jump to navigation

An assessment of US Catholic colleges well before the Council September 22, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, Christendom, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, paganism, persecution, scandals, secularism, Society, the return.
1 comment so far

I have seen many Catholics, who have at least some awareness of the crisis in the Faith, struggle with comprehending how the revolution that struck the Church in the 1960s seemingly came out of nowhere.  The fact is, it didn’t – the revolution had been growing in fits and starts for 150 years, at least, prior to the Council.  Generally, revolutionary sentiment and error existed just below the surface.  In the early 20th century, the revolutionaries, fired by inordinate zeal, attempted to prematurely break out into the open, but were crushed by Pope Saint Pius X and a still overwhelmingly orthodox Church.  The revolutionary simply went back underground, continued to grow and influence more and more, so that, by the late 50s, the Church was nearly, if not quite, a seething cauldron of error and proto-revolutionary sentiment under a patina of orthodoxy. At least, that was the case among the institutional Church – the academics, religious, priests, bishops, etc.  Many were fully gone over into heresy and revolutionary sentiment, while many others were too weak to resist. All that was needed was a spark, and the Council was that spark.

How did the revolution continue to advance even under official bans and lay opposition?  One key breeding ground was the university.  Most the key leaders of the 1960s revolution came out of academia.  There they had been coddled and protected, allowed to “experiment” with heresy and error, for decades.  As evidence of that, read this critique of the American Catholic (ahem) university in the 1940s, from a book whose title I will reveal at the end of the post:

In the American Catholic college……the apostasy was more implicit, and took the form of a wholesale aping of secular standards.

The Catholic colleges did not say outright that man is in the world for the achieving of his own ends, that he is the alpha and omega of all things.  They did not say, as the teachers in secular colleges, that man’s eternal destiny  is only an idea that some theologians and philosophers like to play with; that it is the notion which made for the backwardness of the dark ages and the superstition of the Middle Ages’ that it is, in fact, the reason why Catholic countries today are without modern improvements, such as bathtubs and showers! [They may not quite have done so then, but they do today!] But the courses in the Catholic colleges were, nevertheless, completely secularized. The religion course was in a compartment all by itself, and its presentation was dull and mediocre, without fire, and it communicated its message not at all to the other courses in the curriculum.  These courses seemed to be set up only with an eye to making the student, later on, a rich man or a power in some field where his scientific prestige or political aggrandizement would redound to the glory of the college.  Even a mediocre student could, for the most part, be assured of a good job upon graduation.  And every student could be sure that he would look like and be like every other college graduate of every other college in America, whether Catholic or non-Catholic.  That he was totally unaware that his Faith was the most exciting thing in the world, and that the full living of it would change the world, seemed not to matter to anyone………. [All of these are not just valid criticisms of Catholic colleges today, but almost all Catholic schools from pre-school on up.  Catholic schools are not ordered towards producing superlative Catholics, but nominal Catholics, at best. They are ordered to produce high achievers and important men of the world - both of which often make right practice of the Faith very difficult.  But we can see this problem has been with us for some a long time.]

………We had no need to ask ourselves for how long this state of things had come to pass in Catholic education. The answer was right before our eyes, across the street in Harvard Yard.  Twenty four Jesuit priests were studying that year at Harvard…….The Greeks have a saying, “Send you son to school to a slave, and he will become a slave.”  We might add, “Send your priests and nuns to secular schools, and they will become secular teachers – in Catholic schools!” [and that is precisely what happened, especially after Council, which precipitated the most dramatic decline in religious life in recorded Church history.  Ever before the Council, there was a push from the highest levels of the Church for religious to receive secular education.  And those religious proceeded to become thoroughly secularized, and then secularized their entire orders!  This is still ongoing today, perhaps due to lack of an alternative.  Even some of the most conservative/orthodox religious orders (but not traditional), especially active orders, send their members to secular colleges so they can teach, or whatever.  Some require degrees before acceptance.  Thus there is still a great deal of exposure to radical secular thought, even if many of those so exposed are relatively inoculated against it by a strong faith.  One wonders if some of that secularism does not creep into the practice of their religious life, however.  Note the early involvement of the Jesuits, which order over the course of the 19th and 20th century turned elite education into something of an idol.]

…….None of the secular colleges have knowledge according to the pattern which a priest should be teaching.  It is easy to see the harm that comes to the Faith of the priests in these universities.……

……It would fare better for Catholic colleges, it seems, if they had, on their faculties, more Cure’s d’Ars, and less PhD’s. The times in which we live are badly in need of saints in the priesthood.  And we are supplying, at the present, a conforming, course-taking, liberal clergy!

