Another edifying interview by Cardinal Burke October 16, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, episcopate, General Catholic, scandals, secularism, Society, SOD, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
Folks, I labored for an hour and a half on a really good post tying together quotes from Rorate, Fr. Ray Blake, “Boney,” Father Carota………and then WordPress ate it. Not just ate it, but sent it to another dimension where it will never be heard from again. That stinks. And I am having another crisis day at work, so I have precious little time to post. Nevertheless, Rorate kindly uploaded another interview Cardinal Burke gave on the Synod, and I thought I would add this. My previous post was based on Rorate’s reporting of scheming manipulation and threats being used to try to coax the more orthodox prelates into embracing the Kasperite – or is that Beroglian – gambit of radical destruction of the Moral Doctrine of the Faith. It was pretty hot. Maybe it’s better it was lost.
I will just say this, as a way of conveying aspects of that previous post: there is much sturm and drang about the midway “Relatio,” and whatever the final one – to be released on Saturday, apparently! – will be. But it is obvious the midway “Relatio” was written in advance of this Synod of Darkness (the words of a local priest). That “Relatio” had nothing to do with the actual interventions, it was basically another polemic for the radically heretical crowd. Given that the final “Relatio” is due out Saturday, I suspect it is also already written. It may have been written last summer. In which case, this Synod has always been a sham, a farce, and simply an effort to give some official, “collegial” authority to something written by a small cabal of self-interested individuals.
Sorry for the light content, I do add a few brief comments, I think it important to not always look at merely the surface of Cardinal Burke’s comments, but also the deeper meanings, which are almost universally very strong denunciations of the novelties being foisted on the Church:
Q: What do we see happening at the Synod on the other side of the “media curtain”?
A: We see a worrisome skewing of the discussions, because there are some who support the possibility of adopting a practice that departs from the truth of the faith. Even if it should be evident that one cannot go down that path, many still encourage, for example, a dangerous openness to change with respect to the question of giving Holy Communion to those divorced and remarried. I do not see how it is possible to reconcile the irreformable understanding of the indissolubility of marriage with the possibility of admitting to Communion those who are living in an irregular situation. To do this is to act as if our Lord’s words were up for discussion when he taught that whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery. [Throughout all this discussion, wherein Cardinal Burke gives what I would call sterling witness to the Faith, I do wonder.....what will you do, Your Eminence, if the unthinkable does happen? I just don't feel that can be ruled out anymore. I also feel more and more strongly that Cardinal Burke is growing more and more in appreciation of Tradition and in his role as a remarkable shepherd of souls. He may have failed in the past, he may have weaknesses now, but I'm hard pressed to identify any prelate giving such witness at the Vatican]
Q: According to the “reformers” this teaching has become too harsh.
A: They forget that the Lord assures us of the help of his grace to those who are called to live in marriage. This does not mean that there will not be difficulties and suffering, but that there will always be divine assistance to face them and to be faithful to the end.
Q: It seems that you represent a minority position.
A: A few days ago I saw a statement broadcast in which Cardinal Kasper said that things were moving in the correct direction towards openings (to the change of practice). In a few words, the 5,700,000 Italians who followed that broadcast statement were led to believe the idea that the whole Synod is marching on this path, that the Church is on the point of changing her doctrine on marriage. But this is simply not possible. Many bishops have said in their speeches that changes in the doctrine of marriage are not possible. [The modernists are trying to use the media to create an unstoppable force again, as they did in 1962.]
Q: But what you say is not coming out of the daily briefing from the Vatican Press Office. Cardinal Müller has also complained about this.
A: I do not know how this “briefing” works, but it seems to me that something is not working well if the information is manipulated in a way so as to stress only one position instead of reporting faithfully the various positions that were expressed. This worries me very much, because a consistent number of bishops do not accept the idea of a break with traditional Church teaching, but few know this. They speak only of the necessity for the Church to open herself up to the clamorous urging of the world as Cardinal Kasper propounded in February. In reality, his thesis on the theme of the family and on a new form of discipline with respect to the divorced and remarried is not new. It was already discussed thirty years ago. [In reality, it has been discussed for 2000 years. It's always been one of those "hard" teachings, which means it must do great work in keeping souls from satan. Thus, he hates it and attacks it] Then from this February on it took on a new life, and it has been allowed to grow in a not innocent way. But this must stop, because it is provoking the possibility of great damage to the faith. Bishops and priests say to me that now that so many divorced and remarried men and women are asking to be admitted to Holy Communion because this is what Pope Francis wants. In reality, I take note that, to the contrary, he has not expressed himself on this subject.
Q: But it seems evident that Cardinal Kasper and those who speak in agreement with him claim that they have the support of the Pope.
A: This is true. The Pope named Cardinal Kasper to the Synod and has let the debate go along this track. But, as another Cardinal has said, the Pope has not given his pronouncement on all of this as yet. I am awaiting his pronouncement, which is able to be only in continuity with the teaching given by the Church through her whole history, a teaching that has never changed because it cannot change. [Interesting point. Cardinal Burke seems to be saying: I don't care what this Synod says, I won't accept any change in this regard unless it comes from the mouth of the Pope. And he feels very strongly the Holy Ghost will somehow prevent that from happening. I certainly pray he is right.]
Q: Some prelates who support the traditional doctrine say that if the Pope should makes changes (in that doctrine) they would support those changes. Is this not a contradiction?
A: Yes, it is a contradiction, because the Pontiff is the Vicar of Christ on earth and therefore the chief servant of the truth of the faith. Knowing the teaching of Christ, I do not see how it is possible to deviate from that teaching with a doctrinal declaration or with a pastoral practice that ignores truth. [Don't say "I don't see how," say "It ISN'T possible!"]
Q: The emphasis placed by the Pope on mercy as the most important, if not the only, idea that should guide the Church: does this not contribute to sustaining the illusion that one can advocate pastoral practice that is set loose from doctrine?
