Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, Basics, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Holy suffering, horror, mortification, Papa, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, the return.
I’m sure it means something to the Knights of Malta, an invitation only charitable organization composed almost entirely of blue bloods, but this is a truly stunning development. The mask is off, and it’s straight up war. LifeSiteNews has confirmed that Burke will be gone from the Rota and may even be demoted before the Synod so that he cannot take part. This is huge, because I think Cardinal Burke was leading much of the opposition to the Kasperite gambit to destroy marriage and the perceptions of sanctity of the Blessed Sacrament:
Sources in Rome have confirmed to LifeSiteNews that Cardinal Raymond Burke, the head of the Vatican’s highest court, known as the Apostolic Signatura, is to be removed from his post as head of the Vatican dicastery and given a non-curial assignment as patron of the Order of Malta.
The timing of the move is key since Cardinal Burke is currently on the list to attend October’s Extraordinary Synod on the Family. He is attending in his capacity as head of one of the dicasteries of the Roman Curia, so if he is removed prior to the Synod it could mean he would not be able to attend. [I bet money the goal is to remove him before the Synod, but that may depend on the reaction. We need to get louder, folks. The only thing the new order seems to care about is public perception, so let's give them a very, very bad one]
Burke has been one of the key defenders in the lead-up to the Synod of the Church’s traditional practice of withholding Communion from Catholics who are divorced and civilly remarried.
Most of the Catholic world first learned of the shocking development through Vatican reporter Sandro Magister, whose post ‘Exile to Malta for Cardinal Burke’went out late last night.
Things are happening fast, no? It’s almost like they’re building to a thundering crescendo?
That last one reminds me of:
Birds of a feather.
Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, disaster, episcopate, error, General Catholic, horror, paganism, persecution, rank stupidity, sadness, scandals, secularism, sexual depravity, sickness, silliness, unadulterated evil.
And I read somewhere it is “sold out,” whatever that means. Satan is indeed having a field day and then some. How sad is that?
The infinitely evil affront against the Living God that is the black mass will, barring a miracle or some unforeseen event, take place this Sunday – although, it is believed, without a consecrated Host. On Our Lord’s day, naturally. I do not know what kind of response is planned in OKC – I hope a very crowded and vociferous one. At one time I did plan to travel to OKC to participate in any protests, but this dang staph infection just doesn’t quite want to go away (please keep praying). And, we must keep praying that this mass – which, by its very nature, recognizes in its blind hatred the existence of not only God but the Real Presence, but rejects the Love of both – will be cancelled. The affair in Boston at least resulted with the satanists, as they should be, on the run, and having to conduct their evil under cover. And that was all decided at the last minute, so there is still hope.
TFP Student Action, whatever you think of their parent organization, has pushed a petition that has over 50,000 signatures and is seeking to hit 100,000 before Sunday. The petition will be presented to Oklahoma City civic leaders prior to this sacrilege taking place. If you haven’t signed it already, you might consider doing so:
I regret to inform you that satanists are still planning a “Black Mass” on city property at the Civic Center in Oklahoma City on Sunday, September 21, 2014.
Please spread the word to all your friends so we can stop this sacrilege. Your voice and prayers were decisive at Harvard University – the “Black Mass” there was stopped. Canceled. Saint Michael won a great victory that day. And God can win again.
Our first goal of 50,000 petitions has been achieved. The new goal is now 100,000. Your petition, together with many more, will be presented to the Civic Center, as well as the Mayor of Oklahoma City and the Governor of Oklahoma before September 21.
One news item refers to the “Black Mass” in these terms: “A Religious Black Mass will be conducted as a public event to help educate the public about Religious Satanism. Enjoy the delights of the Devil.” [Was that proselytism for satan done by some newsie in ignorance, or forbearance?
Registered sex offender Adam Daniels will be leading the anti-Catholic satanic ritual on public property.
Every black mass is a direct, deliberate and sinful act of hatred against God. Typically, a Consecrated Host is stolen from a Catholic Church and then used to desecrate, mock and insult the Catholic Mass. The Person of Our Lord Jesus Christ is attacked in a most vile and unspeakable manner. These insults against God are not only offensive to Christians, but also repulsive to everyone of good will.
In this instance, maybe we should be like democrats – voting early and often. If you have multiple e-mails addresses and a few convenient aliases…..
Locally, I know some parishes will be having Adoration in reparation for this diabolical sickness. I know Bishop Slattery, at least, plans Eucharist Processions and Adoration in Tulsa. Are there acts of reparation planned for your diocese or parish?
Lord what a dark time! Have mercy on us for having so offended You! Please change our hearts through Your Grace! Help Your poor suffering Church.
