JULY/AUGUST 2016

Culture Wars
VOL. 35, NO. 8
$5

The Man
Behind
the Curtain
Michael Voris and the
Homosexual Vortex
 The Main Problem
Facing the Church in
Our Time…
is not abortion; it is not homosexuality; it
has nothing to do with the sexual
issues which have all been settled theologically. The
main issue facing the Church is conversion. Is baptism
necessary for salvation? Is it necessary for everyone? Is
it necessary for the Jews? John Beaumont’s compen-
dium of Catholic of American Catholic converts, The
Mississippi Flows into the Tiber, presents an exhaustive
list of conversion stories which show that nothing has
changed in God’s eyes. The same call that Elizabeth
Ann Seton answered over two hundred years ago is
still being answered in our day by people who know
that there is only one effective response to the ques-
tion, “What must I do to be saved?”

Mail checks payable to Fidelity Press:
206 Marquette Ave, South Bend, IN, 46617 USA
Visit www.fidelitypress.org or call Fidelity Press
today at 574-289-9786 to place your order.
The Mississippi Flows into the Tiber:
A Guide to Notable American Converts
to the Catholic Church
Hardcover, 1014 pp. $69, plus $8 shipping.
ISBN: 978-0-929891-13-2

“Fascinating, Illuminative, and inspiring compilation
of the continuious stream of American men and women
whom God has drawn home to the Catholic Church. The
Mississippi Flows into the Tiber is far more than a mere
encyclopedic list of biographical data; it is full of inspiring
reflections on their struggles and victories in living out the
Catholic faith in their work and home life.”
- Marcus Grodi
Host of The Journey Home on EWTN
“Year by year from the country’s founding, there has
been growth in the Catholic Church and not only through
birth, but also by conversion. I know, I am one of them.
This book will surprise you in many cases and also gives in
brief snippets what brought them to the Roman Church.”
-Newt Gingrich
Former Speaker of the US House of Representatives
“This book captures the journey so many have taken
towards embracing the Catholic Faith. A must-read for
Catholics and Non-Catholics alike as it captures the spiri-
tual quest toward beauty and truth that defines the human
condition.”
- Larry Kudlow
Host of CNBC’s The Kudlow Report
“Converts make the best Catholics, it is often said. That
may or may not be true, but at least every convert had a
reason for joining the faith, and in my case, at least, it was
something I did not take lightly. John Beaumont’s collec-
tion of conversion stories will be a delight to converts, to
cradle Catholics, and especially to all those who are some-
where in the process, for whom these wonderful accounts
will no doubt be a ray of light and an inspiration.”
- Alfred S. Regnery
Lawyer, author and former publisher
 Table of Contents
Letters p. 2

“No social progress Bullets

outside the moral order.”
James G. Bruen, Jr. p. 48
Editor
E. Michael Jones, Ph.D.
Business Manager Culture of Death Watch
Ruth P. Jones
Disco Inferno:
Typesetting and Layout
The Great Satan Devours His Children
Ultramontane Associates, Inc.
E. Michael Jones p.12

©  Copyright Ultramontane Associ-

ates, July/August 2016 (Volume 35
No. 8) Culture Wars Magazine (ISSN
1080-9058) is published monthly,
Features
except for a combined July/August is-
sue, by Ultramontane Associates, Inc. The Man Behind the Curtain:
Postmaster: Send address changes to Michael Voris and the Homosexual Vortex
Culture Wars Magazine, Subscription
Dept., 206 Marquette Ave., South
E. Michael Jones p. 22
Bend, IN  46617. Subscription price
in U.S. is $49 per year; $59 per year
outside U.S. Single copy price: $5.00.
We accept Visa and Mastercard.

Reviews
Address all subscription requests and
changes of address to Culture Wars
Magazine, 206 Marquette Ave.,
South Bend, IN  46617; phone 574-
289-9786; editorial mail and non- Bearing False Witness: Debunking Centuries of
returnable manuscripts to Culture Anti-Catholic History
Wars Magazine, 206 Marquette Ave.,
South Bend, IN 46617. Letters to Reviewed by John Beaumont p. 38
the Editor may also be sent by Fax to
(574)  289-1461 or by electronic mail
to jones@culturewars.com
LETTERS
USARY, LENDING, LOANS
I actually fancied myself one of
the best educated people on the
planet in economics. But your lec-
tures have turned me around on
some matters in a really fundamen-
tal way. It goes a bit like this: Just
because a total ban on usury might
be sub-optimal, in terms of the ab-
solute best policy settings, this does
not justify usury. Since if some-
thing is wrong and dangerous, like
putting a penny in the fuse box,
then it ought to be avoided except
when practical considerations are
overwhelming.
The most pristine form of savings
that the value of all other savings
is based on, is not when someone
makes a deposit with a bank, and
the banker lends that money out.
The most pristine form of sav-
ings is when a sole trader takes his
retained earnings, and uses these
funds to buy a durable producer
good, to improve the cash flow of
an existing income stream. That
is the best form of savings, it is a
form of wealth creation, and if the
bankers aren’t lending for some-
thing akin to this, no new wealth
is produced. But as durable as that
producer good is, it will degrade
in value, become obsolete, and re-
quire effort to maintain it. Hence,
usury to buy the thing is immedi-
ately a bit suspect right there. Here
I talk on straight technical eco-
nomic grounds.
Then, having thought through
your material, and made consid-
erations akin to the above, it oc-
curred to me that the conclusions
of even our best economists were
leaning way too far on giving cred-
it to usury for wealth creation. In
some sense usury could be given
2 / Culture Wars
credit for setting up certain insti-
tutions. But as an ongoing prop-
osition, now that we know how
to create wealth, we don’t need to
put up with it. The excellent mod-
els of Riccardo, Böhm-Bawerk,
Von Mises, Rothbard, and Reis-
man (all Jews) are fatally flawed.
These are the best of the economic
thinkers. And yet I now under-
stand their thinking to contain
a largely overlooked flaw. Since
as good as the thinking of these
men was, their models act as if ev-
ery last dollar that is lent by the
bankers will be for durable pro-
ducer goods!!!!! They don’t think
this, they don’t say this, but this
covert assumption is in some ways
implied, in the conclusions that
these great economists reach. It's
kind of like us economics boffins
have all been blinded by a super-
natural force, not to have seen this
implication. Bankers lend for land
inflation, credit card debt, shares,
derivatives, consumer goods. All
sorts of wealth destroying rubbish.
Many and actually most loans are
made, that you would have to
say, are by their nature a misuse
of funds, relative to the supposed
wealth creation that savings are
supposed to achieve under capital-
ism's best defenders.
So the upshot is that we ought
never tax the retained earnings of
the sole trader. Only his drawings
and excessive private land hold-
ings. We want as much of that
pristine form of savings as we can
get. The more we get what I am
terming “pristine savings”, via re-
tained earnings, the less we rely
on bankers. Then the various State
Governments should see to it that,
for the most part, banks lend only
for wealth creation. Which they
will do if usury is banned and only
fees are allowed. Under that cir-
cumstance they just won’t lend for
a lot of this other rubbish. For if
a feature of a wealth-creating loan
is that it improves cash flow prior
to repayments, a wealth-creating
loan is a loan which can be paid
back relatively quickly. A ban on
usury, with the right regulation
and policy settings, therefore forces
the banker to make loans that cre-
ate wealth, if he wants any decent
return. With a straight fee, a loan
that is slow in the repayment im-
plies a low internal rate of return.
It’s not a wealth creating loan,
and its a loan he ought never have
made. The reward for a loan paid
back quickly (in this “banker’s
business model”) is access to great-
er funds down the track.
If we ban usury without hav-
ing a clear idea of what type of
lending we want to encourage,
we could do great harm. But if
we ban usury, knowing what we
want to achieve, and set policy ac-
cordingly, it will work very well.
In the sole trader model, employ-
ment and high wages come when
you have all these sole traders with
too many producer goods for the
available workers. The fellow has
too many beehives, a mead brew-
ing facility, too many flowering
trees. He just cannot seem to find
the people to help him work with
all this gear he’s built up, and he
cannot do all the work himself.
With many sole traders in this
position the sole traders paradise
(where private land use is econo-
mised via tax considerations) leads
to a workers paradise, because of
the relative scarcity of labour, ver-
sus durable producer goods.
It's kind of crazy how the excel-
lence of 90% of the thinking of
these very good economic models
leaves one blind to their horrible dren of this world who consider 3. Weak widows against strong
flaws. the children of light to be stupid willful children
Graeme M Bird. and believe themselves to be the 4. Weak fetuses against strong will-
birdsnewworld@yahoo.com.au prudent ones. Their prudence is ful mothers
their death.”  5. Weak borrowers against strong
Fr. Matt willful lenders
mattwick@netzero.ne 6. Weak children against strong
 THE WISE OF THIS WORLD
willful homosexualists and trans-
The Trump candidacy contin- genderists who want to scandalize
ues to be unusual considering how
WHO ARE THE WEAK? their young minds
little support he has gotten in the Pope Francis’ mercy is misplaced 7. Weak men against strong willful
past.  But Americans are so sick of because his use of the word “weak” pornographers
politicians they’ll vote for a ham is totally backwards. Here are the 8. Weak employees against strong
sandwich to make their point. He true weak who need mercy: willful employers
is an oligarch, but his own kind of 1. Weak wives against strong will- By focusing on the weakness and
oligarch, a “loose cannon” oligarch, ful husbands need for mercy of the would-be
which is why the oligarchs who 2. Weak orphans against strong divorcee, allowing the intergenera-
usually control our politics don’t willful parents tional family unit to be destroyed,
want him.
The country is also sick of the
Bushes, which is a positive and I
think it is also sick of the Clintons, Culture Wars welcomes letters to the editor.
but there are no other Democrats
for whom to vote.  The fact that no
Preference will be given to letters which deal
other Democrat challenged her is a with topics discussed in the magazine. Letters
story that needs to be told.  I think
that there are a few who could
should ideally be limited to one single-spaced
have beaten her in the primaries page, but we know how difficult it is to fol-
but may have been told to stay
out.  Bernie says he is an indepen-
low ideals in this world. Letters can be sent
dent, so why is he allowed to be in by mail to Culture Wars, 206 Marquette
Democratic primaries?  Because he
is not dangerous. 
Ave., South Bend, IN  46617; by fax to 574-
So we have had our half-Black 289-1461; or by electronic mail to jones@
president and his Blackness didn’t
do much for the country.  We may
culturewars.com.
have our first woman president and
her femaleness will also do nothing
for our country and may even be
dangerous.   But both Trump and
Clinton are dangerous for different
reasons.
Here is your St. Anthony of Padua
quote for the day: “These symbol-
ize (Proverbs 30:24) the greedy and
usurers whose teeth are swords and
knives which they use to devour
the poor and steal their meager
possessions.  All of them are chil-

July/August 2016 / 3
President Gabriel García Moreno and the Sacred Heart of Jesus
the Pope throws to the wolves the
weak party in 1-3.
By saying that only the secu-
lar state is good, he throws to the
wolves the weak parties in 4-8.
Currently, no one is speaking for
the weak parties in 1-8, not even
the Church.
Here are just some recent exam-
ples of the way the Pope uses the
word “weak” (May 20, 2016 hom-
ily): “Jesus…is so understanding
with sinners, with the weak” and
“Jesus always distinguished be-
tween the truth and 'human weak-
ness.'”
Roddy McCorley
St. Louis, Missouri
A FAIR HEARING!
I found E Michael Jones's May
article “How the Oligarchs Got
Their Power: very enlightening
4 / Culture Wars
and, yes, Tanzania’s president
Julius Nyerere was absolutely
correct in condemning the IMF
(International Monetary Fund)
and the World Bank for looting
the Third World nations. Howev-
er, to quote your article Nyerere
was a fervent admirer of Chair-
man Mao, (the most ruthless
dictator in history) and adopted
his (Nyerere’s) economic program
after Mao’s Great Leap Forward
and also permitted the Marxist
revolutionary Che Guevara to
establish a base in Tanzania plus
an adoption of Stalin’s Five Year
Plan of brutal forced collectiviza-
tion in agriculture. For the Cath-
olic bishop of Musoma to insti-
tute canonization proceedings
for Nyerere is a moral aberration,
and so I find your final sentence
stating that Nyerere may now
get a fair hearing with Francis as
Pope rather puzzling.
When Pope
Francis wrote
his first En-
cyclical “Lau-
dato Si” cov-
ering Global
Wa r m i n g
he contact-
ed Leonardo
Boff who had
written two
warped books
about Glob-
al Warming.
Some of Boff’s
twisted views
appeared
(some verba-
tim) in Pope
Francis’ En-
cyclical. Boff,
of course,
was a prime
promoter, as
a priest, of “liberation theology”
in Latin-America who was sus-
pended by his order and ordered
by the Vatican to cease advancing
‘liberation theology,” a Communist
creation aimed at subverting Ca-
tholicism and installing a Marxist
shaped society. Boff refused and
quit the priesthood so as to con-
tinue to do his thing. The Catho-
lic priests who served in the ranks
of the Communist Sandinstas in
Nicaragua were staunch devotees
of Boff. I find the claim that Pope
Francis opposed “liberation theol-
ogy” hard to accept. Why? Well,
Brazilian Archbishop Helder Ca-
mara was the “lefthand man” of
Cardinal Suenens, a Freemason,
in the manipulation of the Vati-
can II Council into a “progressive”
harvest. Camara defended Mao
and Castro, opposed Humanae
Vitae, advocated women’s ordina-
tion and the acceptance of divorce
and remarriage by the Catholic
Church. He believed class war-
fare compatible with Christianity
and saw Communism as having a
Christian nature. The head of the
Congregation for the Causes of
Saints, Cardinal Amato, has de-
clared Camara a “Servant of God,”
and Pope Francis has approved the
cause for the beatification of the
likes of Camara. On his arrival in
La Paz, Bolivia, July 9, 2015 Pope
Francis gratefully accepted a blas-
phemous “Communist crucifix”
from the leftist president Evo Mo-
rales. (Pope Francis was presented
with, but did not accept the Cruci-
fix.–EMJ) It featured Christ being
crucified on the hammer of a ham-
mer and sickle, a duplicate of the
original carved by a Spanish Jesuit
in the 1970’s, Father Luis Espinal
who was murdered in 1980 by the
Bolivian dictatorship. Pope Fran-
cis stopped and prayed at the spot
where Fr. Espinal was murdered
and announced “Dear sisters and
brothers, I stopped here to greet
you and above all to remember a
brother, our brother, a victim of
interests who did not want him
to fight for the freedom of Boliv-
ia. May Christ draw this man unto
himself.” In a press interview Pope
Francis defended the blasphemous
“Communist crucifix” fashioned by
this Marxist priest even acknowl-
edging that Marxism motivated Fr.
Espinal’s “protest art,” stating that
“Fr. Espinal was an enthusiast of
this Marxist analysis of the reality,
but also of theology using Marx-
ism. With this he came up with
this work (the blasphemous cruci-
fix). Also, his (Fr. Expinal’s) poetry
was of this kind of protest. But, it
was his life, it was his thought. He
was a special man with so much
human geniality who fought in
good faith, no?” NO. Some actu-
ally consider this “faithful” Marx-
ist priest a martyr who lived the
Gospel with the same spirit as the
Blessed Salvadoran, Oscar Romaro
who was murdered by rightwing
Salvadorian oppressors two days
after Espinal’s death. What about
Archbishop Oscar Romero. Was
he murdered for religious or for
political reasons? Yes, he strongly
denounced the rightwing oppres-
sors of the Salvadorian people. But,
he allowed the Marxist controlled
leftists to store guns, ammunition,
and revolutionary literature in the
basement of the National Cathe-
dral in San Salvador and the hang-
ing of revolutionary banners along
the inner walls of the Cathedral,
one of them featuring Jesus Christ
toting a machine gun. At this same
time in neighboring Nicaragua,
Cardinal Obamo Bravo opposed
both the rightwing Somoza dicta-
torship and its successor, the Com-
munist Sandinistas. Bravo was not
murdered because he didn’t take
sides regarding two evil systems as
a true Catholic prelate should do.
And, which of the two, Romero or
Bravo, was the more true Catholic
prelate? Romero was killed for po-
litical reasons and was not a martyr
for the Faith and thus not deserv-
ing of Sainthood.
In the 19th century, Garcia More-
no, an exemplary Catholic gentle-
man, who strove throughout his
15 years as President of Ecuador
to make that nation a most truly
Catholic state, based not on any
secular domination but on the
principles and commandments of
Catholicism, and the teachings of
Pope Pius IX, who hailed Moreno
as the greatest of all active world
leaders. In 1871 Moreno recalled
the Jesuits. He consecrated Ecua-
dor to the Sacred Heart of Jesus.
He set in place an extensive sys-
tem of social and charitable assis-
tance with the help of the Catho-
lic Church. He became known as
The Regenerator of the Fatherland
as Ecuador benefited materially,
intellectually, morally, and in its
religious stability. Moreno also out-
lived Masonic lodges in Ecuador
and several assassination attempts
failed, but on May 6, 1875, after
attending Mass, he was attacked
by Masons near the adjacent Pres-
idential Palace where they hacked
off his right hand, his left arm,
sliced his forehead and shot him 17
times. A priest rushed to his side,
knowing Moreno had just received
Holy Communion, asked him
to forgive his assailants. Moreno
tapped the priest’s hand, nodded
and died. His murder was encour-
aged (if not jointly planned) by the
U.S. consul to Ecuador who was a
Mason. Archbishop Checa y Bar-
ba of Quito who had collaborated
with Moreno in making Catholi-
cism preeminent in Ecuador, pro-
tested the Mason’s new persecu-
tion, and on Holy Thursday 1877
Archbishop Barba dropped dead
while saying Mass, the result of his
chalice being poisoned with strych-
nine. For 100 years the bodies of
these two martyrs were hidden in a
nearby convent by the nuns so that
the Masons could not desecrate the
bodies. Pope Francis, on his 2015
trip to South America, stopped in
Quito, Ecuador and even walked
on the very spot where Moreno
was assassinated, but this Pope of
Mercy made no reference to More-
no and Archbishop Barba. On
this trip, Pope Francis apparently
wanting to be politically correct,
referred to the infamous and un-
just manufactured “Black Legend”
July/August 2016 / 5
of Catholic missionary Spain con-
centrating solely on whatever abus-
es were committed without once
mentioning or displaying any grat-
itude concerning the wonderful
evangelization of those lands by the
Spanish Catholic monarchy and
Church. Yet Pope Francis praised
the complete goodness of the En-
lightenment influenced Mason and
Protestant-inspired revolutions and
independence from Catholic Spain
during the 19th century. In plain
simple terms, Pope Francis is quite
conciliatory to most groups even
those seeking the destruction of
Catholicism, but in regards to tra-
ditional Catholic individuals and
groups, Pope Francis doesn’t just
oppose them. Oh no, this para-
gon of mercy loathes and actually
HATES traditional Catholics and
traditional Catholicism with every
fiber of his being. Whenever he re-
fers to these Catholic traditionalists
he spews out venom.
Be merciful. Don’t be judg-
mental. Speak gently, spouts Pope
Francis. The question is – when is
he going to start practicing what
he preaches. Yes, I am certain
that Pope Francis would give the
pro-Marxist, Nyerere, a very, very
fair hearing.
Jack Moran
St. Louis, Missouri
THE CONSECRATION
OF RUSSIA TO THE
IMMACULATE HEART
OF MARY
Ever since you decided that the
Marian request for the Consecra-
tion of Russia to the Immaculate
Heart of Mary took place as pre-
scribed by Mary at Fatima, I have
6 / Culture Wars
been on a crusade of sorts to find
out evidence for or against that
proclamation. If I were to assume
the key words, that Russia, “will
spread her errors throughout the
world,” then my reading of that,
according to Jones, was the idea
that “error” was being primarily
or exclusively of a military nature,
either covertly or overtly—this be-
ing shown by the seeming collapse
of the Soviet Union, even though
there has been no significant re-
duction in their nuclear or con-
ventional forces. If, as I assume,
“error” could more likely be in the
line of Marxist/communist ideol-
ogy that has come out of Russia,
then it is difficult to believe that
the end result of the request has
been achieved.
The atheistic theory of evolution
took root in a number of plac-
es, being a significant part of the
Nazi uberman, but it seems to have
found a more fertile ground in
Russia which spawned the Marx-
ist/socialist/communist ideology
that has even infected the Catholic
Church.
Some of the Catholic Popes in
the past have commented on the
major changes coming in the fu-
ture. One such Pope was Pope Pius
XI, who wrote the following in
1937: “Communism has behind it
occult forces which for a long time
have been working for the over-
throw of the Christian Social Or-
der ….” Pope Pius IX wrote even
earlier in November, 1846, about
the changes that he saw in the fu-
ture: “That infamous doctrine of
so-called communism… is abso-
lutely contrary to the natural law
itself, and, if once adopted, would
utterly destroy the rights, proper-
ty and possessions of all men, and
even society itself.” Pretty ominous
words from a day when there was
hardly any evidence of commu-
nism, to be sure.
As far as the reported demise
of the Soviet Union, this in itself
does not portend the end of com-
munism. Whether or not one per-
ceives that there is less communist
activity throughout the world, it
seems the Communist Party is
alive and well and thriving in the
good old USA, based in Chicago—
that is, the same city that Barack
Obama hails from. It seems that
maybe they didn’t get the memo
about the Soviet Union.
According to author Trev-
or Loudon in his book, Barack
Obama and the Enemies Within,
“Barrack Obama came to Chicago
in 1983 inspired by the city’s new
mayor, Harold Washington. A
long time Communist Party asso-
ciate, Washington staffed the city’s
administration with communists
and socialists.” After a stint as a
community organizer in Chicago,
Obama, who had done previous
work for ACORN (Association
of Community Organizations for
Reform Now) in the cities of New
York and Chicago, moved onto
Harvard Law School. He then re-
turned to Chicago in 1992 where
his talents were recognized by a
number of communist groups:
Students for a Democratic Soci-
ety (SDS), Democratic Socialists
of America (DSA), the Commu-
nist Party USA (CPUSA), and the
Committees for Democracy and
Socialism (COCDS). With their
support, he went on to a success-
ful bid for state senator in 1996 by
taking out his three opponents by
legal technicalities. In 2004 he was
able to win a seat in the US Senate
for the state of Illinois. Before that,
there is good evidence to show
that he was mentored by photog-
rapher, poet, and Communist Par-
ty USA member, Frank Marshall
Davis, for the whole time he was
in Hawaii, from the ages of 11 to
18. It appears that Davis’ previous
connections in Chicago may have
helped Obama when he arrived
in Chicago. There is even good
evidence for his being Barrack
Obama’s real father—but that is a
story for another time. The point
of all this is to show that Obama
has been groomed and supported
for almost his entire life by Marx-
ist/communists before becoming
the 44th President of the US and,
obviously, there are a number of
radical Marxist/socialist/commu-
nist groups that had a significant
part to play in it.
With a number of articles of
late in Culture Wars it seems to me
the only thing missing is the word
“conspiracy.” With the mention
that has been made of the CFR,
TLC, and the Bilderbergers, you
have managed to enter the realm
of the so-called “conspiracy nuts.”
Authors such as Gary Allen, An-
thony Sutton, John T. Flynn, Eu-
stace Mullins, John Stormer, and
many others, have warned of the
actions of the elite capitalists who
are meaning to enslave us all. The
capitalists who, in fact, have no
trouble working with the commu-
nists to achieve their goals, which
is the sort of action that the aver-
age conservative just doesn’t under-
stand (or just don’t want to admit
to) and so pass over as the talk of
conspiracy nuts. Just the kind of
talk that the elite capitalists pro-
mote as it takes the attention away
from what they are doing, and
makes it less likely that the general
public would listen to those who
are sounding the alarm.
A number of these writers have
mentioned the “Hegelian Dialec-
tic.” What this entails is the idea
that the elitists employ a manufac-
tured crisis in order to implement
the plans that they would want to
have in order to control the pop-
ulation. The elitists are well aware
that when there is a problem the
people generally will clamor for
the government to come up with
a solution that usually results in
more control and surveillance,
such as The Patriot Act after 911,
and the wars in Iraq and Afghan-
istan.
The one thing that those who are
revealing the plans of the elite cap-
italist’s One-World Conspiracy are
loathe to admit, either because they
don’t believe it themselves or they
don’t want to be called anti-Semite,
is the fact that nearly all of the elite
capitalists with designs on world
domination are, in fact, Jewish.
These same Jewish elites have been
primarily responsible for placing
this country into a usurious system
of injurious debt to the Federal Re-
serve (which is actually a misnomer
as it is a private corporation), as well
as financing the Bolshevik revolu-
tion in Russia. According to Rabbi
Wise, “Some call it Marxism—I call
it Judaism.” It is also illuminating
to see that according to the Ameri-
can Hebrew of September 10, 1920:
“The Bolshevik revolution in Rus-
sia was the work of Jewish brains,
of Jewish dissatisfaction, of Jewish
planning, whose goal is to create a
new order in the world. What was
performed in so excellent a way in
Russia, thanks to Jewish brains, and
because of Jewish dissatisfaction
and by Jewish planning, shall also,
through the same Jewish mental
and physical forces, become a reality
all over the world.”
One of these elite bankers, Da-
vid Rockefeller, was pretty candid
in his published memoirs, “Some
even believe we [the Rockefeller
family] are part of a secret cabal
working against the best interests
of the United States, characterizing
my family and me as ‘internation-
alists’ and of conspiring with others
around the world to build a more
integrated global political and
economic structure — one world,
if you will. If that’s the charge, I
stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”
Professor Carroll Quigley, in his
book, Tragedy and Hope, who just
happened to be a professor of Bill
Clinton at Georgetown University,
was remarkably candid: “The es-
tablishment of the Federal Reserve
(1913) ensured that the United
States would become indebted to
and owned by international bank-
ing interests, and thus, act in their
interest. The Fed financed the US
role in World War I, provided the
credit for speculation, which led
to the Great Depression and mas-
sive consolidation for the interests
that own the Federal Reserve Sys-
tem. It then financed US entry
into World War II.” Quigley was
allowed to examine the records of
the elites and then wrote his over
1300 page book without their pri-
or knowledge or approval. A num-
ber of copies were purchased by the
general public before the rest were
swiftly taken out of circulation and
the plates destroyed. Professor Car-
roll Quigley was generally support-
ive of the elitist plans, although he
was not happy that they were keep-
ing it a secret—thus the reason he
wrote the book.
With the seemingly failed po-
litical system in this country and
the fact that the conservatives are
nearly always on a losing trajectory,
July/August 2016 / 7
no matter who is in office, some- ety of food products. This could be I posted this comment under The
one would have to assume that the used to devolve the food industry. Next Conservatism: What is Conser-
politicians are either totally incom- You could attack Archer Daniels vatism from May 9, 2016 by Wil-
petent or that this is by some ne- Midland this way using heirloom liam Lind at TraditionalRight.com.
farious design. I prefer to believe it produce and heirloom livestock The more I think of this the more
is by design. The evidence is readi- breeds from Europe. This way you obvious it seems.  Do you agree? 
ly available for anyone wishing to could counter the big companies Have you read Toward A Truly
read it, especially with all the eB- and the Frankenfood they sell. Free Market by John Medaille? It
ooks available free on-line. The phony Homogenization in explains the very Catholic idea of
the Catholic church has given us distributism that Belloc and Ches-
Michael Steil parishes under assault from Cul- terton started.  There was a seg-
mesteil@cox.net tural Marxism. The loss of Ger- ment last week on the McLaughlin
man, Irish, Italian, etc. parishes has Group about poverty and what to
created this phony Liberal church. do about it.  It can be watched at
The Maronite and Greek Orthodox McLaughlin.com.  No one really
THE IMPORTANCE OF
here have excellent three day food had an answer.  Eleanor Clift wants
ETHNIC CATHOLIC PARISHES 
festivals, while our generic Catho- more welfare, Pat Buchanan wants
I have read several of your books lic parishes have one day, boring, more jobs.  Paul Craig Roberts es-
and know of the importance you bland festivals. In the 1980’s the timates 102,000,000 people have
place on the old ethnic Catholic Irish parish here had great multi- stopped looking for work.  They
neighborhoods and parishes.  Does day festivals. No more. We still are not counted in the unemploy-
the following make sense to you? have an Oktoberfest, but no Ger- ment statistics because they receive
Why does no one talk about man parishes. This is a huge loss. no welfare.  I am all for Trump
crossing Nationalism with Dis- All those groups were assimilated and his tariffs, but realistically how
tributism? The Eastern churches in historically within their respective many jobs are coming back?  In
San Antonio (Maronite, Greek Or- Nationalist/ethnic parishes. While San Antonio there is all this pat-
thodox, Coptic Orthodox) retain their Americanism may have been ting on the back of our local lead-
their Nationalism/ethnic identity. questioned at one time, no one ers for designating the Missions as
So does our Anglican-use Cath- questions the Americanism of a World Heritage Site.  As far as
olic parish which has high masses Germans, Irish, Italians, or today’s I am concerned it is nothing but
in English, Latin Mass, classical Eastern Christians. Perhaps that is corporate welfare for the tourism
church music and chant every Sun- the trouble with the Hispanics. No industry.  The San Antonio Food
day. No Liberal foolishness there. specific Hispanic parish with Latin, Bank has been asked to farm the
These parishes have many Hispan- Spanish Baroque music and a guild land to grow produce for the poor. 
ics attending, but do not seem to for the old Spanish Charros in San That is charity.  My idea would be
be assaulted by Cultural Marxism Antonio to produce grass-fed beef, a for profit business that would put
as most of our Catholic parishes sacharros.org. Every ethnic group people to work.  Ideally guilds for a
do, always bowing to the Hispan- should wear traditional clothing Charro worker cooperative should
ics and Leftists.  NanoFarms.com to work. I have no problem with be set-up at the Missions, but I
is a good idea, but it does not go putting National flags on food don’t think they could do that
far enough. The Eastern churches products. The Confederate flag since the missions are now con-
would be perfect for creating guilds on Southern food products would trolled by the U.N.  In addition,
to produce ethnic food products. also be appropriate. Is this not tra- Melkites should reach out to Greek
William Lind, Pope Francis, and ditional culture? Is this not Retro- Orthodox to form co-operatives
the Orthodox would like to see the culture? Every ethnic group needs together.  Maronites should reach
papacy devolved so all the churches its own parish. Every Distributist out to Syrian Orthodox, etc. May-
can reunite and yet keep their Na- worker-co-operative should be be this would get Liberal/lapsed
tionalism/ethnic identities. Europe connected to an ethnic parish. At- Catholics lined up with us.  Food
has many Nations with a great vari- tack Archer Daniels Midland! issues are big with Liberals at the

