You were probably unaware that there was anything of note going on at the Vatican this month. Even if you’re a diehard Catholic interested in the inner workings of Church politics, there’s enough going on in the wider world to keep you distracted. We’re less than a month away from a major national election here in the United States (early voting is underway at this point), two hurricanes just wreaked havoc across North Carolina and Florida (and the current administration has failed epically at responding appropriately), and the war trumpets of World War III seem to be getting louder and clearer much more rapidly than any of us would like. Meanwhile, at the Vatican, just under 400 clerics, religious, and lay Catholics are sitting at round tables, seeking to finish a process that began nearly three years ago and which we were promised would come to an end last year. For those of us who are watching the proceedings from home, it’s still just a “meeting on meetings” — a process that Cardinal Christophe Pierre, apostolic nuncio to the U.S. reportedly compared to a lower ring of hell in Dante’s Inferno — and interest in it is slowly petering out. The synod’s agenda is not entirely clear to those of us who aren’t sitting at round tables in the St. Pope Paul VI Hall, but we do know a couple of things: First, the female diaconate (perhaps the controversial issue the synod was supposed to comment on) is not on the agenda. Back in March, the pope handed that issue to a study group, but he never gave it a deadline for when to turn in a report. Then, in May, he told 60 Minutes in no uncertain terms that a female diaconate involving the sacrament of Holy Orders was not in the works. So it seems the issue is mostly resolved. One imagines the media will continue to stir up controversy over female ordination for years to come, but at least there’s a definitive statement that one can point to as assurance that major changes to the way women are involved in parish life are not coming to the Catholic Church anytime soon. What may be on the agenda, whether the Vatican hierarchy likes it or not, is blowback to Fiducia supplicans, the document released by the Dicastery of the Doctrine of Faith (DDF) last December, which allows Catholic clergy to bless homosexual couples (although it does not permit them to bless the union between those couples). (READ MORE: Vatican Scrambles to Clarify Same-Sex Blessings. Is It Enough?) The Pillar reported that during a press briefing last week connected with the Synod on Synodality, the archbishop of Rabat, Morocco, Cardinal Cristóbal López Romero, criticized the way Fiducia supplicans was released. “It would’ve been better that [it] underwent a synodal path. It didn’t come out of the synod, but from the Dicastery of the Doctrine of Faith, without us bishops knowing it was coming, without being consulted. That’s why it’s not strange that there were many reactions against some parts,” he said. One imagines that discussion of the document, which had left many African clerics annoyed (ultimately, the Vatican saw fit to exempt the entire continent from Fiducia supplicans), is likely to take place — especially since it was something of a betrayal of the synodal way. Here, it would be remiss not to say that the Synodal Way may have had some positive outcomes in the last couple of years. As Ed Condon pointed out at the Pillar, “[I]f one wanted to point to a visible fruit of ‘synodality’ over the course of the process, it would seem to be the ability of bishops from places like Africa to assert themselves, and the weight of the Church moral authority, with confidence in the face of minority calls for radical change.” Condon is, of course, right. African bishops have proved themselves far more traditional than some of their loud European (and even sometimes American) counterparts. The Synodal Way has given them yet another opportunity to make their voices heard. Not only have African bishops pushed back against minority calls (usually coming from Germany) to embrace radical change in Church teaching or practice, it’s likely due to their influence that there won’t be major and permanent structural change to the way the Catholic Church runs things — the Vatican doesn’t seem inclined to develop a permanent parliamentary system for governance anytime soon. Even though we have yet to define what “synodality” looks like in the long term (stay tuned for more in July 2025) and even though there is plenty that the Synod should probably address in terms of global issues to avoid being condemned by future generations, nobody’s worst fears from 2021 and 2022 have been realized. Instead, the synod seems to have petered out into irrelevance, the way most “meetings on meetings” tend to do. The post The Synod on Synodality: Petering Out Into Irrelevance? appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

