Saturday, October 31, 2009

Protest Semi-porn Blasphemy Images of Our Lady of Fatima and Saints

America Needs Fatima

Send your instant e-protest to the Minister of Justice of Spain against a calendar that shows the Fatima apparitions in a perverted and homosexual sense.

October 26, 2009

My heart is sick to tell you, but...

...as Catholics, we must defend Our Lady's honor, especially when She is blasphemed, and shown half-naked!

According to press reports, homosexual groups in Spain published a calendar that has horrific, unspeakable blasphemies against Our Lady of Fatima and other Marian apparitions!

Besides a man that is practically naked alongside Our Lady, the calendar has "images that are based on famous works of sacred art, especially apparitions of the Virgin Mary, but interpreted by transsexuals.

"In the 'Secular Calendar,' each month is represented by a free interpretation of famous scenes of Catholic imagery, such as Our Lady of Fatima and the three shepherd children. But redecorated with homosexual esthetics."

"The scenes show saints dressed as drag queens, using crowns, necklaces, bracelets, and colored condoms with applicators and vibrators attached to the crowns."

Moreover, the homosexual group behind the calendar suggests December 25 be officially declared the Day of Democracy instead of Christmas. (BOL Noticias, online 10/19/09). http://noticias.bol.uol.com.br/internacional/2009/10/19/ult36u47296.jhtm
--- (Access with caution).

As Catholics, you and I cannot remain silent before such blasphemous insults to Our Lady and the Catholic faith! No matter where in the world it is.

So please send a protest message NOW via email to the Minister of Justice in Spain.

It's vital that you send your message right away. I don't believe the honor of Our Lady has ever been attacked like this before in history. Ever!

You and I, and tens of thousands of Americans MUST speak out against this and spread our just outrage to other countries too. And, with God's help, our prayers and protest may become so huge that the authorities in Spain will enforce the country's anti-blasphemy laws, and prohibit this blasphemous calendar.

How wonderful that would be!

For love of Our Blessed Mother, please pray this happens.

So please send your e-message today to the Minister of Justice of Spain.

And consider forwarding this email message to all the Catholics you know.

And since the honor of Our Lady was insulted in the worst way ever, you and I MUST offer the most fervent and widespread act of reparation possible at this time.

To join our nationwide, even worldwide campaign of reparation, please go here to download and pray these acts of reparation to the Immaculate Heart of Mary and the Sacred Heart of Jesus.

Thank you for joining me in this fervent, filial and global act of reparation in face of such a vile, unspeakable blasphemy against our dearest and purest Mother.

May God bless you!



Sincerely in Jesu et Maria

Robert E. Ritchie
America Needs Fatima
www.ANF.org

PS --- Please send your instant e-mail protest against this blasphemy to the Minister of Justice of Spain at https://www.americaneedsfatima.net/campaigns/E0075/protest-terrible-blasphemy-to-our-lady-of-fatima.html

Above all, please pray that our protest be blessed by God, and that hundreds of thousands of Americans join Catholics worldwide in defending the holy honor of Our Lady against this vile calendar.


Spider-Man vs. Porn

By Fred Martinez

Steve Ditko, the original artist and co-creator of the Spider-Man comic, which is now a record-breaking hit movie, is the Greta Garbo of comic books.

Refusing to give interviews for 20 years, he recently refused interviews for major articles about him by the Los Angeles Times and one of Canada's leading newspapers, the National Post.

Ditko, however, explained his philosophy of art in a narrative on a 1987 video titled "The Masters of Comic Book Art," hosted by author Harlan Ellison. In his introduction, Ellison dismissed Ditko's plea that heroes in art and literature be measured by the moral courage shown in objective good vs. evil choices.

The artist now seems prophetic for saying in the show that if we glorify the anti-hero in art, then anti-life and violence will come into our culture. The anti-heroes of the Columbine-like killings in public schools and the Sept. 11 terrorists seem to justify his claim.

What our American and global culture needs are heroes as models. In the program, the artist and co-creator of Spider-Man says, "Aristotle said that art is more important than history. History tells how man did act. Art shows how man should and could act. It creates a model.

"The self-flawed and anti-hero provide the heroic label without the need to act better. A crooked cop, a flawed cop, is not a valid model of a good law enforcer," Ditko said in the program. "An anti-cop corrupts the legal good, and an anti-hero corrupts the moral good."

Spider-Man as a Model for Good

The power of Ditko's art has in fact influenced youth toward good. In the fall 2001 issue of the Jesuit, a teenager named Pedro tells how he was inspired to go to college by Spider-Man's message.

"Spider-Man got his power when he was a teenager and wasn't sure how to use it," Pedro explains. "So his grandfather [actually uncle] told him, 'With greater power comes greater responsibility.' That's the way it is at Cristo Rey. We're learning to make the world a better place. We're going to go to college and give a whole lot back from what we've been given."

Some are saying that Spider-Man is even a type of Christ. In his essay for the video, Ditko seems at times to be describing Spider-Man as well as Christ. He said, "Early comic book heroes were not about life as it is, but creation of how a man with a clear understanding of right and wrong and the moral courage to choose acts even if branded an outlaw."

On the Internet, I found the testimony of a man who used Ditko's art to turn to God. Mark Dukes, now a deacon of the African Orthodox Church, said:

"My father wasn't around. My mother was a single parent. It was a vacuum in my life. Who am I supposed to be? How am I supposed to be?

"For me, Spider-Man really resonated. Spider-Man's alter ego was Peter Parker, who was a nerd. And I didn't feel like I was a cool guy either. Spider-Man was disliked and feared. Everyone thought he was a crook, but he was a good guy. No one gave him any respect but he continued to do good even in the face of all that.

"He would sacrifice himself, get beat up and then people would say 'Ahhh. Spider-Man! Run. He's going to do something to us!' And really he had just now saved the world. That is very saintly.

"For me, Spider-Man was a type of Christ. He went through suffering just to do good. And he continued to do it even in the face of everyone misunderstanding him and hating him."