8 / Culture Wars
local level.  A lot of it I agree with,
but it is missing the traditional eth-
nic Catholic dimension.
My problem is convinc-
ing anyone in San Antonio of
this.  For years I have thought
about the Retroculture con-
cept that Paul Weyrich and Wil-
liam Lind came up with.   I real-
ize this is a bit different maybe
than what they were thinking
of.  My tweaking makes sense
though. Toward A Truly Free Mar-
ket by John Medaille explains Dis-
tributism, but no mention of the
traditional ethnic dimension in the
parishes where these guilds should
be created.  My goal was to create
a Retroculture Association so all
of this could be discussed,  I have
talked to a number of people lo-
cally and no one understands what
I am talking about.  They think I
am crazy.  I have talked to several
priests. I even sent a box of books
to the Maronite priest.  I am not
a member of that parish, but I go
out there from time to time.  In my
reading on Syrian/Lebanese history
I learned that before the churches
split, before Islam appeared, and
before Lebanon split off as a sep-
arate country they were known
for three things:   Wine, Olive oil,
and the purple dye used to make
the Byzantine emperors robes.  It
occurred to me that there were in
the last 10 or 15 years people in
Texas making wine and Olive oil.  Fallon.  It was riveting!  As riveting
So why not the Maronites & Syri-
an Orthodox?  It could be done in
Melkite/Greek Orthodox parishes
as well.  I actually located two re-
cently published coffee table books
in English on Amazon about Leba-
nese wine, and Lebanese Olive oil
being made today.  When I spoke
to the priest he hadn’t bothered
to look through the stuff I sent or
read my letter.  San Antonio, birth-
place of the Texas Cattle industry,
has not had an operating stock-
yards for about 15 years.  Most of
the cattle industry consolidated up
around the panhandle and small
ranchers here could not compete
anymore.  They still bring people
in for the Rodeo every year, but
it’s not really local anymore.  If the
Charros started training people to
start a worker cooperative and raise
premium grass-fed beef it would be
a perfect way to re-establish that in-
dustry and create jobs.  They would
be offering a different product that
could be sold at Whole Foods type
stores.   I am not a writer, but I
think a statement is needed that
Conservative culture people and
Liberal food people can sign off
on.  It could then be presented to
the bishops.  Otherwise, this is go-
ing nowhere.  I have e-mailed some
with Dr. Robert Moynihan who is
with the Urbi et Orbi Foundation,
and publishes Inside the Vatican
magazine.  He liked my ideas.  I
even e-mailed Andres Duany be-
cause I thought towns could be
built around these groups and their
businesses, similar to the old neigh-
borhoods.  He sent me his book
called Garden Cities about agrarian
urbanism.  Recently, I joined the
Weston A. Price Foundation and
watched the DVD “Nourishing
Traditional Diets,” hosted by Sally
as reading books from authors like
you, Russell Kirk, William Lind,
etc. All the food issues are
summed up in the five and a half
hour DVD.  However, the Nour-
ishing Traditional Diets cookbook
is lame.  The recipes are all Mod-
ern.  It lacks the traditional ethnic
dimension that our better festivals
have here in San Antonio.  There
is a big irony to our urban renewal
in San Antonio. The urban renewal
that took out a lot of the old neigh-
borhoods in San Antonio became
Hemis Fair park for the World’s
Fair in 1968.  One of the exhibit
halls/museums has survived.  It is
called the Institute of Texan Cul-
tures and shows history of all of the
ethnic groups who came to Tex-
as.  Every year they have the Texas
Folk Life Festival there and all the
ethnic groups have excellent food
booths! It is a Remnant.  As white
flight occurred the old ethnic dis-
solved.  The locals who are interest-
ed in food issues tend to be hippie
type college students. However,
this festival draws everybody. I also
found a short book titled Being
Consumed: Economics and Christian
Desire by William T. Cavenaugh. 
It talks about how Christians are
supposed to be consumers because
we consume the Eucharist, but
society is disordered, so our “con-
sumerism” is disordered.  I think
all Catholics, Liberal and Con-
servative need to be lined up on
the same side in November.  This
might do it.  My problem is put-
ting this all together.
Louis A. Jamail, Jr.
San Antonio, Texas
DELIBERATELY DESTROYED
Those Catholic ethnic neighbor-
hoods were deliberately destroyed
because the American regime could
not tolerate competing, uncon-
trolled identities. I demonstrated
this in my book The Slaughter of
Cities. In their place, the regime
confected pseudo-ethnic identities
based on consumer items. Har-
ley-Davidson riders is one; sports
July/August 2016 / 9
teams of all sorts are another.
Both provide people with pseu-
do-ethnic clothing and a sense of
identity that renders them docile.
These original European eth-
nic identities cannot perdure in
America. Actually, they can hard-
ly perdure in Europe for the same
reason, namely, American im-
perialism. The main engine of
assimilation other than social en-
gineering is marriage. I am Irish
and German. All of my cousins are
bi-racial as well. Unfortunately, the
Catholic Church failed to see that
Catholicism, according to the Tri-
ple Melting Pot, is the new ethnic
identity in America. The Church
failed to see this because the bish-
ops to a man are all Americanists of
either the sexual or libertarian Re-
publican variety. When that dime
drops, something might happen.
E. Michael Jones
South Bend, Indiana
A PRISONER IN TEXAS
Sir, it appears I’ve done it again.
My captors appear to be attempt-
ing to terminate my life, once
more. Here is my situation, and
it is perhaps a bit more dangerous
than I am expressing:
I am working on the John Wyn-
ne Prison, Texas’s most profitable
forced labor compound, in its en-
tire 112 prison system, now home
to over “150 thousand men” and
“women”. My efforts in the area
of civil rights, after the “murder
by staff” of 67 year old Leopoldo
Cruz, consisted of submitting 27
separate prisoner affidavits to fed-
eral judge Kenneth Hoyt, about
the horrid conditions on that slave
compound, have now led to a “13
10 / Culture Wars
prison uprising.” The prisoners all
refused to go to their forced-labor
jobs. This is nearly unheard of in
Texas prisons because such a com-
plicated maze of intimidation is
firmly in place. Several newspapers
and the web covered the multi-pris-
on work stoppage… (Please bear in
mind that “none” of the millions
of dollars that Texas slave com-
pounds of free-labor bring into the
state banks, “actually go to a single
victim – ever.”) “Not a dime” of
the hundreds of millions of dollars
Texas makes by using forced prison
labor to do “free-world jobs” – ever
goes to anybody except the bloated
salaries and budgets under the gov-
ernment bosses in Austin. Victims
of crime need not apply… Their
only restitution will be in the form
of “more taxes” for “more prisons”
to hold more state-owned slaves!
Just like the “good old days.” Ok,
back to me for a bit… I did some
legal work for a prisoner named
Solomon Salazar. Mr. Salazar was a
pitiful case, in which a 150 pound
Spanish man was attacked on mul-
tiple occasions by a Captain Boy-
kins… Salazar had over 50% of his
body paralyzed due to a stroke at
age 10. He has a verifiable IQ of 67.
One arm is less than half the size
of the other, as is one leg. The bad
arm is totally paralyzed and held in
a sling, while the leg is 60% gone…
he limps so badly that it is not possi-
ble to “miss.” So… this 400 pound
black officer, (Boykins), now a “cap-
tain,” decides to pull Salazar over
at 4 am in route to the law library.
Solomon’s face was ground into a
steel fence (taking several staples to
close) and then Boykins broke Sol-
omon’s “crippled arm” over his knee
just for fun… (The medical de-
partment left the arm badly bent).
I took to helping Salazar in the
federal court in Beaumont Texas,
called the Eastern District. Boykins
said “he felt threatened” and an-
other so-called “correction officer”
who was part of it, was terminat-
ed. Boykins has broken the bones
of many-a-disabled prisoner here
on the “Mark Stiles Medical Pris-
on Unit”…. He killed one young
man not long ago by bashing his
head in with a radio. So, God told
me, (quite plainly, to use my gifts
and humble abilities to help Sol-
omon. Dr. Jones, I’m 57 now and
my heart requires three medications
to make it beat properly. As a slave,
I’m of no use to the state of Texas.
So, they sent me to John Sealy Hos-
pital in Galveston TX (a research
hospital for the University of Texas)
to have the heart looked at, to see
if I would stand-up to the hernia
surgery now needed from all the
abuse on the John Wynne forced-la-
bor compound. And, when I got
back two days later, I was placed in
“overflow”. This is where they put
you to punish you, but for me it’s
suppose-to-be due to a “housing
shortage”… In short, they make me
sleep on a steel bed frame without a
mattress. And A/C is pushed in the
little cell, all steel, at 50° all night. I
have no covers, no toilet paper, and
no access to any of my property.
This letter was possible only because
a letter I wrote to you on the sub-
ject of “my nephew and his Black-
water involvement,” came back. I
used the envelope and some writing
supplies with a stamp given me by a
sympathetic prison worker, to write
you this. Dr. Jones, I’ve been in this
room for nine near-sleepless nights.
The prison refuses to allow me my
heart medication. I tried to file a
“life-endangerment” on this and am
daily being refused all access to the
Courts or outside people… It will
be by God’s Grace if this letter gets
out. Once they realized I was help-
ing Solomon Salazar and drawing
federal heat here, combined with
my willingness to expose the ac-
tual homicidal doings my broth-
er’s son, John, openly admitted to
me, face to face, over coffee at my
brother’s home in Pell City, Ala-
bama… it’s my belief that my cap-
tors are trying to cause my heart to
fail by deliberate design. No heart
meds for a week, plus “should have
done it.” But I feel great! Better
than I have in years! Imagine that.
So, the question is, “what’s next?”
Once I get my property back again,
the essay on the “Confessions of a
Blackwater Killer for Hire” will be
yours to publish. Realize that Mr.
Prince, Blackwater’s founder, was
tight with little Bush, George Jr.
… our former governor and heav-
ily involved in the prison’s “Faith-
based programs.” This scam gar-
ners millions in private donation
to the prisons and is “heavy” on
the “Herbert W. Armstrong” type
propaganda… In short, we are all
taught that the “British” are really
“lost Israel” and the “Jews” are “Ju-
dah”… So we white boys must go
kill all the Arabs for “Judah” our
long-lost brothers…. All Catholics
are of course, the new Babylon and
revived Roman Empire… etc… ad
infinitum… ad nauseum… Anyway,
it’s Texas prison war propaganda
“yet unexposed.” I have angered big
Boykins, the unit’s bone-breaker/
prisoner-killer… and his pals. These
are Major Lavias, Capt. Goodman,
Lt. Cordell, Lt. Valez, Lt. Gander,
Lt. Edison… and our homosexual
warden “Carter” All but Valez are
both “black” and “queer”. Note:
The Texas city of Beaumont is a
well-known “queer infestation,” and
most of them work for the prisons
here. Eight in all. So far, my “cell
mates” have all been “black racists.”
Most are either “Crips,” “Mandin-
go Warriors” or some other black
gang. One was HIV positive for 15
years,…. Now, here’s where it gets
evil, Dr. Jones: HIV medication
is “required by law,” here and very
costly… Three pills a day cost you,
the tax-payers, about $2600 per
month just for the pill alone. So, if a
man is dying of AIDS on the street
and still “hell-bent on practicing
sodomy” with other men, he need
only “come to prison” to do it – in-
definitely, “at your expense.” And
there are “hundreds of them” on
just this unit alone. Loyal, drug-de-
pendent, slaves of the state have a
“giant, queer, HIV pajama-party”
on you folks! They let these freaks
“make-out” on the rec-yard. They
are “fed double-portions.” They
“service” the queer officers here.
They are 90% all black – just like
“real life…” And, if my speculation
and calculations are correct, the
state is most probably skimming
the AIDS medication-money, using
back door generics, and breeding
more for profit, with the nearly all
black staff here running the whole
freak show. Dr. Jones, I’m in pretty
deep again. But, God plus one, let
alone adding EMJ, and this too will
be a necessary dragon which needs
immediate slaying, eg. the profits
of HIV in prison. Solomon Salazar
and those like him need help too,
sir. He is a small-time criminal with
more “guts than brains.” His case
is heard in Beaumont in the East-
ern Federal District by some mag-
istrate trying to give the poor guy
the “bums rush.” I really do think
they’d like to kill me sir.
M. David Simmons
Beaumont, Texas
THREE STOOGES INSULT
Dear Dr Jones, My name is Dr.
Larry Fine and I want to let you
know that I'm deeply offended
by your comments on the show
Israel. Why are we stooges always
used as the perfect examples of
ignorance and stupidity? Don't
you realize that being a stooge is
very, very serious business!! I real-
ize that I am a Jewish subversive
and have provided an extremely
negative role model for many stu-
pid Goyim children, but please,
please don't compare me to an
animal Goy Koch sucker like your
tinkerbell politician from Indiana.
Why are all of your politicians
such lollipop loving sissies. Why
doesn't the State of Indiana im-
itate the State of Rhode Island,
all of our politicians are Italian
gangsters. Our judges and reps
are crooks but at least they like
women! (I forgot about Rep. Cic-
cilline) Why do you think they
call the Rhode Island godfather
Baby Shacks? Because he likes to
shack up with women that's why!
If your Mayor doesn't understand
that the plug goes into the socket
how is he going to govern his city
(much less plug in a toaster). How
long must stooges be oppressed by
the dominant culture? There have
been many of us living lives of se-
crecy throughout history. In fact
many of our glorious Presidents
have been stooges. If you persist
in your discriminatory comments
I guarantee you will never work in
Hollywood again.
Dr Larry Fine
rcatjr@cox.net
July/August 2016 / 11
Culture of Death Watch
Disco Inferno: The Great Satan
Devours His Children
Once again Pete’s timing was
impeccable. Last year, if you’ll re-
member South Bend Mayor Pete
Buttigieg announced that he was
a homosexual one week before the
Supreme Court handed down its
Obergefell decision. The news of
the Supreme Court’s decision went
out over the electronic media just
as I was holding a press conference
denouncing the mayor for not only
committing, but advocating, sins
that cry to heaven for vengeance.
The concatenation of events proved
perfect for the cub reporter for one
of the local TV stations, who asked
me how it felt to be on the wrong
side of history. I replied by saying
that from Dred Scott to Buck v.
Bell, there has never been an insti-
12 / Culture Wars
tution more closely associated with
the wrong side of history than the
U.S. Supreme Court. Mention of
Dred Scott evoked peals of dismis-
sive laughter from the black min-
isters standing behind me, but it
went completely over the head of
the cub reporter, who didn’t have
time too to look it up on Wikipe-
dia.
One year after his debut as the
gay mayor of South Bend, Butt-
igieg was being promoted again,
this time by Frank Bruni of the
New York Times as the “first gay
president.”1 Bruni is a homosexual.
His prose has the mincing, fawn-
ing feel of speeches given by minor
characters in Shakespeare for comic
relief. If anyone doubted my claim
that Buttigieg was a stooge of the
oligarchs, Bruni’s article laid those
reservations to rest. Like Barack
Obama, Pete went to Harvard;
like Bill Clinton he was a Rhodes
Scholar. Having cleared the first
two necessary career hurdles for
any prospective defender of the
Anglo-American empire, Buttigieg
has now morphed into a “thrilling
symbol of our country’s progress”
and a fitting successor to Hillary
Clinton, whose nomination be-
spoke “the breaking of barriers.”
Bruni’s puff piece on Mayor Pete
was an indication that the oligarchs
and their pundits were preparing
us for “more milestones to come:
for women, for blacks, for Hispan-
ics, for other minorities.”2
 Chasten Glezman with Mayor Pete Buttigieg
Mayor Pete, who told Bruni
that he wasn’t interested “in being
a poster boy” for the homosexual
agenda, went on to flaunt his re-
lationship with Chasten Glezman,
“a middle-school teacher, [who]
moved in with him this year and
sometimes accompanies him to
public events,” by describing how
he “popped into Glezman’s class-
room with an offering from Star-
bucks.” This prompted e-mails
from parents who felt that Mayor
Pete was shilling for the homosex-
ual agenda, which prompted in
turn patronizing comments to the
benighted proles of South Bend,
as faithfully transcribed by the gay
reporter from the New York Times.
Mayor Pete was “just doing… the
same kind of thing a straight cou-
ple would do…. I didn’t go in
there to discuss L.G.B.T. issues. I
went in there to bring a cup of cof-
fee to somebody that I love.”
Except that “straight couples”
don’t do this sort of thing, certain- if it were the same.” No, Pete, you eral election. Bruni’s article makes
ly not in public schools in South can’t, and no, you and your buddy the reason for Buttigieg’s anointing
Bend, Indiana, which lately re- are not the same as normal people as the “first gay president” clear.
semble minimum security prisons. precisely because you are homo- Mayor Pete is the oligarch’s answer
The doors to the classrooms are sexuals. It’s not irrational prejudice to Donald Trump. His title is may-
locked; the halls are full of unruly that sets up situations like this; it’s or of South Bend, but he is in re-
students whom teachers can no your violation of the natural law. ality the empire’s proconsul, whose
longer handle—all of which testify Behind Bruni’s article we can job is to tell the natives that they
to social engineering schemes gone discern the dim outline of Donald had better get used to living in a
awry. Peter Helland, host of the Is- Trump, in particular the impres- conquered province. Unlike Don-
rael cable access talk show that has sion he made on the oligarchs when ald Trump, who was applauded
had me on as a guest a number of when he complained about Car-
times, was banned from these same rier Air Conditioning moving its
classrooms for bringing a Bible in
“No person is born factory to Mexico, Mayor Pete has
with him, largely because of the homosexual, just like been anointed by the oligarchs to
efforts of the same social engineers no one is born a thief, disabuse the locals of any illusions
who are now trying to use the pub- they might have about earning a
lic schools to mainstream homo- a liar or murderer.” decent salary. His job is to appear
sexual behavior among the young. pleasant and upbeat as he tells
Mayor Pete concluded his anecdote he won the Republican primary in the locals that they can no lon-
by concluding ruefully, “But it was Indiana in May, just four years after ger “participate in the fiction that
one of those moments … when I Indiana had voted for the oligarch’s if we just turn back the clock and
realized we can’t quite go around as oligarch Mitt Romney in the gen- get rid of trade, everybody can get

