Francis versus the Church, or Francis versus Jesus Christ? October 20, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, General Catholic, scandals, foolishness, disaster, Papa, episcopate, persecution, error, secularism, self-serving, abdication of duty, the return, SOD.
The writer at That The Bones You Have Crushed May Thrill (a sublime bit of Scripture, but I’m not so sure as a blog name) has two excellent posts up on the aftermath of the Synod and Pope Francis. I will quote extensively from one, you can go read the other.
First, is it really in the “God of surprises” to contradict Himself and change eternal Truth? How can we reconcile this belief with the idea that one is “a loyal son of the Church?” The post below starts out with an excerpt from Pope Francis’ “media via,” or “middle way” approach in his closing speech to the Synod, in which the Holy Father posits a path between the “extremes” of adherence to the Faith handed down to us and rank apostasy:
“And since it is a journey of human beings, with the consolations there were also moments of desolation, of tensions and temptations, of which a few possibilities could be mentioned:
One, a temptation to hostile inflexibility, that is, wanting to close oneself within the written word, (the letter) and not allowing oneself to be surprised by God, by the God of surprises, (the spirit); within the law, within the certitude of what we know and not of what we still need to learn and to achieve.
From the time of Christ, it is the temptation of the zealous, of the scrupulous, of the solicitous and of the so-called – today – “traditionalists” and also of the intellectuals.”
In his speech at the close of the Synod it is true that Francis talked of other temptations, but it is noteworthy that ‘traditionalists’ were first in the line of fire. So I guess that before the ‘liberals and progressives’ (Cardinals Kasper, Madriaga, Schoenborn etc) are punished, we can assume Cardinals Mueller and Napier as well as the already demoted Burke will be first for the chop. [It is the actions that speak much more loudly than words. Pope Francis may proclaim the need for a "middle way" in the Church, but his actions show that he sees the middle far, far more to the modernist/progressive side than any of his predecessors. The modernists are promoted and given influential sinecures, while the more faithful prelates are railroaded out of office and banished to the hinterlands. So the "middle way" seems a farce, a rhetorical tool at most, a hypocrisy at worst.]
…… It is only in the reign of Francis that to hold fast to the Magisterium of Holy Mother Church, to defend with one’s speech the Church’s teaching, as Cardinal Burke has done, on the Sacrament of Marriage and the institution of the family, that it has been posited, by the Pope himself, that to do so is a ‘temptation’. The Church, in her teachings and her law has never been ‘flexible’ with sin. It has always shown leniency to repentant sinners. [Repentant being the key word, meaning recognizing one's actions as evil, having true contrition for them (meaning willing to remove oneself from the occasion of sin and do one's utmost to avoid that sin in future), and having a firm purpose of amendment. Remaining in your adulterous situation with your third "spouse" indicates none of the above. I know those situations are very difficult, there are probably a few souls who have been divorced and remarried w/o annulment who now have happy relationships, possibly even with children, and who would like to be faithful Catholics. But they remain in sin, and by endorsing their sin, permitting the Blessed Sacrament to be blasphemed, would be only to further encourage more such terrible situations. We must also recognize, at the same time, that many divorces are made simply for convenience or due to a great deal of flippancy. The basic problem with the Pope's position, however, is that it is no charity to permit people to add sin upon sin, that no matter what he says or what disastrous "pastoral" approach is adopted, the sin will remain, and these souls will be judged accordingly. It is truly frightening to contemplate how far von Balthasar's destructive errors regarding Hell: Population Zero have reached into the minds of even great prelates.]
In his condemnation of the ‘temptation’ to uphold marriage, the moral law, and the sanctity of marriage, presumably Pope Francis is also rather annoyed with Jesus Christ Who said, “Anyone who puts away his wife and marries another commits adultery” and Who said to the woman caught in adultery, “Go and sin no more.”……. [And that is the point of this equally important post. This second post notes that it is not Francis versus the Church, by which secularists mean the "rigid hierarchy," but it is Francis versus Jesus Christ, the Bridegroom espoused for all eternity to His Church. And then we get back to all the false mercy which just happens to accord perfectly with what the world - or the self-anointed elites - demand from the Church. I do not think anyone, even a Pope, can trust themselves to be truly unbiased or uninfluenced by this utterly dominant worldly view, unless they know without doubt they are clinging with all their might to the Doctrine of the Faith. Anything else carries the greatest danger, if not the moral certainty, or worldly self-seeking.]
Clearly, once Francis has purged the episcopate and Roman Curia of liberals, progressives and traditionalists, he will be there, all alone, because he alone can embody the Holy Faith of Christ! Nobody else gets it but him!
