More Evidence that the Catholic Church is Evil

Now that Glen Beck is against the Catholic Church, I may have to convert.

I'm not sure I even get Glen Beck.   I'll have to check it out.  A while back, several companies pulled their advertising from his show due to pressure from African American organizations.   Back then, that left only bumpers and Faux News advertising during his show for the most part, meaning, Beck wasn't bringing in any add revenue.   

If that's still the case, then we know for sure Beck is being allowed to spew his insanity because Rupert Murdock wants him to, and can't hide behind even the stinky excuse of his show making money.

Religious Republican voters probably have no place in their plans for the future as it was in Vichy France and Nazi Germany. Conservatives of then and today are onlty required to conform to the ideology but not immerse themselves totally. Total immersion is for the current youngest and for future generations. Beck will be considered Goebbels-lite in comparison to propagandists of the near future. Like the Nazis did, they are already lying to Americans and Canadians that civilians in VietNam, and today in Afghanistan and Iraq etc are not targeted for murder by the army. And this is as much a lie today as it was for Germans with respect to Poles etc. Like Hitler once declared, our fearless leaders bomb and invade other countries for humanitarian reasons, or democracy or whatever the bullshit happens to be. Beck is a low level propagandist. Only children and the more soft-minded conservatives would believe his bullshit.

Who does not understand the antipathy of fundamentalist churches toward the Catholic church, and what is a propagandistic blurb from Fox about such a blatant attack by a monstrous, self-oriented and pathological belief system doing in this forum?   Are folks here so naive about the objectives of the  American evangelical movement?  Robertson is a moving force behind such filth.

Glenn Beck wrote:

Later, Beck held up cards, one with a hammer and sickle and other with a swastika. "Communists are on the left, and the Nazis are on the right. That's what people say. But they both subscribe to one philosophy, and they flew one banner. . . . But on each banner, read the words, here in America: 'social justice.' They talked about economic justice, rights of the workers, redistribution of wealth, and surprisingly, democracy."

I think what Beck is trying to say is that if the plutocracy is ever threatened by communism in future, capitalist fangs will be bared for all the world to see, once again. Capitalism is fascism with the mask on.

During a crucial period in world history, from  the 1930's to 1949, communism was the only effective opposition to fascist aggression in Russia and China.

And what's on the agenda today with "the grand chess board" scheme of things?  The military encirclement of Russia and China, of course.

George Victor wrote:

Just not a commercial encirclement.  That's what China is doing to everyone else,

George, there are more than 1.3 billion of them in that country alone. Add India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia, SE Asia, and a few more, and the numbers are way lopsided in their favour whether democracy is the rule or not. This is the economic system they were forced to follow. The capital road is the only road they can take without incurring the wrath of superimperialists here in the west. I think cold war imperialists neglected to forsee a situation where those countries would compete for dwindling world resources with our capitalist imperialists though. China was supposed to be ruled by their running dog Chiang Kai-shek and subsist as the Asian equiv of the Africa and just another thirdworld colony for the supply of raw materials and cheap labour(as it is now) but not the strong nationalist country that it is today. Their's were once the largest economies in world history. They will be again.

KeyStone wrote:

Fox News commnetator Glen Beck has pretty much singled out the Catholic church as one you should run away from as fast as you can. His reasoning:

The use the term social justice, and since both Communists and Nazis also used that term, then clearly all three groups must be the same.

I am not making this up. Glen Beck really thinks Americans are that stupid.

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/03/08/glenn-beck-urges-listeners-to-le...

He doesn't seem to be singling out Catholics. He's attacking christian churches that preach social justice. (By the way, Glen Beck was raised Catholic and is now a Mormon.)

The Catholic Church has a lot of evil in it. Ratzinger was more concerned with crushing liberation theologists and promoting conservative sects than protecting children from pedophiles.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article7060406.ece

George Victor wrote:

Liberation theology was crushed by the 1980s. But I can't imagine the evangelicals ever taking such a tack as liberating the peasantry ....well, perhaps their souls....  I refer you to Gregory Baum's Catholics and Canadian Socialism: Political Thought in the Thirties and Forties for some background on the differences. Radical Catholic thought on the "left" today is simmering on hold.

