jump to navigation

Traditional Priest – Soft, liberal Katholycism will offer no resistance to resurgent militant Islam August 26, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, disaster, Ecumenism, episcopate, error, General Catholic, horror, persecution, priests, sadness, scandals, secularism, Society, Tradition.
19 comments

Great post by Father Carota, as usual.  He notes that islam is increasing in population at a time when the Church is shedding members in the millions in most parts of the world, especially Europe and the Americas, Her traditional home.  Now, I have read detailed studies of islam’s own fertility collapse, and outside a few countries in Africa the population of muslims will peak around 2030 or 2040 and then begin to follow the same decline that is being seen almost everywhere else, but the problem is, islam’s fertility collapse is trailing Christianity’s by over 50 years, and that time interval represents an increasing window of danger as population percentages shift.  Irrespective of the demographics, so long as islam, and especially its radical wing, presents a very vibrant, cohesive, and countercultural set of beliefs, it will continue to attract more and souls disaffected with the prevailing sexular pagan status quo, the sort of soft socialism with pandemic sexual immorality that American hegemony has set loose upon the world.  The more the Church rejects Her own countercultural beliefs, the more elements within Her try to please the world and succumb to its prince, the fewer the souls that will be attracted to the Church’s far stronger, reasonable, glorious, charitable, and Truthful belief set.

So while the Church continues to retreat under the twin forces of sexular paganism and militant islam, many souls, including souls raised within the boundaries of the remnant of Christendom (Britain is the source of many of the most extreme of the ISIS psychopaths, including the one who beheaded that poor journalist), will drift into islam’s orbit or formally join this disordered, violent, and even diabolical religion.

Father Carota notes some of the depravities of islam, especially with respect to the persecution of Christians, as well as the cancers eating away at the Church. First, only a very brief list of islamic atrocities:

1) Raping Catholic and other non muslim women and girls. [and performing mass, forced genital mutilation.  They also sexually enslave islamists of sects other than wahhabism]

2) Driving Catholics and others out of their homes and country.

3) Bombing, burning and destroying Catholic, Orthodox and other christian churches.

4) Suicide bombings.

5) Kidnapping men, women and children to be sold as slaves, (and some as sex slaves). [indeed, the only parts of the world where slavery has not been totally eradicated are in islamic areas and, perhaps, in East Asia, where women and even children are sold into what amounts sexual slavery.  But as the sexular pagan ethos continues to advance in the West, there will be fewer and fewer philosophical and social strong points of opposition to slavery, and I fully believe that if this culture does not turn around, the utilitarian and materialist ethos dominant in the West will find justifications for the reintroduction of slavery and/or indentured servitude in the not too distant future]

6) Stealing Catholic’s and other’s houses, cars, jewelry and possessions as they are driven out of town.

7) Torturing, burring alive, crucifying and murdering of Catholics and other religion members, (and bragging about it on Youtube).

Father Carota also notes some specific atrocities muslims have committed, such as various bombings and terror attacks, and the constant treatment of women as chattel. He then asks how such a religion could be growing and attracting thousands of young men willing to die for religion, when most Catholics, far from being willing to suffer even a minor inconvenience to show up to Mass once or twice a year, demand the Church change it’s Dogmas to suit them and their sins.  And that is why islam is attracting at least a fair number of converts, because it presents a strong, masculine-seeming and vibrant set of beliefs in opposition to the ongoing pointlessness of self-absorbed existence in the West and much of the rest of the world.  Father Carota lists some reasons for islam’s growth:

1) They have passion for what they believe in.

2) They will kill you or make life difficult for you if you do not convert.

3) They give men a masculine role in their religion;  a) God made men to be leaders, and  b) Men and boys like to fight. [While Western women want to emasculate men and smash "patriarchy."  You know what......success in their endeavor will make them even more miserable than they are now.  But ideologues aren't much open to reason]

4) Religion and state work together for their religious laws. [This is very key.  Islam demands the state accord to the religion, and islamic nations enforce laws to perpetuate their faith.  We in the West are of course far too sophisticated for that, having chosen the false gods of "self-determination" and atheism as the de facto state religion.  States founded on such nebulous and ultimately false beliefs will not stand a religiously motivated enemy]

5) Men can marry a lot of women and have more sex.

6) Muslim men get non muslim women to fall in love with them and convert.  They then could later on find out that these men have other wives as well. [That's not the half of it.  They can claim any women from the infidels they conquer and keep them as concubines in their harem. This has been ongoing in Iraq and Syria. Those don't even count as marriages.  So muslim men get to screw a lot of different women, which has a certain animalistic appeal].

7) There is sex in heaven. [Their entire conception of "heaven" is entirely worldly.  Islam is incapable of understanding God or existence outside of time as they must be, where worldly "pleasures" (almost always associated with some pain or downside) have no meaning. That's because it's a recycled version of pre-Christian Judaism with heretical Arianism thrown in]

8) Oppressed races are given honor when they convert, like when (Cassius Marcellus Clay Jr), Mohammed Ali converted. (Read here his conversion on a pro muslim blog).  Many black men convert to the muslim religion in prison. [I don't know about "oppressed," but converts are certainly lauded.]

So what is the Church doing in opposition to this existential threat?

we Catholics 1) feminize our Catholic faith, 2) accept all religions as good and equal and 3) become more and more hedonistic, we will continue to see more and more Catholics converting to islam.

And that’s just the beginning.  We also see Church leaders fawning all over islam as a great “religion of peace,” we are told, rather coyly, that islam “worships the same God,” in the current catechism, we see Koran’s kissed, we see even TFG tell muslims there is no reason for them to convert……we see a very great deal, none of it good.  We see a constant denial of islam as an endemically hostile religion that seeks to conquer or convert the entire world, and has the zeal and willingness to do so. We also see  pointless “dialogue” that often gives scandal and undermines the Faith of the relatively few souls striving to accept and practice what the Church has always believed.  We see a very great deal.

