn't bode well for Europe either.
Our own Catholic prophecies tell us of a future time when Muslims and Marxists will take to the streets in Europe together, overthrowing European governments much in the same way Arab governments are being overthrown today. Perhaps this is a little of "what comes around goes around." We did it to them, and soon they will do it to us. (Maybe they'll do it in America and Canada too.) Those of us who study Catholic prophecy also know how this will end up. The Secular republics of Europe will fall (perhaps the North American republics too), and it will be up to the pope to save the day. One pope will fall, and another will rise in his place, crowning a great Christian monarch who will launch another great crusade against the jihadists one last time. Things will go differently this time. Somehow in a way we cannot fully understand in this day and age, the fall of Islam in Europe will result in the fall of Islam in the Arab world too, opening the door to Christian missionary work.
There is a significant difference between the religious prophecies of Catholicism verses those of Evangelicalism, Judaism and Islam. Catholic prophecies require us to do nothing but wait. The only action required of us is prayer and personal holiness. The Evangelical interpretation of Biblical prophecies, coupled with a whole lot of Zionist TRADITIONS, require Evangelicals to give unwavering and blind support to the Nation State of Israel. This support can be moral support, financial support or political support, but it must be support of some kind. Because, according to many Evangelical Zionist traditions, if you don't support the Secular Nation-State of Israel, God may curse you. The Jewish interpretation of prophecy, as understood by most Jews under the influence of Zionism, requires them also to commit unwavering support for the Nation-State of Israel, and the rebuilding of "Zion" which includes Jewish supremacy over the region and the rebuilding of the Temple for animal sacrifice. This is necessary for the Messiah to come, according to their beliefs. The Islamist prophecies are certainly the most extreme, requiring them to believe in militant jihad and the killing of infidels to bring about the apocalypse needed to spur the coming of their Al-Mahdi or 12th Imam. No matter how you look at it, no matter who's prophecies prevail, war is inevitable.
Tonight the President of the United States gave his reasons for the bombing of Libya. My regular readers probably already know that I don't care what they are and I don't think anything he says really matters. He's a puppet himself, who is told what to do by his handlers, just as our last president was told what to do by his handlers. There are bigger powers working behind the scenes here. We know some of their names, others remain in the shadows. The United States no longer controls it's own destiny. It hasn't for some time. Our federal government is nothing more than a tool, and it is being used to enhance the power of those who are already powerful.
I suspect what we are seeing unfold now is the slow decline of the United States and Europe. I believe the CIA sponsored rioting-coups are going to backfire. I believe the Arab world will unite under some form of Islamist caliphate because of it. I believe the State of Israel will inevitably go to war as a result. I believe the United States will be left in an economic quagmire with rising gasoline prices, mortgage defaults, inflation and another market crash. America's days of intervention in the Arab world are numbered. The same goes for Europe. Israel's fate is up for grabs, and the Muslim world is setting itself up for its final destruction. The Islamists are likely going to get what they want for a time, but in the end it will destroy them and their entire religion. Yes, this is how I see things unfolding, and all we can do is pray the rosary for the conversion of Russia. There really is no other option left for a faithful Catholic. Here's some good news in all of this. As of 2012, the Russian Federation will begin teaching religion classes in all of it's public schools. This is not the "conversion" we've been praying for, but it is a positive step in the right direction. Somehow Russia is the linchpin in all of this. So let's keep praying the rosary.
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Above you will see a clock that counts down the days, hours, minutes and seconds to the beginning of the new English mass translation. The clock is set to run on your web browser's internal timer. So it is set relative to your time zone. This means when the clock runs down to zero, it will be November 26, 2011 at 4:00 PM in your area. That is when the new English mass translation will be in full effect, and the old English mass will have been permanently suppressed. Thanks be to God!
The poor English mass translation we've been using for the last forty years has been a bulwark of the Modernist occupation of the English-speaking Church. It has allowed liberals within the Church to get away with all sorts of liturgical innovation and poor catechesis. That's not to say that liturgical innovation and poor catechesis will stop with the new translation. On the contrary, liberals will probably try all that much harder to hang on to what they've created. However, with the old translation suppressed, it's going to be a lot harder for them to do that, and the playing field has just been tilted in favor of Traditionalists within the Church. Slowly over time, Tradition will make advances as the Modernists retreat in a gradual 5 to 10 year war of attrition from that time forward. The Modernist English mass we are all so painfully familiar with today will be radically diminished by 2016 and virtually extinct by 2021. As I said, the new English translation is a game changer. I'm not alone in this assumption, as the U.S. Catholic bishops have made a similar (albeit veiled) admission on their website promoting the new translation...
What will happen after the texts are used in liturgical celebrations? The long-term goal of the new translation is to foster a deeper awareness and appreciation of the mysteries being celebrated in the Liturgy. The axiom lex orandi, lex credendi — “what we pray is what we believe” — suggests that there is a direct relationship between the content of our prayers and the substance of our faith. It is hoped that writers will start to provide materials reflecting on the rich content of the text. These contributions might encourage priests to use the content of the prayers as a basis for their homilies or to supplement their homilies on Sundays. Those giving retreats or days of recollection can use the new texts of the missal as a resource for their presentations. All can make use of the texts for deepening their prayer life.
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: This is a breaking alert. A financial coup is currently underway in the United States, and according to sources, the trap is set to be sprung in May of this year (2011). The key players are labor unions, orchestrating a mortgage strike designed to bring the U.S. stock market to it's knees. Attorney General Eric Holder has just been notified of the situation and members of congress are now calling for an investigation of financial terrorism...
March 23, 2011 The Honorable Eric H. Holder, Jr. Attorney General U.S. Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Washington, DC 20530-0001
Dear Attorney General Holder:
Recent media reports suggest that the former director of the Service Employees International Union’s (“SEIU”) banking and finance campaign has threatened to seriously endanger the welfare of the United States. In a forum at Pace University earlier this month, Stephen Lerner, the former SEIU official, revealed a “secret plan” to “cause a new financial crisis . . . destroy J.P. Morgan . . . and weaken Wall Street’s grip on power” by using “civil disobedience” to create “the conditions necessary for a redistribution of wealth and a change in government.”
