Corpus Christi Procession in Shafter with Father Rodriguez October 31, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, episcopate, Eucharist, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Holy suffering, Latin Mass, persecution, sanctity, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
1 comment so far
And, I’m pretty sure, there may be a certain commenter on this blog who might be visible in some of the video. And I think also a few other readers may be in the vid.
Please pray for Father Rodriguez. Like so many priests he is a target of satan and he will need a lot of prayers and much Grace.
But for now, it is glorious to see this witness to our timeless and universal faith. I understand many souls come from a long distance to participate in this witness with Father.
Understanding the cold sterility of perverse, “same-sex” relations October 29, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, Basics, contraception, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, paganism, persecution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
The very philosophical E.Bougis at FideCogitActio has a post examining the ontological differences between normal, rightly ordered (and God-ordained) desires ordered towards the procreation of children, and the cold, barren sterility of perverse relations between people of the same sex. Both Mr. Bougis’ own analysis, and a quote from Germain Grisez are worthy of reading. First, Mr. Bougis:
Homosexuality is, by definition, love of one’s sameness-in-sex. It is, in other words, love of one’s self-in-sex. Homosexuality is, therefore, onanism by a longer name. It is the quintessence of the contraceptive (i.e. sterile) mentality. As such, it is not simply immoral; it is an aesthetic outrage, and therefore it is the pageant of our grotesque age.
For those who are, like me, unaware of what “onanism” means, it means self-abuse. And without going into too much detail, I fervently agree. I have long believed that so-called homosexuality is a very highly developed form of narcissistic self-love, fed by self-abuse, that over time and especially with repeated exposure to pornography can eventually – not in every case, but in some – cause an individual to actually develop appetites for the same in intimate relations rather than the opposite. Yes there are many corollary factors such as childhood sex abuse by a same-sex abuser (THE number one cause for falling into this kind of lifestyle), absent or distant fathers, perhaps even a certain predisposition to this kind of perversion, but overall, the perverse appetites develop as a result of unconstrained and truly abusive descent into addictive self-pleasuring. As the mind and soul experience more and more of this pleasure at the, ahem, hands of the self, somehow the natural appetites are deranged to desire not the opposite, but the same in this powerful and almost totally misunderstood realm of psycho-sexual behavior. Acceptance of self-abuse as “natural, normal, and harmless” in pseudo-scientific literature on the subject in such disastrous “guides” as The Joy of Sex and others caused, I believe, the explosion in perverse behavior we have seen in the past few decades. Between normal relations rendered sterile by contraception, and the virtual epidemic of self-abuse in our culture (virtually every man today abuses himself regularly, and the large majority of women now, too), individual’s normal repulsion towards unnatural behaviors has been dramatically lessened, and the groundwork laid for “tolerance” and even “acceptance” of incredibly destructive behaviors. We presently have an epidemic of intentional sterility in our culture, and that epidemic is destroying it. God always allows our own worst sins to be our downfall, whether as individuals, or as a society.
On to Germain Grisez’ comments:
“[A]lthough it is true that partners in sodomy also could conceivably share in a committed relationship with sincere mutual affection and express their feelings in ways that would be appropriate in any friendship, the coupling of two bodies of the same sex cannot form one complete organism and so cannot contribute to a bodily communion of persons. Hence, the experience of intimacy of the partners in sodomy cannot be the experience of any real unity between them. [Which is why so many same-sex "couples" practice serial "infidelity" and few relations last any length of time. Even those most "committed" partnerings held up as examples of "virtuous" same-sex behavior almost always tolerate regular couplings outside the "committed" relationship]Rather, each one’s experience of intimacy is private and incommunicable, and is no more a common good than is the mere experience of sexual arousal and orgasm. Therefore, the choice to engage in sodomy for the sake of that experience of intimacy in no way contributes to the partners’ real common good as committed friends.