I subscribe to John Adams’s view of the relationship of religion to the politics in our republic. The country needs people who govern their own lives in the light of God. Only such people are competent to steer the ship of state away from the shoals of corruption and ruin. Without people having an inner map, the country would survive only by chance. My first political concern, then, has been deeply tied in with my own religious commitment, in which life comes first — Therefore choose life, said Moses in Deuteronomy.  The greatest disasters to the human cause in the times that have informed me were the great dictatorships. I was born when Hitler was already dead and Stalin had but a year to go. The stench of their shambles, however, permeated the air, and clung to the people who had been through their dark night and who bore its wounds. To show that the evil was real, Mao was just ready to make his run at the record of total deaths caused — the Babe Ruth of death. So as haunting memory and as unfolding horror, they figured large, unparalleled in their voracious appetite for human life and their contempt for the human spirit.  Jewish traditions teach that our public concerns must build upward from what is closest and best known, the place where we are most knowledgeable, competent, and, most importantly, loving. I saw the people whom the horror had touched, and I lived with the knowledge that such things are possible, and even probable if we fail to recognize the next one rising, and accept full responsibility for pre-empting the existential threat that he represents. Hitler’s Holocaust eradicated a full third of all the Jews in the world; Stalin killed off many, especially the religious, and had Soviet Jews in his crosshairs when, blessedly, he died. Hitler and Stalin both had interests in the Middle East, and so did more than a few Nazis as well as the Soviet government. Like the Wuhan laboratory, they were cooking up virulent, function-enhanced viruses of the mind. Linking onto the worst of religious tradition, just as Hitler had done in Germany, they developed the exterminationist Jew hatred that for more than a century has tried to eliminate what is now the world’s largest Jewish community, Israel, after having destroyed and expelled other Jewish communities that had been present elsewhere in the region since the days of Nebuchadnezzar, millennia ago. America has identified itself at its inception with the ancient people of Israel — look at the hundreds of Biblical place names all across our land. Read the early sermons of the earliest preachers. America identified itself with the fight against the Jew hatred that was at the core of Nazism. Our young men and women gave their lifeblood to extinguish that regime of hate from the earth. America has stood with Israel for decades as it has been relentlessly targeted for extinction by its relentless and hate-filled enemies. This is at the top of my own political commitment, ahead of any party. I voted for Carter in ’76 because of Gerald Ford’s notification to Prime Minister Rabin that he was going to cut off aid to Israel for not yielding back more land to Egypt, which had nearly extinguished Israel in its Yom Kippur surprise attack. Carter led me to vote for Reagan in ’80 through his increasing siding with Sadat against Menachem Begin as well as his colossal blunder of enabling the antisemitic mullahs to take over Iran. Bush the Elder replaced the magnificent George Schulz with the Israel-hating James Baker and so lost my vote in ’92. In this light, the argument for Trump is a simple one for me.  Obama initiated a policy of deliberately downgrading America’s relationship with Israel while simultaneously (and at first secretly) planning on appeasing Iran. Donald Trump reversed both policies: Israel was backed warmly, and Iran was isolated and impoverished due to effective sanctions. As a result, the Sunni states felt empowered to warm their relations with Israel, eventually resulting in the Abraham Accords, the first peace treaties with Israel and its Arab neighbors that resulted in warm partnerships rather merely an end to open hostilities. Iran’s penury severely crimped its ability to fund its terrorist clients in Gaza, Lebanon, Yemen, and its global reach (such as the bombing of the Jewish community center in Argentina that had resulted in 85 deaths).  When Joe Biden took over, he immediately reversed the Iran policy, taking its Houthi clients off our terrorist list, opening up its frozen cash and allowing its oil exports, with a total cash flow during his presidency of hundreds of billions of dollars. Flush with money, Iran opened up the pipelines to its terror clients, and as a direct result, we had an ever-accelerating missile bombardment of Israel from Hamas, Hamas’ October 7 orgy of murder, rape, and kidnapping, Hezbollah’s massive bombardment of Israel, Iran’s first two direct attacks on Israel via missiles and drones, the Houthis’ takeover of the Red Sea shipping lanes, and the Houthis’ attacks on Israel. Biden presided over this disastrous collapse of the peace into fiery chaos. But this was not enough: he tossed gasoline on the fire through tolerating the UN’s alignment with Israel’s enemies, through taking no decisive steps to deter Houthi pirating closing of the sea lanes, and through ineffective resistance to international tribunals taking up vicious lawfare against Israel that defies the norms of international law and of our own concepts of sovereignty and liberty.  