Posted by Tantumblogo in disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, manhood, paganism, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
Like it or not, radical feminists make up a highly influential part of that nebulous coalition of self-anointed elitists (incl: academics, media, politicians, leading businessmen, left wing advocacy groups, etc) who have arrogated to themselves the right to determine what the rest of us should think, say, and do. Feminism, the perverse marriage of lesbianism and marxism, is a hugely influential force in Western “culture.” I have personally seen how even many individuals striving to be faithful Catholics have, through absorption of the dominant cultural mores, adopted many quite radical beliefs derived from feminism (radical in the historical or traditional sense. They may be quite “conservative” views today, but they would have been radical 50 or 100 years ago. A few of these are innocuous. Most are not, and have helped spread a great deal of misery and resulted in more than a few broken marriages. Both men and women can fall victim to this type of thinking). Feminism – marxist lesbianism – is part of the wicked broth in which we stew in this decadent and fallen culture.
How sick are radical feminists? Robert Stacy McCain has essentially written a book in the past 6-8 months documenting the near total insanity – and hatred of any traditional moral order – espoused by virtually every marxist lesbian/feminist. There are too many examples to list, and I don’t recommend McCain’s site overall due to immoral material he posts with some regularity, but perhaps one example may serve as an indicator of all the rest. In this particular example, an elderly marxist lesbian who lives alone with her cats*has been a long time advocate of the systematic murder of 90% of the world’s male population, the better to demonstrate her
careful reasoning and general charity towards souls unhinged hatred towards everything male (I add emphasis and comments)
At least three further requirements supplement the strategies of environmentalists if we are to create and preserve a less violent world. I) Every culture must begin to affirm a female future. II)Species responsibility must be returned to women in every culture. III) The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race. . . . [First of all, the idea that a female dominated world would be one of enlightened virtue and peace is utterly unsubstantiated. There isn't much historical precedent for such, but the underlying assumption of these man-hating lesbians is that woman = good, man = utterly evil. Therefore, anything can be justified in the pursuit of the destruction of the male half of the species]
To return species responsibility to women means in very practical terms that erotic and reproductive initiative must be restored to women all over the globe. . . . Make the decision entirely that of the woman as to how she will be impregnated and how often, if indeed she chooses to be so at all, and whether by heterosexual intercourse, artificial insemination or a form of ovular merging. Restore to each woman the inalienable right to say what shall become of any fertilized egg and to control absolutely the number of children she wishes to emerge from her body. . . . Make nonexistent any male’s say-so in the process of reproduction. [Because, according to this creature of pure hate, men have absolutely no rights and exist only at her pleasure. This is the ranting of someone who is clinically insane, and yet this individual, Sally Miller Gearhart, has been a highly influential professor and created one of the first "women's studies" programs in the nation. Her work is highly influential in marxist lesbian circles] Create and protect alternative structures of economic and psychological support for independent women — women not attached to men — who are child-bearers and child-raisers. . . . [She means state funding of women because they are women. But when women make up 90% of the population, will some women want to be taxed to pay for the lifestyles of others?]
Women will bear the number of children they know can be sustained not just by their own social group but by the wide ecological system. [Is this because women are so intuitively brilliant they simply know how many people the planet will bear, or will their marxist lesbian overseers dictate to them what is acceptable? Who has money on the latter?] They will not bear the children that some man wants only to perpetuate his name or the family possession of his property; they will not bear the children they presently convince themselves they must have because their only role is obedient wife and mother; [For how many women does this kind of thinking even remotely apply at this point?] women will not have the children men think are necessary to perpetuate the tribe or the religion or the specific culture. Instead they will bear the children that they want, that they can care for, and that they assess are needed by the specific group and the entire species. . . . [This means central planning and regulation of procreation. Brave New World, the marxist dystopia, yet again]
In every culture it must be women in charge of the changes: [Because she says so! No authoritarianism, no will to power here!] women-identified women, no women who are pawns of men, no women who out of their fear of losing their lives or those of their children, still hold to the securities of that dangerous patriarchal culture, [It doesn't seem so dangerous compared to your unhinged self-pleasuring fantasy. I don't know many men calling for the murder of 3 billion people] but women utterly free of coercion, free of male influence and committed to the principle that the right of species regulation is their own, and not the prerogative of any man. I suggest that lesbians and other independent women are already moving in this direction. . . . [Pity them. If we needed an example of how truly sick perverse sexual desires and acts can make someone, I think we've just gotten an object lesson]
To secure a world of female values and female freedom we must, I believe, add one more element to the structure of the future: the ratio of men to women must be radically reduced so that men approximate only ten percent of the total population. . . . [Of course! What marxist program would be complete without the wholesale slaughter of billions! That's how all marxist stories end!]
