Sunday Morning Scene. Dominionism and the Department of Defense.

The following was posted by Assistant Secretary of Defense, Sean Parnell:

Sean Parnell

@SeanParnellASW

“Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, ‘Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?’ And I said, ‘Here am I. SEND ME!’” — Isaiah 6:8

Frankly, this is a shocking association of the US military with religion.
I've warned here that the US is in the thick of an Administration that features individuals in it who who hold minoritarian Evangelical views well outside the mainstream of Christianity, and further that were introduced rather late in Christian history.  Unfortunately, the United States, which is a Protestant country, is basically the epicenter of such views and many Protestants don't realize their views are not held by most of the globes Christians, most of whom are Apostolic Christians.

Included in that set of views, for some, is the concept that Christians can help bring about the Second Coming and, in some quarters, that the United States is a nation directly charged with a Devine Mission.

The military is definitely suffering right now, with some elements of the Navy having morale problems and a war going on which the administration repeatedly claims we've won, but which drags on.  The current hope is that economic sanctions will bring Iran to its knees but none of the predictions about the war have proven correct so far.  

Not one.

One way to definitely end the war would be to commit ground troops.  It'd also be a bloody mess.

These recruiting blurbs do not indicate a commitment to inserting ground troops, but they do demonstrate a frightening mix of religion with foreign policy.  We are not Crusaders and frankly Crusaders would have regarded American Evangelicals as weird heretics.  The fact that the government sends out a message like this should be alarming, and it should be offensive to Christians, Muslims and Jews, all of whom regard Isaiah as a prophet.

Indeed, when Isaiah spoke those words, he wasn't asking to be sent into combat.  He was being sent as a prophet.

The military should never be committed to an immoral cause, but we should not imagine that every time it has been committed the commitment met Christian standards.  None of the military actions taken during the Second Trump Administration do.  They most particularly do not under the reconsideration of the Just War Theory made by Pope Leo.

What Parnell did here is wrong on so many levels.  Christians should be horrified.

Saturday,July 4, 2026. What I intend to do (or not) for the 250th Anniversary of the U.S. Declaration of Independence. The Betrayal of the Revolution. Additional labels

Pope Leo and the Just War Theory.

To all of this, the media and digital dimensions are adding new and decisive elements. Communication networks, fragmented information environments and algorithms that reward conflict can magnify polarization and resentment, increase propaganda and make shared discernment more difficult. Thus, war is not only fought, but also culturally conditioned through simplistic narratives, a friend-or-foe mentality, disinformation and fear. When historical memory fades and the ethical principles that protect civilians and the most vulnerable are weakened, it becomes easier to justify violence as necessary, inevitable or even “sanitized.” It is in this context that humanity is slipping into a violent culture of power, where peace no longer appears as a responsibility to be taken on, but as a fragile interval between conflicts. Today, more than ever, without prejudice to the right to self-defense in the strictest sense, it is important to reaffirm that the “just war” theory, which has all too often been used to justify any kind of war, is now outdated. [182] Humanity possesses far more effective and capable tools for promoting human life and resolving conflicts, such as dialogue, diplomacy and forgiveness. The use of force, violence and weapons reflects a relational poverty that always has disastrous consequences for civilian populations.

Pope Leo XIV, Magnifica Humanitas.

When first released, almost all of the attention given to Magnifica Humanitas was on his discussion of Artificial Intelligence, but then somebody noticed is comments on the Just War Theory, and now people are freaking out.  Conservative Catholic pundits have already come out with the "Pope is wrong" commentary, and even an Anglican journal came out with an article to the same effect.

He isn't wrong.

And this isn't really new.

First of all, the Just War Theory was always that, a theory.  It's not doctrine, and in some quarters its never been accepted.  Moreover, since World War Two the Church has really made significant modifications to what can be considered a "just war".  

So, what did Pope Leo really say here.

First, what's the Just War Theory hold?

Well, let's look at the Catechism of the Catholic Church. It states:

According to CCC 2309, the following conditions must be met in order for war to be just:

(1) The damage inflicted by the aggressor must be lasting, grave, and certain.

(2) All other means of putting an end to it must have shown to be impractical or ineffective.

(3) There must be serious prospects of success.

(4) The use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated (the principle of proportionality).

So, presently, those are the criteria set out in the Catechism.  Will this be changed?  I suspect it will be modified.  And frankly, based on prior statements by the last three Popes, the Catechism does not support the view that the Pontiffs have  been stating.  The thing that they've repeatedly stated is that war is only justifiable for defensive purposes.  Hence the comment; "Today, more than ever, without prejudice to the right to self-defense in the strictest sense, it is important to reaffirm that the “just war” theory, which has all too often been used to justify any kind of war, is now outdated."