Thus……the failure of Catholic colleges in the post-war period in America.  The inroads of liberalism had disequipped them for the strong religious leadership of their own people……..

———–End Quote————-

It must be stressed that this thorough denouncement of Catholic education came from people with direct experience of it, 70 years ago.  This was decades before the scandal of Land O’ Lakes and the formal surrender of the American Catholic college to leftist dogma.  In a very real sense, and save for a handful of exceptions, Catholic colleges chose secular dogma and worldly accolades over Jesus Christ and their own sanctification through marginalization and anti-Catholic bias.  To say it very clearly, Catholic academia, and most primary/secondary schools, have chosen to embrace the dogmas of this fallen world in order to gain the world’s approval and to be a “player” along the same lines as all the other secular universities.  Thus, they are just as far gone into leftism and amoral indifferentism as the worst secular colleges.  But, at least at a secular college, the errors are presented straight up, and not under the devastating deception of being somehow “Catholic” and in line with the Faith.

Oh, the book.  The excerpt is from The Loyolas and the Cabots, by Catherine Goddard Clarke.  Yes, she was part of the sad tale of Father Leonard Feeney, but there is a great deal to recommend in the book in spite of that fact. I left the “announcement” until now because I did not want to bias your reading above.

satanic black mass held, thousands protest and Process September 22, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, disaster, Ecumenism, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.

WARNING, some images and sounds of satanic activity are visible in the first video.  I strongly recommend turning sound off and averting eyes during the evil parts.

This country was founded on several gross errors, some of the gravest being the false idea of “religious freedom,” which in practice means official agnosticism if not atheism, and the idea that even the most perverse, disgusting acts somehow qualify as protected “speech” (OK, the last bit was not explicit at the founding, but has come to be held as a sacred shibboleth by the purveyors of leftism).  Historically, in Christendom, blasphemy was a very grave civil offense.  But that was long ago, and governments now, in a sense, endorse not only blasphemy but even offenses to God as infinite as the mocking of His Passion, Death, and Resurrection as re-presented in every Mass.

The black mass was held. I have not really tried to find out the details, but they claim no consecrated Host was used.  It seems there were also several other elements apparently missing from this “black mass” presentation.  But there was still immense ugliness, perversion, effrontery, and the gravest of offenses against the God whole so loves and created them.  Also on display were some very, very, very lost souls, souls who have such empty lives they are willing to commit even an act of ultimate evil in order to attract a bit of attention to barren existence. And that refers not only to those who committed this montrosity, but also those who, either through some desire to bask in the reflected darkness or out of some morbid sense of curiosity, witnessed this nightmare.

Two videos below on the atrocity, and the reaction.  The first covers bits of both, and, I have to say, gives a fair amount of coverage to the insane rantings of the satanists at the black mass itself.  I would really advise watching with the sound down, or only turning it on for those parts that are licit and not steeped in evil. Avert your eyes from the evil.  It may be best not to watch at all. For those who do want to see the reaction from thousands of faithful Catholics, see below. Thanks to reader MS for the link:

This video has more on the reaction with less objectionable content:

There was a large Procession, there were a couple thousand people, at least, protesting (though I saw one site that said 16,000), there was a lot of good witness, but, still, it happened.  It was not stopped.  That’s where we’re at.  That’s how weak we are.  Sorry, I don’t see any other way around it.  At least a couple of souls went beyond the bounds of what our government overlords saw as acceptable behavior and were arrested for trying to save the souls of those involved in this calamity.  Maybe I’m not supposed to say this, but good for them.  What is 1000 had rushed the doors?

But we Catholics have been conditioned to be nice, sheep-like Americans for 150 years, at least.  Don’t rock the boat!  Don’t offend the protestant majority!  Don’t make waves!  Infiltrate, don’t chastise!  Protestants are our brothers!  We shouldn’t judge “gays.”  Marriage is between a man and a woman, but “civil unions” might be OK!  Abortion is bad, but never mention the cause of the vast majority of them, contraception!  No one really goes to hell!  Muslims are our brothers!  We all believe in the same “god!” And on and on, until we got to where we got today?

So, how long before it becomes “protected speech” to bust open tabernacles and let horses drop their dung on Our Lord, as happened in the Cristiada?  And will the vast majority of our leaders hide their heads then, too?

If readers judge it advisable, I may delete the first video.

Some background on the dismaying appointment of Bishop Blase Cupich to the Archdiocese of Chicago September 22, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Papa, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, the return.

So by now many readers will have heard that Bishop Blase Cupich of Spokane, WA, has been named by Pope Francis to replace the somewhat orthodox Cardinal Francis George as Archbishop of Chicago.  Since this is such an important see, it is virtually assured Cupich will get a red hat before too long.