July/August 2016 / 13
Frank Bruni
their manufacturing jobs back.” In
benighted Indiana, “there are a lot
of people who think they lost their
jobs because of globalization, when
they actually lost their jobs because
of technology,” and the oligarchs
find this reluctance to face the eco-
nomic music annoying. The gospel
which the oligarchs have anointed
Pete to spread among the proles in
northern Indiana, “isn’t isolation-
ism, protectionism, and nostalgia.
It’s new skills and a next genera-
tion of products and services.”3 The
oligarchs have dispatched Pete to
South Bend to correct the thinking
of the local Democrats, who “are
not yet comfortable working in a
vocabulary of ‘freedom.’”
“Freedom” in this context means
sexual liberation of the sort prac-
ticed by homosexuals like May-
or Pete and following the gospel
of Michel Foucault, which Pete
learned at his father’s knee, a gospel
which promotes sexual liberation
and libertarian economics, as well
as the notion that the homosex-
14 / Culture Wars
ual is America’s ideal citizen. The
oligarchs know full well that this
type of “freedom” is another word
for bondage, but they don’t want
the word to get out because homo-
sexuals, their proxy warriors in this
war, are docile consumers and loy-
al commissars. They cannot marry
and so, therefore, they cannot form
families which beget children. In-
stead, they engage in state-sanc-
tioned parodies of these actions,
while at the same time working
loyally to dismantle “Fordism,”
which is to say the economic sys-
tem based on high-paying industri-
al jobs. In the meantime, they will
commandeer whatever high-paying
jobs are left and turn the salaries
that were intended for men who
were heads of families into dispos-
able income that homosexuals can
now spend at gay discos and other
lifestyle purchases.
Pete Buttigieg is living proof
that homosexuals make the best
proconsuls. They are completely
inured to the realm of normal hu-
man allegiances and affec-
tions. They have no king but
Caesar. They are loyal ser-
vants of the empire because
they lack the normal links
that bind men and women
together in families, clans,
ethnic groups, and nations.
Their allegiance to their oli-
garch masters is completely
undivided. Homosexuals
also make the best traitors,
as the English discovered to
their lasting chagrin. Guy
Burgess, Anthony Blunt, and
Donald McLean were loyal
servants of an empire, the
Soviet empire, and willing to
betray those closest to them.
It was E. M. Forster, another
member of the Cambridge
Apostles, who said famously, “if I
had to chose between betraying
my friends and my country, I hope
that I would have the guts to be-
tray my country.” That was then.
Now Pete gets to betray his constit-
uents by serving his country.
Within hours of the appearance
of the puff piece promoting Butti-
gieg as our “first gay president,” 49
homosexuals were murdered and
53 wounded at the Pulse disco in
Orlando, Florida. It was the biggest
mass shooting in American history,
and the fact that the victims were
homosexuals meant that Bruni was
called upon to explain the mean-
ing of it all. In prose that made his
puff piece on Mayor Buttigieg look
restrained by comparison, Bruni
portrayed the Orlando disco shoot-
ing as an attack on America and
everything America stood for. It
was, in fact, an attack “on freedom
itself.”4 Omar Mateen, the 29-year-
old shooter, was born in New York
to parents from Afghanistan. Ma-
teen’s father had a TV show in Dari
called Durand Jurga. The Durand
line divided Afghanistan arbitrari-
ly from Pakistan. A jurga was the
Afghan equivalent of the town hall
meeting. It was through his father
that Omar Mateen made contact
with the Saudi madrassas that were
the breeding ground for the muja-
hidin that the CIA had weaponized
to drive the Soviets out of Afghan-
istan in the wake of their 1979 in-
vasion.
As if to prove that great minds
run in the same circles, New York
Times pundit Roger Cohen also
said that the Pulse gay disco shoot
up was an attack on America. He
was much more daring in the
charges he leveled and connected
more dots, linking Omar Mateen
not only to the Islamic state but
also to Gavrilo Princip, the man
who started World War I, Donald
Trump, Brexit, Marine Le Pen, and
the world generally being swal-
lowed up in a “downward spiral of
escalating violence.” Omar Mateen
was an expression of “political and
economic frustrations” that “have
produced a groundswell against the
status quo and an apparent readi-
ness to make a leap in the dark”
by supporting Donald Trump or
having Britain leave the European
Union. Once again the pundits
at the New York Times feel called
upon to articulate the fears of the
oligarchs, namely, that “Trump
and ‘Brexit’ represent action —
any action — to shake things up.
They are, to their supporters, the
comeuppance smug elites deserve.”
The National Rifle Association
was also part of this conspiracy
because Mateen used an AR-15,
which is the “gun liberals love to
hate,” Cohen ended his column by
accusing President Obama of hav-
ing:
actively done nothing in Syria over
more than five years of war — so
allowing part of the country to be-
come an ISIS stronghold, contrib-
uting to a massive refugee crisis in
Europe, acquiescing to slaughter
and displacement on a devastating
scale, undermining America’s word
in the world, and granting open
season for President Vladimir Putin
to strut his stuff — amounts to the
greatest foreign policy failure of the
Obama administration.5
While holed up in the Pulse dis-
co men’s room, Mateen placed a
911 call, during which he pledged
his allegiance to ISIS, Al Qaeda,
and Hezbollah, without adverting
to the fact that these groups were
fighting each other in the Middle
East. ISIS, the Nusra Front, and
Al Qaeda could be considered al-
lies, but Hezbollah was fighting
all of them. Rather than parse
this conundrum, the pundits fo-
cused on ISIS, which became a
necessary part of the Bruni/Co-
hen narrative, which was itself an
updated version of George Bush’s
“they hate us for our freedoms”
line. ISIS was an integral part of
the narrative the oligarchs wanted
to convey.
The fact that Brandy disappeared
and Omar ended up dead convinced
Howell that he needed protection from
the CIA, which was orchestrating this
operation.
Once ISIS became part of the
narrative, however, it immedi-
ately implicated Hillary Clinton,
who, as secretary of state, was in-
strumental in arming Al Qaeda to
bring down Moammar Gaddafi in
Libya. She was then equally instru-
mental in moving the same men
and materiel to Syria, where they
came to be known as (or joined
forces with) ISIS in order to bring
down Bashar al-Assad. “Hillary
Clinton, in her tenure as Secretary
of State, was instrumental in help-
ing to fund, organize, train, and
direct al-Qaeda terrorist forces in
Libya and Syria.”6 After destroy-
ing one of the most prosperous
countries in Africa and murdering
its leader, Secretary of State Hil-
lary Clinton encouraged foreign
mercenaries, including Americans,
to join the ranks of Syrian jihad-
ists to overthrow Syrian President
Bashar al-Assad as the “best way to
help Israel.” As some indication of
her murderous and psychopathic
nature, Clinton also wrote that it
was the “right thing” to personal-
ly threaten Bashar al-Assad’s family
with death. As if that weren’t bad
enough, Seymour Hersh says that
Hillary Clinton and Libyan am-
bassador J. Christopher Stevens
shipped poison gas to Syria, to be
used in a false flag operation there
to topple Assad. According to Rus-
sian Insider:
Hersh pointed to a report from
British intelligence saying that the
sarin that was used didn’t come
from Assad’s stockpiles. Hersh also
said that a secret agreement in 2012
July/August 2016 / 15
 was reached between the Obama
Administration and the leaders of
Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar, to
set up a sarin gas attack and blame
it on Assad so that the U.S. could
invade and overthrow Assad.7
Hersh claims that Ambassa-
dor Stevens was killed in Beng-
hazi while implementing a plan
to overthrow Bashar al-Assad that
involved funding from Turkey, as
well as Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
Stevens’ role also involved coordi-
nating the efforts of the CIA and
MI6, who were “responsible for
getting arms from Gaddafi’s ar-
senals into Syria.” All of this took
place during Hillary Clinton’s ten-
ure as Secretary of State, and Hersh
implicates her directly in running
the Libya to Syria “rat line.”
Revelations like this help us to
understand why Hillary Clin-
ton is reluctant to talk about the
“The Durand Jirga, Inc.” mirrors
traditional CIA fronts in southern
Florida existing for decades to
overthrow governments, from Cuba
and Nicaragua to Venezuela and
the Dominican Republic.
e-mails she sent during her tenure
as Secretary of State. One of John
Kerry’s main concerns when he
became Clinton’s successor was
preventing the weapons she had
shipped to Syria from falling into
the hands of terrorists. In a report
which appeared in February 2015,
the Washington Times “points out
Clinton’s treachery in the funding
and support of jihadists in Libya”
16 / Culture Wars
and cites her as “one of the princi-
pal officials who promoted the idea
of supporting terrorists” to over-
throw Moammar Gaddafi in 2011
using NATO-backed rebels.2 In
2011 the New York Times claimed
that Hillary Clinton, along with
Samantha Power, then at the Na-
tional Security Council, and Susan
Rice, the U.N. ambassador at the
time, was the “prime mover” be-
hind the Obama administration’s
decision to back the anti-Gaddafi
insurgents.3 Even after it had be-
come clear to the world that the
“freedom fighters” in Libya were
actually terrorists and jihadists,
Hillary continued to promote the
idea of assisting the “rebels” in Syr-
ia as long as they were willing to
participate in the removal of lead-
ers of state like Bashar al-Assad,
who opposed the regime’s agenda
in the Middle East. In fact, even
after it became clear to the world
that the fighters known to the gen-
eral public as “rebels” were actually
terrorists and jihadists, she contin-
ued to support al-Qaeda and ISIS
fighters in Syria for the purposes of
destroying the secular government
of Bashar al-Assad.
When Omar Mateen implicat-
ed ISIS in the killings, the Obama
administration also implicated Hil-
lary Clinton. Perhaps this explains
why the Obama Administration
began backing away from the of-
ficial explanation within 48 hours
of the shooting. On Monday, June
13, U.S. President Barack Obama
said there was no evidence that the
massacre of 49 people in a Florida
gay nightclub was directed from
abroad or was part of a larger ter-
rorist plot.8
So, was the disco attack blow-
back or was it a false flag opera-
tion? As Frank Bruni put it: “These
locations are never random. These
targets aren’t accidental.”
On the Sunday of the attack in
Orlando, reports started circulat-
ing that James Wesley Howell of
Indiana had been apprehended in
Santa Monica, California with a
car full of explosives and weapons,
which Howell planned to use in
his attack on that city’s gay pride
parade.9 Initially, reports claimed
that Howell had been arrested as a
suspicious character at 2:00 AM on
the day of the Orlando shootings,
but later reports made it clear that
he had turned himself in to the
Santa Monica police because he
wanted protection from the CIA,
which he claimed had armed him
and five other men as agents provo-
cateurs:
According to two department sourc-
es, Howell called the Santa Monica
police on Sunday morning claiming
that he needed protection from the
CIA. Howell further elaborated to
the dispatcher stating that he ‘had
been set up by the CIA – they are
going to kill me.’10
After Howell “heard on the news
that Omar Mateen, the lead gun-
man in the Orlando group, had
been killed by sniper fire, he real-
ized he was being set up as a pat-
sy and would be killed” as well.11
 Seddique Mateen at the State Department
Howell was not working
alone, but once the FBI
took over his case from
the Santa Monica po-
lice, any mention of his
co-conspirators was ex-
punged from the official
record. Howell was not
only not working alone;
it also turns out that he
knew Mateen.
When Howell was
questioned about how
he and his conspirators
knew each other, he said
that, “We were all fa-
miliar with each other
through an online fun-
damental Islamic knowl-
edge seminary course– we
were recruited through
the course and trained
together at a camp in Vir-
ginia – we were taught
how to shoot and make
bombs – everyone knew
their part – [but then]
something went wrong….” “Before was orchestrating this operation. It other countries have faced constant
the officers could further question was at this point that he turned to “blowback” from U.S. support for
Howell, agents working for the Los the Santa Monica police for help.14 jihadist terrorists. The older Boston
Angeles office of the FBI quickly Omar Mateen, it turns out, had Marathon bomber brother — Ta-
swept in and took over the case. merlan Tsarnaev — and the Orlan-
the same connections to the CIA
Santa Monica detectives were never do club shooter Omar Mateen (aka
as the Tsarnev brothers, who took
allowed to talk with Howell.”12 Seddique Mateen) were investigated
the fall for the Boston Marathon by the FBI on more than a single
In a conversation with two Santa bombings. Wayne Madsen sees a occasion. 
Monica policemen, Howell iden- link between the two terrorist at-
tified an accomplice from Cali- The uncle of Tamerlan and Dz-
tacks:
fornia by the name of Dan as well hokhar Tsarnaev, Ruslan Tsarni
as two co-conspirators in Florida, There is one major commonality (aka Tsarnaev) had been linked
one by the name of Brandy and between the jihadist terrorist attacks to the CIA. Tsarni was married
another named Omar. Accord- on a gay nightclub in Orlando on to the daughter of Graham Full-
ing to Howell’s explanation of the June 13 and on the Boston Mara- er, one of the chief CIA architects
plan, “Omar was not supposed to thon in 2013 and that is the Central of the radicalization of Muslims
be killed. They lied to us. Omar Intelligence Agency. Ever since the
to act as radical foot soldiers for
and Brandy were supposed to get ill-conceived CIA-led war against
the United States, whether in Af-
away.”13 The fact that Brandy dis- the Soviet Union in Afghanistan in
ghanistan against the Soviets or in
appeared and Omar ended up dead the 1980s and the agency’s incuba-
tion of the most violent extremes
the Caucasus against Russia. Mir
convinced Howell that he needed Seddique, aka Mir Seddique Ma-
of Islam, the United States and
protection from the CIA, which teen, the father of Omar Mateen,

