Another craven submission from Radio Vaticana September 2, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, scandals, secularism, Society.
Via Rorate (http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/09/coexist-hochkultur-in-vatican-radio.html?m=1) it’s hard to find any Vatican organization more on board with the new party line than Vatican Radio. We had the sodomite rainbow flag waving a few months ago, and now this, albeit in a slightly (and deviously) sanitized version:
So this was to do with Radio Vaticana’s coverage – seemingly inexplicable – of some Argentine children’s program. The RV website was breathless with progressive praise:
In today’s episode (of Footprints in Culture) we arrive at the world of Plim Plim, an Argentine series whose goal is to educate and amuse the little ones at home, always hand in hand with solidarity, responsibility, teamwork, sports, and respect for the environment.
It’s almost all there, almost the entire “new” Ten Commandments! It certainly seems someone has gotten the message, and it is a very clear one indeed.
Does much seem to be said ? Note we also get beat over the head again with the misappropriation of the rainbow by a certain depraved movement, twice now we’ve seen such at Vatican Radio. I would suggest someone there is out of control. Or perhaps they are doing exactly what their master (s) desire.
I don’t know about you, but I have always found this bumper sticker highly annoying and dangerous in it’s absolute indifference and its smug insistence that devout believers just need to chill out, toke up (or whatevs), and take a chill pill. It is so condescendingly elitist and reflexively progressive. It also shows how the modern liberal state (and its religious devotees) must constantly besmirch, belittle, and compartmentalize religion (nix that: Christianity and especially. Catholicism – you don’t see these same folks troubling themselves much over islamic or hindu extremism) into a very small box.
But of course, liberalism has always been the deadly enemy of the Church. It exists to opposebthe Church. That is why satan created it. It is sad to see its stupid assumptions accepted on a Vatican webpage.
On a personal note, your prayers are having good effect! Please keep praying! If I keep improving, I hope to be back in a day or two. I cannot thank you all enough. This has been the most serious medical situation I have faced since I blew out my back in ’03.
Thank you again.
Traditional Priest – Soft, liberal Katholycism will offer no resistance to resurgent militant Islam August 26, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, disaster, Ecumenism, episcopate, error, General Catholic, horror, persecution, priests, sadness, scandals, secularism, Society, Tradition.
Great post by Father Carota, as usual. He notes that islam is increasing in population at a time when the Church is shedding members in the millions in most parts of the world, especially Europe and the Americas, Her traditional home. Now, I have read detailed studies of islam’s own fertility collapse, and outside a few countries in Africa the population of muslims will peak around 2030 or 2040 and then begin to follow the same decline that is being seen almost everywhere else, but the problem is, islam’s fertility collapse is trailing Christianity’s by over 50 years, and that time interval represents an increasing window of danger as population percentages shift. Irrespective of the demographics, so long as islam, and especially its radical wing, presents a very vibrant, cohesive, and countercultural set of beliefs, it will continue to attract more and souls disaffected with the prevailing sexular pagan status quo, the sort of soft socialism with pandemic sexual immorality that American hegemony has set loose upon the world. The more the Church rejects Her own countercultural beliefs, the more elements within Her try to please the world and succumb to its prince, the fewer the souls that will be attracted to the Church’s far stronger, reasonable, glorious, charitable, and Truthful belief set.
So while the Church continues to retreat under the twin forces of sexular paganism and militant islam, many souls, including souls raised within the boundaries of the remnant of Christendom (Britain is the source of many of the most extreme of the ISIS psychopaths, including the one who beheaded that poor journalist), will drift into islam’s orbit or formally join this disordered, violent, and even diabolical religion.
Father Carota notes some of the depravities of islam, especially with respect to the persecution of Christians, as well as the cancers eating away at the Church. First, only a very brief list of islamic atrocities:
1) Raping Catholic and other non muslim women and girls. [and performing mass, forced genital mutilation. They also sexually enslave islamists of sects other than wahhabism]
2) Driving Catholics and others out of their homes and country.
3) Bombing, burning and destroying Catholic, Orthodox and other christian churches.
4) Suicide bombings.
5) Kidnapping men, women and children to be sold as slaves, (and some as sex slaves). [indeed, the only parts of the world where slavery has not been totally eradicated are in islamic areas and, perhaps, in East Asia, where women and even children are sold into what amounts sexual slavery. But as the sexular pagan ethos continues to advance in the West, there will be fewer and fewer philosophical and social strong points of opposition to slavery, and I fully believe that if this culture does not turn around, the utilitarian and materialist ethos dominant in the West will find justifications for the reintroduction of slavery and/or indentured servitude in the not too distant future]
6) Stealing Catholic’s and other’s houses, cars, jewelry and possessions as they are driven out of town.
7) Torturing, burring alive, crucifying and murdering of Catholics and other religion members, (and bragging about it on Youtube).