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) defines terrorism as “the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.” The escalation of Mr. Lerner’s threats would clearly constitute domestic terrorism and pose substantial harm to the American people and the economy. I am therefore requesting that you investigate Mr. Lerner’s terrorist plans and notify me how the Department of Justice plans to respond to these threats.
The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform is the principal oversight committee of the House of Representatives and may at “any time” investigate “any matter” as set forth in House Rule X. An attachment to this letter provides additional information about responding to the Committee’s request.
If you have any questions regarding this request, please do not hesitate to contact [redacted]. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, _______________________ Jason Chaffetz cc: The Honorable Darrell Issa, Chairman cc: The Honorable Elijah E. Cummings, Ranking Minority Member
Conservative radio talk shows are now pointing out a deep connection between involved union bosses and the Obama administration. The situation is still developing.
The Catholic Knight warned about this in December of 2010. (see post here) The objective here is to make YOU (regular people) the instruments of their takeover. You see, they destroy the financial systems that we all rely upon, creating economic disaster, resulting in an outcry from YOU (regular people) to the government to "do something!" The government (headed by Barack Obama) is glad to help of course and institutes all sorts of Marxist solutions via executive order under the auspices of a "national emergency." The powers to enact such executive orders, were given by executive order, to the president by the president, way back in May of 2007. (see the story here) Yes, President George W. Bush effectively gave Barack Obama the power to execute the plan Marxists have been dreaming of for decades. Now we just sit back and wait for the trap to be sprung. Currently the target date is May of 2011. Maybe that date will change now that this story is being broken, maybe not, but one thing is very interesting. The mainstream media is not touching this story.
(WND) - Could President Obama's decision to sidestep Congress and strike Libya as part of an international coalition put the U.S. on a military collision course with Israel?
While the prospect of American or Western forces confronting Israeli troops may seem remote, one Middle East policy expert is warning the precedent set by Obama in agreeing to target Libya opens the door to other possible United Nations-backed confrontations, including perhaps one day with Israel.
"Particularly concerning is the prospect that what we might call the Gaddafi Precedent will be used in the not-to-distant future to justify and threaten the use of U.S. military forces against an American ally: Israel," writes Frank Gaffney Jr., president of the Center for Security Policy.
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: The whole notion seems kind of far fetched to me, but not beyond the realm of possibility. The fact that some are even considering it simply demonstrates how far the United States has fallen down the road to global empire. It's not an empire in a traditional sense but in a geopolitical sense. We are are the World's policeman you see, and it's not because the president of the United States wants to be. It's because he has to be. You see, the dirty little secret is this. The president of the United States does exactly what he is TOLD to do. He is not beholden to the people of America who elected him. No. He has a boss, and it's not us. The only problem is we don't exactly know who that boss is. We can speculate, but we don't know for sure. Yes, G.W. Bush answered to somebody else when he was president, and likewise Barack Obama does the same. Remember that.
If the United States ever finds itself in a confrontation with Israel, it's going to cause an interesting situation here at home. First, the Evangelicals will be in an uproar. I'm not talking about just being angry here. I'm talking about absolute hostility of the worst kind. Opposition to the Whitehouse will take on a religious fervor, and this will put the United States government at odds with a large portion of the American public. The potential for government violence against Evangelicals will be high, especially after some crackpots (not necessarily associated with the Evangelicals) try some terrorist stunts in the name of Zionism.
All that aside, where should Catholics stand on this. Having learned my lesson from the Iraq War in 2003, I have come to agree with the pope. All military intervention is generally a bad idea except in clear cases of self defense. So that being said, the Iraq War was a bad idea. The Libyan NATO bombing currently going on is a bad idea. Likewise, any confrontation with Israel is a bad idea as well.
It's bad enough European and American intelligence agencies are intimately involved with the popular uprisings in the Arab world, but to back these uprisings with military force from the West only proves that the West was behind these uprisings in the first place.
As a Catholic and an American I can only advise my nation to pull out of the Arab world completely. Send humanitarian aid to Christians in the region, and otherwise stay out of that hornet's nest. In my opinion, that is the Catholic position. Don't take sides, and help the persecuted Christian minority. Sadly, I seriously doubt anyone in Washington D.C. is going to listen to a practicing Catholic when it comes to foreign policy.
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: It's official! The pope's personal ordinariate for Anglican Catholics now has it's own place on the Internet. This of course simplifies things for people seeking more information and possibly reconciliation with Holy Mother Church. The number of parish groups forming in the U.K. has exploded over the last two weeks. You can visit the website by clicking here or on the image to the right.
The U.K. ordinariate was established on January 15, 2011 after Monsignor Keith Newton (a former Anglican bishop) was installed by the pope as the designated Ordinary for England and Wales and ordained into the Catholic priesthood on the same day. On March 17, 2011 he was elevated by the Holy Father to the rank of Protonotary Apostolic. Other Anglican clergy have also come over to the Catholic Church and the U.K. ordinariate now promises to become quite a considerable force in a rather short period of time. The Personal Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham, as it is officially called, will begin in earnest after Easter of this year. It is expected that other ordinariates will soon follow in the United States, Canada, Australia and other parts of the world.
The emerging U.S. ordinariate has also seen a significant increase in the number of parishes and groups that have committed to the cause. As it stands right now, the U.S. ordinariate could not be established quickly enough, as it already has a working model in place with the Anglican Use Pastoral Provision. One can only hope the Holy Father does not wait too long to establish the American ordinariate as a growing number of American Anglicans are extremely eager, practically chomping at the bit really, to come into full communion with Rome. It would be tragic for such enthusiasm and zeal to be hampered by a protracted "waiting period" before Rome makes it's next move. The United States was historically the first Anglican province outside the Church of England and has once again demonstrated it's readiness to stand side-by-side with her ordinariate brethren in the U.K. May God hasten the establishment of the U.S. personal ordinariate for Anglican Catholics.
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: I'm actually a little surprised CNN did this story, but at the same time, I guess I shouldn't be surprised with the popularity surrounding the recent Hollywood release. Of course, the reporter was careful to use such phrases a "some believe" making sure to distance CNN from confirmation of any religious teachings. (We can't have that now can we.) Nevertheless, I was pleased to see the story and if it raises public awareness to the reality of the devil and the dangers of occult practices, than it's probably a good thing.
Working in the field I do, I have encountered people whom I believe were likely possessed by demonic spirits. In all counts these were people with a history of drug abuse and the occult.
