A major leader of the Vatican, Cardinal Raymond Burke, has declared Allah is not the God of Christianity, as we read in one recent report:
Catholic Cardinal Raymond Burke, an American and former head of the highest court at the Vatican, said that Christians and Muslims do not worship the same God because the Islamic god “is a governor,” and Islam is Sharia, the law “which comes from Allah” and which “must dominate every man eventually.”
“I hear people saying to me, well, we’re all worshipping the same God, we all believe in love,” said Cardinal Burke in an August teleconference about his latest book, as reported by EWTN’sNational Catholic Register.
“But I say stop a minute and let’s examine carefully what Islam is, and what our Christian faith teaches us both,” he said.
The cardinal, who is an archbishop and the patron of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, explained that in Christianity God is the creator of reason and the “giver of revelation,” and His law is written “on our hearts” and “we’re given a divine grace to live according to that law.”
“This is not true in Islam,” said Cardinal Burke.
“I don’t believe it’s true that we’re all worshipping the same God, because the God of Islam is a governor,” he said. “In other words, fundamentally Islam is, Sharia is their law, and that law, which comes from Allah, must dominate every man eventually.”
“And it’s not a law that’s founded on love,” said Burke. “To say that we all believe in love is simply not correct.”
“And while our experience with individual Muslims may be one of people who are gentle and kind and so forth, we have to understand that in the end what they believe most deeply, that to which they ascribe in their hearts, demands that they govern the world,” he said.
“Whereas, in the Christian faith we’re taught that by the development of right reason, by sound metaphysics, and then that which leads to faith and to the light and strength that’s given by faith, we make our contribution to society also in terms of its governance,” he said.
Cardinal Burke is a force of good amongst evil and demonic people who are trying to control the Vatican and the Catholic Church. There are major homosexual rings in the Vatican, what I like to call "homosexual hornets nests." I myself have had experience with the homosexual infiltrators in the Catholic Church.
While we were doing some work in Texas we were told of a man named Msgr. Michael Yarbrough (also known as Michael Yarborough), of Holy Trinity Catholic Church, and how he is a deviant priest who forcefully kissed a young man named Hector Escalante on the lips, and how he was supporting a pro homosexual group called Call to Action. Here is a photo of Msgr. Michael Yarbrough:
Well, we decided that we were going to bait Msgr. Michael Yarbrough. I visited him in a confessional booth where I told him my age and apparently it registered an interest and he asked me if I wanted to come and hang out with him. He fell for the bait. I found it very odd that a priest of his high position, with a very busy schedule, would all of a sudden want to spend time with me.
I accepted his offer, and gave him a call, and asked him if we would meet at a book store. He said that he preferred that we meet in his office. I found this quite disturbing because it was in his office where he kissed Hector Escalante. When I did research on Msgr. Michael Yarbrough, I found a 2002 report written in the San Antonio Express which stated:
Hector Escalante complained that Monsignor Michael Yarbrough kissed him on the lips and groped him in his office in 1998 when Escalante was 27, on his last day on the job as a St. Matthew's Parish employee.
Yarbrough admitted kissing him but said Escalante misunderstood the gesture, which the priest said was common among men in his family. He denied groping Escalante.
Imagine, a man kissing another man on the lips as "common."
I told Msgr. Michael Yarbrough that it would be better that we meet in a book store, to which he agreed. I asked him how much time he had, and he said, as long as I wanted. After doing some more research, I also found out that on top of kissing a young man on the lips, Msgr. Michael Yarbrough is a also a major donor to a pro homosexual group, called Call to Action, and I found his name on a list made by Call to Action designated as "major donors". I took a snapshot of the list with Msgr. Michael Yarbrough's name highlighted:
So, we had the meeting at the bookstore, and after some conversation, I busted him on his heresies and his scandals, and also paid a visit to his church where I was eventually kicked out by his followers (who probably know nothing on how evil this heretic is). Here is the video:
For years we have seen how the Vatican covers up for sexual predators and deviants, heretics and debased theologians. But we have never seen how the agents of the Vatican cover up for such evildoers in their private conversations. Well, Shoebat.com is now giving you this exclusive video showing you how the conniving is really done.
