Traditional Priest – Soft, liberal Katholycism will offer no resistance to resurgent militant Islam August 26, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, disaster, Ecumenism, episcopate, error, General Catholic, horror, persecution, priests, sadness, scandals, secularism, Society, Tradition.
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!
In actuality, intercepting ballistic missiles, in spite their fantastic speed, is an exceedingly easy targeting solution. Indeed, the US obtained skin on skin hits with the ancient Nike Zeus system, using a mechanically scanned radar, as far back as 1962. The reason why the targeting solution is that a ballistic missile, once launched, follows an entirely predictable, parabolic arc, so that radar and computer systems working in concert can predict where that missile or warhead will be at any given moment with fantastic accuracy. This does not deal with the matter of penetration aids, obviously, but as a basic technology, missile defense has never been terribly difficult, in spite of the speeds involved.
In many respects, these rickety short range missiles fired into Israel represent a more difficult targeting solution than do long range ICBMs, even if these short range missiles are much shorter ranged. But it is that shorter range that makes them difficult to intercept, short range means short flight time and less time for defenses to react. Many of these short range missiles have a flight time of only 2 or 3 minutes. In addition, because they are so flimsy, the often start falling apart in flight, providing a sort of penetration aid to target in the form of debris that can fool the radars into mistaking false targets for the real ones. Flimsiness can also result in deviations from the ballistic flight path, which means accuracy is non-existent, but makes defense all the more difficult (Hamas doesn’t care how inaccurate their missiles are, so long as they land in Israel and kill Jews).
So it is not a mean feat when Iron Dome engaged and defeated fifteen Qassam rockets simultaneously – and from the same battery. Boo yah!
Regarding some of that old missile defense technology, which they used to call ABM (anti-ballistic missile):
Something more recent – MRBMs have a range of about 1000 miles. BTW, the Soviets, errr…..Russians, are now in violation of the 1987 INF treaty by testing the SS-26 ‘Stone’ medium range theater ballistic missile.
If I were President, I would wallpaper the country with these things. Defense is inherently moral, offense much more problematic.
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
- 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).
- 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?
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.
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!
Imagine, if you can, an aircraft larger than an MD-11, and weighing as much, that could travel over three times the speed of sound, and not just for a brief spurt, as experimental and a few fighter aircraft could do, but for hours at a time. Imagine an aircraft that could conduct its full strike mission from CONUS to the USSR, and back, in 6 hours or less. If you can imagine that, you can understand what an incredible aircraft the North American XB-70 Valkyrie was.
Conceived in the late 1950s as a replacement for the mighty B-52 Stratofortress just then entering squadron service, it was the XB-70 that embodied all of General Curtis E. LeMay’s desired characteristics in an intercontinental bomber. LeMay knew the B-52 would soon be rendered highly vulnerable to rapidly improving Soviet air defenses. LeMay also knew that a highly supersonic bomber could make almost any defense extremely difficult and incredibly expensive, even for a country like the FSU that spent almost half its gross domestic product on “defense.” It was predicted that the B-70, possessing extremely capable electronic countermeasures and even hypersonic defensive missiles shaped like little flying saucers, would be able to penetrate any defense the Soviets could conceive.
However, the B-70 program ran into two enemies it could not overcome: the intercontinental ballistic missile, which supposedly rendered the manned bomber obsolete, and the intransigent hatred of Robert Strange McNamara for both manned bombers in particular and the Strategic Air Command in general. McNamara was convinced that ICBMs were far, far cheaper than manned bombers, even if ICBMs had numerous limitations and were very vulnerable themselves (the whole bomber-ICBM debate, which ties in deeply with the ICBM-missile defense debate, would take several very looong posts to unpack. Suffice it to say, what most people “know” regarding the supposed invulnerability of ICBMs, the high vulnerability of high-altitude high speed bombers, and the claimed inefficacy of missile defense is all completely, totally wrong). It turned out, as usual, that McNamara was massively wrong: while individual missiles were cheaper than individual bombers, by the time one added in the cost of super-hardened missile silos, the incredibly elaborate and redundant command and control systems needed to manage an ICBM fleet, maintaining complicated missiles in cramped holes in the ground, etc for a very long time, bombers are actually quite a bit cheaper. But McNamara and his Kennedy/Johnson allies had the whip hand, and the B-70 program was reduced to a technology demonstrator.