Father Carota also notes some specific atrocities muslims have committed, such as various bombings and terror attacks, and the constant treatment of women as chattel. He then asks how such a religion could be growing and attracting thousands of young men willing to die for religion, when most Catholics, far from being willing to suffer even a minor inconvenience to show up to Mass once or twice a year, demand the Church change it’s Dogmas to suit them and their sins. And that is why islam is attracting at least a fair number of converts, because it presents a strong, masculine-seeming and vibrant set of beliefs in opposition to the ongoing pointlessness of self-absorbed existence in the West and much of the rest of the world. Father Carota lists some reasons for islam’s growth:
1) They have passion for what they believe in.
2) They will kill you or make life difficult for you if you do not convert.
3) They give men a masculine role in their religion; a) God made men to be leaders, and b) Men and boys like to fight. [While Western women want to emasculate men and smash "patriarchy." You know what......success in their endeavor will make them even more miserable than they are now. But ideologues aren't much open to reason]
4) Religion and state work together for their religious laws. [This is very key. Islam demands the state accord to the religion, and islamic nations enforce laws to perpetuate their faith. We in the West are of course far too sophisticated for that, having chosen the false gods of "self-determination" and atheism as the de facto state religion. States founded on such nebulous and ultimately false beliefs will not stand a religiously motivated enemy]
5) Men can marry a lot of women and have more sex.
6) Muslim men get non muslim women to fall in love with them and convert. They then could later on find out that these men have other wives as well. [That's not the half of it. They can claim any women from the infidels they conquer and keep them as concubines in their harem. This has been ongoing in Iraq and Syria. Those don't even count as marriages. So muslim men get to screw a lot of different women, which has a certain animalistic appeal].
7) There is sex in heaven. [Their entire conception of "heaven" is entirely worldly. Islam is incapable of understanding God or existence outside of time as they must be, where worldly "pleasures" (almost always associated with some pain or downside) have no meaning. That's because it's a recycled version of pre-Christian Judaism with heretical Arianism thrown in]
8) Oppressed races are given honor when they convert, like when (Cassius Marcellus Clay Jr), Mohammed Ali converted. (Read here his conversion on a pro muslim blog). Many black men convert to the muslim religion in prison. [I don't know about "oppressed," but converts are certainly lauded.]
So what is the Church doing in opposition to this existential threat?
we Catholics 1) feminize our Catholic faith, 2) accept all religions as good and equal and 3) become more and more hedonistic, we will continue to see more and more Catholics converting to islam.
And that’s just the beginning. We also see Church leaders fawning all over islam as a great “religion of peace,” we are told, rather coyly, that islam “worships the same God,” in the current catechism, we see Koran’s kissed, we see even TFG tell muslims there is no reason for them to convert……we see a very great deal, none of it good. We see a constant denial of islam as an endemically hostile religion that seeks to conquer or convert the entire world, and has the zeal and willingness to do so. We also see pointless “dialogue” that often gives scandal and undermines the Faith of the relatively few souls striving to accept and practice what the Church has always believed. We see a very great deal.
Father Carota concludes:
I find it interesting that when the Israelites would become evil, God would send people from Babylon to destroy them and take them into exile. Isn’t Iraq where Babylon was? Yes, it is. [see Psalm 43, which I posted yesterday]
But God will never be outdone, even when we are giving away our Catholic souls to the muslims. God will come to our aid. And that is why we need the passionate traditional Catholic beliefs and practices. At least a few of Jesus’ followers are standing up strong for His Catholic Faith. And our loving Catholic witness in our everyday life, speaks powerfully in a world filled with selfishness and hate.
Meanwhile we should be praying, sacrificing and sending money to help the Catholic refugees from muslim terrorism. Especially offer your Holy Rosaries for the conversion of muslims and the spreading of the Catholic faith. [I do, every day. Even if my devotion and attentiveness during prayer is not what it should be] Mary has always had a powerful hand in defeating the muslims and all evil. [Dang right! And another sign of the weakness in the Church today was the replacement of the great Feast of Our Lady of Victory every October with Our Lady of the Rosary. I have a great devotion to the Rosary, but Our Lady is also a powerful intercessor in earthly Christian struggles against rampaging hordes of pagans and infidels of all stripes, especially muslims. She has intervened to effect miraculous victories on numerous occasions. And, in response to the overly pacifist tendency in Catholicism today, a complete misunderstanding and misrepresentation of Saint Francis, in particular, our God is the God of Armies! That's what "God of Hosts" means, He is the God of Armies, earthly and angelic! And He always intervenes to protect and bring victory to His souls, when they are faithful to Him!]
I’ll add this final consideration – does not soft, liberal katholycism, far from offering any opposition to islam and its effectiveness in bringing in many converts, some former Catholics, but does it not instead immensely aid islam in its continued growth and depredations? Does not the pathetically soft response of so many Church leaders only help convince radical islamists that Christianity is weak and ripe for attack? And for how long must we be told that the great mass of muslims are peaceful and kind and loving, just like the best Catholics, when they seem to offer absolutely no opposition to the radical elements at all (exactly the opposite from how “radical” traditional Catholics are treated), and in fact can be found, in much coverage of the ongoing atrocities, happily milling around and taking photos and videos while people are crucified, beheaded, raped, or shot? Where is the movement of this “great mass” of muslims in opposition to the radicals? They are nowhere to be found, because they are either too cowed to stand against them, or really don’t mind seeing Christian, shiites, and others, get what they “deserve.”
