jump to navigation

Michael Voris on Ecumenism July 1, 2010

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, General Catholic.
comments closed

Much is made of ecumenism.  Vatican II was described as an ‘ecumenical council.’  Many of the changes in the Mass were made to try to make the Mass ‘less objectionable’ to protestants.  But as Cardinal Levada recently stated, all goal of all ecumenism must be a return to the One True Church instituted by Jesus Christ. 

Pro-abort feminist Catholyc – good Catholics abort their children July 1, 2010

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, asshatery, Basics, General Catholic, scandals.
comments closed

This is what happens when leadership in the Church fails to perform its most crucial duty – to support, defend, and explain the Faith, and to correct those, sometimes even painfully, who publically denounce the Faith.  A European pro-abort politician and head of the European equivalent of Catholics for baby butchery Choice and Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good has stated that the biggest danger in the Catholic Church is “religious fundamentalism” (hah!) and that a woman has a right to abort because “she has a right to a good life” and does not have “the right to ruin it.”  Think about that statement for a moment.  Not only does a woman have a right to have her child aborted (murdered, killed, torn asunder, burned, scalded, etc), she doesn’t have a right to have a child if someone (an elite like this politician) thinks it will inconvenience her too much.  Make no mistake, that is where these folks are headed – to a Brave New World where couples have to beg the government’s permission to have a child, no doubt for the sake of the environment.  This is flabbergasting to me – European society is imploding.  In 50 or 100 years, if present trends continue, this politician, Elfriede Harth, won’t even dare to raise their voice in public as the Muslims will dominate Europe.   To quote Ms. Harth directly:

 “And if a pregnancy is going to ruin her life in any way, she has a right to get the abortion. She has the right. She has an obligation to protect her life from being ruined. … Because you owe this respect to yourself because you’re a child of God. You should feel guilty if you don’t,”

You should feel guilty if you don’t have an abortion.  If that kid is going to mean you can’t spend your 18 weeks of European Union mandated vacation in some Greek paradise, damn you, you had better abort that kid!  Think about your carbon footprint!  Think how many air miles you can offset if you abort your child! 

Ms. Harth wasn’t done yet!  She goes on to lecture the Church by saying that “anyone baptized in Catholic” (the baptists will be most upset), and that the Church does not have a right to excommunicate those who either procure an abortion for themselves, or the politicians like Ms. Harth who try to expand access to abortion.  Ms. Harth stated, regarding how the Church views her pro-abort catholyc organization:

they don’t like us at all.  They’re always trying to say we’re not real Catholics, which is wrong, because the criterion to say you’re Catholic is that you’re baptized. That’s all.  And I don’t accept that other people pretend that they define what is Catholicism. You know? The way the Vatican presents Catholicism is incomplete.

The way the Vatican presents Catholicism is incomplete.  Because we all know that Code of Canon Law 915, stating that those who have been excommunicated or who manifestly persist in grave sin is just  a modest recommendation!

How can this be?  How can a self-described Catholic proclaim so falsehoods, and, I’m sorry, heresies, publically, and feel not the least bit of shame?  She denounces the Church’s most critical moral teaching – that no one at any time may coldly and calculatedly take the life of a child – and then goes on to state that the Code of Canon Law is a joke, that the Pope doesn’t understand the Faith, and that frankly like is about our own material happiness.  I am certain there are numerous ulterior motives behind this woman’s rejection of Church dogma, most notably the sinister undertone of totalitarianism in her words.  Be that as it may, how can we have so many millions of Catholics who claim to be sweet and innocent and in love with Jesus and His Church, who just flat out reject so many core doctrines?  Yes, this is absolutely a failure of formation, there is no question.  But this also has to be a failure of leadership.  For far too many years, these way out individuals have been able to make outrageous statements regarding the Faith and have received little if any rebuttal.  In terms of actual consequences, they have been, except in a few very rare cases, absolutely nil.  So, to the far left (or right) politician that is looking to score some points with the more excitable elements of their base, there is no downside to publically rejecting Church Authority. 

But this is even more than that.  This is an insurrection.  There are numerous elements in the Church, like the pending American Catholic Council, that are seeking to usurp the role of the magisterium and to rob the bishops of their role as THE defenders and definers of the Faith in their ordinariates.  The lack of leadership and action over the past several decades has embolded those who wish to define the Faith for themselves to start to act more concretely, to begin to take action to set up an organization that could step in and turn the Catholic Church, especially in the United States, into a schismatic organization.

The incalculable tragedy of all this is that many people will become lost because of words like this.  The lifesitenews article quoted a woman who stated that she used to feel guilty about supporting abortion as a Catholic, but now she feels just great.  This is the point of the alternative magisterium – to provide enough cover for people who by their politics or lifestyle are seeking excuses to believe contrary to the doctrine of the Faith.  The Church has taught for centuries that rejecting dogma, core beliefs of the Faith, puts one in a state of grave sin, as the Church embodies the Truth of Christ.  How many souls are being put in grave jeopardy because people like this politician are able to say whatever they want about the Faith with absolutely no consequences? 

Where is the discipline in the Church?

Ignatius Insight has a hilarious take on this.

Comment post July 1, 2010

Posted by Tantumblogo in Dallas Diocese, foolishness, General Catholic, North Deanery.
comments closed

So I saw some comments over at another blog that is run by a regional priest.  I don’t want to use his bandwidth or attach him in any way to my comments, so I’m posting my full comments here.  A priest wrote an exhortation to a parish he was departing.  He received several favorable comments, and then he received an admonition from a fellow priest and another commenter that along with his 40 point exhortation, he should write a counterbalancing 40 point “things I love about my former parish” post.  To not offend, you see.   There were words used like ‘arrogant and condescending’ to describe the exhortation. 

I find this very troubling.  Knowing the priest involved, I think I can surmise his intent – to exhort his former parish to even greater heights.  I know this priest acted in complete charity.  There is part of me that wonders if there isn’t some manipulation at work here.  Instead of just letting the exhortation from a now departed priest lie, he is being made to feel badly for his exhortation, as if seeking to live the Faith Christ instituted in His Church, as it has been lived and celebrated for millenia, is something he shouldn’t be too forthright about.  I find this very unfortunate.  The comments could even be interpreted as something of a warning – don’t be too bold in your wishes for your parish church, or there will be pushback.  I’m sure that was not the conscious intent, but the lesson to be learned is readily apparent.

It is a personal failing of mine, this being uncharitable, but I find this marked tendency in our modern culture, and specifically in the Church, to seek never to offend, to always make people feel that they’re doing great, no more effort is required, etc….I think it is substantially responsible for many of the negative things we see going on in the Church.  It is an acquiescence in mediocrity, or worse.   I see no need why a list of dreams for the future of a Church (and why should it be a dream to have more Adoration, or Eucharistic or Marian Processions, in a Catholic Church?!) should contain a counterbalancing list of all the wonderful things the good people of a parish are presently doing.  Logically, counterbalancing the exhortation with a list of all the wonderful features of Parish X reduces the impact of the exhortation.  I  must wonder if that wasn’t the point.  Most of all, I feel badly for the priest.  Perhaps I’m being too strident in my defense due to my personal feelings, but I think it a shame that a simple exhortation cannot be written without someone getting their feelings hurt.

And so now this very good priest has felt the need to acquiesce.  I’m quite certain those who questioned the intent of the exhortation, the charitability of the priest, feel relieved now, because the chance that anyone could possibly be offended has been markedly reduced. 

If you wish to comment, please keep the situation anonymous.  If you don’t, I’ll delete your comments and ban you if you’re a first time commenter (because I’m uncharitable like that).