But what a demonstrator it was! The first XB-70 was pretty limited – it could fly at Mach 3, but had some structural problems that limited it, eventually, to less than M2.5. But the second XB-70, incorporating many improvements, could cruise at well above Mach 3 and nearly 80,000 ft as long as the fuel lasted (which was quite a while). A number of 5 hour missions were flown with most of that time being spent above Mach 3.
Well, as always on Friday, I have run out of time. The videos below are only pretty good, they give some great footage but do repeat the prevailing, and erroneous, orthodoxy regarding the supposed vulnerability of the B-70 to surface-to-air missiles. That vulnerability was always greatly overstated for political purposes. Maybe more on this next week. The B-70 was a pivotal program at a pivotal time, and tied in so many issues related to strategic offense and defense that one post cannot even begin to do it justice.
Know that improved, production versions of the B-70 were to fly as fast as M3.5 and at altitudes nearing 100,000 ft. If you know anything about surface-to-air missiles, you know there are almost none that would have a capability to engage a target that high and fast, and that any such missile that could be developed to do so would require such awesome capabilities as to be nearly as expensive as the bomber itself. And, the bomber can shoot back.
Pretty good overview from Discovery Wings:
Testing was not without problems. The landing gear locked up on one early flight, resulting in a dangerous fire and a quite grave situation:
The B-70 testing program was brought to an end because of a really preventable tragedy on a publicity flight. GE wanted to get video footage of a bunch of GE-powered planes (which the XB-70 was), but Joe Walker flew his F-104 into the wake turbulence of the XB-70, his aircraft flipped over the back of the Valkyrie removing both vertical fins, with the result of two men dying and two aircraft lost, including one irreplaceable one. God rest his soul, Chuck Yeager said Walker was always a lousy formation pilot (for all his great aviation achievements and records set), and never should have been on that flight:
Below, the Standard Aircraft Characteristics of the initial B-70 production version. Note test aircraft routinely exceeded Mach 3 and approached 80,000 feet.
Wow, that lede almost started out like a really bad personal ad.
So, I while back I broached the idea of getting a group of men together to give some witness outside some of the many “gentlemen’s clubs” (what a ludicrous euphemism) in this Diocese of Dallas. The hope was to find 8 or 10 men willing to do so, to have a large enough group to hopefully insure at least 3 or 4 men would be able to participate on any given night. I think 3 or 4 is the minimum number for safety. I hoped to maybe make this a monthly or bi-weekly effort, and if it grew, possibly more frequently.
However, my initial request only netted two responses from locals. I do thank you gentlemen profusely for your willingness to take a stand and remind men of their marriage vows, the perversity of such places, and the denigration of women that occurs therein. Unfortunately, I don’t think 3 is going to be enough to make a start of this.
So I am asking local men, you don’t have to be Mater Dei parishioners, to strongly consider taking some really concrete action to oppose the growing immorality of our times. There are so many reasons to take this one small action. First and foremost, there are souls at stake. Secondly, these places are gateway drugs for much more advanced immorality – not just drunkenness transitioning to hard drug use and addiction (most “dancers” are addicts), but also from parading one’s naked body to out and out prostitution. Thirdly, these places were some of the first public occurrences of really lewd and lascivious behavior that became legal under ludicrous interpretations of ideas such as “freedom of expression.” I can’t think of a better place to start rolling back the culture of death. Fourth, we all like to think we are very good and holy and just doing all we can for ourselves, our families, and our communities, but is that really the case?
These places are a cancer on the whole culture. You may not think these kinds of places have any bearing on you and your family, but you are mistaken. They discolor and disorder the entire culture. The very existence of these places is an offense against God, His Church, and good morals.
I don’t want to belabor the point, but I would find it kind of depressing if I can’t find even 8 or 10 other men to join me in trying to give some peaceful, prayerful witness outside these establishments. I know we will experience 99% rejection and even hostility, but I am also completely confident at least a few souls will be reached if they are reminded how offensive these places truly are.