A: The idea is bandied about that there can be a Church which is merciful and that at the same time does not respect the truth. But I am offended by the abysmal idea that, until today, bishops and priests could not have been merciful………. [Yes, that's not a very humble idea, is it? In fact, it reeks of that same modernist pride which leads revolutionaries to conclude that it is only they and their ilk that have ever had true faith, true humility, true charity, etc. What a crock.]
Q: Don’t the reformers think about those Catholics who have held their families together even in very difficult situations, and in these situations who have refused to make a new life for themselves?
A: So many people who have gone through this laborious life effort ask me now if they were totally wrong in their decision. They ask if they have thrown their lives away in making sacrifices that in the end are of no use. This is not acceptable. It is an act of betrayal. [Dang right. It is unconscionable. And these a-hole modernists just don't care. They are basically saying "we prefer the sinner, the heretic to the faithful." They are saying "we prefer the adulterer to the chaste." Synod of death.]
Q: Do you not think that the crisis in morals is deeply involved with the crisis in liturgy? [Great answer below]
A: Certainly. In the post-conciliar period a collapse of the life of faith and of ecclesiastical discipline has taken place, seen especially in the liturgical crisis. The liturgy has become an anthropocentric activity. [Dang right. Elsewhere in the interview, the secular interviewer himself notes that the Eucharist has become more a matter of "social acceptance by the community" than the reception of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. That is to say, the Eucharist has been thoroughly protestantized in the minds of the vast majority of Catholics, even among our exalted eminences] It has ended up by being a reflection of the idea of man instead of the right of God to be adored as He himself asks. From here, in the moral sphere attention is focused almost exclusively on the needs and wants of men, instead of on what the Creator has written in the hearts of his creatures. [Dang right] The lex orandi is always bound to the lex credendi. If someone does not pray well, then he does not believe well and therefore he does not behave well. [So how about a statement about the derangement in the NO in general?] When I go to celebrate the Traditional Mass, for example, I see so many beautiful young families with so many children. I do not believe that these families do not have problems, but it is evident that they have more strength to confront them. [Heck yes.] This has to say something. The liturgy is the most perfect and most complete expression of our life in Christ, and when all of this is lessened or is betrayed every aspect of the life of the faithful is harmed. [How about this for a response, Your Eminence- only ever again assist at or offer the TLM, publicly or privately. I know you're already at the TLM at least a couple times a week, but how about always?]
Q: What can a pastor say to a Catholic who feels bewildered by these winds of change?
A: The faithful should take courage, because the Lord will never abandon his Church. We should think about how the Lord calmed the sea in the storm and his words to his disciples: “Why are you afraid, you men of little faith?” (Mt. 8:26). If this time of confusion seems to put their faith at risk, they have to only work even harder to live a life that is truly Catholic. But I am aware that to live in these times is a source of great suffering.
Q: It is becoming difficult not to think of this as a time of chastisement.
A: I think about this first of all concerning myself. If I am suffering at this time because of the situation in the Church, I think that the Lord is telling me that I have need of purification. And I also think that, if the suffering is so widespread, this means that the whole Church is in need of purification. But this is not because of a God who is waiting only to punish us. This is because of our own sins. If in some way we have betrayed doctrine, moral teaching or the liturgy, it follows inevitably that we will undergo a suffering that purifies us to put us back again on the narrow way. [That is a most beautiful reflection]
Long enough. God bless Cardinal Burke and his example in these times of suffering.
Who knows, what he is going through now could result in his being much more papabile in the future.
Pope Leo XIII speaks to the Synod and all of us October 15, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, episcopate, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, manhood, Papa, sanctity, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
In the 1860s, the same revolution which had overtaken France in the preceding century, bringing nothing but misery and destruction in its wake, was being unleashed upon Italy. Having been subject to the feverish revolutionary sentiment of Napoleon’s conquering army for over a decade, many in Italy had embraced the worst aspects of left wing thought. Secret masonic societies proliferated, all with the single-minded goal of uniting Italy, then a group of separate states, into one anti-Catholic republic that would crush the papacy and be done with the Church forever. In 1860, the state of Piedmont, under the republican influence of the Comte di Cavour, invaded the Papal States, under the direct sovereignty of the Pope, conquering large swaths of territory and subjecting them to a radical republican government. As we have seen so often – such as Mexico, where masons were also instrumental in the continual revolutions against the Church – the revolutionaries even went so far as to tell the Church how many priests a certain region could have. They said one priest could serve 20,000 souls!
In response to this and any other atrocities, the bishops of the former Papal States region of Umbria, led by the Cardinal Archbishop of Perugia, sent a letter to Blessed Pope Pius IX, cataloging many of the errors of the republicans and the struggle the Church was then facing. I was struck by how much the language of these bishops was in complete contrast to that which emanated from the Second Vatican Council only a century later. The two – faithful bishops of Umbria, and Vatican II fathers – had rather different things to say about certain topics such as “religious liberty.” A few select quotes on the matter from this excellent biography of Pope Leo XIII, who, in my mind, surely must be a Saint:
They are offered [the peoples of the conquered regions of the Papal States] , as the basis of reconciliation, [with the revolutionary powers] to accept the condemned and fatal system of the separation of Church and state, which, being equivalent to divorcing the state from the Church, would force Catholic society to free itself from all religious influence…..
The tendency of this last intrigue is patent enough. It is calculated that the clergy of Italy, violating their own duties, and separating themselves from their lawful pastors, and from you principally; Most Holy Father, who are their Supreme Chief and Ruler, should abase themselves to legitimize and sanction the acts accomplished by the revolution, and thereby become the advocate and accomplice of the total spoliation and destruction of the sacred sovereignty of the Church, which they are now planning so noisily…….