And that’s a pretty funny point, which I think is true in the sense that I have increasingly felt over the past year or more that Pope Francis seems to think nobody quite understands the Church like he does, that all of the rest of us – perhaps excluding Kardinal Kasper – are deficient to various degrees in our understanding and practice of the Faith.
So often Pope Francis’ rhetoric is very negative. He has castigated almost every variation in the practice of the Faith imaginable. He very rarely seems positive and uplifting when describing the efforts of millions of pious souls. He seems much more comfortable with those outside the Church, than within. He seems to think, especially, that those of us who adhere to the traditional practice of the Faith are the worst enemies the “Church” – or his reductive vision of the same – has. It is interesting to contemplate how that mentality has seeped into those now leading the Franciscans of the Immaculate. Or maybe it was there all along.
I do bear in mind that I think the rhetoric in Pope Francis’ closing address regarding the errors of progressives/modernists was pretty much just that – he criticized faithful Catholics, and probably felt obliged to throw those pious souls a bone by criticizing the other side. But as I said above, actions speak much louder than words, and Pope Francis’ actions have all been of one kind – advancing and aiding the most egregious modernists, and punishing and inhibiting the more faithful - in proportion to their faithfulness! And that says a lot.
It reminds me of our own leftist President’s dictum to reward his friends and punish his enemies.
I want to maintain that in spite of the criticism and the increasing clarity of my comments I do have a strong filial love for Pope Francis. He remains my father in the Faith. He is the Pope. I find much of what he does and believes disconcerting and destructive, I pray he changes many of his beliefs and practices, but I am in union with him as the Vicar of Christ. God permitted him to be elected Pope, probably to remind us all how short we fall in our practice of the Faith. I am a Catholic, he is my father, and I love and pray for him, even if I disagree with him. But that does not mean I am blind to reality, or have to behave as a sycophant and pretend everything he does or says is just wonderful and the very embodiment of Catholicity.
That kind of hyper-montanism, on even the most trivial of prudential issues, is how we have gotten into this mess. God could be chastising the Church and bishops for turning the Holy See into a cult of personality over the past 120 years or so.
Now I’m just spitballing. I’ll stop.
Helpful tips for our times…….. October 20, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, catachesis, episcopate, error, foolishness, fun, General Catholic, Grace, Holy suffering, manhood, Papa, persecution, scandals, secularism, sickness, silliness, Society.
…….I thought at least the male readers might find this useful:
Maybe it’s just better to wear pants.
This is more romantic:
Whatever the motivation, we’ve got to keep up the fight. The Synod, whatever it was – minor setback, major defeat, or pre-planned retrenchment after the introduction of soul-destroying novelties – will be back next year. We’ll see much more that is disturbing and upsetting between now and then. So keep ‘em girt, strap on your armor, or whatever you need to do to be ready to fight.
So my daughter did this cartoon….. October 17, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in Art and Architecture, awesomeness, Dallas Diocese, Domestic Church, family, fun, General Catholic, Papa, persecution, silliness, SOD.
……more or less spontaneously. I sort of put the idea in her head but she took off and did it on her own. When she started it on Monday, it made a great deal of sense. But I kind of wonder now if it were not the other way around, with a small pope hiding behind a large Cardinal.
I do wish she would use better paper. My oldest daughter is a very talented artist but she so frequently just uses whatever crummy scrap of paper she finds, even though we’ve bought her all these really nice art supplies with heavy bond paper and the like.
It probably comes out better here, I keep my office notoriously dark ———>>>>>>> 0683_001
So another awesome thing about my kids. Yesterday in religion class, of all things, the teacher started touting evolution. My 13 yo was apparently the only kid that fought back. And she apparently didn’t do so just a little bit. I’m afraid there’s going to be a bit of a row about this at the co-op. That sort of thing is not acceptable.
Pope Leo XIII speaks to the Synod and all of us October 15, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, episcopate, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, manhood, Papa, sanctity, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
In the 1860s, the same revolution which had overtaken France in the preceding century, bringing nothing but misery and destruction in its wake, was being unleashed upon Italy. Having been subject to the feverish revolutionary sentiment of Napoleon’s conquering army for over a decade, many in Italy had embraced the worst aspects of left wing thought. Secret masonic societies proliferated, all with the single-minded goal of uniting Italy, then a group of separate states, into one anti-Catholic republic that would crush the papacy and be done with the Church forever. In 1860, the state of Piedmont, under the republican influence of the Comte di Cavour, invaded the Papal States, under the direct sovereignty of the Pope, conquering large swaths of territory and subjecting them to a radical republican government. As we have seen so often – such as Mexico, where masons were also instrumental in the continual revolutions against the Church – the revolutionaries even went so far as to tell the Church how many priests a certain region could have. They said one priest could serve 20,000 souls!