I confronted Deacon Ron Walker, an official of the Vatican, asking why the Church has done nothing to punish Robert L. Kincl, a priest and canon law judge who was appointed by the Pope himself, who teaches that if two men masturbate each other they do not commit sin, and who himself defended confirmed child molester priest, Fr. Robert Hrdlicka. This is after Shoebat.com filed a complaint against Kincl after we caught him teaching us depravity.
Deacon Ron Walker and the Bishop of Austin, Joe Vasquez, and Vicar General Daniel Garcia, did nothing to have Robert L. Kincl punished, even after they promised to take care of this evil. Shoebat.com realized that they were just patronizing us and so we made this video.
Here is the video:
Robert L. Kincl, who was appointed by the Pope, had befriended us as a fan of Shoebat.com acting as conservative, yet referred to homosexual fondling as permissible in the conversation. Having been shocked at his remarks, I told Kincl:
How can you, as a priest, be so liberal toward such a sick evil as two men fondling each other, or as two men having a "relationship" just as long as they are not going with other men. It is evil and it is reprobate.
I also told him:
It is not tolerable for you, as both a priest and a canon law judge, to be permissive to somebody having a homosexual relationship just as long as they are not being promiscuous with other men. It is deplorable, and in the words of St. Paul, "worthy of death" (Romans 1:32).
Kincl defended his position and responded with a rejection of the Old Testament and a twisting of St. Paul's condemnation of homosexuality in Romans, stating
We do not follow the Hebrew Scriptures. We follow Jesus Christ who never mentioned gay relationships. When St. Paul mentioned such a relationship he was referring to the promiscuousness of the Romans using sodomy.
Shoebat.com decided to investigate Kincl and found that he has a dark past. In 1993, Kincl worked as a Commander in charge of clergy at the U.S. Navy, and while he was in the service he defended another chaplain confirmed to be guilty of child molestation, named Robert Hrdlicka.
The investigation revealed that Robert L. Kincl had even written the authorities, not to charge the pedophile who molested the young boys, but urged them to send him back to serve as a chaplain:
Catholic chaplain Lt. Robert Hrdlicka pleaded guilty to molesting boys in 1993. Before his sentencing, six other Catholic Navy chaplains and the church’s archbishop for the military services urged authorities to send Lt. Hrdlicka to a church-run treatment center.
“It is my fervent hope and prayer that he will be able to return to the active ministry as soon as possible,” wrote then-Cmdr. Robert L. Kincl.
Instead, Lt. Hrdlicka went to prison.
Shoebat.com looked up Kincl's My Life page, to find out that after all these years Kincl is still friends with Hrdlicka the pedophile, since he is on his friends list, of which I took snapshots:
Just as we have Muslims, like Bergdahl, who have infiltrated the military, we have people like Kincl who have infiltrated both the military and the Catholic Church, with their depravity.
Kincl is now serving as a priest in Our Lady's Maronite Catholic Church alongside Msgr. Don Sawyer. When I confronted Sawyer on Kincl, Sawyer vehemently defended Kincl.
Robert L. Kincl, depraved priest who defended a child molesting priest
Don Sawyer, Msgr. at Our Lady's Maronite Catholic Church where Kincl serves
Shoebat.com decided to contact the Diocese of Austin to file a complaint, and spoke with the Very Reverend Daniel E. Garcia as the Vicar General for the Diocese of Austin, and Chancellor and Secretariat Director for Administration, Deacon Ron Walker, who were under Bishop Joe S. Vásquez of the Diocese of Austin.