……..And when the overbearing might of the world, in order to supplant it, presumes to enter the sanctuary and to impose on men a fictitious and deceptive morality, it is time that it should hear us repeat: “We must obey God rather than men.” [to impose on men a fictitious and deceptive morality......."We must obey God rather than men".......are you listening, Synod?]
…….We therefore sovereignly deplore both the pretension of our modern politicians, who endeavor to subject to their bondage all ecclesiastical offices, and the blindness of those priests, [and bishops] who, forgetful of their august calling, and dazzled by the false promises of the world, have strayed away from the sheepfold of Christ.
……It is a grievous error against Catholic Doctrine to pretend that the Church is subject of any earthly power and bound by the same economy and relations which regulate civil society. The Church is not a human institution, nor is it a portion of the political edifice, although it is destined to promote the welfare of the men among whom it lives. It affirms that from God come directly its own being, its constitution, and the necessary faculties for attaining its own sublime destiny, which is one different from that of the state and altogether of a supernatural order. Divinely ordered, with a hierarchy of its own, it is by its nature independent of the state.
Perhaps some key takeaways: the order of most liberal states is antithetical to that envisioned in Christendom throughout most of its history and highly disordered from the right morality. In addition, We Must Obey God Rather Than Men, no matter how fallen people and the culture may become, nor how tempting it may be. I am somewhat heartened to see that it appears there are still many leaders in the Church who recognize this, even if their understanding of that obedience may be less than ideal at times. They still seem to get the basic concept, which is a far cry from Kasper and his ilk, who make no pretense that they are undermining and attacking the directly conveyed Law of God.
Completely predictable – Houston’s lesbian mayor and left wing bureaucrats attempt to censor Christian’s speech October 15, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, Basics, disaster, error, General Catholic, horror, paganism, persecution, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, Spiritual Warfare, the enemy, unadulterated evil.
I have long believed, along with others like Father Michael Rodriguez, that this sodomization of the culture would be the vehicle for persecution of Christians. There is already ample evidence of this in other nations where the false “right” of those lost in sins of the gravest perversion to not feel badly about themselves trumps any kind of “religious freedom” supposedly enlightened liberal states allow. In Canada several years ago, the now largely disbanded “human rights commissions” persecuted several Christian pastors for having the temerity to repeat the constant Gospel Truth regarding the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah, including jailing one and directing that he could not broach the topic of sodomy even in the privacy of his own home.
Houston, quite incredibly, elected one of the nation’s first lesbian mayors of a major city and a very left wing city council. That council, earlier this year, passed one of the most draconian, repressive, and immoral “non-discrimination” ordinances in the country, which, among other things, permitted either sex to use public restrooms nominally reserved for women, and attempts to make what was universally accepted morality just a few years ago into “hate speech.” There was a huge recall effort that generated tens of thousands of signatures in record time, but the left wing cabal running the city just ignored the petition and then, in retaliation, demanded of local pastors (who were not directly involved in the recall effort, but certainly did oppose the new ordinance) all the contents of their sermons for the past several months, apparently in the hope to find evidence with which to embarrass and incriminate those who stand in opposition to the advancing immorality. Sermons by a number of pastors – it is unknown if any are Catholic – are now under subpoena by the city, with threat of jail time if the pastors refuse to turn the contents of their sermons over.
The city of Houston has issued subpoenas demanding a group of pastors turn over any sermons dealing with homosexuality, gender identity or Annise Parker, the city’s first openly lesbian mayor. And those ministers who fail to comply could be held in contempt of court. [One might wonder on what possible grounds, but the controversial ordinance makes it a "crime" to denounce the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah.]
“The city’s subpoena of sermons and other pastoral communications is both needless and unprecedented,” Alliance Defending Freedom attorney Christina Holcomb said in a statement. “The city council and its attorneys are engaging in an inquisition designed to stifle any critique of its actions.” [Eerily similar to events a couple years ago in El Paso. In that case, too, the city council and mayor who foisted an incredibly unpopular measure extending benefits to "same sex partners" used every devious means of legal trickery and naked force to block the will of the people]
ADF, a nationally-known law firm specializing in religious liberty cases, is representing five Houston pastors. They filed a motion in Harris County court to stop the subpoenas arguing they are “overbroad, unduly burdensome, harassing, and vexatious.”……
……The subpoenas are just the latest twist in an ongoing saga over the Houston’s new non-discrimination ordinance. The law, among other things, would allow men to use the ladies room and vice versa. The city council approved the law in June.
The Houston Chronicle reported opponents of the ordinance launched a petition drive that generated more than 50,000 signatures – far more than the 17,269 needed to put a referendum on the ballot.
However, the city threw out the petition in August over alleged irregularities.
After opponents of the bathroom bill filed a lawsuit the city’s attorneys responded by issuing the subpoenas against the pastors. [So then this is just political retaliation, yes?]
The pastors were not part of the lawsuit. However, they were part of a coalition of some 400 Houston-area churches that opposed the ordinance. The churches represent a number of faith groups – from Southern Baptist to non-denominational. [But no Catholics, as far as I could determine. We don't want to be controversial, after all. And with the Synod, oh, who knows how things may change! The prime opposition seems to come from conservative evangelical types. The only traditional Catholic parishes in the Houston area are located well outside the city limits, and thus the authority, of these repressive leftists]
“City council members are supposed to be public servants, not ‘Big Brother’ overlords who will tolerate no dissent or challenge,” said ADF attorney Erik Stanley. “This is designed to intimidate pastors.”
Mayor Parker will not explain why she wants to inspect the sermons. I contacted City Hall for a comment and received a terse reply from the mayor’s director of communications.
“We don’t comment on litigation,” said Janice Evans. [Very similar to the behavior of the Obama Administration. We shall never recover from these 8 years]
However, ADF attorney Stanley suspects the mayor wants to publicly shame the ministers. He said he anticipates they will hold up their sermons for public scrutiny. In other words – the city is rummaging for evidence to “out” the pastors as anti-gay bigots.
