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!
All young priests are belong to us August 26, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, Dallas Diocese, Eucharist, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Interior Life, Latin Mass, manhood, priests, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
Not really, but it makes me feel very good to see this:
Oh how I love to see priests rock the cassock! I know one of these priests fairly well, the one on the right, not as much, but I do know something very wonderful about him but I have to bite my tongue. Sthho haawd.
The priest on the right is the one who led the Good Friday Procession from near downtown to far north Plano earlier this year. I understand he would like to lead another such Procession next year, and is working on….and I’m so excited to hear this…..a Corpus Christi Procession at some point in the near future! What a great Grace both will be, but especially the latter, as Corpus Christi Processions have a long and glorious history in this Diocese. I miss this priest a lot, he’s so holy, and very good in the confessional! Both of these priests have been ordained in the Diocese of Dallas in the past few years.
I am so edified seeing good priests of this Diocese wearing traditional clerical dress and giving witness to the continuity in Tradition of our glorious Catholic Faith!
Now for the tonsure……..
Gueranger and de Sales on the active and passive virtues August 22, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Holy suffering, Interior Life, religious, Saints, sanctity, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
I read the following yesterday in Dom Prosper Gueranger’s The Liturgical Year in the reading for August 21, Saint Jane Frances Fremiot de Chantal. While the discourse focuses on religious life, it has applicability for lay people, as well. And even more, I think there is some really valuable guidance on judgment and charity. Without further ado:
If the Kingdom of God is within us, it iis because it is not meat and drink, but justice and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost (Rom XIV:17). To criticize others on their exterior observance, and to neglect the rule in what regards the soul, is to take out a gnat from the cup and to swallow a camel. Thou breakest thy body with endless labor, thou mortfiest with austerities thy members which are on the earth; and thou dost well. But while thou allowest thyself to judge him who does not so much penance, he perhaps is following the advice of the Apostle: more eager for the better gifts, keeping less of that bodily exercise which is profitable to little, he gives himself up more to that godliness which is profitable to all things. Which, then, of you two keeps the rule better? Doubtless he that becomes better thereby. Now which is the better? The humber, or the more fatigued? Learn of me, said Jesus, for I am meek and humble of heart (Saint Matthew XI:29).
Saint Frances de Sales, in his turn, speaking of the diversity of the religious orders, says very well: ‘All religious orders have one spirit common to them all, and each has a spirit peculiar to itself. The common spirit is the design they all have of aspiring after the perfection of charity; but the peculiar spirit of each is the means of arriving at that perfection of charity – that is to say, at the union of our souls with God, and with our neighbor through the love of God.’ Coming next to the special spirit of the institute he had founded together with Saint Jane Frances de Chantal, the Bishop of Geneva declares that it is ‘a spirit of profound humility towards God and of great sweetness towards our neighbor, inasmuch as there is less rigor towards the body, so much the more sweetness must there be in the heart.’ And because ‘this Congregation has been so established that no great severity may prevent the weak and infirm from entering it and given themselves up to the perfection of divine love,” he adds playfully: ‘If there be any sister so generous and courageous as to wish to attain perfection in a quarter of an hour by doing more than the Community does, I would advise her to humble herself and be content to become perfect in three days, following the same course as the rest. For a great simplicity must always be kept in all things: to walk simply, that is the true way for the Daughters of the Visitation, a way exceedingly pleasing to God and very safe.“
………”Do all things without haste, gently as do the angels: follow the guidance of the divine movements, and be supple to Grace; God wills us to be like little children.”
“Playful” or not, I think that stricture above about the race going to those who make slow, steady effort of improvement, instead of those who on occasion make great outbursts of effort and then, as often as not, slip back into older, less edifying modes of existence, is so important. There are some folks who, on occasion, get a great burst of “spiritual energy,” and throw themselves into some spiritual exercise or practice of mortification, only to give up because it is too tiring, too hard, or too boring. That is not a very efficacious means of advancing in the spiritual life. No, many Saints indicate that such advancement in the practice of virtue and growth in adherence to God’s will for us is a practice of steady work at prayer and fasting, self-denial, learning, practice, failure, Confession, re-commitment, etc. on and on throughout our lives.
Ours is a race that does not necessarily go to the swiftest, but to the ones who stay the course, who are around to finish the race. And as we never know just when our particular race will be over, we must remain constantly vigilant not to fall into sin and error, and to remain perpetually in the state of Grace that will permit our salvation.
I pray you found the above useful! May God sustain us all in this race of our lives!