End post. I was going to post a great writing by Saint Louis, King of France, but I have run out of time. Tomorrow, God willing! Dang work!
Over at The Remnant Newspaper’s website, Christopher Ferrara has a loooooong article about the upcoming Synod and all the many, many reasons faithful/traditional Catholics might want to oppose it. Some of the reasons are mere annoyances or doubts caused by TFG’s behavior, while many others are quite detailed and deserve serious consideration. Because the post is so long and detailed, it’s a bit difficult to excerpt, but here’s a couple of extracts (my emphasis and comments):
First they came for the Roman Rite, which they destroyed. Then they came for the Church Militant, which they disarmed and surrendered to the spirit of the age. Now, at the Synod, which threatens to become Vatican II rebooted, progressivist bishops and their apparatchiks will be coming for the moral law itself under the guise of a search for “pastoral solutions” to “challenges facing the family” [This is a point Christopher Ferrara and Michael Matt have argued extensively in other settings. Suffice it to say, the argument, I believe, proves beyond a doubt there is certainly a large segment of the hierarchy that does seem set on that last bit, which is the unwinding of the Church's entire moral law, or whatever remains after 50 years of concerted assault. I will say that Cardinal Kasper and his greatest ally have been almost diabolically wise in their choice of point of attack, because if one undoes the current belief surrounding marriage as one time union of man and wife resulting in a radically new and different union that simply can't be undone, while simultaneously turning the Blessed Sacrament, the reception of God in the Flesh Himself, into something to which every person has a positive right, irrespective of their sinfulness......if you do these two things, the entire moral Doctrine of the Faith can be completely unwound and destroyed, along with much of the remaining positive theology in other areas. The Church would be left a totally prostate liberal protestant sect, about on the par with the episcopalians. And look at how well they're doing, with their average congregation size of, I kid not, 67 souls]
But the proposal to find “solutions for remarried divorcees” is only part of the looming threat posed by the Synod—a Synod for which there is no more actual need than there was for the disastrous Second Vatican Council itself. The entire Synod project smacks of an effort to determine Church practice on the basis of what people who reject Church teaching would like to see. In that regard, the Synod’s Instrumentum Laboris(working document) refers to the earlier “Preparatory Document” containing a survey filled with loaded questions which give the impression that Church teaching is a matter for debate and discussion at the “pastoral” level. While the questionnaire was directed solely to the bishops, many bishops promptly distributed it widely or posted it on diocesan websites to obtain “input” from any priests and members of the laity who wished to speak for “the People of God.” The result, quite predictably, was that a questionnaire intended for the bishops became an opinion poll generating what the Instrumentum Laboris calls “significant reflection among the People of God” regarding “new demands of the People of God.” Demands! [So, after 50 years of catering to the absolute lowest common denominator in the Church, from aggrieved liberals to apostate priests, how has that worked out? Has the Church, through this debasing of Herself, at least attracted scads of liberal converts and reverts into the fold? Absolutely not. In fact, it is the liberals who have left, or stayed gone, in the greatest numbers. Because liberalism/leftism is a competing religion in its own right, one our secular friends much prefer to any worldly version leftists in the Church can trot out]
It seems, however, that “the People of God” have a problem with the Law of God. Half a century after the imaginary “renewal of Vatican II” supposedly began, the Instrumentum admits: “[t]he People of God’s knowledge of conciliar and post-conciliar documents on the Magisterium of the family seems to be rather wanting,” that “many Christians, for various reasons, are found to be unaware of the very existence of this teaching,” and that “even when the Church’s teaching about marriage and the family is known, many Christians have difficulty accepting it in its entirety.”[Ha! That's a mild understatement! How about stating the Truth, which is that a whole great swath of people are deeply mired in sin, and don't want to be reminded of that fact, so they demand the Church change Her beliefs in order to assuage their own consciences. It still won't work, because God is God and sin will remain sin - all that will happen is the continued destruction of the Church and condemnation of millions of souls] It is of course inconceivable to the ideologues of Vatican II that what the Instrumentum describes is a catastrophic failure of the attempt to “update” Church teaching by restating it in more accessible language. Yet the very title of the document, “The Pastoral Challenges of the Family in the Context of Evangelization,” is an implied admission that fifty years after the Council it islapsed Catholics who must be evangelized because they are more or less apostates, producing the “silent apostasy” John Paul II lamented. Instead of admitting the Council’s utter failure to “renew” the Faith, however, the drafters of the Instrumentum—one can only laugh at the suggestion—call for yet another “updating” of Church teaching…..[Well, of course. As I’ve said recently, the post-conciliar Church represents a competing religion, the religion of secular leftism, trying to exist within the Church. That is impossible, which is why these “spirit of…..” types are irrepressibly hostile to the traditional practice of the Faith. And as Ferrara notes, they are dogmatic ideologues, so they are completely closed to any contradictory evidence – they are literally blind to the destruction their project to redefine the Church has caused. Or, they secretly see it as a feature, and not a bug. Either way, they press ahead with one “new evangelization” and “new catechesis” project after another, only to see Church attendance, donation, vocation, and other indicators slip, yet again. And then we’ll have another “new” program, more slip, etc., ad infinitum, until……..? But I will say this Synod represents one of the gravest threats to any possibility of true restoration in the Church in the past few decades. And it won’t take a formal “change” to Doctrine, Doctrine can be obliterated in practical terms by secular pastoral approaches
So I almost put a question mark at the end of the lede, because while I fear this upcoming Synod (while retaining confident hope of a miracle), I don’t think a petition is going to accomplish very much – especially one with only 1000 signatures. It would take 1000 times that many to attract any serious attention. But, in conscience, I thought I would go on the record as putting forth my wish that it be stopped. I am very concerned that even some subtle “pastoral” changes that seem innocuous at first could have enormous repercussions that are impossible to discern in advance. Certainly we’ve seen that with regard to many pastoral “advances” made in the past 50 years.