It sounds to me like it’s a good time for a whole bunch of hard drives to crash. It works so well for the federal government, after all. It appears none of the pastors in question are going to comply. They face possible jail time for “contempt of court.” It will be interesting to see whether, even if they win in this case, this threat does not have a further chilling effect on opposition to the sodomite cabal.
This is exactly the kind of hateful, vindictive behavior we can expect from those so lost in immorality. There is such a thing as the reprobate sense, which develops in those souls so given over to sin that they no longer have the ability to change right from wrong. Many, perhaps most, who develop reprobate sense start with sins against the 6th and 9th Commandments. Certainly, once one is so lost in sin – as we have seen so often among pro-aborts – sin starts to add unto sin, and the evil and cruel tendencies branch outward into other areas. We also have seen very strong evidence that this radical sodomite cabal that is feeling so empowered of late, having bullied tens of millions into acquiescence of their immoral acts, tends to brook absolutely no criticism whatsoever. Much of what the sodomite cabal is trying to achieve, politically and culturally, is oriented towards seeking that constant affirmation they crave, the better to quell any remaining scruples they may have.
So, this is to me utterly predictable, and something the faithful can expect much more of as time goes by and the institutionalization of gross perversion becomes more and more entrenched. The room in which faithful Christians are allowed to operate will grow steadily narrower. They seek to drive us from the public square, and will not be satisfied there. They will also attempt to insinuate their evils into the churches themselves, punishing those who do not comply and attempting to force even the most recalcitrant souls to embrace their wantonness. They seek to utterly destroy the Church, the constant enemy and eternal target of all left wing groups, as the final impediment between them and ultimate power.
And this Synod may give perfect cover to that large number of Catholic bishops and priests who would eagerly go along.
I guess I should not have been surprised, but apparently Anthony Kennedy and John Roberts (those well known Catholics in good standing) are once again having scruples about limiting the availability of abortion in this country. So, in spite of strong opposition from Antonin Scalia, Samuel Alito, and Clarence Thomas, the Supreme Court overturned the 5th Circuit’s ruling of two weeks ago permitting the implementation of aspects of House Bill 2 that would have shuttered 80% of the abortion mills in the state. These are the aspects having to do with abortuarys – where major surgery certainly takes place, as anyone who has ever seen the blood-stained women leaving mills can attest – having to meet minimal ambulatory surgery center requirements. While the 5th Circuit had ruled that the health and safety requirements could be implemented while the final ruling was still pending at the circuit level, the Supreme Court overturned that ruling and said they could not. They also lifted the requirement that doctors have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals for mills in McAllen and El Paso.
I guess I should not have been surprised, as the Supreme Court has already noted, abortion is the vital backstop to one of the main, defining elements of the current American lifestyle, contraception, and hence cannot be made too inconvenient.
Abortion mills that have been closed for over a week are now free to reopen with this ruling. How many babies will be brutally slaughtered as a result is known only to God:
The Supreme Court on Tuesday blocked key parts of a 2013 law in Texas that had closed all but eight facilities providing abortions in America’s second most-populous state.
In an unsigned order, the justices sided with abortion rights advocates and health care providers in suspending an Oct. 2 ruling by a panel of the New Orleans-based U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals that Texas could immediately apply a rule making abortion clinics statewide spend millions of dollars on hospital-level upgrades. [No they are not "hospital level." They are the same requirements any day surgery center has to meet. Guess what, when you rip a living, growing entity intimately connected to the mother's body, that constitutes surgery! There is blood and infection and all manner of risk. This is a long, long overdue requirement, but the abortion mill hates it, because it will so cut into the abortionists bottom line that most choose to close their mills rather than meet the requirements, proving once again that abortion, for most child-murderers, is about filthy lucre, as it always has been. Only a narrow group of pro-abort ideologues like Planned Barrenhood are so committed to abortion as their dark sacrament of hate that they will take the hit and upgrade facilities to meet the requirements.]
The court also put on hold a separate provision of the law only as it applies to clinics in McAllen and El Paso that requires doctors at the facilities to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals. The admitting privileges remains in effect elsewhere in Texas. [The tenor of these rulings makes me suspect the Supreme Court will overturn them even if the Fifth Circuit rules in favor of HB2]
Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas said they would have ruled against the clinics in all respects.
The 5th Circuit is still considering the overall constitutionality of the sweeping measure overwhelmingly passed by the GOP-controlled Texas Legislature and signed into law by Gov. Rick Perry last year. [Can you believe we live in a country where this is even a question? But this is far from the only one]
But even as it weighs the merits of the law, the appeals court said that it can be enforced in the meantime — opening the door for the emergency appeal to the Supreme Court……..
……Until the nation’s highest court intervened, only abortion facilities in the Houston, Austin, San Antonio and the Dallas-Fort Worth areas remained open. And none was left along the Texas-Mexico border or outside any of the state’s largest urban areas. [28 of 35 - 80% - were closed. Even Planned Barrenhood's new super center in South Dallas - which is supposed to meet the new requirements - was closed last week, apparently]
It will be interesting to see whether the Supreme Court will allow all aspects of HB2 to stand. I am confident that the Fifth Circuit will rule favorably in all respects. I fear the “Catholic” majority on the Supreme Court is just a dice roll – we never know how they are going to rule, and they are darned clear about the fact that they never, ever allow the Faith to guide their judgments. Even Scalia declared as much. Incredible.
Pray this law remains in full effect. Yes, it is far from perfect, yes, it leaves abortion legal, but it did go very, very far in dramatically limiting the availability of abortion in this state. I am confident that if fully implemented tens of thousands of babies will be saved a year. It is one of the most effective and far-reaching abortion-limiting laws passed anywhere in the country.