Some quite salutary words from the Apostle of the Blessed Sacrament, Saint Peter Julian Eymard. From The Eymard Library, Vol. 7, The Eucharist and Christian Perfection II:
Here is a scene which has remained profoundly etched in my memory and which will give you an idea of the sufferings of despair. In 1852, a man possessed by the devil was brought to me. He was an excellent man and, in his well moments, an exemplary Christian. The devil spoke through his mouth; he blasphemed against the duration of his ceaseless punishment. A priest who was present said to him, “What conditions would you consent to put up with to obtain a gleam of hope in a million years?” At this point, the demon, who said that he had been a seraph in Heaven by the name of Astaroth, illumined the face of the possessed with a sinister gleam and said to us in a voice hissing with rage, “IF from hell to Heaven there were a column all bristling with scythes, with sabres, and other sharp instruments, and it were necessary to climb up on it every day for a million years, we would all do it just to have one minute of hope; but it is useless!” And blaspheming with rage and anger, he hurled imprecations agaisnt God. “oh,” he said to us, “how unjust God is! You men sinned a thousand times more often than we. We sinned only once, and you renew your crimes every day. Nevertheless, He pardons you. All His love is for you; for us there is only the revenge of justice!” And he tore out his hair in despair; he would have killed himself if we had not prevented him. [Twothings. 1, I pray the priest in question was a trained exorcist, since demons are such skilled and inveterate liars, possessing an intellect that towers in comparison to the most brilliant men, it is advised never to discourse with a demon. It can be done by highly trained exorcists for certain purposes, but most priests and certainly lay people should never do so, unless under the specific direction of an exorcist. 2. St. Thomas describes angelic nature as very different from human. Because they are pure spirit, and equipped with an intellect that is so massive, once they make a decision to sin, or to be virtuous, that decision was made for all time. Of course, they also exist outside of time, so this comparison to the "one" (but ongoing, for all time) sin of demons, to the "many" disparate sins of men in time, is really a false comparison. The demons made their choice to reject God once they found out God was going to save disgusting creatures made out of mud by dying for them, and that choice was permanent, for the reasons given above. Angelic nature cannot really change, in the human sense, once they make a moral decision of this type, they are really locked into it forever. That is my gleaning from the Summa, anyway, I am no expert on St. Thomas]
Observe, moreover, in the Scriptures, the unfortunate rich man in hell. He supplicates father Abraham to give him a drop, a single drop of water, to moisten his parched lips. “But Abraham said, ‘My son, remember that thou didst receive thy good fortune in thy life-time……there is a great gulf fixed between us and you, so that ther eis no passing from our side of it to you, no crossing over to us from yours.” (Lk XVI:25-26) Do you hear that? This man had committed none of those great crimes which human justice punishes; he had simply enjoyed the good things of the world too much. He is condemned without hope, without consolation, forever and ever!
…..But above all, what must be the sufferings of those who acted well during the greater part of their lives, like the priest Saprise, spoken of in the History of the Church. [I do not know work St. Eymard is referencing] He had ever suffered the first torments of martyrdom, but was not able to preserve to the end! These are the real despairing ones, the damned who suffer the most. They had loved God; they had a foretaste of eternal happiness while serving God, and now they see themselves cast out forever! Forever; for there are, says the Sage, three chasms that have no bottom: avarice, death, and hell!
The conclusion for us is to live in wholesome fear, to work out our salvation in awe and trembling. There are certainly in hell many who have sinned less than I! How good God has been not to strike me down at once after my sin! And yet I deserved it. If He had condemned me, I would have had nothing to say. The murderer has no answer to give when he is condemned to death: that is the law of retaliation. Yet any one of my mortal sins has put Jesus Christ to death; I am his executioner and His murderer!
There are some in hell who were regarded as saints during their lifetime. There are surely priests and religious there. That could happen to me, for they were more saintly than I.
Therefore, how good God is not to have abandoned me! ON the other hand, who knows whether I will persevere to the end; that is the great question. I certainly want to; but will I always say that?
That is certainly the purpose of this post. Will I always say that? Will I always receive the Grace of repentance, and will I cooperate with that Grace? We must bear in mind, as unpopular as such is today, even in the Church, Our Blessed Lord Himself said “narrow is the way that leads to salvation, and few there are that enter therein.” He was not joking, nor exaggerating. All the evidence from Sacred Scripture, Tradition, and the testimony of many Saints and visionaries is that most souls – MOST SOULS – are lost. Beg God that you be not one of them.
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.
Priests in Name Only and Not in Deed August 20, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, Dallas Diocese, General Catholic, Latin Mass, priests, scandals, secularism, sexual depravity, Tradition, Virtue.
A very good sermon from a priest I’m sure some will recognize by voice. It’s not very long, it is only 9 minutes.