So please leave a comment or e-mail me! You locals know who I am, by and large. Again, you don’t have to go to Mater Dei (even though, the clubs are less than 10 minutes from many MDers who live in Irving). I pray another 5 or 6 men will step forward to help get this started! I have to believe there are at least that many men who read this blog who care enough to take part and have one night free a month!
Either way, God bless you. Thank you for even listening to my whinge.
PS – I hope you can see how taking part in this activity may not only help the souls of others, but your own.
God be praised! Consecrated Host to be used in OKC black mass ostensibly returned! – UPDATED August 21, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, Christendom, Eucharist, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, scandals, sickness, Society, Victory.
If this is true, and it seems it is, God be praised to the skies! He overcomes all His foes! And the many prayers offered up probably played a critical role in this very unexpected development! I have to leave, perhaps more tomorrow, but here is the report from a CatholicVote mailing:
The Consecrated Host is back in the hands of Archbishop Coakley and the Catholic Church.
Additionally, the Satanists have agreed to sign a statement saying that they will not use a Consecrated Host in a black mass – if it happens.
Talk about a great victory!
I work in politics. There are many important battles on Capitol Hill, in our federal courts, and at the ballot box.
But I’ll be totally honest: This victory is perhaps the most important one of them all!
The Satanists thought they had us against the ropes. It’s a public forum and we couldn’t stop them from performing their “ceremony.” They even went so far as to brag about having a Consecrated Host!
But that’s where they crossed the line.
Our friend, attorney Michael Caspino, sprung into action. Lifted by the prayers of Catholics all across the country – and with the support of Archbishop Coakley — Caspino fought back against the Satanists in court.
And we won. We won for Jesus.
The Satanists might still hold a black mass, but promised that they won’t do so with a Consecrated Host. So let’s continue praying to Saint Michael, in thanksgiving for his powerful intercession.
Yes let us continue praying, for the cancellation of this perverse mass and the conversion of those so lost as to desire to put it on.
UPDATE: I see a number of commenters are skeptical that the consecrated Host will be returned. Indeed, it would be impossible to prove, absent a great miracle, whether the Host in question is consecrated or not. And satanists, being a group that is almost proud of its immorality, are dubious sources at best. But, I understand there is some backstory and some investigation that has gone on into the history of this Host, how it was obtained, and whether there are more. I agree that a black mass cannot be held without the violation of a Host – that is its entire aim and intent. So pressure should remain very heavy to get this black mass cancelled, and the request below to contact the authorities in OKC remains, I think, very necessary.
Even more necessary is continued prayer and fasting. If the the sole Host these satanists possess has indeed been turned over, then that would be a great proof of God’s pleasure at the prayers and sacrifices offered up heretofore, and would be a positive indication that further spiritual warfare would turn the entire matter around.
Updates on the Oklahoma City black mass debacle August 21, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, paganism, persecution, rank stupidity, scandals, secularism, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
So in spite of many souls who abstained from meat in the Diocese of Tulsa (at the behest of Bishop Edward Slattery) and elsewhere, it appears the diabolical black mass is still planned for the OKC civic center next month. At this point, organizers are asking poeple to call the OKC mayor and city council. There is also some more background from someone who has already called and spoken with Oklahoma City officials:
Debbie Martin, from the OK mayor’s office, returned my call this morning. She was very sympathetic and said that although the mayor and council all opposed the black mass, the city attorney had informed them that they couldn’t deny the rental of the space because of freedom of speech. I thanked her for her opposition (I’m sure all those opposed haven’t heard “thank you” enough), and pointed out three possible ideas, which she said she would pass along to the attorney.
- The Eucharist is stolen property (already under investigation)
- OK State law prohibits blasphemy
- This group already states that their services is a perversion of the Catholic mass (which implies that it is anti-religion, not religion, which would have been constitutionally protected).
Debbie also stated that police officers would be attending the “event” to make sure laws are not violated, and to make arrests, if needed.
I also heard from a board member that this event had occurred last year, [this is different from what I thought. I read somewhere they had attempted it but switched to a private venue last year] but apparently only one person attended in the audience. I wasn’t aware of that. May all the prayers and good efforts this year overwhelm all the evil from these events and put a stop to them, at least on public property.