July/August 2016 / 17
Hillary Clinton and Libyian "Freedom Fighters"
is a self-styled leader of a govern-
ment-in-exile of Afghanistan based
in Port St. Lucie, Florida. The fa-
ther’s operation, using a Florida
not-for-profit company called “The
Durand Jirga, Inc.” mirrors tradi-
tional CIA fronts in southern Flor-
ida existing for decades to over-
throw governments, from Cuba
and Nicaragua to Venezuela and
the Dominican Republic. Mir Sed-
dique hosted a television program
called the “Durand Jirga Show.”
The show is broadcast on the Af-
ghan satellite network “Payam-e-
Afghan,” which is headquartered
in Los Angeles and broadcasts in
Pashto and Persian. Payam-e-Af-
ghan’s Facebook page indicates a
link between the network and the
Fethulleh Gulen organization’s
Rumi Awards. Gulen, a Turkish in-
dustrialist who lives in Pennsylva-
nia and is an opponent of Turkish
18 / Culture Wars
president Recep Tayyip Erdogan,
has been linked to the CIA.
Mateen’s father was “part of U.S.
pro-Taliban CIA/VOA network.”
His son had traveled to Saudi Ara-
bia in 2011 and 2012, just as the
Tsarnev brothers had taken part in
training seminars in Tblisi, Geor-
gia run by the Caucasus Fund of
Georgia, a group affiliated with the
neo-conservative think tank, the
Jamestown Foundation, between
January and July 2012. Jamestown
was founded by CIA director Wil-
liam Casey in the 1980s. Mateen’s
trips to Saudi Arabia brought him
to the attention of the FBI, who
interviewed him and then dropped
the case, not because there was no
cause to pursue the case but be-
cause “the FBI often backs down
on investigating foreign terrorists”
when they discover that the terror-
ists are working for the CIA.
Howell’s implication of four oth-
er co-conspirators lends credence
to those who felt that one shooter
could not wreak the sort of carnage
involved in the Pulse disco shoot-
ing. When asked if he thought it
was possible for one shooter to kill
49 people and wound 53 more in
the relatively short time between
when Mateen entered the disco and
got into a gun battle with the se-
curity guard at the door and when
he barricaded himself in the disco
men’s room, Derek Dieter, former
police officer and South Bend City
Council member, and now direc-
tor of his own private security firm,
responded by saying that Mateen
had to have someone with him to
bring that off. The AR-15 is the
semi-automatic civilian version of
the M-16, the notoriously unreli-
able gun that American troops were
issued during the Vietnam War.
Its magazine holds 30 .223 caliber
rounds. The crucial moment in
shooting incidents like this comes
when the shooter has to reload. Di-
eter finds it surprising that no one
tackled Mateen at this point.
So, at the very least the Pulse
disco attack was blowback, which
could be traced back to the Sovi-
et invasion of Afghanistan and the
decision by the CIA to back the
mujahidin there as their proxy war-
riors. The CIA promoted Muslim
fundamentalism during the 1980s
in order to topple virtually all of
the secular Arab leaders in the Mid-
dle East, from Saddam Hussein in
Iraq to Hosni Mubarak in Egypt,
to Muammar Gaddafi in Libya.
Hafez al-Assad was their next tar-
get and still is, but the offensive
there stalled when 1) the Muslim
world woke up to what was going
on and 2) Russia decided to inter-
vene to save Assad. Hillary Clinton
was using her gay ambassador in
Libya to effect the transfer of weap-
ons from Al Qaeda to ISIS when
the operation went south, Chris-
topher Stevens got killed, and the
offensive stalled.
Blowback has been happening
ever since the mujahideen defeated
the Soviet Union and then turned
their eyes to the new enemy, the
Great Satan, the United States.
And why was America the Great
Satan? Largely because of its pro-
motion of things like homosexu-
ality. Like Satan, America controls
through moral corruption. So no
matter which narrative thread you
follow, the evidence always leads to
the same conclusion. As Pogo once
said, “We have met the enemy,
and he is us.” As Wayne Madsen
put it: “The United States has but
one country to blame for the rise
of Islamist jihadism and radicalism
around the world:  itself.” And no
one is more responsible for carry-
ing out those policies than Hillary
Clinton. You’d think that Donald
Trump might have noticed this and
re-directed the narrative in this di-
rection, but he allowed himself to
be lured into the Democrats’ trap.
Instead of staying on message and
talking about America First and
the dangers of foreign interven-
tionism under people like Hillary
Clinton, he allowed his message to
become part of the conventional
narrative by calling for a complete
ban on Muslim immigration. The
fact that Omar Mateen happened
to be an American citizen who had
been corrupted by the Great Sa-
tan like every other denizen of the
Pulse disco evidently did not occur
to Trump, nor did it occur to him
that he should be agreeing with the
sheikhs when it comes to issues like
homosexuality.
Bruni did not mention Mateen’s
homosexuality or the connection
between homosexuality and mass
murder in his piece on the Pulse
disco murders because his job was
not so much to understand what
happened as it was to craft a narra-
tive that would allow the incident
“Omar was not supposed to be killed.
They lied to us. Omar and Brandy
were supposed to get away.”
to be weaponized as part of the oli-
garchs’ war on Donald Trump and
the uprising of the proles in Indi-
ana. According to this narrative
Omar Mateen:
was lashing out at an America at
odds with his darker, smaller, more
oppressive mind-set. The people in-
side Pulse were citizens of it. More
to the point, they were emblems of
it. In Pulse they found a refuge. In
Pulse they found joy. To him they
deserved neither. And he communi-
cated that with an assault rifle and
bullets. The Islamic State and its ilk
are brutal to gay people, whom they
treat in unthinkable ways. They
throw gay people from rooftops.
The footage is posted online. It’s
bloodcurdling, but it’s not unique.
In countries throughout the world,
to be gay is to be in mortal danger.
To embrace love is to court death.
In line with his puff piece on
Pete Buttigieg, Bruni used the oc-
casion to attack state government,
specifically Florida governor Rick
Scott, who showed “lack of support
for issues important to L.G.B.T.
people.” Just in case we were all
wondering, Bruni added “Those
complaints have merit.” Shame on
Governor Scott, who should know
that America is one big gay disco
according the oligarchs and their
pundits. This means that:
All Americans are under attack and
not exclusively because of whom
we drink, dance or sleep with, but
because of our bedrock belief that
we should not be subservient to any
one ideology or any one religion.
That offends and inflames the zeal-
ots of the world.
Homophobic Islam was an essen-
tial part of this story. As President
Obama was luring Donald Trump
July/August 2016 / 19
into the trap of attacking all Mus-
lims, the Wall Street Journal, where
Muslim bashing is acceptable in a
way that it is not at the New York
Times, dedicated a piece to show-
ing that “The Orlando massacre
is a hideous reminder to Ameri-
cans that homophobia is an inte-
gral part of Islamic extremism.”15
Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who happens to
be a fellow at the Harvard’s Ken-
nedy School and as such a reliable
agent of the oligarchs, went on to
claim that “Muslim homophobia is
institutionalized.” In fact, “Muslim
law … prescribes cruel and unusu-
al punishments for homosexuality.”
This is true, but so does the Old
Testament. And why is that the
case? Well, because the normal cit-
izen of this world finds homosex-
uality repugnant. The difference
between the Islamic world and the
West is that this repugnance hasn’t
been socially engineered out of the
Islamic populations at large. This
is, of course, one of the major rea-
sons for our on-going war in the
Middle East.
Ms. Hirsi Ali cites Muzzamil
Siddiqi, former president of the Is-
lamic Society of North America, as
saying: “Homosexuality is a moral
disorder. It is a moral disease, a sin
and corruption…. No person is
born homosexual, just like no one
is born a thief, a liar, or murderer.
People acquire these evil habits due
to a lack of proper guidance and
education.” His views may seem
extreme to students at the Kenne-
dy Center, but they are indistin-
guishable from the teaching of the
Catholic Church. In fact, if you
dig deeply enough into the tradi-
tional moral teaching of Christi-
20 / Culture Wars
anity, you will find statements that
are virtually identical to the state-
ments of the Muslim clerics Ms.
Hirsi Ali cites as extreme examples
of homophobia.
No one can get printed on the
pages of the Wall Street Journal
without representing the views of
the oligarchs, and Ms. Hirsi Ali
is no exception to this rule. After
telling us that “in 33 out of the
36 countries” recently surveyed,
75 percent of the population felt
that “homosexuality was ‘morally
wrong,’” and only 10 percent felt
that homosexuality was “moral-
ly acceptable,” the grad student at
the Kennedy School then let the
cat out of the bag when she said,
“These countries’ laws against ho-
mosexuality align with the attitudes
of the overwhelming majority of
their populations.” Wait a minute,
shouldn’t the laws of a country con-
form to the “attitudes of the over-
Franklin D. Roosevelt knew about the
Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in
advance, but chose to sacrifice over
2,000 American lives in order to get
the US into the war.
whelming majority of their popula-
tions”? Doesn’t the Kennedy School
believe in democracy and consent
of the governed? The answer to this
question is no. The homosexual
movement is by its very nature an-
ti-democratic. The cabal of CEOs
and homosexuals which overturned
Indiana’s Religious Freedom Resto-
ration Act last year (and legislation
in Georgia, Mississippi and North
Carolina in 2016) was created pre-
cisely to overturn representative
government.
The main difference between the
Christian view of homosexuali-
ty and the Muslim view has to do
with the punishment appropriate
to this sort of behavior, not wheth-
er this behavior is wrong. Most
Islamic countries still feel that ho-
mosexuality is a crime that should
be punished under the civil law.
As Ms. Hirsi Ali delights in saying,
many Islamic countries still consid-
er homosexuality a capital crime.
Iran, for example, “is notorious for
hanging men accused of homosex-
ual behavior. The Associated Press
reports that since 2014, ISIS has
executed at least 30 people in Syr-
ia and Iraq for being homosexual.”
As if that weren’t bad enough, Ms.
Hirsi Ali then quotes Sheikh Yusef
al-Qaradawi, “one of the world’s
leading Sunni clerics and chairman
of the European Council for Fatwa
and Research,” who has an open
mind on the issue of crime and
punishment when it comes to ho-
mosexuality: “Some say we should
throw them from a high place,
like God did with the people of
Sodom. Some say we should burn
them and so on. There is disagree-
ment… The important thing is to
treat this act as a crime.”
 As if to assure us that she is not
a self-hating Muslim, Ms. Hirsi
Ali adds: “Not all Muslims are ho-
mophobic. Many are gay or lesbian
themselves.” What she forgot to add
is that Omar Mateen was one of
those homosexual Muslims. The oli-
garchs and their pundits were des-
perately trying to confect a narrative
that pitted jihadis against homosex-
uals. That narrative derailed shortly
after their columns appeared when
stories began to surface indicating
that Omar Mateen was a homosex-
ual. On the Monday following the
attack, the press reported that “The
gunman who attacked a Florida
LGBT nightclub had attended the
club before the attack and had used
a gay dating and chat ap.”16 It turns
out that the perpetrator of the at-
tack was a homosexual jihadi. Ma-
teen was radicalized both by contact
with radical extremists in his travels
to Saudi Arabia and on the inter-
net, but he was also radicalized by
his experiences at gay bars. Why
should this be surprising? What we
are witnessing here is the unexpect-
ed confluence to two revolutionary
movements, both of which were set
in motion by the U.S. government.
The oligarchs created the homo-
sexual movement as their domestic
proxy warriors to overthrow repre-
sentative government in the Unit-
ed States every bit as much as they
created the mujahidin, Al Qaeda,
and ISIS as their proxy warriors to
overthrow Mubarak, Kaddafi, Sadd-
am Hussein, and Hafez al-Assad in
the Middle East. Omar Mateen had
the misfortune of being caught up
in two contradictory revolutionary
movements run by the same em-
pire.
The only unanswered question
at this point is whether the Unit-
ed States used its proxy warriors to
murder homosexuals in order to
achieve political goals. We know
that Franklin Delano Roosevelt
knew about the Japanese attack on
Pearl Harbor in advance, but chose
to sacrifice over 2,000 American
lives in order to get the United
States into the war. In the 9/11 at-
tacks, roughly the same number of
Americans died to launch the cur-
rent war in the Middle East. The
Israelis, the CIA’s mentor in decep-
tive operations like this, created the
classic false flag operation known
as the Lavon affair in Iraq, in order
to create panic and migration to
Israel. What the homosexuals need
to learn from the Pulse disco attack
is that, like all proxy warriors, they
are expendable. Forty-nine homo-
sexuals were murdered by a man
who couldn’t keep his identities
straight. The pundits at the New
York Times have explained in their
way that these men had to die in
order to put down the Trump in-
surrection and get Hilary Clinton
elected in the fall, so that she can
pursue the oligarchs’ dream of to-
tal world dominance through total
moral corruption.
E. Michael Jones
ENDNOTES
1. http://www.nytimes.
com/2016/06/12/opinion/sunday/the-
first-gay-president.html
2. http://www.nytimes.
com/2016/06/12/opinion/sunday/the-
first-gay-president.html
3. http://www.nytimes.
com/2016/06/12/opinion/sunday/the-
first-gay-president.html
4. http://www.nytimes.
com/2016/06/13/opinion/the-scope-
of-the-orlando-carnage.html?ac-
tion=click&contentCollection=opin-
ion&module=NextInCollection&re-
gion=Footer&pgtype=article&ver-
sion=column&rref=collection%2F-
column%2Ffrank-bruni
5. http://www.nytimes.
com/2016/06/14/opinion/orlan-
do-omar-mateen-pulse-florida-don-
ald-trumps-america.html?rib-
bon-ad-idx=4&rref=opinion&mod-
ule=R
6. http://www.activistpost.
com/2015/11/hillary-clinton-and-the-
funding-of-al-qaeda-terrorists-in-libya-
and-syria.html
7. http://russia-insider.com/en/sey-
mour-hersh-hillary-approved-send-
ing-sarin-gas-syrian-rebels/
ri14164?utm_source=Russia+In-
sider+Daily+Headlines&utm_cam-
paign=02105daff5-Russia_Insider_Dai-
ly_Headlines11_21_2014&utm_me-
dium=email&utm_term=0_c626db0
89c-02105daff5-227220613&ct=
t%28Russia_Insider_Daily_Head-
lines11_21_2014%29&mc_ci-
d=02105daff5&mc_eid=65f09a757a
8. http://www.timesofisrael.com/
obama-no-evidence-orlando-attack-di-
rected-by-islamic-state/
9.http://needtoknow.news/archi-
ves/2016-2/2016-06-17/
10. http://getoffthebs.com/
11. http://needtoknow.news/archi-
ves/2016-2/2016-06-17/
12. http://getoffthebs.com/
13. http://getoffthebs.com/
14. http://getoffthebs.com/
15. Ayaan Hirsi Ali, “Islam’s Jihad
against Homosexuals,” WSJ, 6/14/16,
p. A15
16. http://www.latimes.com/nation/
la-na-orlando-nightclub-shooting-
20160613-snap-story.html
July/August 2016 / 21
 The Man Behind the Curtain
Michael Voris and the Homosexual Vortex
by E. Michael Jones
“No one wants to admit that their entire self-perception around which they have built their
lives and thoughts, opinions and world-view has been a big lie. But that doesn’t alter the objec-
tive fact that it is a lie.” - Michael Voris
A CRISIS AT CHURCH MILITANT
On January 23, 2016, Michael Voris, the Internet
TV personality who was the face of Church Militant
TV, placed an emergency call to his spiritual advisor,
who was in Mexico at the time, asking for prayers. A
homosexual had gone on Facebook claiming that he
knew the man who had given Michael Voris AIDS.
He was now claiming that Michael Voris was “as gay
as they come” and that he was going to reveal what he
knew about Voris’s homosexual past. The announce-
ment precipitated a crisis at the Church Militant stu-
dio in Ferndale, Michigan.
Michael Voris was a native of the Detroit area who
had graduated from the University of Notre Dame
with a degree in communications in 1983. After
roughly 20 years as a reporter, producer, and news an-
chor for CBS affiliates in New York, Albany, Duluth,
and Cheyenne, Voris experienced a conversion, occa-
sioned by the death of his mother and brother. As a
result of that conversion, Voris went from being, in his
own words, “a lukewarm Catholic”1 to a flaming Cru-
sader for reform in the Catholic Church. The e-mails
adverting to Voris’s homosexuality, which were now
showing up with increasing regularity on the Church
Militant website, were some indication that there was
more to Voris’s past than “lukewarm” Catholicism
might indicate.
The man in charge of managing perception at
Church Militant was Terry Carroll, a Texan who had
22 / Culture Wars
showed up out of nowhere, contributed some money,
and then ended up running, then Real Catholic TV’s,
and now Church Militant’s on-line forum. Carroll
would patrol the CM website and take down the al-
legations about Voris’s homosexuality as soon as they
appeared. Feeling that he was on the defensive against
a never-ending assault on Voris’s character, Carroll
had developed a heavy-handed way of managing dis-
cussions that left many bloggers annoyed at what they
saw as blatant pro-Voris censorship. Steve Skojec,
the founding publisher and executive director of the
OnePeterFive.com blog ran afoul of Carroll when he
published an article in which he opined that Catholics
had a duty to criticize “the errors of a pope”:
Despite what should be a natural synergy between our
organizations, I’ve had a frustrating relationship with the
folks at  Church Militant. I don’t know, nor have I ever
interacted with, Michael Voris. I’ve had unpleasant run-
ins with certain influential members of their organization.
My essay insisting that Catholics have a duty to criti-
cize the errors of a pope (using their editorial policy to
the contrary as a launching point) and my calls for rea-
sonable, non-incendiary rhetoric towards the SSPX has
earned me persona non grata status with their gatekeepers.
They no longer link to our articles. They have banned me
from their comment boxes (and their heavy-handed mod-
erators have done the same to countless others who ask
probing questions). Not a few of their former readers and
subscribers have turned to support our work instead after
similarly frustrating experiences.2

WHO IS THE MAN BEHIND THE CURTAIN?
TERRY CARROLL?
The suspicion that Terry Carroll was running
Church Militant from behind the scenes intensified
after Voris attacked the Society of Pius X. Was Car-
roll behind the expose on the SSPX and the accusation
that they were in schism? Christopher Ferrara thought
so, and eventually wrote a piece that concluded that
Terry Carroll was “the man behind the Vortex.” So
who was in charge at Church Militant? The tradition-
alists were bewildered because Voris had spent a week
at their annual pow-wow at Lake Gardone in Italy. Vo-
ris had mastered the art of telling certain groups what
they wanted to hear, and both Michael Matt, editor
of The Remnant, and Remnant columnist Christopher
Ferrara, felt that Voris was one of them. Now in the
wake of Voris’s attack on the SSPX, both Matt and
Ferrara were equally bewildered. “I don’t get it,” Fer-
rara complained:
I was on his show. He called me an awesome dude. We
were friends. He was with us for two weeks at Lake Gar-
done. We joked with him. I told him exactly what our po-
sitions were, and as far as I could tell we were in complete
or at least substantial agreement. Bizarre. By the time he
finished attacking all of those targets, there was no one
Michael Voris
left but Michael Voris. … There was no one left. I don’t
know what’s going on in that warehouse in Detroit. It’s
sad really, and it really doesn’t merit a lot of serious com-
mentary.3
Instead of admitting that he might have made a mis-
take in judging Voris’s character, Ferrara concluded
that Terry Carroll was “the man behind the Vortex.”4
Carroll became “the ‘brains’ of the operation,” when
he issued “the mystery manifesto” which:
advanced the curious proposition, unsupported by any
teaching of the Magisterium, that while Catholics are free
to engage in public criticism of any member of the hier-
archy whose actions warrant it, as CMTV does every day,
they may never criticize the Pope publicly because “the
Pope is different.” CMTV, wrote Carroll, “will not engage
in public criticism of the Pope. Period.”
As a result:
Terry Carroll has single-handedly destroyed what could
have been a fruitful collaboration between CMTV and
the traditionalist media. I don’t know how deeply Carroll
has his clutches into CMTV’s operations, but I would say
this to Mike Voris out of respect for what he is trying to
do for the good of the Church: if there is any way you can
dissociate yourself from this character, do it now before he
inflicts irreparable damage on your apostolate.
July/August 2016 / 23
 As far as I know, Terry Carroll never responded to
Ferrara’s attack, but he did respond to Dave Arm-
strong’s attack by claiming, tacitly at least, that Mi-
chael Voris was running the show:
That Michael Voris’ apostolate continues to grow in the
face of the vindictive obstacles thrown in his path is proof
that there is a need to hear what he is saying by a sig-
nificant number of Catholics. For them, he is the voice
of their agony and frustration and desire for “heroic Ca-
tholicism.” They feel heard and understood. He gives
them hope. You may not be able to understand that but
we could paper your walls with emails thanking him for
bringing them back or into the Catholic Church.5
In response to Ferrara’s accusation, Christine Niles,
one of the on-camera personalities at CMTV, respond-
ed by saying that there was no man and no curtain:
There is no secret donor, no one bankrolling the aposto-
late, no rich Opus Dei member pulling the strings (the
very idea is laughable). Neither does Terry Carroll (or
anyone else) exercise the sort of control that others claim
he does. Michael Voris calls the shots at his apostolate. He
is very much is own man, and makes his own decisions–
based on the good of the Church and of souls.
The Trads weren’t buying Niles’ account. A blog-
ger at Gloria TV identified Carroll as “a parishioner
at Mater Dei Parish in Irving, Texas,” which was “run
by the [Fraternity of St. Peter], and that Carroll and
his pastor had a “personal vendetta against the Soci-
ety” which created an “unwillingness to go full bore
after the dangers associated with the Council, the new
Mass, and the actions of the pope.” Carroll had had
a corrupting effect on Voris. In addition to that, he
was especially heavy-handed in managing traditional-
24 / Culture Wars
ist comments on the Church Militant comment box.
Specifically, Carroll:
deleted from his website any and all references to his for-
mer positions; as well as the segments that include me; a
13 part Vatican II series among them. He refuses to en-
gage the people he criticizes directly. He pretends he never
believed anything other than what he spews today… This
isn’t the behavior of a man who had a change of heart
based on a new awareness of truth….In the end, Michael
can protest that Terry Carroll’s money has no part in this
all he wants, but only a willing fool can believe it…. I’ll
leave it to you to decide if the “jihadist” with the cash in
hand played a part in influencing Voris to reinvent him-
self.6
WHO IS THE MAN BEHIND THE CURTAIN?
E. MICHAEL JONES?
Blinded by their obsessions, the traditionalists could
not plumb the depths of what was going on at Church
Militant. Terry Carroll was on to something that Chris
Ferrara could neither admit nor understand. In a letter
to Marc Brammer, an early investor in Real Catholic
TV, dated April 25, 2010, Terry Carroll sketched out
his plan for dealing with the SSPX and the issue of
schism:
My position, which I hope to show is the Catholic posi-
tion, is clear.  First of all, schism is in its way every bit as
bad as abortion.  Secondly, the Society of
St. Pius X is in schism. Thirdly, if they are
not then there is no such thing as schism
and fourthly that in presuming to be tra-
ditional in defiance of the wishes of the
pope, Mr. Davies and the Society are not
only committing the grave sin of schism,
they are also in an uncanny fashion suc-
cumbing to the very liberalism they claim
to oppose by making private judgment the
ultimate criterion in matters of religion.
Crucial to that debate was an article I
had done in 1993.7 In the same e-mail,
Carroll referred to the piece I had done
on my debate with Michael Davies
over whether the SSPX was in schism as “a great arti-
cle.” So great, in fact, that
It doesn’t matter that it was written in 1993, since SSPX
positions have, if anything, hardened over time.  I have
 tons and tons of supporting documentation from so
many sources it makes me dizzy, but this ties everything
together in a manner I can share with others easily.  It
has taken me a LOT of time to “prepare a brief ” with
footnotes and references.  Now I can keep those and bring
them forth as necessary.
It turns out that I was the man behind the man be-
hind the Vortex, and that Chris Ferrara had never got-
ten over my debate with Michael Davies. As I said then:
there is only one group of people in the world who thinks
that the topic, “The Society of St. Pius X is in Schism,” is
debatable and that is the Society itself. Schismatic groups
have this peculiar characteristic: they never consider
themselves in schism. Eventually they all travel the same
trajectory, whose end point is always the same. We, the
schismatic group tells itself, are the true Catholic Church,
the true Church of Christ (however you want to phrase it)
and they, meaning the almost 1 billion people who in fact
do belong to the Church, are the real schismatics. They
(say, “the Novus Ordo Church” or some such appellation)
have defected from the faith of history and are now im-
posters. We (meaning the SSPX) will go on courageously
preserving “tradition” (of course, as we define it) until we
are vindicated by history and in effect the Novus Ordo
Church admits that we were right all along.
THE NATURE OF SCHISM
I was to hear all of this from my opponent be-
fore the night was over, but I was also to get unex-
pected confirmation of my thesis that the SSPX was
in schism as well. Schism is the occupational hazard
of self-appointed Church reformers. Schism is tricky
because, in spite of how everyone construes it, it has
nothing to do with doctrine. Schism is based on lack
of charity, which expresses itself as a refusal to remain
in communion with a Church which the schismatics
consider sinful. Bishop Bernard Fellay, current head
of the SSPX, came up with a classic formulation of
the schismatic mindset when he said in an interview:
“The Church has cancer. We cannot associate with the
Church because then we would get cancer.” Bishop
Richard Williamson said much the same thing. My
own understanding of schism was based on a read-
ing of two classical texts: St. Augustine’s treatises on
Baptism and on the Donatists. The fact that my de-
bate with Michael Davies was the inspiration for Terry
Carroll and Voris’s attack on the SSPX—something I
did not know at the time—is not surprising, given the
sources I used, but it is puzzling because it made an-
swering the question of who was in charge at Church
Militant more difficult than ever. Was I in charge at
Schism is the occupational
hazard of self-appointed
Church reformers…it has
nothing to do with doctrine.
CMTV? Was I the man behind the curtain without
knowing it? In addition to managing the on-line dis-
cussion, Terry Carroll ran the Church Militant black-
list. This included a list of groups who could not post
comments on the CM website no matter how favor-
able they were. On April 26, 2010 Carroll referred to
Jones as “my new BFF” and then quoted something I
had written in a piece on Bishop Williamson:
The Catholic Church under Peter’s successor is the only
barque of Christ, and that no matter what waves of heresy
buffet its sides, one is never justified in jumping ship; not
even during the fiercest storms.  Those who do jump over-
board during the storm learn the hard way that it was the
Church, no matter how beleaguered, that was sustaining
them all along.  They also learn that the only alternative
to an uncomfortable position on her tossing decks is to
sink beneath the waves and drown.
CHURCH MILITANT AND
E. MICHAEL JONES ON THE JEWS
This thought was the one that eventually become
the basis for the program Voris did attacking the SSPX
for being in schism. Fuller collaboration between us
was blocked, however, because of Carroll’s misgivings
about my views on the Jews. A year and a half later,
Carroll wrote to Marc Brammer:
It may be true that, at its core, contemporary Judaism is
“anti Logos” and, therefore, “revolutionary” and destruc-
tive of world order.  I think that’s at the heart of Jones’
distinction between antisemitism, which we cannot sup-
port, and “anti-Jewish,” which he says we must be.  The
problem is that in the world of common speech, such
distinctions are almost impossible to make and, as fallen
nature is wont to do, we conflate antisemitism and “an-
ti-Jewish” as being the same thing.
July/August 2016 / 25
 Carroll was worried about an upcoming show which
Voris planned to do on the thirtieth anniversary of
Culture Wars/Fidelity magazine. “Jones,” he wrote, “is
astounding in his ability to see ‘patterns’ and ‘connec-
tions’ invisible to us lesser mortals” but…
if one does a Google Search on ‘E. Michael Jones,’ the
first impression you get is that Jones is a flaming antisem-
ite.  I know he is not because I have read enough of his
work to know the difference between antisemitism and
Jones’ beliefs.  The problem is that, as with the word ‘gay,’
there is a common understanding of antisemitism that is
reducible to nothing more than using the word ‘Jew’ in
any kind of context that is not unabashedly worshipful.  that make any particular ethnicity look bad.
To even use the word ‘Jew’ in any context other than the
Gospel of John SOUNDS antisemitic and colors every re-
sponse.  E. Michael Jones is not antisemitic, but he will
go to his grave judged so by more people than not.  Un-
fair.  Inaccurate.  Unjust.  A mockery of all that Jones has
written and stands for. However, the distorted view is that
Jones is antisemitic, and anyone who associates with him
is painted with the same brush.  In terms of sheer effect,
all of Jones's work other than his Jewish Revolutionary
Spirit loses both visibility and credibility just because of
the presumption that he is antisemitic.
After Ann Barnhardt told Carroll that she “wouldn’t
touch this guy with a ten-foot pole,” Carroll conclud-
ed that “Association with Jones would effectively end
RCTV and permanently destroy all credibility.  It
is that simple.  The enemy would never, ever let the
world hear the end of it.  You would be branded as
Nazis forever, and Michael’s speaking engagements
would end.  It would be over.”
As Carroll read The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit, his
attitude began to change:
I’m actually PLOWING MY WAY through The Jew-
ish Revolutionary Spirit - it’s a GREAT read! - and hope
“…the unprecedented
emergence of ‘New Church’
is the very essence of the post-
conciliar crisis.”
to finish it before my death.  As you may notice, I, like
Jones, find multiple things interesting at the same time
26 / Culture Wars
(and show no restraint in telling everyone about it!). If
you read the email we received this morning from the Fr.
Coughlin people, I think Fr. Coughlin faced the same
problem that Jones faces, i.e., in a true and objective
meaning of antisemitism, neither Coughlin nor Jones are
antisemitic.  However, neither Coughlin nor Jones are al-
lowed to define antisemitism in fair and objective terms
but are afflicted with the “common understanding” of
the term in the culture, and in the culture antisemitism
is ANYTHING that sounds negative about Jews or Juda-
ism.  Coughlin and Jones face charges that others today
face with charges of “racism.”  Almost ANYTHING can
be called “racism” today if you make objective statements
Eventually, Church Militant went forward with
the interview, largely because Voris overrode Carroll.
Everyone, including me, considered the interview a
success. Voris asked good questions. The chemistry
worked. Marc Brammer called it “magic.” Mark Shea
freaked out, but as the Arabs are wont to say, the dog
barks and the caravan passes by.
VORIS IS HARMING THE CHURCH
BY CRITICIZING BISHOPS
The January 2016 posting on Facebook was not the
first time that someone from the homosexual scene
had come forward and accused Michael of being gay.
In each instance he denied the allegations. As at the
time of the SSPX attacks, Christine Niles came to
Michael’s defense when people accused him of being
a homosexual. Niles had had four children with a
man with whom she had been living with in an irreg-
ular marriage. When she saw Michael on the Vortex,
she immediately fell in love with him, left her hus-
band, and became Voris’s most vociferous defender.
Although Christine could never land Voris as a hus-
band, she never got over her infatuation with him.
Among the staff at Church Militant, she became
known as “Mrs. Voris,” the faithful Magdalena at the
foot of the cross. After the first incident, Christine
approached Voris; he denied the allegations, and that
was that.
In spite of the denials emanating from Church Mil-
itant, the blogosphere kept insisting that Michael was
gay. Before long the staff realized that “the clock was
ticking.” This was not going to be another tempest in a
 Ponte Sant'Angelo
teapot like the SSPX affair. By the time the new allega-
tions began to arise during early 2016, Voris’s spiritual
advisor had seen pictures of Michael in his gay lifestyle
period. Now he was hearing from good priests who
were telling him that Voris was harming the Church
by accusing priests and bashing bishops. In his famous
“mystery manifesto,” Carroll formulated the position
of Church Militant vis a vis the pope and the bishops
in the following way:
The Pope represents the Church in a way that bishops and
priests do not. You can criticize bishops against a ‘horizon’
of love for the Church. You can’t criticize the Pope without
risking a blurring of that ‘horizon’ because the Pope rep-
resents and symbolizes the unity of the Church in a way
that bishops and priests do not.8