Someone who admits that sodomy necessarily lacks the unitive significance of heterosexual intercourse which makes a couple a single reproductive principle might nevertheless suggest that a couple can choose such sodomitic intercourse as a way of communicating good will and affection. [I'm sorry, but to sodomize someone is such a violent, unnatural act, I find any such claims to be mere shams, ridiculous cover given to try to excuse the inexcusable.]However, just as with fornicators, sexual intercourse is not chosen by sodomites in preference to conversation and mutually beneficial acts because it is the more expressive means of communicating good will and affection. Rather, it is chosen because it provides subjective satisfactions otherwise unavailable. [And I think the act in question involves the acting out of very sick and twisted roles of aggressor and submissive which, in almost every human society in history until now, were always understood to be the resort of a demented mind. Fem-fem acting out is just as sick even if the abuse takes place in different ways.] Consequently, while sodomites may not choose, as fornicators do, an illusory good instead of a real one, they do choose to use their own and each other’s bodies to provide subjective satisfactions, and thus they choose self-disintegrity as masturbators do. Of course, while masturbators can be interested exclusively in the experience of sexual arousal and orgasm, sodomites also are interested in the illusion of intimacy.” (From The Way of the Lord Jesus, vol. 2)
Perhaps, but I would argue that even these relatively benign (but still outrageously perverse) reasons for this behavior given above are rare in the individuals so accursed. That is why even in public demonstrations of their perversions these poor lost souls cannot help but engage in outrageous displays of nudity, sado-masochism, denigration of wholesome institutions (like the Church and family), and violence. Anyone who has seen photos of “pride” parades knows this to be true, and while perhaps most do not engage in these very public displays of degeneration, a very large number do so in private.
And what is more, these folks know, deep down inside, what they are. That is why they demand such constant affirmations and even glorification from the culture at large, and why they will persecute the faithful with an unyielding savagery.
It is amazing I even have to write this. The very idea that someone would have to explain the manifest grotesqueness of this perverse behavior against widespread societal acceptance would have shocked the average person from even 20 or 30 years ago. That is how far we have fallen, so very fast.
And yet our beloved Church is absolutely infested with this perversion. Lord, have mercy.
Expert imam proclaims violence endemic to islam October 29, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, catachesis, disaster, Ecumenism, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, paganism, persecution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society.
add a comment
The following qoutes, also from Catholic newspaper, are from probably the most famous islamic cleric and scholar of the past 100 years, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, founder of the world’s first modern islamic republic. The Ayatollah makes many claims from the koran and hadiths……can any muslim, using the same sources alone, refute his claims as to what islam commands?
Militant muslims constantly point to the numerous surahs that call for killing the enemies of islam, lying to them, cheating them, taking their women, etc., etc. But some muslim proselytes in the West, and even the dialogue obsessed within the Church, always tell us that islam is this great religion of peace that is misrepresented by the militants. But the evidence from around the world seems to indicate that the violent interpretation is by far predominant, and we never, ever see some mass movement of “peaceable” muslims against the radicals, policing their own religion, as it were. All too often, the formerly peaceful ones join in the militancy once it is clear the militants are dominant and controlling a given area. It seems the claims of a peaceful, loving islam are more rhetoric than fact.
The words of the Ayatollah, one of the most evil men of the past few centuries, as quoted in Holy Terror: Inside the World of Islamic Terrorism and reported by Catholic newspaper:
Islam makes it incumbent on all adult males, provided they are not disabled and incapacitated, to prepare themselves for the conquest of other countries and peoples so that the writ of Islam is obeyed in every country of the world. But those who study islamic holy war will understand why islam wants to conquer the whole world. Those who know nothing of islam pretend that islam counsels against war. Those who say this are witless. Islam says kill all the unbelievers just as they would kill you all! Does this mean that muslims should sit back until they are devoured by the infidels? Islam says kill them, put them to the sword and scatter their armies. Does this mean sitting back until infidels overcome us? Islam says kill in the service of allah those who may want to kill you! Does this mean that we should surrender to the enemy? Islam says whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword and in the shadow of the sword! People cannot be made obedient except with the sword! The sword is the key to paradise, which can be opened only for holy warriors! There are hundreds of other koranic verses and hadiths urging muslims to value war and to fight. Does all that mean that islam is a religion that prevents men from waging war? I spit upon those foolish souls who make such a claim.
There you have it, from the Ayatollah himself. This man managed to convince an entire muslim country – or enough of it to take it over – that he was right. His language and understanding of islam is echoed by centuries of other imams and caliphs. The most devoted muslims almost universally share this understanding. And then there is the entire matter of taqiyyah.
How can the Church “dialogue” with this?
When Pope Francis spoke on corruption, just who did he condemn? October 28, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Holy suffering, Papa, persecution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, shocking, Society, SOD, Spiritual Warfare.