We now come to a critical point: how is such a reduction in the male population to take place? One option is of course male infanticide. It differs very little from the female infanticide that has apparently been carried out even into the twentieth century by some cultures. Such an alternative is clearly distasteful and would not constitute creative social change. . . . [But I doubt she'd be very much opposed if push came to shove. I would ask this poor sick soul, who is fighting the most against female infanticide? It is surely not the marxist feminists, who cannot criticize the practice, because to do so might weaken support for their most sacred shibboleth, abortion on demand and without apology. No, it is the hated, patriarchal pro-life movement! But irony is utterly lost on leftist ideologues]
[I]f women are given the freedom of their bodies then they may well choose [experimental "ovular merging" technology that produces only female embryos] in great enough numbers to make a significant difference in the sex ratio of women to men. A 75% female to 25% male ratio could be achieved in one generation if one-half of a population reproduced heterosexually and one-half by ovular merging. [And here the fantasy truly reaches insane dimensions, dreaming about a world where females can reproduce absent the contribution of men. There is absolutely no evidence to substantiate this concept of rubbing two eggs together to create a new person. Even the thought is offensive to reason and just. plain. nuts.]
Such a prospect is attractive to women who feel that if they bear sons no amount of love and care and nonsexist training will save those sons from a culture where male violence is institutionalized and revered. These are women saying, “No more sons. We will not spend twenty years of our lives raising a potential rapist, a potential batterer, a potential Big Man. [So, according to marxist lesbian Gearhart (boy, is that name apropos), ANYONE who has the potential to grow up to be ANYTHING evil should be wiped out before they are born. Why doesn't this woman address the skeleton's in her own movement's closet, like the extremely high rates of violence in lesbian relationships? Oh, yes, I forget...facts are inconvenient.]
This post is a bit off topic, perhaps, but it’s important to know just what “feminism” is. McCain has proven quite conclusively to this blogger that feminism is the product of marxist man-hating lesbians, whose “utopia” is a world of savage cruelty and complete disregard for one half of all humanity – and their total authoritarian control over the remaining half. It is also another manifestation of leftist God-hatred, as this woman’s resentment towards God’s creating us male and female is palpable in every word. Thus her wild eyed rantings about asexual reproduction and magical self-reproducing eggs. This excerpt may seem extreme, even ludicrous, but such writings are taken very seriously within the “feminist” movement. Unhinged diatribes like this are not at all uncommon, and writings from women like this feature prominently in women’s studies programs at colleges across the country, programs that are oriented towards only one thing: generating more man-hating marxist lesbians.
“Feminism” is one of the most noxious and destructive of the leftist errors that have afflicted Western (ahem) civilization in the past 100 years. Distilled to its essence, it provides a cover and refuge for the hateful fantasies (which would be acted out if they ever got the chance) of very lost and disturbed sexual deviants. Do not let your daughters (or sons) fall prey to its seductive claims of victimhood and its pretensions toward power! Feminism is already directly responsible for the deaths of at least 1 billion children through direct abortion, and who knows how many billions prevented from seeing life through contraception. It is a philosophy, like all leftism, straight out of hell and something to be opposed at all turns.
There is a bit of humor in all this. I can’t quite escape the notion that what really drives women like this nuts is precisely the fact that they are not a man. And they are so very, very angry with God over that fact. Perhaps I’m off, but it seems very likely to me………
Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, disaster, episcopate, error, General Catholic, horror, Papa, pr stunts, sadness, scandals, secularism, sexual depravity, shocking, the return.
That’s the strong implication of this article from the Daily Telegraph, quoting a spokesman or the Diocese of Rome. The actual term is cohabiting….whether they have repented of and confessed their sin, and have abstained from fornication for some time, is anyone’s guess:
Couples who have been “living in sin” and women who had children out of wedlock will be married by Pope Francis at a ceremony at the Vatican on Sunday, in a further sign of his determination to make the Catholic Church more inclusive and compassionate.
They will be among 20 couples from Rome who will tie the knot in St Peter’s Basilica, in the first such ceremony led by the Pope in his role as Bishop of Rome since he was elected in March last year.
For the Vatican, it will be the first such event since Pope John Paul II joined eight couples in matrimony in 2000.
The prospective brides and grooms had varying personal backgrounds, the diocese of Rome said in a statement.
“There are those who are already cohabiting, those who already have children, who got to know each other in Church,” the diocese said.
One of the women getting married has a grown-up daughter from a previous relationship and will marry a man who was previously married but obtained an annulment.
The woman, named only as Gabriella, said she never imagined that she would be married by the Pope in St Peter’s.
“We didn’t feel worthy or able to meet the requirements of a good Catholic couple,” Gabriella told La Repubblica newspaper. “But the Church under the leadership of Pope Francis has welcomed and embraced us.”
There is just so much wrong with that statement it’s hard to know where to start. If you have confessed any previous sins and have no currently valid marriage, where is he impediment? It seems to me rather likely something very significant has been left out of this brief description. As in, was the previous “relationship” a marriage?