And the use of "evil" as a descriptor should be left to those of Christian faith...Catholic or Calvinist in origin, don't you think?

Liberation theology was not crushed by the 1980s; in 1985, it was still being heavily attacked. It exists today, but it is still being crushed. I use the example of Peru. In the altiplano of Puno, Peru liberation theologists were removed by force no more than 2 or 3 years ago. Liberation theologists were operating a rather extensive program in a very marxist section of the country (not surprisingly, Opus Dei had an archbishop in the hot zone of the Shining Path in the 1980s and 1990s, and they currently have one placed in the other leftist politicized zone of Cusco that neighbours Puno).

As for evil, consider it my idiosyncracy and an adoption of Christianity's lexicon. I think a bunch of right-wingers who try and stabilize their interests and ultimately the colonial project by using religion are pretty damn evil.

I think that if all religion was ended tomorrow, fascists would not be inconvenienced. They shalt commit mass murder and bombings and invasions and crooking taxpayers regardless. And they would still be incapable of feeling guilt or remorse.

The new conservative prelates are fighting a rearguard action against the invasion of evangelicals out of the U.S. , j.m. The role of the Jansenists in Voltaire's time when the Jesuits were letting down the church in the face of those early Calvinist incursions.

George Victor wrote:

The new conservative prelates are fighting a rearguard action against the invasion of evangelicals out of the U.S. , j.m. The role of the Jansenists in Voltaire's time when the Jesuits were letting down the church in the face of those early Calvinist incursions.

Ooops... Misread your message.

I have heard similar arguments made. The protestant/evangelicals are winning huge grounds as a result of the failures of the Catholic Church in the zones where Liberation Theology - Conservative Theology battles were fought, but also as a result of violent conflict and the lack of response of the church.

George Victor wrote:

I think you don't understand the social role of religion, fidel.

I think it's possible to corrupt just about any organization. The Boy Scouts,  the YMCA, Red Cross blood collection, economic theory taught in universities, and even governments can and have been corrupted in various examples.

But if it's democracy that's lacking in general, then why not admit it and deal with the real issues. Close down religion, and we still have a pre-existing problem that wants attention but never receives it. For exampe, I think that calling for divestment and sanctions against South Africa or Israel is a lot like playing whack a mole. It just never ends and tends to be a lesson in pointlessness. The left someday has to consider concentrating efforts toward abating the overall problem at its source.

Fidel wrote:

Glenn Beck is an American Joe Goebbels. His propaganda techniques are somewhat similar to those of the Nazis with helping Americans to visualize evil and "the enemy" In the extreme, Hitler's euthanasia programs for gassing cripples and the elderly and mentally challenged went against beliefs of the religious Catholics in Germany. Germans in general were conforming to rather than believing in the Reich's early programs for extermination of those deemed by the Nazis to have lives not worth living. One rabidly anticommunist Catholic bishop of Munster in Westphalia wrote letters to Hitler warning him that extermination of lives not worth living went against core Catholic beliefs. The Nazis realized that the religious beliefs of Germans were more deeply engrained than Nazism at that point, and Hitler put a stop to the exterminations in Germany for a period. Without those engrained religious beliefs, the extermination of handicapped and elderly Germans would have continued unchallenged by a population without morals whatsoever. Over time the Nazis intended to displace any and all religious beliefs with Nazi doctrinaire. It's not the same, but US health care has been described as favouring the strong over those lives not worth living.

In France, the propaganda was targeted at the very young who were thought to be part of the future of the Nazi German empire. Philippe Petain's Vichy regime taught French youth about a future when there would be no socialism and no communism, just strong people working and living for the good of the country. Posters of Petain's image were everywhere in France then and increasingly idolized by French youth. The resistance considered him a complete traitor.

Is Beck's propaganda targeted toward thinking adult Americans or just young Americans and future citizens of korporate Amerika?

You watched that Saturday night on CBC,did'nt you?

welder wrote:

You watched that Saturday night on CBC,did'nt you?

Love, Hate, and Propaganda hosted by Strombo.

Fidel wrote:

welder wrote:

You watched that Saturday night on CBC,did'nt you?

