Mark Shea declares President Trump an Anti-Christ

...based on nonsense. 

Apparently, a protestant woman by the name of Paula White is one of President Trump's spiritual advisers and she said the following... 

“They say about our president, ‘Well, he is not presidential.’ Thank goodness. Thank goodness. Thank goodness,” White said. “And I mean that with all due respect. Because in other words, he is not a polished politician. In other words, he is authentically — whether people like it or not — has been raised up by God.” “Because God says that he raises up and places all people in places of authority,” she continued. “It is God who raises up a king. It is God that sets one down. When you fight against the plan of God, you are fighting against the hand of God.”

Shea got his undies in a twist over this statement because he did not recognize that White, in her own protestant way, was referencing Sacred Scripture. 

Romans 13 Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)  
13 Let every soul be subject to higher powers: for there is no power but from God: and those that are, are ordained of God.2 Therefore he that resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God. And they that resist, purchase to themselves damnation.3 For princes are not a terror to the good work, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? Do that which is good: and thou shalt have praise from the same.4 For he is God's minister to thee, for good. But if thou do that which is evil, fear: for he beareth not the sword in vain. For he is God's minister: an avenger to execute wrath upon him that doth evil.5 Wherefore be subject of necessity, not only for wrath, but also for conscience' sake.6 For therefore also you pay tribute. For they are the ministers of God, serving unto this purpose.7 Render therefore to all men their dues. Tribute, to whom tribute is due: custom, to whom custom: fear, to whom fear: honour, to whom honour.8 Owe no man any thing, but to love one another. For he that loveth his neighbour, hath fulfilled the law.

And because Shea doesn't know these Bible verses or deliberately ignored them, he concluded that #676 in the Catholic catechism is a better fit for the current Pro-life, God bless America, freedom of religion protecting President Trump. *funny, I don't recall Shea ever referring to Obama, the baby butcher as an antichrist*

CCC 676: The Antichrist’s deception already begins to take shape in the world every time the claim is made to realize within history that messianic hope which can only be realized beyond history through the eschatological judgment. The Church has rejected even modified forms of this falsification of the kingdom to come under the name of millenarianism, especially the “intrinsically perverse” political form of a secular messianism. 

Shea is of course, as he so often is, wrong. 

Shea writes: 

"Do I think Trump is The Antichrist? No. Do I think he is *an* antichrist? Yes. Antichrists are a dime a dozen.  You don’t need to puke pea soup to be an antichrist. You merely have to oppose Christ."

Not so fast Jack. It is the denial of God that makes one an antichrist according to Sacred Scripture... 

[1 John 2] 22 "Who is a liar, but he who denieth that Jesus is the Christ? This is Antichrist, who denieth the Father, and the Son. 23 Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father. He that confesseth the Son, hath the Father also." 

Trump is no pillar of Christianity, but neither is he denying whom God is. All protestants "oppose" Christ in one way or another because they reject Christ's Holy Catholic Church and oppose Her teachings. That makes them protestant, not de facto antichrists. 

If Shea's view were correct, then Shea as an ex-protestant would clearly be declaring himself (and all current non-Catholic Christians) to have been an antichrist for a good portion of his life. One wonders, does Mark Shea consider himself a reformed antichrist? 😏

We can clearly see President Trump's belief in God in the many speeches and statement he's made. President Trump at the National Prayer Breakfast... 

[in part] TRUMP: "I was blessed to be raised in a churched home. My mother and father taught me that to whom much is given, much is expected. I was sworn in on the very Bible from which my mother would teach us as young children, and that faith lives on in my heart every single day.The people in this room come from many, many backgrounds. You represent so many religions and so many views. But we are all united by our faith, in our creator and our firm knowledge that we are all equal in His eyes. We are not just flesh and bone and blood, we are human beings with souls. Our republic was formed on the basis that freedom is not a gift from government, but that freedom is a gift from God." 

 Another example, when Syria used chemical weapons on its own people. 

[President Trump] "On Tuesday Syrian President Bashar al Assad launched a horrible chemcial attack on innocent civilians using a deadly nerve agent. Assad choked out the lives of helpless men, women and children. It was a slow and brutal death for so many. Even beautiful babies were cruelly murdered at this very barbaric attack. No child of God should should ever suffer such horror. "Tonight I ordered a targeted military strike on the airfield in Syria from where the chemical attack was launched. It is in the vital national security interest of the United States to prevent and deter the spread and use of deadly chemical weapons. There can be no dispute that Syria used banned chemical weapons, violated its obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention and ignored the urging of the UN Security Council. "Numerous previous attempts at changing Assad's behavior have all found and failed very dramatically. As a result, the refugee crisis continues to deepen and the region continues to destabilize, threatening the United States and its allies. Tonight I call on all civilized nations to join us in seeking to end the slaughter and bloodshed in Syria and also to end terrorism of all kinds and all types. We ask for God's wisdom as we face the challenge of our very troubled world. We pray for the lives of the wounded and for the souls of those who passed. And we hope as long as America stands for justice and peace and harmony , we will in the end prevail. Good night and God Bless America and the entire world." 