What’s to choose? Ms. Harris is on every side of the Israel issue, as she is on every other issue of import. For her, it is all just a laugh on the way to unmerited promotions, the story of her career and about the only thing for which she has displayed a real talent. She has the feeling of a character fresh out of the pages of Brave New World, ready to pop some soma, play a round of centrifugal bumblepuppy, give a tug on the zipper, and sing “Orgy Porgy, Ford and Fun.” The Obama/Biden crew would be left unmolested to cut Israel loose and join the young Ivy Leaguers in getting a warm Facebook commendation from the Khomeini for helping him finally destroy the Little Satan, Israel, as his first step towards destroying the Great Satan — America. As long as we hold fast to our First Amendment, none of us are compelled to accept any one religious framework to guide our politics. That allows us to see that one of the most important blessings of our shared religious heritage is to realize the only valid compulsion when it comes to God is the inner voice of our soul, created in God’s image. America’s soul has long aligned it with the cause of the Jewish people. This was true at its start, when George Washington wrote to Newport’s Jews that all were citizens here on an equal basis. It was true though our mighty and successful effort to shatter Nazism. It is the soul of our long commitment to securing Israel’s security in the face of Nazism’s Middle Eastern heirs.  This last year has made it clear that this commitment to Israel is nothing less than the choice for civilization against a new barbarianism, armed by science and defended by a new sophistry that exudes a nihilistic contempt for all we have ever valued. Forget the noxious froth of the Harris campaign — that is where the actual danger to democracy crouches, ready to pounce. That’s the choice that I see. My vote will express this viewpoint and my affirmation of the civilization that depends upon us to carry on a few more years, while we raise a new generation who knows its precious value.  I trust and pray you see it this way as well. My prayers are with you and this great country as you make the solemn and consequential choice this election offers. The post For Israel and Civilization, Vote Trump appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

My favorite charities are those that feed people. In recent years I have taken up the custom of delivering holiday packages to indigent Jews in Toronto in behalf of Chabad and did so again last week just before Rosh Hashana, the Jewish New Year. At some point during this holiday most Jews gather together with family and friends for a festive meal. The packages that I delivered contained all of the fixings that a single person needed to enjoy such a holiday meal plus some traditional greetings, prayers and blessings. In a few rare instances where the recipient was not living alone, I delivered two and, in a couple of instances, as many as three packages to one address — but these were rare exceptions to the rule. For the most part these impoverished Jews live alone.  Chabad’s Outreach and Inclusion Chabad is technically a Hasidic sect. If one looks at a gathering of hardcore members one observes a sea of black hats, black suits, and unkempt beards, all of which to the unknowing eye makes this branch indistinguishable from other Hasidic camps. These are just a few of the reasons why the UN, like the League of Nations before it, deserves to be disbanded. At prayer services the rabbi will wear a bekishe, the traditional long black frock coat, and usually there are a few black suited men among the congregants — but as for the rest of the congregation anything goes. The head is covered but beneath that one finds novelty t-shirts, jeans, occasional tattoos (which, by the way, are forbidden in Jewish law) and all sorts of sundry attire up to and including designer sneakers. Chabad is very much about outreach and inclusion and has been very successful in this respect. It has become legendary among Jews, almost a joke, that Chabad shuls are to be found everywhere, even in the remotest parts of the world, and it is by far the fastest growing denomination among Jews. The delivery of these packages is part of its outreach. It is designed to bring comfort to poor Jews and connect them with the wider community. (READ MORE from Max Dublin: Has Canada’s Taxman Been Weaponized?) This year when I arrived to pick up my packages the rabbi asked if I could handle twenty-five, a rather larger number than usual, and when I said that I could he added another one for good measure. To the reader this may not sound like a large number but this is not a door-to-door operation in a Jewish slum. There is no such thing in Toronto. The Jewish poor are pinpricks scattered all over town and this year I found myself driving all the way down to the waterfront and then up again through Liberty Village and the Junction in the west end. Moreover, there’s seldom anywhere to park legally and it’s often difficult to gain access to the designated abodes. As one might expect these are marginal and