In response to this and any other atrocities, the bishops of the former Papal States region of Umbria, led by the Cardinal Archbishop of Perugia, sent a letter to Blessed Pope Pius IX, cataloging many of the errors of the republicans and the struggle the Church was then facing. I was struck by how much the language of these bishops was in complete contrast to that which emanated from the Second Vatican Council only a century later. The two – faithful bishops of Umbria, and Vatican II fathers – had rather different things to say about certain topics such as “religious liberty.” A few select quotes on the matter from this excellent biography of Pope Leo XIII, who, in my mind, surely must be a Saint:
They are offered [the peoples of the conquered regions of the Papal States] , as the basis of reconciliation, [with the revolutionary powers] to accept the condemned and fatal system of the separation of Church and state, which, being equivalent to divorcing the state from the Church, would force Catholic society to free itself from all religious influence…..
The tendency of this last intrigue is patent enough. It is calculated that the clergy of Italy, violating their own duties, and separating themselves from their lawful pastors, and from you principally; Most Holy Father, who are their Supreme Chief and Ruler, should abase themselves to legitimize and sanction the acts accomplished by the revolution, and thereby become the advocate and accomplice of the total spoliation and destruction of the sacred sovereignty of the Church, which they are now planning so noisily…….
……..And when the overbearing might of the world, in order to supplant it, presumes to enter the sanctuary and to impose on men a fictitious and deceptive morality, it is time that it should hear us repeat: “We must obey God rather than men.” [to impose on men a fictitious and deceptive morality......."We must obey God rather than men".......are you listening, Synod?]
…….We therefore sovereignly deplore both the pretension of our modern politicians, who endeavor to subject to their bondage all ecclesiastical offices, and the blindness of those priests, [and bishops] who, forgetful of their august calling, and dazzled by the false promises of the world, have strayed away from the sheepfold of Christ.
……It is a grievous error against Catholic Doctrine to pretend that the Church is subject of any earthly power and bound by the same economy and relations which regulate civil society. The Church is not a human institution, nor is it a portion of the political edifice, although it is destined to promote the welfare of the men among whom it lives. It affirms that from God come directly its own being, its constitution, and the necessary faculties for attaining its own sublime destiny, which is one different from that of the state and altogether of a supernatural order. Divinely ordered, with a hierarchy of its own, it is by its nature independent of the state.
Perhaps some key takeaways: the order of most liberal states is antithetical to that envisioned in Christendom throughout most of its history and highly disordered from the right morality. In addition, We Must Obey God Rather Than Men, no matter how fallen people and the culture may become, nor how tempting it may be. I am somewhat heartened to see that it appears there are still many leaders in the Church who recognize this, even if their understanding of that obedience may be less than ideal at times. They still seem to get the basic concept, which is a far cry from Kasper and his ilk, who make no pretense that they are undermining and attacking the directly conveyed Law of God.
Cardinal Burke asks for prayers for Synod October 2, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Abortion, Basics, contraception, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Papa, persecution, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, shocking, the return.
When Cardinal Burke speaks, thoughtful Catholics should listen. I received the following in an e-mail. I think the original article was in the Washington Post. There is a lot of blah blah blah in the article, but there is an important point conveyed first:
Cardinal Burke has asked for the Chaplet of the Holy Face of Jesus to be prayed by the faithful for the synod that is meeting in October. Please take the time to pray. Also please keep him in your daily prayers, he is a wonderful and very holy Cardinal. Being in his presence is an experience you never forget. Please pass this prayer request on to others
I find the prayer Cardinal Burke has asked for to be very significant. There is a Confraternity to the Holy Face here in Dallas centered on the generous nuns of our blessed Carmel. I would like to think this request will find many happy collaborators here.
Now, on to the article. When rhetoric reaches this point, you know tensions are high. Words such as those we see below, from men like Cardinal Burke, who normally speak in such a measured and careful manner, indicate major storm clouds. Well, duh, you may say, this is an F5+ tornado and it’s been bearing down on us for months, but I think it significant, nonetheless:
Kasper has said that the pope supports his efforts to find ways to fully reintegrate divorced and remarried Catholics into church life. The proposals have become a prime focus of the upcoming Vatican meeting, called a synod, which will convene on Sunday for two weeks to consider changes in family life in the modern world.
“I find it amazing that the cardinal claims to speak for the pope,” said Burke, the former archbishop of St. Louis, speaking from Rome. “The pope doesn’t have laryngitis. The pope is not mute. He can speak for himself. If this is what he wants, he will say so.”
