“The crowning disloyalty to God is heresy” November 20, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, General Catholic, scandals, foolishness, sadness, disaster, Papa, episcopate, priests, error, true leadership, secularism, catachesis, the return, SOD.
So said Fr. Faber, as relayed by the recent St. Vincent Ferrer Foundation announcement. Thanks to the Foundation for this edifying quote:
“If we hated sin as we ought to hate it, purely, keenly, manfully, we should do more penance, we should inflict more self-punishment, we should sorrow for our sins more abidingly. Then, again, the crowning disloyalty to God is heresy. It is the sin of sins, the very loathsomest of things which God looks down upon in this malignant world. Yet how little do we understand of its excessive hatefulness! It is the polluting of God’s truth, which is the worst of all impurities. Yet how light we make of it! We look at it, and are calm. We touch it and do not shudder. We mix with it, and have no fear. We see it touch holy things, and we have no sense of sacrilege. We breathe its odor, and show no signs of detestation or disgust. Some of us affect its friendship; and some even extenuate its guilt. We do not love God enough to be angry for His glory. We do not love men enough to be charitably truthful for their souls. … Where there is no hatred of heresy, there is no holiness. A man, who might be an apostle, becomes a fester in the Church for the want of this righteous indignation”
So what do you say to that? And how does such a clear statement of truth relate to the ongoing and accelerating crisis in the Faith?
How did the idea ever creep in that leaving people in the most foul and corrupting of errors, errors which objectively will result in their damnation if not rejected, was being charitable or merciful? The only explanation that I can grasp at is that most people in the Church today, including so many leaders anointed by God for sacred roles, simply no longer believe in the reality of hell and the fact that souls, perhaps most souls, do go there.
Could there be another explanation? is it just that they don’t care, or don’t believe any of this God-bothering stuff?
Pray Novenas for Father Rodriguez! November 20, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, disaster, episcopate, error, General Catholic, Grace, Holy suffering, manhood, martyrdom, Novenas, persecution, priests, sanctity, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
1 comment so far
As most readers will know, Father Rodriguez is currently on sabbatical. When placed on sabbatical, he asked that prayers be offered for his discernment and the future of his apostolate. It was also announced that an effort at mass, joint Novenas would be made to that end. The Novenas were just announced. I give text of the announcement below, along with the prayers. Please do pray for Father Rodriguez and the many afflicted souls formerly of his care in El Paso in this most trying time:
MANY THANKS to all who have been praying for Fr. Rodríguez. We have received many messages of encouragement, support and prayer.
- Tomorrow we will begin praying a continuous novena for Fr. Rodríguez, which will last until 10 May 2015. The current novena should always be at the PRAYER / CURRENT NOVENA tab from the website homepage (www.svfonline.org). It will also be accessible through the website’s calendar: http://svfonline.org/el-paso-
- Our first novena, appropriately enough given Father’s fervent Marian Devotion will be to Our Lady. This particular novena is to Our Lady of Remedy. We will pray it from Nov 21 – Nov 29. It is attached in .pdf format.—–>>>>Novena Our Lady Good Remedy
- The second novena will be the traditional Christmas Novena prayed for twenty-five days from the Feast of St. Andrew to Christmas Eve (Nov 30-Dec 24). It is also attached in .pdf format.—–>>>>Novena Christmas 2014 [You should be praying this Novena anyways!]
- Following the Feast of the Immaculate Conception (which is Father’s ordination anniversary), we will also begin to pray a 54 Day Rosary Novena. As soon as I have those files prepared in .pdf format, I will email them out as well.
Thanks to St. Vincent Ferrer Foundation for sending this information out. SVF also noted this sad development in Trier, Germany, which mirrors situations in El Paso, New York, and elsewhere:
The bishop of Trier in Germany has removed the parish priest of Beckingen from his parish, ostensibly for the reason provided in canon 1741 of the current Code of Canon Law, “a manner of acting which brings grave detriment or disturbance to ecclesiastical communion.” Wherein exactly the disturbance of communion consists is difficult to tell…….
……..What exactly “the obscure complaints” are remains unclear. Rorate Caeli interviewed one of the parishioners, who said that the complaints had to do with the pastor’s “too strict application of the diocesan guidelines on funerals,” and his practice of occasionally celebrating Mass ad orientem and of wearing the biretta on feast days.
Maybe the good father could find a place in Lincoln.
Beautiful Italian Crucifix miraculously survives church fire November 20, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in Art and Architecture, disaster, General Catholic, Grace, Holy suffering, sadness, Society, Tradition, Virtue.