The rite of exorcism is gaining popularity among young (more traditional) priests and seminarians. Perhaps within a decade we will see at least one exorcist in every diocese.
MARCH 19, 2011 OBAMA: 'Today we are part of a broad coalition. We are answering the calls of a threatened people. And we are acting in the interests of the United States and the world'...
MARCH 19, 2003 BUSH: 'American and coalition forces are in the early stages of military operations to disarm Iraq, to free its people and to defend the world from grave danger'...
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT has taken the last eight years to learn a very important lesson. I've learned that our leaders cannot be trusted, and that lying to the American people is a regular presidential tradition. I've also taken the time to learn what is really behind Arab-American politics and have elaborated on it HERE. In that blog entry three days ago I predicted this very thing would happen.
For my fellow Catholics still in the Democratic Party, or who consider yourselves "progressive" in a political sense, please wake up and smell the coffee. I learned my lesson. Will you? When you voted for Obama in 2008, I'm sure many of you thought about the Iraq War, and believed you were electing a man of peace. You were wrong. It doesn't matter whether a presidential candidate is a Republican or Democrat anymore. Not even such a man as Barack Obama will keep the United States out of entangling wars.
Now as the United States bombs Libya with coalition forces, don't think for one second that innocent women and children aren't getting killed right alongside the bad guys. The so-called "smart bombs" haven't gotten any "smarter" since Bush left office. The exact same kind of action that killed thousands of innocent Iraqis is now killing innocent Libyans (soon by the thousands). It's no different. It's the same thing. Just because the sitting president has a "D" for "Democrat" behind his name doesn't change a thing.
Now don't get me wrong. I know our military is doing everything it can to minimize the loss of innocent life, just as they did in Iraq and Afghanistan. War, however, is messy business, and there really is no such thing as a "surgical strike." If a real surgeon operated the way a war machine does, he would be out of work and broke from malpractice lawsuits. Again, I'm not criticizing our armed forces here. They are good people who are doing everything they can, but it is the nature of warfare you see, and there are some things not even the United States military can control. In other words "stuff happens."
I've learned my lesson. Never listen to a politician over a pope. Always trust the teachings of the Church, and never trust the excuses of a government. Pope John Paul II was right when he told President G.W. Bush not to attack Iraq, and Bush was wrong to ignore him. That same principle applies in Libya. President Barack Obama has betrayed our current Pope Benedict XVI on more than one issue, most notably abortion, but now this. Will you "Progressive Catholics" and "Blue Dog Democrat Catholics" ever wake up? Or is what happened today all okay now because the man sitting in the oval office just happens to have a "D" behind his name this time?
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Hindsight being 20/20, it would appear that as we've had time to reflect on the events to 2011 thus far, patterns are emerging, and the truth is beginning to come out. Our suspicions are being confirmed.
Western Liberals, particularly in the United States, have for the past three years (at least) been working behind the scenes to create these riotous revolutions in North Africa and the Middle East. Now when I say "Liberals" I'm including Neoconservatives in the United States as well. I'm talking about everyone from the far Left (George Soros and company) to the libertarian centrist (George Bush and friends). I am not talking about the truly right wing (paleoconservative) groups, which have been disenfranchised in the United States and Europe for decades.
Information emerging from Wikileaks is starting to confirm many of the suspicions we had, but were hesitant to voice, while the riots were beginning to unfold weeks ago. What we have here is an elaborate strategy that has been executed with precision to elicit a certain response in the Arab world. The manipulation began under the George W. Bush administration and is now continuing under the administration of Barack Obama. While the United States seems to be the principle agent, European powers are likewise in collaboration. This helps to explain the United States' seeming "standoffish" posture while the riot-revolutions unfold. The United States has been intimately involved, but this has been behind the scenes and under the table. Moving in too fast in a public way would tip the world off as to what is really going on.
In dealing with the Arab world the United States us using a threefold strategy to get what it wants. Here's how it works...
First, major corporations within the United States (and Europe) pitch business deals to Arab powers, promising money and prestige to any Arab leader that will cooperate.
Next, if the first step should fail, the CIA steps in and attempts to orchestrate a revolution from inside the nation, to change the regime and place people in power who will be more willing to make business deals with American (and European) companies.
Lastly, if the second step should fail, a pretense for war is manufactured resulting in military action from American and NATO powers, again attempting to produce a regime change.
We saw this entire scenario unfold in Iraq and Afghanistan. We've been watching it unfold in Iran for about a decade now, and the plan has met considerable resistance from there with multiple failures in Step Two, and preparation being made for Step Three. In the last two months we have watched Step Two unfold all across the Arab world as more and more evidence continues to surface of deep American involvement. Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Tunisia, Bahrain, Oman, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Syria; are all experiencing unrest. So far the Saudis, Jordanians, Kuwaitis and Syrians have been able to pacify their people with financial aid to citizens and the promise of reform. Saudi Arabia has been having increasing trouble in the south and is now moving troops into Bahrain for a direct confrontation with protesters. Egypt's president, Hosni Mubarak was not so lucky, and became the first leader to be ousted in this recent clandestine Euro-American venture. The fate of Libya's dictator Muammar Gaddafi remains uncertain, though it would appear he is winning at the moment. (You will notice the emerging Euro-American pretense for war starting to develop as the West mulls over a transition to Step Three above.) If Gaddafi prevails we can probably expect the accusation of "war crimes" and "ethnic cleansing" against him to come out of Europe and the United States as they attempt to coax their people to support a military "solution."
Of coarse the logical question for anyone to ask is "WHY?" Why would the Western world do this? What is the purpose? What's the benefit? You might be surprised to learn is not about oil. There is plenty of oil all over the world, especially in North America. No, its about something a little more nuanced called "peak oil." What is "peak oil?" Here's is the definition from Wikipedia...
(Wikipedia) - Peak oil is the point in time when the maximum rate of global petroleum extraction is reached, after which the rate of production enters terminal decline. This concept is based on the observed production rates of individual oil wells, and the combined production rate of a field of related oil wells. The aggregate production rate from an oil field over time usually grows exponentially until the rate peaks and then declines—sometimes rapidly—until the field is depleted. This concept is derived from the Hubbert curve, and has been shown to be applicable to the sum of a nation’s domestic production rate, and is similarly applied to the global rate of petroleum production. Peak oil is often confused with oil depletion; peak oil is the point of maximum production while depletion refers to a period of falling reserves and supply.