Shea declares that because Trump when asked about his faith and asking God for forgiveness for his actions stated, “I am not sure I have. I just go on and try to do a better job from there. I don’t think so,” he said. “I think if I do something wrong, I think, I just try and make it right. I don’t bring God into that picture. I don’t.”, he must certainly be antichrist. Again, that makes Trump a Protestant, not an antichrist. Shea clearly has a hard time separating the two.

By the biblical definition there are billions of antichrists in the world...pagans, Jews, Muslims, Wiccans, Buddhists, atheists, etc,...but Trump is not among them. 


My message to Mark Shea...😇

In Christ, 


Julie @ Connecticut Catholic Corner 


Sources: 

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/markshea/2017/08/trump-spiritual-advisor-paula-white.html#disqus_thread

http://religionnews.com/2017/08/22/trump-paula-white-raised-up-by-god/

http://www.wltx.com/news/nation/president-trump-no-child-of-god-should-suffer-such-harms/429393512

http://time.com/4658012/donald-trump-national-prayer-breakfast-transcript/


P.S. 
I don't think Mark Shea likes me...😎

Can we say #Snowflake? 😊 

Reverend Hillary Clinton?

When Hillary declared "deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed." I had no idea she'd decide to become a preacher and start her own religion! 

Quote: "After losing to President Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election, Hillary Clinton has reportedly indicated what she would like her next endeavor to be.
At a recent photo shoot for his new book, the former secretary of state reportedly told her pastor, Bill Shillady, that she wants to follow in his footsteps and become a pastor, as she now believes that it is time to speak out about her faith, according to The Atlantic." 

Just what the world needs the morally bankrupt Hillary spreading her delusional faith beliefs to the masses in some mega church somewhere. 

In Christ, 

Julie @ Connecticut Catholic Corner 

sources: 

http://www.westernjournalism.com/report-hillary-clinton-wants-pastor/

photo: http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/30/politics/clinton-faith-private/index.html

#FlashbackFriday: The Catholic Church Then and Now

This is a new feature you will see more of on my blog. As a collector of old Catholic books (100+ years old) I have quite a collection to read from. 

These books clearly show how the Catholic Church used to be- how and what it taught in comparison to what we sadly see today after modernism entered and tipped the scales. So they have inspired me to start a "Then and Now" feature. 

I will be sharing what I am reading in them and on the Internet while comparing what is currently being taught in our Church - more specifically the teachings and views that showed up in the 1960's and afterwards in our Church. There are some big differences in these teachings, and I admit as a convert who 100% believed the Church didn't change Her teachings, reading these old Catholic books (published by the Church mind you) and listening to today's clergy and reading what I see on the U.S. Bishops website...how can anyone think the Church hasn't changed what She used to teach compared to what She is currently teaching? 

Please read these "Then and Now" quotes and tell me the Catholic Church's teaching hasn't changed on this topic. I'd love to hear comments from everyone, most especially clergy or religious.    

Today’s focus is on Islam.  

Then:

COUNCIL OF VIENNE (1311-1312)

[25]. It is an insult to the holy name and a disgrace to the Christian faith that in certain parts of the world subject to Christian princes where Saracens[followers of Islam] live, sometimes apart, sometimes intermingled with Christians, the Saracen priests commonly called Zabazala, in their temples or mosques, in which the Saracens meet to adore the infidel Mahomet, loudly invoke and extol his name each day at certain hours from a high place, in the hearing of both Christians and Saracens and there make public declarations in his honour. There is a place, moreover, where once was buried a certain Saracen whom other Saracens venerate as a saint. A great number of Saracens flock there quite openly from far and near. This brings disrepute on our faith and gives great scandal to the faithful. These practices cannot be tolerated any further without displeasing the divine majesty. We therefore, with the sacred council's approval, strictly forbid such practices henceforth in Christian lands. We enjoin on catholic princes, one and all, who hold sovereignty over the said Saracens and in whose territory these practices occur, and we lay on them a pressing obligation under the divine judgment that, as true Catholics and zealous for the Christian faith, they give consideration to the disgrace heaped on both them and other Christians. They are to remove this offence altogether from their territories and take care that their subjects remove it, so that they may thereby attain the reward of eternal happiness. They are to forbid expressly the public invocation of the sacrilegious name of Mahomet. They shall also forbid anyone in their dominions to attempt in future the said pilgrimage or in any way give countenance to it. Those who presume to act otherwise are to be so chastised by the princes for their irreverence, that others may be deterred from such boldness.

~
(click image to view larger)

~

Council of Basel 1431-45 A.D.