Please keep up the calls, especially to Heaven
Yes, especially the last part. Here is a list of numbers to call. Would you strongly consider, in your charity, calling at least one of the below? From what I have gathered, calls to the Mayor and/or city council members are most likely to be effective. They are listening, apparently, even if they feel – maybe conveniently, maybe not – bullied by their attorney into having to allow this blasphemous travesty. I am skeptical the OKC city council would allow something particularly offensive to pentecostals or baptists, but who knows? Even if true, that would not necessarily prove prejudice, but could simply reveal lack of understanding of the actual Christian Faith, which is of course the Catholic Faith – and the utterly central role the Mass plays in that Faith.
Mayor Oklahoma City, Mike Cornett, 405-297-2424
James Greiner 405-297-2404
Dr. Ed Shadid 405-297-2402
Larry McAtee 405-297-2404
Pete White 405-297-2402
David Greenwell 405-297-2569
Meg Salyer 405-297-2402
John A. Pettis Jr. 405-297-2569
Patrick J. Ryan 405-297-2404
The following are some of the members of the Board of Directors of the OKC Civic Center:
Elizabeth Gray (she is a Catholic, I am told)
Walters Power International
2915 N. Classen Blvd. #400
Oklahoma City, OK 73106
6301 Waterford Blvd. #101
Oklahoma City, OK 73113
Price Edwards & Company
210 Park Avenue #1000
OKC, OK 73102
You know what leftists, and especially sodomites do, right? They would picket and threaten the places these commissioners work for, asking them how they could allow such a raging anti-sodomite “bigot” (i.e., someone who understands marriage to mean what it has always meant) to work for them? Such tactics are immoral and unfair, but have been startlingly effective. It is through such pressure tactics that many folks have been “converted” to the embrace of rank immorality, as it is much easier to just go along to get along.
The following is Bishop Slattery’s announcement from August 4, 2014 of his Diocese’s response to this black mass, which included the aforementioned period of fasting/abstinence, in which many good souls participated (I know some local priests did). The video below, when I watched it two weeks ago, really impressed me, as I felt that Bishop Slattery conveyed true pain and umbrage at this most despicably evil of acts, conducted in broad daylight in full public view. We are headed for most dark times, that such a thing would be permitted. And if we ever needed conclusive evidence that this nation, founded on the false principle of “religious freedom” (or, officially endorsed agnosticism if not atheism), has a highly disordered system of political organization, I can’t think of a better example than this current one to give that proof. As we have seen over and over again of late, when it comes to made up rights like “freedom of expression” or even freedom of speech, they inevitably trump the purported “freedom of religion” and, even more, the rights of Jesus Christ our True and Sovereign King. Thus, it certainly appears that very soon, sodomites will be able to petition the government to try to force churches to change their teachings and commit depraved acts of immorality in order to suit them. And furthermore, it appears the government is growing more and more amenable to doing so every day. Which only proves that any nation not founded with Jesus Christ as its visible head is profoundly disordered and doomed to eventual failure, and by failure I mean cruel repression of religion. Anyway, the video, and watch closely from 1:15-1:30 for Bishop Slattery’s obvious pain at the idea of profanation of the Blessed Sacrament:
This is a topic I have always avoided touching with a ten foot pole, because it always turns into a big furball with no end in sight. If the comments degrade, I’ll cut’em off. Against my better angels of my judgment, I’m going ahead with this short post.
So a member of my wife’s blessedly large, Catholic family is pretty into Medj. Apparently, one of the, ahem, visionaries, has claimed to have received a “critically important” message from our Blessed Mother regarding the world, stating that the ongoing wars in the Mideast will spread around the world and that people must pray to stop this from happening. As such, the visionary says Our Lady is asking everyone to stop at 6:30 pm every day to pray three Ave’s.
So here is my question……..don’t we already do that, and isn’t it called the Angelus? Yes, I know, it is typically at 6, and not 6:30, but does Our Lady want both? Or stop the Angelus and do just the three Hail Mary’s at 6:30, or? And don’t Catholics normally pray for peace, and end to awful persecutions and suffering, etc?
It is amazing how topical the Medj visionaries ceaselessly tend to be. That’s certainly conducive to keeping people’s interest up. It is also amazing how much evidence they give of being quite unfamiliar with the great Tradition of the Church.