Father Carota concludes:

I find it interesting that when the Israelites would become evil, God would send people from Babylon to destroy them and take them into exile.  Isn’t Iraq where Babylon was?  Yes, it is. [see Psalm 43, which I posted yesterday]

But God will never be outdone, even when we are giving away our Catholic souls to the muslims.  God will come to our aid.  And that is why we need the passionate traditional Catholic beliefs and practices.  At least a few of Jesus’ followers are standing up strong for His Catholic Faith.  And our loving Catholic witness in our everyday life, speaks powerfully in a world filled with selfishness and hate.

Meanwhile we should be praying, sacrificing and sending money to help the Catholic refugees from muslim terrorism.  Especially offer your Holy Rosaries for the conversion of muslims and the spreading of the Catholic faith. [I do, every day.  Even if my devotion and attentiveness during prayer is not what it should be] Mary has always had a powerful hand in defeating the muslims and all evil. [Dang right!  And another sign of the weakness in the Church today was the replacement of the great Feast of Our Lady of Victory every October  with Our Lady of the Rosary.  I have a great devotion to the Rosary, but Our Lady is also a powerful intercessor in earthly Christian struggles against rampaging hordes of pagans and infidels of all stripes, especially muslims.  She has intervened to effect miraculous victories on numerous occasions.  And, in response to the overly pacifist tendency in Catholicism today, a complete misunderstanding and misrepresentation of Saint Francis, in particular, our God is the God of Armies!  That's what "God of Hosts" means, He is the God of Armies, earthly and angelic!  And He always intervenes to protect and bring victory to His souls, when they are faithful to Him!]

I’ll add this final consideration – does not soft, liberal katholycism, far from offering any opposition to islam and its effectiveness in bringing in many converts, some former Catholics, but does it not instead immensely aid islam in its continued growth and depredations?  Does not the pathetically soft response of so many Church leaders only help convince radical islamists that Christianity is weak and ripe for attack?  And for how long must we be told that the great mass of muslims are peaceful and kind and loving, just like the best Catholics, when they seem to offer absolutely no opposition to the radical elements at all (exactly the opposite from how “radical” traditional Catholics are treated), and in fact can be found, in much coverage of the ongoing atrocities, happily milling around and taking photos and videos while people are crucified, beheaded, raped, or shot?  Where is the movement of this “great mass” of muslims in opposition to the radicals?  They are nowhere to be found, because they are either too cowed to stand against them, or really don’t mind seeing Christian, shiites, and others, get what they “deserve.”

End post.  I was going to post a great writing by Saint Louis, King of France, but I have run out of time.  Tomorrow, God willing!  Dang work!

Sign Petition to cancel upcoming Extraordinary Synod on the Family August 26, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, Christendom, disaster, disconcerting, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Spiritual Warfare.
7 comments

Over at The Remnant Newspaper’s website, Christopher Ferrara has a loooooong article about the upcoming Synod and all the many, many reasons faithful/traditional Catholics might want to oppose it.  Some of the reasons are mere annoyances or doubts caused by TFG’s behavior, while many others are quite detailed and deserve serious consideration.  Because the post is so long and detailed, it’s a bit difficult to excerpt, but here’s a couple of extracts (my emphasis and comments):

First they came for the Roman Rite, which they destroyed. Then they came for the Church Militant, which they disarmed and surrendered to the spirit of the age. Now, at the Synod, which threatens to become Vatican II rebooted, progressivist bishops and their apparatchiks will be coming for the moral law itself under the guise of a search for “pastoral solutions” to “challenges facing the family” [This is a point Christopher Ferrara and Michael Matt have argued extensively in other settings.  Suffice it to say, the argument, I believe, proves beyond a doubt there is certainly a large segment of the hierarchy that does seem set on that last bit, which is the unwinding of the Church's entire moral law, or whatever remains after 50 years of concerted assault.  I will say that Cardinal Kasper and his greatest ally have been almost diabolically wise in their choice of point of attack, because if one undoes the current belief surrounding marriage as one time union of man and wife resulting in a radically new and different union that simply can't be undone, while simultaneously turning the Blessed Sacrament, the reception of God in the Flesh Himself, into something to which every person has a positive right, irrespective of their sinfulness......if you do these two things, the entire moral Doctrine of the Faith can be completely unwound and destroyed, along with much of the remaining positive theology in other areas.  The Church would be left a totally prostate liberal protestant sect, about on the par with the episcopalians.  And look at how well they're doing, with their average congregation size of, I kid not, 67 souls]

But the proposal to find “solutions for remarried divorcees” is only part of the looming threat posed by the Synod—a Synod for which there is no more actual need than there was for the disastrous Second Vatican Council itself. The entire Synod project smacks of an effort to determine Church practice on the basis of what people who reject Church teaching would like to see. In that regard, the Synod’s Instrumentum Laboris(working document) refers to the earlier “Preparatory Document” containing a survey filled with loaded questions which give the impression that Church teaching is a matter for debate and discussion at the “pastoral” level. While the questionnaire was directed solely to the bishops, many bishops promptly distributed it widely or posted it on diocesan websites to obtain “input” from any priests and members of the laity who wished to speak for “the People of God.” The result, quite predictably, was that a questionnaire intended for the bishops became an opinion poll generating what the Instrumentum Laboris calls “significant reflection among the People of God” regarding “new demands of the People of God.” Demands! [So, after 50 years of catering to the absolute lowest common denominator in the Church, from aggrieved liberals to apostate priests, how has that worked out?  Has the Church, through this debasing of Herself, at least attracted scads of liberal converts and reverts into the fold?  Absolutely not.  In fact, it is the liberals who have left, or stayed gone, in the greatest numbers.  Because liberalism/leftism is a competing religion in its own right, one our secular friends much prefer to any worldly version leftists in the Church can trot out]