not super functional people. Some suffer from what would appear to be a mild form of mental illness or come from a foreign land such as Russia and have not managed to acclimate themselves to their adopted country. Some live in public housing but due to shyness or fear are reluctant to answer their buzzer if, in fact, they have one. I remember one Russian émigré who answered the door dressed in his best shabby suit. When I tried to hand him his package, he refused to take it because he said he could not afford it. It took a while till I was able to bring home to him that it was a gift but then he decided that he was too proud to take it. In the end I prevailed upon him to accept the package and he was ever so grateful, but I wished he hadn’t been. Another one was an elderly lady who answered the door wearing a threadbare housecoat. She was very welcoming and spoke to me effusively in the Yiddish dialect of a Polish Jew. Her sweetness, warmth, and enthusiasm and the cadence of her language reminded me of my own mom of blessed memory.  Those who did not live in public housing lived in slummy little buildings, the shabbiest of rooming houses that by their crumbling, musty, smelly nature smacked you in the face as soon as you entered the front door. Following years of gentrification there is not much of such housing stock left in Toronto, and the landlords should long ago have been cited. On the other hand, the rent must still be very cheap if it can be afforded by those on public assistance, and what is most striking in such circumstances is that the occupants are trying their best to live independently and with dignity. Their look and circumstance are reminiscent of the photographs taken by Roman Vishniac in Poland before the Holocaust. They are also reminiscent of the photos taken by Bruce Davidson in his magnificent album East 100th Street. What is most striking about these Jews is their lack of grievance coupled with quiet dignity. They are not the angry poor who sometimes, if one examines their situation closely, aren’t really poor at all but just like playing the victim card. They are the invisible poor, hidden because they have basically retreated from a world that has proven too much for them. Chabad’s influence and work is not lost on rather more secular Jewish and non-Jewish leaders. When its spiritual leader Rabbi Menachem Schneerson was alive top world leaders used to seek audiences with him just as they do with the Pope. On July 2 Chabad of Toronto sponsored a big event in Toronto’s Roy Thomson Symphony Hall, and I attended because David Friedman, Trump’s ambassador to Israel, was the keynote speaker. In his speech Friedman stated that though he was not a member of Chabad — and nor, incidentally am I — he considered it to be the most important Jewish organization in the world. He recounted his role in the behind-the-scenes activity in the Trump administration leading up to moving the American embassy to Jerusalem. Before making the final decision Trump canvassed his cabinet for advice and every last one of his cabinet members said that they were against the idea because they feared that it would light up the Arab street. Trump summoned Friedman to Washington for a month to try to persuade them to go along but to no avail. In the end Friedman counselled that he should go ahead anyway. He said that one must not give in to fear of the crybullies in the Arab street. Trump proceeded with the move and, as it turned out, there were very few fireworks in the Arab street. There is a fringe faction of Hasidim called Neturei Karta (NK) that repudiates the legitimacy of the Jewish state basically by claiming that it was reestablished by Jewish people and not through the coming of the Messiah. I have seen them — or perhaps imposters of them — mingling with pro-Hamas Jew-hating demonstrators. On the other hand, the philosophy of the Chabad movement is quite the opposite of that. Chabad has long maintained that Israel should never exchange land for empty, treacherous, and manipulative promises of peace. Nothing more than the present war in which Israel is painfully clawing back lost territory in both the south and the north has vindicated the Chabad position. (READ MORE: A Very Unhappy Anniversary) The Fading United Nations At the Chabad event Friedman told the audience that his advice to Trump was inspired by the famous passage in Isaiah, “They shall beat their swords into ploughshares and their spears into pruning hooks.” He maintained that it was the successful moving of the American embassy that laid the groundwork for the ensuing Abraham Accords. This famous passage is carved on what is known as the Isaiah wall of the United Nations. But like its predecessor the League of Nations, the UN has failed miserably in keeping the peace. On the contrary, members of its agencies, UNRWA in Gaza and UNIFIL in Lebanon, have collaborated with terrorist war mongers Hamas and Hezbollah. Now UNIFIL, which was supposed to keep Hezbollah north of the Litani river, is refusing to get out of the way during the IDF ground operation in south Lebanon. Moreover, by espousing and promoting the crazy covid lockdown and the green agenda — that, among other things, calls for the curtailing of food production on the planet — the UN has exacerbated the problems of the poor rather than alleviate them. These are just a few of the reasons why the UN, like the League of Nations before it, deserves to be disbanded and replaced by a truly worthy and moral world body. The post Chabad Fulfills Its Mission, the UN Does Not appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

