Europe: will Brexit kick-start the Christian restoration – or is it too late?

 From the website of the Lepanto Foundation – dated 7 December, 2018

The roots of the crisis in the European Union (1991 – 2011)

The economic, social and political crisis which the EU is undergoing is there for all to see. In a few days it will be the 20th anniversary of the Maastricht treaty, signed on 11 December 1991, which brought the European Union into being. Professor Roberto de Mattei, who was then president of the Lepanto Cultural Centre and who is now president of the Lepanto Foundation, was one of the first in Europe to express his criticisms of the Maastricht Treaty in a letter sent to all MEPs in Strasbourg on 11 May 1992, the day before the speech given by Queen Elizabeth II to the European Parliament. His analysis, which preceded by nearly 10 years the entry into force of the euro, invites us to reflect on our future.

Prof. Roberto de Mattei’s letter to the Members of the European Parliament.

Rome – May 11th, 1992

Dear Sir /Madam,

On behalf of the Lepanto Cultural Centre, of which I am President, I take the liberty of submitting for your attention certain reflections (1) on the Maastricht Treaty, stipulated by the Heads of State and Government of the Twelve on the 11th of December 1991, to launch the new international organization called “European Union”.

This Treaty, formally signed on the 7th of February 1992 and due to be endorsed by the respective national Parliaments by the 31st of December 1992, is arousing increasing doubts and perplexities in many quarters: will it really unite and strengthen Europe, or will it plunge her into chaos? This letter aims to stimulate discussion on this capital point.

A nihilist dream of the destruction of Europe

The year 1992 marks the 500th anniversary of the Discovery and civilization of America by Europeans, yet European and Christian Civilization is on trial.

Europe is being accused of having imposed its civilised patterns on the world, instead of “opening itself to the Other”, “to what Europe is not, never was and will never be” (2); it should therefore deny itself to recover the “otherness” it rejected, viz. barbarians, Indians, Muslims, all bearers of a “cultural message” which we must now adopt. Europe should therefore renounce its “secular ambition of historical centralization whose symbol is Columbus” (3) in order to “de-civilize” itself and sink into tribalism.

According to the historical vision by these “theoreticians of chaos”, Europe should be founded on the “loss of foundations” (4) and “not identify with itself” (5). This is nihilism.

No historical and cultural identities would deserve to survive because in the world nothing is stable and permanent and everything is devoid of order and significance: this Nothingness is the only reality which is to assert itself in history and society: “We must acknowledge the historically positive role of Nothing / … / We should base our European citizenship on Nothing” (6).

The real nature of the Maastricht Treaty

These nihilist theses on Europe, set out in journals, books, symposia, amplified by the mass-media and abundantly echoed by politicians, are neither to be ignored nor forgotten when debating such an ambitious political accord as the Maastricht Treaty.

It is not a matter of being generally for or against Europe, but of addressing the real background issue: What kind of Europe are we aspiring to? What kind of Europe is envisaged by the Maastricht Treaty? Political and diplomatic agreements do not simply boil down to technical formulas, but reflect political patterns, visions of the world and ideal aspirations. Which ones in this particular case?  Click here to read the rest of Professor Roberto de Mattei’s prophetic letter – it is lengthy, and thoroughly documented, and very well worth reading in its entirety. 

Comment: 

One highly significant section in the Professor’s letter relates to the rise of Islam in Europe:  “In terms of the Treaty, European political parties will “express the political will of Union nationals” (Title II, art. 138A). A “European Muslim Party”, owing to its deep-rooted presence in all territories of the Union, its power of political and religious cohesion, its financial resources and its international connections, might become the leading party in the European Parliament. This would imply Muslim political domination in Europe, peacefully won, or rather, peacefully handed over by Europeans themselves.” 

Professor de Mattei goes on to point out the possibility of this same dominance in the member states.  Logically, then, we must ask, might Brexit actually contribute to the restoration of Christianity – Christian belief and culture – both here in the UK and on the continent of Europe?  If you have any practical ideas on how this might be effected, share them with us. Or maybe you think the restoration of Christianity in Europe is a pipe dream?

Is the UK no longer free? 

The treatment of Tommy Robinson, coupled with the contrived outrage over Boris Johnson’s ‘burka’ remarks this week, do beg the question: is Tucker Carlson right to question whether, in fact, the UK really is a free land?   And why are the Catholic bishops not asking the same question? 

Comments invited…   

Commission: de-Christianise UK – Give More influence To Non-Christians

 

crucifixion2Britain is no longer a Christian country and should stop acting as if it is, a major inquiry into the place of religion in modern society has concluded, provoking a furious backlash from ministers and the Church of England.

30114_Koran_Volksausgabe.indd

 


A two-year commission, chaired by the former senior judge Baroness Butler-Sloss and involving leading religious leaders from all faiths, calls for public life in Britain to be systematically de-Christianised.  Hindu Symbol

 

It says that the decline of churchgoing and the rise of Islam and other faiths mean a “new settlement” is needed for religion in the UK, giving more official influence to non-religious voices and those of non-Christian faiths.  Click here to read the entire article

Comments invited 

Church Youth Groups Destroy Faith…

A study commissioned by a protestant organization has found that Christian youth groups, with an infantile approach to the faith and aImage focus heavily on being “hip” to this fallen culture, are a predominate factor in driving many young people from Christianity.  Mind, this study looked at Christians in general and not Catholics, but the Church has mimicked disastrous protestant programs in recent decades and has reaped the same whirlwind of devastation:

A new study might reveal why a majority of Christian teens abandon their faith upon high school graduation. Some time ago, Christian pollster George Barna documented that 61 percent of today’s 20-somethings who had been churched at one point during their teen years are now spiritually disengaged. They do not attend church, read their Bible or pray.