Spider-Man, Icon Art and Invisible Realities

Dukes is an artist of Orthodox icons for churches, which is art that doesn't at times have the same perspective or photo-realistic graphics, like Ditko's early drawings of Spider-Man.

Blake Bell, creator of Ditko.Comics Web site, said:

"Visually, Ditko had what most people would consider a cartoony style, but his work was far more real than the "photo-realist" comic artists that would appear on the scene in the following 20 years.

"His was more real because the visual laws defined in his universe were so real, so consistent, that one suspends disbelief to its maximum."

Icon historian Andrei Navrozov, in the June issue of Chronicles, agrees with Bell that art can either be about "gaining a deeper understanding" of reality by symbols or can "mimic" reality.

Perspective was first invented in 470 B.C. by Agatharchus as a means of "geometric illusionism" to mimic reality in stage sets for theater, according to the icon historian.

Navrozov said the "theater set is conceived as a fiction, whereas a [icon] painting is born as an attempt at truth of life, an attempt that in no sense compromises the integrity of the original [reality]. ... They are symbols of real life, not lifelike imitations of reality.

"There is no deeper conflict in history than that between these opposing views of art. 'Is art to serve reality and the individual under God or is it to serve [materialistic] realism and the masses under communism?"

Navrozov shows us that the modern battleground against God and reality is imagery and the imagination. Michael O' Brien in "A Landscape with Dragons: The Battle for Your Child's Mind" said that the imagination is the way that mankind comprehends "God's territory" and his created "invisible realities."

The modern imagination, according to O'Brien, has lost "God's territory" by returning to its "pre-pagan split in consciousness," which is the Gnostic rejection of the "sacramental" unity of spirit and matter, the addiction to occult tales of will to power like Harry Potter, and the relativistic denial of good and evil with ends-justify-the means storylines.

J.R.R. Tolkien's "The Lord of the Rings" is for O'Brien a prime example of a return to the Western Christian epic tradition of the moral imagination, which comprehends "God's territory" and his created "invisible realities."

O'Brien said, "The discernment of the right paths that must be taken, if good is to triumph, is dramatized in the myriad geographical, emotional, spiritual, and symbolic choices faced by the questers. In each of these, Tolkein's world is faithful to the moral order of the universe, to the absolute necessity of freedom. Middle-earth is a "sacramental" world, an "incarnational" world. ... Spirit [invisible realities] and matter are never portrayed as adversaries."


Western Culture Based on Reality and God

The Western Christian culture was rooted in this service to reality and God. Reality was the belief in the objectivity of things that are both material and spiritual. During the last two to five centuries, materialistic modernity has been the adversary of this spiritual and matter "incarnational" worldview.

This "incarnational" reality was rooted out and refilled with the lone materialistic science and "realism" in art worldview – in which reality was contained only within material objects that could be tested or seen.

Spiritual (invisible) realities like God, love, beauty, responsibility and free will were neither seeable, material nor testable, so they were not within modernity's realism.

Modernity attacked the primacy of realistic philosophies such as Thomism and realistic symbolic literature like Dante's spiritual epics and Shakespeare's dramas contrasting persons who were symbols of the conflicting real worldviews of modernity and the older realistic philosophy.

Hamlet's "To be or not to be?" illustrates what the two cultures were in conflict about. In our time, Clinton ("What is the definition of is?") is the symbol of modernity's denial of "to be" or objective truth or falsehood.

Modernity, in its desire to stamp out the Christian culture, dislodged Thomism realistic philosophy and realistic symbolic literatures with Pavlovian behaviorism as well as the materialistic reductive studies and application of art, which represented only material acts. Such as Freud's deterministic reduction of all symbols of the mind to represent only the physical acts of sex and Picasso's sexual anti-art.

This cramped reality of only the materially seeable or testable led to rootlessness and alienation, which was so unbearable to modern man that there was a reaction. According to philosopher Allan Bloom, Friedrich Nietzsche's philosophy of disbelief in all reality, seeable or unseeable – material or spiritual – became the language of the American reaction.

Friedrich Nietzsche's values philosophy led to the subjectivity of all concepts of objective truth, which included good and evil.

Many will remember when President Reagan called the USSR "the evil empire"; he was roundly criticized for violating the new language of "beyond good and evil." This language of value relativism allows for neither the words nor the symbols of evil and good.

Nietzsche's anti-reality philosophy of "God is dead" led to the anti-heroes of politics and art.

In society this led to the denial of the concepts of absolute truth and the law of identity in reality by modernist artists such as Pablo Picasso and by politicians such as Clinton. This rejection of good and evil in turn led to the degrading of women and sexuality.

In the case of Picasso, E. Michael Jones in "Degenerate Moderns" says:

"His break with the traditions was an index of his hatred not only toward the spiritual values of the West but toward the human body and spirit that the West prized as good. In the end, the only thing that Picasso portrayed realistically was the woman's crotch. Modern art had returned to its roots, and the gaping crotch was the only thing now that could keep the aging Picasso in touch with the real world."

Spider-Man the Hero

On the other hand, the hit Spider-Man movie may be a sign that our society wants to go back to the culture that Nietzsche, Picasso and Clinton rejected – a culture that was able to see the objective reality of God, love, beauty, responsibility, free will and the honorable hero.

In the climax of the movie, at the top of a bridge, the Green Goblin's hand holds up the woman that Spider-Man loves and in the other hand he holds a cable with a tram full of children dangling at the other end.

Then the villain lets them fall to their deaths. As he does this, he gives Spider-Man a choice by saying, "You can save either the girl or the children."

Spider-Man, almost miraculously, saves both. For some, this is symbolic of the need in our society to return to the Christian tradition of men retaking the heroic responsibility of showing love by committing both to his woman and the fruit of their love through "better or worse" for life.

As our hero slowly lowers, by the cable, his love and the children to safety, he is repeatedly knocked around by the Green Goblin.