El Paso Bishop Seitz: I’m down with whatever the Synod comes up with on “gays/lesbians”! October 14, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, disconcerting, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, sadness, scandals, secularism, Society, SOD, the return.
You know there will be a very large number of bishops who feel and act this way, whatever their motivation. It could be due to that very prevalent hyper-montanism present in the Church today, due to their own preferences, or simply because they constitutionally simply cannot be seen as somehow in “opposition” to the Pope, even if the Pope makes no direct statement on this subject and continues to work through underlings at the Synod. Nevertheless, this is probably something we’ll see quite a bit of. My general impression of the episcopate today is that there are a few solid orthodox types who are strongly attached to the perennial belief and practice of the Church, there are probably even more wildly heterodox bishops, there are the career climbers who don’t care a whit for doctrine, and you have those who are happy where they’re at and just generally go with whatever they perceive to be the flow. I fear that perhaps a majority fall into that latter category, but I, of course, am not one to judge our ecclesiastical superiors (umm…..).
Nevertheless, Bishop Mark Seitz, formerly of Dallas and now ordinary of El Paso, has made his statement. By the way, you should also see how the secular media is playing this story, just as many feared: that the “bishops” have decided to embrace sodomy, adultery, and all the rest, with nary a peep of challenge to these sinful acts. This is totally false, the “Relatio” was produced in advance and didn’t represent the views of the Synod at large at all, but it was certainly a danged neat trick by the wolves, wasn’t it? As for Bishop Seitz, he’ll blow with the wind:
Catholic bishops showed unprecedented openness Monday to accepting the real lives of many Catholics today, saying gays had gifts to offer the church and should be accepted and that there were “positive” aspects to a couple living together without being married. [Right off the bat, the "Relatio" has done its work. What a travesty. This is of course probably not at all what the majority of bishops at the Synod believe, at least according to the few reports we've had, and there is no way on earth a 6,000 word document was developed and translated into several languages in a day, but these critical factors are ignored by the media, who want to turn the Church into another toothless, useless, unthreatening-to-the-leftist-agenda body like the episcopalians.]
A two-week meeting of bishops on family issues arrived at its halfway point with a document summarizing the closed-door debate so far. No decisions were announced, but the tone of the report was one of almost-revolutionary acceptance, rather than condemnation, with the aim of guiding Catholics toward the ideal of a lasting marriage. [And many individual bishops, and even some national conferences, have already said the "Relatio" is utterly unacceptable.]
Bishops clearly took into account the views of Pope Francis, whose “Who am I to judge?” comment about gays signaled a new tone of welcome for the church. Their report also reflected the views of ordinary Catholics who, in responses to Vatican questionnaires in the run-up to the synod, rejected church teaching on birth control and homosexuality as outdated and irrelevant. [I want to throw up. The Synod members are going to have to have cast iron you know whats to keep from caving on this coup executed by the heretics in mitred hats]
The bishops said gays had “gifts and qualities” to offer and asked rhetorically if the church was ready to provide them a welcoming place, “accepting and valuing their sexual orientation without compromising Catholic doctrine on the family and matrimony.” [As Rorate has noted, it appears this addition to the document was written by one man, a man known for his extreme leftism and his comfort around the perverse]
[Now for the truly disturbing part] El Paso Catholic Bishop Mark Seitz did not seem shocked that the church could shift its its approach to gays and lesbians.
“I think Pope Francis from the very beginning has signaled that he wants to reset the button a little bit and help people to see the church, not just as a place where there are certain knows ["knows?" I think they mean "no's] - thou shalt not,” Seitz said. “But as a place of love and welcome and mercy and that applies to every person. … It applies to people who struggle with same-sex attractions, with homosexuality. That is what the church is all about. And it’s our task to walk with people in whatever situation they find themselves.” [Lord have mercy! And so it's "love" to tell people in the gravest of sins that they are fine, that they don't need to change, that everything is just wonderful, even as they walk their way to hell! Do you even believe in hell anymore, Bishop Seitz, or that anyone actually goes there?]
A bishop who is a part of the Roman Catholic Church does not have leeway to not follow the new doctrine toward homosexuals if the bishop disagrees with the doctrine. [WAIT! I THOUGHT THE SYNOD WAS ALL ABOUT "PASTORAL" APPROACHES, AND NOT DOCTRINE! WHAT IS THIS?!? Do you not see what will happen? No matter how "pastoral" the Synod will claim to be, it will be turned into another danged super-dogma by the media and many willing collaborators in the Church! We have been reassured again and again that Doctrine would not be touched - just as it wasn't "touched" at Vatican II. And how has that worked out for us?]
“I’m a member of the church and a disciple of Jesus. And I trust that the guidance I receive from the teaching authority of the church – of which I am a part – is something that will be consistent with our constant teaching and something that I have resolved to follow whether I fully understand it or not,” Seitz said. “So, I have no problem saying whatever conclusion that the church comes to is something that I will gladly support.”
To be charitable to Bishop Seitz, in some sense, that is what a bishop has to say, I suppose. Although I think it a very dangerous and sad sort of excuse. What if, just supposing, the Synod “pastorally” declared that Jesus Christ – only for the purposes of “outreach” to those outside the Church, of course – was just a man? Would Bishop Seitz go along with that? I don’t think the old cop-out of “Oh, but that’s impossible, it would never happen!” holds anymore. Who among us 2 years ago would have imagine a Synod document proclaiming that the Church should accept active sodomites as is, without any conversion or repentance, or toying around with admitting adulterers to the Blessed Sacrament? Oh……. But hopefully you get my point. And from this potential cave on such a hugely important topic, how else can ANY remaining Doctrine of the Faith be taken seriously?
Not to mention the fact that I think it wrong to assign some kind of huge doctrinal significance – which Bishop Seitz seems to do – to a novel new body that consists of only a tiny fraction of all the bishops in the Church and has no authority to craft doctrine, anyway. But he’ll go along with whatever they say, anyway?