SESSION 19 - 7 September 1434

“They urge and daily stimulate us in a wonderful way to pursue this holy work, strongly and persistently affirming two things: that union is only possible in a universal synod in which both the western church and the eastern church meet, and that union will assuredly follow if matters proceed in that synod in the way that is agreed below. We were filled with joy and gladness when we heard this. For what happier and more glorious thing could ever happen to the catholic church than that so many eastern peoples, who seem to be about equal in number to those of our faith, should be joined with us in the unity of faith? What could be more useful and fruitful to the Christian people, since the beginning of the church, than for an inveterate and destructive schism to be completely eradicated? Moreover, we trust that with God's help another benefit will accrue to the Christian commonwealth; because from this union, once it is established, there is hope that very many from the abominable sect of Mahomet will be converted to the catholic faith. What, then, should not be attempted and done by Christ's faithful for so holy and salutary an objective? What Catholic is not in duty bound to risk not only the passing substance of this world but even his body and soul for such an advance of the Christian name and the orthodox faith?” 

~

Fifth Lateran Council 1512-17 A.D.

SESSION 12 - 16 March 1517

 We are suitably carrying out the duty of our office when we renew again that reform of the whole church and its affairs which we have accomplished with profit; when we plan to apply suitable remedies for the unchallenged observance of the reform and to make provision for cathedrals and metropolitan churches so that they may no longer be without their pastors; and when we supervise these remedies with ever-present attention and untiring efforts, by means of which we may be able to render the Lord's flock, which has been entrusted to our care, acceptable and submissive in the sight of the divine majesty. Our aim is also to crush the Turks and other infidels standing firm in the eastern and southern regions. They treat the way of true light and salvation with complete contempt and totally unyielding blindness; they attack the life-giving cross on which our Saviour willed to accept death so that by dying he might destroy death, and by the ineffable mystery of his most holy life he might restore life; and they make themselves hateful enemies of God and most bitter persecutors of the christian religion. Strengthened by defences not only spiritual but also temporal, we may be able, under God's guidance and favour, to oppose the bitter and frequent sallies by which, in wild rage, they move savagely amidst christian blood .

~

~

Encyclical of Pope Benedict XIV promulgated on August 1, 1754.

To Our Venerable Brothers the Archbishops and Bishops as well as Our Beloved Sons, the Parish Priests and Missionaries of the Province of Albania.

Venerable Brothers and Beloved Sons, We give you Greeting and Our Apostolic Blessing.

Forbidding Use of Mohammedan Names

The Provincial Council of your province of Albania, Venerable Brothers and Beloved Sons, was held in the year 1703 during the pontificate of Our predecessor Pope Clement XI. It decreed most solemnly in its third canon, among other matters, as you know, that Turkish or Mohammedan names should not be given either to children or adults in baptism. It also decreed that the faithful of Christ should not allow themselves to be called by Turkish or Mohammedan names which they had never received, for the purpose of either exemption or immunity from taxes, or the advantage of free trading, or avoiding penalties. We have confirmed and commanded the observance of this decree in Our encyclical letter Inter omnigenas, addressed to the kingdom of Serbia and its neighbouring regions. This encyclical letter, covering many subjects of religion and discipline, was published on the 2nd of February 1744 in the fourth year of Our pontificate. This prudent and saving statute was established by your predecessors with great wisdom and devotion as a shining example of your Catholic faith and sincere Christian piety; in our 1744 encyclical, We strictly ordered it to be imitated and fully observed by other churches. Just as adhering to it clearly results in the greater fame and reputation of your province and in greater benefits for securing the eternal salvation of souls, so if it should be neglected, it would greatly dishonor your province and openly endanger these souls.

In Our letter mentioned above, We designated that abuse as a cowardly concealment of the Christian profession, approaching infidelity. Since then, We have learned with great mental anguish that many people in that province continue to take Turkish or Mohammedan names despite the consideration of their eternal salvation. They do so not only in order to be immune and free from those taxes and burdens which have often been and continue to be imposed on the faithful of Christ, but also in order that neither they themselves nor their parents may be thought to have abandoned the Mohammedan sect, thereby avoiding the requisite penalties. For all this cannot take place without a pretense of the errors of Mohammed, even if the faith of Christ is adhered to in the heart, and this is at variance with Christian sincerity. It involves a lie in a most serious matter and includes a virtual denial of the Faith, most insulting to God and scandalous to their neighbors. It even gives the Turks themselves a suitable opportunity to rate all Christ's faithful as hypocrites and deceivers, and accordingly to persecute them justly and deservedly.

2. Our sorrow and anguish is further increased by the fact that some of you yourselves, venerable brothers, and of you also, beloved sons, parish priests and missionaries, take no measures against so vile and hateful a pretense. In fact, some of you even connive at it; by being impressed by empty motives to find excuses for sins, you do not hesitate to allow those who take common Turkish or Mohammedan names and desire to be addressed by them, to partake of the Sacraments with no pang of conscience at all, to the public offense of the obedient faithful.