Love, Hate, and Propaganda hosted by Strombo.

 

I saw it too..

We could demand dissolution of the monasteries and make it happen tomorrow, and we might still be without democracy for centuries into the future. For a number of centuries in history, power chased money. Today the opposite is true. Iow's, we haven't advanced a great deal in terms of democracy. It's the democracy gap. Some say it;s more like a canyon. I think I'd sooner do crossword puzzles than play whack a mole with religion. It would be a more productive use of time and effort.

Fidel wrote:

Love, Hate, and Propaganda hosted by Strombo.

 

I tried watching that for a few minutes.  It was rather pedestrian, plus the film editing was so jerky and "cable TV-ish" that I found it unwatchable.

A few remarks:

A few liberation theologians did take up arms. [url=http://www.greenleft.org.au/1996/219/15042]Here's[/url] an article that will tell you a little bit about that. 

Liberation theology is still alive, though it's not what it was, not just in terms of influence but (to my mind) in terms of theory.

There are quite a few Christians who are neither Catholic nor evangelical and while they aren't much of a presence in North America or Europe, they are present in significant numbers in the global south. 

Beck is not going after just Catholics. He's an equal opportunity if your church talks about 'social justice' it's nazi/communist/socialist and you must leave it preacher. Even some leaders from his own professed faith group are raising there eyebrows at this one.

Here's some of the lastest on the Beckian Religious War of 2010.

In Spite of Glen Beck's New Threats, My Invitation to Dialogue Stands

Quote:

Last week, when radio and television talk show host Glenn Beck said that social justice is a "code word" for Communism and Nazism, and urged people to leave their churches if they teach social justice, I decided that message needed to be challenged.

Quote:

In fact, on Friday, I sent Glenn a letter proposing that the two of us sit down together and have an open and public discussion on what social justice really means and how Christians are called to engage in the struggle for justice. I said, "let's make this a civil dialogue and not engage in personal attacks on each other -- which is never helpful in trying to sort out what is true. So let's talk about the heart of the matter."

Well, on today's Glenn Beck radio show, I got a response that disappointed me. Glenn Beck said:

So Jim, I just wanted to pass this on to you. In my time I will respond -- my time, well, kind of like God's time, might be a day, might be a week to you, I'm not sure. But I'm going to get to it in my time, not your time. So you go ahead and you continue to do your protest thing, and that's great. I love it. But just know -- the hammer is coming, because little do you know, for eight weeks, we've been compiling information on you, your cute little organization, and all the other cute little people that are with you. And when the hammer comes, it's going to be hammering hard and all through the night, over and over...

“Yes, capitalism is an evil. It’s contrary to the common good. God will come down and eradicate it somehow.” - Catholic Priest Dick Preston, "Capitalism, a love story", Michael Moore

 Capitalism is “contrary to the Jesus who said ‘blessed are the poor: woe to the rich’. - Thomas Gumbleton, auxiliary Catholic Bishop, Detroit

And in Moore's movie, he shows a clip of the blithering idiot George W. Bush talking about how capitalism delivers social justice. Steinbeck's Grapes of Wrath came to mind as I'm watching Americans being evicted from their homes in the film.

This stonewalling by top Catholic church leaders is only going to make matters worse for the church. The people involved in these coverups, which may include the pope himself, are no better than mafiosa.

Sean Brady: Catholic Leader Won't Quit For Serial Rape Coverup

DUBLIN � Ireland's senior Roman Catholic, Cardinal Sean Brady, said Monday he would not resign despite admitting he helped the church collect evidence against a child-molesting priest � and never told police about the crimes.

Brady, as a priest and Vatican-trained canon lawyer in 1975, said he interviewed two children about the abuse they suffered at the hands of the Rev. Brendan Smyth. He said both children were required to sign oaths promising not to tell anyone outside the church of their allegations.

Smyth went on to molest and rape scores of other children in Ireland, Britain and the United States before British authorities in neighboring Northern Ireland demanded his arrest in 1994. The Irish government of the day collapsed amid acrimony over why Smyth was not quickly extradited to Belfast.