I know many may not be comfortable with this post. I am sorry that I feel there is some necessity in putting this out. I know many others have already covered Pope Francis’ amazing comments on corruption from last Thursday, but none of that coverage has mentioned the part of this address I found most……..I don’t know, revealing, disconcerting, damning? You be the judge (just not of ……..you know).
Now, for the few who may not know, Pope Francis had an address on Thursday in which he, among other things, stated his opposition to both the death penalty and life imprisonment:
“All Christians and people of good will are thus called today to struggle not only for abolition of the death penalty, whether it be legal or illegal and in all its forms, but also to improve prison conditions, out of respect for the human dignity of persons deprived of their liberty. And this, I connect with life imprisonment,” he said. “Life imprisonment is a hidden death penalty.”
The pope noted that the Vatican recently eliminated life imprisonment from its own penal code.
Just for clarity’s sake I would like to reiterate that the constant Doctrine of the Faith regarding the death penalty has been that the state has the right of the sword. It is a prudential matter to determine whether, or when, to apply that power. Pope Francis may not like that fact, he may think that the death penalty’s day has passed, but he cannot declare the Church in formal opposition to the use of the death penalty, because She has never been so opposed and is not now. For many centuries the Church cooperated in the use of the death penalty by the civil authority for those who committed crimes against the Church. While many may find this cooperation abhorrent today, for me, it was just another indication of how much more seriously the Church, and the souls within Her, took at that time their considerations of the eternal life and their recognition that this life on earth is not the be all and end all of our existence. For those many long centuries, the taking of a human life, even in the name of the defense of the Faith, was seen as far preferable than running the risk of exposing many souls to pernicious, destroying error. But, as a local priest might say, compared to them, we are pygmies in the Faith, and those men giants.
I will also note in passing that Pope Francis’ declaration regarding the Vatican is pointless. When is the last time a murder took place in that uniform community of celibate males? How about an armed robbery, a rape, or a terror attack? So it is not such a great work of magnanimity, it is more another post-conciliar PR move.
Moving on, the comments that many found most perplexing in this somewhat meandering address were the following:
The corrupt one does not perceive his own corruption. It is a little like what happens with bad breath: someone who has it hardly ever realizes it; other people notice and have to tell him,” the pope said. “Corruption is an evil greater than sin. More than forgiveness, this evil needs to be cured.“
Far be it from me to question the theological formation of the reigning pontiff, but this statement is simply amazing on so many levels. There is no evil greater than sin, because all evil stems from sin. So it’s a non sequitur at the top. But often overlooked in dyspepsia about the first part is what is said in the second part: what is being said there? How does this correlate with all the calls to mercy we’ve heard? So, apparently, there are some things we can be judgmental about, especially those that interest sociaslist-leaning (Peronist) elites from Argentina? Who are we to judge the “corruption” of another? Note there was also a bit of nationalism in this part of the address, where the “corruption” was ascribed, at least to some degree, to being a particular fault of “Anglo-type” capitalism.
But for me, the most incredible part of the address is this, below:
The pope spoke scathingly about the mentality of the typical corrupt person, whom he described as conceited, unable to accept criticism, and prompt to insult and even persecute those who disagree with him.
And as the Pope readily noted, corrupt people are notoriously difficult to convince of their corruption. What they need is to be cured, or, as a Catholic might say…….converted.
I believe this was much the point of Father Ray Blake’s excellent post, which conclusion I excerpt below:
The impression that is given is that Justice in the Church is itself corrupted, indeed, that it is actually about settling scores and has nothing to do with truthfulness which was once considered a Christian virtue. Rather than being consoled by accounts of these investigations I become increasingly alarmed, it seems as if some religious orders or diocese that seem to produce fruit and are orthodox are subject to investigation whilst others which are barren and often highly unorthodox carry on in their own sweet way, especially if the have powerful or wealthy friends at court. The problem is that Justice appears to used as a robber baron or some New World dictator might use it, as a means of intimidation and threat, not to bring the Salvific Light of Christ to bear on dark and hidden corners. It is as if some are above the Law and others crushed by it.
In other words, physician, heal thyself. It is more than slightly ironic that in this most “merciful” and “humble” of pontificates, both are amazingly lacking, especially if one happens to fall on the wrong side of the ecclesiastical spectrum. Far from a populist pontificate, it seems far more aristocratic and elitist, much more in the mold of the Renaissance Borgias than the early Church Fathers.