It seems, however, that “the People of God” have a problem with the Law of God. Half a century after the imaginary “renewal of Vatican II” supposedly began, the Instrumentum admits: “[t]he People of God’s knowledge of conciliar and post-conciliar documents on the Magisterium of the family seems to be rather wanting,” that “many Christians, for various reasons, are found to be unaware of the very existence of this teaching,” and that “even when the Church’s teaching about marriage and the family is known, many Christians have difficulty accepting it in its entirety.”[Ha!  That's a mild understatement!  How about stating the Truth, which is that a whole great swath of people are deeply mired in sin, and don't want to be reminded of that fact, so they demand the Church change Her beliefs in order to assuage their own consciences.  It still won't work, because God is God and sin will remain sin - all that will happen is the continued destruction of the Church and condemnation of millions of souls]  It is of course inconceivable to the ideologues of Vatican II that what the Instrumentum describes is a catastrophic failure of the attempt to “update” Church teaching by restating it in more accessible language. Yet the very title of the document, “The Pastoral Challenges of the Family in the Context of Evangelization,” is an implied admission that fifty years after the Council it islapsed Catholics who must be evangelized because they are more or less apostates, producing the “silent apostasy” John Paul II lamented. Instead of admitting the Council’s utter failure to “renew” the Faith, however, the drafters of the Instrumentum—one can only laugh at the suggestion—call for yet another “updating” of Church teaching…..[Well, of course. As I’ve said recently, the post-conciliar Church represents a competing religion, the religion of secular leftism, trying to exist within the Church.  That is impossible, which is why these “spirit of…..” types are irrepressibly hostile to the traditional practice of the Faith.  And as Ferrara notes, they are dogmatic ideologues, so they are completely closed to any contradictory evidence – they are literally blind to the destruction their project to redefine the Church has caused.  Or, they secretly see it as a feature, and not a bug.  Either way, they press ahead with one “new evangelization” and “new catechesis” project after another, only to see Church attendance, donation, vocation, and other indicators slip, yet again.  And then we’ll have another “new” program, more slip, etc., ad infinitum, until……..?  But I will say this Synod represents one of the gravest threats to any possibility of true restoration in the Church in the past few decades.  And it won’t take a formal “change” to Doctrine, Doctrine can be obliterated in practical terms by secular pastoral approaches

So I almost put a question mark at the end of the lede, because while I fear this upcoming Synod (while retaining confident hope of a miracle), I don’t think a petition is going to accomplish very much – especially one with only 1000 signatures.  It would take 1000 times that many to attract any serious attention.  But, in conscience, I thought I would go on the record as putting forth my wish that it be stopped.  I am very concerned that even some subtle “pastoral” changes that seem innocuous at first could have enormous repercussions that are impossible to discern in advance.  Certainly we’ve seen that with regard to many pastoral “advances” made in the past 50 years.

You can sign the petition at the bottom of the Remnant link.  Whether you sign or not, prayer is an even better response.

Guide to help attain the TLM in your parish August 25, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in attachments, Basics, episcopate, General Catholic, Latin Mass, Liturgy, persecution, priests, sadness, scandals, secularism, Tradition, Virtue.
comments closed

The Latin Mass Society has a helpful guide available to souls desiring more access to the TLM, perhaps in their own parish.  The main portion of the guide is here.  Not only are there some general recommendations copied below, but also much discussion of common objections raised by opponents of the TLM and how to do with the stonewalling and opposition frequently encountered. I know many readers have lamented lack of availability of the TLM in their diocese or local area – this guide may help you to see that pastoral need addressed.  And just because your diocese already has a TLM, or even a TLM-specific parish, doesn’t mean you don’t have the right to ask for the Mass in your local area!

Under Summorum Pontificum, every lay person has the right to request the TLM, every priest has the right to publicly offer the TLM, and priests and bishops are to do all they can to accede to every reasonable request for the TLM from the faithful. We all know that is not how it works in practice, but with much patience and prayer, there has been a good deal of positive growth in the availability of the Traditional Mass.

The step-by-step guide, below:

1. Establish a ‘stable group’. Members of the group do NOT have to reside in the same parish. They do NOT have to have an attachment to the Traditional Mass going back to 1969. They must rather be a group sufficiently committed and sufficiently local that if a Mass were established for them, they would support it. There is no minimum size fixed for such groups, but to be taken seriously you need to show that numbers are at least in double figures. Your local Latin Mass Society Representative should be informed at this stage and should be able to put you in touch with other people who will support your project. [Well I don't know if many places in the US have a local LMS representative.  But I'm sure you can contact them to find out.  I will say, when we asked for a Novus Ordo Latin Mass, we had dozens of names, and good attendance until a completely unnecessary controversy over the reception of the Blessed Sacrament from an Extraordinary Minister brewed up.  Then it went into the tank and never recovered, but such would never occur at a TLM]

2. Write to the parish priest. You need to choose a parish either where most of the members of your group live, or one where an additional Mass would be easiest to establish (i.e. one where there are not too many Sunday Masses taking place already), or one where the priest is most friendly to your cause. If this Parish Priest is unable to help you it will be up to the Bishop to suggest to nearby parishes that they may accommodate your group if that is the best way forward.  [I will say two things.  In most dioceses, expect a huge amount of pushback. Most dioceses are not complying with the provisions of Summorum Pontificum, and treat the matter as if availability of the TLM depends on some kind of gracious indult from the bishop.  That is very different from how SP reads, but that's the reality.  In addition, picking a parish where you know, with certainty, there is a priest who desires to offer the TLM himself is key, especially a pastor. If it is simply the vicar, and a young one at that, but the pastor is opposed, you are unlikely to make any headway]

3. Include with your letter a simple petition in its support (‘We the undersigned support this request for a Sunday Mass in the X area celebrated in the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite’), and get all the members of your group to sign it, and include their postal addresses. KEEP COPIES OF WHAT YOU SEND[Indeed]

4. If the parish priest does not respond within a fortnight, send your letter to him again; it may have got lost or forgotten about. Politely suggest that if you do not hear back from him within a month you will take the matter to the bishop, in accordance with the provisions of the Motu Proprio. [Good advice]

5. If you receive a negative response, you may be able (politely) to help your parish priest to overcome any misunderstandings about the Motu Proprio with the aid of the FAQs below. If his response remains negative, or if he does not respond at all, you must write to the bishop explaining that you have applied for the Traditional Mass under the Motu Proprio and are passing the matter to him as the Motu Proprio requires. Include with your letter to the bishop a copy of your letter(s) to the Parish Priest, and your petition.