Holy Cross Catholic Church in San Jose, California was gutted by fire on Saturday, but somehow this beautiful ornate Italian crucifix, ten feet tall, managed to escape damage:
God bless the firefighters for treating this symbol of our Faith with such respect and care. Would that similar care would have been taken during the orgy of destruction that afflicted so many treasures of art and great symbols of our Faith during the wild excesses of the post-conciliar period.
The video at this link will give you an idea of the extent of the damage.
Given the extent of the blaze it is miraculous that the crucifix survived. It certainly appears the entire interior of the parish was consumed.
Some more details in the video below. What a beautiful crucifix, I am glad it could be saved, and apparently, virtually undamaged:
Via Pertinacious Papist - hardly a traditionalist source - a video of a group of followers of the deceased “Bishop” Tony Palmer meeting with Pope Francis within days of the Synod wrapping up. All of these individuals represent various protestant sects.
I will forewarn those who do not like critical assessments of the actions of the current Pope, they may not be comfortable with this post. I internally debated for a long time just posting the video without comment in order not to offend, but I fear that the video is so difficult to watch that the vast majority of readers would not get much of the content, so I decided to provide an assessment of the content. I apologize in advance to the extent that this post troubles anyone.
As I said, the video below is painful to watch, for several reasons, not least of which is the slow manner of speech and the constant interrupts for the translator (and you can argue about how accurate the translation is until the cows come home, I can tell some of the key words, it’s not that far off). Pope Francis says, more or less, all Christians are essentially equal due to our common baptism – even if some protestant sects hold very different views regarding the role of baptism in the economy of salvation (justification by faith alone argues implicitly that baptism is not necessary for salvation, contrary to Our Blessed Lord’s plain revelation, yes I understand there may be exceedingly rare exceptions but water baptism is the normal vehicle for inclusion in the Body of Christ – some protestants argue it is not necessary)- and that pointing out the vast doctrinal differences between the various sects and Churches and the fact that one may risk damnation by absorbing protestant errors, errors denounced constantly for 4 centuries, is doing the work of the devil. I am not opining, I am simply repeating what Pope Francis says in the video below:
Pope Francis’ declaration regarding an invisible community of baptized believers is diametrically at odds with the statements of Pope Pius XII: Hence they err in a matter of divine truth, who imagine the Church to be invisible, intangible, a something merely “pneumatological” as
they say, by which many Christian communities, though they differ from each other in their profession of faith, are united by an invisible bond.”
Pope Francis says doctrinal differences between the Church and all the separated groups are for theologians to figure out: meanwhile, the great project of ecumenism must move forward. What does that say for his appreciation of the impact the false doctrines of the sects, decried and opposed for centuries by the Church and Her many Saints, has on the salvation of souls? Did not Saint Peter say we had to accept the Faith whole and entire, or that we were not within the Church?
I could add more by reminding how at odds Pope Francis’ statements appear to be with the constant belief and practice of the Faith, and how he is at least tacitly attacking the lives of too many great Saints to list by making such a declaration. Just off the top of my head: Saint John Chrysostom, Saint Augustine, Saint Hilary of Poitiers, Saint Jerome, Saint Teresa of Jesus, Saint Peter Canisius, Saint Thomas Aquinas, Saint Alphonsus Maria de Liguori……all Doctors of the Church……..Saint Vincent of Lerins, Saint Ignatius of Loyola, Saint Justin Martyr, Saint Ignatius of Loyola, Saint Francis Xavier, Pope Saint Pius X…….I could go on for a very long time.
I could also add how Pope Francis frequently only has invective and criticism for Catholics, especially the most faithful Catholics, but seems to have nothing but praise and understanding for protestants, and especially the more pentecostal types of protestants. I know some fear Pope Francis may cause a huge boost in membership for the Society of Saint Pius X, but I fear far more the great windfall this pontificate may mean for the more conservative sects.
Many great popes, like Pope Leo XIII, have proven without a doubt that protestant bodies are not churches but are sects. Their ecclesiastical bodies are so deficient in so many regards they are not part of the Church of Christ – their ordinations are not valid, they do not confect the Blessed Sacrament if they make the attempt, they have no valid apostolic succession, they are full of errors that lead souls dangerously astray from the Church Christ founded - again, this could be a very extensive list. There was something of a kerfuffle when, after they agreed to ordain women “priests” and tolerated the US Episcopal embrace of sodomite simulation of marriage, Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams was not seated with the Orthodox and other recognized (if schismatic) Churches at the 2011 Assisi ecumenical confab held by Pope Benedict, but was instead seated with the numerous evangelical-type sects. So even Pope Benedict, who certainly held to post-conciliar views of ecumenism, recognized that simple baptism does not mean an ecclesiastical body makes a Church.