UPDATE: So I guess it’s a hoax, in the sense that the seer in question claims not to have made this particular revelation. But the interesting thing is, it has been picked up and reported as valid by many pro-Medj sites. Why might that be? Could it be due to the many similar such prophetic announcements made in the past? And as far as the main message of the post goes, pray the Angelus! Hopefully we don’t need a Slavic seer to get us to do that!
Speaking of furballs, this is more to my liking:
Examining the underlying errors of modern(ist) philosophy August 20, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, Christendom, disaster, error, General Catholic, reading, scandals, secularism, sickness, Society, Tradition.
I’ve been reading a very good book on philosophy by Edward Feser called The Last Superstition. This book is a defense of Aristotle, Aquinas, and the gloriously whole and valid philosophy/theology known as Scholasticism, against the rank errors of modern philosophy (“modern,” in this sense, being anything since about 1500). Like Christopher Ferrara’s Liberty: The God That Failed, Feser’s book demonstrates not only the massive errors of modernist, and especially endarkenment, philosophy, he also shows that modern philosophy and all its various antecedents; conceptualism, nominalism, rationalism, etc., were all devised with one primary intent in mind: to free man from the “tyranny” of being a creation of the living God, and to put religion in its right place – that is, somewhere between an annoying hobby and a impolitic set of beliefs forbidden in “polite” society. The excerpt is long, I may have to break it into two parts, but here goes, from Chapter 5, Descent of the Modernists, from The Last Superstition:
But it is not only contemporary secularist progressives who regard this traditional [Catholic] worldview with horror; many early modern thinkers did too. Consider that by the time Bacon, Hobbes, Descartes., et. al., were writing, Luther had already greatly extended Ockham’s individualist tendencies in religion and politics, replacing not only ecclesiastical authority but also (what he regarded as) the stifling and unbibilical system of Aristotelian Scholasticism with the primacy of individual conscience. In his defense of divorce, he had (together with Henry VIII) inaugurated a revolution in social mores, undermining one of the traditional bulwarks of the stability of the family. [And we see, by the same inexorable illogic Luther and Henry VIII used, the continuing unraveling of marriage and advance of horrific immorality all around us today. It is a straight line from Luther's politically convenient (and motivated) embrace of divorce, and today's neo-Sodom] John Calvin’s brand of protestantism had replaced the traditional emphasis on the spiritual dangers of wealth and benefits of poverty with a new affirmation of industry, thrift, and acquisition as Christian “virtues.” Intentionally of not, the Reformation thus ushered in a new worldliness the practical results of which – increased wealth and an new sense of individual freedom – led to a desire for more of the same. At the same time, its fragmentation of Christianity into hostile camps and the bloody conflicts that resulted made religion come to be seen as a dangerous source of social unrest; and its pitting of faith and the Bible against reason and philosophy increasingly made religion come to seem rationally unfounded as well. So, while the ancients pursued wisdom and virtue for their own sakes, and the medievals applied ancient learning to shoring u p the claims of religion and directing man towards his destiny in the hereafter, the moderns, naturally enough given the new cultural climate that shaped their values and perceptions, sought to reorient intellectual endeavor to improving man’s lot in this life, and to defusing post-Reformation religious tensions by sowing a general skepticism about the possibility of attaining much in the way of religious knowledge, so that there’d be little left to fight over. Hence Bacon’s conception of a new science that would give us mastery over nature, the promise of new technologies, and hope for making this world a fitting habitation for man. Hence Locke’s aim of drawing definite limits to what was strictly knowable where religion was concerned, so as to put all conflicting creedal claims on an equally low epistemic footing and thereby to lay the predicate for his doctrine of religious toleration. [Which was really nothing but the promotion of indifference, and with his idea of the secular (or officially agnostic) state, the use of state force to help curtail deep religious belief, especially as acted in the public sphere. From Locke's original and deliberate knee-capping of religion, we have advanced today, inexorably, to mass atheism and the rise of neo-paganism, as surely, and as predictably, as the rising of the sun. And yet Locke is the paramour for the modern republican secular state, including our very own United States]