And yet, of course, the Pope remains capable of saying some good things, but I will note the below, which a commenter mentioned and which is being much ballyhooed in some quarters, seems passing strange with respect to the documents just released by the Synod on the family:
In an audience with members of an international Marian movement, Pope Francis warned that the sacrament of marriage has been reduced to a mere association, and urged participants to be witnesses in a secular world.
“The family is being hit, the family is being struck and the family is being bastardized,” the Pope told those in attendance at the Oct. 25 audience.
He warned against the common view in society that “you can call everything family, right?”
“What is being proposed is not marriage, it’s an association. But it’s not marriage! It’s necessary to say these things very clearly and we have to say it!” Pope Francis stressed.
He lamented that there are so many “new forms” of unions which are “totally destructive and limiting the greatness of the love of marriage.”
That’s all very true. And it’s nice to hear. But to quote my father: “a hundred ‘attaboy’s’ are wiped out by one ‘aw shit!'” Maybe not fair, but certainly human nature. I will note these comments are very much opposed to the spin that came out of the Synod, to Cardinal Kasper’s claims of having the fervent support of the Pope in the Synodal attacks on the family, and in Pope Francis’ refusal to clarify his stance with respect to the Synod in any public statement.
Modernists thrive on confusion. Pope Francis, I think, does enjoy adulation and attention. He was with a group of fairly orthodox Catholics. You do the math.
Perhaps I am being unfairly critical. Perhaps I am not giving the utmost benefit of the doubt. But criticism of a Holy Pontiff is most certainly permitted to the faithful, especially when we are confronted with such a bewildering array of statements, PR events, doctrinal proposals put forth in the Pope’s name, reactions, calls for clarifications, virtual defenestrations of the more orthodox members of the Curia, vibrant religious orders shut down, an apparently growing movement to sack any faithful/orthodox bishop who has even a slight scandal in his diocese, etc., etc.
Again, you do the math. Maybe the Pope’s statements on the family above fill you with great hope, but then I would ask, do the documents produced by the Synod, especially the mid-term “Relatio” which speaks in the Pope’s own voice, correspond with these statements above? Does the principle of non-contradiction still apply? And what of the Synod fathers rejecting the most egregious statements of the Relatio, and excluding them from the final report, and then the Pope reinserts them on his own authority?
So please forgive me if in my sinfulness and hardness of heart I am not overly relieved to see the Pope denounce attacks on the family. I appreciate this defense, given in nicely strong terms, but I must ask if recent actions do not correspond with this bit of rhetoric? Could these words be the start of some great conversion? Again, forgive me if I am skeptical. Just today there were some more than slightly discomfiting words from the Holy Father regarding evolution and the “big bang” theory:
Reading Genesis we imagine that God is ‘a wizard with a magic wand’ capable of doing all things, he said. ‘But it is not so. He created life and let each creature develop according to the natural laws which he had given each one.
God is not capable of doing all things? What?!? How counter to Scripture and Tradition can you get?!? You mean God is bound by our pathetic human theories, theories that have been proven wrong time and time again in the history of the religion of science? Coupled with the second half of the statement – taken in context – these are almost the views of an “enlightenment” deist.
So I do not think it will do to get into a “tit for tat” game with Pope Francis’ many off the cuff (or are they?) remarks. For one, the tally may not bode well for Pope Francis’ Catholicity, and then there is the matter that one crazy statement does more damage than a hundred orthodox ones do good. Again, maybe not fair, but that is human nature.
Remnant video on the Synod October 24, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, persecution, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, SOD, the return.
The video below was posted yesterday. I agree with the sentiments expressed almost in toto, although I do hold out the possibly forlorn hope that the opposition that developed towards the end of the first portion of the Synod may coalesce into something significant. As it is, for now, it seems Pope Francis ably sidestepped that opposition and went ahead and had the disastrous paragraphs included in the final report, anyway, if in a different section and with a bit of discussion regarding the “controversy” they caused.
I can’t say I know for certain what happened at the Synod – was it everything going just about totally according to modernist revolutionary plans, who figured in advance there would be some opposition and just moved the ball as far forward as they could? Or was the “revolt,” such as it was, a sign of serious setback? I know opinions vary even among some of the best, most orthodox/traditional Catholics out there.