6. With the Bishop, as with the Parish Priest in step 4 and 5: if there is no response after a fortnight, write again with a month deadline. If there are objections based on a misreading of the Motu Proprio, you may be able to respond with the help of the FAQs below. If, finally, there is a negative response or no response at all, you need to write to the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei.

7. For this step, you should get in touch with the Latin Mass Society office. We will advise you on the wording of your letter, and we can arrange hand delivery in Rome, which will give your letter more force. You will need to include with your letter all your previous correspondence: letters to and from the parish priest and the bishop. [Great advice, and a step I never took.  I strongly recommend going this route if you encounter stonewalling]

It is of the utmost importance that all of the letters from your side are polite, succinct, clearly written, and well informed about the Motu Proprio. [And don't rant about the Novus Ordo]

Will you get a response? The PCED may, or may not, acknowledge your letter. They will read it, however, and they will be in touch with your Bishop. They will seek to negotiate with the Bishop, and this may take time, and may result in an offer from the Bishop of a Mass in a different church than originally anticipated, in a rota of churches, or with some other arrangement. Such offers, even if not ideal, should be accepted if at all practical, and used as a basis for the establishment of a community committed to the Traditional Mass, which will demonstrate to the Bishop and local priests that allowing the Traditional Mass will not cause problems and divisions in the diocese.

If there is no response, and no progress, then after a year has passed it would be legitimate to go through the whole procedure again. [Oh boy!]

Polite persistence is the key to success.

————-End Quote————-

As the guidelines above mention, there is a FAQ at the link that addresses how to overcome common misconceptions and excuses used to oppose the offering of the TLM.  But unless you are incredibly blessed, you can expect to encounter a great deal of resistance.  As for going through the process over and over again, year after year, that will probably have only a low probability of success if you encounter an initial refusal, but it never hurts to try.  Since many dioceses are large, geographically, it is not reasonable to put forth that since there might be one parish offering the Traditional Mass, that is enough.  In some dioceses, traveling to that one location might require hours of travel.  But such is the attachment to this Mass, that some people do so, week after week, and sometimes more frequently than that.  Holy roller zealouts, what could they be thinking?

If you encounter resistance regarding the potential for the TLM to cause division, especially arguments that say, to the effect, that it is wrong for their to be different forms of the Mass as that might encourage an elitist or separatist attitude, there are many easy replies to make.  First of all, why is it acceptable to offer the Mass in every language under the sun rather than Latin?  Does having Mass in Spanish or Vietnamese somehow make those communities separate or elitist?  You can also counter with, if we must accord to the norm, then shouldn’t most Catholics endure lousy catechesis, use contraception, support abortion, and all the rest, since that is what most “Catholics” do today?   Another argument is that Latin is the official, universal language of the Church, it ties in with our great patrimony and offers the benefit that the TLM can be understood and participated in everywhere in the world on the same terms.  It is in fact really vernacular Mass that is novel and which tends to cause division, since instead of having one universal Mass offered in one language throughout the Church, there are now literally hundreds of different missals in different languages, with slight (or great) differences of translations and emphasis throughout all of them.  This has turned the Church into a tower of Babel, with dramatically less, not more, liturgical fluency across cultures.

There is lots more, but that’s enough for now.  Just know that by requesting a TLM you are not being a rabblerouser, elitist, or troublemaker.  You are being a faithful soul striving to improve the availability of the form of the Liturgy that has been used in the Church throughout the world for centuries, and you are doing so because you know enormous Grace will be the result.  So don’t let rejection get you down, be faithful, polite, and persistent, and most of all, pray!

Compare and contrast – the “life outcomes” of alcoholism and sodomy August 25, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society.
comments closed

I have long maintained on this blog that there are powerful, I would say almost irrefutable, similarities between drug addiction and the favored sin du jour, the sins of sodom and gomomrrah.  The more I have thought about this, the more I have tended to believe that “homosexuality” reflects a process of sexual addiction and self-worship that culminates in one desiring the “same,” instead of the “opposite.”  In some sense, it’s almost genital worship.  Strange as that may seem, you ought to read what some radical lesbian feminists and sodomite men write and say regarding their equipment.  To say it seems to be the be all and end all of their existence (speaking generally, of course) would be not much exaggeration.

It is amazing how, in our current society, certain behaviors that result in negative “life outcomes” or effects on one’s life receive great concern and medical attention as something to be combated and, hopefully, reduced, while others – with even far worse outcomes – are held up as a wonderful source of diversity and something as good and wholesome as apple pie. Such is the incredible achievement of the 25 year long sodomite propaganda campaign which has taken a tiny minority, rightfully viewed with some disdain and concern, and turned it into a dominant cultural powerhouse that is now demanding, and receiving, from the dominant majority all manner of special treatment, even at great cost to the majority itself!  But the dread life effects remain all the same, and no matter how much propagandists attempt to dress up sodomy and its allied sins as wholesome, that is simply one lie that will never become the truth.  As a post at Pertinacious Papist points out, compared to even alcoholics, sodomites have disastrously bad rates of all manner of afflictions, from premature death to risk of all manner of disease.  First, alcoholism:

  • A significantly decreased likelihood of establishing or preserving a successful marriage
  • A five- to ten-year decrease in life expectancy
  • Chronic, potentially fatal, liver disease –hepatitis
  • Inevitably fatal esophageal cancer
  • Pneumonia
  • Internal bleeding
  • Serious mental disabilities, many of which are irreversible
  • A much higher than usual incidence of suicide
  • A very low likelihood that its adverse effects can be eliminated unless the condition itself is eliminated
  • An only 30 percent likelihood of being eliminated through lengthy, often costly, and very time-consuming treatment in an otherwise unselected population of sufferers (although a very high success rate among highly motivated, carefully selected sufferers).