Brady admitted his role in gathering evidence against Smyth because he has been named as a defendant in a current Dublin lawsuit filed by one of Smyth's female victims. Lawyers in that case unearthed records of Brady's involvement in gathering testimony from two Irish boys abused by Smyth.

Irish newspapers had identified the victims as a 10-year-old altar boy and a 14-year-old girl. But Martin Long, Brady's spokesman, told The Associated Press that both victims were boys.

Brady said it was the responsibility of his diocesan bishop, as well as the leader of Smyth's separate Catholic order of priests, to tell police. But he said the church didn't do this because of "a culture of silence about this, a culture of secrecy."

"Yes, I knew that these were crimes," Brady said. "But I did not feel that it was my responsibility to denounce the actions of Brendan Smyth to the police. Now I know with hindsight that I should have done more, but I thought at the time I was doing what I was required to do."

Smyth abused at least 90 children in Ireland, Britain and in U.S. parishes in Rhode Island and North Dakota from 1948 to 1993.

His Irish religious order, the Norbertines, gave him sanctuary in the Republic of Ireland in 1991 after one Belfast family told Northern Ireland police he had molested four of the family's children.

I think Glenn Beck is a careful and methodical liar. Expert liars and propagandists in recent history have to have "an in" with the average person and to speak the truth some large percentage of the time in between telling "the big lies."  The big lie is usually always saved for emergencies and maintenance of the capitalist system in the US. Americans are really angry and frustrated with American plutocracy right now. The big lie is saved for such instances when the kleptocracy needs mouthpieces like Beck to tell Americans  that there are no alternatives to kleptocracy and American plutonomy. They hear the truth often enough from Beck that when he does tell "the big lie", many do not suspect that Beck is capable of lying to them. Yanks are saturated with lies and half truths every day of their lives. Most Canadians who've been to the US know this to be true of rightwing radio and TV and the newspapers in America.

The big lie is needed in America now more than at any time during the cold war. The big lie is that there are no alternatives to American plutonomy. It's time to brainwash millions against the red menace and any thoughts of real social justice and social democracy as promoted by very many Catholic bishops and priests for a long time. Socialism and anything with that word root in it represents a personal terror for the richest one percent of Americans and their hirelings in government and propaganda ministries.

 Fidel,  I agree with most of this post except that Beck is a careful and methodical liar. At least not in the way that he knows what he is saying is completely bogus and intellectually goes through the process of changing it to what he ends up saying.  He's just not that intelligent.  He actually believes and is quite sincere with his own analysis and because of the feedback he gets the confirmation he needs that he is on the right track. He lives within a confirmation bubble of his and others creation.  This bubble feeds back and forth within itself and gets crazier and crazier as time goes on.    He's in no way stupid though, where his intelligence does manifest is in his delivery. He does know how to talk to the average person and hit peoples emotional buttons. In this he is calculating and is quite good. 

Beck is useful to the powers that be and in this way is being used or put up with because of this usefullness.  I see him as one who is being manipulated as much as he manipulates and passes it down the line.  Plus he makes people money and as much as the ideas and propaganda are important money talks as well.  Even people on his own network think he's freaking nuts and out to lunch but that doesn't matter.  He's good for the bottom line.

Beck strikes me as playing a part of similar to a cult leader.  Avid Beckians are very cult like in how they approach him and talk about him.  They gush about his 'history lessons' and think he is one of the biggest intellectuals in America today.

Right now though some cracks are showing.  Lately Beck has done a few things that have begun to piss some of his followers off and in the wingnut sphere he's losing some of his shiny golden luster.   Not in the sense that people have come to their senses but that Beck isn't following the line that people want to hear which is even nuttier.   Last week he made some sort of comments about Geert Wilder and the European far right.  He basically said they were facist and people started screaming about how he didn't know what he was talking about and questions arose about his intellectual prowess.  That whole episode would have been funny if they were screaming about something based in some sort of reality.    Beck apparently is going over to the other side, being co-opted and as the theory goes it's because of the Islamist infiltration of Fox New Corp by the Saudis. The Eric Massa fiasco did his credibility in that quarter a lot of damage and he has to redeem himself from that.

