A Reminder: The Teaching of the Catholic Church on Marital Obedience

Second only to the Church’s teachings on usury and the duties of the state to the Catholic faith, the Church’s teaching on obedience in marriage is one of the most maligned and ignored by those tasked with defending it. When you encounter the modern view on this question, as with the others, simply quote the Church’s teaching and demand that the defender of the modern view produce a verbatim retraction (which of course will not be forthcoming):

“On the other hand, the duties of a wife are thus summed up by the Prince of the Apostles: Let wives be subject to their husbands. that if any believe not the word, they may be won without the word by the conversation of the wives, considering your chaste conversation with fear. Let not their adorning be the outward plaiting of the hair, or the wearing of gold, or the putting on of apparel: but the hidden man of the heart in the incorruptibility of a quiet and meek spirit, which is rich in the sight of God. For after this manner heretofore the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection to their own husbands, as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling hint lord.

To train their children in the practice of virtue and to pay particular attention to their domestic concerns should also be especial objects of their attention. The wife should love to remain at home, unless compelled by necessity to go out; and she should never presume to leave home without her husband’s consent.

Again, and in this the conjugal union chiefly consists, let wives never forget that next to God they are to love their husbands, to esteem them above all others, yielding to them in all things not inconsistent with Christian piety, a willing and ready obedience.” [i]Catechism of the Council of Trent: The Sacrament of Matrimony[/i]

Standard

A Message to Steve Bannon

“If you want something done right, do it yourself”

You don’t have time to cultivate another nationalist populist candidate. Go for the Presidency. Tell people that you’ll do the things Trump said he’d do.

Standard

A Donald for a Caesar

I don’t approve of having a republic as a form of government. That said, it’s certainly true that some republican systems are better than others. For example, the ancient Romans wisely had a practice whereby, in a situation of national crisis, a dictator would be appointed on a temporary basis. While the emergency continued, the dictator’s rule was absolute.

It should be clear at this point, that on January 6th, after the electoral votes were officially counted, Trump should have stated something to this effect:

“Much like us, the ancient Romans had a republic, and it was a wonderful republic, believe me. Now, in order to keep things on track, they would in times of serious national crisis appoint one man to be a temporary absolute ruler, whose word was law. Now, it’s apparent that draining the swamp will not be possible if I have to work within the current legal apparatus, therefore I will take my election as such a mandate. So, upon taking office, I will unilaterally promulgate any law, budget, or executive order that I deem necessary to Make America Great Again, and I will not allow for any judicial or other review.

Now, I’m not for true dictatorship of course, so I’ll allow a little bit of oversight in this: if Congress finds this unacceptable, either now or in the future, they can impeach me, and I’ll step down voluntarily. I’m even giving them two weeks fair warning, in case they want to preempt me entirely. Personally, given a choice between career suicide and an eight-year paid vacation, I’d take the latter, but it’s up to them.”

Standard

A note on the CIA

Just a note:

The CIA is, by virtue of its publicly acknowledged purposes, a group of dishonest execrable liars who encourage people to commit treason against their countries. If the government were just, its members would be executed from the top down for espionage.

Carry on.

Standard