You can sign the petition at the bottom of the Remnant link. Whether you sign or not, prayer is an even better response.
I have long maintained on this blog that there are powerful, I would say almost irrefutable, similarities between drug addiction and the favored sin du jour, the sins of sodom and gomomrrah. The more I have thought about this, the more I have tended to believe that “homosexuality” reflects a process of sexual addiction and self-worship that culminates in one desiring the “same,” instead of the “opposite.” In some sense, it’s almost genital worship. Strange as that may seem, you ought to read what some radical lesbian feminists and sodomite men write and say regarding their equipment. To say it seems to be the be all and end all of their existence (speaking generally, of course) would be not much exaggeration.
It is amazing how, in our current society, certain behaviors that result in negative “life outcomes” or effects on one’s life receive great concern and medical attention as something to be combated and, hopefully, reduced, while others – with even far worse outcomes – are held up as a wonderful source of diversity and something as good and wholesome as apple pie. Such is the incredible achievement of the 25 year long sodomite propaganda campaign which has taken a tiny minority, rightfully viewed with some disdain and concern, and turned it into a dominant cultural powerhouse that is now demanding, and receiving, from the dominant majority all manner of special treatment, even at great cost to the majority itself! But the dread life effects remain all the same, and no matter how much propagandists attempt to dress up sodomy and its allied sins as wholesome, that is simply one lie that will never become the truth. As a post at Pertinacious Papist points out, compared to even alcoholics, sodomites have disastrously bad rates of all manner of afflictions, from premature death to risk of all manner of disease. First, alcoholism:
- A significantly decreased likelihood of establishing or preserving a successful marriage
- A five- to ten-year decrease in life expectancy
- Chronic, potentially fatal, liver disease –hepatitis
- Inevitably fatal esophageal cancer
- Internal bleeding
- Serious mental disabilities, many of which are irreversible
- A much higher than usual incidence of suicide
- A very low likelihood that its adverse effects can be eliminated unless the condition itself is eliminated
- An only 30 percent likelihood of being eliminated through lengthy, often costly, and very time-consuming treatment in an otherwise unselected population of sufferers (although a very high success rate among highly motivated, carefully selected sufferers).
- A significantly decreased likelihood of establishing or preserving a successful marriage
- A twenty-five to thirty-year decrease in life expectancy
- Chronic, potentially fatal, liver disease — infectious hepatitis, which increases the risk of liver cancer
- Frequently fatal rectal cancer
- Multiple bowel and other infectious diseases
- A much higher than usual incidence of suicide
- A very low likelihood that its adverse effects can be eliminated unless the condition itself is
- An at least 50 percent likelihood of being eliminated through lentghy, often costly, and very time-consuming treatment in an otherwise unselected group of sufferers (although a very high success rate, in some instances nearing 100 percent, for groups of highly motivated, carefully selected individuals)
What the above fails to note is that the rate of suicide for sodomites is even higher than that for alcoholics, and by a substantial amount. In addition, there are frighteningly high rates of drug addiction among that same sex afflicted community (as any addict can tell you, crossover addictions are exceedingly common. Even when addicts get clean, they often manifest addictive behavior in other areas of life, and it’s not uncommon for addicts to have several addictions ongoing at once).
There are, in addition, other public health risks unique to the latter population which we don’t need to talk about now, but which seem almost to have been purposefully designed to target primarily that community.
That sodomy, in particular, was a dirty practice subject to grave health risks used to be one of those things most even semi-literate people understood, but many in the culture are either too propagandized to understand this, or have been educated into imbecility and no longer accept the wisdom of the ages.
But that process may well have been part of a broader plan, as well, no?
I read the following commentary on the ongoing civil unrest in the St. Louis suburb of Ferguson, MO, on Friday. I’ll present the text before I tell you who wrote it and provide a small amount of commentary:
As we watch the scenes from Ferguson, Missouri unfold on the nightly news, does it prompt some questions? Certainly, they are not scenes that we in the United States expect to see in 2014. But, what do we see?