We asked them how could someone who supports homosexuality and defended a pedophile still be serving as a priest and not be excommunicated, to which Deacon Ron Walker, rolling his eyes, said that the Church's main objective would be to reconcile him with God, and not excommunicate him.
It seems that the Diocese of Austin could care less if one of its priests supports homosexuality and defended a pedophile.
Bishop Joe S. Vásquez
Vicar General Danny Garcia of the Diocese of Austin
Why is this man serving as a priest when the Catholic Church, in its teachings, forbids homosexuality?
It is not surprising to see how far reaching homosexuality has gone in the Vatican. What other deviancies will enter the Vatican in the next decade remains to be seen. Whatever happened to normal sin? In the good old days, steeling a chicken perhaps constituted such sin, but these days, its sleeping with it.
Christianity is not about sycophancy, its about war against evil and the devil. We must arm ourselves to fight in this war.
So many today, fattened by materialism and lost in their own ego, want nothing to do with the holy words of the prophet Moses, nor any of the prophets after him, nor the words of the Apostle who declared that sodomites are worthy of death, but continuously want to teach the precepts of a vain secular moralism. I am not speaking of the atheist who denies everything holy and whose blasphemies are expected; I am speaking of supposed “Christians” who carry the title of conservative and who tout themselves as advocates for family values, while at the same time exert themselves to please the sodomites and the acolytes of perversion as they try to censure those who honor the laws of God.
I myself have dealt with this numerous times. I remember when I posted my video of me calling thirteen pro-homosexual and homosexual bakeries and asking them for a cake that says “Gay marriage is wrong,” and being denied service every time. The video went viral. Not too long after this happened, Janet Porter a well known conservative personality who I respect, contacted me asking if I would allow her to use clips of my video to add to her documentary exposing the homosexual agenda. I said it would be no problem. The documentary has been out for some time and has already had showings in select theaters in the United States.
But then, the spirit of fear crept its way inside. Peter LaBarbera, an Evangelical who is in the documentary, was confronted by the leftist media on the fact he is in the same documentary with me, the man who believes in God’s law that says that sodomites are to be put to death. Instead of defending the law of the Bible, which he claims to believe, this hireling decided to push for me to recant my statements, and said that if I didn’t that I should be removed from the documentary. Janet called me urging me to make a statement to “clarify” what I really believed, that I really don’t believe in the death penalty for sodomites, but simply in the anti-sodomy laws that were once enacted in Texas.
To be honest I was quite hesitant to do this because to do so would mean recanting all of my writings in support for the death penalty. Janet sent me the first draft of the statement to receive my stamp of approval. The draft stated:
“While I have had homosexual activists call for my death and beheading, etc., I have not called for anyone to take the life of those practicing homosexual behavior. I do want the laws of the United States to once again make sodomy illegal as they did prior to the 2003 Lawrence v. Texas ruling because such practice is not only immoral, but physically dangerous, as well.”
But Peter LaBarbera objected to the draft and expressed his dissatisfaction with it, pushing for me to recant my position that an inquisition should be established to uproot homosexuality and other perversities. Peter LaBarbera responded to the draft with this email to Janet:
“Not good enough, if he called for an "Inquisition" against homosexuals. We need to look at the exact comments and craft a statement based on those. I do not have time to do that today or tomorrow as I'm driving to DC. We need transcripts of the exact comments and then he needs to disavow that approach (or clarify what he meant). Otherwise people will keep asking about those specific comments.”
Peter Labarbera, more afraid of the sodomites than the law of God
All of these words are filled with fear. LaBarbera is afraid of negative attention from the leftist media. Such behavior is contrary to God, Who is Love, “because perfect love expels all fear.” (1 John 4:18) Why should a Christian be afraid or ashamed of the law of God which states that “If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death” (Leviticus 20:13)? Why should a Christian be ashamed of the words of the Apostle when he said that homosexuals do things that “are worthy of death” (Romans 1:32)? They will say that such words are against love. But how could a Christian use such argumentation when St. Paul himself says that “the purpose of the commandment is love” (1 Timothy 1:5), and in the same epistle goes on to say that “we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully, knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, for fornicators, for sodomites” (1 Timothy 1:8-10)?