Now to translate this into common English here is what it means. There is plenty of oil all over the earth. In fact, there is considerable evidence mounting that oil isn't even a "fossil fuel" and that it's actually produced as a byproduct of geological forces deep inside the earth. NASA believes that there is evidence of oil on other worlds with high volcanic activity, and so if that is the case, it can't be the result of decaying dinosaurs and plant life as previously thought. All that aside nobody is talking about oil depletion here, as it would appear that oil may very well be a renewable source of perpetual energy provided by geological-volcanic activity deep beneath the earth's surface. So if the modern science is right, the earth will never run out of oil. It just takes time for the oil to bubble up high enough in the earth's crust for us to drill down and get it. That being said we run into another problem. It's not about how much oil exists, or will exist in the future. It's about how much oil can be extracted at a time even if every country is using all of its resources to get at it. When you reach the maximum extraction rate possible, and the amount of oil consumption surpasses that, you have reached "peak oil." In other words, it's not about how much refined oil hits the market, but rather it's about how fast it's being consumed by the industrial world. Once you hit "peak oil" fuel prices go up, way up, and that slows down economies and threatens economic growth. Without economic growth a nation's political power and corporate hegemony begins to decline, and that spells bad news for the people in charge.
Ever since the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991 a new bipolar conflict has emerged between the United States and Russia. That conflict is over peak oil, and both the United States and Russia are trying to gain control of as much oil producing countries as possible to gain the upper hand when peak oil occurs. It's expected to occur sometime within the next few decades, so each superpower it vying for as much control as possible. The nation that has the most control over the most oil production suffers the least in a peak oil world economy. The Soviet Union lists as it's oil "producers" most of the "stan" states (Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan) along with Azerbaijan, Ukraine and Iran. Within these states exist vital pipelines and oil fields supplying the new Russian Federation. Recently, the United States attempted to cut a deal with the nation of Georgia, promising oil revenue from the West and military protection under NATO. This was considered a political "invasion" into the Russian sphere of influence and resulted in a Russian military counter-invasion of Georgia in 2008. Russia seized a northern province in Georgia that contained the coveted oil pipeline, and accused Georgia of "ethnic cleansing" to justify it. (This was a direct "thumb in the nose" to NATO allies which accused Serbia of the same thing in Kosovo to justify the NATO bombing of this Russian ally in the late 1990s.) It was a little case of what comes around goes around.
Among America's allied oil producers are most South American nations and many nations within the Arab world. However, the United States has run into a problem lately. The Arab world has been getting "uppity" in recent decades, namely since the creation of OPEC and the tight control of oil production which dictates fuel prices. The United States took it's currency off the gold standard in 1971 and indirectly placed it on the "oil standard" in that oil is now traded in U.S. dollars. Thus as a result, when the price of oil goes up the dollar is weaker, and when the price of oil goes down the dollar is stronger.
After the economic collapse of the United States and Europe in late 2008, the western economies were propped up artificially with various bailout "stimulus packages" created by Western governments. The United States of course led the way with the largest stimulus package and the printing of U.S. dollars to pay for it. With this massive injection of liquidity (money printing) of U.S. dollars into foreign markets, the price of food rapidly increased creating inflation. These increased food prices destabilized various economies that trade in U.S. dollars, particularly the Arab nations. Euro-American involvement in clandestine populace movements sponsored riots and revolutions in these nations. The idea here was to force Arab leaders to start pumping more oil to stabilize the U.S. dollar and give the Western world an upper hand in the emerging peak oil economy. Those leaders that don't comply face more protests, riots and revolutions to come. It's a nasty little game we're playing to maintain our political influence, economic prowess and corporate hegemony. We're doing it to keep the Russians from getting the upper hand and maintain our superpower status both domestically and internationally.
The problem here is this is how we're treating our supposed "allies" in the Arab world. Granted, they haven't been treating us too nicely in recent decades, but nevertheless, we need their support to prevent Russia from gaining a peak oil advantage. Supporting and sponsoring riots and revolutions within the nations of your supposed "allies" is not very conducive to good relations. We're effectively acting more like a bully than a friend. The only way this pays off for the United States and Europe is if it's successful, and regime changes occur all throughout the Arab world, but even then it's risky business, because if those new regimes are taken over by radicals, we could be in a lot of trouble. Furthermore, if these riot-revolutions are not successful, we have just effectively pissed off our "allies" who give us the upper hand in a peak oil economy. On thing is for sure, if Gaddafi survives the attempted coupe in his nation of Libya, he'll never sell another drop of oil to Europe again. His oil will go to Russia instead.
The problem with Western Liberals (both Leftist Socialists and Centrist Libertarians) is that they both believe their economic models will work just fine in the Arab world since they have proved to work so swimmingly well in the Western world. (Well, sort of.) So the Centrist Libertarians (otherwise known as the Neoconservatives of George W. Bush and company) have pushed to recreate the Arab world in the Western world's image, assuming that this will result in greater oil trading partners over time. While the Leftist Socialists (George Soros and company) also believe their models will work well in the Arab world and so they likewise work with the Centrist Libertarians to accomplish the same goal of regime change. In the end however, their final objectives are considerably different. The Centrist Libertarians (Neoconservatives) would like to create a world where the United States and Europe have the upper hand in a peak oil economy, while the Leftist Socialists envision a new order in which there is an "open society" whereby socialist nations trade oil on equal footing. Both groups are terribly mistaken.
The Arab world isn't going to fall for the Neoconservative or Socialist vision. The Arab world has it's own vision and that is Shariah law. Now there are various degrees of this vision, and a lot of it depends on what part of the Arab world we're talking about, but the basic premise of the vision is shared throughout. They envision Islamic Sharia, under Arab political prowess, with their own economic hegemony. The United States and Russia can just be dammed as far as their concerned. So long as their leaders continue to cooperate with both superpowers they will be vulnerable to uprisings. Right now the Islamic religious leaders in the Arab world are using the subversion of the CIA to their advantage. They know that once their leaders are overthrown there will be a period of vulnerability which they can use to seize power. It's happened before (Iran in 1979), and it will likely happen again. Both the United States and Russia are playing with fire here, but the United States is more deeply entangled, at least as far as we can tell for now. It is likely the whole thing will blow up in our faces in the not-too-distant future.