Are we looking in a mirror? Are we seeing ourselves as others see us? Are we seeing ourselves as God sees us? Do we feel the pain and frustration of those protesting? Do we feel the fear and anxiety of the police officers? Or, are they like figures in an NCIS episode?
I wonder if we have become anesthetized to the authentic agony of others, whose real life pain and suffering will not be resolved by the end of the show. Have we fallen victim to the culture of indifference that inures us to the sufferings of others?
Have we lost the capacity to weep over the pain of those different from us? I hope not. I pray that we seek to be compassionate not judgmental. I pray that we stand down, not stand firm. May God bring peace, justice, understanding and mercy to all the people of Ferguson and throughout this great land and may He grant us all the wisdom to see ourselves as God sees us.
The author was Dallas Bishop Kevin Farrell.
I really don’t want to say too much, I am interested in your reactions. But I will say a few things.
I could bring up a number of matters of prudence, such as the seeming assumption that the audience is a group of 5 year old’s that have difficulty discerning reality from a TV show (a manifestation of clericalism?). Since I haven’t had a TV in a while, perhaps its influence is even more pernicious than I thought, and there are scads of people who think what is occurring in Ferguson is entertainment.
There is much room for commentary on both the original shooting, the crimes that led up to it, the rioting and looting of the community, the extremely militaristic response of the police, and the ongoing strife in that town. Indeed, there have been probably thousands of pages written in response to this Ferguson matter, already.
I noted above, from a man standing in an office inherited from the Apostles, a heavy focus on emotion in place of reason. This is very common in the world and such emphasis on emotion over reason has crept into the Church to a marked degree over the past several decades.
Taking in all of the above, I am struck by how many opportunities for catechesis by Bishop Farrell were missed in choosing to place the emphasis on emotion and non-judgmentalism. Saint Thomas does make plain that to rebel against the state authority is a grave sin, unless the state’s tyranny be truly egregious and all other methods of recourse have been exhausted. Even then, any rebellion against the state, which this kind of rioting represents at least in part, must have at least a reasonable chance of success in changing the government, either by overthrow or by forcing a change in behavior. I do not think either likely in response to the rioting in Ferguson, although I do hope this militarization of the police gets reconsidered.
There seems to be a growing sentiment in this country that if a white cop shoots a black person, some injustice has occurred. But how does that sentiment line up with reason and Catholic belief? That would have been an interesting avenue to explore. And what of the role in the media in stoking this unrest, repeatedly referring to a fully grown, 6’5″ 300 lb 18 year old giant as a boy or teen? Yes, technically he was, but he was a teen fully capable of doing grave harm to others.
I’m not sure what the takeaway is supposed to be. Don’t judge, have empathy for others? So, we should just stand by when people riot and loot? Or feel the pain of “anxiety” of the militarized police when they conduct an erroneous no-knock raid on my house at 3 am on a bogus warrant, because some unfireable civil servant typed in the wrong address?
I’m getting excited, I could go on for quite some time, but some final questions- have we, as a Church lost the capacity for bishops to guide us in necessary moral distinctions and to give reasonably clear and vigorous responses to ongoing moral questions in the Church and world? Or are we as a Church now in a place where the best we can possibly expect is a muddy call to “understanding” and having empathy for all, no matter how egregious their behavior? And, of course, never, never, never judge! Of course, Christ was referring to the state of someone’s soul, and not the evil of individual or group actions, but He did say “judge not,” ergo, irrespective of the context, and contrary to 2000 years of Catholic understanding, you better not judge!
Updates on the Oklahoma City black mass debacle August 21, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, paganism, persecution, rank stupidity, scandals, secularism, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
So in spite of many souls who abstained from meat in the Diocese of Tulsa (at the behest of Bishop Edward Slattery) and elsewhere, it appears the diabolical black mass is still planned for the OKC civic center next month. At this point, organizers are asking poeple to call the OKC mayor and city council. There is also some more background from someone who has already called and spoken with Oklahoma City officials:
Debbie Martin, from the OK mayor’s office, returned my call this morning. She was very sympathetic and said that although the mayor and council all opposed the black mass, the city attorney had informed them that they couldn’t deny the rental of the space because of freedom of speech. I thanked her for her opposition (I’m sure all those opposed haven’t heard “thank you” enough), and pointed out three possible ideas, which she said she would pass along to the attorney.
- The Eucharist is stolen property (already under investigation)
- OK State law prohibits blasphemy
- This group already states that their services is a perversion of the Catholic mass (which implies that it is anti-religion, not religion, which would have been constitutionally protected).
Debbie also stated that police officers would be attending the “event” to make sure laws are not violated, and to make arrests, if needed.
I also heard from a board member that this event had occurred last year, [this is different from what I thought. I read somewhere they had attempted it but switched to a private venue last year] but apparently only one person attended in the audience. I wasn’t aware of that. May all the prayers and good efforts this year overwhelm all the evil from these events and put a stop to them, at least on public property.