Ferrara rightly dismissed Carroll’s explanation of

why it was okay to criticize bishops but not the bishop
of Rome as theological “nonsense.” In spite of getting
the idea for an SSPX/schism article from my debate
with Michael Davies, Carroll did not get this idea
from me. It had a close resemblance to the editorial
policy of The Wanderer, the other Matt family publica-
tion, whose editors had been wise enough not to for-
mulate it explicitly.
Ferrara’s position was that Voris should criticize the
bishops and the pope. The teaching of the Church,
however, is clear. The bishops are the successors of the
apostles. Shortly after I had separated from The Wan-
derer, I met with Lyman Stebbins, founder of Cath-
olics United for the Faith. Lyman sat me down at
that meeting and read me chapter and verse from the
Church fathers on not criticizing bishops. It was pre-
cisely this dispute over criticizing bishops that had led
to the split between CUF and The Wanderer shortly
before I had arrived on the scene. That teaching found
expression in Lumen Gentium, the Vatican II docu-
ment on the Church. Like the Apostles:
the bishops received the charge of the community pre-
siding in God’s stead over the flock, of which they are
the shepherds in that they are the teachers of doctrine,
ministers of sacred worship and holder of office in gov-
ernment….The sacred synod consequently teaches that
the bishops have by divine institution, taken the place
of the apostles as pastors of the Church, in such wise
that whoever listens to them is listening to Christ and
whoever despises them despises Christ and him who
sent Christ.9
MOTHER ANGELICA AND
MICHAEL VORIS COMPARED
That prohibition found expression in Canon 1373
of the revised code of Canon Law, which specified
that: “One who publicly either stirs up hostilities or
hatred among subjects against the Apostolic See or
against an ordinary on account of some act of ecclesi-
astical power or ministry or incites subjects to disobey
them is to be punished by an interdict or by other just
penalties.”10
Canon 1373 was precisely the canon which Roger
Cardinal Mahony cited as the basis of a Canon Law
suit that he was planning to file against Mother An-
gelica in the late ‘90s. Ferrara hoped to “show that the
unprecedented emergence of ‘New Church’ is the very
essence of the post-conciliar crisis, and that this de-
velopment was predicted in the Third Secret of Fati-
ma, as Pope Pius XII indicated in a stunning prophecy
that figures largely in this book.” By concentrating on
all of the traditionalists’ obsessions, especially the ob-
session to prove that they are not in schism, Ferrara
lost his chance to provide those who bought EWTN:
A Network Gone Wrong with what they really wanted
to know, namely, the story of what really happened
to Mother Angelica. There were all sorts of eerie simi-
larities between EWTN and Church Militant TV for
those with the eyes to see. Both Mother Angelica, née
Rita Rizzo, and Michael Voris were wounded children.

July/August 2016 / 27
Mother Angelica and Rhoda Wise
Rita’s father walked out when she was six years old, at
the start of the Depression, plunging the family into
poverty and subjecting Rita to ridicule at the Catholic
school she attended. Michael Voris, who went by the
name of Gary at the time, was ridiculed mercilessly as
“Gary the fairy” in the schoolyard for his effeminate
behavior. There were other similarities. Both Voris and
Rizzo sought solace from their childhood wounded-
ness in the religious life. Rizzo would go on, as Mother
Angelica, to become the most famous American nun
of the last quarter of the 20th century. Voris’s career as
a religious was shorter lived. Voris joined Dunwoodie
seminary after graduating from Notre Dame and then
got kicked out two years later.
Gerard van den Aardweg claims that the crucial fac-
tor in the development of homosexuality—even more
than the classic constellation of weak distant father
and overbearing mother—is peer interaction during
childhood:
the lack of same-sex group adaption weighs even more
heavily as a predisposing factor. Traditional psychoanal-
ysis reduced all emotional malformation and neurosis to
disturbed parent-child relationships; without denying the
great importance of child-parent interactions, the final
determining factor generally lies more in the adolescent’s
28 / Culture Wars
self-image in terms of gender, as compared with
same-sex peers.11
Lack of same-sex group adaption creates
the neurosis which gives rise to homosexual
desires, but “giving in to homosexual wishes
creates a sexual addiction.” As a result, “per-
sons who have reached this stage have essen-
tially two problems: their gender inferiority
complex and a relatively autonomous sexual
addiction (a situation comparable to that of
a neurotic with a drinking problem.)” Ho-
mosexual desires are rooted in “self-centered-
ness or immature ‘egophilia,’” which leads to
“hyperdramatization,” which conventionally
goes by the term “narcissism.” Therapy in-
volves emphasizing “those human and moral
virtues that have a ‘de-egocentrizing’ effect
and enhance the capacity to love.”12
During the ‘90s, Voris devoted himself to
a life of homosexual debauchery that exacer-
bated the spiritual immaturity, the neurosis
at the heart of the problem, by encasing it
in a protective layer of narcissism that would
prove more and more difficult to penetrate. Plato said
that when a man creates any institution it will mir-
ror the state of his soul. The cult-like atmosphere at
Church Militant seemed to bear out what the philoso-
pher said. Deprived of the possibility of using a parish
to serve his spiritual narcissism, Voris created an “apos-
tolate,” a code word for his self-ordained position as
savior of the Catholic Church.
Becoming a crusader for Catholicism was in many
ways the worst thing Voris could have done after his
conversion, because by putting himself in the lime-
light, he simply hardened and exacerbated the narcis-
sism that lay at the root of his neurosis and was the
cause of his homosexuality. In terms of recovery, van
den Aardweg claims that:
Any kind of infantile self-affirmation should be “frustrat-
ed”; in this way, swift progress can be made. Don’t for-
get attempts to be “great” in one’s own eyes, to excel, to
be admirable. In a sense, infantile self-affirmation seems
“reparative,” particularly to inferiority complaints. In ef-
fect, however, it merely nourishes such complaints as it
strengthens one’s ego-centeredness (all infantile urges and
emotions interconnect like communicating vessels; feed-
ing one automatically strengthens the others). Mature
self-affirmation, which provides a kind of joy, is content-
 ment with being able to achieve something, not, how-
ever, because “I am so special”; partly, it is gratefulness.
The mature adult is aware of the relativity of his achieve-
ments.13
Mother Angelica’s case was different. There is no
evidence that Mother Angelica ever acted sexually on
the wound she received in childhood. The discipline
of pre-Vatican II convent life kept whatever impulses
she might have had under control. During the ‘70s,
however, Mother Angelica was prayed over by an itin-
erant charismatic by the name of Robert DeGrandis
and received the gift of tongues. This event eventually
led to a more and more public life, until in 1981 she
founded her television apostolate. Receiving the gift of
tongues can often be accompanied by a reduction in
inhibition, specifically sexual inhibition. The history
of “enthusiasm” is littered with sexual excess, as Msgr.
Knox has demonstrated. The fact that Mother Angel-
ica never acted on the childhood wound sexually does
not mean that the wound wasn’t there. The narcissism
“The cold dismissal hit hard,
reviving childhood feelings of
rejection in Angelica. Smothering
her anger in the embrace of Sr.
Raphael and the other nuns…”
that flowed from it gradually found expression in her
apostolate as well, in ways uncannily similar to what
happened at Church Militant. The most uncanny sim-
ilarity of all had to do with the bishops. Why did both
EWTN and CMTV end up in de facto violation of
Canon 1373? The short answer to that question is nar-
cissism.
EWTN AND MOTHER ANGELICA’S
NARCISSISM
During EWTN’s coverage of the 1993 World Youth
Day in Denver, Colorado, some unsung liturgist de-
cided to cast a girl in the role of Jesus Christ during
that festival’s Stations of the Cross. After witnessing
the event, Mother Angelica blew up and delivered her
famous “I’m not going to take it anymore” diatribe,
which had an electrifying effect on Catholics of a con-
servative stripe. People like Joseph Fessio and Ralph
McInerny immediately swore allegiance to their new
champion, whose rage waxed incandescent at EWTN:
It’s blasphemous that you dare to portray Jesus as a wom-
an. You know, as Catholics we’ve been quiet all these
years…. I’m tired, tired of being pushed in the corners.
I’m tired of your inclusive language that refuses to admit
that the Son of God is a man. I’m tired of your tricks. I’m
tired of you making a crack, and the first thing you know
there’s a hole, and all of us fall in. No, this was deliber-
ate… you made a statement that was not accidental. I am
so tired of you, liberal Church in America. You’re sick….
You have nothing to offer. You do nothing but destroy.
You don’t have vocations, and you don’t even care – your
whole purpose is to destroy… You can’t stand Catholi-
cism at its height, so you try to spoil it, as you’ve spoiled
so many things in these thirty years….14
Just as he failed to detect Voris’s homosexual narcis-
sism during the week he spent with Voris in Gardone,
Ferrara missed the narcissism at the root of Mother
Angelica’s outburst during the 1993 World Youth Day
Stations of the Cross incident. Ferrara’s approach to
both Voris and Mother Angelica was similar. As long
as they toed the traditionalist line and made favorable
noises about the Latin Mass, Fatima, etc., Ferrara was
willing not only to give them a pass but to ascribe their
misbehavior to underlings who lurked behind the cur-
tain. Ferrara’s main reason for disappointment in the
Stations of the Cross incident was Mother Angelica’s
failure to adopt the straight-up Traditionalist approach
to what was ailing the Church:
Mother Angelica and her wonderful sisters are to be
congratulated for their courage and fortitude, but also
we should pray that they go even a step further…. It is
our hope that along with all her other courageous work,
Mother Angelica will one day consider calling for the un-
conditional return of the historical Latin Mass and strike
the ultimate blow against the modernist onslaught of the
Catholic Church.15
Given her stature as the world’s most famous nun,
Mother Angelica could have called up Bishop Stafford,
Denver’s ordinary at the time, and asked him in pri-
vate something to the effect of “what the hell is going
on?” Stafford would most certainly have taken her call
and could have given his understanding of what had
happened. Armed with that understanding, Mother
Angelica could have done a much more perceptive
July/August 2016 / 29
piece on the problems associated with World Youth
Day. I say this because Stafford was later quite open in
saying that the American bishops had been betrayed
by their staffs and had lost all effectiveness in dealing
with the problems facing the Church. Presumably, a
bishop willing to admit this would have been open to
a critique of the girl-Jesus Stations of the Cross. But
instead of bringing liturgical abuse to the attention of
Bishop Stafford privately, Mother Angelica denounced
him publicly in a way that bespoke—dare we say
it?—narcissism and self-dramatization. The times had
changed, and Mother Angelica, by eschewing private
discussion for public denunciation, had placed herself
on a collision course with the American bishops, who
had now been defined as the enemy.
I had called Mother Angelica in what must have
been 1983, when I was working for Harry John’s
Catholic television network in Hollywood, and found
her warm and maternal and full of helpful advice. By
1996, when I shared the dais with her at the Call to
Holiness Conference in Detroit, the difference be-
tween the 1981 Mother Angelica and the 1996 version
had gotten too big to ignore. As part of her warm-up
act, I spoke on the Call to Action Conference, whose
participants had launched the revolution in the
Church 20 years earlier. The Detroit Call to Holiness
Conference was the largest audience I have ever ad-
dressed in my life. There were over 2,000 people in the
hall, and most of them were women. In spite of the
applause I got when my talk was over, it was clear that
they hadn’t showed up in droves to hear me. Mother
Faced with a canonical
lawsuite and takeover at the
hands of the bishops, Mother
Angelica panicked…
Angelica was the big draw, and she did nothing to dis-
appoint the expectations of the audience.
By 1996, Mother Angelica had mastered the art of
stand-up comedy. She had reworked the story of the
founding of EWTN based on a template that she had
taken from the Hollywood film, Lilies of the Field, with
Mother Angelica in the lead role. The audience roared
with laughter as she played the naïve nun trying to
get cantankerous construction workers to get the job
30 / Culture Wars
done at her studio. The punch line always involved her
descriptions of a little old nun’s ignorance of the TV
business and her success in spite of that. The audience
loved it. They identified with her completely.
Then,
with the laughter still ringing in the rafters, Mother
Angelica suddenly got serious and began talking about
the bishops. At this point her voice changed and in a
low growl she said, “Before I hand my TV station over
to the bishops, I’ll blow it up.” The ladies howled with
approval, but it was clear, to me at least, that some-
thing distinctly unfunny had entered into her stand-
up routine.
One year later, in November 1997, Mother Angeli-
ca combined her 1993 Denver diatribe and the veiled
threat she had made against the bishops in 1996 by de-
nouncing Roger Cardinal Mahony’s pastoral letter on
the Eucharist as “a modernist obfuscation of the true
doctrine of the Mass.” Those are Christopher Ferrara’s
words. What Ferrara left out of the story was mother’s
“attitude” as the driving force behind the dispute:
“The cardinal wants the Holy See to do something about
Mother Angelica’s whole attitude that she is not responsi-
ble to the National Conference of Catholic Bishops or to
any of the individual bishops,” Father Gregory Coiro, di-
rector of media relations for the L.A. archdiocese told the
National Catholic Reporter. “It goes beyond her criticism
of the cardinal—it’s about how the network operates and
to whom it is responsible.”
MOTHER ANGELICA JUMPS FROM THE
FRYING PAN INTO THE FIRE
The network needed to be “reoriented,” in Cardinal
Mahony’s estimation, and his spokesman unveiled a
possible instrument to ensure that it happened; Father
Coiro mentioned Canon 1373, a law forbidding in-
dividuals from inciting disobedience against the Pope
or bishops. Among the “just penalties” attached to the
canon was “interdiction.” This severe punishment,
akin to excommunication, excludes the individual or
entity from the sacraments and is metered out by the
Church for “grave crimes.”16 According to Raymond
Arroyo’s account: “The threat of interdiction caused
her to pause. Could she be deprived access to the very
sacrament she lived to protect and defend?”17 Mahony
then filed a canonical complaint against Mother An-
gelica. Faced with a canonical lawsuit and takeover at
the hands of the bishops, Mother Angelica panicked
 Mother Angelica Selling Fishing Lures
in the wake of an apostolic visitation in February/
March of 2000. According to Ferrara:
In desperation, Mother made a prudential decision that
in retrospect was a huge mistake: Fearing that Archbishop
Gonzalez’s report to the Vatican would recommend an ec-
clesiastical takeover of her apostolate, Mother surrendered
all control over EWTN to the lay people who run it to-
day. At an emergency board meeting in March of 2000,
she resigned as CEO of EWTN, relinquishing her veto
power, and with it her control over EWTN’s affairs. At
the same meeting EWTN’s board amended the corporate
by-laws to insure lay control and preclude any control in
the future by a bishop, priest or religious. Thus, instead of
continuing her direct resistance to liberal prelates, Moth-
er Angelica thought she could defeat them by a strategic
retreat.18