To get some sort of understanding of the Beck phenomenon is to understand how much he is informed and confronted by the people who listen to him.  The higher up have expectations, his rightsphere peers have expectations and the lower downs have just as much. Due to the power of the internet they do have the ability to voice their kudos and displeasure.   He is expected to be a good mouthpiece and if he doesn't comply with the latest outrage of the day and confirm what people out there are saying then he is not being a good little boy.  As much as he creates the outrage he also responds to it.  He is both a leader and a follower.  He is also a competitor in the right wing talkosphere and blogoshere that informs a lot of what he does.  This is what I was referring to when I mentioned the bubble his mind lives in.  They feed back and forth on each other and if one of them steps to far out of line they start eating each other.  For example he and Malkin had a huge public fight last week over the Eric Massa affair which was a huge deal in that bubble world.  People took sides, went after each otehr and when the dust settled Malkin came out on top as the winner.  Apparently Becks intellectual ability just doesn't match up with the heft of Michelle Malkin's and with some he has to 'prove' himself to still be part of the club.

remind wrote:

interesting oversight Eliza, thank you, what do you see occuring between on the ground  Evangelicals and Catholics in Canada?

 

 personally am happy  that a split is occuring between the Evangelicals and Catholics, it can only be good for the rest of us.

 I don't see this particular Beck line of thought as a Evangelical vs Catholic thing.  It's a 'liberal' vs 'righter wing' religious thing and includes lefter leaning evangelicals.  It also crosses into other relgions such a Judaism though Beck himself doesn't mention it in particular the ensuing 'discussion' has.   It's basically an attack on any form of moderate to lefter leaning religious thought that dares suggest that the 'gubmermint' or the state should have anything  or even has any responsibility  with enacting policies that have anything to do with 'social justice' or 'economic justice.'  It is another avenue to attack the left and left wing thought.   It's just dressed in religious garb.

    So helping a poor person by feeding him some soup with your own money is perfectly fine. Jesus would be okay with that.    Suggesting that the 'state' has a responsibility for creating a system where that poor person doesn't need the soup or even provides soup giving programs is not fine.   That's Marxist. That's communist. That's socialistic.  That's the redistribution of wealth.  Taxes in this regard are 'charity' and forced charity.   That is religious heresey and therefore right wing heresey as well.  It is also evil.  Hence the references to Nazi and Communists supporting 'social justice' because as we all know those folks were/are plain evil.   That's all the proof you really need.   It's similar to the 'logic' used to equate healthcare reform with Nazism.  Naziss did government run healthcare ergo when you put your critical thinking hat on, the obvious conclusion is that since Nazi's are bad, government healthcare is bad.    It sounds ridulous but this type of logic works and people buy it hook line and sinker because as they are being taken through this exercise in 'critical thinking' the notion that this is 'critical thinking' is enforced and talked about.  Since critical thinking is a good thing then its just accepted without a whole lot of thought.   Add in the blathering that anyone else who disagrees isn't as smart as you and is out to get you and you've created a perfect self enforcing bubble where you can pretty much say anything and people will believe it because it 'just makes sense.'   Beck is really good at this.  He even uses a blackboard when he's 'teaching' this stuff.  He also is a guy who is on the road to discovering just how deep the whole evil goes and is sharing his voyage of discovery.  He's just an average guy who is suffering like everyone else.

 Anyway the 'liberals/commie/marxist/socialists' have infiltrated the Churches and it's time to fight back.     Beck is trying to warn people that they are being taken in by this conspiracy and is just doing his job of illuminating what the words being used mean.  He's teaching people about 'liberal/marxist (in Beck world these a pretty much the same now) code words because he understands the truth of it.   They want an 'nanny state' we all know what that means because we've covered this topic many times before.

 There is also a dose of prosperity doctrine type thinking thrown in there.  The poor, the downtrowden and oppressed are as they are by the will of God.  It's their fault and if they would just get with the 'right' (pun intended) religious program then they would see their fortunes increase.  It's just a relgious language translation of very typical righter wing thinking.  If people don't suceed it's an individual failing, they didn't work hard enough, they're failures in the eyes of the market/capitalist God.  It's their own damn fault and any government intervention or 'help' is interferring with God/Market/Capitalism.   

Beck approaching it from a religious standpoint is new, however whats behind it isn't new at all.