Michael Matt and Chris Ferrara below seem to veer predominately on the side of the Synod being almost an unalloyed victory for Pope Francis and the modernist cabal associated with him. Some of the language below (a quite small amount) gets a bit harsh and goes beyond what I would typically endorse, but there is so much good commentary it merits airing. I pray Ferrara and Matt (and D) and others are not right, but I fear they are. If they are……Lord have mercy, I have no idea what the Church looks like in a year, but it will not be good:
If criticism of the Holy Father means falling out of full communion with him, then we have an increasing number of prelates doing so. Fortunately, that is not now nor has it ever been the case.
The farce of it all: Kalifornia uber alles orders churches to fund abortions – or else October 23, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, contraception, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, paganism, persecution, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, Society, unadulterated evil.
Well, surprise, surprise, surprise……as part of its enforcement of Obamacare, the state of Kalifornia has determined that surgical abortion now constitutes “basic health services” and must be covered by ALL insurance plans, whether the holders of those plans are churches with moral objections to the murder of babies or not. Everyone with a brain knew Obamacare would wind up instituting universal coverage for grave moral evils like contraception and abortion even on churches, even on the Church. Kalifornia has simply jumped the gun a bit. Whether this will hold up in court, it all depends on what the magic 8 ball of Anthony Kennedy says on that particular day:
For the past four years, the Obama administration and its friends on the Left were careful to claim that they still strongly support religious libertywhile arguing that Hobby Lobby’s Green family, Conestoga Wood Specialties’ Hahn family, and others like them must lose. Principally, they contended, religious liberty protections could not be applied to Hobby Lobby because (1) It is a for-profit corporation, (2) It isn’t a church (and thus not a true “religious employer”), and (3) It is wrong on the science—Plan B, a copper intrauterine device, et cetera, they claimed, do not cause abortions. [WRONG.] They implied, if not claimed outright, that they would surely support religious freedom in another case, but Hobby Lobby was unworthy to claim its protections. [Horse hockey]
The State of California is now calling their bluff. California’s Department of Managed Health Care has ordered all insurance plans in the state to immediately begin covering elective abortion. Not Plan B. Not contraceptives. Elective surgical dismemberment abortion.
At the insistence of the American Civil Liberties Union, [a long time communist front group, founded by a communist] the DMHC concluded that a 40-year-old state law requiring health plans to cover “basic health services” had been misinterpreted all these decades. Every plan in the state was immediately ordered, effective August 22, to cover elective abortion. California had not even applied this test to its own state employee health plans (which covered only “medically necessary” abortions). But this novel reading was nevertheless quietly imposed on every plan in the state by fiat.……..[Ah, the leftist's favorite word.......fiat]
…..Several other California churches have received similar notices from their insurers, and others will follow. While California (like the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS) exempts churches from its contraceptive mandate, there is no exception to this bureaucratic abortion mandate. This leaves California churches in the illogical and impossible position of being free to exclude contraceptives from their health plan for reasons of religious conscience but required to provide their employees with abortion coverage. [And even more illogically, chemical abortions are excluded, but not surgical ones! They must really feel a need to ramp up the offerings to satan there in the Kalifornia state government.]
This California mandate is in blatant violation of federal law that specifically prohibits California from discriminating against health care plans on the basis that they do not cover abortion.[So there had to be a law enacted specifically to keep Kalifornia from persecuting churches? Do they pick on mosques in the same way?] Alliance Defending Freedom and Life Legal Defense Foundation have filed administrative complaints with the HHS Office of Civil Rights (which oversees this federal law) on behalf of individual employees and seven California churches forced into abortion coverage in violation of their conscience.
What will be the administration and the Left’s response to this unprecedented attack on religious liberty? If they couldn’t stand with Hobby Lobby because it was a for-profit business, not a church, and because they thought its conscience concern was misplaced on the abortifacient nature of Plan B, will they now demand religious liberty for churches forced to cover elective abortion? If not now for religious liberty, when?
Oh please, never. They don’t give a squat for “religious liberty,” “freedom of worship,” or any of it. To the militant sexular pagan left, religion is for bitter clingers who just can’t get with the program in modern society without a crutch. Even over just the past few years, the left’s open hatred for bible-@#$%ing Christofascist God botherers [their terms] has grown more and more open. They’ll say what is politically convenient at a particular time, but when push comes to shove, when it’s time to ratchet up the persecution another notch, all on the left will eagerly support the new measure, while the right will just mewl a bit and say how unfair it all is.