The Goblin taunts him to let go and save himself, which would mean the deaths of those he is lowering. But as the villain zeros in for the kill, Spider-Man is ready to give his life for others, as another hero did 2,000 years ago.

With the help of New Yorkers, Spider-Man saves his love and the children and defeats the Goblin, who finally begs for mercy. As our hero is about to give him his hand, the villain sends his high-tech vehicle to kill Spider-Man from behind. Spidey avoids the vehicle and it ends up killing the Goblin.

This is the Christian message in a symbolic nutshell.

God will forgive anyone no matter what the offense, with only one exception. The only offense God can't forgive without destroying our free will is one's choice to reject mercy. By the Judas choice, one freely sends oneself to where God is not, which is the definition of hell.


Pornography and Clinton the Anti-hero

The Democrats and their public relations agency, the media, are at the other end of the symbolic spectrum, as real-life anti-heroes who use the seduction marketing trick of association to sell lies.

Years ago, in Catholic books, association meant personal relationships with good or bad companions – friendships that led to depravity or honorable lives.

Association now means creating the false impression that a product, place, thing or politician is like the symbol he figuratively stands next to. Nike shoes are "good" because stars like Michael Jordan wear them, or toothpaste will make you popular because that's what happens in the commercial.

It's a con job to sell products and politicians. Sadly, the shadier part of our economic culture is based on this tactic. This shallow magician's trick, as with all lies, leads to meaninglessness and despair.

The selling of pornography to the masses by associating it with constitutional freedoms would make our founding fathers turn over in their graves.

Porn is not only bad, it is also an empty evil that can only mimic reality. It's men having imaginary relationships with glossed-over images of what was once a picture of a real woman, betraying her most intimate self and future relationships. The emptiness keeps multiplying.

Porn is not symbolic of real life, but a lifelike imitation of reality.

As Navrozov said, "There is no deeper conflict in history than that between these opposing views of art. 'Is art to serve reality and the individual under God or is it to serve [materialistic] realism and the masses."

The marketing and selling of porn brings us to Bill Clinton, who, despite promises to the contrary, disrupted the "obscenity prosecution" of Ronald Reagan's task force, which had the porn industry in "serious trouble in the late '80s and early '90s."

Culture War editor E. Michael Jones said, " This [Reagan] task force caused a major rollback of the porn industry during the late '80s and early '90s. ... Florida, according to Sears, was on its way to becoming a porn-free state – except for one county, whose District Attorney inexplicably refused to prosecute cases. That county was Dade county and the name of the DA was Janet Reno and she became the Attorney General when William Jefferson Clinton took office in 1992. That event signaled the end of the federal task force to prosecute pornography."

Clinton lived the message. He was the presidential X-rated soap opera star for the $10 billion annual pornography industry.

Our society was willing to accept Clinton as an anti-hero. And as Ditko said, "[A]n anti-hero corrupts the moral good."

His presidential movie star appeal and the porn industry's money helped his party by association to sell porn, homosexuality, abortion and masturbation all the way down to the elementary schools.



Mr. Clinton, There Is an Is

A few years ago, I spoke with a Texan director of a crisis pregnancy center who has saved thousands of unborn babies. We spoke of a pro-life group whose top priority – to put it mildly – was not saving as many babies as possible. He said to stay away from them because they are "spiritual masturbators."

I love new word combinations, so I researched it to see where it would take me. I found masturbation to be a good metaphor for the spiritual direction our society is taking.

"The ultimate direction of masturbation always has to be insanity," Norman Mailer said. If one has, for example, the image of a beautiful sexy babe in masturbation, one still doesn't know whether one can make love to her in the flesh. All you know is that you can violate her in the brain. ... But, if one has fought the good or evil fight and ended with the beautiful sexy dame ... one has something real to build on."

Masturbation – as the pornography industry knows – is a profitable lie. For example, if someone says he had sex with a porn star and he didn't, it is a lie. If one imagines having sex with a porn star, it is still an untruth. The imagination is used to reach unreality.

In contrast to this abuse, the imagination can be used to reach into deep reality. As philosopher Edith Stein showed, truth can be found using the phenomenon of the imagination. As Thomas Aquinas also demonstrated, the mind can grasp the realities of love, truth and God using the phenomena of the imagination and reason. One only need read Shakespeare or G.K. Chesterton to see the imagination grasping deep truths.

Chesterton, in a book on Thomas Aquinas' philosophy, shows how the reason and imagination can work together to reveal the philosophical reality of being:

"A brilliant Victorian scientist delighted in declaring that the child does not see any grass at all; but only a sort of green mist reflected in a tiny mirror of the human eye.

"This piece of rationalism has always struck me as almost insanely irrational. If he is not sure of the existence of the grass, which he sees through the glass of a window, how on earth can he be sure of the existence of the retina, which he sees through the glass of a microscope. ... [T]he child is aware of Ens [being]. Long before he knows that grass is grass, or self is self, he knows that something is something. Perhaps it would be best to say very emphatically [with a blow on the table], There is an Is ... a thing cannot be and not be. Henceforth, in common or popular language, there is false and true."

The masturbator who imagines he is with the porn star is not in is – or, in common language, he is in falsehood. His body and imagination are moving – as moderns would say, progressing – but the direction of his mind is toward unreality. The porn addict and people like Clinton must always ask for the definition of 'is' because they are living in a lie.

Once one denies absolute truth and the law of identity, he will live in a lie. Ditko said, "Aristotle formulated the law of identity. A is A. A thing is what it is. It has a specific nature and identity. It cannot contradict itself and be a lie."

Our society has this choice.

It can either go the Clintonian direction toward the unreality of the pornography industry, which does not want an is because then it would have to be morally responsible.

Or it can go in the direction of the reality that Ditko points to, where there is an is, as well as the reality of God, love, beauty, free will, responsibility and the honorable hero.

Why do the Leftists and Gay Culture’s Rejection of Objective Truth leads to Sexually Abusing Children?