Please keep up the calls, especially to Heaven
Yes, especially the last part. Here is a list of numbers to call. Would you strongly consider, in your charity, calling at least one of the below? From what I have gathered, calls to the Mayor and/or city council members are most likely to be effective. They are listening, apparently, even if they feel – maybe conveniently, maybe not – bullied by their attorney into having to allow this blasphemous travesty. I am skeptical the OKC city council would allow something particularly offensive to pentecostals or baptists, but who knows? Even if true, that would not necessarily prove prejudice, but could simply reveal lack of understanding of the actual Christian Faith, which is of course the Catholic Faith – and the utterly central role the Mass plays in that Faith.
Mayor Oklahoma City, Mike Cornett, 405-297-2424
James Greiner 405-297-2404
Dr. Ed Shadid 405-297-2402
Larry McAtee 405-297-2404
Pete White 405-297-2402
David Greenwell 405-297-2569
Meg Salyer 405-297-2402
John A. Pettis Jr. 405-297-2569
Patrick J. Ryan 405-297-2404
The following are some of the members of the Board of Directors of the OKC Civic Center:
Elizabeth Gray (she is a Catholic, I am told)
Walters Power International
2915 N. Classen Blvd. #400
Oklahoma City, OK 73106
6301 Waterford Blvd. #101
Oklahoma City, OK 73113
Price Edwards & Company
210 Park Avenue #1000
OKC, OK 73102
You know what leftists, and especially sodomites do, right? They would picket and threaten the places these commissioners work for, asking them how they could allow such a raging anti-sodomite “bigot” (i.e., someone who understands marriage to mean what it has always meant) to work for them? Such tactics are immoral and unfair, but have been startlingly effective. It is through such pressure tactics that many folks have been “converted” to the embrace of rank immorality, as it is much easier to just go along to get along.
The following is Bishop Slattery’s announcement from August 4, 2014 of his Diocese’s response to this black mass, which included the aforementioned period of fasting/abstinence, in which many good souls participated (I know some local priests did). The video below, when I watched it two weeks ago, really impressed me, as I felt that Bishop Slattery conveyed true pain and umbrage at this most despicably evil of acts, conducted in broad daylight in full public view. We are headed for most dark times, that such a thing would be permitted. And if we ever needed conclusive evidence that this nation, founded on the false principle of “religious freedom” (or, officially endorsed agnosticism if not atheism), has a highly disordered system of political organization, I can’t think of a better example than this current one to give that proof. As we have seen over and over again of late, when it comes to made up rights like “freedom of expression” or even freedom of speech, they inevitably trump the purported “freedom of religion” and, even more, the rights of Jesus Christ our True and Sovereign King. Thus, it certainly appears that very soon, sodomites will be able to petition the government to try to force churches to change their teachings and commit depraved acts of immorality in order to suit them. And furthermore, it appears the government is growing more and more amenable to doing so every day. Which only proves that any nation not founded with Jesus Christ as its visible head is profoundly disordered and doomed to eventual failure, and by failure I mean cruel repression of religion. Anyway, the video, and watch closely from 1:15-1:30 for Bishop Slattery’s obvious pain at the idea of profanation of the Blessed Sacrament:
This is a topic I have always avoided touching with a ten foot pole, because it always turns into a big furball with no end in sight. If the comments degrade, I’ll cut’em off. Against my better angels of my judgment, I’m going ahead with this short post.
So a member of my wife’s blessedly large, Catholic family is pretty into Medj. Apparently, one of the, ahem, visionaries, has claimed to have received a “critically important” message from our Blessed Mother regarding the world, stating that the ongoing wars in the Mideast will spread around the world and that people must pray to stop this from happening. As such, the visionary says Our Lady is asking everyone to stop at 6:30 pm every day to pray three Ave’s.
So here is my question……..don’t we already do that, and isn’t it called the Angelus? Yes, I know, it is typically at 6, and not 6:30, but does Our Lady want both? Or stop the Angelus and do just the three Hail Mary’s at 6:30, or? And don’t Catholics normally pray for peace, and end to awful persecutions and suffering, etc?
It is amazing how topical the Medj visionaries ceaselessly tend to be. That’s certainly conducive to keeping people’s interest up. It is also amazing how much evidence they give of being quite unfamiliar with the great Tradition of the Church.
UPDATE: So I guess it’s a hoax, in the sense that the seer in question claims not to have made this particular revelation. But the interesting thing is, it has been picked up and reported as valid by many pro-Medj sites. Why might that be? Could it be due to the many similar such prophetic announcements made in the past? And as far as the main message of the post goes, pray the Angelus! Hopefully we don’t need a Slavic seer to get us to do that!
Speaking of furballs, this is more to my liking:
Examining the underlying errors of modern(ist) philosophy August 20, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, Christendom, disaster, error, General Catholic, reading, scandals, secularism, sickness, Society, Tradition.