Those of us familiar with Catholic prophecy concerning the Chastisement of God (which we are now in and will likely soon conclude) will result in the fall of Europe to Muslim and Marxist powers in an upheaval of anarchy. This may very well be payback for Euro-American subversion in the Arab world. We also know that Russia is involved in this somehow, and it would appear the United States is strangely silent, as if we are unable to do anything. We know this results in the fall of the Vatican in Rome, the assassination of our pope, and the rise of a new pope in exile who will crown a new French king that will eventually reestablish the Holy Roman Empire. We also know that nothing short of a direct intervention from God, a disaster of epic proportions and unrivaled in all of recorded history, will be the decisive blow to the powers of evil in this age. Before that happens however, the Church in Europe will be decimated, and European Christians will face the threshold of extinction. Exactly when and how this will all unfold is not known to us at this time, but with each passing month the emerging picture becomes a little more clear.
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Yes, morality does play a direct role in economics, and America's moral crisis is now followed by an economic crisis of unprecedented levels...
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Japan's super-earthquake (magnitude 8.8 to 9.1 depending on the news source) is a warning to the world of more to come...
(CNA) - The city of Akita, which experienced fire damage and flooding along with many parts of northern Japan, is a place of veneration for Catholics.
In 1973, the Virgin Mary was said to have predicted a number of future events – including natural disasters even more serious than Friday's earthquake and tsunami – during three appearances to a Japanese religious sister, Sr. Agnes Sasagawa.
The purported appearances of the Virgin Mary in Japan were reviewed by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger in 1988. During his time as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith prior to his election as Pope Benedict XVI, he let stand the local bishop’s judgment that the apparitions and the messages were acceptable for the faithful.
The messages warned of chaos within the Church, and disasters which could afflict the world...
The apparition of Our Lady of Akita occurred just 90 miles away from the greatest devastation resulting from the super-earthquake and tsunami in Japan. The events of last week, followed by the tragic aftermath of this week, bring our attention to this apparition in 1973...
What follows below is the full text of the prophecy from Our Lady of Akita to Sr. Agnes Sasagawa on October 13, 1973 which was the fifty-sixth anniversary of the miracle of the sun in Fatima Portugal....
"My dear daughter, listen well to what I have to say to you. You will inform your superior."
"As I told you, if men do not repent and better themselves, the Father will inflict a terrible punishment on all humanity. It will be a punishment greater than the deluge, such as one will never have seen before. Fire will fall from the sky and will wipe out a great part of humanity, the good as well as the bad, sparing neither priests nor faithful. The survivors will find themselves so desolate that they will envy the dead. The only arms which will remain for you will be the Rosary and the Sign left by My Son. Each day recite the prayers of the Rosary. With the Rosary, pray for the Pope, the bishops and priests.
"The work of the devil will infiltrate even into the Church in such a way that one will see cardinals opposing cardinals, bishops against bishops. The priests who venerate me will be scorned and opposed by their confreres (other priests); churches and altars will be sacked; the Church will be full of those who accept compromises and the demon will press many priests and consecrated souls to leave the service of the Lord.
"The demon will be especially implacable against souls consecrated to God. The thought of the loss of so many souls is the cause of my sadness. If sins increase in number and gravity, there will be no longer pardon for them.
"With courage, speak to your superior. He will know how to encourage each one of you to pray and to accomplish works of reparation.
"It is Bishop Ito, who directs your community."
"You have still something to ask? Today is the last time that I will speak to you in living voice. From now on you will obey the one sent to you and your superior.
"Pray very much the prayers of the Rosary. I alone am able still to save you from the calamities which approach. Those who place their confidence in me will be saved."
The apparition at Akita is a warning both to the Japanese people and to the world. It is a message intimately linked to the apparition at Fatima as evidenced by the date of the prophecy given above. Akita testifies to Fatima, and Fatima testifies to Japan as follows...
Exactly what is the message of Fatima? For the average laymen it amounts to just three things....
Repent of your sins.
Believe the gospel.
Pray the rosary.
It is essentially the same message given at Akita.
According to this prophecy at Akita, and many others from many places around the world, what Japan has just suffered will be magnified and spread throughout the world in the not-too-distant future. The people of Japan now bear a great burden, to repent of their sins, turn to Jesus Christ, and spread to the world the message of warning His mother gave to them in 1973. They MUST do this. The message was given to them. It is their burden to carry. May God give them the strength to do just that and heal their nation. May God give us all the strength to continue to pray the rosary and plead for His mercy.
Our Lady of Akita, pray for us.
St. Peter Baptist, martyr and patron of Japan, pray for us.
St. Francis Xavier, patron of Japan, pray for us.
St. Paul Miki, martyr, pray for us.
St. Anthony Dainan, martyr, pray for us.
St. Anthony Ishida, martyr, pray for us.
St. Francis Nagasaki, martyr, pray for us.
St. Francis of St. Bonaventure, martyr, pray for us.
St. Gabriel Jusuke, martyr, pray for us.
St. Gaius Francis, martyr, pray for us.
St. James Kisai, martyr, pray for us.
St. Joachim Sakachibara, martyr, pray for us.
St. John Kokumbuku, martyr, pray for us.
St. John Soan de Goto, martyr, pray for us.
St. Leonard Kimura, martyr, pray for us.
St. Leo Tanaka, martyr, pray for us.
St. Louis Ibachi, martyr, pray for us.
St. Louise of Omura, martyr, pray for us.
St. Matthias of Meako, martyr, pray for us.
St. Michael Kozaki, martyr, pray for us.
St. Paul Aybara, martyr, pray for us.
St. Peter Shukeshiko, martyr, pray for us.
St. Romanus Aybara, martyr, pray for us.
St. Thomas Danki, martyr, pray for us.
St. Thomas Kozaki, martyr, pray for us.
St. Vincent Kaun, martyr, pray for us.
Holy Martyrs of Japan, pray for us.
God our Father,
you guide everything in wisdom and love.
Accept the prayers we offer for the nation of Japan;
by the wisdom of their leaders and integrity of their citizens,
may their suffering be lessened,
may harmony and justice be restored
and may there be lasting prosperity and peace.