By casting the new owners at EWTN as part of the

“Modernist Mafia, from the Vatican on down,” Ferr-
ara created a conspiracy in the Catholic Church which
includes just about everyone but readers of The Rem-
nant, and in doing so missed the point of what had
really happened. There was a takeover at EWTN, but
it wasn’t the takeover Ferrara described. More impor-
tantly, by compartmentalizing EWTN into pre- and
post-Mother Angelica eras, Ferrara ignored the role
which Mother Angelica’s narcissism played in the de-
mise of EWTN:
EWTN now actively supports and defends against all fire correctly. Blinded by his thesis, Ferrara failed to see
criticism every element of the “new” Catholicism that that it was the neoconservatives, not the “Modernists,”
supposedly arose during and after the Council: the new who took over EWTN when Mother Angelica hand-
Mass, the new ecumenism, the new “dialogue” and “inter- ed it over to a lay board of trustees. After the transfer,
religious dialogue,” the new “opening to the world,” the EWTN resembled the Republican Party at prayer, fea-
new attitude toward the conversion of the Jewish people, turing Neoconservative luminaries like Deal Hudson,
and even a new version of the Message of Fatima. The until he had to resign when his past, involving a sexual
result of all the changes is what I have already described scandal, caught up with him; Richard John Neuhaus,
as “New Church” – a pseudo-Church existing within the
who died before his past could catch up with him; and
official structure of the Roman Catholic Church in a kind
Fr. Robert Sirico, who was EWTN’s go-to guy on eco-
of parasitical relationship to the host organism. As we
nomics, in spite of his homosexual past.
shall see, not a single one of these novelties has ever been
imposed upon Catholics as a duty of their religion. Yet
EWTN promotes them all as if they were obligations of THE DANGER OF SCHISM
the Faith.19
Schism, as I said, is the occupational hazard of
Ferrara quotes Mother Angelica’s authorized biogra- Church reformers and goes a long way toward ex-
pher as saying that “By the end of 2001, Mother An- plaining the similarities in apostolates as different as
gelica’s detachment from EWTN was complete.”20 By EWTN and the SSPX. Ferrara got it wrong because he
placing EWTN under a lay board of trustees, Mother was obsessed with proving that the traditionalist cir-
Angelica had jumped from the frying pan into the fire; cles he frequents are not in schism. His EWTN book
Ferrara got that part right, but he failed to describe the is filled with one tendentious and self-incriminating
July/August 2016 / 31

passage after another. After appointing himself grand
inquisitor, Ferrara announces that “the ecclesial cri-
sis has advanced to the point where one must speak
frankly of who is, and who is not, adhering to the
Roman Catholic religion in its integrity.”21 EWTN is
to be faulted because “It seems the only ‘schism’ that
EWTN and the New Church establishment recogniz-
es is the “schism” of Catholics who hold fast to the tra-
ditional Latin Mass by attending it at “irregular’ Cath-
olic chapels” of the sort Ferrara frequents.22
As I predicted in 1993, Ferrara soon makes it clear
that the Vatican is in schism, precisely the attitude I
discerned in my conversation with Bishop Williamson
in Wimbledon:
At EWTN, however, the concept of schism now applies
only to Catholics who are trying to preserve their faith
in the midst of a failing ecclesial establishment in North
America which even the Vatican’s Cardinal Gagnon de-
scribed (in 1987) as de facto schismatic. For EWTN,
schism consists, therefore, solely in a Catholic’s attempt
to escape the veritable schism and heresy of neo-Modernist
prelates such as Cardinal Mahony, who, as Mother An-
gelica herself courageously protested, are destroying the
Faith in their dioceses. Such is the diabolical disorienta-
tion in the Church today.23
Full of anger and bewilderment at Voris’s betrayal
of the Traditionalist cause, Ferrara started denounc-
ing whole countries as schismatic. Forgetting for a
32 / Culture Wars
moment the fact
that he had previ-
ously insisted that
schism was a le-
gal matter, Ferrara
opined that “The
Church in Germa-
ny is effectively in
a state of schism al-
ready.”24 While the
SSPX and the four
excommunicated
bishops are “not
schismatic in any
traditional sense
of the word.” No,
“The real schism is
the silent aposta-
sy in the Church.
They’re sitting in
church buildings as
they contracept, as they divorce and remarry…. There
are literally millions of Catholics who have abandoned
the faith, and yet we have this obsession with four
bishops … who subscribe to every doctrine and dog-
ma of the faith…. The source of the problem is what
has been happening at the top of the Church since the
opening of Vatican II and Mr. Voris doesn’t get it or he
doesn’t want to get it.”25
Blind to the homosexual narcissistic fantasies that
were the driving force behind the programming at
Church Militant, Ferrara and Matt ended their dia-
tribe by holding out hope that Michael Voris would
return to the traditionalist fold: “Michael Voris should
apply his talents to what we thought we had before,
which was an alliance with the full-fledged traditional-
ist movement, even if he can’t bring himself to become
a part of it.” It would be interesting to know if that
offer still holds. Perhaps not, Michael Matt seemed to
have an uncanny premonition of the future when he
claimed that Voris’s attack on the SSPX was “not too
different from what happened to Fr. Corapi … and
now there are these huge scandals. We’re serving up
another one, and it’s so regrettable, Chris.”26
The problem, according to Ferrara, was not Voris’s
homosexual fantasies, which Voris had portrayed on
the Vortex in cryptic fashion in 2010, two years before
the Voris/Ferrara bromance in Gardone; the problem
once again was Terry Carroll, whom Voris “brought
out … the other night to say why I’m in schism …
which is, of course, a mortal sin.”27
WHY IS VORIS ATTACKING THE BISHOPS?
By 2014, Voris had a long history of attacking bish-
ops. Terry Carroll’s “mystery manifesto,” which jus-
tified attacking bishops but not the pope, was based
more on praxis at CMTV rather than the theological
principles he had derived from Denzinger. Those at-
tacks reached a crescendo in December 2015 when
Voris did a Vortex entitled “Dolan Has To Go.” It was
the most intemperate of a long series of attacks on
bishops for defending homosexual priests. During the
course of this broadcast, Voris claimed that over the
course of nearly two years, Fr. Peter Miqueli, pastor of
St. Frances de Chantal parish in the Bronx, had em-
bezzled up to a million dollars “to fund his sadomas-
ochistic sex fantasy with a live-in boyfriend.” Accord-
ing to Voris’s account, “Cdl. Dolan never questioned
Fr. Miqueli about charges of a radically perverse sex
life where he is reported to have drunk the urine of his
male prostitute many times during their role-playing
sexcapades.” Voris claimed that Dolan did nothing to
investigate the charges against Miqueli. Confronted
by a local camera crew, Dolan told the woman who
claimed to have the goods on Miqueli, to produce
the evidence: “Oh, I’m glad.” Dolan told the camera
crew, “We’re looking for data. Please come in and give
them to me and to the police.” Unfortunately, she
didn’t present her evidence, thus stymying Dolan’s
inquiry.  After presenting his case against Dolan, Vo-
ris “sat down with close to a dozen parishioners from
St. Frances de Chantel and asked them about all of
this: why they filed the suit, how this has been a drain
on their spiritual lives, and if they thought that Cdl.
Dolan should step down as archbishop of New York
in view of his covering for Fr. Miqueli and neglecting
them. Not all of them wanted to appear on camera for
fear of reprisal.” The transcript of that interaction is
unavailable, but the video shows Voris sadistically bul-
lying the parishioners, one after the other, into saying
“Dolan has to go.” Driving home his point at the end
of the broadcast, Voris faced the camera and declared:
Cdl. Timothy Dolan has lost nearly all credibility and
moral capital. Only a complete and public admission of
wrongdoing and actions to start over can save his belea-
guered episcopacy…. Bottom line: A growing number
of Catholics — clergy and laity — have simply lost faith
in him, and that is no position for a shepherd to guide
his flock. In view of all this, Cdl. Dolan has shown gross
ineptitude, an epic, massive dereliction of duty by not
removing, or at the very least, suspending a priest who
for over two years has been the center of such a storm of
immorality, filth and criminal activity.28
MICHAEL VORIS HAS TO GO
These were strong words, even if enabled by Terry
Carroll’s “mystery manifesto.” Did Terry Carroll ap-
prove them? If Terry Carroll wasn’t in charge who was?
The answer was Michael Voris, or more precisely Mi-
chael Voris’s past and the neurosis that was driving it.
That past was now becoming the present, and Voris
was suffering under the pressure of the neurosis that
had created the past that he was determined to hide.
In his expose of Cardinal Dolan, Voris failed to tell
his audience that he had been in the seminary with
Miqueli. Voris would later claim that he had gotten
kicked out of Dunwoodie after two years for “sexual
immaturity.”
On November 4, 2005, the Vatican’s Congregation
for Catholic Education issued an “Instruction Con-
cerning the Criteria for the Discernment of Vocations
with regard to Persons with Homosexual Tendencies
in view of their Admission to the Seminary and to
Holy Orders”29 to all but universal opprobrium from
the pundits whose job it was to ratify the status quo of
sexual liberation in general and homosexual rights in
particular. The 2005 Instruction stated that: The can-
didate to the ordained ministry, therefore, must reach
“Dolan has lost nearly all credibility
and moral capital…A growing
number of Catholics…have simply
lost faith in him, and that is no
position for a shepherd to guide his
flock.”
affective maturity. Such maturity will allow him to re-
late correctly to both men and women, developing in
him a true sense of spiritual fatherhood towards the
Church community that will be entrusted to him.”30
July/August 2016 / 33
 The implication of the Vatican statement was clear:
homosexuals were suffering from spiritual immaturity,
a psychological condition that preceded and contex-
tualized any homosexual behavior and rendered the
applicant unfit to serve as a priest because it rendered
him incapable of “relating correctly to men and wom-
en.” The ban on ordination covered not only practic-
ing homosexuals but extended to persons who “pres-
ent deep-seated homosexual tendencies” as well as
those who “support the so-called ‘gay culture’” because
“Such persons, in fact, find themselves in a situation
that gravely hinders them from relating correctly to
men and women. One must in no way overlook the
negative consequences that can derive from the ordi-
nation of persons with deep-seated homosexual ten-
dencies.”31 No desire on the part of any applicant, no
matter how ardent, can overcome this deficiency. The
Church has the final say in the matter, because “there
does not exist a right to receive sacred ordination.”32
The 2005 document only affirmed the constant
teaching of the Church on the matter of homosexu-
ality and the priesthood. On February 2, 1961, Pope
John XXXIII approved a document which affirmed
that: Advancement to religious vows and ordination
If “a deeply-seated homosexual
tendency” renders a man incapable of
functioning as a priest, it would have
a fortiori the same debilitating effect
on a self-anointed layman reformer.
should be barred to those who are afflicted with evil
tendencies to homosexuality or pederasty, since for
them the common life and the priestly ministry would
constitute serious dangers.33
Shortly after the release of the Vatican instruction
on homosexual tendencies in seminarians, the Cath-
olic News Agency published an article entitled “Re-
flections on the Instruction on the Admittance of Ho-
mosexuals into Seminaries” by Msgr. Tony Anatrella,
a psychoanalyst, professor of philosophy and psychol-
ogy, and a consultant at the Pontifical Council for the
Family. According to Antrella’s explication of the Vati-
can document, any candidate for the priesthood needs
to show that his “psychological, affective, and sexual
characteristics” are “in harmony with human matu-
34 / Culture Wars
rity” so that his “priestly identity” can “assume and
translate symbolically all that this represents.”34
The homosexual person cannot function effective-
ly as a priest, even if he abstains from activity which
constitutes grave sin, because his spiritual immaturity,
aside from any sexual acting out, makes it “difficult”
for him “to  incarnate effectively  this symbolic reality
of spousal tie and spiritual paternity.” If someone with
homosexual tendencies does get ordained, “Experi-
ence shows us that this often involves a diversion” of
his priesthood “towards narcissistic ends, where pasto-
ral activities are limited to surrounding oneself with a
limited group of persons, in a context of seduction.”
Because the priest with homosexual tendencies lacks
maturity, he tends to view the world, much like an ad-
olescent, through the lens of personal grievance, thus
creating institutional problems by expressing “harsh
criticism against the essential reality of priesthood that
go against truths taught by the Church.” The category
of “affective and sexual maturity,” is a criterion that is
“legitimate and non-negotiable.”
The issue is not sexual sin; the issue is the neurosis,
spiritual immaturity, and the narcissism which finds
a ready outlet in homosexual activity. Unfortunate-
ly, according to Antrella, seminary officials in some
countries have made the mistake of assuming “that
candidates (for the priesthood) who have this ten-
dency could be ordained as long as they … remained
celibate.” This was, unfortunately, not the case. Once
ordained, the priest with homosexual tendencies “fre-
quently experienced strenuous psychological tensions”
that not only limited “his availability of spirit.” It also
caused “deviated pastoral relations” and sometimes the
pressure led to “sexual experiences,” which in turn led
the priest to “militate in favor of homosexuality.” The
scandals which subsequently rocked the Church show
the “lucidity and wisdom” of the traditional ban.35
Antrella is adamant in insisting that: “It is neces-
sary to free ourselves from the idea, that  basically
states that to the extent that a homosexual person re-
spects the commitment to continence lived in chastity,
there will be no problems and he can therefore be or-
dained priest.” This trivializes the gravity of homosex-
ual actions and how radically these actions deform the
soul. But more than that, a life lived in chastity does
nothing to remove the spiritual immaturity which is
the cause of homosexual actions in the first place and
which remains as a neurotic predisposition, even if
the seminarian or priest never acts on those tenden-
 Dr. Gerard van den Aardweg
cies. Those who “experience
[these] personal issues… will
need special care and regular
interventions on part of the
authority, and a life set in a
constant medical and psy-
chotherapeutic cure.”
In order to distinguish be-
tween a candidate who has
a “deeply seated homosex-
ual tendency” and “behav-
ior that we find sometimes
during adolescence for var-
ious reasons: attraction, es-
thetic, identification with
the same sex to comfort
one’s own identity, narcissist
fixation, or regression after a
psychic conflict, etc., a problematic which is frequent- woodie, spiritual immaturity had become a code word
ly ‘overcome on its own,’” Antrella notes that the In- for homosexuality. The rector of the seminary at that
struction requires that “the problem be solved at least time was Egan, later Cardinal, who was also named
three years before acceding to the Sacred Orders.” But in Voris’s expose of the archdiocese of New York. Was
it does nothing to change the rule, which affirms that: there an element of unacknowledged personal grudge
behind Voris’s attack on Dolan? Was Voris enraged by
candidates that present a “deeply-seated homosexual ten- the fact that Miqueli had gotten away with the very
dency,” that means an exclusive attraction with regard to
thing that had led to Voris’s dismissal from the same
persons of the same sex (a structural orientation)-inde-
seminary?
pendent of whether or not they’ve had erotic experienc-
es… cannot be admitted into seminary nor have access
to sacred Orders…. This ban has nothing to do with the THE NEED FOR THERAPY AND
risk that a priest may act on these disordered desires by TIME TO HEAL NATURE
engaging in homosexual activity. It involves the neurot-
ic spiritual immaturity which is the cause of homosexual Grace doesn’t destroy nature, it perfects it, said St.
behavior. It is counter-indicated because “the collateral Thomas Aquinas. Even after the homosexual activity
effects inherent to this tendency … produce a behavior is gone, the neurosis which caused it remains. Van den
contrary to the diaconal and priestly ministry.” Aardweg feels that recovery takes time because “a neu-
rosis like homosexuality may have been largely over-
If “a deeply-seated homosexual tendency” renders a come, yet various related neurotic habits and mind-
man incapable of functioning as a priest, it would have sets, apart from the danger of occasional relapses, may
a fortiori the same debilitating effect on a self-anoint- remain for a long time.”36 He indicates that therapy
ed layman reformer, who was outside of all of the safe- takes a “long job (requiring years) of coaching.” At one
guards of clerical control because of his state in life. point he suggests three years; at another, he claims that
Voris may have stopped acting on his homosexual “One must have lived for at least five years with a total
desires at the time of his conversion experiences, but inner change, including having homosexual feelings”37
the sadistic impulses were still there, even if they were before embarking on a significant change in one’s state
being channeled into what he thought were “spiri- of life.
tual” ends. When Voris did his “Dolan Has To Go” It was precisely during what should have been a re-
program, the element of personal grievance driving covery period conducted at the hands of a father-figure
the agenda at CMTV had become too obvious to ig- therapist, when Voris should have been allowing the
nore. By the time Voris had gotten kicked out of Dun- narcissistic wound to heal, that he conceived the idea