“But for me as a cardinal to say that what I am saying are the words of Pope Francis? That to me is outrageous,” said Burke, who is reportedly set to be sidelined by Francis to a largely ceremonial post as patron of the Knights of Malta, a global church society based in Rome.
Burke also said whatever Francis thinks about a more lenient approach on Communion for remarried Catholics, the pope can’t change current church teaching because he and all bishops “are held to obedience to the truth” about marriage, and that cannot change. [Well, that is certainly the orthodox understanding. But men like Arius, Pelagius, Nestorius, Luther, and Calvin did not share that view, did they?]
Burke’s comments were echoed by others on the call and represent the latest effort by church conservatives to try to head off any possibility that the bishops and cardinals meeting at the Oct. 5-19 synod would open the door to changing any Catholic teaching, especially on marriage……..
Follows some driven about Kasper.
…….Opponents, including Burke, say that you can’t separate the discipline from the doctrine without undermining Christianity’s moral truths. They’ve become increasingly vocal and organized in lobbying against the reformers. [So, hopefully the forces of Truth won't be caught with their pants down as they were in '62. Allow me to rephrase: I fervently pray the forces of orthodoxy are fully organized and prepared before this Synod begins.]
And now some comments from Cardinal Kasper, who has become increasingly low and debased in his PR offensive prior to the Synod:
In an interview this week, Kasper expressed confidence that bishops at the back-to-back synods would ultimately back some change, and he hit back at critics like Burke, saying they are engaged in political maneuverings. He said they are afraid that any changes would lead to a “domino effect.” [Does this man have any shame? Who instigated the political maneuverings? Which faction in the Church has used nothing but naked power and behind the scenes maneuvers to crush opposition for the past 50 years?]
“This is all linked to ideology, an ideological understanding of the gospel that the gospel is like a penal code,” Kasper, who is retired from a curial job but lives in Rome, told America magazine. [As usual, a progressive projects his own behavior and ideas on others. If there be an ideology at work, it is the deadly and condemned error of modernist liberalism, and you are its prime public promoter, Cardinal Kasper]
Critics of change in church policies are displaying “a theological fundamentalism which is not Catholic.” [Hmmm.....now isn't that interesting. There is Kasper using the term fundamentalism in the last week of September, and a few days later, we have it used again by a well-connected Opus Dei priest. Coincidence?]
“If fear is at work,” he said, “fear is always a bad counselor. The church should not act out of fear. The church should be the people of hope.” [Really, and I could have sworn Saint Paul said "to work out our salvation with fear and trembling." I guess he was a bad counselor.]
Well, there you go, clear as day, the public representatives of the forces of Truth and darkness arrayed against each other.
Who wins may come down to our prayers. Untold, naturally irreparable damage can be done short of “changing” Doctrine – is that not what has occurred in the past 50 years? Did Vatican II formally repudiate any Doctrine? No. It just added contradictory interpretations, subtle shades of grey, and the left’s favorite term, nuance. And look what has happened.
Please consider, in your charity, answering Cardinal Burke’s call to prayer. It would not hurt to start now.
The Chaplet of the Holy Face is below for your convenience:
The Chaplet of the Holy Face is composed of a medal and 39 beads, 6 of them being large ones, 33 being small ones, with a medal of the Holy Face.
The chaplet of the Holy Face honours the 5 senses of Our Lord, Jesus Christ, and entreats God for the triumph of His Church. It is recommended that the faithful pray the Chaplet of the Holy Face to obtain from God, by means of the Holy Face of the Lord Jesus, the downfall of His enemies.
The 33 small beads represent the 33 years of the mortal life of Our Divine Lord Jesus on earth. The first 30 beads call to mind the 30 years of His hidden life. These are divided into 5 groups, with the intention of honouring the 5 senses of touch, hearing, sight, smell, and the taste of Jesus. These senses have their seat, principally, in the Holy Face and render reparative homage for all the sufferings which Our Lord Jesus endured in His Face, through each of these senses.
The last 3 small beads remind us of the 3 years of public life of Our Saviour, and have as their object, to honour all the wounds of His Adorable Face.
Begin as follows:
Make the sign of the Cross, with the Cross, and say:
“O God, incline unto my aid.
O Lord, make haste to help me.”
Then say 1 Glory Be….
Before each group of beads, there is a large bead. On this bead, reflect on the sense of Jesus, or the wounds of His Face, and say 1 Glory Be… and the following prayer invocation:
“My Jesus, mercy.”
On every small bead, say:
“Arise, O Lord, and let Thy enemies be scattered, and let them that hate Thee fly before Thy Face!”