This sermon was given in 2004 in the wake of the priest boy rape scandal. I call it that, because over 80% of the victims were pubescent boys. The priest alludes to Pope Pius XII and his instruction that men found to have problems of unchastity should be removed from the priesthood. How much great suffering would have been avoided had that dictate been upheld! From an official Vatican document of 1961: “Among the priests and signs of a divine vocation the virtue of chastity is regarded as absolutely necessary. Should superiors find a student unequal to the task of keeping ecclesiastical celibacy and practicing priestly chastity, then completely ignoring any other outstanding qualities they must bar him from the religious life and the priesthood. Advance ment ot religious vows and ordination should be barred to those afflicted with evil tendencies [towards sodomy] since doing so would constitute serious dangers”
It is actually a great work of charity by the Church to bar such men from the priesthood, because admitting them to that holy and august office would expose them both to much greater temptation, and would also mean that they would be judged so much more severely by God for having taken on such an vital role in the Church.
See what you make of the rest. I think it’s very, very good, and still timely 10 years later. I fear the problem, so to speak, has only gone further to ground:
A document was released by the Diocese of Fort Worth several days ago that had to do with the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei’s “ruling” regarding Bishop Olson’s abrogating Fisher-More College’s ability to offer the Traditional Latin Mass. That matter certainly caused enormous sturm and drang early this year, but since the college no longer exists as a place where students would physically go to live and matriculate, and thus desire regular access to the Mass, PCED considered the matter now moot and resolved of its own accord. The entire sad affair played out exactly as many of us locals predicted it would.
But that’s not the interesting part. The interesting part, to me, is that Bishop Olson has confirmed something that has been rumored for a while, which is that he is considering standing up a TLM parish in the Diocese of Fort Worth, one that will probably be administered by the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter:
On July 24, 2014 I received a letter dated July 17, 2014 from Archbishop Pozzo informing me that the Pontifical Council Ecclesia Dei considers the matter involving the celebration of the Extraordinary Form of the Mass at Fisher More College to be closed. It is my sincere hope hat all of us in the Diocese of Fort Worth might now be able to move past this recent unpleasantness for the sake of the mission of the Church. With the guidance of the Holy Spirit, the Diocese of Fort Worth is considering, as part of the development of an overall pastoral plan, the establishment of an independent parish devoted to the Extraordinary From and entrusted to capable priests.
I think that’s great and something very much in our prayers. The FSSP monthly newsletter for August covered Bishop Olson’s presiding at Mass last month in great detail. I believe, and have been told, Bishop Olson was very impressed with the Mass, the priests, and the laity. From what I understand (possibly mixed in with a bit of pious hope), whether to have a regular TLM parish in Fort Worth is less a matter of will or desire, and more one of logistics at this point. The Fraternity has more requests for parishes than it can meet, so it may be some time before the request could be met.
As I said, that last bit is perhaps exaggerated, all we know for certain is that Bishop Olson enjoyed the Mass at St. Mary of the Assumption last month and is “considering” the establishment of a TLM parish.
Here is one Catholic praying this consideration becomes reality, and soon!
Please Pray for Father Michael Rodriguez! August 20, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, Basics, General Catholic, Latin Mass, manhood, martyrdom, mortification, persecution, priests, scandals, secularism, sickness, Society, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
A little birdie has communicated to me that Father Michael Rodriguez’ situation in the Diocese of El Paso may be increasing in difficulty. There is nothing certain or public, of course, but due to his steadfast proclamation of the Truth and his firm attachment to all Holy Mother Church believes, he has become a veritable pariah among his brother priests in that Diocese. There is a new bishop in El Paso, Mark Seitz, and Bishop Seitz has done a good thing or two in his short time there, but Father Rodriguez’ position remains quite awkward. He is still serving in the furthest possible extremity of the Diocese in Presidio, Candelaria, and his “home” in Shafter.
Probably many readers have a list of priests they pray for. Or perhaps you pray for all priests. And I’m also confident many of my good readers already maintain Fr. Rodriguez in your prayers, but on the off chance you don’t, please pray for this good and holy priest who has done so much to bring the great Tradition of the Church to many starving souls. I cannot go into detail, but some of the things I’m being told are quite dark, quite worrisome. So please keep him in your prayers!
Thank you and God bless you!
Below, a few videos from Father Rodriguez. He hasn’t been making any lately, and there is, of course, a reason for that.
I do miss hearing from good Father Rodriguez! Maybe he could join the Fraternity (but I won’t hold my breath):
By the way, you can help Father Rodriguez, JMJHF productions, and many other good Catholic resources by supporting the Saint Vincent Ferrer Foundation. They provide a great deal of assistance to Father Rodriguez, some Carmelite monks associated with his apostolate, and other good works. This is a tax deductible foundation.
Blessed Pius IX on change in the Church August 19, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, error, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, paganism, Papa, scandals, secularism, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
Frequent commenter DotDO sent me a link to Fr. Carota’s blog over the weekend. Good Father Carota qoutes Blessed Pope Pius IX as below, considering doctrinal “change” and ideas, very prevalent in the mid 19th century as they were in the mid-20th, that the Church should open Herself up to the world and all its “marvels” and “progress.” Blessed Pius IX, a truly titanic Pope, would have none of that (emphasis in original, my comments):