In Christianity, love and justice and indistinguishable, for all virtues, be it justice, charity or endurance, are in love, for God is Love, and in God is all virtue. So how could such Christians say that I am against love, when the purpose of the law is love, and this very law declares that sodomites are worthy of death?
Peter LaBarbera was blocked from entering Canada, and he goes before the media showing how persecuted he is, but yet he wants to block me — a Christian — from being in a documentary for being more politically incorrect than him. And at the same time, he kisses the feet of the sodomite to deny me as Peter denied Christ. A filthy sodomite who calls himself “Joe My God”, began to attack LaBarbera for being in the documentary with me. Peter LaBarbera quickly went on Twitter to appease the sodomite, even going to far as to address him with the blasphemous title of “Joe My God”:
Why would a Christian address an evil person with such a blasphemous title as "Joe My God"? It is truly pathetic how these modern Christians get on their hands and knees for these useless sodomites. The sodomites make up such a small part of the population, and yet the Christians, who are supposedly the majority, are terrified of them. Caesar wanted the whole world to address him as kyrios, or lord. And yet you never see any of the early Christians ever address Caesar as kyrios. In fact, St. Paul went directly against this idea when he said "that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord" (Philippians 2:11), that is that Christ is Kyrios. Yet this Peter LaBarbera wants to do an inquisition on me, firmly saying "We need to look at the exact comments" and "We need transcripts of the exact comments and then he [Theodore Shoebat] needs to disavow that approach", while at the same time he runs to some sodomite to get his approval. What an absolutely pathetic person. Peter LaBarbera does not want to respect God, but rather "Joe My God".
This is why the Christians keep losing ground and the sodomites keep gaining ground. Instead of using the attention that controversy brings, Christians run away from controversy. This is why Christendom is drowning.
Another example of this demonic infiltration is Michael Coren, a heretic who lied about being Catholic while holding a position as a news host in Canada. He wrote numerous books about how great Catholicism is, and while praising the Catholic faith, he was attending Anglican church services. Now he has declared his renunciation of the Catholic faith, and has become an open agent for the sodomite religion. He expressed his leaving the Catholic Church by saying, “I could not remain in a church that effectively excluded gay people,” and also saying “I felt a hypocrite being part of a church that described homosexual relations as being disordered and sinful. I just couldn’t be part of it anymore.”
So Michael Coren has become an ambassador for the sodomites. Michael Coren is also a betraying, superficial effeminate. He denied me and turned his back on me as he cowered in the presence of two Muslims on Canadian television, when they berated him for referencing our website, shoebat.com. Here is the video:
Michael Coren, false Christian, cowered before Muslims, agent of homosexuality and acolyte of the Antichrist.
If Michael Coren will betray me for saying that pagan Muslim Albanians need annihilation, then he most certainly will betray Moses for slaughtering the calf worshippers; he most certainly will betray Joshua for exterminating the Canaanites; he most certainly will betray Jehu and Elijah for killing the priests of Baal; and he most definitely has betrayed God Himself, for God ordered the extermination of the wicked.
I wrote an email to Michael Coren, telling him:
I saw your debate with Shabir Ali and the other Muslim. I have always considered you an ally, and still do. But I must tell you one thing: The cock crowed three times, and you denied me thrice.
Michael Coren responded to me fearfully, like a shaking dog, saying:
I think we should speak. Is there a number I can call you on later today? Please hear my side before you condemn me. Michael.