At the end, say:
The Glory Be… 7 times, in honour of the last 7 Words that Jesus spoke on the Cross, and the 7 dolors of the Immaculate Virgin.
Upon completing the Chaplet, say on the medal:
“O God, our Protector,
look down upon us
and cast Thine eyes
upon the Face of Thy Christ!”
Does tyranny reign in the Church? October 1, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, catachesis, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Holy suffering, Papa, persecution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, the return.
I read this brief quote below the other night, and felt very strongly that it very succinctly but accurately defined so much of what is going wrong in the Church today. The Church has been on a long, slow slide ever since the French Revolution. There have been ups and downs since then, but the overall trend has been very negative. Western Civilization took a disastrous turn towards the end of the 18th century, and while the Church fought that turn steadfastly for a century and a half, for the past half century the Church has more and more mirrored the disordered, destructive, fallen culture of which it is both a part, and ordained to stand aloof from. As authoritarianism under the guise of a false liberty has spread in the culture, so has it in the Church. See what you think:
When the Faith is fully lived, Truth and freedom to profess the Truth are the right of every man. When the Faith goes down, authority, bereft of the Truth it exists to sustain, alone is left. And this authority then becomes an absolute; authority without substance; authority without purpose; authority for its own sake. Gradually freedom is replaced, under this regime, with tyranny.
Liberals make great hay out of their supposed open-mindedness and tolerance. That is, until they meet any opposition, and then they become the most totalitarian, heavy handed authoritarians the world has ever seen. This has been a constant feature of the political-cultural left since it came into being 200+ years ago. There are too many examples to list: the bloodbaths of the French Revolution, all for the “good” of the people, the rivers of blood and rigidly enforced conformity of the Paris Commune, the revolts of 1848, all the communist states, all the fascist states…….all of them use such high-minded and flowery language regarding rights, freedoms, the “good” of the people, all the while they impose repressive regimes that would shock the most authoritarian monarch of the “bad old” Middle Ages.
As I mentioned above, this mentality, long resisted, has crept more and more into the Church in the past century or so. Initially it was fought and suppressed, but it came roaring back not just to fight for authority in the Church, but to come to dominate that authority through co-option. The example quoted above had to do with an early example of such egregious abuse of authority, abuses which would have outraged Catholics throughout most of the history of the Church. That specific example had to do with the actions of an archbishop, and later cardinal, whose liberal bona fides were clearly proven when he stealthily sided with Planned Barrenhood to help legalize contraception in Massachusetts in the early 1960s. While there are many debatable matters in that specific case, what is not debatable is that the accused had their rights trampled and there was abuse of canon law, the virtue of justice, and even reason throughout that sad imbroglio.
And we see the same ongoing today. Religious orders are crushed on the flimsiest grounds of suspicion, with no ability to argue their case or right of appeal to the usual juridical structures in the Church. Authority not grounded in the Truth of Jesus Christ and the firmest faith will always tend towards absolutism and will crush the rights of opposing minorities. I am afraid we will likely see much more of this before things even begin to approve. It will take a couple more generations to purge the reigning left wing orthodoxy from the Church – if we are that lucky.
Great minds think alike? I just posted a little excerpt from Pope Leo XIII, whose comments are as relevant to the upcoming Synod as any I’ve seen from any prelate in the Church in the past 2 years. Lo and behold, I stroll over to FideCogitActio, and I find he’s also posted from a different encyclical by Pope Leo material which is also highly relevant to doctrinal issues being forced in the Church today. It does not redound to my charity, but I cannot help thinking that this sudden “crisis” regarding adultery, re-marriage, divorce, non-annulment, and all the rest, matters which have been addressed repeatedly in the past 50 years at the highest level, and which are the result of failures to proclaim many truths believed by the Church, is simply the work of a narrow and self-interested cabal – just as it was in Pope Leo’s day. As Ecclesiasticus says, there is nothing new under the sun (emphasis in original, I and comments):
“The Church … has done nothing with greater zeal and endeavour than she has displayed in guarding the integrity of the faith. Hence she regarded as rebels and expelled from the ranks of her children all who held beliefs on any point of doctrine different from her own. … ‘There can be nothing more dangerous than those heretics who admit nearly the whole cycle of doctrine, and yet by one word, as with a drop of poison, infect the real and simple faith taught by our Lord and handed down by Apostolic tradition’ (Auctor Tract. de Fide Orthodoxa contra Arianos). [Exactly. And the Church has suffered horrible wounds, historically, for that defense of Doctrine, because it was the defense of Divine Truth. But today, it seems fewer and fewer are concerned about things like divinely revealed Truth, and only care about getting along, palling around, cocktail soirees at 5-star resorts, endless ecumenical confabs, and all the other attractions the world holds out for those who will only turn their backs on Jesus Christ.]