Professor Allan Bloom, author of "The Closing of the American Mind, " said that the only virtue 50 years of Nietzsche's influence on public education – and he could have said 30 years of Catholic education – has achieved is relativity of truth. Bloom said relativism "is the modern replacement for the inalienable natural rights that used to be the traditional ground for a free society."
The move away from objective truth leads to universal rights being replaced by Nietzsche's will to power. Bloom, for example, showed how the old civil rights movement "relied on the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution." But the new Black Power movement considered the Constitution "corrupt" and demanded a "black identity, not universal rights. Not rights but power counted."
The liberal "Catholics" speak the jargon of the Catholic while following Nietzsche's will to power. They understand power and hold most of the power positions in the infrastructure of the American Church.
According to Catholic scholar James Hitchcock, the leftist "clerical homosexual network" extends to "bishops, seminary rectors, chancery officials, [and] superiors of religious orders."
The "real" Catholics, the ones not infected with relativism and will to power, not realizing that their opponents use words as ploys to attain power, still use logic in an attempt to reason them back into objective truth. So they control many publications, as well as the EWTN Cable Network, but they have power over only a few dioceses, colleges and high schools, where the real power is.
Meanwhile, the Nietzschean "Catholics" are going for the throat by going after the young. They control the American Catholic high school system, which is pro-homosexual, and filter out Roman Church documents such as the Catechism of the Catholic Church. The Catechism states that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered ... [and] under no circumstances can they be approved."
That the Catholic schools are not teaching the Catechism of the Catholic Church is shown by recent polls which found that the vast majority of Catholic high school students are pro-gay. That is, they buy the whole gay agenda and even have gay clubs at their Catholic schools.
Norman Mailer, in his book "Prisoner of Sex," shows why this relativism and moving away from natural objective truths such as heterosexual sex can lead to will to power:
"So, yes, [homosexuals] in prison strive to become part of the male population, and indeed – it is the irony of homosexuality – try to take on the masculine powers of the man who enters them, even as the studs, if Genet is our accurate guide, become effeminate over the years. ... Homosexuality is not heterosexuality. There is no conception possible, no, no inner space, no damnable spongy pool of a womb ... no hint remains of the awe that a life in these circumstances can be conceived. Heterosexual sex with contraception is become by this logic a form of sexual currency closer to the homosexual than the heterosexual, a clearinghouse for power, a market for psychic power in which the stronger will use the weaker, and the female in the act, whether possessed of a vagina or phallus, will look to ingest or steal the masculine qualities of the dominator."
This is the end result when universal truths and responsibility toward those truths are denied. The only "currency" left to the left is stealing of power, because they are insecure in any truth including their own objective masculinity.
Unsure of their own objective masculinity – or any objective truth, for that matter – they will not tolerate truth, calling it intolerance. They will not tolerate the truth of the purpose of sex, which is married love, with the creation of a secure family for the children of that love.
Leftists replace the traditional family with sexual power struggles that lead to the death mills of the abortion industry and the graveyards of AIDS and the abandonment of children and women at the altar of free sex.
Sex is not free. It was once a responsibility that a mature man entered into for life, for the security of his beloved children and wife.
Likewise, liberals replace the Constitution with sex and ethnic power struggles that lead to the breaking of the rule of law. If a president can sexually abuse women and possibly even rape them, then obstruct justice and lie under oath, are we under the rule of law? If our society will not tolerate truth, then men and women are not secure in their "inalienable natural rights that used to be the traditional ground for a free society," as Bloom said.
If we reject the rule of law and natural rights, our society will progress toward the Clintonian power tactics of prison homosexuals. The leftists in the Church and the media rejecting objective truth no longer want to be identified as men of objective faith and reason, but rather as Nietzschean post-modernists to be identified with the "culture" of the gay and Clintonian playboy slogans of the media elite.
The media elite uses management tactics on anyone who wants to be identified as a man of objective morals, faith and reason. They redefine the meaning of words like morals, faith and reason through association and repetition, then isolate those who don't accept the new definitions, after which they ostracize the good name of any person or group that doesn't accept the new "culture" and isn't a "team player."
The very respected scholar Edgar H. Schein of MIT Sloan School of Management explains the process in "Organizational Learning as Cognitive Re-definition: Coercive Persuasion Revisited":
"It may seem absurd to the reader to draw an analogy between the coercive persuasion in political prisons and a new leader announcing that he or she is going 'to change the culture.'
"However, if the leader really means it, if the change will really affect fundamental assumptions and values, one can anticipate levels of anxiety and resistance quite comparable to those one would see in prisons. The coercive element is not as strong. More people will simply leave before they change their cognitive structures, but if they have a financial stake or a career investment in the organization, they face the same pressure to 'convert' that the prisoner did. ... Consider, for example, what it means to impose a 'culture of teamwork' based on 'openness and mutual trust' in an individualistic society."
By using this process, the leftists with the media's marketing ability learned they could create massive peer pressure – some would call it a "mob mentality," which changes the worldview of people with weak morals, weak faith or the Judas mentality. These types of people see themselves as the "elite" because they accept the "culture of teamwork" and have "openness" to the new definitions.
These persons wishing to be part of the "culture" or "team" are open to cognitive re-definition. Schein explains how the process works:
"'Cognitive redefinition' involved two different processes. First, concepts like crime and espionage had to be semantically redefined. Crime is an abstraction that can mean different things in different conceptual systems when one makes it concrete. Second, standards of judgment had to be altered. Even within the western concept of crime, what was previously regarded as trivial was now seen to be serious. The anchors by which judgments are made are shifted and the point of neutrality is moved. Behavior that was previously judged to be neutral or of no consequence became criminal, once the anchor of what was a minimum crime was shifted. These two processes, semantic re-definition and changing one's anchors for what is good or bad, acceptable or unacceptable, are the essence of cognitive re-definition."
Bloom thought that Nietzsche was the father of modern America culture. He said, "Words such as 'charisma,' 'lifestyle,' 'commitment,' 'identity,' and many others, all of which can easily be traced to Nietzsche ... are now practically American slang."
But the most important Nietzschean slang word is "values."
"Values" are the death of Christian morality because values simply mean opinions. If opinion is how things are decided, then might makes right.
One must remember that whenever someone talks about values in modern America – family values or religious values or place-the-blank-in-front-of values – they are saying there is no real or objective right or wrong – only opinions of the self and its will to power.
Nietzsche's philosophy is summed up by Bloom as
Commitment values the values and makes them valuable. Not love of truth but intellectual honesty characterizes the proper state of mind. Since there is no truth in the values, and what truth there is about life is not lovable, the hallmark of the authentic will is consulting one's oracle while facing up to what one is and what one experiences. Decisions, not, deliberations, are the movers of deeds. One cannot know or plan the future. One must will it.
As a philologist, Nietzsche believed there was no original text and transferred this belief to reality, which he thought was only pure chaos. He proposed will to power in which one imposes or "posits" one's values on a meaningless world.