Who is Blase Cupich?  He is one of the most reliably, and extremely, progressive members of the American episcopate.  He is also extremely close to the current papal nuncio, Archbishop Vigano, a confirmed anti-Ratzingerian.  I was looking through old posts wherein I might have spoken of Cupich, and found two, both of which had some very revealing insights.  In the first, dating from 2011, we see Bishop Cupich banning Adoration throughout the Diocese of Spokane and implementing a complete and total ban on priests in the Diocese from taking part in public pro-life activities:

Bishop Cupich has informed all of his priests and seminarians that they cannot:
– pray outside of Planned Parenthood
– promote or organize peaceful protest outside Planned Parenthood in their parishes (naming 40 Days for Life specifically)
– or allow pro-life material to be distributed in their parishes unless it is published by the Washington State Conference of Catholic Bishops or the USCCB–who, ironically, support 40 DFL.

Eponymous Flower reports that this Bishop Cupich also discontinued Eucharistic Adoration on a Diocese-wide basis at some point in the past

Then I found this editorial I posted by Patrick Buchanan from last year, which turned out to be amazingly prescient and insightful.  Get all this:

“Pope Francis doesn’t want cultural warriors; he doesn’t want ideologues,” said Bishop Blase Cupich of Spokane, Wash.

“The nuncio said the Holy Father wants bishops with pastoral sensitivity, shepherds who know the smell of the sheep.” [Is it a smell, or a stench?]

Bishop Cupich was conveying instructions the papal nuncio had delivered from Rome to guide U.S. bishops in choosing a new leader……[of the USelessCCB]

…Yet here is further confirmation His Holiness seeks to move the Catholic Church to a stance of non-belligerence, if not neutrality, in the culture war for the soul of the West.

There is a small problem with neutrality. As Trotsky observed, “You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you.”

If you couple the above with the below, from an unnamed priest-insider to Vatican politics, you can see the whole picture start to come together:

Cupich’s promotion to this particularly important position, that usually entails the elevation to the cardinalatial red, was a personal decision of Pope Francis himself. More precisely, the Pope imposed his candidate on Cardinal Ouellet and the Congregation for Bishops, under the desperate suggestion of the Apostolic Nuncio to the United States, Abp. Carlo Maria Viganò. We know well that those men who are particularly authoritarian, such as Francis, also are, in many cases, easily manipulated by those who learn how to read them. Moreover, it is enough to waggle before the eyes of the Pope the scarecrow called Cardinal Burke to lead him in one direction or another, because he has kept against the Prefect of the Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura an extremely strong rancor after the 2013 conclave, in which the American Cardinal was one of those who tried to thwart his path to the pontificate.

There is more somewhat cryptic and difficult to follow inside baseball at Rorate.  But I did find it fascinating that Cupich was stressing his relationship with the nuncio last year, when trying to influence the selection of the next head of the USCCB, and now, according to this inside source, he has been rewarded with an immensely visible see (and almost certainly a cardinal’s hat) for his efforts (I am certain there is much more to it than that, but it’s interesting to see the relationship).

Some other data points from his time in Spokane:

  • Opposes Mass Ad Orientem
  • Is a huge liturgical liberal – he is in favor of all the Novus Ordo “reforms” and desires more that has not been implemented.
  • Holds the laughably literal view of “active participation” to mean lay people running around the sanctuary during Mass
  • gave a highly conflicted exhortation when the state of Washington voted to destroy marriage
  • Had his local Catholic Charities sign people up for Obamacare, which of course means helping at least some obtain contraception and abortion
  • On the plus side, he has made occasional pro-life statements.  So, yay.

This guy is clearly in the mode of the Bernadin boys and, as I said, almost eye-wateringly left wing. As for his “smelling of the sheep,” like the vast majority of bishops, he spent less than three years actually serving in a parish.  They are all groomed from an early age.

Someone said to me on Saturday – the beatings are commencing, and they will not let up for a long time.  They are going to get more and more severe. I agree.  I will say, more and more do I lament that unthinking, erroneous, un-traditional ultramontanism that causes the Church to swing wildly from one pontificate to the next.  This is no way to run an eternal Church, founded by Christ – heck, it wouldn’t be a way to run a Jack in the Box, or anything else.

But enjoy your beating, all the same. Seriously, we must not let this get to us, make us angry (which is why I try to keep some wry humor at all times), or take our peace away. If it does any of the above, it is vital to pull back and just focus on our own sanctity.  Don’t let the pope or anyone else ruin your day, or, God forbid, sin!  I know it’s hard and we feel heart-broken and angry, but at this point I think we know what we’re dealing with and it may be best just to go into a shell and ignore all this stuff – if it is really bothering you.  However, to offer up these sufferings for the good of the Church and our souls would be a glorious response, which I strongly encourage.