“The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authoritative Magisterium. … [As I said in the previous post, this is not complex stuff. It is only (OK, primarily) since the ill-wind of aggiornamento started blowing that doctrine suddenly became so convoluted, nuanced, and difficult to comprehend. Luther, Arius, and other arch-heretics also loved nuance and shades of grey.]
“Wherefore, from the very earliest times the fathers and doctors of the Church have been accustomed to follow and, with one accord to defend this rule. Origen writes: ‘As often as the heretics allege the possession of the canonical scriptures, to which all Christians give unanimous assent, they seem to say: “Behold the word of truth is in the houses.” But we should believe them not and abandon not the primary and ecclesiastical tradition. We should believe not otherwise than has been handed down by the tradition of the Church of God’ (Vetus Interpretatio Commentariorum in Matt. n. 46).”
I could not agree more. I post this as yet another reminder that timeless truths are being called into question, or swept under the rug in the name of “pastoral” sensitivity – but is it sensitive to admit individuals in a manifest state of public mortal sin to receive the Blessed Sacrament? This question can only be answered two ways, and it all comes down to the same narrow, exclusive claims the Church has always made, because it is the Truth: that Jesus Christ is God Incarnate, that He revealed how we are to live, that we will be judged according to our lives, and that we will face an eternity of either Heaven or hell. I simply cannot comprehend how anyone can doubt, call into question, or seek to evade any of the Truths always held by the Church unless they reject one of those four core truths listed above. And I think anyone who is a thinking, praying Catholic knows that the excuses peddled for shucking Doctrine for the sake of pastoral expediency are just that, excuses, and they will not result in any great flood of souls into the Church, but will only result in more falling away, less respect for the Church and Her beliefs, less of that cherished “relevancy,” and more and more ruin.
Maybe this is getting tiresome. I don’t say the above just to complain, but in the fervent hope that someone, somewhere is listening. I know my many good readers listen, but, we laity don’t have a great deal of say. And I feel it necessary to counter all the error emanating from some very high places. I have heard it said, that it takes 15 words to utter some heresy, and 15,000 words to refute it. Well, there you go.
The core point is, there is a religion being pushed that is not that which was held by great popes like Leo XIII, and Blessed Pius IX, and Saint Pius X, and Gregory XVI, and so many others. I will not shut my big trap or pounding fingers until that false, erroneous religion is defeated.
Pope Leo XIII speaks to the Synod…… September 30, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, awesomeness, Basics, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Papa, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, Society, the return.
……and, quite possibly, the current Bishop of Rome. Pope Leo XIII wrote in his 1899 encyclical to the American episcopate, Testem Benevolentiae, denouncing the heresy of Americanism, the following bit below. Reading it again last night, I was struck by how much the “new problems” afflicting the Church, of huge swaths of the world being lost in sin and demands to contradict Doctrine in practice if not directly in order to somehow “excuse” the inexcusable, are not new at all. They are in fact the same old temptations the Church has always faced to please men and not God. Pope Leo was countering a grave problem he saw in the late 19th century US episcopate, that of indifference and a tendency to reduce the Church to an inoffensive worldly do-good society. Unfortunately, Pope Leo’s denunciation of widespread problems in the US hierarchy were ignored then and more or less openly repudiated later on, so that by the mid-20th century many bishops in the US were proclaiming their indifferentist beliefs and tacit rejection of rather large swaths of Doctrine.
Fast forward 115 years from when it was written, I think we can plainly see that the warnings were not heeded, the errors not addressed, and now the errors, even the openly promoted heresy, has spread like a cancer to include vast swaths of timeless, constant Church belief, up to an including solemnly defined Dogmas. But I am poor and ineloquent, it is far better to let Pope Leo speak for himself (I add emphasis and comments):
…..For they [the Americanists, still very much with us today] contend that it is opportune, in order to work in a more attractive way upon the wills of those who are not in accord with us, to pass over certain heads of doctrines, as if of lesser moment, or to so soften them that they may not have the same meaning which the Church has invariably held. Now, Beloved Son, [This encyclical was addressed quite specifically, and pointedly, at Cardinal Gibbons, who, whatever his merits, had pushed the idea of national conferences and episcopal agitation for social concerns] few words are needed to show how reprehensible is the plan that is thus conceived, if we but consider the character and origin of the Doctrine which the Church hands down. On that point the Vatican Council says: “The doctrine of faith which God has revealed is not proposed like a theory of philosophy which is to be elaborated by the human understanding, but as a divine deposit delivered to the Spouse of Christ to be faithfully guarded and infallibly declared [It is precisely this sense that is apparently very nearly extinct in the entire, worldwide episcopate today]………That sense of the sacred dogmas is to be faithfully kept which Holy Mother Church has once declared, and is not to be departed from under the specious pretext of a more profound understanding” (Constitution of Catholic Faith, C. IV). [That is, later "understandings" of dogmas cannot be contradicted by later "explanations" or even 'pastoral applications." REALLY, THIS STUFF IS NOT VERY HARD!]