Previous to Freud's psychoanalysis, Nietzsche's writings spoke of the unconscious and destructive side of the self. In fact, Freud wrote that Nietzsche "had a more penetrating knowledge of himself than any other man who ever lived or was likely to live."
Max Weber and Sigmund Freud are the two writers most responsible for Nietzschean language in America. Few know that Freud was " profoundly influenced by Nietzsche," according to Bloom. Freud, much more than Weber, profoundly changed America from a Christian culture to a therapeutic or self-centered culture.
The therapeutic approaches, which started with Freud, have a basic assumption that is not Christian. The starting point is not the Christian worldview, which is summed up in the parable of the prodigal son: a fallen and sinful world with persons needing God the Father to forgive them so they can return to be His sons and daughters.
Unlike the Christian worldview, the therapeutic starting point is that the individual must overcome personal unconscious forces, in Freud, and in Carl Jung the person must unite to the collective unconscious, which is shared by all humans.
In both cases, the therapist assists his client to change himself to 'become his real self.' Forgiveness and returning to God are not needed. What is needed are not God and His Forgiveness, but a therapist assisting a self to reach the fullness of its self.
Freud, under the influence of Nietzsche, moved psychiatry away from the mechanistic and biological to the previously "unscientific" model of the "symbolic language of the unconscious."
Freud's pupil Carl Jung took the symbolic language of the unconscious a step further. Unlike his mentor, Jung's unconscious theory is not just about making conscious sexually repressed or forgotten memories. His symbolic therapy used what he called the "active imagination" to incorporate split-off parts of the unconscious (complexes) into the conscious mind.
He believed with Freud that dreams and symbols are means to the unconscious, but for Jung the dream and symbol are not repressed lusts from stages of development. They are a way to unite with the collective unconsciousness.
Many Christians thought this "language of the soul" was a step forward from what they considered the cramped scientific reality of modernity. What they didn't understand was that Jung's theory was part of a movement that led to the rejection of objective morality and truth.
Jungian (and Freudian) psychoanalysis reduces Christian concepts such as God, free will and intelligence to blind reactions, unconscious urges and uncontrollable acts. Even more disastrous, Jung inverted Christian worship.
Leanne Payne, a Christian therapist, considers Jung "not a scientist, but a post-modernist subjectivist. Jung's active imagination therapy is hostile not only to the Judeo-Christian worldview, but to all systems containing objective moral and spiritual value. Within this world the unconscious urge becomes god. What the unconscious urge wants is what is finally right or moral. These psychic personae [complexes] are literally called 'gods' (archetypes),' and so an overt idolatry of self follows quickly."
Within the modern French Nietzschean schools of thought, a type of Jungian unconscious urge is replacing the old existential conscious self who chooses. The post-modernist is moving from the idolatry of self to the idolatry of autonomous inner "beings" that, according to Payne, are similar to pagan "gods."
As C.S. Lewis predicted in "The Screwtape Letters," we are moving to a "scientific" paganism. C.S. Lewis' name for the "scientific" pagan was the Materialist Magician and the name of the autonomous inner "beings" was the "Forces."
In "The Screwtape Letters," his character who is a senior evil spirit said:
I have high hopes that we shall learn in due time how to emotionalise and mythologise their science to such an extent that what is, in effect, belief in us (though not under that name) will creep in while the human mind remains closed to the Enemy [God]. The "Life Force," the worship of sex, and some aspects of Psychoanalysis may here prove useful. If once we can produce our prefect work – the Materialist Magician, the man, not using, but veritably worshipping, what he vaguely calls "Forces" while denying the existence of "spirits" – then the end of the war will be in sight.
Some of the largest audiences for this "scientific" paganism with its inversion of worship and the Judeo-Christian worldview are followers of Christ. By using Christian symbols and terminology, Jungian spirituality has infiltrated to a large extent Christian publishers, seminaries, even convents and monasteries.
Many Christians are using Jung's active imagination as a method of prayer. Psychiatrist Jeffrey Satinover, M.D., thinks this is dangerous "because this fantasy life has no moral underpinnings, because it helps to reinforce an experience of autonomous inner 'beings' accessible via the imagination, and because it is a defense against redemptive suffering, it easily allies with and quickly becomes a Gnostic form of spiritually with powerfully occult overtones."
If one is under the influence of the autonomous inner "beings," uncontrollable urges can overpower the self. One can go temporarily or permanently insane. And in the Christian worldview, the autonomous inner "being" is not always just an imaginary being, but can be a personal being, which then makes possession a rare, but not impossible, occurrence.
In fact, according to one Jungian therapist, Nietzsche himself went insane permanently when an autonomous inner "being" (archetype) overpowered him. So, unfortunately with the widespread acceptance of Jungian spirituality, mainstream Christianity seems to be moving to post-modern Nietzschean insanity and possibly, in some cases, possession.
Jung's autobiography is full of insane or occult experiences. He was continually hearing 'voices.' In his autobiography he said his home was "... crammed full of spirits ... they were packed deep right up to the front door and the air was so thick it was scarcely possible to breathe."
During the Hitler regime, which itself was obsessed with the occult, Jung edited a Nazi psychotherapeutic journal where he said, "The 'Aryan' unconscious has a higher potential than the Jewish." Keep that word "potential" in your mind. It will be used by American psychology.
Once opinion is master, then might makes right. In "Beyond Good and Evil," Nietzsche proclaimed a new morality, "Master morality," which was different from Christian morality – or "slave morality," as he called it. He thought the weak have the morality of obedience and conformity to the master. Masters have a right to do whatever they want; since there is no God, everything is permissible.
In what Nietzsche considered his masterpiece, "Zarathustra," he said the new masters would replace the dead God. The masters were to be called Supermen, or the superior men.
After Freud and Jung came Alfred Adler, also a follower of Nietzsche, with "Individual psychology," which maintains that the individual strives for what he called "superiority" but now is called "self-realization" or "self-actualization," and which came from Nietzsche's ideas of striving and self-creation.
The "human potential movement" and humanistic psychology of Abraham Maslow and Carl Rogers are imbedded with these types of ideas. The psychologists of "potential" teach the superior man.
Edvard Munch said:
Alfred Adler translated Nietzsche's philosophical idea of "will to power" into the psychological concept of self-actualization. Thus, Nietzschean thought forms the foundation for and permeates Alfred Adler's Individual Psychology, Abraham Maslow's Humanistic Biology, Carl Rogers's Person-Centered Psychology, and has influenced many other psychological ideas and systems. ... Alfred Adler was the first psychologist to borrow directly from Nietzsche, making numerous references to the philosopher throughout his works. Adler took Nietzsche's idea of "will to power" and transformed it into the psychological concept of self-actualization, in which an individual strives to realize his potential.
Mary Kearns, in an address to the Catholic Head Teachers Association of Scotland, spoke of the Nietzschean ideas now being taught in Catholic schools in the name of "scientific" psychology. Kearns said:
The methods are based on "the group therapy technique" first developed in America in the 1970's by two psychologists, Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow. They described how emotional conditioning should be carried out by a group "facilitator". The facilitator does not impart knowledge like the old fashioned teacher. Instead he/she initiates discussions encouraging children to reveal their personal views and feelings. The facilitator's approach is "value free". There is no right or wrong answer to any religious or moral question. Each person discloses what is right or wrong for them. All choices are equally valid even if they are opposites. Everything depends on feelings or emotions. Reason and conscience are discouraged. If anyone attempts objective evaluation, they are to be treated as an "outsider" and there will be a strong emotional reaction against such "judgemental intolerance".