July/August 2016 / 35
of becoming the crusader for the Catholic Church.
The proximity in time between his conversion and his
new mission in life all but guaranteed that his “apos-
tolate” was going to be another narcissistic fantasy. As
I stated before, it was the worst thing he could have
done, because, as van den Aardweg put it:
Any kind of infantile self-affirmation should be “frustrat-
ed”; in this way, swift progress can be made. Don’t forget
attempts to be “great” in one’s own eyes, to excel to be ad-
mirable. In effect, however, it [infantile self-affirmation]
merely nourishes such complaints as it strengthens one’s
ego-centeredness.38
If Voris had spent the first five years following his
conversion in therapy, he might have seen that his per-
sona as the super-macho Catholic crusader was in real-
ity, “role-playing; pretending; trying to make an inter-
esting or special impression” because “these behaviors
are part of “attention/sympathy seeking” which “The
homosexual man … half-consciously cultivates. The
homosexual who is still in the thrall of his narcissistic
fantasies creates for himself “a supermasculine role,”
whose “unspoken accompanying thought” is “‘How
terrific I am’ … I am the important one upon who
rests the world’s fate.” If Voris had spent the first five
years after his conversion in therapy, he might have
learned that:
Frustrating these tendencies by stopping them as soon as
one notices them costs a little, for one gives up the emo-
tional rewards of a tickled narcissism. The result, however,
is a feeling of relief, liberation; one feels inwardly more in-
dependent, stronger. The role-player, the attention seeker,
conversely, makes himself dependent on others’ judgment
of him.
Instead of taking the doctor’s advice, Voris suc-
cumbed to a form of narcissism which was more per-
nicious because it purported to be spiritual, when in
fact it was nothing more than a “premature tendency
to ‘witness.’”39 The Vortex was “psychic infantilism”
masquerading as Savonarola. It was the wounded in-
ner child clamoring for more attention.
The signs that Voris wanted to come clean about his
homosexual past were there for those who had the eyes
to see. On September 24, 2010, Voris did a Vortex on
homosexuals as “victim souls” which should have also
been a sign that he was taking the “apostolate” down
the road of narcissistic fantasy. The homosexual, Voris
explained in 2010:
36 / Culture Wars
is different. His cross, if accepted, unlike that of many
other people’s crosses will draw countless souls to Christ,
countless more souls to Christ. The heavier the cross, the
more burdensome, the greater the glory realized. We cel-
ebrate this truth in raising martyrs to the honors of the
altar. Greater love hath no man than this, that he lay
down his life for a friend. For the faithful Catholic with
the cross of homosexuality, he or she lays down her life
every day for their friends…. I don’t know, but I suspect
that many come to the intuition that God has specially
chosen them to be instruments of salvation like few others
have been chosen, and as a result they actually glory in
their cross.
The suffering of the man with homosexual inclina-
tions is “almost beyond understanding for Catholics
who do not have this cross.” The heterosexual Catholic
“is in a completely different category than a homosex-
ual faithful Catholic who simply cannot get married
…as the homosexuals from
his past began to surface on
Facebook and name names,
the psychic pressure became
unbearable.
because he or she desires the same level of sexual in-
timacy but cannot entertain it.” According to Voris’s
theology, homosexuality “means that this person is
more intensely loved by God than most others.” Ho-
mosexuals are “victim souls, those who suffer in a way
more exacting than most of the rest of us…. There are
others whose sufferings remain largely hidden from
our eyes.”
Voris then went on to describe the “intensity of suf-
fering” and “loneliness” endured by “those who nev-
er really feel that they are like everyone else…. The
person who suffers from the cross of homosexuality is
not like most other people.” The “homosexual Catho-
lic who accepts his lot” is, in fact, a Christ-like figure
who:
sees laid out before him the long path to Calvary and re-
alizes that only now has he begun to climb. So he is dif-
ferent. He must approach life from an entirely different
aspect than most others, that of the victim soul. He is dif-
ferent. He is a treasure beyond compare to the God who
 brought him forth and crafted this cross for him in the
circumstances of a fallen world.
It’s not difficult to see in this manifesto the cry of
a deeply conflicted soul. On the one hand, Voris had
created the persona of himself as the super-masculine
Church reformer to distract everyone, including him-
self, from his homosexual inferiority complex, but on
the other hand, Voris desperately wanted the world
to know about his homosexuality. In this, he was like
Dimmesdale, the troubled minister in Nathaniel Haw-
thorne’s The Scarlet Letter, who bared his chest on the
scaffold, but at midnight when no one could see him,
or Jonathan Harker in Dracula, who told his fiancee,
“Here is my diary. Do not read it.”
Voris desperately wanted to get rid of this homosex-
ual past, and yet he continued to cling to a narcissistic
image of himself that arose directly from his neurotic
homosexuality. He accomplished this impossible task
by turning homosexuality into the vehicle of salvation
which would lead “many other souls to heaven.”
Holding all of these contradictions together required
an enormous amount of psychic energy in 2010. Six
years later, as the homosexuals from his past began
to surface on Facebook and name names, the psychic
pressure became unbearable and began manifesting
itself in physical symptoms. At around this time, Vo-
ris developed a case of shingles, which can also be a
sign of a compromised immune system. The “Dolan
Has To Go” video was a clear sign that Voris was out
of control. Voris could no longer draw a clear line
between his homosexual past and his current role as
Catholic apologist and crusader. As homosexuals from
Voris’s past continued to level allegations on Facebook,
the staff slipped into a state of paralysis. Terry Carroll
had been out of the picture for some time because of
his role in what Voris now considered the SSPX de-
bacle. Voris’s spiritual advisor knew about his homo-
sexual past but found himself crippled by a combina-
tion of his previous inaction and his own advisor’s bad
theology, which refused to acknowledge the gravity of
the sin and the need for penance. No one wanted to
say that Voris was increasingly beholden to his hidden
past, even as it threatened to jeopardize the future of
the operation.
TO BE CONTINUED IN CULTURE WAR'S
SEPTEMBER ISSUE. THE ENTIRE ARTICLE IS
NOW AVAILABLE ON KINDLE AS AN E-BOOK.
ENDNOTES
1. Michael Voris, Wikipedia
2. http://www.onepeterfive.com/church-militant-expos-
ing-the-new-york-archdioceses-gay-mafia/
3. http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/fetzen-fliegen/
item/1264-pay-no-attention-to-the-man-behind-the-vortex
4. http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/fetzen-fliegen/
item/1264-pay-no-attention-to-the-man-behind-the-vortex
5. http://philotheaonphire.blogspot.com/2013/09/cmtvs-re-
sponse-to-dave-armstrong.html
6. https://gloria.tv/media/dWt72t2jatp
7. http://www.culturewars.com/CultureWars/Archives/Fideli-
ty_archives/SSPX6.htm
8. http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/fetzen-fliegen/
item/1264-pay-no-attention-to-the-man-behind-the-vortex
9. Vatican Council II: the Conciliar and Post Conciliar Docu-
ments, Austin Flannery, OP, general editor (Collegeville, MN:
Liturgical Press, 1975), p. 372.
10. The Code of Canon Law: Latin/English edition (Washing-
ton, DC: Canon Law Society of America, 1983), p. 497.
11. Gerard J. M. Van den Aardweg, Ph.D., The Battle for
Normality: A Guide for (Self-) Therapy for Homosexuality (San
Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 1997), p. 20.
12. Van den Aardweg, p. 21.
13. Van den Aardweg, p. 131
14. Christopher A. Ferrara, EWTN: A Network Gone Wrong
(Pound Ridge, NY: Good Counsel Publications, 2006), p. 6.
15. Ferrara, p. 7.
16. Raymond Arroyo, Mother Angelica: The Remarkable Story of
a Nun, Her Nerve, and a Network of Miracles (New York: Dou-
bleday, 2005), pp. 267-8.
17. Arroyo, p. 268.
18. Ferrara, p. 4.
19. Ferrara, p. 10.
20. Ferrara, p. 1.
21. Ferrara, p. 12.
22. Ferrara, p. 103.
23. Ferrara, p. 113.
24. http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/remnant-tv-
forum/item/1570-inflammatory-media-on-michael-voris
25. http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/remnant-tv-
forum/item/1570-inflammatory-media-on-michael-voris
26. http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/remnant-tv-
forum/item/1570-inflammatory-media-on-michael-voris
27. http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/remnant-tv-
forum/item/1570-inflammatory-media-on-michael-voris
28. http://www.churchmilitant.com/video/episode/cardinal-do-
lan-has-to-go
29. http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccathe-
duc/documents/rc_con_ccatheduc_doc_20051104_is
30. http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccathe-
duc/documents/rc_con_ccatheduc_doc_20051104_is
31. http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccathe-
duc/documents/rc_con_ccatheduc_doc_20051104_is
32. http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccathe-
duc/documents/rc_con_ccatheduc_doc_20051104_is
33. The same document is published in its entirety, in English,
in the Canon Law Digest, Volume V (Bruce Publishing Co,
1963), pages 452 to 486.” 3
34. http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/resources/life-and-fam-
ily/homosexuality/reflections-on-the-instruction-on-the-admit-
tance-of-homosexuals-into-seminaries/
35. http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/resources/life-and-fam-
ily/homosexuality/reflections-on-the-instruction-on-the-admit-
tance-of-homosexuals-into-seminaries/
36. van den Aardweg, p. 94.
37. Van den Aardweg, p. 95.
38. Van den Aardweg, p. 131.
July/August 2016 / 37
Reviews
RODNEY STARK, BEARING FALSE WITNESS: DEBUNKING CENTURIES OF ANTI-CATHOLIC
HISTORY (TEMPLETON PRESS, 2016), ISBN 9781599474991.
Your reviewer was attracted by
the powerful, “no holds barred”
title of this book. Testimony and
witness are keys to evangeliza-
tion, and the idea of someone
bearing false witness is something
that should galvanize the Catho-
lic Church into a firm response,
something that we have seen lit-
tle of in the years since Vatican II.
The prevailing approach has been
so often one of not offending any-
one even though truth is one and
unchanging. Well, Rodney Stark
proposes “debunking several cen-
turies of anti-Catholic history.”
What is more, he describes him-
self as “an American Protestant”
who has grown into an agnostic.
So, a bit of a surprise, then, but
one that can be very useful in the
sense that he can hardly be ac-
cused of being biased. So, let us
38 / Culture Wars
Black
Legend
debunked
see how Stark gets on. He sets out
ten targets to which he proposes a
response, but before tackling each
of them in detail, he has a fasci-
nating introductory chapter enti-
tled “Confronting Distinguished
Bigots.” This starts with what is
probably the classic example of
historical misunderstandings in-
volving the Catholic Church. In
America it is set in the context of
Columbus Day. Stark recalls his
Protestant upbringing:
Didn’t [Catholics] see the irony in
the fact that although Columbus
was a Catholic, his voyage of dis-
covery was accomplished against
unyielding opposition from Roman
Catholic prelates who cited biblical
proof that the earth was flat and that
any attempt to reach Asia by sailing
West would result in the ships fall-
ing off the edge of the world?
Yes, it’s the old myth regard-
ing the Church as consisting of a
bunch of flat earthers. Then there
were the movies, plays and songs,
all telling the story of Columbus
proving the world to be round. You
know how it goes, well according
to Ira Gershwin’s lyrics: “They all
laughed at Christopher Columbus,
when he said the world was round.”
Well, no, they didn’t laugh at all
actually, because, as Stark shows,
“By the fifteenth century (and for
many centuries before) every edu-
cated European, including Roman
Catholic prelates, knew the earth
was round.” The prevailing mood
at the time was not amusement,
but genuine worry and concern.
This was because the problem peo-
ple perceived to be there for Co-
lumbus was that this round world,
acknowledged by all, was a heck
of a lot bigger in its circumference
than he thought it was and there-
fore his life, in addition that of his
men, was being put at real risk of
death by what he intended to do.
That was why these supposedly
ignorant clerics, who in fact knew
much more on this than Colum-
bus did, opposed his voyage. After
all, nobody knew at the time that
the Western hemisphere existed. If
it hadn’t, then all of his men would
have died of thirst and starvation.
In reality, and this is the actual
truth, this anti-Catholic story did
not exist until over three hundred
years after Columbus’ voyage. It
appeared, as pointed out by Stark,
in a flawed biography of the great
explorer written by Washington Ir-
ving and published in 1828.
Of course, anti-Catholicism did
not start in the nineteenth centu-
ry. The Reformation had already
proved a major source of falsehood,
notably against Spain as the major
Catholic power. The principal er-
ror related to what became known
as the Black Legend and that ever
fertile source of prejudice, the
Spanish Inquisition. Later on the
Protestants were joined by anti-re-
ligious writers, especially during
the period misleadingly referred
to as the Enlightenment. Notable
here is, of course, Edward Gib-
bon, who ironically at one point
in his life actually converted and
joined the Catholic Church. But
that did not last long. The number
of what Stark calls “distinguished
bigots” is a long one, consisting
both of lapsed Catholics like Kar-
en Armstrong, John Cornwell and
James Carroll, and the so-called
“new atheism” today, much of the
writings of which is targeted at the
Catholic Church and consists very
often merely of old matters re-cy-
cled for today. The names of Steven
Hawking and Richard Dawkins in
Britain and Daniel Dennett and
Christopher Hitchens in Ameri-
ca come most obviously to mind,
Hitchens being of course originally
another British product.
The aim of this review is not,
for reasons of space, to consider
in detail all of these topics, but to
concentrate on those that relate
most clearly to the issues being
dealt with frequently in the pages
of Culture Wars and particularly in
the writings of its editor. This focus
relates firstly and primarily to the
question of anti-Semitism and the
whole matter of the relationship
between the Church and the Jews.
But, it also relates to another theme
of Dr. Jones’ writings, that is the
question of capitalism and the rela-
tionship between labor and usury,
examined in great detail in Barren
Metal, though space precludes a
full examination of this. However,
before looking at these matters it
is important to say a few words on
In reality, and this is the actual truth, this anti-
Catholic story did not exist until over three
hundred years after Columbus’ voyage.
two more general points, also dealt
with by Rodney Stark, and then to
make some comment on the book’s
approach to other specific topics.
GENERAL ISSUES
First of all then, to deal with the
two general points, all Catholics
writing or speaking on the topics
dealt with in this book must be
utterly objective in their analysis
of them and must recognize that
God in his Church works in many
respects through fallible human
beings. Individual Catholics have
done very bad things all the way
through the history of the Church.
As Stark puts it, there must be no
“whitewashing” of Church histo-
ry. Stark himself makes the point
that he has “written at some length
on such matters as corrupt clergy,
brutal attacks on ‘heretics’, and on
more recent misdeeds and short-
comings of the Church, such as
covering up for pedophile priests
and the misguided advocacy of lib-
eration theology.” But there has to
be a matter of balance here.
[N]o matter how much importance
one places on these negative aspects
of Church history, it does not jus-
tify the extreme exaggerations, false
accusations, and patent frauds ad-
dressed in the chapters that follow
In fact, it is noteworthy that
when Stark states the various at-
tacks on the Catholic Church, he
states them in their strongest form,
which brings added credibility to
their subsequent refutation.
Secondly, if Stark is correct when
he says that these various false-
hoods are patent, obvious, and
notorious, why do they persist, as
they do, and are repeated in every
generation? Stark’s partial answer
is that “they are so mutually rein-
forcing and deeply embedded in
our common culture that it seems
impossible for them not to be
true.” The prejudices in society are
so deep set that nothing seems to
remove them. And most of the ex-
July/August 2016 / 39
perts tend to write for each other
and not for the general public. In
a time when one cannot assume
anything with respect to people’s
knowledge of even the basic facts
of Western civilization, there is a
great need for a straightforward
analysis of these central myths.
Rodney Stark seeks to provide such
a guide for our times. In addition,
as a non-Catholic, he states that
he wrote it not in defense of the
Church, but in defense of history.
EIGHT SPECIFIC
ALLEGATIONS
Now for the specific topics.
leaving aside for the moment the
Jewish question and that of capi-
talism and the modern world. The
topics most often raised against
the Church seem to remain pret-
ty stable. Stark deals with the fol-
lowing accusations: suppression
of alternative gospels; persecution
of paganism; opposition to reason
between the Dark Ages and the
Renaissance/Enlightenment; the
Crusades; the Spanish Inquisition;
opposition to science and persecu-
tion of scientists, notably Galileo;
failure to oppose slavery; support
of dictators, and opposition to lib-
eral government. Each of the fol-
lowing chapters deals with one of
the matters above.
When it comes to newly discov-
ered gospels, we seem to have been
inundated with them in recent
years. Yet long ago they were dealt
with by St. Irenaeus in his Against
Heresies. They were a very strange
lot and no great loss. Well, now,
in some cases, we have the actual
copies of these books and not just
the versions dealt with by the Fa-
thers of the Church. But, not a lot
has changed. Stark goes into great
40 / Culture Wars
detail on the writings of several
modern commentators of these
so-called gospels. He is under no
doubts as to his finally destination
after this research, identifying these
books as characteristic of Gnosti-
cism:
Which brings us to the greatest
distortion of them all: to present
these as Christian gospels. Any hon-
est reading of the primary Gnostic
gospels reveals that, despite some
Christian content, these are funda-
mentally pagan scriptures and thus
are precisely the bizarre heresies that
the early church fathers said they
were.
Stark goes into great detail con-
cerning the content of these Gnos-
tic books and brings out how utter-
ly unlike the Christian scriptures
they are.
The lost gospels were not excluded
from the Bible because the early
church fathers were malicious dog-
matists, but because they were fully
aware that the Gnostic scriptures
were not Christian.
Another common allegation
against the Church, expressed most
notably by Edward Gibbon, is that
the key to the fact that the Chris-
tians quickly became the majority
after the reign of Constantine is
the brutal persecution of the ever
tolerant pagans by the Church.
Well, the truth is that there has
been something of a revolution in
historical thought regarding this
matter. There was very much less in
the nature of repression than previ-
ously thought. There was much as-
similation of certain pagan practic-
es and paganism simply died away
in the face of a much healthier and
vibrant social and communal situa-
tion under Christianity.
Two general factors were involved:
social and doctrinal. Socially, Chris-
tianity generated an intense con-
gregational life - people belonged
to a Christian congregation, while
they merely frequented pagan tem-
ples. High levels of commitment
and social relations not only were
directly rewarding, additionally
they empowered Christian groups
to provide substantial “social ser-
vices.” Doctrinally, in contrast to
paganism’s limited, unreliable, and
often immoral gods, Christianity
presented an image of God as mor-
al, concerned, dependable, and om-
nipotent. Christianity also provided
a clear method for the forgiveness of
sins and offered the prospect of an
attractive eternal life.
Stark next tackles the allegation
that the Church conquered the Ro-
man Empire and most of Europe,
but then imposed a thousand years
(AD 300 to AD 1300) of ignorance
known as the Dark Ages. Major
proponents of this view were Pe-
trarch, Voltaire, Rousseau, Gibbon,
and Bertrand Russell, but it is still
put forward today. The contrast is
then made between these so-called
Dark Ages and the Renaissance and
Enlightenment. Stark brings out the
myth of the Dark Ages. He empha-
sizes, to begin with the advance of
the practical, the rise of technology:
[T]he most important factor in the
myth of the Dark Ages was the in-
ability of intellectuals to value or
even to notice the nuts and bolts
of real life. Hence, revolutions in
agriculture, weaponry and warfare,
nonhuman power, transportation,
manufacturing, and commerce went
unappreciated. So too did remark-
able moral progress. For example,
at the fall of Rome there was slavery
everywhere in Europe, by the time
of the Renaissance it was long gone.