Look, if these left wing Synod members and the rest of the crew want to chuck Church Doctrine, you have to chuck all of it. That means many of their pet projects they love to beat people over the head about must be chucked, too. Things like opposing “corporate greed,” capitalism in general, gerbal worming, having corporal charity for others, helping the poor, visiting the sick, engaging in their cherished “social justice,” etc., etc. If we can chuck 2000 years of Doctrine and the literal, direct Word of the Second Person of the Holy Trinity on one subject, why can we not chuck the rest? And you know, that is exactly what will happen – the Church will have absolutely no moral authority on ANY subject, not just the ones in which the media and their leftist fellow-travelers would like to see the Church change.
I mean it! How on earth could the Church be welcoming to sodomites, of all people, not chastising or criticizing their behavior in the slightest, inviting them to blaspheme the Holy Spirit by receiving the Most Precious Body and Blood of Our Savior in the Blessed Sacrament while in a state of wretched sin, and not welcome corporate raiders, abortionists, the most corrupt politicians, or even mafiosos? Or is the Church, then, to be just what our Pope ostensibly opposes – just another worldly NGO? Because that is precisely what it will be if the direction outlined in the “Relatio” is adopted.
Good Cardinal Burke gave a long interview yesterday in which he expressed his frustration at the doctrinal chaos Pope Francis has encouraged in the Church and called on the Pope to makes statements reaffirming the constant belief and practice of the Church. Some highlights via LSN, then Burke’s recent interview on EWTN (a different one from the one quoted below) in its entirety:
In a candid interview Monday, Cardinal Raymond Burke voiced the concerns of many of his brothers in the Synod hall and lay Catholic activists throughout the world that the public presentation of the Synod has been manipulated by the organizers in the General Secretariat. [Hmmm......who appointed and controls the General Secretariat?]
He strongly criticized yesterday’s Relatio post disceptationem, or “report after the debate,” which the Catholic lay group Voice of the Family had called a “betrayal,” saying it proposes views that “faithful shepherds … cannot accept,” and betrays an approach that is “not of the Church.” He called on Pope Francis to issue a statement defending Catholic teaching. [It was also not a "report" of the actual Synod debate - which has been dominated by more faithful views - but was a pre-prepared document that advanced the radical secularist viewpoint. Thus, this Synod appears even less a true debate and more an exercise in providing cover for......something. Someone apparently wants the appearance of cherished "collegiality," but that's too messy and unpredictable. Better to manipulate the process to arrive at a pre-determined result?]
“In my judgment, such a statement is long overdue,” he told Catholic World Report’s Carl Olsen. “The debate on these questions has been going forward now for almost nine months, especially in the secular media but also through the speeches and interviews of Cardinal Walter Kasper and others who support his position.” [Good for you Cardinal Burke, calling a spade a spade. May God protect and support you.]
“The faithful and their good shepherds are looking to the Vicar of Christ for the confirmation of the Catholic faith and practice regarding marriage which is the first cell of the life of the Church,” he added.
The relatio, he said, proposes views that many Synod fathers “cannot accept,” and that they “as faithful shepherds of the flock cannot accept.” [So now we see a difference in Cardinal Burke's mind, between faithful and unfaithful shepherds. Otherwise, he would not have used the term. It is not often we hear such language from prelates in this age.]
The document, among its most controversial propositions, asks whether “accepting and valuing [homosexuals’] sexual orientation” could align with Catholic doctrine; proposes allowing Communion for divorced-and-remarried Catholics on a “case-by-case basis”; [which "reviews" you know will be a sham and quickly deteriorate to mass indifference and acceptance of even more bizarrely immoral situations as posing no problem in the reception of the Blessed Sacrament] and says pastors should emphasize the “positive aspects” of lifestyles the Church considers gravely sinful, including civil remarriage after divorce and premarital cohabitation. [Yes, like how sodomites practice chronic promiscuity, have rates of sexual diseases many times (and often orders of magnitude) higher than others, have stratospheric rates of addiction, severe psychological problems, rampant violent relationships, rampant child abuse in relationships where children are present, extraordinarily high rates of suicide. Yes, there are just SO MANY POSITIVE ASPECTS!]
“Clearly, the response to the document in the discussion which immediately followed its presentation manifested that a great number of the Synod Fathers found it objectionable,” Burke told Olsen.
“The document lacks a solid foundation in the Sacred Scriptures and the Magisterium.[Boy that's an understatement. This document is so extreme it is almost devoid of references to Scripture and Tradition, and get this, can hardly even point back to Vatican II except occasionally, and sometimes in an abusive way, applying the most radical interpretations of Vatican II possible - which is saying something, for the most nebulous Council in history] In a matter on which the Church has a very rich and clear teaching, it gives the impression of inventing a totally new, what one Synod Father called ‘revolutionary’, teaching on marriage and the family. It invokes repeatedly and in a confused manner principles which are not defined, for example, the law of graduality.”
Now, Cardinal Burke’s EWTN interview, which I will not elaborate on:
Friend of blog Kevin Lents publishes strong apologetics book October 14, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, awesomeness, catachesis, Ecumenism, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Society, true leadership, Virtue.
Occasional reader Kevin Lents has published a book entitled Language of Dissent: Answering Those Who Distort the Catholic Faith. The book is an apology for many topics of the Faith where there is great misunderstanding both within and outside the Church. I have only read an excerpt of the book, but it looks promising. I know Kevin a little through e-mail and comments on the blog and he’s a very solid orthodox Catholic. I think this book could be valuable to many: those with non-Catholic family, those who fight error within the Church, those who evangelize protestants and/or Orthodox with erroneous understandings of the Faith, liberals, leftists, new agers…….I think you understand.