We are in the midst of quite a storm — with the aftermath of Hurricane Helene, Hurricane Milton, and the political climate this election season. In this episode of The Weekend Spectator, Paul and Grace address various topics, including the recent hurricanes, euthanasia in Canada, Elon Musk, Bob Casey Jr., and the crucial Pennsylvania race. This past week, Paul Kengor stopped by the Butler Farm Show grounds, the site of the infamous assassination attempt, as former President Trump held one of his largest rallies of all time. Elon Musk’s special appearance at Trump’s rally made headlines, as he has become heavily involved in the effort to re-elect President Trump. Watch the full episode to find out more: READ Paul and Grace’s work here and here. Hurricane Outrage: Where is Harris? Kamala Seeks Shelter From Hurricane Donald The Weekend Spectator Ep. 15: Iran Steps Out From Behind the Proxies The post <i>The Weekend Spectator</i> Ep. 16: Hurricanes, Trump in Butler, the Rise of Euthanisia in Canada, and Bob Casey Jr. appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Venice, Italy — A few days ago, when Ethel Kennedy passed away, I was in faraway Italy. Padua to be exact. But I did not want her passing to go unnoticed by me. She was a special kind of Democrat to me. Her sense of humor and sense of fun extended to Republicans. Even the Wall Street Journal noted that in its sparkling obit of her. She was famous for her sense of fun, which she kept up despite being struck by tragedy after tragedy. She had a sense of fun which she maintained especially after the grind of politics was over for the day. I remember one particular evening at her home, Hickory Hill, when she stood in the doorway greeting guest after guest at that historic manse. She had even included me among her guests as improbable as that might sound. She could not have been more effervescent when she greeted me. “Oh, I know why you are here,” she smiled. “You are Kathleen’s guest, and she is so-oo conservative.” Ethel laughed. Kathleen is her daughter and former lieutenant governor of Maryland. She may be conservative on some things, but I had utterly failed to convince her of Milton Friedman’s free market economics. We settled on human rights violations and Catholic values. But Kathleen and Ethel for that matter shared with me the belief that friendship (and patriotism) always trump politics. Theirs was of the kind that recently was seen in the splendid movie, Reagan. In that film there is a scene where Tip O’Neill appears at the bedside of the recently shot President Ronald Reagan and slips a Rosary over the President’s hand. They shared a joke about both being Irish. Politics could wait for the next day. That night at Hickory Hill and on other memorable occasions we all abjured politics for the evening. The only thing Ethel would not abjure was joking about the Rosary. She was a daily communicant and now her journey is over. This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license. The post Ethel Kennedy, RIP appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Following daily polls on this year’s election can lead to intellectual vertigo, especially among those who picture Mr. Trump sporting a Hitler mustache, or others who struggle to decipher policy views buried in cackling Kamala’s word salads. America’s media noise machines breathlessly report that this or that state is Trump’s to lose; no, make that Harris’ to lose, who last night or last week “surged” to a one-point lead, or two points, or something. In fact, if Groseclose’s work is considered devastating, Attkisson’s review of The Narrative is no less than horrifying. It’s the same story for the rest of the battleground states: either candidate is up here, down there, gains a point or two someplace in the Midwest, only to be knocked down a statistical smidgeon somewhere else that experts insist is a “must-win” contest. The only constant in this babble fest of numbers is confusion among many voters who try to make sense of it all. Those whose brains haven’t been fried by the fabricated insanity of Trump hatred might conclude that the election shouldn’t be close, especially since Kamala Harris and her ilk have supported policies that no sane, normal person would entertain for a second: massive invasion of illegal aliens — including thousands of felons, defunding police, coddling criminals, showing disdain for women who object to males changing in their locker rooms, funding surgery for mentally ill youngsters suffering from sexual dysphoria, mandating that everyone be judged on the basis of race, class, or gender — the list goes on. For all that, however, one hears about the importance of voting against Trump. What