Now, sodomy:

  • A significantly decreased likelihood of establishing or preserving a successful marriage
  • A twenty-five to thirty-year decrease in life expectancy
  • Chronic, potentially fatal, liver disease — infectious hepatitis, which increases the risk of liver cancer
  • Frequently fatal rectal cancer
  • Multiple bowel and other infectious diseases
  • A much higher than usual incidence of suicide
  • A very low likelihood that its adverse effects can be eliminated unless the condition itself is
  • An at least 50 percent likelihood of being eliminated through lentghy, often costly, and very time-consuming treatment in an otherwise unselected group of sufferers (although a very high success rate, in some instances nearing 100 percent, for groups of highly motivated, carefully selected individuals)

What the above fails to note is that the rate of suicide for sodomites is even higher than that for alcoholics, and by a substantial amount.  In addition, there are frighteningly high rates of drug addiction among that same sex afflicted community (as any addict can tell you, crossover addictions are exceedingly common.  Even when addicts get clean, they often manifest addictive behavior in other areas of life, and it’s not uncommon for addicts to have several addictions ongoing at once).

There are, in addition, other public health risks unique to the latter population which we don’t need to talk about now, but which seem almost to have been purposefully designed to target primarily that community.

That sodomy, in particular, was a dirty practice subject to grave health risks used to be one of those things most even semi-literate people understood, but many in the culture are either too propagandized to understand this, or have been educated into imbecility and no longer accept the wisdom of the ages.

But that process may well have been part of a broader plan, as well, no?

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWHhLfc0VLg]

 

A commentary on the situation in Ferguson, MO (not what you think) August 25, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, Basics, Dallas Diocese, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, sadness, scandals, secularism, Society.
comments closed

I read the following commentary on the ongoing civil unrest in the St. Louis suburb of Ferguson, MO, on Friday.  I’ll present the text before I tell you who wrote it and provide a small amount of commentary:

As we watch the scenes from Ferguson, Missouri unfold on the nightly news, does it prompt some questions? Certainly, they are not scenes that we in the United States expect to see in 2014. But, what do we see?

Are we looking in a mirror? Are we seeing ourselves as others see us? Are we seeing ourselves as God sees us? Do we feel the pain and frustration of those protesting? Do we feel the fear and anxiety of the police officers? Or, are they like figures in an NCIS episode?

I wonder if we have become anesthetized to the authentic agony of others, whose real life pain and suffering will not be resolved by the end of the show. Have we fallen victim to the culture of indifference that inures us to the sufferings of others?

Have we lost the capacity to weep over the pain of those different from us? I hope not. I pray that we seek to be compassionate not judgmental. I pray that we stand down, not stand firm. May God bring peace, justice, understanding and mercy to all the people of Ferguson and throughout this great land and may He grant us all the wisdom to see ourselves as God sees us.

———–End Quote———–

The author was Dallas Bishop Kevin Farrell.

I really don’t want to say too much, I am interested in your reactions.  But I will say a few things.

I could bring up a number of matters of prudence, such as the seeming assumption that the audience is a group of 5 year old’s that have difficulty discerning reality from a TV show (a manifestation of clericalism?). Since I haven’t had a TV in a while, perhaps its influence is even more pernicious than I thought, and there are scads of people who think what is occurring in Ferguson is entertainment.

There is much room for commentary on both the original shooting, the crimes that led up to it, the rioting and looting of the community, the extremely militaristic response of the police, and the ongoing strife in that town.  Indeed, there have been probably thousands of pages written in response to this Ferguson matter, already.

I noted above, from a man standing in an office inherited from the Apostles, a heavy focus on emotion in place of reason.  This is very common in the world and such emphasis on emotion over reason has crept into the Church to a marked degree over the past several decades.

Taking in all of the above, I am struck by how many opportunities for catechesis by Bishop Farrell were missed in choosing to place the emphasis on emotion and non-judgmentalism.  Saint Thomas does make plain that to rebel against the state authority is a grave sin, unless the state’s tyranny be truly egregious and all other methods of recourse have been exhausted.  Even then, any rebellion against the state, which this kind of rioting represents at least in part, must have at least a reasonable chance of success in changing the government, either by overthrow or by forcing a change in behavior.  I do not think either likely in response to the rioting in Ferguson, although I do hope this militarization of the police gets reconsidered.

There seems to be a growing sentiment in this country that if a white cop shoots a black person, some injustice has occurred. But how does that sentiment line up with reason and Catholic belief?  That would have been an interesting avenue to explore.  And what of the role in the media in stoking this unrest, repeatedly referring to a fully grown, 6’5″ 300 lb 18 year old giant as a boy or teen?  Yes, technically he was, but he was a teen fully capable of doing grave harm to others.

I’m not sure what the takeaway is supposed to be.  Don’t judge, have empathy for others?  So, we should just stand by when people riot and loot?  Or feel the pain of “anxiety” of the militarized police when they conduct an erroneous no-knock raid on my house at 3 am on a bogus warrant, because some unfireable civil servant typed in the wrong address?

I’m getting excited, I could go on for quite some time, but some final questions- have we, as a Church lost the capacity for bishops to guide us in necessary moral distinctions and to give reasonably clear and vigorous responses to ongoing moral questions in the Church and world?  Or are we as a Church now in a place where the best we can possibly expect is a muddy call to “understanding” and having empathy for all, no matter how egregious their behavior? And, of course, never, never, never judge!  Of course, Christ was referring to the state of someone’s soul, and not the evil of individual or group actions, but He did say “judge not,” ergo, irrespective of the context, and contrary to 2000 years of Catholic understanding, you better not judge!