I did see one constant apologist say this is no big thing! The Church is full of sinners! These people are getting their relationships regularized, that’s good! And it is…….but the traditional practice was and is that those persisting in that kind of relationship had to stop their fornication (and cohabitation in almost all cases) to give an indicator of good will and to have their sins washed away through repentance and confession prior to receiving such an august Sacrament. Simply getting married does not remove the guilt of grave sin due to fornication/cohabitation – it takes Confession to do that. We also have the reception of the Blessed Sacrament to consider.
But that was in the bad old days. The obvious doubleplusungood think of back then was that one must show both a true compunction for the sin by abstaining from fornication for quite a while before receiving either marriage or the Blessed Sacrament, and give visible testimony to that by terminating the scandalous aspects of the relationship. I know people who have had to do so at traditional parishes today. Pray God, someone has at least thought to get these souls to Confession before they possibly blaspheme the Holy Ghost.
What do you make of this? Just hype, no big deal, happens all the time, or something more ominous? And what does this act mean in light of the upcoming Synod, if anything?
I’m too tired to figure it out.
Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, persecution, sadness, scandals, self-serving, sexual depravity, shocking, Society, the return.
Reader TM sent me a link to the following letter sent by Virginia House of Delegates member Bob Marshall to Archbishop Carlo Vignano, Apostolic Nuncio of the United States. Who knows how that letter will be received, what with the new focus on “mercy” cum indifference, but the author has requested that this letter be shared as widely as possible, and I agree with the concerns expressed therein. Some excerpts:
New York’s Cardinal Dolan, appointed as Grand Marshal of the 2015 St. Patrick’s Day Parade, praised the decision to allow an openly gay group to march in the St. Patrick’s Day Parade. “I have no trouble with the decision at all … I think the decision is a wise one,” he said.
His action has left many Catholics, including elected officials like myself, puzzled and disheartened especially when we measure Cardinal Dolan’s new policy with that of his predecessor, John Cardinal O’Connor. [I understand there is a massive new excavation on Manhattan Island. It developed only recently, but has already achieved prodigious proportions. It is caused by Cardinal O'Connor spinning in his grave at hypersonic speeds.]
In 1993, when LGBT groups and government officials demanded that openly homosexual groups be included in the Parade, Cardinal O’Connor vowed in a St. Patrick’s Day sermon that he “could never even be perceived as compromising Catholic teaching. Neither respectability nor political correctness is worth one comma in the Apostles Creed.” (New York Times, 1/20/93) [We certainly do not have the same caliber of man as Cardinal Archbishop of New York today. What a buffoon this Dolan is.]
At that time, the New York Times also noted that, “The Hibernians and Cardinal O’Connor have said there is no place for a gay contingent in the parade because it is a Catholic Event and the Church teaches that homosexual acts are sinful.”
Yet, Cardinal Dolan claimed, “Neither my predecessors as archbishops of New York nor I have ever determined who would or would not march in this parade,” adding that “the parade would be a source of unity for all of us.” (New York Times, 9/3/14) [Which shows that Cardinal Dolan was either ignorant of the very public stand of his predecessor, or is quite willing to prevaricate. The repeated statements by Dolan in defense of this indefensible act are increasingly troubling and reveal a man detached from the Catholic sensus fidei.]
Would Cardinal Dolan, as Parade Marshal, applaud the inclusion of Irish abortion clinic owners or Planned Parenthood employees in a Parade honoring Saint Patrick? On what logical grounds does he applaud openly LGBT marchers and reject openly pro-abortion Catholics, including some “Catholic” nuns? [Give him time. He well might.]
……..This situation is not about judging individual souls. God loves all his children, and fortunately He is the only one who judges men’s hearts, but we live in a world of actions that have individual, social and legal consequences. [But there is such a thing as objectively sinful acts. And we have to judge those acts and the people who commit them - not their eternal destiny or the state of their soul, but whether such acts conform to Truth and goodness, or falsehood and evil. And we cannot give support to those who manifestly and unrepentantly promote their evil.]
Equality of persons is not the same as equality of behavior. What message does Cardinal Dolan’s decision give? The US Supreme Court is considering whether to hear challenges to state laws allowing only one-man, one-woman marriage. Cardinal Dolan’s statement and actions are most untimely……… [More than untimely, almost diabolical in their likely effect]
……I know from a lifetime in and around politics that federal judges and Members of Congress read newspapers. They are influenced by the actions of moral leaders. They gauge what they can “get away with” by what Catholic prelates “tolerate.”