3. We who are entrusted with the care of all the churches and the supreme administration of the sacred Apostolate; in this capacity, We are obliged to lead all Christians back to the way of salvation and to present them to God pure and sincere, walking in the spirit and in truth without stain. We have heard Our Venerable Brothers, the Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church, who are general Inquisitors for evil heresy on this subject. In accordance with their advice, We first renew and confirm by Our Apostolic authority in this letter the praiseworthy canon of the council of your province of Albania, and We command that it be strictly observed. Also We extend the decrees of Our church by the same authority and uniformity to include your province; We equally strictly prohibit any of Christ's faithful from daring to take Turkish or Mohammedan names in order to be considered Mohammedans, in any case, under any pretext, or in any conceivable circumstances.

4. Furthermore, venerable brothers and beloved sons, We ask and urge you in the Lord to think seriously about your ministry and the strict account you will have to give to the Eternal Judge Jesus Christ, the Supreme Prince of Pastors, for the sheep entrusted to each one of you; to this end, We urge you to take personal care by your good works that your election will be assured. Since it would be very careless and negligent on your part not to, do not fail to patiently convince, implore, and exhort the faithful of Christ in your Province to lead a good life among the nations. Urge them in all affairs to conduct themselves so as to be an example of good works in order that those who oppose them may be chagrined since they have nothing evil to say of them, and they cannot accuse them of being evildoers who for the sake of base gain profess one thing with their lips while believing differently in their hearts. But if they do not accept your warnings and Our commands, they must be compelled by the rod to follow the norm of Apostolic discipline. The sanctions and penalties provided for by your Albanian council and by Our letter mentioned above must be fully applied in their case: that is, they must be declared unfit to receive the Sacraments in their lifetime, and if they die unrepentant, to benefit from prayers after death. Insofar as it is necessary, We renew and reapply these penalties; We enjoin you to ensure their due execution. This should not be hard for any one of you, venerable brothers and beloved sons, for none of the schismatics and heretics has been rash enough to take a Mohammedan name, and unless your justice abounds more than theirs, you shall not enter the kingdom of Heaven.

5. Finally, gravely advise those who have converted from Mohammedanism or the children of such converts, if they lack confidence in their constancy in the Faith, fearing punishment by their rulers if they abandon their Turkish names, to emigrate secretly from those territories and come for refuge to Christian lands. There they shall in no way lack the help of God who gives food to all flesh, or the charity of the faithful, especially if their Bishops provide them with letters of recommendation. In the meantime, We lovingly grant you Our Apostolic Blessing, venerable brothers and beloved sons, and We desire each Venerable Brother Bishop to extend it in Our name to all the orthodox faithful of Christ in his own diocese.
Given at Rome in St. Mary Major on the first day of August, 1754, in the fourteenth year of Our Pontificate.

~

CONTRA GENTILES

By Thomas Aquinas - On the Truth of the Catholic Faith

[4] On the other hand, those who founded sects committed to erroneous doctrines proceeded in a way that is opposite to this, The point is clear in the case of Muhammad. He seduced the people by promises of carnal pleasure to which the concupiscence of the flesh goads us. His teaching also contained precepts that were in conformity with his promises, and he gave free rein to carnal pleasure. In all this, as is not unexpected, he was obeyed by carnal men. As for proofs of the truth of his doctrine, he brought forward only such as could be grasped by the natural ability of anyone with a very modest wisdom. Indeed, the truths that he taught he mingled with many fables and with doctrines of the greatest falsity. He did not bring forth any signs produced in a supernatural way, which alone fittingly gives witness to divine inspiration; for a visible action that can be only divine reveals an invisibly inspired teacher of truth. On the contrary, Muhammad said that he was sent in the power of his arms—which are signs not lacking even to robbers and tyrants. What is more, no wise men, men trained in things divine and human, believed in him from the beginning, Those who believed in him were brutal men and desert wanderers, utterly ignorant of all divine teaching, through whose numbers Muhammad forced others to become his followers by the violence of his arms. Nor do divine pronouncements on the part of preceding prophets offer him any witness. On the contrary, he perverts almost all the testimonies of the Old and New Testaments by making them into fabrications of his own, as can be. seen by anyone who examines his law. It was, therefore, a shrewd decision on his part to forbid his followers to read the Old and New Testaments, lest these books convict him of falsity. It is thus clear that those who place any faith in his words believe foolishly. [Book One] 

~

Now:

Second Vatican Council, Lumen Gentium 16, November 21, 1964

“But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place among whom are the Muslims: these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.”

~

Paul VI, address to the Islamic communities of Uganda, August 1, 1969

“In our prayers, we always remember the peoples of Africa. The common belief in the Almighty professed by millions calls down upon this continent the graces of his Providence and love, most of all, peace and unity among all its sons. We feel sure that as representatives of Islam, you join in our prayers to the Almighty, that he may grant all African believers the desire for pardon and reconciliation so often commended in the Gospels and in the Qur’an.
“Our pilgrimage to these holy places is not for purposes of prestige or power. It is a humble and ardent prayer for peace, through the intercession of the glorious protectors of Africa, who gave up their lives for love and for their belief. In recall the Catholic and Anglican Martyrs, We gladly recall also those confessors of the Muslim faith who were the first to suffer death, in the year 1848, for refusing to transgress the precepts of their religion.”