Readings from Requiem Masses explode protestant myths September 19, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, Bible, catachesis, Ecumenism, error, foolishness, Four Last Things, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Latin Mass, the return, Virtue.

One of the things I find most edifying about belonging to a traditional parish is the vastly increased focus on our last end: death, judgment, Heaven, and hell.  This focus takes many forms, but one of the most efficacious, to me, is the regular offering of Requiem Masses.  Contrary to critics of the Traditional Mass, this is not because TLM devotees are all incredibly old and dying in great droves.  No, it is because Requiem Masses are offered not just once the souls of the departed, but frequently on anniversaries of deaths.  I would say that I assist, on average, at at least one Requiem Mass every two weeks.  Thus, I have a frequent reminder that one day such a Mass will be offered for the repose of my soul, and I am reminded of how vital it is to pray for the souls of the departed.

I have been struck in recent months at some of the readings used in the Requiem Mass.  Obviously selected over the centuries through long use and saintly influence upon the Mass, these readings are not only edifying for those who assist at the Mass, they are also powerful reminders of the errors espoused by so many who take the name Christian.

From the readings for the Daily Mass for the Departed, some salutary lessons in the differences between our Catholic Faith and that of those who persist in the gravest of errors.  First, the Epistle, The Apocalype of Saint John, XIV:13:

In those days: I heard a voice from Heaven, saying to me: Write: Blessed are the dead, who die in the Lord.  From henceforth now, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labors, for their works follow them.

“Their works follow them,” a direct refutation from Sacred Scripture of the protestant idea that works avail nothing, that “faith” alone suffices.  But, even more substantially, who are the blessed who die in the Lord?  The Gospel from the same Mass, Saint John VI:51-55, tells us:

At that time: Jesus said to the multitudes of the Jews: I am the living Bread which came down from Heaven. If any man eat of this Bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is My Flesh for the life of the world. The Jews therefore strove among themselves saying: How can this man give us his flesh to eat?  Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen, I say unto you: except you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink His Blood, you shall not have life in you.  He that eateth My Flesh and drinketh My Blood, hath everlasting life; and I will raise him up in the last day.

All well formed Catholics know that this famous discourse, the Bread of Life discourse from John VI, is the strongest, most obvious support – I would not say it is even a support, it is a command! – from Scripture for the Real Presence in the Blessed Sacrament.  And those who do not eat that Bread worthily shall not have life in them.  Those who do so unworthily shall be “guilty of the Body and Blood of the Lord,” according to Saint Paul.  There is not a single protestant sect that professes to believe in the Real Presence, and even if they did, they would not have validly ordained priests to confect the Blessed Sacrament.  Thus, an extremely strong support for the traditional claim of Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus, and a clear warning to all those who reject formal membership in the Church Christ founded.

There is another very moving passage used in the Epistle for the Mass on the Anniversary of the Death or Burial, from 2 Machabees XII:43-46:

In those days: The most valiant man Judas, making a gathering, sent twelve thousand drachmas of silver to Jerusalem to be offered for the sins of the dead, thinking well and religiously concerning the resurrection (for if he had not hoped that they that were slain should rise again, it would have seemed superfluous and vain to pray for the dead): and because he considered that they who had fallen asleep with godliness, had great grace laid up for them. It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins.

Now, protestants, starting with Luther, reject all of Machabees, and several other volumes of the Old Testament, as supposedly “apocryphal.” Of course, Luther also wanted to exclude the Catholic Epistle of Saint James since it said some very inconvenient things, but was told there were no grounds to do so.  The grounds for the exclusion of the Old Testament books inconvenient to protestantism were similarly flimsy.  It was truly the height of effrontery for men to come along, 1200 years after great Saints and Fathers had settled the Canon of Scripture, to tell them they got it wrong.  And all to support the pretensions of those who rejected the constant belief and practice of not only the Catholic Church, but all the sadly heretical schismatic and heretical groups who had fallen along the way, the Eastern Orthodox and the Monophysites and the Nestorians.

This excerpt from Machabees is one of the strongest supports for the Catholic belief in Purgatory, a place after death distinct, in a sense, from Heaven and hell (although Purgatory is formally part of hell). Of course, Catholics should not fall into the protestant game of looking solely to Scripture to support our beliefs – the Church existed before Scripture was written, She has practiced the same Faith constantly since Her inception, and thus must look to Her own past, to the earliest days of the Church to see what the Church believed and did, then.  And all the evidence is clear that prayers for the dead have been a part of the Catholic religion since its inception.  It is truly a “holy and wholesome thought” to pray for the dead, which many protestants do, anyway, even if their various sects officially disbelieve such “nonsense.”