We do our brothers and sisters no service by pretending that God’s teaching or the “Laws of Nature and Nature’s God” are not important today. No one can change Natural Law or the Word of God, written in the blood of Our Savior for our wellbeing and redemption/
I haven’t talked to one Catholic who thinks that what Cardinal Dolan did was prudent or helpful in defending the Faith, marriage or morals. Converts, especially, are distressed. [Yes, I am distressed. But there are millions of katholycs out there who think what he's done is just grand. But I agree, I don't think a single Catholic could support Dolan's actions - including Bill Donahue. Perhaps he should change his group's name to the Katholyc League.]
Some contemporary American Catholics falsely think that “tolerance” is exercised by maintaining indifference towards ideas, opinion or even error, or holding that all points of view are equal. For a Church authority to embrace political correctness at such a time will have consequences which extend far beyond the parade route. [False tolerance, meaning indifference and the pretension that this life is the only one to be concerned with, is the driving heresy of the sexular pagan religion]
Cardinal Dolan’s actions will make enacting legislation in conformity with the Natural Law immeasurably harder to defend especially for lay Catholics or Catholic legislators……..[Dang straight. Already, one or two tragic, flippant comments are constantly thrown in faithful Catholic faces regarding all manner of moral issues, from abortion to sodomy to fornication to whatever! "Who am I to judge?" goes right along with "I think the decision a wise one." The position of faithful Catholics has been horribly undermined.]
Cardinal Dolan is rapidly becoming the American poster boy – at least for the present day, there have been many others – for the new state religion of sexular paganism. From all appearances, it seems Dolan seeks to change the Church to suit the ways of this fallen and evil world, rather than the other way around. Or, if not change the Church, at least change the appearance of the Church so that She never appears to stand in contradiction to the oppressive desires of the power elite. It’s so much easier that way! And Governor Cuomo will answer your calls, and let you feel important for a few minutes! And you’ll get more interviews on 60 Minutes!
See! It’s win-win!
Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, Basics, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, pr stunts, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness.
Bill Donahue, head of the Catholic League, is not known for subtlety. The man constantly reminds me of Archie Bunker, but Bunker was frankly not quite as over the top.
Donahue has spent years attacking the sodomite agenda in this country and defending Church Doctrine – and good for him for doing so. Unfortunately, he has also consistently shown himself to be a creature of the Archdiocese of New York and has contradicted himself, and undermined the Doctrine he used to defend, increasingly as Cardinal Dolan continues his descent into pathetic political pandering.
Perhaps the conflict generated by Dolan’s increasing heresy has finally become too much. The Catholic League has pulled out of the Saint Patrick’s Day Parade for reasons that seem flimsy at best. See what you think (note, the article below consistently misuses the term “gay,” as does Donahue):
For the first time in 20 years, the president of the the Catholic League has announced the group will not be marching in New York City’s St. Patrick’s Day parade next year.
The decision comes one week after parade organizers lifted a ban on gay groups marching under their own banners. Catholic League President Bill Donohue said the decision was based on parade organizers not allowing a pro-life group to march as well.
“Prior to the announcement that a gay group would march under its own banner in the 2015 parade, I was consulted by parade organizers about their plans,” he said in a statement, a New York CBS affiliate reported. “I told them that I could only support this decision if there were a formal revision in the parade’s rules governing marching units, and that is exactly what I said in my first public statement.
“To be specific,” he continued, “I asked them to pledge that a pro-life Catholic group would also be permitted. I was told that a formal change in the rules had been approved and that a pro-life group would march. Now I am being told that the list of marching units is set and that no pro-life group will march in next year’s parade. Accordingly, I have decided to withdraw our participation.”
Mr. Donahue said his decision has nothing to do with gays, but with the inconsistencies of the parade committee.
But perhaps I’m all wet, thinking Donahue might have had enough of being Dolan’s lap dog:
“Attempts will now be made to pit me against Timothy Cardinal Dolan, the Grand Marshal of the 2015 parade,” Mr. Donohue said, the station reported. “The suggestion that I am at odds with the New York Archbishop is not only false, it is despicable. Cardinal Dolan has no more rabid supporter than Bill Donohue, and nothing that has transpired recently changes anything.”
If the above is really true, Mr. Donahue, the only thing that is despicable is your willingness to subvert revealed Truth, cause huge scandal, and undermine the salvation of innumerable souls, in order to continue your cozy relationship with the Cardinal Archbishop of New York. What Doctrine, exactly, would Dolan have to reject in order to lose your most fervent support.
I will say, though, that if Donahue is anything, he’s politically adept. He knows which way the winds are blowing in the Church, and he has changed tack to follow suit.
That should be troubling for us all. If a man like Donahue is willing to publicly make a fool of himself by appearing so blatantly hypocritical, he must have a pretty strong motivation to do so. And I fear that motivation comes from more sources than just the Archdiocese of NY. There is a completely different feel and emphasis in the Church today, it is as if the is 1970 all over again.