Kevin Lents, author of The Language of Dissent, does a tremendous job in answering those who distort the Catholic faith. In The Language of Dissent, Mr. Lents takes up issues such as:
+Jesus did not know He was God.
+There are errors and contradictions in the Bible.
+Adam and Eve are merely legends and myth.
+Jesus really did not multiply the fishes and loaves.
+The Catholic Church no longer teaches the doctrines of purgatory and Indulgences.
+We do not know if Jesus actually performed any miracles.
And many more. You can see a chapter of the book here (this is the homepage of one of my friends who helped me – Michael Lofton):
In addition, Kevin has provided a most generous “look inside” at Amazon. You can see quite a fair overview of the book.
Like I said, it looks quite promising. I encourage you to check it out. It might make a pretty good book for those wavering in the Faith, or who have gotten most of their catechesis (seemingly a huge majority today) from the “mainstream” media. I know sometimes reaching those folks – the invincibly convinced of liberal error types – can be most difficult of all. Perhaps this book may help.
God bless Kevin for his efforts. Oh, and discount the “number remaining” on Amazon, there are plenty in stock.
As I’ve said many times before, efforts like this are the kind of ecumenism I can get behind. Congratulations to Kevin on his new book.
Cardinal Kasper’s incredible anti-Catholic beliefs October 14, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, disaster, disconcerting, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, SOD, the return.
My wife sent me the following over the weekend. Unfortunately, during this most critical of weeks for faithful Catholics, my work would naturally be crazy. So, I haven’t had much time to blog. I’ve had zero until now, today. Please consider in the following, for those who are wont to go apoplectic over such things, simply quoting a source should not be taken as an endorsement – or a denouncement- of that source. It simply is what it is, a handy resource that contains much information on the man “driving” this Synod, or, at least, serving as the implement of another, higher authority. Find below, courtesy of the SSPX, some of Cardinal Kasper’s more egregious errors and, yes, even heresies (I pick a few highlights, or lowlights, you can read the entire panoply of ugliness at the link):
In his book Introduction to the Faith, he opines that dogmas can “be thoroughly one-sided, superficial, obstinate, dumb and rash.”
In his study Jesus der Christus he writes with regard to accounts of miracles in the New Testament:
From a literary-critical standpoint, we can observe the tendency to heighten the importance of, exaggerate and multiply miracles…. Thus the material of the miraculous accounts is substantially reduced. [Perfect representative of modernist sentiment, which is really just new age Gnosticism and Arianism - Christ was just a man, "secret" knowledge available only to the elites is necessary for "salvation," you have to have 10 years of post-doctoral work in theology to even begin to "understand" (re: twist unto meaninglessness) doctrine, miracles are impossible, etc., etc]
About the oldest Gospel account of the Resurrection of Christ (Mk 16:1-8), he comments: “that these are not historical features, but rather stylistic devices that are meant to grab attention and create suspense.” Not only faith in the resurrection of the Lord but the whole Christological dogma is dissolved by Kasper. He writes:
According to the synoptic Gospels Jesus never designates himself the Son of God. Consequently the Son of God himself is clearly proved to be a profession of faith by the Church [Because Christ was just a super-duper man, arguing for social justice and the first revolutionary, right, comrade?!?]
In another passage he says: “Therefore he probably called himself neither Messiah nor servant or Son of God, and probably not Son of man, either.” The dogma that Jesus “is fully man and fully God” is “something that can be overhauled.” [Straight up unequivocal heresy. The fact that Kasper has never had to retract this statement is a sign of the glaring failure of ecclesiastical discipline. See, there is NO Dogma these guys won't touch, even though the definition of Jesus Christ as fully man and fully God, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, is something the Church fought and struggled over for more than two centuries. Several Ecumenical Councils, numerous popes, and an unspeakable number of Saints and Fathers all attested to Christ's dual nature as God and man. There is probably no more clearly defined DOGMA in the entire catalogue of Church belief. Simply incredible. As I said, this poor sick lost infinitely egotistical creature is nothing but a modernist, and an exceedingly well developed instance of the breed]
The previous comments were from various of Cardinal Kasper’s books. The following comes from his tirade before the consistory in February of this year:
We find ourselves today in a situation similar to that of the last Council, when they discussed the question of ecumenism or religious liberty. Then, too, there were encyclicals and decisions of the Holy Office that seemed to block the way forward. Nevertheless, without questioning the binding dogmatic tradition, the Council opened doors. [Ahem. Which perhaps says much more than the Cardinal intended to say.]
This is really just a very small selection of many of Cardinal Kasper’s amazingly destructive beliefs. How this man was made bishop and then a cardinal is simply beyond me. But such is the state of the Church today.
All you really need to know about Cardinal Kasper is this: this man is Hans Kung’s best, most promising protege’. And I must wonder, given the manifest and declared heresies of Kung, would one not think that his best student would have absorbed no small part of his errors? How can it be, then, that this man – retired, too (we see once again the liberals break their own rules when it serves their interests) – is the intellectual lodestar of this Synod? It is his ideas that are discussed, his errors that are being challenged, his disastrous proposals that must be fought. And yet, we are told that his theology is “serene.”
Please. This “serene” man has waged an unprecedented PR campaign over the past two months, attacking and calumniating opponents – men of far better faith and good will than him – left and right. That is “serene?” That is “theology that comes from time spent on the knees?”
Something tells me that Cardinal Kasper does not have callouses on his knees like Saint Anne and some others have had. But who am I to judge?
Our Lord speaks on abortion/contraception October 13, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, Basics, catachesis, contraception, episcopate, error, General Catholic, Saints, sanctity, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, Society, SOD.