“And what is wrong with all that?” many readers will ask. Well, there might be nothing at all wrong with it; and then again, there might be something very deeply wrong with it. But the point for now is not to determine whether this project was good or bad, [It has been an unmitigated disaster from which Western Civilization, and possibly all of mankind, may never recover] but rather to emphasize that to a very great extent it was a desire to further the project, and not an actual refutation of Aristotle on particular merits, that moved modern thinkers away from his metaphysics. The agenda determined the arguments rather than the other way around. In particular, it determined an new conception of what science could and should be: not a search for the ultimate causes and meaning of things (as Aristotle and the Scholastics understood it) but rather a means of increasing “human utility and power” through the “mechanical arts” or technology (Bacon), and of making us “masters and possessors of nature” (Descartes). Usefulness would replace wisdom, and pampering the body in this life would push aside preparing the soul for the next. Hence modern science, far from refuting Aristotle’s metaphysics, was simply defined in such a way that nothing that smacked of Aristotelian formal and final causes and the like would be allowed to count as truly “scientific.” There was no “discovery” here; there was only stipulation, naked assertion, and insistence on forcing every object of scientific investigation into a non-Aristotelian Procrustean bed, and – if necessary – simply denying the existence of anything that couldn’t be wedged in. For the Aristotelian Scholastic categories led, in the view of thinkers like Locke, to a dangerous “dogmatism” in religious and philosophical matters. (In other words, if we accept these categories, we’ll have to admit that the entire Scholastic system is more or less rationally unavoidable). And in the Baconian view, they distract us from the one thing needful. (In other words, if Aristotle is right, then we’ll end up spending more time contemplating first principles and the state of our souls and less time thinking up new gadgets and further ways to gorge and sex ourselves). While the early modern philosophers and their contemporary successors quibble over this or that argument of Aristotle, Aquinas, etc., then, what they really don’t like are the conclusions. Admit formal and final causes into the world, and at once you are stuck – rationally stuck – with God, the soul, and the natural law. The modern, liberal, secular project becomes a non-starter. So, “reason” must be redefined in a way that makes these conclusions impossible, or at elast severly weakened. The classical metaphysical categories, espeically Aritotelian and Thomistic ones, must be banished from science and philosophy altogether, by fiat. The game must be rigged so that Aristotle and St. Thomas cannot even get onto the field……
You don’t have to take my word for it. As philosopher Pierre Manent has put it, for the early modern philsophers, “in order to escape decisively from the power of the singular religious institution of the Church, one had to renounce thinking of human life in terms of its good or end” and the “pagan (classical Greek) idea that nature is naturally legislative.” Hence it is the teaching of Aristotle, which was essentially adopted by Catholic Doctrine, that Descartes, Hobbes, Spinoza, and Locke will implacably destroy.” [And even more, they deliberately set out to do so]
I am very much out of time, but I hope the quote makes sense. What it means, and there are numerous other quotes from contemporary philosophers and thinkers of other stripes which confirm the existence of the “project,” the project being to deliberately “escape” from the tyranny of God by rejecting the underlying philosophy – Scholasticism – which so finally and unavoidably proves His existence. There is a reason the 12th and 13th centuries were a period of high flower for the Church and millions of souls, and that is because the people of that time accepted Scholasticism and understood that God, most certainly exists. It must also be restated that Aristotelian Scholasticism has never, in any fundamental way, been “refuted” or shown to be false. There are minor quibbles around the periphery, but the main arguments, the ideas of formal and final causes, have never been refuted. They have been ignored and shoved aside in pursuit of the great, humanist project of liberalism (and note how, even 500 years ago, liberals used the same dirty rhetorical and argumentative tricks they are so fond of today).
The goal of modern philosophy and “science,” then, has been to prevent the Divine Foot from ever having a chance to enter the door of men’s minds. And that goal has been thoroughly achieved.
Maybe more tomorrow. The takeaway is, the entire liberal/modernist/rationalist/indifferentist project is one founded in error and in deliberate rejection of the greatest philosophical truth ever divined by man. And that is why liberalism is generally so opposed to the good of souls. It is also why modern man feels so profoundly lost and detached, that so many people feel their existence is random and devoid of meaning, because they have accepted too many of the claims of modernist liberalism. It is a very straight line from Luther and the other early modern promoters of error, and the dire straights in which the culture staggers along today. It is a very straight line, conceptually, from rejection of Scholasticism and Catholic Truth to “gay marriage” and freezing eggs to be grown in plastic decanters.