If it is true that Catholic education now uses these techniques in "teaching religious and moral education," then the Catholic education system has entered into the Nietzschean insanity. If these are the techniques being used in education and in the seminaries, then sexual misconduct charges against priests are a symptom of "scientific" paganism replacing Christianity.
Santa Rosa priest Don Kimball, who is charged with sexual misconduct, is an example of someone whose "approach" was "value free" – that is, there was "no right or wrong answer to any religious or moral question."
In 1996, Karyn Wolfe and Mark Spaulding of Pacific Church News said, "THE WEDGE! You can't do youth ministry (any ministry for that matter) without it. ... Basing his theory on psychologist Abraham Maslow's 'Hierarchy of Needs', the Rev. Don Kimball developed this model for the growth and maturity process of a group."
Another example of the value-free approach is Thomas Zanzig, a major leader in the Catholic Church for youth ministry, plus an editor and writer of Catholic textbooks.
According to Marks S. Winward, Zanzig, in a book on youth ministry, "bases his 'Wedge Model' on a similar model developed by Fr. Don Kimble." Homeschool leader Marianna Bartold said, "Sharing the Christian Message by Thomas Zanzig has students come up with as many slang or street words as possible for penis and vagina in three or four minutes."
Now, many might say these are only isolated cases of misuses of Maslow and Adler until one reads the original text. According to William Coulson, a former collaborator of Carl Rogers,
Maslow was always a revolutionary. ... In 1965, working a radical idea about children and adult sex into his book about management, "In Eupsychian Management: A Journal," [Maslow said]: "I remember talking with Alfred Adler about this in a kind of joking way, but then we both got quite serious about it, and Adler thought that this sexual therapy at various ages was certainly a very fine thing. As we both played with the thought, we envisioned a kind of social worker ... as a psychotherapist in giving therapy literally on the couch."
As one can see, the basic therapeutic assumption leads to certain results in the real world. These thinkers don't believe in the basic Christian assumption that there is a need for forgiveness from God. Instead, they believe there is no sin, only selves needing to reach the fullness of themselves.
It is understandable that atheists such as Maslow , Adler and Gay activists could hold these basic assumptions that sexually abusing children is okay, just as Hitler thought killing Jews was okay since all have the basic assumption is that there is no right or wrong. ,
But that Christians and priests hold these assumptions is a disgrace. The denial of original sin and personal sin is, in large part, behind the headlines of the Boston catastrophe and other dioceses