Thanks to reader MFG for the link.
Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, Flightline Friday, foolishness, history, sadness, secularism, silliness, Society, technology.
How old are American military aircraft? World War II ended almost 70 years ago. On November 12, 1944, with the war at the peak of its intensity, the Boeing C-97 Stratofreighter took to the air for the first time. Derived from the B-29 Superfortress, not many cargo versions of the aircraft were built, but over 800 tanker versions – the KC-97 – were built, starting in 1948.
The Northrop P-530/YF-17 Cobra has already been covered on this blog. First conceived in 1969, the YF-17 engaged in a flyoff competition with the YF-16 in 1974. The photo below is from that competition. At the time, highly obsolescent KC-97 tankers were rapidly passing from service. They were all gone by 1978, for a service period of 30 years. The YF-17 was developed into the F-18 Hornet, which entered service in 1980. It has been in service, then, 34 years, and is at present the Navy’s most modern fighter in squadron service (the F-35 still hasn’t achieved that).
So in a single photo, you can see a direct line of constantly operational US military aircraft from 1944 to 2014 – 70 years. In fact, since the Super Hornet will be in service for at least another 20 years, that almost 100 years of aviation in one photo. 70 years ago, it would have been unthinkable that an aircraft could remain in service for so long, but it is common in the military today. The USAF used to have a policy of painting an “O,” for obsolete, in front of the tail numbers of all of its aircraft more than 10 years old (in fact, you can see that on the tail of the KC-97L above). From the inception of flight until the 1970s, that was a pretty fair policy, since most aircraft served less than 10 years and were replaced. In the go-go 50s and 60s, when American aviation was at its peak, new types were introduced almost every year, and “old” types retired. Now, we’re so broke, there is barely a new fighter for each decade, and a new bomber or cargo aircraft once each generation. This trend is the inevitable result of the advanced state of socialism in our political-economic system. In fact, the average age of the USAF fleet is over 30 years. Many types, like the B-52 and KC-135, are over 50 years old.
Britain once ruled the waves. Until at least the 1930s, Britain was as powerful a nation as any in the world. Fighting WWII alone for a year did terrific damage to the British economy, but that’s not why Britain is in the pathetic state, militarily, that it is today. In all honesty, I do not think Britain even retains the ability to defend their nation from external attack, let alone project any power. At present, the Royal Navy is 2/3 the size of the United States Coast Guard – and about as combat effective. The British Army only has 36 operational tanks. The Royal Air Force consists of about 100 combat capable tactical aircraft (and most of those, the Typhoons, are still very limited).
Britain, in terms of socialism, has been, consistently since WWII, about 20-30 years ahead of the United States. The same budget pressures, caused by massive transfers of wealth from productive to unproductive sectors of the economy, and ham-handed centralized economic planning, that have left Britain almost defenseless, are at work in the United States. The US military is in the process of being gutted, once again. I won’t go into the details, but in 5-10 years the US military will be a shadow of its former self. Perhaps that is as it should be, given what an immoral instrument the armed services have become under the past two demonrat administrations.
This post is a bit of a lament. I loved the US military of the 80s, strong, well-armed, well-funded, with tons of great kit being produced, and most of all – not used. At least not much. There were no endless, draining wars back then. There didn’t have to be, the world knew the US military circa 1987 was large, capable, and not to be messed with. Even the massive Soviet military machine respected and, to a degree, feared our military capabilities. As that military weakens, and our political leadership becomes increasingly feckless and beholden to domestic political interests, more and more adversaries will be tempted to take a shot.
The world is going to become a much bloodier, messier, less happy place. I am not recommending a massive increase in defense spending, or more wars, especially not with the current clown college running things in this country, but I am maybe sounding a bit of a note of caution. It’s easy to bash military intervention and pine for isolationism, but all that will have a cost. Human nature being what it is, when the alpha male weakens and resigns the field, others will take their chance. We’re seeing that in abundance already. And I fear it will only get worse.
The Hellenic Air Force still uses A-7H’s. Hopefully next week I’ll have time to do a post on the A-7, a very underrated and under-appreciated bird.
Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, Ecumenism, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, persecution, sadness, scandals, secularism, SSPX, the return.
Reader D provided a link to a most interesting article at The Remnant, which raises most important questions. The main one being, why are so many bishops, even relatively good ones, ever ready to be lovey dovey and ecumenical with protestants, even to the point of indifference or at least tacitly accepting, even promoting, protestant errors, while their attitude towards the Society of Saint Pius X is that they are a dangerous group of heretics that Catholics must avoid at all costs. Really?
Bishop David Zubik is a good man, reportedly one of the better bishops in the country in fact. He has been an outspoken opponent of homosexual “marriage”; he has prayed the rosary in front of abortion clinics; he’s even gone on the record opposing Common Core.