Here are some direct quotes for those who cannot make out the audio (I had little difficulty, I just found it very boring and upsetting):
We are sinning against the will of Christ, because we are looking only at the differences. But we all have the same baptism, and baptism is more important than the differences. We all believe in the Father, in the Son, and in the Holy Spirit. We all have within the Holy Spirit who prays, “now” for us, the spirit who prays in us. [So then having the Blessed Sacrament, or not, makes no difference? What of John 6? What of Matt 16:18-20?]
And everyone must know that there is also a father of lies, the father of all divisions, the “anti-Father,” the devil who gets in and divides, divides… Tony talked about this a lot, about this going forward and walking, walking together in what unites us. And that the Lord Jesus with his power may help us so that what divides us may not divide us too much. [And I will believe the sincerity of the protestants towards the ecumenical project when they stop calumniating the Church founded by Jesus Christ and stop going all out to steal away tens of millions from the bosom of the Church]
I don’t know, it’s crazy… Having a treasure and preferring to use imitations of the treasure. The imitations are the differences, what matters is the treasure. [Some might say......many Saints did say......that it is exactly protestantism that is the imitation, while the Church is the treasure.]
There is so much more I could point out. But I don’t like being in this position any more than some of those who may read this. This is a tragedy of incomprehensible proportions.
I post this because it is highly relevant to the ongoing revolution in the Church and to address errors put forth by the most influential person in the Church. I also post this because it highlights the question that has been foremost in my mind for at least a year: Is Pope Francis glad that I became Catholic? Would he prefer or recommend – if I still were not – that I not become Catholic? Did I make a mistake in becoming Catholic?
Cardinal O’Malley’s troublesome 60 Minutes interview November 19, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, persecution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, SOD, the return.
Cardinal Sean, as he likes to be called, was interviewed by the progressive political organization “60 Minutes” recently and the interview was broadcast Sunday night. I know my opinion regarding Bishop Robert Finn of Kansas City-St. Joseph, MO diverges from some readers but I was pretty disgusted to see him thrown under the bus by Cardinal
O’Malley Sean. I could not tell who to be more incensed by, the interviewer for constantly asking questions with a decisively left-wing slant, or Cardinal O’Malley Sean for willingly playing her game and failing to give a vigorous defense of the Church and his brother bishop, who to my mind was very much railroaded by a highly antagonistic political-media establishment that was seriously peeved by Bishop Finn’s orthodoxy. Suffice it to say, it is quite ludicrous to pick on him for a comparatively very minor crime when men like Cardinals Mahony Roger and Daneels Gottfried are still in full public ministry (yes Mahony is “retired” but he is very far from inactive in LA and still exercises great influence there) even though their cover-ups were orders of magnitude worse and in the case of Daneels still ongoing. I guess the red hat does have its privileges, provided one is of the correct ideological orientation?
By the way, I’m not going to give CBS a bunch of clicks, if you want to watch the whole interview (I recommend not having eaten for at least an hour or two before doing so) find it yo dang self, but this preview below contains some of the more egregious elements:
Did you like how she spun the Vatican investigation of women’s religious in the US? Poor persecuted sweet little leftist sisters! No, the investigation had nothing to do with repeated statements from LCWR leadership that they were “post-Catholic” and even “beyond Jesus,” it had nothing to do with the fact that virtually every single one of their orders, which they inherited in full fruit of vibrancy, will be gone within 10 or 20 years due to absolute lack of vocations, it has nothing to do with all the moral and theological error they promote and instill in vulnerable minds, no, it was all about the fact that they did not oppose abortion enough (quite the contrary, they support it, and with vigor!). What a travesty of a presentation. Unfortunately, Cardinal O’Malley gave a very poor response, even calling the apostolic investigation of these dying, anti-Catholic religious (are they still really Catholic religious?) a “disaster.” What a way to treat the man who made him Cardinal and gave him such a platform. See how quickly these will o’ the wisp bishops will turn when the wind blows a different direction!
I will say that the newsreader’s attempts to spin the opposition to sodomite boy abuse in the Church as an invention of Pope Francis are simply disgusting. Repeatedly in the narration of the interview, the left-wing newsreader tries to make this false portrayal, but then I ask: who rehabilitated and returned to power the exceedingly corrupt Cardinal Sodano, a man heavily on the payroll of the disgraced Father Maciel and who had been sacked by Pope Benedict? In fact, who has returned many such individuals to positions of power and authority? Who invited the aforementioned Cardinal Daneels to help preside over the Extraordinary Synod on the Family, of all things!, even though Cardinal Daneels is still actively involved in the cover-up of his own crimes and those of several of his proteges? But the newsreader can get away with such injustices because 99 1/2% of all Catholics, let alone those outside the Church, have no idea of the truth of such matters. In truth, no Pope to date has done more to combat the clergy boy rape scandal and the cover-ups by bishops than Pope Benedict. While some bishops are under investigation now, given how some others (like Daneels) are given important new sinecures and all those under investigation are of a more orthodox bent, the “crackdown” appears to many to look more like an ideological witch-hunt than a real attempt to curb priest sex abuse of minors.