I heard his side of the story on the phone and left it at that. I had no intentions at that point to make any actions against him. But after seeing how he is now advancing the sodomite religion and going against Christianity, realizing that his appeal meant nothing, now I must respond to him and confront him for the heretic he is. He is a heretic and the worst kind. There is one heretic that says: "I am a heretic. I hate God." But there is the other type, the more deceptive strand that says, "I love God. I am orthodox. But lets tolerate the enemies of God, lets enable them, empower them, allow them to eclipse the light their darkness." This is the worst type of heretic and the most dangerous kind.
There are many of these types, who promote the evil, while at the same time calling themselves Catholic.
One of these, is Robert Spencer. Recently, Spencer wrote against me for simply exposing the sodomites and their defenders within the “counter-jihad” movement, and for maintaining the prescription of death upon sodomites and those who approve of them and their evils. While it takes one fool to write short articles at the strike of a pen, it takes the wise to write triple to refute it. I will quote Spencer, extensively:
In a video posted last Thursday, Theodore Shoebat says: “Pamela Geller is worthy of death.” Her crime? Appearing at a “Gays for Trump” event along with gay activist Milo Yiannopoulos at the Republican National Convention in July. For that, says the learned Shoebat the younger, “In Biblical law, in the government of Christendom, she is worthy of death.”
Is that so? Yes, says Theodore, because Romans 1:32 speaks of those who “having known the justice of God, did not understand that they who do such things, are worthy of death, and not only they that do them, but they also that consent to them that do them.” Pamela Geller is not homosexual, you see, but by appearing at the event, she gave “consent” to those who are, and thus she also is “worthy of death.”
Theodore Shoebat doesn’t mention that this passage refers not only to men who “have burned in their lusts one towards another,” but also to those who are guilty of “iniquity, malice, fornication, avarice, wickedness,” and are “full of envy, murder, contention, deceit, malignity, whisperers,” as well as “detractors, hateful to God, contumelious, proud, haughty, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,” and those who are “foolish, dissolute, without affection, without fidelity, without mercy” (Romans 1:26-31). All of these people are, in the Apostle Paul’s view, “worthy of death.”
Why, then, do we not see Christians (or at least Christians outside of hysterical Hollywood fantasies) committing mass murder, bent on killing everyone who is envious, haughty, and disobedient to his parents? Because Paul’s saying that these people are “worthy of death” is not a call for mass executions and a reign of terror, but part of his argument that all people have sinned and are in need of the divine mercy.
In today’s overheated and jihad-preoccupied environment, however, Theodore Shoebat’s charge that Pamela Geller is worthy of death is not theological musing, but arguable incitement to murder.”
Robert is both, deceptively twisting my words, and insinuating that I am calling for someone to murder that lunatic wretch, Pamela Geller, and to carry out vigilantism. If Spencer watched the whole video that I did, which he quotes, he would have known that Geller was taking part in an event that has pederastic images of boys, that promotes homosexuality, that advances and inculcates the very evils that God absolutely hates and sees as worthy of destruction.
Geller also spoke with a sodomite named Milo, someone who teaches that sodomites are born inheriting genetics that give them higher IQs. This is absolutely akin to Nazism, and for Geller — a Jew — to be associating herself with some of a supremacist ideology, like that of the Nazis and the Social Darwinists -- claiming the idea of superior genetics -- is both evil and diabolical. And yet, I am the bad guy? I never asked anyone to murder Geller. What I said was that in the context of Christendom, heretics like Geller would be put to death, and rightfully so.
Also, as we know based on the elucidations of St. John Chrysostom, St. Paul was indeed directing his words towards judges to punish the evildoers, and we also know that it is obvious, based on a full reading of Romans 1, that Paul describes homosexuals, as opposed to merely listing homosexuality as a sin amongst sins.
Spencer goes on to say, “Theodore’s words demonstrate that old habits and mindsets die hard and aren’t always effaced by a change of creed”, thereby implying that I am still Islamic in my beliefs. Amazingly, this is coming from a person who does not see himself as judgmental. How does this person know from where I determined my beliefs on this issue? If he would have asked me, I would have shown him. He knows nothing about my intellectual evolution. He does not know that my affirmations were cultivated from reading, firstly, the Scriptures, and then amplified from the fathers and the ancient scholars, like Firmicus, Cyprian, Augustine, Aquinas, Bellarmine, Chrysostom, Ambrose, Vitoria, St. Bernard, St. Bernardino of Siena, and others. Were all of these men jihadists?