19 comments:

St.B said...

http://blasphemia-nervosa.blogspot.com/

I find your outrage somewhat astounding. You'd think as christians you'd comprehend the rights of free speech. We must tolerate your delusional diatribes, so you can withstand the jocularity of others. carpe diem

St.B said...

Blasphemia Nervosa/

Fred Martinez said...

Please remove http://blasphemia-nervosa.blogspot.com/ from my blog because it is sick porn and anti-Christian and anti-Islam.

Please pray for this homosexuals who seem satanic in their anti-Christian and anti-Islam views.



Fred Martinez

St.B said...

Sir, perhaps you should avail yourself of a dictionary.

par·o·dy [pérrədee]
n (plural par·o·dies)
1. amusing imitation: a piece of writing or music that deliberately copies another work in a comic or satirical way

Comedy is subjective.

Fred Martinez said...

C. S. Lewis in his book The Screwtape Letters describes the real agenda of this “comedy” as a "thousand miles away from joy; [in that]it deadens, instead of sharpening, the intellect."

In the book his character, who is a senior evil spirit, says:

"But Flippancy is the best of all. In the first place it is very economical. Only a clever human can make a real Joke about virtue, or indeed about anything else; any of them can be trained to talk as if virtue were funny. Among flippant people the Joke is always assumed to have been made. No one actually makes it; but every serious subject is discussed in a manner which implies that they have already found a ridiculous side to it. If prolonged, the habit of Flippancy builds up around a man the finest armour-plating against the Enemy [God] that I know, and it is quite free from the dangers inherent in the other sources of laughter. It is a thousand miles away from joy; it deadens, instead of sharpening, the intellect; and it excites no affection between those who practice it."

St.B said...

You used the words of a fictional demon to rebut? I suppose you fail to see the irony. You already use the words and acts of fictional characters to rule your everyday life and judge others by. There is a difference between parody/humor and flippancy. Humor and parody need understanding and knowledge, where as flippancy requires nothing but blindly brushing away anything you deem inconsequential. Oh, wait, I guess that would be you wouldn’t it? (That was sarcasm.)

I’ve always wanted to know… is ignorance really bliss?

Fred Martinez said...

Norman Mailer, in his book "Prisoner of Sex," shows why this relativism and moving away from natural objective truths such as heterosexual sex can lead to will to power:
"So, yes, [homosexuals] in prison strive to become part of the male population, and indeed – it is the irony of homosexuality – try to take on the masculine powers of the man who enters them, even as the studs, if Genet is our accurate guide, become effeminate over the years. ... Homosexuality is not heterosexuality. There is no conception possible, no, no inner space, no damnable spongy pool of a womb ... no hint remains of the awe that a life in these circumstances can be conceived. Heterosexual sex with contraception is become by this logic a form of sexual currency closer to the homosexual than the heterosexual, a clearinghouse for power, a market for psychic power in which the stronger will use the weaker, and the female in the act, whether possessed of a vagina or phallus, will look to ingest or steal the masculine qualities of the dominator."
This is the end result when universal truths and responsibility toward those truths are denied. The only "currency" left to the left is stealing of power, because they are insecure in any truth including their own objective masculinity.
Unsure of their own objective masculinity – or any objective truth, for that matter – they will not tolerate truth, calling it intolerance. They will not tolerate the truth of the purpose of sex, which is married love, with the creation of a secure family for the children of that love.

St.B said...

Homosexuality is God’s way of insuring that the truly gifted aren’t burdened with children. -Sam Austin


To your choice as Mailer being your verbal representative... he hardly espouses your religious ideology.

Quoting Mailer via The New York Post, Oct.7th, 2007:

"MICHAEL LENNON: Let’s start at the beginning, with your views on God.
MAILER: Much of the world’s present-day cosmology is based on such works of revelation as the Old and New Testament, or the Koran, but for me, revelation is itself the question mark—not God’s word, but ours."

"Fundamentalists look to alleviate that fear by way of what I would call their desperate belief that it’s “God’s will” and at the end they will be transported to Heaven."

"I’ve never understood this: Why is there this enormous desire in God to be glorified? Why is that so acceptable to so many branches of religion? We laugh at people who insist on being constantly glorified. We speak of neurotic movie stars or spoiled athletes, crazy generals and impossible authors, mad kings and greed-bag tycoons. One of the few things we all seem to agree on is that excessive vanity, once it has grown into a thing in itself, is dire. By that logic, a God-sized vanity is hard to comprehend. Where is the need for it?"

Fred Martinez said...

First note that in order for the universe to fall back in on itself there would have to be enough mass for gravity to overcome the outward force of the expansion. But according to the best estimates scientists have, there isn't enough matter to cause such a contraction. Consequently, if the universe cannot contract, there could have been no previous big bangs and no endless cycles. At most you could posit one big bang.

There is nothing that would cause the universe to expand again after it had collapsed. If such a collapse occurred - a big crunch, so to speak - the universe would remain in an unimaginably compressed state, never capable of expanding again. The tremendous gravity exerted by such a great mass would prevent any expansion. Black holes, which are most probably collapsed stars, are an example of this phenomenon on a much smaller scale. A black hole's gravitational pull is so strong not even light is able to escape from it.

If all the matter in the universe were compressed into a single black hole or something like a black hole, the gravitational forces would be incalculable, and it is hard to imagine anything that could overcome them. If they couldn't be overcome, nothing could escape in the form of another big bang.

Even if there were a mechanism to re-expand the universe, each cycle of expansion and contraction would lose energy because of entropy, the tendency to of matter run down, much as a spring-driven clock runs down. The extent of the universe's expansion would diminish with each cycle - consider how swings of a pendulum slowly diminish - and eventually the universe would cease expanding entirely, its mass remaining collapsed. There could never be an infinite number of successive expansions and contractions.

Keep in mind that the idea that the universe came into existence as a result of a cataclysmic explosion of highly compressed matter is not inconsistent with the Catholic teaching that God created the universe. A big bang could have been part of his method of creation.

But an atheist has a problem here. If there really was a big bang, and if there could not have been an infinite series of big bangs before the present one, then there are only two possibilities: Either God created matter out of nothing and (arguably) set things going through a big bang - this alternative destroys atheism - or matter existed for an infinite amount of time in a primordial black hole state. But if it existed that way for an infinite amount of time, it never could have exploded in the big bang.

If an infinite amount of time passed without a big bang, then every combination of protoplasmic matter and energy would have existed at one time or another within that black hole, without any one combination leading to the big bang. All the combinations would have been tried, and none of them would have produced the explosion. (Remember, this presumes an infinite amount of time.) If none of the combinations could have produced a big bang, and if a big bang occurred anyway, it could have arisen only from outside intervention, not from anything inside the black hole.
Since the whole of the universe - all matter and energy, even space Itself - was compressed into the black hole, "outside" must imply a non-natural force, a force above nature, and that is the definition of supernatural. No matter which alternative an atheist takes, he ends up with God.
http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/quickquestions/keyword/atheism

St.B said...