Because he’s a good man we’re confident he must be concerned when members of the Catholic faithful become confused and scandalized by something his chancery office has done.
A bit of background: Last week we reported that Bishop Zubik of the Diocese of Pittsburgh encouraged the Catholic faithful of Pittsburgh to join him in joining hands with Billy Graham’s son, Franklin, for the recent 3-day praise and song festival in Pittsburgh—the Three Rivers Festival of Hope at which “altar calls” and “forgiveness of sins” by Protestant ministers were reportedly part of the program.
We posted video of the Bishop in attendance at the gathering and in fact praying with the Protestant attendees (though electing not to make the Sign of the Cross onstage), asking God to bless them but saying nothing about any need for them to convert to the Catholic Church. [This is what I mean by at least tacitly accepting, even promoting, error. To pray with them, to endorse their erroneous acts (one time altar calls resulting in "salvation," rejection of the Sacraments....the list is long) is to give at least visible, tacit approval to those errors. Now, there could be reasons to participate in such acts, but such should always be accompanied with a clear explanation as to why such participation might have been seen as necessary, as well as a repudiation of any errors present at the ecumenical function. But that clarification/rejection virtually never happens anymore]
We also reported that a few days later Bishop Zubik’s office released a sternly-worded letter of warning against any association on the part of Pittsburgh’s faithful with the Society of St. Pius X, which had recently purchased an old Catholic church in downtown Pittsburgh with the intention of restoring it and reopening it for use by Catholics rather than Muslims, for a change.
Bishop Zubik let it be known that he was not happy that the old church had been spared the wrecking ball or worse in this manner, and instead determined to admonish the faithful to stay away from the SSPX and their recently acquired building because the Society is “separated from the Catholic Church.” [Which, in and of itself, is certainly within his prerogative and many would consider both prudent and just. But why the difference? Why are protestants given approving participation and great doses of mercy, while the SSPX is always given the iron fist of harsh discipline? It's the double standard that grates so. You want to defend Church unity? Great! But then why don't you publicly lament the far vaster disunity, division, pain, and suffering caused by the protestant heresies? Even if you assume the SSPX really is completely outside the Church, to which group does the Church lose far, far more souls - the SSPX, or protestants? So why are the SSPX almost universally treated as the greater threat?]
Conspicuous by their absence from the diocesan letter of warning, however, were any expressions of love, hoped for reconciliation, willingness to dialogue, or words of kindness or solidarity with the souls attached to the SSPX. Nothing! Just: “SSPX, BAD! Stay away!” [Because the "right" has none? Is this not a parallel to the radically harsh treatment being meted out to the Franciscans of the Immaculate, in comparison to the constant mercy and endless generosity extended to radical women religious who left the Church decades ago in all but name?]
And this is part of a bizarre pattern on the part of the Diocese of Pittsburgh. In an earlier “official statement” regarding the status of the SSPX’s Our Lady of Fatima Chapel in Collier Township, the faithful were informed that the SSPX Masses do not fulfill Sunday obligation (a contention that contradicts several statements from the Vatican, including not a few issued by the Vatican’s Ecclesia Dei Commission), that participation at Our Lady of Fatima Chapel implies “separation from the Catholic Church” and results in “ex-communication from the Catholic Church” and the “subsequent denial of Christian burial from the Catholic Church.” [That's a very harsh stand. And one that has been specifically repudiated by the Vatican in the past. The Bishop of Honolulu some 20 odd years ago, an active and unrepentant sodomite, it turned out, claimed faithful who had been confirmed at an SSPX chapel had incurred excommunication. The faithful appealed to the Vatican and that judgment was overturned. The Vatican has repeatedly confirmed that participation in SSPX Masses and other Sacraments is not cause for excommunication. The Masses are valid, but not licit. Confession is much trickier, but that's not the point of this post.]
Even if one assumes that the SSPX is 100% in the wrong, there is still an inexplicably harsh attitude towards that group, as opposed to virtually any other religious body in the world, from most of the hierarchy in the Church, even “relatively” good bishops. There is a huge double standard, because the only true remaining heresy in the Church today seems to be being too old fashioned, too traditional, too orthodox. So long as you aren’t that, you can attack marriage, the Blessed Sacrament, even the Divinity of Christ, and you can have a tenured faculty position or lead an international religious order. But if you start to drift…….heaven’s to Betsy, call out the Inquisition! Crush them!
It’s not the actions themselves. It’s the dichotomy, the double standard, that is jarring, even scandalous. I know most bishops cannot stand having the SSPX in their diocese for many reasons, not the least of which is the fact that the Society both exists outside their control (while being in their jurisdiction) and also serves as a sort of living rebuke to, ahem, “spirit” abroad in almost all dioceses. But it’s a bit much to have the SSPX be the only group get labeled schismatic, excommunicate, and even to be denied Christian burial, when protestants, wiccans, muslims, you name! it are all our brothers, and shouldn’t we have unlimited mercy towards them?