We ask this through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son,
who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit,
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: We are living in a very historic time. We have been warned, and many people believe we are already in the Chastisement of God prophetically foretold by Catholic saints and mystics in previous centuries. If indeed we are already in this Chastisement, it likely began in 1938 with the beginning of World War II and could last until 2038. The children of Fatima warned us that Our Lady foretold if the people did not repent, a greater war than World War I would follow, under the reign of Pope Pius XI, after a strange light in the night sky over Europe. On January 25th 1938, during the reign of Pope Pius XI, a solar storm produced an Aurora Borealis that was seen all over Europe and North America -- as far south as California in the United States. These lights were seen by Hitler himself and he took it as a "sign" to begin his war plans. On February 4th 1938, less than two weeks after the aurora was seen by the world, Hitler promoted himself to military chief in Germany. A month later he marched his army into Austria. This was one of the early aggressions that started World War II. At that point the Fatima prophecies cease to be conditional.
Did the Chastisement of God, foretold by our Catholic saints and mystics, begin in 1938? Is this the 75 to 100 year war of Satan against Christ's Church foretold by Pope Leo XIII in 1884, exactly 33 years before the Fatima apparitions? If indeed 1938 was the starting point, than the end point would be anywhere between 2013 and 2038. It is the last portion of this Chastisement (particularly the last four and a half years) which is prophesied to be the most bloody and the most terrifying. If the prophecies are accurate, this period will conclude with a cleansing of the Church, the fall of a good pope, the rise of a great pope in his place, and the coronation of a great Christian monarch in Europe that will mark the end of multiculturalism and secular republics. France is prophesied to produce this monarch.
As we look at the world around us it appears that many of the events that seemed so impossible in generations past are now becoming more of a plausibility. The three secrets of Fatima underscored a theme of apostasy for Europe. That has already occurred, as Europeans turned away from Christianity in record numbers after World War II. The whole continent is now "post-Christian." As a result, Europe is now falling to Islam in a cultural sense. Europe had already been plagued by Marxists for the last century. A Muslim-Marxist nexus seems inevitable now. The riotous events and civil wars now unfolding in the Islamic nations of North Africa and the Middle East mark the beginning of a new popular Islamic era that is sure to become increasingly unfriendly to the Western world. The multiculturalism in France, and other European nations, combined with the lack of Christian faith that swept the continent since World War II, is spawning a new wave of conservative nationalism, forcing European leaders in France, Germany and Britain to admit that multiculturalism is a complete failure. While we must say that recognition of the problem is a step in the right direction, we must also acknowledge that it's too little too late, and the events unfolding have reached the irreversible state. All of Europe will soon be plunged into civil war, likely to occur anytime within the next two decades, and the outcome will change the course of world history.
As for North America, particularly the United States, Canada and Mexico, there is only one defense. The only thing standing between us an a fate similar to Europe is a healthy and robust Christianity. Our governments need to stop attacking the values of our Christian faith, and our people need to turn back to Christianity in large numbers. This is the U.S. Catholic Church's grand opportunity to seize the moment and reclaim the majority of America's secular population for Rome. Sadly we don't see much effort in this regard coming from the general Roman Rite. Hopefully, with the grace of God, the emerging Anglican ordinariates in North America will do their part to pick up the slack. If they don't, or if the general Roman Rite doesn't awaken from it's long slumber, the United States and Canada may soon be facing a similar fate as Europe.
St. John of God, Patron of Publishers Pray for us!
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: On January 21st, 2011 the Missouri Catholic Conference Messenger ran a number of articles outlining it's case against the Missouri Jobs Act, otherwise known as the "Missouri Fair Tax." This series of articles was very condemning of the measure, creating the illusion that the legislation harmed the poor and opposed the social teachings of the Catholic Church. Catholic Missourians reading the articles were likely to walk away with the notion that one cannot support the measure and still remain a Catholic in good standing with the Church. To make matters worse, the Missouri Catholic Conference (MCC) cites as it's board of directors the Catholic bishops of the State of Missouri (Archbishop Robert J. Carlson, Bishop Edward Rice, Bishop John R. Gaydos, Bishop James V. Johnston and Bishop Robert W. Finn). The "Messenger" claims to write on behalf of the MCC and as a voice for Missouri's Catholic bishops.
There were two things I found particularly disturbing about this. The first was the way the articles were written. They left the reader with the impression that there was no redeeming quality to the Missouri Jobs Act, thus giving the reader the false impression that one cannot support it and remain a good Catholic. The second was that the lead article was written by a person who may not necessarily have the best interests in mind for Missouri's Catholic bishops or the Catholic Church's social teaching in general.
Amy Blouin
Amy Blouin is the Founder and Executive Director of the Missouri Budget Project which David Catanese of KY3 News in Springfield Missouri described as a "liberal leaning" organization. Ironically, she is the former Director of Advocacy for Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of St. Louis from 2001 to 2003. While she doesn't appear to be working within the internal structures of the Catholic Church anymore, she apparently still has connections with the MCC and the "Messenger."
A snapshot of Rep. Oxford's blog taken on 3/8/2011 Click Image To Enlarge
While it is difficult to discern Blouin's personal political leanings with a brief search on the Internet, we can learn a lot about somebody from the things she says and the people she associates with. Blouin's father, who was a Democratic Congressman in Iowa and ran for Governor in 2006, was listed as having a significant influence on her life in an interview with the St. Louis Business Journal in 2008. Blouin also listed her husband, Joe Squillace who teaches as an adjunct professor at Saint Louis University School of Social Work, as a significant influence who encouraged her to start the Missouri Budget Project. Background aside, what is revealing about Amy Blouin and Joe Squillace is their apparent connection to Democratic Missouri Representative Jeanette Mott Oxford - the first open lesbian elected to the Missouri Legislature. Representative Oxford is pro-abortion, and in 2010 received a "Pro-Choice" grade from NARAL. Oxford also appears to be a supporter of same-sex unions. The connection between Oxford and Blouin comes from a post on Oxford's own Internet blog dated July 14, 2006 in which she claimed a fundraising Party at Amy Blouin and Joe Squillace's home for her reelection would be held on Thursday, July 27, 2006 from 5:30 to 7:30 p.m. and would be co-hosted by "Amy and Joe."