According to a new five-week, three-question national survey sponsored by the National Center for Family-Integrated Churches (NCFIC), the youth group itself is the problem. Fifty-five percent of American Christians are concerned with modern youth ministry because it’s too shallow and too entertainment-focused, resulting in an inability to train mature believers. But even if church youth groups had the gravitas of Dallas Theological Seminary, 36 percent of today’s believers are convinced youth groups themselves are not even biblical……

……..“Today’s church has created peer dependency,” McManus says. “The inherent result of youth groups is that teenagers in the church are focused on their peers, not their parents or their pastors. It’s a foreign sociology that leads to immaturity, a greater likelihood of sexual activity, drug experimentation and a rejection of the authority of the Word of God.

I was going to go on about the Prussian school model and the isolation from the family it tends to engender in children (indeed, it was designed to do just that), and how it is unsurprising that when Christians – including the original Christians, Catholics – perpetuate this model by dividing up families and having special Masses for this group, special programs for that……it tends to be self-defeating.

The family is the Church in microcosm. As goes the family, so will go the Church, and vice versa.  Anything that tends to negatively affect the family – such as educating children away from parental influence, with huge emphasis given to how their peers perceive them – will negatively effect the Church.  Lifeteen Masses, CCD, teen youth groups with often highly questionable programs – all these things at least tangentially weaken family unity.  They also help further inculcate children in the culture of peer dependence noted above, and when many young adults today are not just unfaithful regarding their religious duties, but are out and out atheist-communist enemies of the Faith, it is not surprising that so many of these young souls fall away.

So many of these programs are adopted almost unthinkingly, in a spirit of imitation that demonstrates both a lack of understanding of the Faith and of human nature.  Catholic parishes have “vacation bible schools” because protestant sects have them. They even use the same, protestant-generated teaching materials!  That’s just one small example, I could continue on and on through the entire panoply of mimicry. It shows how deranged from the right understanding and practice of the Faith so many in positions of authority in the Church have become.

Anyway, go to Mass as a family.  Don’t go to goofy, gimmicky “special” Masses.  Home school.  Pray together daily. Carefully monitor your kid’s activities, especially on the computer. You can’t guarantee you’re children will remain faithful throughout their lives, but if you do the above, demonstrate virtue, and avoid obvious vice you will immeasurably increase the likelihood that your kids won’t fall away from the Faith.  Source

Comment

I could not be less surprised at the above findings. If anything insults the intelligence (and potential) of young people it’s keeping them rooted in their limited experience and catering for their imaginary need for perpetual entertainment.  Or maybe you disagree?

Can the “immature” be “good” Catholics?

Recently, in the context of discussing the research findings purporting to show that atheists are more intelligent than believers, I found myself in conversation with a variety of readers on the subject of maturity, on whether it is possible to be a truly mature adult Catholic while lacking  any of the qualities generally associated with mature adulthood: check out the article below to identify which of the qualities on the list you think defines a truly mature adult, without which it’s just not possible to be a “good” Catholic…

How can one classify a true adult?  Many people directly attribute age to adulthood.  The problem with this methodology becomes evident when you discuss the topic with various people of different cultural backgrounds.  If you ask each of them what age they believe constitutes the point at which a person progresses from childhood into adulthood, their answers will always be different.  Why?  Because every one of the answers are based on subjective opinion.  Adulthood is not based on age; it’s based strictly on emotional maturity.

So what constitutes emotional maturity, and thus adulthood?  Here are 20 defining characteristics of a true adult:

  1. Realizing that maturity is  an ongoing process, not a state, and continuously striving for self  improvement.
  2. Able to manage personal jealousy and feelings of envy.
  3. Has the ability to listen to  and evaluate the viewpoints of others.
  4. Maintains patience and flexibility on a daily basis.
  5. Accepts the fact that you can’t always win, and learns from mistakes instead of whining about the outcome.
  6. Does not overanalyze negative points, but instead looks for the positive points in the subject  being analyzed.
  7. Is able to differentiate between rational decision making and emotional impulse.
  8. Understands that no skill or talent can overshadow the act of preparation.
  9. Capable of managing temper and anger.
  10. Keeps other people’s feeling in mind and limits selfishness.
  11. Being able to distinguish between ‘needs’ and ‘wants’.
  12. Shows confidence without being overly arrogant.
  13. Handles pressure with self composure.
  14. Takes ownership and responsibility of personal actions.
  15. Manages personal fears.
  16. Able to see the various shades of grey between the extremes of black and white in every situation.
  17. Accepts negative feedback as  a tool for self improvement.
  18. Aware of personal  insecurities and self-esteem.
  19. Able to separate true love from transitory infatuation.
  20. Understanding that open communication is the key to progression.

Above all, true adults do what they have to do when it is required of them, and they do what they want when they can.  They are able to distinguish between the two and manage their time and efforts accordingly.  Source