Have a blessed weekend!

Just a rumor, or? Italian daily reports bishops who accept former FI priests being blacklisted by Pope Francis September 18, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Holy suffering, horror, martyrdom, Papa, religious, scandals, secularism, self-serving, the return.
comments closed

The news, every day, just becomes more and more ominous.  What we have experienced in the past few weeks is almost surreal in its display of hard-hearted vindictiveness and lock-step authoritarian demands for compliance with the new order, or else.  Whatever that new order is.

If the below is true, the animus that is being displayed towards the Franciscans of the Immaculate truly knows no bounds.  It seems very difficult to find a reason for such extreme measures, which, as Rorate notes, are unprecedented in the past several CENTURIES of Church history, if true.  I have a very difficult time comprehending what possible threat could be posed by these men, dispersed in ones or twos or even in small groups in various dioceses of the world, that could make this kind of action necessary, or anything but a cruel and naked exercise of power – IF TRUE:

Because of the harsh intervention that has brought about the near-destruction of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate, many priests of that institute have tried to find refuge by asking to leave the order and be incardinated as secular priests of regular dioceses. Marco Tosatti, the senior religious correspondent for ancient Italian daily La Stampa reports the following:

The transferral of Cañizares to Spain had appeared in the Iberian press – with no small irritation to the interested party – some months before the decision had been made official. And the same thing happens with Burke. [The author of the original Italian piece upon which the Rorate post is based is saying the leak regarding Burke may have been made months before it was intended to take effect. There is a great deal of gossip in the Francis papacy] It is astonishing because no pope before this one – to my knowledge – has anathematized gossip and rumor-mongering, repeatedly and often, as much as the current one; and yet, clearly, his close entourage is not without sin.

And we hope that the unconfirmed report, according to which the Pope is said to have asked for the list of bishops who incardinate in their dioceses the friars of the Franciscans of the Immaculate who wish to abandon the order after its intervention and compulsory re-education, is not true. But unfortunately, we fear the opposite.

Just to be clear, this report is unconfirmed.  Even if true, it is possible a report like this could lead to a backlash that could result in an opposite course being taken.  But from what we have seen in the past year or so, I fear it is true.  My gut tells me it’s true.  And if so, it is shocking how much the public rhetoric departs from the behind the scenes acts, is it not?  It would seem all that rhetoric about mercy is just to advance a certain ideology, and is not to be practiced, especially not with one’s perceived “enemies” – even if those “enemies” have never harmed you in the slightest.  What did our Blessed Lord have to say about that?

Again, just what have these men done that is so absolutely forbidden and evil that they must be so utterly, completely crushed?

I have to wonder if the author(s) of all this destruction will ever lament what he has , what they have, done – will he ever admit it has gone way, way too far?  Or are they too ideological, too committed to the process, to ever do so?

I do wonder.

On the plus side, there may be many Saints being formed in this crucible of unending suffering.  May God have mercy on them, and on their order.

Too bad they prayed too much, fasted too much, contemplated Our Lord too much, and weren’t “Vatican II” enough.  Which latter bit means whatever the progressive overlords want it to mean, from one second to the next.

It’s not easy to stay faithful to a constantly moving target.

This is all so Orwellian it is incredible, but I guess I have to say it one more time – if true.

I think we all know it is.

Islam is a Christian heresy posing as another religion September 18, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, Christendom, Ecumenism, error, foolishness, General Catholic, history, priests, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, Society, Spiritual Warfare, true leadership.
comments closed

I believe this is the same priest that I tried to post yesterday.  He’s certainly hitting on all cylinders.  I’m sure this one will work, since this is a Video Sancto product, and not my own fumblings.

The priest below lays out the origins of islam as I have always understood them, although I have tended to think the influence upon Mohammad was more Arian than Nestorian, but I could be wrong.  I had understood, and it seems supported by many statements from that false religion, that Jesus Christ was a man and great prophet but just a man.  Perhaps the greatest of men, but just a man.  That is a highly Arian position.  But I may have misunderstood subtleties in their position, that may make it more Nestorian.