I’ve been reading a very good book on philosophy by Edward Feser called The Last Superstition. This book is a defense of Aristotle, Aquinas, and the gloriously whole and valid philosophy/theology known as Scholasticism, against the rank errors of modern philosophy (“modern,” in this sense, being anything since about 1500). Like Christopher Ferrara’s Liberty: The God That Failed, Feser’s book demonstrates not only the massive errors of modernist, and especially endarkenment, philosophy, he also shows that modern philosophy and all its various antecedents; conceptualism, nominalism, rationalism, etc., were all devised with one primary intent in mind: to free man from the “tyranny” of being a creation of the living God, and to put religion in its right place – that is, somewhere between an annoying hobby and a impolitic set of beliefs forbidden in “polite” society. The excerpt is long, I may have to break it into two parts, but here goes, from Chapter 5, Descent of the Modernists, from The Last Superstition:
But it is not only contemporary secularist progressives who regard this traditional [Catholic] worldview with horror; many early modern thinkers did too. Consider that by the time Bacon, Hobbes, Descartes., et. al., were writing, Luther had already greatly extended Ockham’s individualist tendencies in religion and politics, replacing not only ecclesiastical authority but also (what he regarded as) the stifling and unbibilical system of Aristotelian Scholasticism with the primacy of individual conscience. In his defense of divorce, he had (together with Henry VIII) inaugurated a revolution in social mores, undermining one of the traditional bulwarks of the stability of the family. [And we see, by the same inexorable illogic Luther and Henry VIII used, the continuing unraveling of marriage and advance of horrific immorality all around us today. It is a straight line from Luther's politically convenient (and motivated) embrace of divorce, and today's neo-Sodom] John Calvin’s brand of protestantism had replaced the traditional emphasis on the spiritual dangers of wealth and benefits of poverty with a new affirmation of industry, thrift, and acquisition as Christian “virtues.” Intentionally of not, the Reformation thus ushered in a new worldliness the practical results of which – increased wealth and an new sense of individual freedom – led to a desire for more of the same. At the same time, its fragmentation of Christianity into hostile camps and the bloody conflicts that resulted made religion come to be seen as a dangerous source of social unrest; and its pitting of faith and the Bible against reason and philosophy increasingly made religion come to seem rationally unfounded as well. So, while the ancients pursued wisdom and virtue for their own sakes, and the medievals applied ancient learning to shoring u p the claims of religion and directing man towards his destiny in the hereafter, the moderns, naturally enough given the new cultural climate that shaped their values and perceptions, sought to reorient intellectual endeavor to improving man’s lot in this life, and to defusing post-Reformation religious tensions by sowing a general skepticism about the possibility of attaining much in the way of religious knowledge, so that there’d be little left to fight over. Hence Bacon’s conception of a new science that would give us mastery over nature, the promise of new technologies, and hope for making this world a fitting habitation for man. Hence Locke’s aim of drawing definite limits to what was strictly knowable where religion was concerned, so as to put all conflicting creedal claims on an equally low epistemic footing and thereby to lay the predicate for his doctrine of religious toleration. [Which was really nothing but the promotion of indifference, and with his idea of the secular (or officially agnostic) state, the use of state force to help curtail deep religious belief, especially as acted in the public sphere. From Locke's original and deliberate knee-capping of religion, we have advanced today, inexorably, to mass atheism and the rise of neo-paganism, as surely, and as predictably, as the rising of the sun. And yet Locke is the paramour for the modern republican secular state, including our very own United States]
“And what is wrong with all that?” many readers will ask. Well, there might be nothing at all wrong with it; and then again, there might be something very deeply wrong with it. But the point for now is not to determine whether this project was good or bad, [It has been an unmitigated disaster from which Western Civilization, and possibly all of mankind, may never recover] but rather to emphasize that to a very great extent it was a desire to further the project, and not an actual refutation of Aristotle on particular merits, that moved modern thinkers away from his metaphysics. The agenda determined the arguments rather than the other way around. In particular, it determined an new conception of what science could and should be: not a search for the ultimate causes and meaning of things (as Aristotle and the Scholastics understood it) but rather a means of increasing “human utility and power” through the “mechanical arts” or technology (Bacon), and of making us “masters and possessors of nature” (Descartes). Usefulness would replace wisdom, and pampering the body in this life would push aside preparing the soul for the next. Hence modern science, far from refuting Aristotle’s metaphysics, was simply defined in such a way that nothing that smacked of Aristotelian formal and final causes and the like would be allowed to count as truly “scientific.” There was no “discovery” here; there was only stipulation, naked assertion, and insistence on forcing every object of scientific investigation into a non-Aristotelian Procrustean bed, and – if necessary – simply denying the existence of anything that couldn’t be wedged in. For the Aristotelian Scholastic categories led, in the view of thinkers like Locke, to a dangerous “dogmatism” in religious and philosophical matters. (In other words, if we accept these categories, we’ll have to admit that the entire Scholastic system is more or less rationally unavoidable). And in the Baconian view, they distract us from the one thing needful. (In other words, if Aristotle is right, then we’ll end up spending more time contemplating first principles and the state of our souls and less time thinking up new gadgets and further ways to gorge and sex ourselves). While the early modern philosophers and their contemporary successors quibble over this or that argument of Aristotle, Aquinas, etc., then, what they really don’t like are the conclusions. Admit formal and final causes into the world, and at once you are stuck – rationally stuck – with God, the soul, and the natural law. The modern, liberal, secular project becomes a non-starter. So, “reason” must be redefined in a way that makes these conclusions impossible, or at elast severly weakened. The classical metaphysical categories, espeically Aritotelian and Thomistic ones, must be banished from science and philosophy altogether, by fiat. The game must be rigged so that Aristotle and St. Thomas cannot even get onto the field……