In reality, I fear this all comes down to the fact that there really is a sense among many in the Church, and especially the leadership, that there was a new church started in December 1965 and that the bad old Church just has to die. The SSPX are seen as being that bad old Church, and so they must be crushed.
I that an unfair appraisal?
Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society.
Sure, there might be momentary applause, but that will quickly fade, and be followed by demands for more, and and more, and “what have you done for me lately?” So while you scandalize your true friends and tell them, to their face, that they are really enemies, the world will just mock you for being the nothing you are:
It is elementary human nature – when someone professes to hold strong beliefs, and then violates those beliefs for the sake of the world, that person rarely gets treated with much respect. There are only two ways on that path – continuing on and on to total apostasy and constant criticism a la Thomas Reese and the National Heretic Reporter, or finally jumping off the bandwagon and then being ignored by the world as a useful idiot whose time has past.
It is ludicrous to say these folks will ever be satisfied with anything less than the abomination of desolation in the very Sanctuary of God. As in the case of islam, with sexular paganism there can be no accommodation, no “tolerance,” no meeting halfway – it is either submit completely and totally, fight back, or get crushed. It is a fool’s errand to ever believe these folks can be placated with scandalous words and scheming indifference. They will take, and take, and take, until there is nothing else left to take. Those within the Church who encourage people in their sins are no friends of Christ’s.
Michael Voris adds more below. It’s pretty strong stuff, but, of course, only goes so far. We must bear in mind that, if the will were present, the means exists and has always existed for all of this madness to be brought to heel in very short order. Such authority has been exercised in the past, and far bigger apostates than a Cardinal Dolan brought to heel under the yoke of strong leadership from the Vicar of Christ. The great Hildebrand, Pope Saint Gregory VII, utterly turned the Church around in a dozen years. But he had the will to do so.
Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, Spiritual Warfare.
An interesting post via Pertinacious Papist, a Dutch physician, once a leader of the pro-euthanasia forces in his country, now has some rather strong regrets. It turns out many people in the Netherlands who are merely sick, unhappy, or lonely are now desiring death, and obtaining it. The slope turned out to be very slippery after all:
A Dutch expert on euthanasia has not only stopped supporting the death practice and the euthanasia law for which he campaigned, but he has made the reasons for his about-face public — something usually frowned upon in Dutch circles. [Could it be the "tolerant" Dutch are really only tolerant so long as one toes the dominant left wing line?]
Professor Theo Boer held a unique position for seeing how the country’s euthanasia/assissted suicide law, enacted in 2002, actually worked. For nine years, Boer, a medical ethicist was a mamber of one of the five Dutch regional review committees charged with investigating all reported euthanasia and assisted-suicide deaths for the government to see if each case complied with the law.
In an article Boer submitted to London’s Daily Mail — in the hope of persuading Britain’s House of Lords not to pass an assisted-suicide law — Boer said he and his colleagues were “terribly wrong” when they concluded five years after the Dutch euthanasia law took effect that there was no “slippery slope” associated with that law. Starting in 2008, the numbers of induced deaths began increasing 15% each year. By 2012, the euthanasia review committees recorded 4,188 deaths (compared to 1,882 in 2002), and Boer expects the reported annual death count to reach 6,000 this year or next year at the latest.
“Euthanasia is on the way to become a ‘default’ mode of dying for cancer patients,” he wrote, and there’s been a sharp increase in the deaths of people with psychiatric illnesses or dementia, and those simply suffering from grief, loneliness, or age. “Some of these patients could have lived for years or decades,” he explained.
Expiatory suffering has always been one of the more difficult sells to make to people lost in the ways of the world, the flesh, and the devil, but I think this willingness to throw life away whenever severe illness occurs, or even because one is sad or lonely, just indicates how utterly banal, unfulfilling, and boring a worldly existence really is. Probably most of these Dutch people are convinced atheists and believe they will just experience oblivion forever once they die. You’d think they’d cling to life a bit more, then, but poor secular man, he traded Grace and the Sacraments for TV and fast food, and he’s finding the exchange wanting. But he is still too blind to realize the source of his pain.
This is a sure sign of a civilization in collapse. When people can not only not be bothered to reproduce, but even to live! Oh, the suffocating ennui! Think of the massive good that suffering united to that of Christ’s could be achieving! Such a waste.
Final note: Holland was an early adopter of some of the most radical tenets of protestantism. That quickly gave way to rationalism, deism, agnosticism, indifference, and cultural atheism. It is little surprise countries like Holland and Czech, where the secularist rot has been so deep, are leading the way to self-annihilation.
Leftism = death.