It is important to understand the etymology of all these early Eastern heresies, still very much with us today in the Church.  All of these heresies were dedicated towards stealing honor from Christ and reducing Him to something more natural, less mystical.  So you had the Arians claiming Christ was just a man; that was squashed, so the Nestorians came along and said he was not one person with two natures, perfectly melded, one human, one divine, but was somehow two persons, one human and one divine, melded into one body.  That was declared heretical, and so the Monophysites came along and said Christ was God, and man, but that his divine nature squashed his human nature and so Christ was not tempted, did not struggle with human desires, etc.  That was also declared heretical, and the Monophysites are still around in the Coptic Church today.

I think the priest makes a brilliant point in saying that the many Eastern Church heresies so weakened the Church by the 7th century that it was ripe for the picking by islam’s terrible sword.  The priest also notes that islam, unique among all major religions, makes almost all its converts by forced conversion, instead of appealing to people’s reason and the better angels of their nature.   There are also very strong pagan and heretical Jewish overtones in islam, which makes sense, since even islam’s own history of Mohammad makes plain he took pieces from various religions extant along the Red Sea coast of Arabia and forged a new religion from the parts. Not only that, but he would try out various beliefs, see which ones appealed to the various tribes he was trying to win over, and then adopted those.  Then there is the manifest immorality so prevalent in islam from its very inception, the lack of any miracles to attest to its veracity, and Rushdie seems even tame in the title of his book.

By the way, it pays to pause the video from time to time and read the statements from various Saints on islam.  They are quite edifying.

I may have a fatwa against me tomorrow.

May God have mercy on the adherents of all false religions and sects and convert them to His Church.

Wow – great sermon that highlights the revolution…..and it’s leaders – UPDATED! September 17, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, disaster, Ecumenism, episcopate, error, General Catholic, Latin Mass, Liturgy, Papa, scandals, secularism, self-serving, the enemy, the return.
comments closed

UPDATE: Dear Readers, sorry for the video problem. It played for me – which I don’t understand, it’s like Google somehow “knew” I was the same person who uploaded it, even through the blog software, and it would play for me on the blog.  Can you tell me if it plays, now?  It was really a bear getting that thing activated, because it’s longer than the 15 minute limit.  Again, excuse the picture, although, in some respects, it does seem apropos.

OK, maybe I highlighted the leaders.  I have often wondered what it must have been like, as a Catholic, to have lived through the revolution that was inflicted upon the Church between 1962 and, say, 1972.  I know there was much other insanity going on at the time, so it was only a signficant part of a larger picture, but, nevertheless, I have wondered why there wasn’t more opposition, more “thus far and no farther.”  Well, it seems there is a determined effort to relive those halcyon days (for the progressives) again.  It is odd seeing geriatric men thinking their decades old ideas are “hip” and “with it.”

But the broader question is, if there is a revolution, and it is obvious, what are we going to do about it?

I really like this sermon below.  Thanks to reader D for sending it. I am sure it comes from Audio Sancto.  There is a real zinger in the last minute, quoting, it is said, Paul VI, in response to a question posed to him, as to why he was so severely against the Traditional Latin Mass, and kept pretending it was “abrogated:”

He would never permit the “Old Mass” to remain, for to allow the TLM a home within the Church, would mean that many of the other changes made by the ‘modern church’ might be brought into question, and it might, even, bring some elements of the recent Council, perhaps, into doubt.”

The priest then concludes by asking whether many of the destructive changes of the past 50 years ought to be brought into question.  A year a go, that question could still be fairly asked, now, I think the question is, what will be left even of that rump of Catholicism that existed, say, in 2012.

The sermon——Oh, you don’t know what a battle I had to get this uploaded. I am sorry for the picture but I am out of time for the day.  Just disregard the pic and listen. I do not have time to figure out the movie making software, upload umpteen pics, and do all the rest. Suffice it to say, I will not be providing much competition to Video Sancto anytime soon.

This gets me back to a post I mentioned earlier, another post from Rorate, regarding how the Novus Ordo, or new Mass, was developed.  I sometimes feel bad picking on the Novus Ordo, because I know there are many people who simply do not have the TLM as an alternative. I pray every day for that to change. But I think the below is so key in describing what a false, fabricated, underdone, poorly thought out a product the Novus Ordo is.  It also reveals how the arch-modernist Bugnini used a weak Paul VI and the still incredibly strong unquestioning, almost unthinking obedience to the Holy See to achieve his most nefarious end:

It was Bouyer who had to remedy in extremis a horrible formulation of the new Eucharistic Prayer II, from which Bugnini even wanted to delete the “Sanctus”. [Knowing how truly awful EPII was and is, can imagine what this must have been like, if what we got was an improvement?] And it was he who had to rewrite the text of the new Canon that is read in the Masses today, one evening, on the table of a trattoria in Trastevere, together with the Benedictine liturgist, Bernard Botte, with the tormenting thought that everything had to be consigned the following morning. [And for this, the Roman Canon, 1700 to maybe 1900 years old, was thrown over]
But the worst part is when Bouyer recalls the peremptory “the Pope wants it” that Bugnini used to shut up the members of the commission every time they opposed him; for example, in the dismantling of the liturgy for the dead and in purging the “imprecatory” verses from the psalms in the Divine Office.
Paul VI, discussing with Bouyer afterwards about these reforms “that the Pope found himself approving, not being satisfied about them any more than I was,”asked him. “Why did you all get mired in this reform?” And Bouyer [replied], “Because Bugnini kept assuring us that you absolutely wanted it.” To which Paul VI [responded]: “But how is this possible? He told me that you were all unanimous in approving it…”  [But Bouyer was far from innocent. One of the original agitators demanding they had the right to change the immortal Mass, to "improve" it, he did recoil when the revolution quickly got out of hand.  But see how Bugnini skillfully played one side off the other to keep the revolution always moving forward.  This is the dominant view of how the liturgical aspect of the revolution - the driving force for the whole revolution - was carried out.  Fr. Cekada argues in his book, however, that Paul VI was far from a  hapless dupe in this process, and that he got exactly the "reform" he wanted.  Not too many have argued that point as strongly as Cekada, who claims to have seen Paul VI's handwritten notes all over developmental copies of the Novus Ordo.  The quote from the sermon above seems to indicate Paul VI had a certain motive for the liturgical deform, doesn't it? But who am I to judge?]
Bouyer recalls in his “Mémoires” that Paul VI exiled the “despicable” Bugnini to Teheran as Nuncio, but by then the damage had already been done. [Of course, many reports attribute that sacking to the irrefutable evidence found of Bugnini's masonic membership.  It did take place in 1975, after Bugnini had been given over a decade to wreckovate the Mass and entire Church, and over 5 years after the grave deficiencies of the Novus Ordo were well known] For the record, Bugnini’s personal secretary, Piero Marini, would then go on to become the director of pontifical ceremonies from 1983 to 2007, and even today there are voices circulating about him as the future Prefect for the Congregation of Divine Worship. …
Everything old is new again:

Sources Confirm – Burke gone from Rota, given debasing position September 17, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, Basics, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Holy suffering, horror, mortification, Papa, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, the return.
comments closed

I’m sure it means something to the Knights of Malta, an invitation only charitable organization composed almost entirely of blue bloods, but this is a truly stunning development.  The mask is off, and it’s straight up war.  LifeSiteNews has confirmed that Burke will be gone from the Rota and may even be demoted before the Synod so that he cannot take part. This is huge, because I think Cardinal Burke was leading much of the opposition to the Kasperite gambit to destroy marriage and the perceptions of sanctity of the Blessed Sacrament:

Sources in Rome have confirmed to LifeSiteNews that Cardinal Raymond Burke, the head of the Vatican’s highest court, known as the Apostolic Signatura, is to be removed from his post as head of the Vatican dicastery and given a non-curial assignment as patron of the Order of Malta.

The timing of the move is key since Cardinal Burke is currently on the list to attend October’s Extraordinary Synod on the Family. He is attending in his capacity as head of one of the dicasteries of the Roman Curia, so if he is removed prior to the Synod it could mean he would not be able to attend. [I bet money the goal is to remove him before the Synod, but that may depend on the reaction.  We need to get louder, folks.  The only thing the new order seems to care about is public perception, so let's give them a very, very bad one]

Burke has been one of the key defenders in the lead-up to the Synod of the Church’s traditional practice of withholding Communion from Catholics who are divorced and civilly remarried.

Most of the Catholic world first learned of the shocking development through Vatican reporter Sandro Magister, whose post ‘Exile to Malta for Cardinal Burke’went out late last night.

Things are happening fast, no?  It’s almost like they’re building to a thundering crescendo?





That last one reminds me of:



Birds of a feather.

+Burke to be cashiered? September 17, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, disaster, Ecumenism, episcopate, error, General Catholic, Holy suffering, horror, martyrdom, Papa, persecution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, shocking, the return.
comments closed

I tell you, Rorate had some very troubling posts in the past 18 hours or so.  The focus of this post, the possible (likely, certain?) removal of Cardinal Burke from a position of influence to one of so little value as to be a mighty slap in the face, is, while very newsworthy and immediate, perhaps the less significant of the two posts I am referring to.  I will get to the more significant matter later, God willing.  Hopefully NC and the other good posters at Rorate do not mind my “ripping off” so much of their material!  I do try to be good about attribution!