……Far be it, then, for any one to diminish or for any reason whatever to pass over anything of this divinely delivered doctrine; whosoever would do so, would rather wish to alienate Catholics from the Church than to bring over to the Church those who dissent from it. [And is this not precisely what has happened in the past 50 years, as millions of spiritually starved Catholics have fallen away, exhausted from a diet of progressive pablum?] Let them return; indeed, nothing is nearer to Our heart; let all those who are wandering far from the sheepfold of Christ return; but let it not be BY any road other than that which Christ has pointed out.
We have sadly had a chance to see, lo these past several decades, just how that kind of softer, “more attractive” presentation of “difficult” Doctrine works out. Most of the time, it is simply dealt with as mokusatsu, killed with silence, if not relativized into meaningless, innocuous nothingness. That’s been the case with contraception and fornication, and looks to be spreading to include fake marriage, divorce, blasphemy of the Blessed Sacrament, etc., etc. “Oh, it’s too hard to talk about X” our bishops living in multi-million dollar mansions say. “Oh, we will turn people away from the Church,” say the men who have overseen the greatest collapse in Church attendance, vocation rates, donations, you name it in recorded history. What an utter collapse in authority.
It would be unbelievable if we were not living through it. Catholic bishops being the prime agents of the destruction of Dogma. For the vast majority of the history of the Church, such would have been unthinkable, a few very notable exceptions aside.
On a lighthearted side note, I cannot tell how great is the temptation I feel to write “Pope Saint Leo XIII.” I know he hasn’t even a cause, but I have long felt this great pontiff has been ignored and overlooked to our collective shame. I do very much love and admire this pontiff. I am really enjoying his biography.
If only…….Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI demands reinstatement as pope September 26, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in foolishness, General Catholic, Papa, persecution, sadness, scandals, secularism, silliness, Society, the return.
As only Eye of the Tiber could possibly report:
According to reports today, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI is seeking the chair of his pontificate months after his resignation. The news has sent shock waves around the world.
Vatican spokesman Fr. Vitateli Devitiamani told EOTT that, “He came for a dinner as scheduled and then proceeded to return to his old living quarters. That wouldn’t be a problem, since His Holiness Pope Francis chose to live elsewhere, the room is open. However, once we asked him where he was going, he simply said, ‘I’m back,’ then proceeded to put his sunglasses on even though we were inside.”
Sources say that the next morning, he walked down the hall asking for his valet and his red
Pradashoes, and was overheard asking an adviser to “get Burke on the line.”
This comes 19 months after his official resignation from the Holy See.
Well…….stranger things have happened. And I strongly suspect there will be a book written on the events of early 2013 in the Vatican someday, and it will be a barn-burner.
A most pre-conciliar commentary on the idol of democracy September 25, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, catachesis, disaster, Domestic Church, error, General Catholic, history, horror, paganism, Papa, persecution, reading, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society.
There is a great conceit held by many Americans and other Westerners; that democracy, whatever reality it has even in our own country, is the only acceptable form of government for not just advanced nations, but for peoples everywhere. A veritable cult has grown up regarding notions such as popular sovereignty, the will of the people, representative government, and all the rest. Surely, there are arguments to commend this very Anglo-American system, but there are also powerful arguments against. For one thing, what may be suited – but perhaps far form ideal – for some nations under certain favorable circumstances, may harbinge death for peoples in other places and times. Such was the commentary of Father Bernard O’Reilly in his biography of Pope Leo XIII, commenting on the foisting of democracy, often unwittingly, on Catholic peoples in Europe after the catastrophe of the French Revolution. I thought there were some edifying points below, perhaps you will agree:
The political quacks who think that the constitutional forms which suit the English race at home or in the United States ought also to suit Belgium, or France, or Spain, or Italy, forget that the institutions of of a country are the natural growth and outcome of a people’s habits and social life. Where, as in Great Britain and in the American Union., the form of government, with the laws and the judiciary, has ever been a part of the people’s existence, it needs no political education to train the masses to the knowledge and exercise of their political rights. They are matters of course, as familiar to the farmer in the country as his implements and methods of agriculture; as handy to the craftsman in the cities as the rules and practice of his trade. How different among the Latin nations of Continental Europe and their offshoots was the use of the suffrage, whether open or secret, in electing to municipal or national offices! What a farce the ballot was from the beginning, and is still in countries we might name! [And is, perhaps, becoming in this country? Or has already become?] And what oppression is practiced, in the name of liberty and under the sham of constitutional forms, by peoples among whom anti-Christian teachings destroy the religious and moral sense, with the elementary and essential ideas of individual right, making what they call free government the most hideous intolerance and the downright and unrestrained proscription of all opinions, convictions, and acts which differ from their own false and narrow notions! [So true, as I think we can see in our own country more and more today, where the rights of minorities, especially religious minorities, and even more, Catholic minorities, are dashed upon the altar of “tolerance” – except for us and our beliefs! Thus, every kink, every perversion, is held to trump the most dearly and deeply held Christian convictions. And never forget, the most repressive countries in history, like the Soviet Union, had constitutions full of flowery language about rights, the power of the people, and all the rest – as they crushed the people, and especially the Church, under an iron boot!