“The Tale of Those Nasty Liberals Who Hijacked Poor Ol’ Vatican Two” August 19, 2014

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

I am dreadfully short on time this week, being virtually forced to devote essentially all my time towards improving the speed and reliability of the internet I have a much better claim to inventing than Al Gore, but wouldn’t you know Eliot Bougis would come through with a great post on VII for me.  It’s more than just a discussion on Vatican II, EB asks some very trenchant questions regarding famous hermeneutics and inexplicable conspiracy theories.  I add a lot of emphasis (because of the general awesomeness) and a few comments:

When the spirit of a council dictates, almost from day one, how the documents of a council are to be read and applied, then that spirit is the true fruit of the council, regardless what the documents may say. Luckily, the Church has never fallen into this trap, so keep calm and party on, right? [heh]

This is the conservative paradox: the same people who are blamed for “hijacking The Council” are those to whom pious submission must be given in the implementation of The Council.  [Can it be said Paul VI hijacked Vatican II?  But if you read some actual history, rather than opinion of the same, it becomes clear very quickly that Paul VI was a major proponent of that "spirit."]  Conspiracy theories are generally taboo among conservatives, but The Tale of Those Nasty Liberals Who Hijacked Poor Ol’ Vatican Two is one conspiracy theory still very much in vogue. The documents have borne the fruits we see (and will probably keep seeing, for a long time to come) because the seeds of said fruit are embedded in the documents themselves. This is why, as Bp. Schneider reminds us, the documents must be subjected to a thorough magisterial pruning, so that the vigor of the Pastoral Mandate can be matched by the tradition of doctrinal security.

Meanwhile, the unrelenting cry for MOAR COUNCIL has a bizarre way of leading to the very abuses which The Council is supposed to have saved us. [Like, for instance, an insidious and deep-seeded tendency towards clericalism, shut up and do as your told, etc.  Certainly, some avenues have opened for more lay involvement, but either question those or step outside the new boundaries, and one finds a clericalism that its seems hard to imagine could have been much worse in the bad old pre-conciliar days]  The Council cannot be a final harbor. It was a milestone, but the Church keeps moving, and I think the Church needs to either enforce the documents with a zeal that any “rad trad” would admire, or needs to admit that The V2 Experiment has failed. The Church will–and must–go on, but, pragmatically speaking, The Spirit of The Council is the clear winner these days. It is heroic of laymen to hold the magisterial line, but it is properly the duty of the episcopal college to get the led out and get our house in order. No “pastoral” strategy is guaranteed infallible immunity. [It's frankly a sad joke for laymen to try to "uphold" Doctrine.  How can we?  We can cajole, scream, embarrass, shame, but we have no power whatsoever.  We are a flea on an elephant's butt.  But I do wonder, somewhat in disagreement to the above, whether it might not be better to shun this non-dogmatic, pastoral Council?]

At the same time, I’m floored that unflinching defenders of Vatican II at least admit that the V2 documents shouldn’t but in fact can be read in a discontinuous, heterodox way. Can the same be said of any prior council? [Yes, yes, YES!  That's the other million dollar quote.  I can't think of any other Council that is full of texts so ambiguous, open to interpretation, and available to be abused as so many of the documents of Vatican II, even - or perhaps especially - the more "official" ones like Apostolic Constitutions, etc.  In fact, the texts from other Councils from Trent to Nicaea are remarkable for their clarity, and precision.  Compare Trent or the Syllabus to significant parts of Vatican II, and it's like night and day.  That fact alone makes Vatican II an entirely novel departure from the preceding Magisterium. ]  And even if it could be, it was the purpose of a later council authoritatively to rectify such problems. No one in the hierarchy is seriously calling for such a correction. Everything Is Awesome. Except, darn it, this time we need to really implement The Council. There’s that creeping conspiracy theory again. [Yes, it certainly does seem that Vatican II, for all its awesomeness, is the most difficult to implement Council in the history of the Church.  One main problem being, there remains massive disagreement over what such an implementation would even look like, due to the vagaries of the texts themselves.  Modernists thrive on ambiguity and lack of clarity, they detest precision and hard definitions.]

[I really shouldn't steal so much, but it's just so darned good......] I don’t see how we can have it both ways. If V2 is to be judged not as a dogmatic intervention but as a pastoral endeavor, and should therefore not be held to such rigorous intellectual standards as prior councils, then the manifest deterioration and disorientation of the Church in certain ways should suffice to show how the pastoral endeavor has been derailed on its own terms. [Indeed.] Rather than being read in an orthodox sense, the conciliar ambiguity in question reverses the entire hermeneutic by subjecting past teaching to endless debate and doubt in the superdogma event horizon that V2 has, despite its intended “humility”, become. [Everything is read through the prism of Vatican II or anything post-conciliar.  Therefore, Casti Connubbi gets frequently cast aside in favor of Humanae Vitae. The Mass of Ages replaced by a manufactured (and clumsily, at that) product.  Everything that existed prior to VII, from vestments to the role of laity to Dogma (in practice) to music to the Liturgy, etc., ad nauseum, had to be re-examined, "renewed," and generally reshaped, often from the ground up, in light of the Vatican II supercouncil. Just a brilliant summation.] To cite prior councils is to be labeled a rad trad, which is pretty astounding a charge. As Brunero Gherardini had persuasively argued, what is need is not a declamation of continuity, but a demonstration of it, and the only possible resources for such a demonstration reside in the very things that get one labeled a rad trad. [That is, reference to all the other ecumenical Councils and everything "pre-conciliar"] V2 is the most self-referential council in the Church’s history, which is why, like any spiraling mass, it sucks everything else into its gravitational pull, and contorts it all into a shape of its own making.

———–End Quote———–

Just fantastic, Mr. Bougis.  Have mercy on me for going well beyond fair use.

I cannot help but note but it was the dawning realization of so much of the above, especially as evident in their willingness to honestly examine the work of Monsignor Brunero Gherardini, that led to the sacking of the Franciscans of the Immaculate.  Apparently, the ultimate super-dogma of the day, the new first and highest commandment, is: “Thou shalt not question, doubt, or cast umbrage on any sacred jot and tittle of Vatican II.”  And viewing Vatican II as the super-dogmatic prism through which all else must be viewed is the fundamental assumption of those who defend that sacking and insist that the founder and previous leadership were deadly threats not just to the “poor, deluded souls” who made up the vast majority of the the membership of the FIs, but the entire Church Herself.

Which gets back to a theme I’ve been pressing of late, which is that the “new” Church, the “post-conciliar Church,” gives every indication of being something radically different from, and irrepressibly hostile towards, the “old” or “pre-conciliar” Church.  This is evidenced in 100,000 different ways and is something, I have said, that must simply be acknowledged, accepted, and then dealt with as best as we can in our individual states in life.