Assuming this information from the State Congresswoman is accurate, and we have no reason to believe it isn't, it would appear that Amy Blouin has no problem actively supporting (even hosting fundraisers) for political candidates who oppose the Church's most basic social teachings against abortion and gay-marriage. This gives us some background context for Mrs. Blouin's article in the "Messenger."
Before I dig into the article, and Mrs. Blouin's consistently left-wing bias on many issues she speaks to on behalf of the Missouri Budget Project, I would like to ask some questions. Why is this person writing articles for the Missouri Catholic Conference? Do the bishops on the MCC's Board of Directors approve of people writing opinion articles on their behalf, who think so little of the Church's teaching against gay-marriage and abortion, and doing so in a newspaper that reports to speak for them? If Amy Blouin demonstrated such egregious lack of judgment, as to support and fund raise for an open lesbian candidate who supports the murder of innocent unborn children, why would the bishops of the MCC trust her judgment on any lesser social issue? Let alone, why would they let her speak for them on it? Furthermore, what has become of the "Missouri Catholic Conference Messenger?" Is it nothing more than a soapbox for Left-wing activists promoting their agenda under the cloak of episcopal representation? Is this how Missouri's Catholic bishops want to be represented?
Now while The Catholic Knight does not personally know the minds of the bishops of the MCC, I have been able to ascertain from their writings, statements and homilies that they are not men who would likely condone this. I am left with the impression that the bishops of the MCC may not know (or may not have been fully informed) of the issue at hand, and the type of representation they got in Amy Blouin's article. I suspect they may actually be misinformed by those running the MCC "Messenger." I admit this is just an opinion on my part, but based on the evidence I've just presented above, I think it's a fair assumption. In light of this, the bishops of the MCC may want to revisit this issue and perhaps investigate the way things are being run by the administrative staff of the MCC with particular attention to the kind of message that is being printed in the "Messenger." Furthermore, to address the damage that may have been done to the conscience of Missouri's Catholics, the bishops might want to consider some form of statement, or press release, that addresses the matter directly. These are just my humble suggestions, for as it stands right now, thanks to the January 21st edition of the Messenger, it would be fair to assume that a large number of Missouri Catholics are under the impression that they can't be good Catholics and support the Missouri Jobs Act at the same time. This impression almost appears to bear the seal of Missouri's Catholic bishops, or at least that's the notion that was created by the Messenger.
Another notion created by the Messenger is the idea that matters of economics and taxation trump the Church's social message of abortion and same-sex marriage. This message was created by giving Amy Blouin such a prominent position in the newspaper. Her apparent support and fund raising for a pro-abortion lesbian candidate is scandalous to say the least, especially when she is placed in a position to speak for the bishops in their own newspaper. One can only wonder how many Missouri Catholics now think fiscal matters and taxation are more important than abortion and family. Again, this is another issue the bishops of the MCC may want to publicly address.
All that aside, let's get down to the nitty gritty of the topic at hand. The subject of the article written by Blouin was about the Missouri Jobs Act, sometimes referred to loosely as the "Missouri Fair Tax." Other articles written by different columnists followed - all of them negative. Now the MCC opposes the Missouri Jobs Act, and Amy Blouin's article was used to back their position. How much Blouin's article influenced the MCC is not clear, but it is certain the MCC is using articles written by this Left-leaning activist to bolster their position.
With all of the pressing social issues that surround us today, one would think Catholic newspapers would be preoccupied with addressing the big three - Life, Family and School Choice. Certainly the Wisconsin bishops have wisely decided to stay neutral in the ongoing dispute between labor unions and state budget cuts. To clarify the Wisconsin bishops' stand on the ongoing labor/budget dispute, Bishop Morlino of the Diocese of Madison issued the following statement...
...The teaching of the Church allows for persons of good will to disagree as to which horn of this dilemma should be chosen, because there would be reasonable justification available for either alternative. (This is unlike the case of abortion or euthanasia, for which reason can offer absolutely no justification in terms of the killing of an innocent victim.)...
This was a wise move indeed, as these bishops know full well that Catholics can hold to good-faith positions on both sides of the issue. Pope Benedict recently pointed out that the pressing issues facing modern civilization can be summarized as the...
"protection of life in all its stages, from the first moment of conception to natural death; recognition and promotion of the natural structure of the family -- as a union between a man and a woman based on marriage -- and its defense from attempts to make it juridically equivalent to radically different forms of union which in reality harm it and contribute to its de-stabilization, obscuring its particular character and its irreplaceable social role, and the protection of the right of parents to educate their children."
- (Pope Benedict XVI, March 30, 2006).
In a society where literally none of these big three necessities are met, one would think Catholic newspapers would focus on them with the full intensity of a red-hot laser beam, shuffling the other issues (such as budgets, taxes, government spending, etc.) to a secondary status.
Not so with the Missouri Catholic Conference Messenger, which for 2011 seems to have decided to put the issue of state taxes at the top of the list. Now Missouri is not like the West Coast or New England states with crushing state income and property taxes that burden families. In fact, Missouri ranks about middle of the road in income and property taxes in comparison to the rest of the country. The Missouri legislature is not contemplating a tax hike that threatens families either. No, what the Missouri state legislature is contemplating is a complete change in THE WAY it collects taxes. The Missouri Jobs Act is Missouri's version of the increasingly popular nationwide Fair Tax proposal. The measure is designed to attract jobs to the state of Missouri, which in the end is the greatest form of social justice and option for the poor in a depressed economy facing a "jobless recovery." Across the nation, economists of all stripes have pointed out that legislation of this kind would indeed attract business and grow the economy.
Here's how it works. All current state income, capital gains and sales taxes are completely eliminated. In exchange, the state implements a low state-wide sales tax on all newretail goods and services, gradually phased in over five years. There is no tax on the sale of used goods, income, investments or savings. The plan assures the changes will be revenue neutral for the state and local communities in each year of transition and allows revenue to grow as the state and local economies grow. Now before we go on let's review...
All current state income, capital gains and sales taxes are completely eliminated.
These are replaced with a single state-wide retail sales tax, onnewretail goods and services that is phased in over five years.
No used goods, income, investments or savings are taxed.
