Is Pope Michael behind this?

I mean, is Pope Michael behind the kind of proposal Robb Thurston made, below.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

I think the Christian militias have a right to defend Christian populations.

old link from 2014:

Muslims Rape Christian Women, 600 Christians Take Up Arms And Make One Final And Heroic Stand Against Muslim Jihadists
By Theodore Shoebat, on July 7, 2014
http://shoebat.com/2014/07/07/muslims-rape-christian-women-600-christians-take-arms-make-one-final-heroic-stand-muslim-jihadists/

Robb Thurston

In the USA, the KKK should do that. They are worthy!

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Are they?

Aren't they still supporting eugenicism and things like that?

Robb Thurston

Isn't the Pope still Infallible? No, just let the KKK protect the USA abd if you ask too many questions, you are a Radical Jihadist. Capiche

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Has HH Pope Michael endorsed KKK?

And as for "abd if you ask too many questions, you are a Radical Jihadist" - you sound like a thug, not like a Catholic?

Also, a Pope being infallible does NOT mean he can secretly give an order and that order is also covered by infallibility, if such should be the case.

Popes are infallible in certain contexts, like speaking up before the whole Church.

If a Pope should make a deal with FBI, CIA, KKK, KGB, Gestapo or whatever, such a deal is NOT covered by Papal infallibility and a Catholic is perfectly free to oppose it.

I hope you get that distinction, which was hammered down by your possible patron Saint, St Robert Bellarmine, in his controversies with James VI & I.

I hope HH is aware of the distinction, if he is not, he is too bad in theology, perhaps even a heretic, to be a Pope.

Robb Thurston

The KKK is a society of knights who are engaged in home guard. I propose that the Muslims should be suppressed under the rulership of a pious Christian Emperor, and the KKK has that Emperor, the Grand Dragon. O/K you go on quibbling, and women get raped, boys are forced into concubinage, Christian art is effaced as "idolatry", and so on. You want an election and popular votes on this, you want liberalism, but all that which smacks of liberalism was condemned in a Bull: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Execrabilis". (1) secure Christendom with a Great Emperor; (2) convene many monasteries to consider ethics of converting the Muslim to the Peace of the Christian Emperor. When Mecca and Medina are Christian shrines, we can consider conciliation of local cultures. In the mean time, secure women and children, as even a sea captain knows best.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

"The KKK is a society of knights who are engaged in home guard."

The Templars were a society of knights, and they were condemned by the Council of Vienne in Isère. 1313.

Not due to difference between Home Guard or Crusades to the lands occupied by Muslims, but due to doctrinal and therefore also pastoral faults.

I was asking whether KKK had cleared itself of its previous and well known doctrinal errors.

"I propose that the Muslims should be suppressed under the rulership of a pious Christian Emperor,"

I do not know exactly what kind of suppression you mean.

If you mean suppression of their agression, I would be for it. Not just Daesh / Islamic state, but also of their role in psychiatry and their predominance in organised welfare.

They do give lots of food to the poor, but sometimes a bit too much. And neither beer nor always even coffee to go with it.

If you mean suppression of their private lives, I am against it.

"and the KKK has that Emperor, the Grand Dragon."

Oh, is that so?

The Empire was never electing its Emperors by the leaders of societies of knights, when it functioned.

It was electing its Emperors through the Electors.

"O/K you go on quibbling, and women get raped, boys are forced into concubinage, Christian art is effaced as 'idolatry', and so on."

My socalled quibbling has not stopped anyone from fighting Muslims.

"You want an election and popular votes on this, you want liberalism, but all that which smacks of liberalism was condemned in a Bull" [Exsecrabilis]

And making a heretic Emperor was as condemned as making a heretic Pope in another Bull, Cum ex Apostolatus.

I was asking whether KKK had ceased to be heretics.

You have not given a straight answer, you have only shirked the issue.

"(1) secure Christendom with a Great Emperor;"

Good idea per se.

At least possibly so.

"(2) convene many monasteries to consider ethics of converting the Muslim to the Peace of the Christian Emperor."

I think the ethics have already been considered.

The answer is:

• a) a Christian who apostasises to Islam may be forced to recant;
• b) a Muslim (individual or force) who agresses Christians in such ways as to merit death penalty may be forced to recant;
• c) a Muslim who is not an apostate and who has not agressed Christians should be offered missionaries but left free to decide.

[In fact, the same principles apply to all non-Christian religions.]

"When Mecca and Medina are Christian shrines, we can consider conciliation of local cultures."

As far as it is possible, conciliation of local cultures should come first. Not as end result of a war project.

"In the mean time, secure women and children, as even a sea captain knows best."

I am not sure KKK is best suited all over North America to provide that service. Most communities the men should be doing that even without the KKK.

And KKK is not suited at all, as long as engaged in heresies about race or eugenicism.

That is why I made the question about whether they had renounced eugenicism.

Craig Crawford

When are Christians going to stand up and defend themselves against Jewish terror?

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Perhaps not a bad question.

Perhaps there will come a day when I will have to. Not sure.

[I was not challenged, but I am referring to things like psychiatry and the Jewish version of the kind of omertà which Robb Thurston was asking of me.]