~

~

John Paul II, address to a symposium on “Holiness in Christianity and in Islam,” Rome, May 9, 1985

“All true holiness comes from God, who is called ‘The Holy One’ in the sacred books of the Jews, Christians, and Muslims. Your holy Qur’an calls God ‘Al-Quddus,’ as in the verse: ‘He is God, besides whom there is no other, the Sovereign, the Holy, the (source of) Peace’ (Qur’an 59, 23). The prophet Hosea links God’s holiness with his forgiving love for mankind, a love which surpasses our ability to comprehend: ‘I am God, not man; I am the Holy One in your midst and have no wish to destroy’ (Ho 11:9). In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus teaches his disciples that holiness consists in assuming, in our human way, the qualities of God’s own holiness which he has revealed to mankind: ‘Be holy, even as your heavenly Father is holy’ (Mt 5:48).
“Thus the Qur’an calls you to uprightness (al-salah), to conscientious devotion (al-taqwa), to goodness (al-husn), and to virtue (al-birr), which is described as believing in God, giving one’s wealth to the needy, freeing captives, being constant in prayer, keeping one’s word, and being patient in times of suffering, hardship and violence (Qur’an 2:177). Similarly, St. Paul stresses the love we must show toward all, and the duty to lead a blameless life in the sight of God: ‘May the Lord be generous in increasing your love and make you love one another and the whole human race as much as we love you. And may he so confirm your hearts in holiness that you may be blameless in the sight of our God and Father when our Lord Jesus Christ comes with all his saints’ (1 Th 3:12-13).”

~

Evangelii Gaudium, Apostolic Exhortation of Pope Francis, 2013

252. Our relationship with the followers of Islam has taken on great importance, since they are now significantly present in many traditionally Christian countries, where they can freely worship and become fully a part of society. We must never forget that they “profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, who will judge humanity on the last day”.[198] The sacred writings of Islam have retained some Christian teachings; Jesus and Mary receive profound veneration and it is admirable to see how Muslims both young and old, men and women, make time for daily prayer and faithfully take part in religious services. Many of them also have a deep conviction that their life, in its entirety, is from God and for God. They also acknowledge the need to respond to God with an ethical commitment and with mercy towards those most in need.

253. In order to sustain dialogue with Islam, suitable training is essential for all involved, not only so that they can be solidly and joyfully grounded in their own identity, but so that they can also acknowledge the values of others, appreciate the concerns underlying their demands and shed light on shared beliefs. We Christians should embrace with affection and respect Muslim immigrants to our countries in the same way that we hope and ask to be received and respected in countries of Islamic tradition. I ask and I humbly entreat those countries to grant Christians freedom to worship and to practice their faith, in light of the freedom which followers of Islam enjoy in Western countries! Faced with disconcerting episodes of violent fundamentalism, our respect for true followers of Islam should lead us to avoid hateful generalisations, for authentic Islam and the proper reading of the Koran are opposed to every form of violence.


~

Has the Catholic Church changed Her teaching on Islam?  What happened? 

Which do we believe? What was taught then for centuries, or has been taught since “the spirit of Vatican II” was spread? 

You tell me if you think the Church has changed it’s teachings. Please sound off in the comments or emails. 



In Christ, 


Julie @ Connecticut Catholic Corner 


P.S. There is still a voice in the Church who hasn’t forgotten our Catholic history with Islam, his name is Cardinal Burke. ( http://www.catholicregister.org/home/international/item/22739-u-s-cardinal-says-christian-nations-in-west-must-counter-islamic-influx )

Sources: 

http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20131124_evangelii-gaudium.html

http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/ecumenical-and-interreligious/interreligious/islam/vatican-council-and-papal-statements-on-islam.cfm

http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Councils/ecum17.htm

https://www.ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/VIENNE.HTM

http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Councils/ecum18.htm

http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Ben14/b14quod.htm

http://dhspriory.org/thomas/ContraGentiles1.htm

Image: https://books.google.com/books?id=-DpLAwAAQBAJ&dq=The+impious+sect+of+Mahometanism+sprung+up+in+this+century 

Image: http://www.crisismagazine.com/2013/islam-and-the-outer-limits-of-ecumenism

Gretchen Carlson is a sandwich short of a picnic

Gotta say something about Fox News firing Gretchen Carlson and her suing the network over a variety of complaints targeting the network and specifically her former co-host Steve Doocy. 