There was of course also an obligatory segment on the USCCB’s stand regarding unconstrained immigration from predominately Hispanic countries. Only visible on the CBS site, you can witness Cardinal Sean distribute the Blessed Sacrament through a border fence in Nogales, Arizona with great showmanship.
I should say in Cardinal O’Malley’s defense who knows how 60 Minutes butchered his quotes? They are notorious for doing so and have faced a number of lawsuits in the past for dramatically misrepresenting the statements of those they interview. I couldn’t even watch the whole thing, it literally did turn my stomach.
I’m sorry to pick on this name calling thing but even if you don’t have enough respect for yourself to be called Cardinal O’Malley, preferring instead to approach the many sheep of his flock like a kindergarten teacher, one would like to think that the office would demand avoiding such cheap and false demonstrations of approachability. In truth much of the present leadership of the Church is very far from kind, warm, and approachable and are some of the worst clericalists the Church has been afflicted with.
It saddens me, but given the name dropping of Bishop Finn in the interview I am sure he is finished in Kansas City. Apparently there is a new standard in the Church, more orthodox bishops are liable to be sacked over even relatively small failings, while progressive bishops can continue getting away with what they have always gotten away with. It helps to have friends in high places.
More data on the collapse of the Church in Latin America November 18, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, demographics, disaster, Ecumenism, episcopate, horror, paganism, sadness, scandals, secularism, Society, SOD.
Probably most of my readers, if not all, read Rorate Caeli, but there was some very disheartening material posted there recently regarding the continuing collapse of the Church in Latin America. As Rorate notes, this collapse cannot be blamed on ongoing secularization nearly to the degree that it can be in the “advanced” nations of North American and Europe. The Church in Latin American was, in 1970, quite strong, cohesive, and going through (perhaps concluding is a better word) a period of great renewal that started well before the Council. But ever since the mid-70s the Church in Latin America has been in free-fall on a scale that outpaces even the collapse of the Faith in some Western European countries. There hasn’t been a period since the protestant revolt when so many have fallen away so fast in a given region.
Another difference between the secularization of countries like Canada, France, Germany, Spain, etc., and the Latin American countries, is that, for the most part, in the former countries people have tended to fall out of religious practice entirely, they have become atheist or agnostic. In the Latin American countries, religious practice remains very strong, but a huge portion of the Church has found the “product,” if you will, so lacking in the post-conciliar environment that they have sought spiritual sustenance even in the separated and heretical sects. And as the data shows, they have done so in great numbers, tens of millions, over the past 4 decades:
I have to look no farther than my own backyard to see witness of this phenomenon. In my home zip code, the population is something like 70% Hispanic, many recent immigrants. There is only one Catholic parish to serve both this and several other zip codes containing tens of thousands of Hispanic families, while one literally cannot drive a block without finding some Hispanic-oriented evangelical sect, many small, but some quite large, serving tens of thousands of former Catholics. It breaks my heart to have to see this every day. And my observation over the past year-plus is that this trend is accelerating dramatically, with new evangelical sects popping up almost weekly.
Even more devastating is the deep anti-Catholicism many of these former Catholic souls have imbibed. There is a little restaurant I frequent on occasion, and the owners are recent Hispanic immigrants who are now evangelical. They were quite warm to me when they saw me reading my Bible in their restaurant, but when they found I was still Catholic they became less so. Even more, there is anti-Catholic propaganda in their restaurant, not obvious, but there. I have tried to engage with the owners but due to my poor Spanish speaking skills (especially when it comes to technical topics – I read much better than I speak) and their self-assured hostility, I have made precious little progress. When souls make a conscious choice to reject the Faith they were raised in, it is very rare for them to return. Please pray for these and millions of other souls falling away from the Church like snowflakes.
It is easy for the scale of this tragedy to get lost in the cold reality of numbers. Each one of these souls falling away from the Church is an incalculable loss both to the souls themselves and to the Mystical Body of Christ. What we are witnessing is a tragedy that is beyond human reckoning, but with widespread erroneous understandings of notions like “ecumenism” and “universal salvation” even at the highest levels of the Church, there is little sense of crisis in response to data like this. To the extent many in the Church are concerned about this ongoing hemorrhaging of souls, the concern is only worldly: what will this mean for Church income, what will this mean for parish closures, how will we run a Church without priests? There is little or no sense of urgency in dealing with this crisis: quite the opposite, so many in the Church and especially the hierarchy seem to be doing all they can to exacerbate the crisis?