So, with this in mind, what we might suppose (although I'm treading on dangerous grounds here as I'm not a theologian) is that the Church would modify the material set out above to read:

A country may legitimately act in self defense when:

(1) The damage inflicted by an attacking aggressor must be lasting, grave, and certain.

(2) All other means of putting an end to it must have shown to be impractical or ineffective.

(3) There must be serious prospects of success.

(4) The use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated (the principle of proportionality).

Is that a big change in what the Popes have been saying?  Not really.

But does it effect some sort of a change?  Well, yes.  A clarifying one, in my view.

What I think the Pope's statement makes clear that the moral laxity in interpreting the Just War theory is not justified.  It never has been, but all too often those citing it go on to hold that whatever war they're speaking of is kind of sort of justified by the theory.  That should not have been the case, and it needs to come to an end.  

It's needed to come to an end for a long time.

There's no way that, for example, the US and Israeli war upon Iran is a just war.  No way.  At least from the U.S. prospective, it's an illegal war as it defies the requirements of the U.S. Constitution for Congress to declare war, making it immoral to a certain extent from the onset.  But the criteria required for a just war even as the CCC states it cannot be met.  The first criteria alone, that Iran was inflicting damage upon the United States in a way that is lasting, grave, and certain, was never met.  The repeated baloney that "they've been attacking us for 47 years" didn't come close to meeting this criteria.  Yes, Iran is a sponsor of terrorism.  Terrorism, however, is an act of the weak and is largely ineffectual.  Launching a massive offensive against Iran was not justified by the fact that Iran acts immorally. 

Indeed, on that score, the war does not meet, in my view, the requirements of the forth criteria.  And it never met the requirements of the second criteria either.

A war launched to change the regime, which was an earlier excuse for the war, was certainly not justified.

And it turns out that the third criteria cannot be met either.  The war has actually made the regime more hard line. The only chance for success would require a massive ground invasion of the country, which is certainly not proportional to the hoped for outcome.

What Pope Leo has clarified is something that other Popes have said, to some degree, and which follows the history of the discussion on the death penalty. Pope St. John Paul the Great made statements to the effect that the death penalty could not be justified in the modern world. The following two Popes amplified that.  Catholic conservatives have still refused to accept that, but that's completely correct.  In the modern world, the criteria which would allow for the imposition of the death penalty simply to not exist.

And with Pope Leo's statements, it seems fairly clear that the criteria for launching an offensive war never exist either.  That's been somewhat presumed all the way back to the 1940s, but now its clear.

And, it should also be clear, this is not a mere academic discussion.

War is killing people and breaking things. There's no two ways about it.  Killing people intentionally is gravely evil, except in self defense.  Supporting killing people except in self defense is likewise gravely illegal.  The same Catholic beliefs that hold that murder is immoral, that abortion is immoral, lead directly to war and the death penalty being immoral.  You cannot, no matter how much you might want to stretch it, supporting abortion if you are a Catholic, and frankly at this point, you cannot support immoral wars.

It was Pope St. John Paul, I think, who instructed that Catholic lawyers should not represent people in divorces.  Judges can still preside over them however.  Which brings us to this next point.

Catholic politicians can clearly not support immoral wars.  When people like Chuck Gray and Megan Degenfelder come around seeking votes, as they are Catholic, their position on this war should be asked of.  If they support it, as Trump supports it, they're willing to condemn their souls to Hell for their ambitions, or at least risk that.  Those Catholics in the Trump administration supporting the war, and we don't really know who they are (we know that Vance wasn't in support of it) are doing the same, to a larger degree.  The military raid on Venezuela that occurred earlier likewise presents the same problem.  Any invasion of Cuba, which it seems likely we will do, poses the same situation.

But beyond that, can Catholic servicemen morally serve in these wars?

I'm sure opinions will vary, but I don't think they can.

And that is a real change.  And given that war involves death, that's a change for the good.

Related threads:

Just War 101: Catholic Teaching for a Dangerous Moment

Supporting Immorality in War is Immoral.

Archdiocese for the Military Services. Not a Just War.

Churches of the East: Magnifica Humanitas

Churches of the East: Magnifica Humanitas: Just out, it's notably already being hailed as a great work, and notably already criticized by the United States Secretary of the Interi...