Guess what, the left doesn’t care about fair, or truth, or being exposed as hypocrites, or being shown to have massive double-standards, or anything else. All the left cares about is naked power, and gradually assuming more and more of it. To the extent any organization poses even a possible threat to that power, it will be crushed. This is why the left, whenever it has seized unequivocal control in any nation, has always made persecution of organized religion one of its first moves. From France in 1789 to the Piedmont in 1848 to all of Italy in 1870 to Russia in 1917 to Eastern Europe in 46-48 to Chile in ’73 to Nicaragua in ’79, the left has always either co-opted the Church when possible (Nicaragua, largely) or tried to crush it out of existence.
The left is a product of endarkenment rationalism which itself was founded on (often well hidden) hatred of Christianity and the Church in particular. Reading pre-conciliar Church histories, biographies of Saints and popes, and the like, makes clear the extent to which the pre-conciliar Church understood the radical political left to be its deadly enemy. Reality hasn’t changed since then, what has changed is the attitude of most in the Church, who have decided its easier to be co-opted than to fight. But make no mistake, the left will only allow a completely pliant, indifferent, ineffective, and pointless shell of a Church – otherwise, the left is always the inveterate enemy of the Church, with the greater the leftness, the greater the hatred.
City of Houston reissues subpoenas against area pastors October 22, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, asshatery, Basics, contraception, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, persecution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, Spiritual Warfare.
I’ve reported on this persecution before. The gomorrist mayor of Houston a few weeks ago, in a very politically motivated act, launched extremely invasive subpoenas against Houston area evangelical pastors who had opposed her radical pro-sodomite ordinance (including, among other things, provisions that allow men to use women’s public restrooms). This subpoena demanded all texts of sermons, e-mails, letters, recordings of conversations, texts, Tweets, or any other correspondence of any kind that touched on the mayor, the ordinance, “homosexuality,” and several other broad categories. There was a big uproar, and the City retrenched. But now a new and narrower but still egregious subpoena has been launched against the same pastors. It must be remembered this subpoena carries a strong stench of political retribution because the pastors supported a ballot petition to have the offending pro-sodomite ordinance put to a direct vote of the people. The City of Houston threw the petition out (even though it garnered 3 times the required signatures) – for unnamed “irregularities” – and opponents of the ordinance then sued the city. As punishment for such insolence, the city then subpoenaed the pastors, even though they had no direct involvement in the matter.
A few more details in the article quoted below, including the fact that Houston gomorrist mayor Anise Parker may be doing all this to further her post-mayoral political career by playing to the radical leftist/sodomite base:
……the city issued a revised subpoena, which narrows the information sought. From the City of Houston’s filing on Friday:
Request No. 12 originally read: All speeches, presentations, or sermons related to HERO, the Petition, Mayor Annise Parker, homosexuals, or gender identity prepared by, delivered by, revised by, or approved by you or in your possession.
Defendants hereby revise Request No. 12 as follows: All speeches or presentations related to HERO or the Petition prepared by, delivered by, revised by, or approved by you or in your possession.
…..It makes complete sense that Parker would make such a politically aggressive move. She is term limited. This is her lame-duck year in office. This national-news-attracting subpoena is base outreach, and I must compliment her because it is a much savvier move than any Wendy Davis has made. Davis is done. She had flash-in-the-pan popularity among a vocal minority on a widely unpopular issue, which she has long since squandered in issue ignorance and gross insensitivity. Parker is looking to replace Davis as the “It” Woman of the Progressive Left. She has the story, the polish, a better political resume, and intelligence. She just needed name recognition and Progressive cred outside of Houston. Facing off against churches will work for her…….
And thus, persecution of the Church will become a regular feature of left wing (including some Repubniks?) politics from now on, and Father Rodriguez and I have often opined. The Church continues to be compressed into a narrower and narrower space by the twin forces of islamism and sexular paganism.
The author of the piece, an attorney, also opines that Parker’s move is actually in line with current IRS law, which she claims does inhibit 501(c)3 charities from engaging in anything even remotely political. I think that a doubtful interpretation, but I was not surprised to see that it was dirty ol’ Lyndon Baines himself who instituted that law in order to crush church opposition to his senate run in 1954. And we see how the gifts of the progressive left just keep on giving!