These souls are falling away, by and large, because they felt spiritually starved. I know a good number of former Catholics who left for the exact same reason. All the changes being discussed – Communion for adulterers, the gifts of sodomites, institutionalizing the travesty of US-style annulment mills, etc., etc. – none of this will attract souls back to the Faith. The opposite is actually true, and I’ve seen comments all over the web to confirm this: souls already outside the Church or leading sinful/heretical lives will only feel confirmed in their errors by all these destructive novelties, and, even more, they feel that a Church that can be so wrong on so much for so long has nothing to offer them.
That is the true tale of the Church in Latin America over the past four decades: a Church without substance feeding worldly pablum to starving souls who then depart en masse. This is so contrary to how the Church conducted Herself for centuries it is simply staggering. The last five decades have proven, without doubt in my mind, that this “openness” to the world is destructive of the Faith and the good of souls. The case of the Church in Latin America is a very strong argument that the collapse in the Faith is not something that just happened to the Church, but is a result of the deliberate direction the Church has taken.
The Dark Side of Martin Luther November 14, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, Basics, damnable blasphemy, disaster, Ecumenism, error, General Catholic, horror, paganism, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, unadulterated evil.
There is a long post at Shameless Popery regarding Luther and his rather substantial dark side. It is a very long post and a bit difficult to excerpt, but for weekend reading I think you would be most edified to read the whole thing. A quote a bit from the intro and conclusion, do go read the whole thing, as Pope Leo XIII and many good priests have argued, protestantism loosed errors on the world that have caused the downfall of Christendom and led directly to the anti-Christian, liberal, amoral culture in which we are awash today. He also provides powerful argumentation that the mass murder machine known as National Socialism and the German embrace of the same was deeply rooted in Luther’s hatred of the Jews and his penchant for absolute obedience to state authority (but forget the Church authority!) almost to the point of religious reverence (another Nazi characteristic, deification of government leaders):
There’s a popular Luther narrative that plays out a little like Star Wars. A humble son of the Church rises up to overthrow the Dark Side, the Evil Empire, the Roman Catholic Church, all while cominfg to see his true identity. We love an underdog story, so it’s easy to root for Luther. And this narrative is an important one, both for Protestants (to show why the Reformation was “necessary”) and atheists (to show why Catholicism/Christianity/fundamentalism/religion is dangerous and evil).
But no matter how attractive it may be, this Luther narrative is a fundamentally false one. It relies on two sets of falsehoods: (1) distortions and exaggerations of the evils done on the Catholic side; and (2) a whitewashing of the real history of Luther and the early Protestants. I’ve addressed (1) before, and I’d like to address (2) head-on today.
The real-life Luther was a man passionately convicted of his own rightness, so convinced that he thought anyone who disagreed with him was either ignorant, stupid, or evil. It was this overconfidence that I would suggest is the root behind some of the shockingly evil things he advocated. I’m going to lay them out here, letting them speak for themselves, before considering the implications of these facts…….
[Follows an analysis of some of Luther's most egregious evils, calling for the most violent and repressive measures against those who took him at his word and started interpreting Scripture privately, which soon led to cultural chaos and armed uprisings in much of Germany. Very worth a read. Mind, this post only discusses Luther's more publicly deplorable acts, and skips the many private vices of the man]
……I mentioned before that Luther was so passionately convinced of his own rightness that he thought his opponents must necessarily be ignorant, stupid, or evil. This is the spirit consistently animating Luther’s writings. When he’s writing to someone who agrees with him, or who he thinks will agree with him, we get Dr. Jekyll. When he realizes that the other person actuallythinks he’s wrong, Mr. Hyde appears. We see it from the first with his writings to the papacy, sweetly promising to obey whatever the pope should decide, and then denouncing him as the Antichrist when the pope doesn’t decide in his favor.
We see that play out time and again in the above passages: he’s convinced that the Christian rulers who disagree with him secretly know the truth about the “Gospel,” but just refuse to acknowledge it. He’s gentle to the peasants until he realizes that they’re not listening to them; then he calls for their mass slaughter. Likewise, he defends the Jews, when he thinks that they’re open to hearing his version of the Gospel; when he fails, he calls for their destruction, as well.
This has all the marks of the sin of pride, the sin said to have caused the fall of Lucifer. And none of us, regardless of Church affiliation, are immune from these temptations. It’s so easy to fall into a mindset where your political or religious opponents are idiots or monsters. Let Luther’s life be a cautionary tale in that regard.