You know all this mess at the Synod will eventually come back to the sacred shibboleths of the progressives, contraception and abortion. So when I read the following over the past couple of days in my usual Bible and other Catholic reading, I thought it suitable to share. No, these are not direct statements from our Blessed Lord incarnate, but they are testaments to the Faith made under His direct inspiration (I should clarify – only the Old Testament verses are assuredly inspired, but the statements of the Apostles and Fathers are, at the very least, indirectly inspired. The Apostles were merely repeating what they had heard from Our Lord in the Second Person of the Trinity, or extrapolating clear instruction to more detailed cases, and Saint Jerome was doing the same. Nevertheless, I should have been more clear).
First, from the Old Testament, God abhors the wanton sacrifice of his creation, little children, to satanic pagan gods (Ps CV, 35-42):
….they were mingled among the heathens, and learned their works.: And served their idols, and it became a stumblingblock to them. And they sacrificed their sons, and their daughters to devils. And they shed innocent blood: the blood of their sons and of their daughters which they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan. And the land was polluted with blood, and was defiled with their works: and they went aside after their own inventions. And the Lord was exceedingly angry with His people: and He abhorred His inheritance.
And He delivered them into the hands of the nations: and they that hated them had dominion over them. And their enemies afflicted them: and they were humbled under their hands.
Pretty interesting allegory for today, is it not? Is not the Church surrounded by heathens, and adopting their ways? Do not so many of us sense a great chastisement? And are the enemies they so adore and emulate, do they not long to crush the Church and place the sacred Bride of Christ under their hands?
Next, the Apostles themselves, in the Didache, deplored child sacrifice to satanic demons:
The second commandment of the teaching: You shall not murder. You shall not commit adultery. You shall not seduce boys. You shall not commit fornication. You shall not steal. You shall not practice magic or use potions. You shall not procure abortion, nor destroy a new-born child. You shall not covet your neighbor’s goods. You shall not perjure yourself. You shall not bear false witness. You shall not speak evil. You shall not bear malice….
The “magic and potions” of the above frequently referred to abortifacient drugs widely used in the ancient world in the Church’s earliest days.
Another version of some of the above reads:
You shall not practice birth control, you shall not murder a child by abortion, nor kill what is begotten
Then just this morning in the letters of Saint Jerome I read the following:
But others drink potions to ensure sterility and are guilty of murdering a human being not yet conceived. Some, when they learn they are with child through sin, practice abortion by the use of drugs. Frequently they die themselves and are brought before the rulers of the lower world guilty of three crimes: suicide, adultery, and murder of an unborn child.
And thus we see, in three brief excerpts, the constant hatred God has had for abortion and its antecedent crime of contraception, since well before God became Incarnate on earth. It is the constant belief of the Christian Church from its inception until today – disregarding the manifest errors of formal heretics – that both abortion and contraception are woefully sinful.
And yet, as Rorate reports, there is evidence even these pillars of Catholic Moral Doctrine may be under attack at the Synod. Humanae Vitae was a shock to many progressives, who felt “their man” as pope would approve the unapprovable. They feel they have their second chance. But woe to those who attack what Christ has revealed through His Church, and undermine the faith of the faithful. It would be better for that man that he had never been born.
Take action, contact Apostolic Nuncio regarding Synod October 13, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Admin, Basics, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, paganism, Sacraments, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, Society, SOD, the return.
Commenter Kathleen helpfully provided the following contact information for the Apostolic Nuncio to the United States, Archbishop Carlo Vigano:
EMAIL, TELEPHONE, FAX OR WRITE TO
His Excellency Archbishop Carlo Vicano
3339 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington DC 20008
Email: nuntiususa AT nuntiususa DOT org
Please send copy of your email to Catholic Family News: cfnjjv AT gmail DOT com
To help us keep track of how many emails the Nunciate receives
Now armed with the contact information, I provide one potential draft submission. Feel free to add, delete, shoot holes, whatever you like with it:
I have been most dismayed to follow the course of the Extraordinary Synod for the Family and Married Life over the past week and throughout the preceding preparatory period. It seems there is a concerted effort among far too many Synod participants to undermine the sacred Doctrine of the Faith through so-called pastoral solutions, solutions which will have the effect of spreading great scandal and confusion and doing untold harm to souls. I implore both you and the Synod fathers that this madness stop. Already over the past several decades, confusion and uncertainty have surrounded public discussion of what the Church believes. A heart-breaking number of theologians, priests, religious, and, incredibly, even bishops and cardinals, have contributed to that confusion by undermining, or even directly attacking, truths the Church has always held as inviolable. It is simply impossible to put Doctrine into conflict with pastoral applications. That is essentially claiming God’s Mercy wars with His Justice – unheard of!
We also know that untold numbers of souls have fallen away over the past few decades. It is my firm belief that the doctrinal confusion reigning in the Church has played a huge role in this pastoral disaster.
Please communicate my great dismay to the Synod over its reported direction. The “Relatio” mid-Synod report seems wildly at contrast with the Faith handed down to us by the Apostles and Fathers. It seems incredible that Casti Connubbi, Humanae Vitae, the 1997 Catechism of the Catholic Church, and so many other great testaments to our Faith can be tossed aside- in effect, if not in toto – to serve some strange conception of “pastoral” care. But as the past several decades have already shown, whatever the purported purpose of the novel formulations proposed at the Synod may be, doctrinal confusion only results in more pastoral calamities, not fewer. The rapidly shrinking Church in Europe and the Americas is a testament to this fact.
I beg and implore the Synod participants to uphold the timeless Doctrine of the Faith and not undermine it through paeans to modernist sensibilities! I pray for the Truth to be upheld and not undermined or lessened in any way. I pray that God may enlighten the hearts of all Synod participants to strengthen and improve that doctrine and especially its rigorous and thorough instruction to all souls in the Church – an instruction completely missing over the past several decades. And I pray that all the Synod participants, and you, our Apostolic Nuncio, may always cooperate with God’s Grace and be abundantly blessed in performing constant service to the Church.
[choose one] Yours very respectfully in Christ/Ad Mariam per Iesu/In corde Iesu/Dominus vobiscum!/