Tell us, Mr. Spencer, was Augustine a jihadist when he wrote:
“Sins against nature, therefore, like the sin of Sodom, are abominable and deserve punishment whenever and wherever they are committed. If all nations committed them, all alike would be held guilty of the same charge in God’s law, for our Maker did not prescribe that we should use each other in this way. In fact, the relationship that we ought to have with God is itself violated when our nature, of which He is Author, is desecrated by perverted lust.”
Tell us, was Augustine a jihadist when he wrote that
"When God commands a thing to be done against the customs or agreement of any people, though it were never done by them heretofore, it is to be done"; and when he wrote afterwards: "For as among the powers of human society, the greater authority is obeyed in preference to the lesser, so must God in preference to all." (Confess. iii, 8)
Tell us, was Augustine a jihadist when he wrote:
"A sovereign serves God one way as man, another way as king; he serves Him as man by living according to the faith, he serves Him as king by exerting the necessary strength to sanction laws which command goodness and prohibit the opposite." (Augustine, letter 185, ch. 19)
Tell us, was Augustine a jihadist when he wrote in praise of King Hezekiah and Nebuchadnezzar (who was not even a believer) when they enacted edicts against blasphemy and perversity? Was he a jihadist when he wrote:
"It was thus that Ezechias [Hezekiah] served Him [God] by destroying the groves and temples of idols and the high places which had been set up contrary to the commandments of God; thus Josias served Him by performing similar acts [see 2 Kings 23:1-25]; thus the king of the Ninevites served Him by compelling the whole city to appease the Lord; thus Darius served Him by giving Daniel power to break the idol, and by feeding his enemies to the lions; thus Nabuchodnosor, of whom we spoke above, served Him when he restrained all his subjects from blaspheming God by a terrible penalty." (Augustine, letter 185, ch. 19, brackets mine)
St. Augustine
Tell us, was King Josiah a jihadist when “he brake down the houses of the sodomites, that were by the house of the Lord, where the women wove hangings for the grove” (1 Kings 23:7)?
Tell us, was St. Thomas Aquinas a jihadist when he wrote:
“it is lawful to kill an evildoer in so far as it is directed to the welfare of the whole community, so that it belongs to him alone who has charge of the community's welfare. Thus it belongs to a physician to cut off a decayed limb, when he has been entrusted with the care of the health of the whole body. Now the care of the common good is entrusted to persons of rank having public authority: wherefore they alone, and not private individuals, can lawfully put evildoers to death.”
Tell us, was Aquinas a jihadist when he prescribed that “heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death." (Aquinas, St. Thomas Aquinas: Whether Heretics Should Be Tolerated, II-II, Q. 11, Art. 3, in Edward Peters, Heresy and Authority in Medieval Europe, ch. v, p. 182)
St. Thomas Aquinas
The Manichaeans promoted homosexuality and cross-dressing, and even devised their own rite in which their followers would eat a false eucharist with male semen on it. Tell us, Spencer, was the Emperor Zeno a jihadist when he decreed:
“We ordain that persons who prefer the Manichaeans’ deadly error should have no freedom or leave to dwell in any place whatever of our state; but that, if ever they should have appeared or should have been found, they should be subject to capital punishment.” (Law of Zeno, or Anastasius I, from the year 487 or 510)
Tell us, were the authors of the Apostolic Constitutions jihadists when they affirmed the Mosaic Law against homosexuality and beastiality:
And fornication is the destruction of one’s own flesh, not being made use of for the procreation of children, but entirely for the sake of pleasure, which is a mark of incontinency, and not a sign of virtue. All these things are forbidden by the laws; for thus say the oracles: “Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind.” “For such a one is accursed, and ye shall stone them with stones: they have wrought abomination.” “Every one that lieth with a beast, slay ye him: he has wrought wickedness in his people.” “And if any one defile a married woman, slay ye them both: they have wrought wickedness; they are guilty; let them die.”