……….Belgium, Catholic Belgium, became especially the paradise of the occult force, not of the purely or professed benevolent and kindly associations which go by different names wherever the English language prevails, but of those bodies of conspirators against Church and State, against the entire social order inherited from the Christendom of the past, who are the legal and legitimate descendants of the masons and their illuminism. English and American societies long and blindly refused to acknowledge the evidence offered them that this occult force on the Continent of Europe, as well as in Spanish and Portuguese America, was a vast and mighty conspiracy against God. [This paragraph compares the differences between the relatively benign practice of mason in the Anglosphere, and the dark, even occult, conspiracies of the Lodge in the Latin countries, always directed at usurping the Church and seeing Her demise. Of course, the masons in the Anglosphere did not have to trouble themselves to achieve the idol of "religious liberty" in England, the US, and other countries, as the triumph of protestantism in those lands, from long ago, made such efforts unnecessary. But they gave much willing help to radical masonic elements in Mexico and other countries struggling to destroy the Church. They have been all too successful.]
……..the battle…..has been fought from the beginning, between the supporters of Christianity, the advocates of a thorough religious education, on the one hand, and the conspirators against religion, who wanted to get possession of the youth and extinguish in their souls all knowledge or all love of the ancient faith of Christendom.
…...we in America are beginning to see that the public school system was from the first open to two serious and unanswerable objections. It levied a heavy tax on those who objected conscientiously to schools where no religion whatever was taught, [Aye, and I must pay handsomely to see others taught dread errors and be led down the wide path of destruction] and refused to grant any share of the school fund to denominations who insisted on a religious teaching in their schools; [No longer entirely true, at least at the federal level. And how was that achieved? Some very cogent criticisms argue that Church schools were only judged acceptable for federal funding when they became so thoroughly secularized and indifferent to our Faith that they were no longer seen as problematic from the reigning secular point of view. The refusal to teach Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus figures prominently in such arguments] and it tended practically (as it has now, confessedly, ended in doing) to turn out young men and women indifferent to all religious principle and practice – men and women all the more dangerous to the community that their trained intellect and acquired knowledge are a terrible agency in the service of their passions, whereas no fear of God is there to restrain them from evil courses or to encourage them to well-doing.
Besides, in a country like the United States, where so many sects exist side by side, with equal rights before the law, [a foundational error in its own right] if the majority must decide the school question like all others of public importance, the minority must perforce submit. Still, that minority will deem it oppression to be taxed for an institution which they cannot approve of or profit by without violating their conscience…….. [Sadly, the vast majority of Catholics no longer deem it a violation of conscience to have their children taught, or they themselves, the dreadest of errors. And for all the world, it appears our leadership has simply exited the struggle, proclaiming the world and its errors right all along, does it not?]
……..Yet the English-speaking world, through its organ, the public press, has invariably sided with the tyrannical majority, and h eld up the struggles of Catholics to educate their children according to the Faith as the battle of the ignorant and intolerant fanaticism against the enlightenment, intellectual progress, and modern civilization.
And the struggle still goes on……in the year 1887. It is still the contest between two antagonistic and diametrically opposed forces, that of religion on the one hand and that of irreligion on the other, for the possession of education, the mightiest means ever devised for the moral elevation or the utter destruction of the human race.
So, one hundred and twenty seven years long, who, does it appear, won that battle, at least to this point? It might also be asked, which side has decided to entirely give up the fight and surrender to the dominant culture, with its conceits of “enlightenment” and “reason,” which are really darker, and more ignorant, than any ideology since Christianity gained ascendancy 1700 years ago?
Something, perhaps, to ponder this weekend.