But there is much more than this
that can be said, and so surprising
is the following omission that one
can truly see an agenda behind the
attacks leveled against this period
of Christian development.
[W]hat is truly difficult to explain is
how the creators of the Dark Ages
myth could have overlooked what
would seem to have been their chief
interest: high culture. Neverthe-
less, they missed or dismissed the
enormous progress that took place
in music, art, literature, education,
and science.
Stark proceeds to give a detailed
list of the innovations and progress
made in this supposedly sterile pe-
riod of time. How could anyone
have missed in particular the period
of the High Middle Ages, many of
the great buildings of which are still
in front of our noses, unless they
had some subversive plan in mind?
But, there are other myths here,
this time real ones, namely the
myth of the Renaissance and the
myth of Secular Enlightenment.
The former claims that freedom
from the Church was needed in
order to allow the “rebirth” of clas-
sical knowledge. This is untrue. As
Stark puts it, “this legacy of classi-
cal culture was fully restored long
before the Renaissance.” The key
to this was the translation of Greek
literature into Latin and this was
done earlier by monastic scholars.
The whole issue of the Renaissance
is one that has been worked on by
expert researchers in recent years
and a notable article setting out
the correct approach can be found
in an excellent article, “The Re-
naissance Myth” by James Frank-
lin, in the November 1982 issue
of Quadrant. With regard to the
Enlightenment, Stark shows that
the secular attacks on religion in
the name of science (which were
similar to modern day attacks by
such as Daniel Dennett and Rich-
ard Dawkins) failed to see that
the rise of science was inseparable
from Christian theology, some-
thing dealt with in detail later in
the book.
On the question of the allega-
tion that during the Crusades “an
Primavera, di Sandro Botticelli
expansionist, imperialistic Chris-
tendom directed by the pope,
brutalized, looted, and colonized
a tolerant and peaceful Islam,”
Stark first describes the fawning
approach to Islam in the wake of
9/11, notably in speeches by both
Bill Clinton and Barack Obama,
and then sets out the traditional
charges, the source of which may
be said to be “the usual suspects,”
namely Voltaire, Hume, Diderot,
and Gibbon.
The answer to this is quite
straightforward:
In recent years these claims have
been utterly refuted by a group of
distinguished historians. They pro-
pose that the Crusades were precip-
itated by Islamic provocations - by
centuries of bloody attempts to col-
onize the West and by sudden new
attacks on Christian pilgrims and
holy places. Although the Crusades
were initiated by a plea from the
pope, this had nothing to do with
hopes of converting Islam.
Stark proceeds to give a very
lengthy, detailed and compelling
July/August 2016 / 41
The Vision of St. Helena, Mother of Emperor Constantine, c.1580
account in which he brilliantly
bring together the various strands
in the overall story of the Crusades.
It could not be done better.
On the question of the Spanish
Inquisition, Stark explains that the
allegation was that “this hideous
Catholic institution tortured and
murdered huge numbers of inno-
cent people.” The major text in this
context, of course, is the book by
Reginaldus Montanus, A Discovery
and Plaine Declaration of Sundry
Subtill Practices of the Holy Inqui-
sition of Spain, written originally
in Latin, published in 1567, then
42 / Culture Wars
translated into English, French,
Dutch, and German, and widely
circulated. Stark’s reply to this sup-
posed source is very simple. He re-
fers to the book as “mostly a pack
of lies, invented and spread by En-
glish and Dutch propagandists in
the sixteenth century during their
wars with Spain and repeated ever
after by the malicious or misled
historians eager to sustain ‘an im-
age of Spain as a nation of fanatical
bigots.’”
It is vital to appreciate that the
supposedly powerful witness,
Montanus, was exactly the oppo-
site, and in fact “was the pen name
used by a renegade Spanish monk
who became a Lutheran who fled
to the Netherlands where he wrote
his book.
The crucial point to be made
today is that we are now in a new
and remarkable era of detailed re-
search on the Spanish Inquisition.
This has resulted from historians’
gaining access to the complete ar-
chives of the Spanish Inquisition
and a mass of other documentary
evidence.
Astonishing as it may seem, the new
historians of the Inquisition have
revealed that, in contrast with the
secular courts all across Europe, the
Spanish Inquisition was a consistent
force for justice, restraint, due pro-
cess, and enlightenment.
And the number of deaths car-
ried out by the civil authorities (the
Inquisition never conducted an ac-
tual execution)?
All told…during the entire period
1480 through 1700, only about
then deaths per year were meted out
by the Inquisition all across Spain,
a small fraction of the many thou-
sands of Lutherans, Lollards, and
Catholics (in addition to two of
his wives) that Henry VIII is cred-
ited with having boiled, burned,
beheaded, or hanged. Then, during
the subsequent century (1530 to
1630), the English averaged 750
hangings a year, many of them for
minor thefts. In contrast, the few
who were sentenced to death by the
Spanish Inquisition usually were
repeat offenders who would not re-
pent.
At a time when all the courts
of Europe used torture, the In-
quisition did so far less than other
courts. And as far as another re-
lated phenomenon, that of witch
hunts, is concerned, the position
is, as Stark states, that “the Spanish
Inquisition sent nearly no witches
to the stake, and those who were
had been convicted for the third or
fourth time. Even more important,
the Inquisition used its power and
influence to suppress witch-hunt-
ing by local mobs or secular au-
thorities.
When it comes to the allegation
that the Church opposed science
and persecuted scientists, some of
the things charged are breathtak-
ing to say the least. Stark cites the
case of the supposed prohibition in
1829 by Pope Leo XII of vaccina-
tion for smallpox on the grounds
that “smallpox is a judgment from
God.” Of course Pope Leo never
said anything of the sort. The real
truth is that the Church had ac-
tively promoted vaccination from
the very start.
The best analyses of the rela-
tionship between the Church and
scientific progress is that given by
the late Fr. Stanley Jaki in his many
books and articles, and so it is per-
haps unnecessary to go into detail
concerning Stark’s chapter on this
topic. Space is also against us, but
Stark’s book does give an accurate
and detailed account of the main
ideas and the main figures histori-
cally about whom we need to know
more in order to come to a correct
view of this whole issue. The fol-
lowing quotation gives a summa-
ry of the conclusions to which he
comes:
[T]he great scientific achievements
of the seventeenth and eighteenth
centuries were not made despite the
Church; they were the culmination
of normal scientific progress that
took place through the centuries in
the universities founded, controlled,
and staffed by the Church. Indeed,
the leading figures in the “scientif-
ic revolution” were unusually de-
vout and about half of them were
Catholics, many of them clergy. As
for Galileo, he never spent a day in
prison, and he didn’t really get in
trouble for his science (the Span-
ish Inquisition never banned his
books), but for arrogant duplicity.
Stark goes on to explain in detail
the Galileo case. He brings out that
the key aspect to the understand-
ing of this was that of a personali-
ty clash. In addition, he shows that
Galileo’s purported proofs of his
theory were erroneous (it was long
after Galileo that science mustered
really convincing proofs). The one
absolutely vital point on this whole
topic of science and Christianity
does not come from the case of Gal-
ileo, but from the fact that Christian
theology was essential for the rise
of science. Stark cites the opinion
of Alfred North Whitehead, an at
first surprising ally in the sense that
he was co-author with the very an-
ti-religious Bertrand Russell of the
important Principia Mathematica.
Whitehead explained that science
developed in Europe because of the
widespread “faith in the possibility
of science…derivative from medie-
val theology.”
The next allegation deals with
the received wisdom that the Cath-
olic Church accepted slavery, and
Even more important, the Inquisition
used its power and influence to suppress
witch-hunting by local mobs or secular
authorities.
did not repudiate it until very late.
This is easily refuted by Stark. As
he expresses it,
The Church opposed and elimi-
nated slavery in Europe more than
a thousand years ago. Then when
European colonists began to rees-
tablish slavery in the new world, the
popes vigorously opposed it
Stark reviews in detail the papal
opposition to slavery, but has to
conclude that “unfortunately the
popes lacked the power to impose
their will.” However, the Church
was able to mitigate the worst fea-
tures of slavery by formulating and
enforcing codes of behavior relat-
ing to the treatment of slaves. The
traditional view adopted by secular
writers is certainly a caricature of
the truth.
Stark deals next with the ques-
tion of authoritarianism and the
charge that the Church has been
the implacable enemy of all forms
of liberal politics. Stark draws a
contrast between the Church of
power and the Church of piety and
shows how, in the context of such
historical events as the French Rev-
olution and the Spanish Civil War,
the sinfulness of humanity was
tempered by prayer and Christian
virtue. The discussion is interest-
ing, but space precludes examina-
tion of it here. Readers will be in-
trigued by the account and are like-
ly to agree with Stark’s conclusion
that the allegation that the Church
opposes freedom and democracy
is untrue and that her opposition
tends to be directed against tyrants
and those who attempt to destroy
the Church.
July/August 2016 / 43
THE CHURCH AND ANTI-
SEMITISM
The longest chapter in the book
is concerned with the relation-
ship between the Catholic Church
and the Jews. Stark begins with
an autobiographical account of
his own journey in respect of this
question. It is quite striking since
he explains that he started out by
writing a book that claimed that
“For centuries persecution of the
Jews was justified in the name of
God.” He explains how he began
to study anti-Semitism through
public opinion surveys as the result
of a grant from the Anti-Defama-
tion League of B’nai B’rith. This
led to a book, Christian Beliefs and
Anti-Semitism (1966), co-written
with Charles Y. Glock, in which he
asserted that there was a significant
link between belief and prejudice.
In consequence of this, Stark was
asked to prepare for the bishops at
the Second Vatican Council a brief
summary of his findings. This pro-
cess was described later by Cardi-
nal Bea as playing a significant role
in producing the Council’s state-
ment on the Jews, Nostra Aetate.
Stark does acknowledge that with
the benefit of hindsight he realizes
that there was really nothing new
in that document. He goes on to
say that after several years he “be-
came aware of the extent to which
the Catholic Church has stood as
a consistent barrier against anti-Se-
mitic violence.” He frankly admits
that his detailed work in this area
forced him to reconsider the entire
link between Christianity and An-
ti-Semitism.
Stark reviews the issues very
comprehensively, beginning with
the charges by contemporary schol-
ars (“contemporary” here meaning
44 / Culture Wars
they were writing at the same time ously very incomplete, but there are
as Stark was doing his own work) compelling reasons to believe that
that the Church originated an- persecution was common and that
ti-Semitism. Here we meet a few it continued for several centuries.
of the usual suspects, e.g., the fem-
After all, Christianity was seen as
inist theologian Rosemary Ruether
an abomination to the Jew. Chris-
and the Jew Jules Isaacs, noted for
tians were seen as committing
his maneuverings at the Council.
crimes. In relation to punishing
Stark starts by rebutting the argu-
such crimes, St. Paul himself tells
ment that the pre-Christian pagans
us in Acts that before his conver-
were mild in their anti-Semitism,
sion he delivered up Christians for
while the Christians laid it down
punishment. Deacon Stephen was
hard. Stark shows this idea to be
stoned to death by order of the
false. The Jews were written against
Sanhedrin, and St. James was exe-
in very severe terms in much Ro-
cuted by Jewish leaders in Jerusa-
man literature and were on several
lem.
occasions expelled from Rome and
Stark looks next at the Talmud,
even at times from all Italy.
that collection of writings by
Stark turns to New Testament
learned rabbis that began in the
passages containing hostile refer-
first century. Stark deals with the
ences to the Jews, such as Mat-
once held scholarly belief that there
thew 27:24-26, Matthew 23:37,
were no authentic references to Je-
and John 5:16-18, but goes on to
sus in the Talmud and brings out
show how often such passages were
the definitive scholarly refutation
interpreted out of context. For ex-
of this contained in the research by
ample, one “should not focus en-
Peter Schafer, the Director of Juda-
tirely on the New Testament but
ic Studies at Princeton. In his book
also should compare its statements
Jesus in the Talmud (2007), which
about the Jews with Old Testament
deals with both the Jerusalem
polemics against other Jews who
and Babylonian Talmuds, Schafer
failed to meet a particular proph-
brings out the many utterly dis-
et’s standard of proper faith.” One
tasteful remarks about Jesus in the
must remember also that we are
Talmud. Stark summarizes the gen-
not talking here about angry com-
eral Talmudic approach as follows::
ments of a Christian majority. At
the time in question the Christians They are counternarratives that
were a “tiny, persecuted minority.” parody the New Testament stories,
Of course, what we have become most notably the story of Jesus’ life
more and more used to, in an age and death. They ridicule Jesus’ birth
where the Church downplays her from a virgin… Most remarkably,
position for fear of being thought they counter the New Testament
intolerant, is an array of allegations passion story with its message of
of Christian persecution of Jews, Jews’ guilt and shame as Christ
but very little, if anything, about killers. Instead, they reverse it com-
pletely: Yes, they maintain, we ac-
Jewish persecution of Christians.
cept responsibility for it, but there
Well, Stark redresses the balance.
is no reason to feel ashamed because
The evidence of Jewish persecution we rightfully executed a blasphemer
of Christians is scattered and obvi- and idolater. Jesus deserved death,
 and got what he deserved. Accord-
ingly, they subvert the Christian
idea of Jesus’ resurrection by having
him punished forever in hell and
making it clear that this fate awaits
his followers as well, who believe in
this impostor.
Stark then proceeds to set out
the more specific points made by
Schafer:
Although she was married to Jo-
seph, Mary conceived during an
adulterous interlude with a Roman
soldier named Pandera (the name
perhaps being a play on the word
parthenos or virgin). According to
Jewish law, both should have been
stoned to death.
Jesus was a mamzer (a bastard) and
would have thereby been excluded
from any participation in Jewish re-
ligious life - In some interpretations
of the Law, mamzers were them-
selves to be stoned.
Jesus engaged in sexual promiscuity
with Mary Magdalene among oth-
ers.
Jesus was convicted of sorcery.
Jesus was not crucified, but in-
stead was stoned by Jews who then
hanged his body upon a tree.
Jesus is spending eternity in hell,
boiling in excrement.
Stark now moves on to the ques-
tion of the Church’s attitude to
anti-Semitic attacks. On this he
is able to use his own consider-
able data. This was assembled in
respect of every fatal anti-Semitic
attack by groups of western Euro-
pean Christians between the years
500 and 1600. He found that be-
tween the years 500 and 1096
there was only one such event,
when in 554 a mob killed several
Jews and forced a number of oth-
ers to accept Christian baptism at
Clermont in southern Gaul (now
France). The fact that there were
no other such incidents shows that
the Church condemned this act
and ruled that Jews should be left
alone. The Church confirmed this
position time and again down the
centuries. Stark’s inability to find
any other attacks during this very
long period of time is confirmed
by several notable Jewish histori-
ans and so this long period of tran-
quility confirms, as Stark puts it,
“that for more than five centuries,
hostile New Testament statements
had no violent consequences.” It is
interesting to note that Stark’s con-
The Jews were written against in very severe
terms in much Roman literature and were on
several occasiones expelled from Rome…
clusions here have been confirmed
by several distinguished Jewish
scholars.
The period of toleration end-
ed in the 11th century. Stark as-
serts the reason for the change to
be that “the conflict with Islam
that boiled over into the Crusades
changed perceptions of religious
threats.” There is probably much
truth in this, but let us stay with
the main issue here, the question
of anti-Semitic attacks. These now
increased as did heresy hunting,
but although the Catholic clergy
initiated the violent repression of
heresies, they did not initiate the
anti-Semitic outbursts.
These were led by laymen, and
it was churchmen who stood up
against them and usually managed
to prevent further attacks.
Stark recounts here in some de-
tail the marauding behavior of that
minor Rhineland count, Emich
of Leisengen. We also hear of the
account of the sterling work of St.
Bernard of Clairvaux, who was
even praised by Jewish chroniclers.
Stark reviews the protection given
by the Church in so many regions,
excepting notably the Rhineland,
where even papal authority failed.
Stark moves on to deal with the
relations between the Jews and Is-
lam. He rebuts an often seen myth
that the Jews were in some sort
of heaven in Muslim Spain, often
contrasted with the notion of a
brutal anti-Semitism on the part of
Christendom. Stark brings much
evidence to show that this idea is
preposterous, concluding as fol-
lows:
[E]ven during the “tranquil” peri-
od both Jews and Christians were
always placed under severe restric-
tions and were highly stigmatized in
Muslim societies.
We live in times when Muham-
mad is often portrayed in very flat-
tering terms. It is interesting, then,
that Stark also notes that the first
Muslim massacre of Jews occurred
in Medina when Muhammad had
all the local adult Jewish males
(about seven hundred of them)
beheaded after forcing them to dig
their own graves.
Finally in this chapter Stark turns
to the issue most often raised these
days relating to the Church and the
Jews, namely the allegation that
Pope Pius XII collaborated with
Hitler at the time of the Holocaust.
July/August 2016 / 45
Stark points out that the original
disinformation came in fact from
the Soviet authorities. At this time,
at the end of World War Two and
just afterwards, many Jewish indi-
viduals and organizations were full
of praise for Pius XII.
As they noted, Hitler had bitterly
attacked the Catholic Church, had
closed all the Catholic schools, and
had arrested thousands of priests
and nuns and sent them to Dachau
and other death camps.
Praise by Jews for Pius XII’s
work continued on right up until
his death in 1958 and came from
many eminent people, notably
Chaim Weizmann, the first presi-
dent of Israel, Moshe Sharett, her
first foreign minister and second
prime minister, and Golda Meir,
a future prime minister of Israel.
All changed, however, with Rolf
Hochhuth’s play The Deputy, and
the various later adaptations of it,
both in the theater and on film.
In rebuttal Stark cites the very
eminent British historian Eamon
Duffy, who after an examination
of all the relevant documents, “de-
cisively established the falsehood
of Hochhuth’s specific allegations
(see Duffy’s Saints and Sinners: A
History of the Popes (1997)). Sev-
eral notable Jews agreed with him,
for example Joseph L. Lichten
of the Anti-Defamation League
and the Israeli diplomat Pinchas
Lapide. There is much other evi-
dence to the same effect. Despite
all of this, in recent years several
more books re-iterating the same
old story have been published, for
example the notorious Hitler’s Pope
(1999) by John Cornwell with its
misstatements and distortions,
and James Carroll’s Constantine’s
46 / Culture Wars
Sword (2001). It is interesting to
note that the former was a drop-
out from a seminary who describes
himself now as a lapsed Catholic,
and the latter is a novelist and an
ex-priest. When it comes to Corn-
well’s book, one hardly knows
where to start. There is the noto-
rious cover picture, which is stated
as being of Pius XII visiting Nazi
headquarters, but is in reality one
of the then Eugenio Pacelli, then
nuncio, leaving a reception for the
President of the Weimar Republic
in 1927. Pacelli never met Hitler
and left Germany in 1929, well be-
fore Hitler came to power. In addi-
tion, Cornwell claimed to have ex-
amined incriminating documents
in the Vatican, claims which were
later shown to be untrue. Much of
Carroll’s book is utterly inaccurate
and full of irrelevant personal de-
tails. The parts dealing with Pius
XII are mainly a rehash of Hitler’s
Pope. Several other authors have
joined this bandwagon. Notable
ones are Garry Wills, Daniel Jo-
nah Goldhagen, Michael Phayer,
and David Kertzer. All of the lit-
erature is driven either by a desire
to promote a liberal version of Ca-
tholicism or by rank anti-Catholic
prejudice and unscholarly writing
by non-Catholics. It is important
to note that one of the best books
on this topic is The Myth of Hitler’s
Pope ((2005), written by David G.
Dalin, who is himself Jewish and
of course also a rabbi. In relation
to so-called Catholic writers, Dalin
gets to the heart of what is going
on here:
The Holocaust is simply the biggest
club available for liberal Catholics
to use against traditional Catholics
in their attempt to bash the papa-
cy and thereby to smash traditional
Catholic teaching… [T]hese po-
lemics…of lapsed or angry liberal
Catholics exploit the tragedy of the
Jewish people during the Holocaust
to foster their own political agenda.
Even those writers who make
some concessions tend to take
them back almost immediately. Su-
san Zuccotti in her Under His Very
Windows: The Vatican and the Holo-
caust in Italy (2000) concedes that
85% of Jews under threat from the
Nazis in Italy survived, most as a
result of being hidden in Catho-
lic buildings. She then goes on to
allege that Pope Pius XII gave no
encouragement to this. The reali-
ty is very different. There is much
testimony about the positive ap-
proach of the pope and about his
personal involvement, such as his
opening up of Castel Gandolfo to
the Jews and his turning his private
apartments into an obstetric ward.
Stark also shows how Pius XII
spoke out against Hitler and rac-
ism during the thirties even before
he became pope. He continued to
do so throughout the war, to the
extent that the New York Times ed-
itorialized as follows at Christmas
in 1941:
The voice of Pius XII is a lonely
voice in the silence and darkness en-
veloping Europe this Christmas…
In calling for a “real new order”
based on liberty, justice, and love,
…the pope put himself squarely
against Hitlerism
As if one needed more evidence,
one need only appeal to the many
Jewish voices that spoke out in
favor of Pius XII; and recall that
there is much evidence of Hitler’s
utter hatred of the pope. In 1943
Hitler wet so far as to attempt to
have the pope kidnapped.
 Stark’s firm conclusion is that
“the Roman Catholic Church has a
long and honorable record of stout
opposition to attacks upon Jews”
and that “Pope Pius XII fully lived
up to that tradition.”
Stark does a good job in bring-
ing to light the truth in respect
of this whole issue of the Church
and the Jews, but there is one
weakness in his analysis. He very
much underplays the extent to
which the Jews down the centu-
ries have attacked the Catholic
Church. He says very little about
the revolutionary aspect of Jewish
history. The question of the revo-
lutionary Jew must be examined
closely if one is to bring to bear
a sound view of the ramifications
of history. And of course this is
exactly what Dr. E. Michael Jones
does so effectively in his out-
standing volume The Jewish Rev-
olutionary Spirit and Its Impact on
World History (2008). Dr. Jones’
book is the definitive text and is
unlikely to be replaced. It is very
detailed, however, and in our fast
moving world, it is useful to have
to hand a summary of the most
important issues relating to this
topic. These are now provided
in two shorter books, setting out
more concisely the key factors.
These are The Catholic Church
and the Jews (2016) and The Jews
and Moral Subversion (2016).
Both are highly recommended by
this reviewer.
CAPITALISM, RELIGIOUS
FREEDOM, AND THE
MODERN WORLD
Stark introduces this under the
heading of “Protestant Moderni-
ty” and starts by explaining how he
himself was raised on the supposed
glories of Lutheranism through
which the great reformer had “set
us free to think for ourselves and to
seek knowledge, thereby bringing
about the modern world.” In other
words, a tie was supposedly estab-
lished between the Reformation
and religious freedom. This was
later supplemented by the gospel
of Max Weber “that Protestantism
gave birth to a unique work ethic
that spawned capitalism and thus it
is that modernity is a direct result
of the Reformation.”
Dealing first with Weber, his
thesis was that the capitalist
economy of the West was dom-
inated by Protestants because
that was the only religion that
“provided a moral vision that led
people to restrain their material
consumption while vigorously
seeking wealth.” Stark’s answer is
straightforward:
Catholic areas of Western Europe
did not lag in their industrial devel-
opment. And even more obvious at
the time Weber wrote was that fully
developed capitalism had appeared
in Europe many centuries before the
Reformation!
On the question of capitalism,
Stark is generally accurate, but
there is a problem. In the interest
of showing that Catholics are up to
date Capitalists, he oversimplifies
the debate and makes untenable
assertions like the following:
Thus, while the “sin of usury” re-
mained on the books, so to speak,
“usury” had become essentially an
empty term… Capitalism was fully
and finally freed from all fetters of
faith… This theological revolution
was the result of direct experience
with worldly imperatives.
In reality the battle over usury
never stopped. Pope Benedict XIV
reiterated the traditional teaching
that all interest on a loan was usu-
ry in his encyclical Vix Pervenit in
1745. The battle continues to our
day and the reader is advised to ex-
amine the definitive account con-
tained in E. Michael Jones’ Barren
Metal referred to earlier.
Regarding the point about free-
dom and the Reformation, Stark
shows clearly that what people
were to believe and how they were
to worship were firmly fixed and
had to be enforced against much
resistance and apathy. Stark con-
centrates on the experience of Lu-
theranism, his own background.
The same could be said about
England, as is shown in Eamon
Duffy’s magisterial The Stripping
of the Altars (1992). To talk about
the Reformation in terms of the-
ology is in fact to miss the point.
The Reformation (and this is most
obviously the case in England)
was first and foremost a looting
operation which later acquired
theological justification. R. H.
Tawney who set out to find the
theological turning point between
Catholic and Protestant principle,
simply could not find it and was
forced to conclude in his memo-
rable phrase that “the upstart ar-
istocracy had their teeth in the
carcase [of Church property] and
weren’t going to be whipped off
by a sermon.” Because powerful
financial interests are behind pro-
moting this version of the Black
Legend, it will most probably be
the last to fall. But Rodney Stark
has done a good job in preparing
the way.
JOHN BEAUMONT
July/August 2016 / 47
Bullets
* Don’t take a summer vacation
from Mass.
* The Sisters of Mercy have allowed
Gabriel Bodenheimer, a “transgen-
der man,” to continue teaching at
Mercy High School, a college prep
school for girls, in San Francisco.
“We feel because of our values,
the choice was this, but that didn’t
mean it was easy,” said Sr. Laura
Reicks, president of the 16-state re-
gion of the Sisters of Mercy West
Midwest Community. We wonder
whether they also allow “transgen-
der women” to join their order.
* Does Pres. Obama insist that his
daughters share bathrooms with
men?
* A Media Darling? New Coke and
New Evangelization? “Pope Fran-
cis has won over a great part of
the media,” says Fr. Thomas Ros-
ica, who helps with Vatican PR.
He “has changed the image of the
church so much that prestigious
graduate schools of business and
management are now using him
as a case study in rebranding.” Fr.
Rosica makes it sound as if ad-
vertising is more important than
evangelization.
* Gay Press. “I work in media,
where being gay is an asset, not a
liability,” writes David Lat, who is
gay, in the Washington Post.
* War Crimes. A question for those
Catholics who defend the bomb-
ing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki as
morally permissible: if Japan had
dropped atomic bombs on Amer-
ican cities, would that have been
morally permissible?
* When no candidate is minimal-
ly acceptable, does that constitute
disenfranchisement?
* Jewish Evangelization. Comedy
Central actress Natasha Leggero, a
convert from Catholicism to Juda-
ism, told Conan O’Brien that she’s
48 / Culture Wars
now “part of this beautiful religion
seeped in culture [in which] abor-
tions are cool.”
* Hillary’s pitch on foreign policy
seems to be: Vote for the candidate
who’s an experienced war criminal,
not the one who is incompetent.
* “Donald Trump Could Threaten
U.S. Rule of Law, Scholars Say,”
ran the headline in the NY Times.
If that proves to be the case in a
Trump presidency, he’ll be walking
in the footsteps of his recent prede-
cessors.
* Faith-Based Deviance. Pres.
Obama named Barbara Satin to
the President’s Advisory Council
on Faith-Based and Neighbor-
hood Partnerships. According to
an interview with LGBT Religious
Archives Network, Barbara was
raised “as a boy” in a devout Cath-
olic family and attended Catho-
lic schools, including a seminary.
Barbara, who hasn’t had medical
or surgical treatments to seem
more like a woman, says: “Barbara
was the name of the first girl that
I felt attracted to, and Satin is the
fabric of my life.” Barbara’s now a
member of the United Church of
Christ.
* “The neocons have two clear for-
eign policy objectives, and Trump
may grant them neither,” writes
former Ambassador Joseph A.
Mussomeli in the Washington Post.
“For many of them, their deepest
yearning, ungranted even in the
waning days of the George W.
Bush presidency, is an air campaign
against Iran. Trump doesn’t like
the Iran nuclear agreement, but
his instinct is to make a better deal
rather than attacking, while Hillary
Clinton has a strong record of sup-
porting the prodigal misuse of mil-
itary force.”
* “The second neocon priority? A
new Cold War with Russia,” con-
tinues Mussomeli. “Far less pet-
ulant than most of the former
Republican candidates, Trump
says he would actually talk with
Putin. … Contrast that with Clin-
ton, who thinks we should not be
talking too much to Putin and that
we ought to further expand NATO
because, in her view, Russia would
be an even greater threat had it not
been for NATO expansion.”
* “Rejecting motherhood means
giving up on humanity,” Turkish
President Erdogan, a Muslim, said
at the opening of the new building
of Turkey’s Women’s and Democ-
racy Association. “A woman who
says ‘because I am working I will
not be a mother’ is actually de-
nying her femininity.” He added:
“Strong families lead to strong na-
tions.” If only America’s Catholic
bishops were as direct and forceful.
JAMES G. BRUEN, JR.
cwbullets@yahoo.com
nEW BookS From E. Michael Jones!

F
Order Today!
See Ordering Details on Back Cover
or the last sixty years or so a series of
battles amounting to a culture war
has been taking place between the
Enlightenment (a form of secular
humanism today) and its main opponent,
the Catholic Church. Dr. E. Michael Jones
has been in the forefront of the ongoing de-
bate concerning this battle and in this book
he gives an account of the events that have
taken place. He analyzes the fundamental
nature of this secular humanism and shows
how the battle has been fought over three
key specific areas: schools and education;
obscenity, in particular in respect of mov-
ies; and (most important of all) the family
and sexuality, focusing particularly on con-
traception and abortion. Dr. Jones analyses
with precision the specific facts of this en-
counter between the Church and moderni-
ty, but what makes his work so important
is his ability to understand and describe the
bigger picture, the overall theme encom-
passing particular actions and events. This
book is an account, unmatched in its accu-
racy, of the crucial issues facing the Church
today and how they have come to be.

Three Books !
1 The Catholic Church & the Cultural Revolution
1 The Jews and Moral Subversion
1 The Catholic Church and the Jews
By E. Michael Jones Edited by John Beaumont

Each Paperback Book is $19.00

Plus $6.00 shipping for one or all three books
Ebooks Available on Amazon $9.99

206 Marquette Ave.
South Bend, IN  46617
CHANGE SERVICE REQUESTED
Capitalism as State-Sponsored Usury
Barren Metal:
A History of Capitalism as the
Conflict Between Labor and Usury
Hardback, 1,456 pp, $69 plus $8 S&H
To Order
Call Fidelity Press at (574) 289-9786
Online at www.culturewars.com
Or Mail Checks Payable to
Fidelity Press:
206 Marquette Avenue
South Bend, IN 46617 USA
Non-Profit Org.
U.S. Postage
PAID
Permit No. 5
New Haven, KY
T he carnival atmosphere at Zuccotti park in Oc-
tober of 2011 was deceptive. The naked wom-
an having her body painted red and the drum circle,
like the patently false reports in the main-stream me-
dia, were sideshows that distracted the intent observ-
er from the real meaning of the Occupy Wall Street
protest, which could only be deciphered by reading
the small, hand-made signs of the protestors. The city
block that encompassed Zuccotti Park was lined with
people holding home-made signs, most of which dealt
with economic issues. “Debt is slavery” was a common
theme, with special emphasis on student debt. “F**k un-
paid internships” was another. After a while it became
apparent that there was focus after all, even if no one
could articulate it. This protest was about the conflict
between usury and labor. Barren Metal is an attempt to
return the science of economics back to where Adam
Smith foundn it when he wrote the Wealth of Nations,
back to its proper matrix in moral philosophy.
ORDER
“A compelling historical exploration that exposes the fundamental flaws of Capitalism:
unjust wages and usury. An entertaining read.”
- Anthony Santelli II, Ph.D.
CEO, AES Capital and Co-Founder, Catholic Finance Association
This is a powerful collection of case studies from almost a millennium of economic his-
tory. It examines the human dynamics of the winners and losers of capitalism through
its triumphal march to the present. It is good history with enough reflection on theory
to provide a crisp critique of economics and its moral connections. - Garrick Small
Queensland University
“This is a fantastic book. It is the most thorough economic history of the West.  If you
want to know the origin of our economic and social ills you must read this book.”  
- Brian M. McCall
Orpha and Maurice Merrill Professor in Law, University of Oklahom