Anyway, Sandro Magister is reporting that Cardinal Burke will be removed from his role as Prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura, the court of final appeal in the Church, and will be named not to a see, not to some other curial post, but to the obscure and strictly ceremonial role of “Cardinal Patron” of the Sovereign Military of Malta, a fine and storied organization to be sure, but one usually given to retirees or strictly as a side job:

The next victim would in fact be the United States cardinal Raymond Leo Burke, who from being prefect of the supreme tribunal of the apostolic signatura would not be promoted – as some are fantasizing in the blogosphere – to the difficult but prestigious see of Chicago, but rather demoted to the pompous – but ecclesiastically very modest – title of “cardinal patron” of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, replacing the current head, Paolo Sardi, who recently turned 80.
If confirmed, Burke’s exile would be even more drastic than the one inflicted on Cardinal Piacenza, who, transferred from the important congregation for the clergy to the marginal apostolic penitentiary, nevertheless remained in the leadership of a curial dicastery.
With the shakeup on the way, Burke would instead be completely removed from the curia and employed in a purely honorary position without any influence on the governance of the universal Church.
This would be a move that seems to have no precedent.

Rorate adds some strong commentary:

If this rumor is confirmed (which seems quite possible, considering Magister’s excellent sources), it is obvious that this very gentle Cardinal will accept it humbly and silently — but, make no mistake, it will the palpable symbol of the hatred (yes, unfortunately that is the precise word) for the person of Cardinal Burke and especially for all that he represents, that is, a life of complete and absolute fidelity to the Authority, Tradition, and Magisterium of the Apostolic See…… [Fr. Blake notes that Cardinal Burke is one of a very few prelates who have never played the episcopal game, never compromised their virtue or ethics.  Is there no room for such men in the new order?]

……It would be the greatest humiliation of aCurial Cardinal in living memory, truly unprecedented in modern times: considering the reasonably young age of the Cardinal, such a move would be, in terms of the modern Church, nothing short than a complete degradation and a clear punishment (for what?).

And this disturbing bit, which is, perhaps, the point of it all:

Now, should Magister’s prediction come to pass before the Extraordinary Synod of Bishops convenes in October, this will have another dire effect: the removal of Cardinal Burke from the Synod, which he is set to join on the strength of his position as Prefect of the Apostolic Signatura. A silencing and removal that will be all the more significant because willed by Pope Francis, and so ill-timed (or so well-timed, depending on which side of the Kasperite proposal one stands.) [And bear in mind, the boy-rape cover up poster boy of Belgium, an extreme dissident, has been appointed to this Synod, as well.]

In the same post, Rorate also quotes an influential Brazilian cardinal as saying the Church has always been seeking a way to recognize “stable” sodomite unions!  Think about that word, perhaps carelessly chosen, but nonetheless……always.  Do you think this prelate defines the Church as beginning in AD 1965?  Even if you grant that, his comment is ridiculous, but when we think of the stand the Church has always taken against this sin that cries out to Heaven for vengeance, one has to wonder, to what church does this prelate belong? Even many of the sects would have more than a small problem with this statement.

They are sure coming out of the woodwork, are they not?  It’s a veritable Night of the Long Knives at the Vatican.  Our new progressive overlords are not so very tolerant towards those who espouse the bad, old religion.  For them, there is no mercy, only the mailed fist of naked power.

What are they thinking? September 16, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, error, foolishness, non squitur, paganism, rank stupidity, secularism, sickness, silliness, Society.
comments closed

This is a bit non sequitur, but what the heck are these truckers thinking?  I see more and more of this lately, truckers sporting huge spikes on the lug bolts of their front tires.  Do you know what that could do to some car’s tire?  Or another truck?  Or even the car itself?


I would say about 1 in 10 or 15 trucks these days has these things.  And the number is growing rapidly –  I never saw these even a year or two ago.  I caught these two in a traffic jam on 635 within a minute or two of each other a few days back.



I don’t know if this is some attempt to be cute, some theft deterrent, or just being “bad,” but I’ll say this – they are dangerous, and I can’t believe they are legal.  How would someone like it if I had spinning saw blades mounted on the side of my vehicle?  Well……when travelling at any speeds, that’s exactly what these things are.

I suppose, being understanding and all that, they could be just for appearance and are really made out of soft plastic and designed to break away upon contact?  But that would still leave a potential to hose up the finish on someone’s car pretty good.  On the other hand, they could be a sign of the growing indifference many people have towards their fellow man.  I could see someone’s tire getting blown out by these things and then their vehicle flipping and getting run over by the trailer.  And wouldn’t that be fun?

Anyone know what’s up with these things?


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 431 other followers