[I regard the below as really key, and as a former protestant I attest to its veracity]
When Catholics point out that several of Luther’s early writings sound pretty Catholic, the standard Protestant response (and a quite reasonable one, I might add), is that Luther wasn’t completely reformed yet. Even after he went into schism, he spent another quarter-century slowly divesting himself of his Catholic beliefs. But what’s remarkable is that, as Luther became less and less Catholic, he became less and less Christian. [Dang right]
Compare the before-and-after you see above to see what I mean. There are countless other examples that point in the same direction, too. For example, Hosanna Lutheran Church notes that Luther’s language in Against the Papacy at Rome Founded by the Devil, written in 1545 (a year before his death), was “the most vehement and vulgar Luther ever wrote. To accompany it Luther commissioned a series of political cartoons by Lucas Cranach defaming the pope and Rome.”
The man praised for taking a bold stand for freedom of conscience was positively bloodthirsty towards those whose consciences disagreed with his own. And he became crueler and more bloodthirsty, the longer he spent away from the Church. [Well like all protestant revolutionaries, "private interpretation" quickly came to mean "MY interpretation." And anyone who opposed Luther's, or Zwingli's, or especially Calvin's interpretation was a damnable heretic and must be put to death. Within three years of Luther posting his false "theses" protestantism had already splintered into myriad groups, mutually antagonistic and all claiming to be right, only joined together in confederations of convenience by hatred of the Church founded by Jesus Christ]
Diocese of Dallas training video: “Two greatest Commandments love of self and love of neighbor” November 13, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, disaster, Domestic Church, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, Society.
Somehow, God got left out of the picture. If I could reduce the past 50 years of the Church’s history into one brief sentence, that would be it.
I put up a post yesterday asking locals for their appraisal of religious formation in the Diocese of Dallas. There have been some good responses, you should go read them if you have not, but I received another one, offline. It had to do with Safe Environment training.
Now, I will state straight up, I have enormous problems with Catholic Safe Environment training in both concept and execution. The Dallas Policy and the training it mandates basically takes a disaster caused by men manifestly unfit for the priesthood (and in most cases, this was obvious from their earliest seminary days) and makes complete innocents victims of their crimes. This victimhood applies to both the adults and children who are forced into these programs. Adults are victims because they are incurring the penalty, if you will, for crimes committed by others, and children because they are exposed to materials what are often not just inappropriate but potentially very damaging. But Safe Environment is just one aspect of the collective bishops’ response to the boy-rape scandal that seeks at all turns to minimize the culpability of the episcopate for their own actions. It is a training program forced on all that assumes all are potential abusers in order to meet a certain legal strategy and reduce their potential future liability.
There has been much ink spilled already about the problems with the Safe Environment training directed at children, which many feel introduces topics and ideas inappropriate for many age groups. The adult training generally gets less visibility and fewer complaints. But I happened to be informed of an egregious faux pas – at least I sure hope it was – in a Safe Environment video for adults produced by the Diocese of Dallas that is so severe it could cause one to question the reliability of the entire content of the video.
I cannot link the video, it is embedded without link and is not public on Youtube (or, at least, I couldn’t find it), so you’ll have to go here to see it. The offending comment starts at 3:59 and goes to about 4:03. Again I will try to be charitable and assume the person who makes the statement didn’t mean what they said, and I quote “The two greatest commandments, love and self and love of neighbor……..” but how could this statement make it through editing and be used as a form of training – it could even be viewed as catechesis – in this Catholic Diocese of Dallas? My correspondent asks how a successor of the Apostles could appear and, one would think, approve of a video where this statement is made? This isn’t just slightly wrong, it’s directly contrary to the entire ethos Christ gave us and is emblematic of the error at the heart of the crisis in the Church and culture: men have replaced love of self for love of God.
I must also say that this is why I am so leery of having half-trained lay people serve as heads of ministries and perform so many roles once assigned to priests and religious in our churches today, and which the comments from yesterday’s post indicate is evidence of a systemic problem in religious education. But I want to stress I am certain the comment is not intentional, the greater problem is how this was vetted and a reviewed and still allowed to go public, as it were. It’s just so revealing of the kind of shoddy product that bureaucracies tend to produce. And the Church has been bureaucratized as never before in the past several decades.
Lest you think there is just this one comment I have a problem with, I assure you, that is not the case. Another person in the video says child abusers go where the children are, so I must ask why those men who displayed such perverse tendencies in seminary and in service, like Rudy Kos (where there will literally dozens of warnings sounded) were allowed contact with children for years?
Anyway, I’m not sure how long the video will stay up, so you may want to jet on over and see it while you can. And another thing, I am reliably informed that at least two complaints about this video (and the offending comment) have already been made, privately, so I consider the lack of response makes this fair game for public airing.
Fundraising organ “The Catholic Foundation” promoting social justice in the Diocese November 12, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, contraception, Dallas Diocese, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, paganism, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, the enemy.