I’m not saying I have an answer or a solution, other than to pray that someday (soon!) we have a Pope that is “beyond” the Council, if you will, that was not directly involved in it or predominately shaped by that “spirit,” and who is willing to examine and clarify its many, many claims against the great guide God has given us in the Magisterial Tradition of the Church.  That’s the only way doctrinal orthodoxy and catechetical clarity can ever really be restored in the Church.

Support White Rose Women’s Center – dinner with Rick Santorum August 19, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, contraception, Dallas Diocese, fun, General Catholic, mortification, sadness, sickness, Society, true leadership, Virtue.
comments closed

You can say what  you will about former Senator Santorum’s politics overall, he was very pro-life in the Senate and there is not a better organization to support, locally.  White Rose Women’s Center, whose two locations provide crisis pregnancy services to women being pressured to kill their child, is always in need of support.  Their only limitation in helping women and families in need is their resources.  Major fundraising efforts like this result in more abortions stopped, more lives saved, and more souls converted, if not to a life of virtue at least from the depths that led them to contemplate abortion.  Many souls reached by White Rose either do convert, or practice their Catholic Faith in a much more pious and faithful manner after interacting with this great charitable service.

The dinner is Friday October 24 at 7 pm at the Dallas Country Club.   You can register here at the White Rose site.

67

 

The only question I have is whether fish will be served.  Of course it will, right?!

You can also contact the below for reservations:

Cheryl Kubic
214-824-5942
cheryl@saintjosephshelpers.org

No, I have no idea of the price.  But remember it’s for a very, very good cause.

Contemplating the above made me think what some of the crisis pregnancy centers will do once the mills shutting down under HB2 are gone.  Two are next to mills that won’t exist in a couple of weeks, God willing.  And there will be the new Planned Barrenhood super abortuary to contend with. I’m sure there will be a CPC near that PB abortuary soon.  As for the other locations, I wonder if they will close?

What a great day, though, when their won’t be mills next to some of the crisis pregnancy centers, because they’ve gone!  If HB2 isn’t overturned between now and then, I’m going to have a party on Sept 1!

Father George Curtsinger, RIP August 18, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, Dallas Diocese, Four Last Things, General Catholic, priests, sadness, Virtue.
comments closed

Good reader Father Anselm Marie sent me this notification over the weekend. I did not know this priest but he apparently was dear to many souls, especially those associated with the now departed College of Saint Thomas More.  Father Curtsinger went to his eternal reward last Thursday.

The following comes from the Star Telegram obituary:

Father George Curtsinger, oldest priest of the Catholic Diocese of Fort Worth, died peacefully Thursday, Aug. 14, 2014. Service: Mass of Christian Burial at 10 a.m. Monday at St. Patrick Cathedral, Bishop Michael F. Olson celebrant. Interment: Mount Olivet Cemetery. Vigil service: 6 p.m. Sunday at Thompson’s Harveson & Cole Funeral Home. Memorials: Gifts in his memory may be made to The Priests Care Fund of the Catholic Diocese of Fort Worth, 800 W. Loop 820 S., Fort Worth, Texas 76108. The second of eight children, George Curtsinger was born Jan. 24, 1915, in Dallas to Eugene C. and Josephine Bomba Curtsinger. Father Curtsinger was ordained to the priesthood as a Discalced Carmelite on Oct. 11, 1952, and incardinated into the Diocese of then Dallas/Fort Worth on Dec. 22, 1959. He served in numerous parishes in Wichita Falls, Longview, Dallas and McKinney before being named chaplain at St. Joseph Hospital in 1967. The beloved priest lived across from the hospital and Catholics flocked from all over the diocese to join him daily in celebrating the Eucharist. During that time, he helped originate St. Joseph’s Hospice, now known as Community Hospice. He believed that these were the most wonderful years of his life. After the hospital closed in 1994, Father Curtsinger served as chaplain at St. Thomas More College until 2010. A veritable renaissance man, Father Curtsinger was a gourmet cook, pianist and, most notably, a photographer, poet and writer. One such publication was a volume of poetry by St. John of the Cross, The Spiritual Catholic, illustrated with his own photographs taken in Spain, Portugal, Greece, California and Fort Worth.

Father Curtsinger was apparently beloved by many affiliated with the College of Saint Thomas More as well as a number of traditional Catholics in the area. I really have no familiarity with him at all but the fact that Father Anselm Marie speaks highly of him is enough testament for me.

May God have mercy on the soul of his servant, Father George Curtsinger.  Requiescat in Pace.

monsignortom1

Fr.-Curtsinger---WEB-200

The sicker it gets……women in NYC now having “egg freezing” parties August 18, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, paganism, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, Society.
comments closed

While we Catholics argue over how to get a local priest to offer a sermon against contraception, the cultural calamity of fifty years ago, the culture keeps moving on and on and on.  It is difficult to imagine that women willing to spend tens of thousands of dollars to have some eggs frozen (so they can continue contracepting a few more years, until they finally desire that child on demand) are going to be very open to many of our arguments regarding contraception.  Of course, miracles do happen, but there generally has to be openness to Grace.  It’s now such a “thing” there are even egg freezing parties in New York and other elite coastal cities, I guess to make the process a little more swinging and a bit less Frankensteinian:

Egg freezing has become such a popular procedure that according to a recent New York Post report, parties are now being thrown for it.

A startup known as EggBanxx recently invited young professional women in NYC to an informational party at New York City’s NoMad hotel to discuss egg-freezing.

During the $45-a-ticket event called “Let’s Chill,” over 70 female attendees socialized and learned about the egg-freezing process from fertility professionals, The Post reported.

The party was thrown to drum up business for EggBanxx, which says it’s trying to make the once-rare and pricey practice cheaper. EggBanxx prices for freezing and storing eggs for the first year range between $6,500 and $7,500 — about half the price it claims its competitors offer.