Quote from Politico: The complaint was filed in the Superior Court of New Jersey and claims Ailes made “sexually-charged comments” to Carlson, "ranging from lewd innuendo, ogling and remarks about Ms. Carlson’s body to demands for sex as a way for her to improve her job standing."
“[D]uring a meeting last September in which Ms. Carlson complained about ongoing discriminatory and retaliatory treatment, Mr. Ailes stated, "I think you and I should have had a sexual relationship a long time ago and then you’d be good and better and I’d be good and better," adding that "sometimes problems are easier to solve' that way,” according to Carlson’s lawyers.
On other occasions, the complaint alleges Ailes asked Carlson to "turn around so he could view her posterior, commented repeatedly about her legs, and instructed her to wear certain outfits that he claimed enhanced her figure.” Ailes also allegedly “directed sexist comments” about Carlson in public and announced to others at a industry event that “he had slept with three former Miss Americas, but not with her.”
The complaint goes on to allege that Carlson was fired from “Fox & Friends” in 2013 because she complained about co-host Steve Doocy’s actions. Ailes, the complaint alleges, mocked Carlson and told her to stop being offended “so God damned easy.” Though she was moved to host her own show in the afternoon hour, the complaint alleges that the move was a demotion and that Ailes “reduced her compensation and withheld network support and promotion for her show.”

Before I get to all that, I need to share my own views of Fox News.  I was a Fox News watcher from their very first day on the air- this was before I had a computer in the 1990's when I would hand write and "snail-mail" comments to the show! I loved this news network.

When 'Fox & Friends' first came on the scene I was hooked.  That was when it was an actual morning news show, as to what it is now- a variety show with bits of news clips scattered between the grilling on the sidewalk segments, the concerts and the 'Fox & Friends' home shopping network of products to buy and which ones to avoid. (I weep at what has been lost at this network). So my comments are in light of the Fox & Friends show, not about the alleged Mr. Ailes complaints.

The lowest point of 'Fox & Friends' in my opinion came the day Gretchen Carlson joined the cast after E.D. Hill left. I personally, did not like this woman from day one and saw clearly she could not fill the void left by Hill.  The chemistry that Doocy, Kilmeade and Hill had was not found with the introduction of Carlson. 

And I hate to say it, but Carlson just came across as dumb on television. Where Hill looked professional and intelligent, Carlson just looked...well, dumb and out of place. 

Carlson's "Jihad Monkey" breaking news story will go down in my mind as her finest moment proving my point.  ;)

I still cringe remembering that one! Seriously, HOW could she do that segment and seem to actually believe what she was saying? Where was her journalistic integrity when she reported on Jihad monkey's being trained by the Taliban? 

How could ANYONE take her seriously or even bother to tune in any more? I couldn't. I gave up on a show I had enjoyed since its creation all thanks to Gretchen Carlson.

When I further read from Politico, Carlson's complaint about former co-host Steve Doocy had supposedly "mocked" her - well...[flashback to Jihad monkey report] 

quote: "Doocy engaged in a pattern and practice of severe and pervasive sexual harassment of Carlson, including, but no limited to, mocking her during commercial breaks, shunning her off air, refusing to engage with her on air, belittling her contributions to the show, and generally attempting to put her in her place by refusing to accept and treat her as an intelligent and insightful journalist rather than a blond (sic) female prop," the complaint alleges." [end quote]

My impression of Steve Doocy is he is a fine upstanding guy.  He speaks well of others, often shares with viewers his Catholic faith in comments during the show (especially during holidays or Catholic news stories) and appears to have a happy decent family.  I don't know Doocy, but I like what I see.

I can't imagine him guilty of "severe and pervasive sexual harassment of Carlson" or mocking her during commercial breaks.  The "shunning her off air", perhaps if she's as dumb in real life as she seems on television, who could blame Doocy for not wanting to further subject himself to her outside of work? 

I gotta ask, how is "shunning" a person sexual harassment? Refusing to engage with her on air is sexual harassment?  If Doocy was sexually harassing Carlson, why is she complaining he shunned her and refused to engage with her? Again, she's complaining he didn't spend more time with her and at the same time saying he sexually harassed her?  By ignoring her? Huh? 

Liar, liar pants on fire Gretchen! I'm just not buying what she's trying to sell.  

I think she's a sandwich short of a picnic.

I won't even get into the complaint of "belittling her contributions to the show" (see Jihad Monkey video again to answer that complaint) or "refusing to accept and treat her as an intelligent and insightful journalist" (again, see Jihad Monkey video). 

She complains of sexual harassment yet shows no example of sexual harassment, instead whines about being ignored. Boo-freaking-hoo! Gretchen Carlson is doing nothing but slandering a former co-host.

All that said, I am THRILLED Fox News canned retched Gretchen Carlson! 

Things are finally looking up at Fox News!  