I have thought for a while that maybe I should change the name of this blog. When I started it, it was very much focused on goings on in the Diocese of Dallas, and especially uncovering and reporting many problematic or disconcerting activities. That quickly became depressing, and even more, I found that the crisis in the Church extended far, far beyond the narrow boundaries of the 9 counties that make up this one diocese. When I started blogging almost 5 years ago, naive little waif that I was, I actually thought that if I only made the powers that be aware of some of these problematic, even destructive, activities they would be cleared up in no time! Silly me! Actually, I wasn’t quite that naive, but I thought it might make a little difference. Has it? Meh, not much.
Still, I was a bit surprised to find, in the hallowed halls of the former Korean methodist church that is now occupied by the glorious Mater Dei parish, a promotional flyer for the local “The Catholic Foundation.” The flyer featured none other than former pastor of St. Elizabeth Ann Seton parish (and current pastor of St. Ann in Coppell) Father Henry Petter. Longtime readers of this blog will know that Fr. Petter and I have not always enjoyed the warmest of relations and will also know that I have been rather critical of the social justice program he instituted at Seton. In fact, Seton was such a hotbed of social justice – which means, in practical terms, left wing political agitation – that the local Alinskyite branch of “Dallas Area Interfaith” (a member of the Industrial Areas Foundation) was given office space there while the parish was under Fr. Petter’s pastoral care.
The flyer itself highlights The Catholic Foundation’s social justice work. The flyer actually states:
The purpose of the fund is to take charitable donations a step further and truly impact structures of injustice in the local community.
Couldn’t have been said better if it had been said by ol’ Barack Hussein Obama himself. Or some communist college professor – it is shocking to see such overtly left wing language in a document purporting to serve an organization of the Church.
Now they claim that over 50% of the money they raise goes to “education,” over 1/3 to “religious,” and the rest to……….well, at least some of it goes to social justice ministries. And even that covered under the broad blanket of “education” could easily be applied to this kind of social justice endeavor, educating us rubes into advancing the socialist revolution that is the true source of goodness, plenty, and light!
So you could take this as an irregular reminder to be very, very careful which organizations you support in the Church. I do not know if the Diocese funnels money assessed from parishes to this Catholic Foundation or other similar groups but I am very leery about supporting any of these large institutional charities or groups. I tend to look for either specific religious orders, organizations like the St.Vincent Ferrer Foundation, the FSSP, Transalpine Redemptorists, etc, to support financially, as I really, really do not want any of my money winding up being devoted to Alinskyite leftist agitation. I do very strongly believe that about the only real influence the laity exercise over the direction of the Church in the near term is the power of the purse. If we keep donating to the regular diocesan appeals or even our local parish’s general funds we can be sure that at least some of our money will wind up supporting efforts just like this, impacting “structures of injustice in the local community.”
It’s actually a genius plan, duping people utterly opposed to socialism and left wing agitation into financially supporting just those diabolical efforts through their own church. Saul Alinsky devoted his master plan, the book Rules for Radicals, to satan, and I feel the program he instituted (using churches as vehicles for funding and respectability) is satanic in its perverse brilliance.
Pope Francis: “God does not love some Christians” November 12, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, disaster, error, General Catholic, Papa, persecution, scandals, secularism, shocking, Society, SOD, the return.
Some readers may recall that I used to be on radio, both broadcast and internet. I loved doing radio but I was cognizant of the danger that it is so easy to misspeak and really step in it, so to say. I enjoyed broadcast much more because that was a group format, there were regular commercial breaks, and so I had to fill maybe 10 minutes of content versus an hour or more. I found internet radio a lot less fun because it was just me yelling at my computer screen for an hour. And it just sat there……….and took it. You have no idea how annoying that is.
I bring all this up (and add a bit of levity) because I understand how easy it is to say things one really doesn’t mean when speaking extemporaneously. For a very significant period of the Church’s history (as in, the vast majority), given both the critical nature of their office and the import of their words, popes only spoke in very carefully scripted and reviewed manners. Many popes even of the 20th century recognized the danger in speaking “off the cuff.” Thus it is that I hope and pray Pope Francis just had a bit of a verbal blunder when he stated the following, as reported by the Vatican News Service and commented on (and what good commentary it is) by Bones:
A fascinating theological exegesis emerges from a recent Pope Francis homily on light, dark and grey Christians and that is that God does not love everyone. There are light Christians, dark Christians and the grey Christians and ‘God does not love these’. This is a controversial thing to say, for any Christian. Does God love the lukewarm, grey, mediocre Christian? Can God’s love be earned? [and yet who makes allegations of Pelagianism!] Who is worthy of God’s love? Does God love the ‘good Christian’, let us say the Franciscan ideal, but loathe, or not love the ‘bad or lukewarm Christian’….