Now of course, any good Catholic should ask the question "what about the poor?" Yes, that's a good question. How are we to insure that the poor do not pay the same sales tax rate as the rich on the basic necessities they need to survive and thrive in Missouri's economy? This issue is specifically addressed with a sales tax prebate that is paid out to all Missouri citizens, compensating them fully for all taxes paid on basic retail necessities based on the poverty line. That means nobody in extreme poverty pays retail sales taxes, reducing the retail sales tax rate for the average Missourian in extreme poverty to zero percent (0%). This is because people in extreme poverty obviously can't buy as much retail goods to begin with. The prebate insures that when they do buy retail goods (or have to buy retail goods) they will pay no state sales tax on those goods. Those who buy more retail goods will obviously pay a slightly higher average percentage (1%, 2%, 3%, etc.) when averaged out with the prebate, depending on how much they spend. It is an established fact that people who make more money tend to spend more money. Those who make the most money, will obviously spend the most money, and those people will in turn pay the highest average percentage of retail sales tax. No income tracking mechanism is needed because the percentages average out on their own based on the prebate and how much you spend. If you spend below the poverty line you pay 0%. If you only spend a little above that, your average sales tax might be around 1% or less. If you spend a little more, it may go up to 2%, all by itself, based on averages, because everyone is reimbursed with a prebate based on the poverty line. What makes this system unique is that it requires considerably less money to operate, as the collection system is already in place at every cash register in the state. It's no different than collecting the state sales tax already collected at Missouri's cash registers....
So now the most commonly asked questions follow...
Is this system perfect? The answer is no. That's because no system is perfect.
Is this system impossible to cheat? Again, the answer is no. There are ways to cheat the system, but then there are even more ways to cheat the current income and sales tax system already in place in Missouri. Besides, this new system will eliminate far more cheating than that, in the sense that people who currently don't pay Missouri taxes (criminals, illegal aliens, people who are paid "under the table") will now pay Missouri taxes every time they buy something at the cash register.
Is the system absolutely and perfectly fair? No. That's because no system of taxation is absolutely and perfectly fair, but in many ways it's a lot more fair and reasonable than the current system.
Is this system better than the current system? Now that's up for debate. A lot of it depends on how you look at at. The truth is nobody really knows the answer, because nothing like this has ever been implemented anywhere in the world before. It is truly a unique and different idea that has yet to be tried. Now this idea is growing in popularity, and in time somebody will try it. It may be another U.S. state, or it may be a completely different country, but somebody somewhere is going to try this eventually. When they do there is a very strong likelihood that state or country is going to experience some economic growth and an increase in jobs. So the question is should Missouri be the first to try it? That is the question before the Missouri state legislature now. It's a question that should get a fair hearing and does not deserve to be crushed prematurely by rogue episcopal newspapers leaving Missouri Catholics with the false impression that no good Catholic can support this.
The Catholic Knight holds to the position that issues of taxes and economics are secondary compared to the far more pressing social issues of abortion and gay-marriage. I think I'm in good company, as the pope holds to a similar point of view. That being said, I am certain that good Catholics can hold good-faith positions on both sides of the Missouri Jobs Act. This is an issue that should be up for healthy debate in which Catholics are free to support or oppose without feeling bullied by rogue newspapers claiming episcopal representation.
Now there are a few issues that are of direct concern to Catholics, which I will attempt to address fairly here. The first has to do with the accusation that Catholic parents would be forced to pay sales tax on the tuition for Catholic schools. This accusation is completely false according to Carl Bearden, the Executive Director of United For Missouri, who points out that under the current legislation proposed no charitable organization will be made to collect the sales tax and no taxes will be collected on any level of education. Meanwhile, the Messenger painted a completely different picture, leading readers to believe churches and religious schools would be taxed. This is misleading.
The Messenger also leads readers to believe that the poor would be taxed disproportionately. As pointed out above, this is simply not the case, as the extremely poor would pay no tax at all, and those who spend at levels just above that would pay an extremely low average sales tax, compared to people with higher incomes and spending, once the prebate is factored in. Also as pointed out above, the legislation rewards thrift. So people who shop at second hand stores, garage sales, swap meets, flea markets, and so on will not pay any state sales tax whatsoever. The legislation encourages the poor to save their money by buying second hand items whenever possible. Once again, the Messenger gets it wrong and misleads readers into false information about the bill.
As I pointed out above, churches and private charities will pay no taxes under the current form of the bill. In Tennessee, which has no state income tax, charitable giving is much higher than Missouri, even though Missouri has a specific income tax deduction for charitable giving. In other words, Tennessee Catholic parishes are collecting more tithes per family than Missouri parishes. Yet the Messenger would have you believe churches will lose money under the Missouri Jobs Act. Once again we have misleading information from the Messenger.
Finally, the Messenger paints the picture that Missouri's public services will suffer under the proposed legislation, that revenue will be cut, and there simply won't be enough money to go around anymore. Well, that's a pretty bold assumption when you consider that not even the State Auditor Tom Schweich could make such a claim. Schweich admitted that the cost or savings to the state could not be determined at this time. However, we can look at other nearby states that have eliminated their income tax in favor of a sales tax, and what we see is that indeed these states do have the necessary revenue to keep their public services operational and sufficiently funded. Proponents of the Missouri Jobs Act never claimed it was a panacea to solve all of Missouri's financial woes. What they claim is that the legislation will simplify the tax code, eliminate the need for Missourians to report their income to the state, attract more jobs to the state, and be just as fair to the poor as the current system if not more so.
Yes, Missouri Catholics CAN support the Fair Tax. They can also choose not to support it. It's a matter for an informed conscience and open debate. Catholics can hold good-faith positions on both sides of the issue, and still be good Catholics in good standing with the Church, and I dare say remain in good standing with the Catholic bishops of Missouri. Again, it would be helpful if Missouri's bishops would publicly address this issue themselves, since the MCC has already seen fit to address it for them in such a troubling and confusing way. Until then I want to encourage my fellow Catholic Missourians to get both sides of the story, look into this matter carefully, and not be bullied by rogue Catholic newspaper columnists who claim to be speaking for the bishops of Missouri. But you don't need to take my word for it. If you want to know what your bishop really thinks, write him a letter and just ask. "Dear Bishop, Is it possible for a Catholic to hold a good faith position on either side of the debate surrounding the Missouri Jobs Act?" The Catholic Knight says "yes," while the Messenger seems to say "no." Maybe it's time for Missouri's Catholic bishops to research both sides of the debate and speak for themselves on the matter.