The author does feel that Supreme Court would overturn any real IRS enforcement of this law, but I, for one, have little confidence that any matter brought before the Supreme Court can be predicted with any confidence. It’s a crap shoot with those “Catholics in good standing” on the Court every time.
One piece of advice the author gives to churches I do share: gird your loins. We are going to see much, much more of this as it becomes increasingly politically popular to persecute Christians.
I must also reiterate this subpoena apparently affected no Catholic churches or pastors in Houston, because none had taken a strong stand against this immoral ordinance.
A Saint for our time October 21, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, Christendom, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Interior Life, manhood, martyrdom, persecution, religious, Saints, sanctity, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
Saint Edmund Campion was a noted English scholar, revert to the Faith, Jesuit, priest, and martyr to the atrocious Elizabethan persecution of Catholics. Campion had been an Oxford scholar with some sympathies to the Faith when the English persecution got restarted under Queen Elizabeth. He chose to leave the country, entered the famous seminary at Douai, and wound up becoming a Jesuit. Some years later, he was sent by the Jesuits and the Pope to help sustain the many suffering and still faithful Catholics of England after decades of protestant repression. He knew that his mission to England would be his last, that he would be inevitably caught, tortured, and killed, as had virtually every other priest sent or remaining in hiding in England.
When he first arrived in England, it came to Campion’s mind to record a testament to the real motives behind his efforts, knowing that the Elizabethan authorities would try to portray him as a treasonous wretch set upon destroying Elizabeth and her totalitarian Tudor state. This document became known as “Campion’s Brag” and recorded not only his motives, but also his denunciation of some notable protestant errors. The letter quickly became public and there was a furious response from the authorities. More publishings from Campion, destroying more protestant errors, quickly ramped up the pressure, and Campion was inevitably betrayed and brought to incredible suffering.
But I thought the closing portion of Campion’s Brag, as contained in Evelyn Waugh’s very readable little biography of the Saint, was most appropriate for these very trying times. They reveal such a wonderful Catholic sense of being, an ethos, that perseveres joyfully even in the midst of unimaginable suffering and repression. It is the endless charity of the Saints, and their upholding of constant Truth, that has sustained the Faith for these many centuries. I found Campion’s witness very edifying and helpful as we continue to worry over the future of our beloved Church:
….Many innocent hands are lifted up to Heaven for you daily by those English students, [at the seminary at Douai] whose posterity shall never die, which beyond the seas, gathering virtue and sufficient knowledge for the purpose, are determined never to give you over, but either to win you Heaven, or to die upon your pikes. And touching our Society, be it known to you that we have made a league – all the Jesuits in the world, whose succession and multitude must overreach all the practices of England – cheerfully to carry the cross you shall lay upon us, and never to despair your recovery, while we have a man left to enjoy your Tyburn, [where the executions of priests took place] or to be racked with your torments, or consumed with your prisons. The expense is reckoned, the enterprise is begun; it is of God, it cannot be withstood. So the faith was planted; so it must be restored. [We should keep this in mind within our own struggles and concerns today]
If these my offers be refused, and my endeavors can take no place, and I, having run thousands of miles to do you good, shall be rewarded with rigor, I have no more to say but to recommend your case and mine to Almighty God, the Searcher of Hearts, Who send us His Grace, and set us at accord before the day of payment, to the end we may at least be friends in Heaven, when all injuries shall be forgotten.
Such beautiful sentiment! What great charity, to beg that even one’s tormentor and oppressor may happily meet with you in Heaven! That is truly a great example for our times, when many may be tempted to wrath, hatred, and despair. It is so very difficult to maintain charity for those we see working, striving to destroy our glorious Faith, planted indeed by God Incarnate in the Second Person of the Holy Trinity, but it is also absolutely necessary.
Our Blessed Lord told us that we shall be judged on the judgment we mete out to others. Ouch. I need to stick that to my monitor and look upon it every time I write! Our Lord also commanded us to be merciful to all, especially those who treat us cruelly or harm us. Again, so very counter to our fallen natures, but absolutely key to our sanctification!
So do not let yourself be scandalized out of the Church! It has happened to many, and cognizance of that should probably temper more of my writings. Yes we must oppose error at every turn with great force, as the great Saint Edmund Campion did to his death, but we must also do so with love in our hearts and not the hatred of factionalism. I know I struggle with that personally, this writing, it does take a toll. Don’t let them take your peace!