Tell us, was St. Jerome a jihadist when he wrote: "To punish murderers and impious men is not shedding blood, but applying the laws." (St. Jerome, Commentary on Jeremiah, in Bellarmine, On Secular People or Laymen, ch. 13, ed. Tutino, p. 50)
St. Jerome
Tell us, was Pope Pius XII, a very recent pope, a jihadist when he wrote, "that which does not correspond to truth or to the norm of morality objectively has no right to exist, to be spread or to be activated." (As quoted by Lefebvre, Religious Liberty Questioned, part 1, p. 14)
Tell us, was Moses a jihadist when he had three thousand Jews slaughtered for worshipping the golden calf?
In 1550, a Franciscan friar from Brescia, named Calgano, was arrested for having a sodomomatical relationship with a boy, and for teaching that Jesus had a homosexual relationship with St. John. This blasphemer was put to death, without question. This is the Christendom that I love, the Christendom that I want back. But it was put to sleep, and is being kept asleep by heretics like Spencer, who does not want to see the holy laws against perverted heresies enacted. Spencer, in fact, says:
“I don’t believe in Islam and don’t wish to live under a government that forces me to conform to its sensibilities; nor do I wish to live under a Christian government that forces non-Christians to conform to its sensibilities.”
So Spencer is okay with sodomites roaming the streets, indulging in their evils, inundating society? Is he okay with Geller speaking in a room with disgusting images, with sodomites who demand for the toleration of homosexuality, a practice worthy of death?
Essentially, Spencer’s mentality would have us call Moses, King Josiah, Joshua, Hezekiah, and all of the holy men of Christianity who struck and killed evildoers, jihadists. Spencer’s perspective is essentially anti-Christian. It is of the Christian Faith to have governments destroy and uproot evil and perversity. As Augustine said, "they are called Catholic Christians, not servers of idols like your Julian [the pagan emperor]; not heretics, as certain ones have been and have persecuted the Church, when true Christians have suffered the most glorious martyrdom for Catholic truth, not justly deserved penalties for heretical error." *Augustine, letter 105, brackets mine* St. Isidore said that law "is composed of no private advantage, but for the common benefit of the citizens." *Isidore, Etymologiae, 5.21, in Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, Ia IIae 90, article 2*
Do you hear that Spencer? Law is for the public benefit, that does not mean the toleration of sodomites, or the freedom given to sodomotical practices. You will then say, “This is America!” Really? Lets look at the laws that were once in the law books, before heretics like yourself let the sodomites take over. Here is a law from New York, 1787:
Here is a law from 1796, from Connecticut:
Mr. Spencer, were the Americans who established these laws, jihadists? It seems that anyone who wishes to support the divine law against homosexuality is deemed as a “jihadist” or “like ISIS.” This is a manifestation of the Hegelian Dialectic, or controlled opposition. Point to a real threat, and then paint your enemies as being a part of that threat. It used to be that one would call a conservative, “a nazi,” but now they are calling Christians “jihadists” or “Muslims.” Its quite disgusting and low class, but what do you expect from a bunch of people who bow down to the homosexual god every time the sodomite elites want people to conform when they complain of true Christians? Orthodox Christians maintain the holy laws, the elite sodomites complain, and to their remonstrances the conservatives who want to be accepted will get on their hands and knees for the god of Sodom.
Spencer begins his article with, “These are times that try men’s souls”, truly they are, and I see what has happened after your soul has been tried, Mr. Spencer: you bow down to the sodomites, and a tart named Pamela has you on her fingertip.
Post a Comment