Magnifica Humanitas

Just out, it's notably already being hailed as a great work, and notably already criticized by the United States Secretary of the Interior.

 MAGNIFICA HUMANITAS

OF HIS HOLINESS
POPE LEO XIV
ON SAFEGUARDING THE HUMAN PERSON
IN THE TIME OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

 If this is correct, it should be the last possible line in the sand for American Catholics.  For those for whom it isn't, there's clearly no outrage that Trump could do that would matter to them.

Report: Trump Administration Is Spying on Pope Leo XIV’s Vatican

An independent journalist with a record of leaked-FBI scoops has documented that the Vatican is being targeted by US intelligence services.

The 25th Amendment Watch List. A Fourteenth and Special edition. Attacking the Catholic Church.

April 13, 2026.

The number of Catholics in the world:  Over 1,422,000,000, with the number growing.

The number of Catholics in the United States: Between 50,000,000 and 70,000,000, with the number growing.

The number of Orthodox in the world 260,000,000

The number of Orthodox Christians in the United States:  2,600,000.

The number of Protestants in the world:  600,000,000 to 1,000,000,000.

The number of Protestants in the United States  140,000,000 to 150,000,000, of which 10 to 15% are mainline protestants, and of which the largest denomination is the American Baptist Conference, which includes 13,000,000 to 15,000,000 members.

The Catholic Church, all rites (the Roman Rite is the largest by far) is the largest single church in the world and the largest single church in the United States, in spite of the United States being a protestant nation.

The second largest church in the world are the Orthodox, meaning that the Apostolic Churches, those which go all the way back to the Apostles, far exceed the number of Protestants.

While all churches have their problems, the Catholic church is growing everywhere.  Protestant churches are dying.

And then we get this:

Trump posted those back to back  yesterday.  There's been all sorts of rumors circulating that the administration has been upset with the Church.

No doubt it isn't a fan of the Church. The Church has God as its King.  Maga has Donald as its.

Throughout Trump's presidency, the first legitimate one and the illegitimate second one, I've warned that support of Trump would likely kill off far right Evangelism in the US.  I've also warned that those far right Evangelicals who support Trumpwould turn on Catholicism, which they don't understand and often don't even think to be a Christian religion, when in fact it's the original Christian religion.  And I've failed to grasp how any thinking Catholic could really support Trump with any depth.

But some have.  I know plenty.

Some are just shallow political thinkers, others not, and all are conservative.  I'm conservative, but I've never supported Trump.

These people are opposed to abortion (so am I), and were horrified by transgenderism (so am I).  That frankly is just about it.  Some buy in to the other hardcore aspects of the far right as well, being opposed to immigration, for instance, which actually requires a more nuanced thought process than they are giving it.  And the Democrats made it impossible for Catholics to really support them, becoming the party of death and weirdness.

None of which meant that anyone had to support a dim, narcissistic, serial polygamist.

For those of you who supported Trump on social issues, there were and are other parties.  And how much do we know about Trump and any of the positions he supposedly supports.  He own track record on moral issues is poor at least in so far as his treatment of women is concerned.  And we're talking about adult women.  This administration outright opposition to releasing the Epstein files certainly raises questions about it being willing to support child rapists, and there's enough smoke around Trump to at least raise questions about how far in the shallow end of the pool he may have been willing to go, although nothing's been proven.  His family's financial dealings this term certainly raise questions of a moral nature.  His launching of an illegal war and threatening mass civilian deaths is criminal.

We could go on.  He's a horrible, demented, man.  Christians who are supporting him need to rethink it immediately.

Catholics supporting him have helped bring us to this.

From here on out there's no excuse for a free pass by members of the Apostolic Faiths.  None.  And that includes the two members in the administration, Marco Rubio and J. D. Vance.  Supporting Trump is supporting this mockery of the Faith and of all Christianity.

But for the voters too.  In the midterms there are already candidates who note they are "endorsed by Donald Trump".  One Catholic candidate here in the state hardcore embraces Trump and another runs, on all of her signs, "Endorsed by Donald Trump".

That needs to end right now.  

The 25th Amendment needs to be applied, now.  Catholics cozying up to Trump need to stop, now.  

Cont:

Q: Did you post that picture of yourself depicted as Jesus?

Trump: I did post it and I thought it was me as a doctor. And had to do with red cross as a red cross worker

Donald Trump.

If that's what he's thought, it's because he's demented.

That being what he thought is rather difficult to believe.  What's more believable is that he's worried American Catholics are now waking up, if they were not already awake, to what a terrible person he is.