Just my 2 cents. ;) 

Julie @ Connecticut Catholic Corner 

Source: http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2016/07/gretchen-carlson-files-lawsuit-against-roger-ailes-alleging-sexual-harassment-225162

Jihad Monkey video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buoVwM1pQEs

Talking to an Atheist

The following discussion began in the comments section of my post "MSNBC's 'United in Godlessness' Up w/Chris Hayes Show" from last Monday. If you are just joining this discussion, I suggest reading the origins first. Below is the last comment I recieved from Brian, a self professed Atheist and ex-Catholic. My comments are in BLUE.
Brian: Now we have a conversation going :-)

*Me: Yes we do!! And for that reason, I am giving our discussion its own article place on my blog. I understand that all your comments are coming from an Atheistic view point and you need to understand that all my responses will come from a Catholic Christian point of view. I understand that you often will not agree with me and you need to have the same understanding of me. If we can both do that, we can continue to have a civil and hopefully enlightening discussion. I have BOLDED some of Brian's text that I am specifically responding to.
To that end, I am going to respond to your comments from the original blog post: http://connecticutcatholiccorner.blogspot.com/2012/03/msnbcs-united-in-godlessness-up-wchris.html

Brian: Christians(in general) come from a standpoint that we are born wretched evil sinners and that only through the grace of god and the murder of Jesus are we given the hope to be made whole. I was Catholic and this is how I was taught. It is a fundamental reason that I left the Church and later dropping the belief in a deity has a lot to do with this line of thinking.
As for you last statement, rather question; "What have you got to lose?" I would think that you can do better than to throw out Pascal's Wager. The problem here is that it supposes that there is only the Christian deity and leaves out all other deities ever conceived of. Mathematically speaking, the probability that the Christian god is actually the correct god, let alone that your version of that god is the exact correct one is very slim. What if we both are wrong? Osiris is much worse on non-believers than the Christian god is. In this case I revert back to my favorite statement by Aurelius.
I believed for most of my life. I left for moral reasons. I found that I couldn't be both moral and a good Christian at the same time. The two do not mix."

*Me: I can’t speak for all Christians, but I was under the impression that “we are born evil wretched sinners” was more of a Protestant theology. The Catholic Church teaches that we all have Original Sin that we need to be baptized for, but I don’t know of any Catholic teaching that claims we are “evil”. Could you point me to where that was taught to you? And as to your comment about “the murder of Jesus”…Jesus was not murdered, He became God Incarnate to willingly give up His life for love of mankind. He was not murdered, he was a willing sacrifice (John 10:18). And to your last comment about moral teaching not “mixing” with Christianity, how so? What moral teaching do you find don’t mix with Christianity?

Brian: BTW, as a real Atheist I hold no belief in any deity simply for lack of evidence. That is not to say that I do not rule out the possibility of one actually existing.
I do have to point out the your statement, "and have no idea to whom you give your gratitude to." is flawed from an Atheist standpoint. Why must there be a who to qualify the gratitude?
I don't think that we are that different. In fact, I don't think that 99.9% of humanity is that different, no matter their faith or lack of faith. It is exactly that similarity, in spite of respective beliefs, that lends great credence to my lack of faith. And when I say lack of faith, understand that I do have faith in a great many things. Based on historical evidence, I have faith that the son will rise. Based on my children's actions, I have faith in their professed love for me. It is by that standard that I hold no belief in a god.

*Me: Oh I agree that “Based on historical evidence, [in my case the Bible & the Church] I have faith that the son [Son] will rise again”- I know that isn’t how you were intending to make your point, but I just can’t pass stuff like that up! *grin* I don’t understand your view that people being alike leads to your not having faith in God. To me, that is the reason I believe we ALL come from God.

Brian: I asked god once, many times, for grace, for salvation, for anything. There never was an answer. I would say that even if you do believe, spend a year as a professed Atheist. Heck, spend six months as one. I think it would open your eyes.

*Me: Here is where we part ways Brian because I simply on all counts disagree with you here. As an ex-Catholic you had grace abundantly (that is not to say grace isn’t given to non-Catholic Christians). There is grace given every time you went to mass…every time you went to Confession and most especially every time you had the Eucharist. You may not FEEL it with the warm-fuzzies, but it’s there none the less. And salvation is a process we go through from the moment of our baptism to the moment of our death. I know some protestant groups will disagree- they subscribe to the “once saved always saved” theology which I rejected years ago after a good study on John 15 (the Vine & the Branches). But in the bible, Jesus says we must pick up our crosses (Mark 8:34) and follow Him to the end. Some do, others fall away along their life’s journey. God never promised life would be easy or without suffering, what He did promise was that those who endured to the end would be rewarded with Salvation and eternity in Heaven. That’s His promise to us.

And as for your suggestion that I "try to be an Atheist", I couldn't even if I wanted to because my faith is as real to me as my arms and legs. I could no more cut them off myself than I could cut off my faith from God. That is not to say our faith isn't tested, our life is one long test on assorted fronts. As I've already mentioned, Jesus didn't tell us to "pick up our crosses" if He meant us all to live on Easy Street our whole lives. Our crosses are our struggles and sufferings that we endure here on earth. The reward comes at the end, with blessings and graces poured out along our way IF we do as He asked "follow" Him WHILE we carry those burdens. Life is a struggle and a gift at the same time with the sweetest most wonderful reward to be had at the end of our lives. Jesus carried his cross and we must carry ours. He had help along the way, and we have help along the way too.