And it does seem to be a growing market for maternal women of a certain age. [How is a woman "maternal" if she is committed to several more years of "consequence-free" sex using contraception while hedging her bets on being able to conceive once she finally settles down?] More women over 30 are choosing to have children outside of marriage, according to The Daily Beast, which also said that the birth rate for unmarried women aged 30-34 “substantially surpassed” those of a younger age for the first time in 2012. [That is a moral catastrophe, a nation of bastards.  Oh, but Uncle Sugar will always be there to play daddy, and then incarcerate the poor youth for life after their third felony]

No wonder that the response has been “overwhelming,” Gina Bartasi, CEO of FertilityAuthority, the parent company of EggBanxx, told Business Insider. “Phones have been ringing off the hook. We know the interest is high.”

Bartasi told us that EggBanxx will throw another party in New York in September, eventually rolling out across the country in cities like Boston, San Fransisco, and Los Angeles in the near future. She said the company is aiming to target women 25 to 38 years old, and would discourage women over the age of 38, as “fertility is very low” at that point. [Is the term "boutique baby" too harsh?]

Bartasi looks at egg freezing as a positive step for the modern, professional woman. “Before, you had your career and you might have ended up with infertility treatments and years of heartache and lots and lots of expense and IVF cycles,” she told us. Now, egg freezing is “an insurance policy. It’s about having no regrets.” [No, it's about being willing to stoop to an endless level of depravity in order to have your cake and eat it, too, insisting in spite of nature and reason that a woman should be able to have a child on demand after years of chemically or otherwise frustrating her fecundity.]  

A bit of an aside to the above, but what is the divorce rate for women who have had 10 or more lifetime partners?  Is not a big part of what is sold to women today as the “ideal lifestyle” the concept of uninhibited gratification with a large number of (frequently nearly random or anonymous) partners at night while being a careerist lioness during the day?

These “parties” are just the latest development in an ongoing and accelerating trend towards female self-abasement.  Men do it too, don’t get me wrong, but women have traditionally been the societal guardians of virtue and when women begin, en masse, to shuck both their feminine instincts (given them by God) and virtues, cultures tend to go very downhill, very fast.  We appear to be heading in this world towards two opposite and hellish ends regarding female behavior (the readers of this blog obvious, I would pray, exceptions) – either severe islamic repression and treatment of women as absolute chattel, or severe progressive repression and treatment of women as nothing but objects of lust, the latter both in how they view themselves and in how they are treated by men (but all dressed up in fake language of “empowerment”).  The diabolical nature of feminism is revealed as a movement founded on allowing women to overcome being treated as mere sex objects now encourages women to behave as mere sex objects.  The worst characteristics of men are trumpeted as liberating and the greatest virtues of women are rejected as stultifying and inhibiting.

Amazing.  It is the literal antithesis of God’s intent for women (and men), and yet people are simply utterly blind to that fact, and to the destruction the collapse in moral virtue is having on the entire culture, economy, and structure of western society.  We are headed towards a fast and hard collapse that could well make the Fall of Rome look like a picnic.  And there will be marauding, extremist muslim hordes to prey on the decaying corpse of Christendom, as well, just as happened back in the post-Roman days of the “dark ages.”

But, God willing, through the suffering,  the Church will be renewed, and “we” will build again.

Pope Francis supports intervention to stop ISIS….. August 18, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, disconcerting, Ecumenism, episcopate, General Catholic, Glory, Holy suffering, martyrdom, Papa, persecution, sadness, scandals, sickness, Society, Spiritual Warfare.
comments closed

…….but believes any such intervention should proceed through the UN, which……..Ah pbmit mah ton owff

I would just say the United Nations, as a venue for achieving conflict resolution, has, over its 7 decade history, shown itself to be amazingly ineffective and generally ordered to just accepting whatever the new status quo is after some people gets devastated by another.  They are then happy to sit down with the victors and perhaps admit them to the Security Council within a few years.

I exaggerate, but not much.

So make what you will of that, but in spite of some in the press saying Pope Francis strongly endorsed military intervention, and others saying he “punted,” here is what he actually said:

BvVsx0VIcAEmKyp

The first paragraph is good, helpful Catholic just war theory.  It’s wonderful to stop an unjust aggression without using force, but often that is simply not possible. The kinds of groups/nations/whatever that would resort to an unjust aggression are not the kind that tend to listen to verbal reason. They only know one language, force.  The United States could fit into that category in many minds.

Second paragraph, perhaps, but I don’t think there have been too many colonial wars of conquest in the past century or so, at least with first world powers as the aggressors.  I think appealing to the US invasion of Iraq in 20033 as a war of conquest would be a pretty far reach, but I have no clear idea if that is what is being referred to.

Para 3 is a bit muddled and seems more like personal opinion – one could even interpret from the language that the nation or group suffering  unjust attack must wait a judgment from the UN that such attack is indeed unjust before responding!  There is nothing in Catholic just war doctrine that a nation under attack must achieve some kind of balance of world opinion or a majority vote declaring the depredations being committed against it unjust.  In the time it can take to achieve such a consensus many nations have been wiped out, so I find this more than just slightly strange.  But it is very consistent with a progressive world view.  I would agree the arguments seem directed against the US acting alone, but, once again, history has shown that by the time one can get the bloated, almost inevitably corrupt UN to act, it is very often far too late to do anything but evacuate the few survivors and pick up bodies from the rubble.

This is another transcript of a famous airplane interview, so who knows.  I think it important to note this is not a doctrinal document.  I’ll admit to being torn on this matter of US intervention, I am scandalized and sorrowful by the ongoing atrocities in the Mideast against Christians (and others) and want it to end now, and I know there is not really another nation that can do any intervening with the level of effect the US can achieve, even alone, but I am pretty reticent to see another Mideast conflict involving the US, especially with the current leadership.  I do not have much confidence any real long term results can be achieved; at most, I can see perhaps a temporary reduction if not elimination of the suffering.

I do get the sense from the statement above, with the usual caveats for “translation errors” and all that, that Pope Francis is torn himself.  There is reality, and then there is the great ecumenical/interreligious project, and the two don’t always align very nicely.

Nevertheless, I pray these words hearten the suffering Iraqi and Syrian Catholics and encourage them to resist this horrific onslaught with whatever means they can find, and with whatever help is given them.  I pray this ISIS nightmare be utterly crushed and returned to the pit from whence it came.

 

 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 415 other followers