April 16, 2026

We'll probably close this one out and start a new one, but this story is still playing out.

Something that should be really obvious, but MAGA just won't accept, is that Donald Trump is insane.  Of course, accepting that a leader who they loved is nuts would mean that some of what they're supporting is nuts.  Nobody wants to acknowledge that, but it needs to occur now.

We're in really dangerous territory.

Trump Rage at Pope Darkens as Ex-Allies Warn of Worsening Mental State

As Trump’s own ex-supporters start sounding the alarm about his mental state, a former top Trump official explains why the president’s madness is now badly messing with ordinary Americans’ everyday lives.

That's from The New Republic, which those with the real Trump Derangement Syndrome, the one that keeps a supporter from acknowledging that he's gone insane no matter what he does, will disregard.  But these warnings aren't in isolation by any means.

Here's one from the National Catholic Reporter:

Trump is detached from reality. The 25th Amendment exists for this moment

For the reporter to call for the 25th Amendment to be invoked is pretty extraordinary, but again those with the real TDS will just say, well, that's because he insulted the Pope.  Indeed, American Catholics in the political far right are already busy dissing Pope Leo XIV as some sort of flaming left winger, which is patently absurd.

Well, here's one from Jewish bonafide somewhat left winger Robert Reich:

He is Seriously, Frighteningly, Utterly, and Completely Losing His Mind

We are in great danger

The man is going insane.  We're in some sort of a race now to see if his cabinet can screw up its courage or finally do something so patently nuts that it can't be denied.  What that is, at this point, is almost too horrific to imagine.

What seems clear, for those who bother to observe, is that the U.S. is going to invade Cuba, unless the military puts a stop to it.  Nobody in the Administration seems ready to stop it.  We're basically starving the country to death, for no reason, right now, other than its a vengeful project supported by Cuban Americans.  The chances that we revive Trump's lust for Greenland at some point, and committing forces to satiate it aren't beyond possibility.  Maybe one of those two acts causes somebody to say "no".

Or maybe it'll be the war against Iran.  We seem to have wondered into a war that has no way out and the stress it's causing Trump is rapidly wiping out what mental faculties he had left.  The thought that Iran may win, and it may, is terrifying for him.  It's also destroying the political chances of J. D. Vance, which Vance likely knows, and which gives Vance, who opposed the war, the chance to be Brutus to Trump's Caesar.  Still, Trump launching an act of absolute barbarity to try to force Iran to surrender, which would fail, isn't beyond possibility either.

Or maybe it'll be something benign.  He says something he can't retract about something abhorrent, or walks out in the paved rose garden sans clothes, or forgets who the first lady is.

Or maybe we wake up one day having deployed nuclear weapons with MAGA wondering, for the most part, how we got there, and with some supporting it as they must or must wakeup.

We're in dangerous territory.

I'd predicted when we started this series that Trump's second term would last 18 months, from January 2025 to June 2026.  We're rolling right up on that.  What is clear at this point is that in November the Democratic Party is going to resume control of the House and the Senate.  At that point Trump's ability to reign like a dictator will end.  Knowing that, if he is still in office, he'll do everything possible to disrupt the 2026 election and steal it..  People like Chuck Gray will help him in that attempt, and are already helping him.  It probably won't work.  If he goes too far, it'll result in mass violence.

The fact that he'll try it, and that it will become increasingly obvious that he's doing to try it as we move towards November, will mean that there will be a fair chance that if Trump is still in office after November, he'll face impeachment and be removed in 2027.  Because of that, there's also an increased chance that if my original timeline was off, the 25th Amendment will be invoked then.  An impeachment of Trump, at this point might very well be followed by an impeachment of Vance, who will not want to face that.

Hitler didn't resign rather than take Germany into defeat.  Comparing Trump to Hitler is something even his opponents hate to have done, but he has a very similar mindset in certain ways.  Hitler was democratically elected and co opted the state as well, and believed manically in himself.  Trump is like that.  Stress and drugs eroded Hitler's mind, as well as the burden of evil.  Trump came into office in his first time an obviously mentally unstable person and it's grown worse.  He's never been a person who is personally admirable.

The longer this goes on, the worse it will become.

April 21, 2026

Donald Trump is losing his mind

Last edition:

Downfall. The 25th Amendment Watch List, Thirteenth Edition. The MAGA Cannibal.

Labels: 2020s, 2026, 25th Amendment Watch List, Donald Trump, Mental Health, The Madness of King Donald, United States and Israel v. Iran, World War Two