You don’t have to take my word for it. As philosopher Pierre Manent has put it, for the early modern philsophers, “in order to escape decisively from the power of the singular religious institution of the Church, one had to renounce thinking of human life in terms of its good or end” and the “pagan (classical Greek) idea that nature is naturally legislative.” Hence it is the teaching of Aristotle, which was essentially adopted by Catholic Doctrine, that Descartes, Hobbes, Spinoza, and Locke will implacably destroy.” [And even more, they deliberately set out to do so]
I am very much out of time, but I hope the quote makes sense. What it means, and there are numerous other quotes from contemporary philosophers and thinkers of other stripes which confirm the existence of the “project,” the project being to deliberately “escape” from the tyranny of God by rejecting the underlying philosophy – Scholasticism – which so finally and unavoidably proves His existence. There is a reason the 12th and 13th centuries were a period of high flower for the Church and millions of souls, and that is because the people of that time accepted Scholasticism and understood that God, most certainly exists. It must also be restated that Aristotelian Scholasticism has never, in any fundamental way, been “refuted” or shown to be false. There are minor quibbles around the periphery, but the main arguments, the ideas of formal and final causes, have never been refuted. They have been ignored and shoved aside in pursuit of the great, humanist project of liberalism (and note how, even 500 years ago, liberals used the same dirty rhetorical and argumentative tricks they are so fond of today).
The goal of modern philosophy and “science,” then, has been to prevent the Divine Foot from ever having a chance to enter the door of men’s minds. And that goal has been thoroughly achieved.
Maybe more tomorrow. The takeaway is, the entire liberal/modernist/rationalist/indifferentist project is one founded in error and in deliberate rejection of the greatest philosophical truth ever divined by man. And that is why liberalism is generally so opposed to the good of souls. It is also why modern man feels so profoundly lost and detached, that so many people feel their existence is random and devoid of meaning, because they have accepted too many of the claims of modernist liberalism. It is a very straight line from Luther and the other early modern promoters of error, and the dire straights in which the culture staggers along today. It is a very straight line, conceptually, from rejection of Scholasticism and Catholic Truth to “gay marriage” and freezing eggs to be grown in plastic decanters.
A document was released by the Diocese of Fort Worth several days ago that had to do with the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei’s “ruling” regarding Bishop Olson’s abrogating Fisher-More College’s ability to offer the Traditional Latin Mass. That matter certainly caused enormous sturm and drang early this year, but since the college no longer exists as a place where students would physically go to live and matriculate, and thus desire regular access to the Mass, PCED considered the matter now moot and resolved of its own accord. The entire sad affair played out exactly as many of us locals predicted it would.
But that’s not the interesting part. The interesting part, to me, is that Bishop Olson has confirmed something that has been rumored for a while, which is that he is considering standing up a TLM parish in the Diocese of Fort Worth, one that will probably be administered by the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter:
On July 24, 2014 I received a letter dated July 17, 2014 from Archbishop Pozzo informing me that the Pontifical Council Ecclesia Dei considers the matter involving the celebration of the Extraordinary Form of the Mass at Fisher More College to be closed. It is my sincere hope hat all of us in the Diocese of Fort Worth might now be able to move past this recent unpleasantness for the sake of the mission of the Church. With the guidance of the Holy Spirit, the Diocese of Fort Worth is considering, as part of the development of an overall pastoral plan, the establishment of an independent parish devoted to the Extraordinary From and entrusted to capable priests.
I think that’s great and something very much in our prayers. The FSSP monthly newsletter for August covered Bishop Olson’s presiding at Mass last month in great detail. I believe, and have been told, Bishop Olson was very impressed with the Mass, the priests, and the laity. From what I understand (possibly mixed in with a bit of pious hope), whether to have a regular TLM parish in Fort Worth is less a matter of will or desire, and more one of logistics at this point. The Fraternity has more requests for parishes than it can meet, so it may be some time before the request could be met.
As I said, that last bit is perhaps exaggerated, all we know for certain is that Bishop Olson enjoyed the Mass at St. Mary of the Assumption last month and is “considering” the establishment of a TLM parish.
Here is one Catholic praying this consideration becomes reality, and soon!
Blessed Pius IX on change in the Church August 19, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, error, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, paganism, Papa, scandals, secularism, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
Frequent commenter DotDO sent me a link to Fr. Carota’s blog over the weekend. Good Father Carota qoutes Blessed Pope Pius IX as below, considering doctrinal “change” and ideas, very prevalent in the mid 19th century as they were in the mid-20th, that the Church should open Herself up to the world and all its “marvels” and “progress.” Blessed Pius IX, a truly titanic Pope, would have none of that (emphasis in original, my comments):