And Saint Edmund and his cohort did triumph in the end, the Faith was sustained – crippled, stunted, but remaining – in England in spite of literally centuries of the cruelest persecution, and bloomed back into full flower in the 1830s when the persecution was finally lifted. It breathed anew for a century or more before the new dark times fell, before the worldwide heresy of modernism became so dominant. But the experience of these English Catholics and martyrs should give us hope as Campion’s example did them. We must remain faithful, even as the giants in our Church seem to fall to the world, the flesh, and the devil.
God bless all of you! May He sustain you to endure these terrible trials.
He’s just a peach of a man. And this is the one who does “serene theology” and is the most influential theologian for this pontificate?
But when you’re the big man’s boy, the “designated success,” you can get away with anything. Anyone who follows the news knows that the self-anointed elites are above the rules they create for the rest of us, and I’m certain Kasper the Klown Kardinal (KKK for short) counts himself in that camp.
First, KKK made the amazing statement to the unquestioning, fawning German Catholic mainstream media that he didn’t even speak at the Synod. It took about 5 seconds for that lie to be exposed:
This Monday, Franca Giansoldati in Il Messaggero reported Kasper’s words on the outcome of the Synod: among other things, he said the following:
“I am not disappointed. There was just a discussion, and now the issue will be deepened. I did not speak at the Synod, I did not want to push my positions. It will be seen, I am calm.”Why did he say that? Because the atmosphere in Rome is so heavy for him after the defeat of the manipulation strategy of which he was the centerpiece during the historic debates of October 16, as well as due to his anti-African words and his lying about it, that he wanted to appear “above the fray,” and save his doomed position safely for the 2015 assembly.Well, that did not last for long. Shortly after this declaration became public, Matteo Matzuzzi, religious correspondent for Il Foglio,tweeted back:
“Card. Kasper: ‘I did not speak at the Synod’. But the official records of the Press Office show that he spoke on October 8, in the afternoon.“Could it be that lying is the entire foundation of his theology? No wonder, as Roberto de Mattei proved, his entire thesis on “communion for remarried divorcees” is based on an immensely and embarrassingly deceptive presentation of historical evidence. Is it possible that this is just the way his mind works always? If so, it does not appear that more “Church Tax Money” is the right answer.
Lie and threaten, lie and threaten, with the occasional disdainful remark: it seems to be his modus operandi. Does this merit a theological award or perhaps, rather, another kind of more thorough evaluation?
Even if he had not spoken, what of it? It is his proposal that drove the discussion, it was his minions in the German episcopate that made the favorable interventions (primarily)……so even this false claim is preposterous and dumb on its face.
But that’s not all KKK’s been up to. He’s evidently hopping mad at Cardinal Burke for having the temerity to question his most exalted and serene authority:
Another comment made by Cardinal Kasper in speaking with Kath.net is quite breathtaking: he talked again about a “deliberate dirty trick” to denounce him. [Oh, now speaking one's mind in defense of the Faith is a "deliberate dirty trick!" Just how exalted an opinion does KKK have of himself?] “The fact that Catholic media (and unfortunately a cardinal in person) should participate in it, in order to tear down another position morally, is shameful,” Kasper opined.[Hello? Pot, kettle? The claim is outrageous anyway. He hasn't hesitated to tear down his opposition. He just doesn't like return fire]When Kath.net asked as a follow-up question who that cardinal was, Kasper unfortunately gave no answer. The retired Curial Cardinal announced, however, that “other journalists” are going to take action against such “undignified machinations”
So now it’s with threats! How is that for “undignified machinations?” KKK, you are a prince among men, I tell you what! A one man demonstration of all that is wrong with the Church. Please keep talking! Please please please don’t shut your mouth! A few more months of this and you will have so discredited yourself and your position that no one with a conscience will be able to approach within 15 feet of you.
But, then again, I would take that threat pretty seriously. This is pretty conclusive evidence that much of the “mainstream Catholic” media is deeply in bed with the modernists – as if we needed confirmation of that! It does further indicate the bankruptcy of the modernist’s position and their own incredible immorality, at least as evidenced by their own chosen leader. Once again, sort of restating the obvious, but there is some benefit when the wolf in sheep’s clothing shows his teeth.
What a scandalous little man. Incredible.
Francis versus the Church, or Francis versus Jesus Christ? October 20, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Papa, persecution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, SOD, the return.
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.