My prayer for you Brian, is that one day you will see that and know how very, very much God loves you and does exist. He's got blessings and graces and a final reward waiting for you too, if you'd just pick up your cross (perhaps your cross is that of Saint Thomas-'doubt'. He doubted yet he endured to the end to become a Saint) and follow him, enduring lifes struggles along the way. I am praying for you Brian.

O God, the everlasting Creator of all things, remember that the souls of unbelievers were made by Thee and formed in Thine own image and likeness. Remember that Jesus, Thy Son, endured a most bitter death for their salvation. Permit not, I beseech Thee, O Lord, that Thy Son should be any longer despised by unbelievers, but do Thou graciously accept the prayers of holy men and of the Church, the Spouse of Thy most holy Son, and be mindful of Thy mercy. Forget their idolatry and unbelief, and grant that they too may some day know Him whom Thou hast sent, even the Lord Jesus Christ, who is our Salvation, our Life and Resurrection, by whom we have been saved and delivered, to whom be glory for endless ages. Amen.

"Christless Crossless Gospel"?

Baptist Grandma returns with: There is one gospel ..it centers upon Christ and the cross and if you are not saved by THAT one you are not SAVED . period .I reckon for someone willing to accept the Christless Crossless Gospel of the Catholic church , such does not matter to you and you think it hateful of me and others who actually CARE enough to share the truth ..for the Record , I understand perfectly about saving faith or faith that has an action/works to it actually BELIEVES the word and works of God / trusts in HIM and walks in it without adding things they have to do to be saved (RCC's saved by works doctrine), as opposed to walking in their OWN actions ..It takes humility to actually put all you are in God's hands you Catholics deny the work of Christ and make it out to be of ZERO power to do anything or of ZERO importance if we do not add to it by some work of our own , or some obedience to your church ..you're parroting a basic Catholic ERROR ..whenever I see it I am going to correct it lest some come reading in here who do not know and believe a lie .

My response: Welcome back Baptist Grandma. I am sure you think you explained yourself and maybe you did to others, but for the life of me, I unfortunately do not and can not understand what you mean by "Christless Crossless Gospel of the Catholic Church". The Catholic Church is neither "Christless" nor is it "crossless" as we have crucifixes in all our parish churches and Christ is the very center of our mass and worship. If you care to further explain what you mean, my email is always available or you may comment at the end of this post. You also mention "RCC's saved by works doctrine", "Catholics deny the work of Christ" and ironic in my opinion you tell me about "humility". Then, your last comment insinuates I am lying about something. Let me assure you I am not lying, I am sharing my faith and responding to misconceptions about my faith to the best of my abilities. Now if a Catholic who knows the faith better than I (and I am sure there are hundreds of thousands who do) sees an error I hope they will let me know as it is not my intention to post any Catholic belief in error. I welcome their correction and likewise when someone writes to me with something in error I am going to correct them.
In response to all you've said above, I will begin with what you THINK Catholics believe about "works". Number one, we do not believe we are saved by "works". Salvation comes by the Grace of God. Period. Number two, if you read Matt. 25 about the "sheep and the goats" you will see that action "works" is part of our faith and it is a requirement for all Christians. We can't just pay lip service to our Lord, we also need to show that we truly love and care for others as He did by serving others. Christ came to bring salvation and while he was here he helped and served others. He didn't ignore those in need and neither should Christians. THAT is what "works" is about, following the actions of Christ. We are not earning our salvation, we are living out our faith as Christ did. Can you understand the difference in that and what you erroneously called "saved by works doctrine"? How are the sheep and goats separated may I ask you? Are they separated by their faith or by their actions "works"? Where do those who do works spend eternity? Where do those without works spend eternity? You need to answer those questions and then re-evaluate your views on "works". A few scripture verses for you to consider while thinking about the faith and works in our salvation is James 2:24 "You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone." - James 2:26 "As the body without spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead." (NIV Bible)
Next you mention "Catholics deny the work of Christ". I have to ask "How?". Jesus Christ brought salvation to the world. Christ was sacrificed for our sins. Catholics do not deny the work of Christ in anyway. If you have something specific in mind, would you clarify what it is? We look upon the image of Christ's death on the cross each and every time we look at a crucifix or go to mass. Catholics do not make Christ out to have "zero power" or "zero importance". Like I said before, Christ is the very center of our worship. Christ is our Savior and Lord of our lives. He is the King of Kings. I truly have no idea where you get this "zero" theology view from but I assure you, it is not part of our Catholic faith in any way.
And for the record, here is the definition of "humility" from my Webster's desk dictionary: "modesty in self-estimation; humbleness."
I'd like to suggest, that if you truly want to know what Catholics believe you get yourself a Catholic catechism and take a look for yourself. I believe you are picking up anti-Catholic views and erroneous information about the Catholic faith from anti-Catholic sources. And as always, you are welcome to write to me or comment here on this blog, it's open to anyone who wishes to share their thoughts and opinions on Catholic beliefs.