…..Recently we have heard more about Pagan Christians. “They” or “them” is a nearly daily refrain of the Pope followed by a swift, sharp criticism towards someone, some ‘kind’ of Christian. Do we only find out who they are when they have been demoted or moved elsewhere? [Ouch, but true....] Are papal homilies really opportunities for Francis to elaborate on the Lectionary reading of the day or are they an opportunity for him to take aim at his theological or ideological opponents and issue a public denunciation? [More like a political speech than a sermon. One might fairly wonder if these are not public signals to those very political hangers-on of this pontificate to take their next action?]
How far does the demonisation of, in Francis’s opinion, ‘the pharisees’, the ‘pagan Christians’, the ‘grey and lukewarm’ Christians, the ‘enemies of the Cross of Christ’ in the Catholic Church extend? Of course, for more denunciations you can read the not-often-updated-because-I can’t-keep-up with-the-insults Pope Francis Little Book of Insults.
Of course, we should all search our consciences for those times that we sin against Christ and by our sinfulness and selfishness fail to live up to the name of Christian. Yet, I cannot help feeling that there is a particular kind of Catholic (If you are Jewish, Muslim, Evangelical, Protestant, Hindu, atheist or consider yourself a genuine Pagan, [Or an active sodomite, adulterer, lecher, etc] don’t worry, Francis gives you a pass…) Francis has in mind, and its not necessarily the people I would usually associate with those who, for example, hate Christ and His Church. [Who, again, seem to get a pass. Or a hearty endorsement]
I have always thought that despite the many, terrible sins that I have committed, the sins I commit and the vices I unfortunately have, despite my lukewarmness in so many ways, my lack of charity and zeal for souls, my indifference to others, that God loves me still. And I have not just considered this a truth to apply to myself, but indeed to all I know, be they Catholic, of other denominations or complete atheists and/or pagans. [Or even enemies of the Church and truly evil men. God may hate sin and allow men to damn themselves, but God created and sustains every one of us, every millisecond of our existence, in the perfect love only He can have]
And if for a moment (and of course, I do actually have those moments) I truly considered that God does not love X, Y or Z, or ‘that type’ of person, I would, I have always thought, cease to be a Christian……
……So when the Supreme Pontiff of the Holy Catholic Church says of certain Christians, that ‘God does not love these’, that is a serious thing to say indeed and one that needs surely some kind of clarification. The idea that Francis might say that God has withdrawn Himself entirely from people who Pope Francis, or Jorge Bergoglio, the man, takes exception to is to say, ‘I know who God loves and who God loathes’, thereby sharing in God’s own thoughts. It is also to say that God loves the man Jorge Bergoglio very much but detests certain Christians. Who could these people be? Who does God not love?
……..The logic of Pope Francis, however, if God does not love ‘some’, ‘certain people’, might lead you to conclude that he [Pope Francis] doesn’t……..
And given how Pope Francis has engaged in more recorded public insults of people of all stripes, but especially of Catholics themselves (when he seems to have unreserved admiration and even adulation for others, like evangelical protestants) than probably all other popes in the past 2000 years put together, I would say this is all of a piece and the explanation fits rather well. I pray it is not true, but as Bones concludes, my heart wants it not to be so, but my head says it is.
So then what we would really have is a blind ideologue, very much lacking in self-awareness, who constantly misrepresents the beliefs and devotions of those he perceives as his ideological opponents while also engaging in heavy doses of psychological projection (Pelagianism, anyone?). I may have crossed my own line regarding making value judgments about the state of the pope’s soul but this is not some minor verbal faux pas, this is the kind of statement simply unthinkable for a Catholic pontiff – heck, even an Anglican “bishop”! – to make. It’s been over a day since this statement has been made and no clarification or retraction has been made, to my knowledge.
The logic of the argument is that if Pope Bergoglio doesn’t love certain Christians, than God doesn’t, either. I have a hard time not seeing even more logical inconsistency in the pope’s statements, because he again castigates the “lukewarm” Christian, but who then did he just marry in Saint Peter’s a month or so ago? Most of those people were public adulterers……are those not “lukewarm” Christians, or even dark ones, to quote the Pope, leading “a life of sin, a life distant from the Lord?” And yet they are fit to receive Holy Matrimony without Confession or contrition and to receive the Blessed Sacrament, as well?
Or is it that he simply does not believe divorce/adultery a real sin, and no impediment to receiving the Blessed Sacrament, in spite of the words of Our Blessed Lord and Saint Paul? But he did associate use of vulgar language with being a “dark” Christian, so how could that be a serious sin and not adultery? The Pope concluded:
we hear so many, some nice, well-articulated, but empty, without meaning
We sure do, don’t we?
I keep trying to be charitable, but I have to say, Bones’ explanation makes as much or more sense to me than any others, in concert with all the other information we have on this most unique of pontificates.