How should I respond to a Catholic who responds to me with caricatures of positions I've never espoused by attacking things like "multiple universes" and ultimately evades the topic every time? Why does this person always create a strawman?

Anonysaurus Rex said...

St.B, I noticed that too. He erects straw man arguments. Erecting a straw man is a sign of weakness. But to answer your question I would quote Thomas Jefferson, "ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions." :)

Back on topic, don't forget that blasphemy is a victimless crime and more importantly as eloquently articulated by Noam Chomsky:

If you believe in freedom of speech, you believe in freedom of speech for views you don't like. Goebbels was in favor of freedom of speech for views he liked. So was Stalin. If you're in favor of freedom of speech, that means you're in favor of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise.

St.B said...

@ A. Rex,
I find it strange that Mr. Martinez fails to see the massive irony, about free speech or blasphemy in and of itself. I accuse Martinez of blasphemy. Science and facts are my gods, it's where my faith resides. He defiles both, truth be damned. J' ACCUSE !!! ( There's that pesky ridicule again.)
His disrespect, hyperbole, and anecdotal flim flamery, are his side show effects in deflection and diversion. He picks and chooses at will, inane quips and comments he feels will back his point of view, with little or no reasonable support. And obviously little care if it makes any sense or has anything in the least to do with the actual topic being discussed.
I've decided to study under Prof. Fred Martinez, he can school me in the art and mastery of "OUT OF CONTEXT" and the ways of the bigot.

Anonysaurus Rex said...

St. B, you are Satanic filth, a witch, or possibly even homosexual! You need cleansing the good old Catholic way, burnt at the steak.

Speaking of getting schooled, though it's more of a massacre. Check out Christopher Hitchens and Stephen Fry annihilating a pair of Catholic apologists in this debate.

One of my favorite quotes from it:

"It's the strange thing about this church: it is obsessed with sex, absolutely obsessed. Now they will say, we with our permissive society and our rude jokes are obsessed -- no, we have a healthy attitude: we like it, it's fun, it's jolly. Because it's a primary impulse, it can be dangerous and dark and difficult. It's a bit like food in that respect, only even more exciting. The only people who are obsessed with food are anorexics and the morbidly obese, and that in erotic terms is the Catholic church in a nutshell."

St.B said...

Steak? Steak? hahahahahaaaa, I'll take mine with a little A-1 sauce...

Sex makes for a more interesting topic than this tripe. Which are you? Anorexic or plump? On the sex as food analogy?

Nice link.

Anonysaurus Rex said...

Haha, I didn't notice I spelled stake incorrectly.

I like my steak extra crispy, but partially melted. Kind of like the freethinker Giordano Bruno's flesh when it was set ablaze at the stake for committing blasphemy against the Catholic faith, by way of Pope Clement's guilty verdict.

Here's a question for you St. B,

Discounting sheep, are there any other animals that would take moral instruction from an institution that has committed the same numerous atrocities the Roman Catholic Church has, yet still holds itself as some righteous superior moral compass that have the right answers on how to live a good life?

St.B said...

Equus asinus asinu. Not all donkey's, but in this case since "jackass" refers to a male donkey... are you following me?

The catholic church being the moral compass for anything is comedy at it's height.

Anonysaurus Rex said...

How about a moral compass on slavery? The Old Testament endorsed slavery, and the New Testament sanctions it. Nowhere does the Jesus character openly condemn slavery, not one verse.

Anyway St. B, I think I've reached my quota of fun on this perverted blog. Back to the 21st century for me where imaginary sky daddies aren't the intellectually tenable position.

And goodbye Fred. Please be mindful of other's when you hit them with your Tsuanmis of Stupid.

Fred Martinez said...

In Plain Words, You Believe Child Sex Abuse is Okay. Please Answer Yes or No.
Martinez responded:

You have to be kidding. Do you think Nietzsche, Freud, Jung and Alder were healthy?

-Nietzsche went insane. One can not make oneself more mentally sick than that.

-Alder wanted therapy in which adults had sex with children. Do you think that is sick or healthy?

Your comment about Adler is an instance of circular reasoning. You are beginning with the assumption that conventional western morality is "healthy", then arguing from this that Adler's theory is unhealthy. Throughout this dialog I've been pointing out that our ideas of what is moral may not always serve our vital interests (which was Nietzsche's point), and Adler was approaching things from exactly this angle.

Martinez responded:

In plain words, you believe child sex abuse is okay. Please answer Yes or No. Please no more jargon.

posted by Fred Martinez @ 9:29 PM 1 comments

Monday, December 17, 2007
Do you think Freud, Jung, Nietzsche and Alder were Healthy?
Martinez said:

I disagree. Each world view has consequences. For example, if one believes there is no objective good and evil, that one is beyond good and evil, then wider sexually abusing or murdering of children is a consequence. For the Christian these are undesirable, but for Alderian psychology this is desirable.

Christians who sex abuse are betraying their ideal, whereas Alderians are fulfilling their ideal.

Younos said:

Nietzsche argues that when one believes that individual self-expression is a bad thing, and that the libdinal energies are evil, then a general herdlike mentality and an unhealthy devaluation of everything vital is a consequence. For the healthy person these are undesireable, but for Christians they are desireable. Christians who condemn self-aggrandizement in favor of a meek and lowly sheep-like existence, who are at perpetual war with their natural passions and therefore make themselves sick, all because they count this life as nothing compared to heaven -- are fulfilling their ideal.

Martinez responded:

You have to be kidding. Do you think Nietzsche, Freud, Jung and Alder were healthy?

-Nietzsche went insane. One can not make oneself more mentally sick than that.

-Alder wanted therapy in which adults had sex with children. Do you think that is sick or healthy?

-Jung in a Nazi psychotherapeutic journal said, "The 'Aryan' unconscious has a higher potential than the Jewish." Were the Nazis and Jung sick or healthy?

-Freud committed suicide and he was a cocaine addict. Do you think that is sick or healthy?

Yunika Wheatcliffe said...

See http://xxxhorror.com/index.php for a truly beautiful experience....