about voting against Harris? The Media Noise Machine Shapes Elections Inconceivable, Vizzini might say (The Princess Bride), and for good reason. Democrats have had the electoral deck stacked in their favor for a long time, as Tim Groseclose documented in his meticulous study about political bias, Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts the American Mind, published in 2011. (READ MORE: Reagan Conservatism Is Alive and Well) Among Professor Groseclose’s conclusions, two points stand out. First, in his words: “My results suggest that media bias aids Democratic candidates by about 8 to 10 percentage points in a typical election. I find, for instance, that if media bias didn’t exist, then John McCain would have defeated Barack Obama 56 – 42, instead of losing 53 – 46.” And presumably, Republicans would have won elections after Obama’s “transformational” exploits in office, including the 2020 contest that advanced a senile cypher to the presidency. Indeed, given Groseclose’s documentation, it’s surprising that Republicans win any elections, especially at the national level. The second point centers on reactions to Groseclose’s work, which he labeled a “firestorm:” denunciations by “hundreds, and maybe thousands, of left-wing blogs.” His study was “highly flawed,” and he should “be fired IMMEDIATELY” from his position as professor of political science at UCLA for “that cockamamie load of bulls**t.” Groseclose’s editor said that he had never seen anything like the reaction to Left Turn, and he hoped the author’s home address wasn’t available. Groseclose himself characterized such responses as “vicious,” certainly an understatement, given the arrogance of his detractors and the vitriol they heaped upon him. For all his efforts, he still received several job offers from other universities, in spite of the considerable smearing of his work and reputation. Speaking of which, scholars at odds with their left-wing colleagues should take some comfort in the fact that half of the country regularly receives the same treatment by liberal luminaries, especially those ensconced in America’s media complex. Perhaps the most trenchant observer is investigative reporter, Sharyl Attkisson, whose career brought her into the belly of the beast, populated by denizens committed to safeguarding The Narrative at all costs. This term has been bandied about frequently over the past decade, but casual listeners might not appreciate its prevalence or its devotees’ ferocious determination to defend it at all costs. In fact, if Groseclose’s work is considered devastating, Attkisson’s review of The Narrative is no less than horrifying. The Narrative is the story line that embraces every event in society, public and private. Its goal, in her words, “is to embed chosen ideas so deeply within society that they are no longer questioned — scratch that — so that questions are not permitted … Contrary views, facts, and science must be shoved down the memory hole — disappeared — as though they had never existed.” No wonder that she begins her recent book, Slanted, with copious examples from George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four. In fact, Attkisson’s review of American media practices is as chilling as Orwell’s fictional treatment of Soviet totalitarianism. And efforts by liberal elites to demonize opposition (especially Donald Trump), eradicate “disinformation,” and expunge the Second Amendment are inspired by identical goals, best summarized by Orwell: “To conquer the whole surface of the earth and to extinguish once and for all the possibility of independent thought.” Anything but a Landslide In short, with the goals clear and the methods set in place, the liberal media establishment has been cranking the machinery to ensure close elections, regardless of the quality of their candidates, the messages they deliver, or the characteristics of their opposition. (READ MORE: Democrats’ Homicidal Rhetoric Inspires Trump-Hating Gunmen) The last thing rulers of the controlling heights of American institutions want is a Reagan-like landslide, even though the administrative apparatus is mostly unaffected. The best way to prevent such a possibility undoubtedly lurks in liberal thoughts, bringing to mind a comment made by Franklin Roosevelt when he began his presidency. An adviser suggested that if he solved the Great Depression, he would go down in history as the country’s best president. FDR said that if he didn’t, he would be America’s last president, presumably ending the possibility of future elections. It is a tragedy of American politics that FDR’s fear is the current liberals’ dream. Marvin J. Folkertsma is an author of several books, retired professor, and former longtime chair of the Department of Political Science at Grove City College.     The post The Race Is Close Due to Our Shameless Media appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Democrats Are Hitting the Panic Button Early

Why Aren’t Christians Voting This Year?

Cowardice or Conviction: Why Christians Must Choose Trump to Uphold Biblical Principles

A Quick Bible Study Vol. 237: What the Bible Says About Truth - Old Testament