jump to navigation

Obama – Egypt’s persecuted Christians need to show restraint October 14, 2011

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, Basics, Dallas Diocese, disaster, Ecumenism, foolishness, General Catholic, sadness, scandals, sickness, silliness, Society.
comments closed

He speaks like a Mufti or Iftar, doesn’t he?  I’m sure my readers are aware of the terrible persecution being suffered by Egypt’s Christian Copt population (monophysites, but that’s immaterial at the moment).  There were videos like the one below shown around the world of innocent Christians being run over by Egyptian APCs:

Anyway, in response to these vicious assaults by the soft, pink bodies of Christians against these multi-ton steel behemoths, Obama is demanding that the Christians show some restraint:

President Obama has responded to the Egyptian military’s massacre of Coptic Christian protestors in Cairo Sunday with a pointedly even-handed statement that calls equally on Christians and the military to show restraint.

“The President is deeply concerned about the violence in Egypt that has led to a tragic loss of life among demonstrators and security forces,” Obama said in a statement released this week. ”Now is a time for restraint on all sides so that Egyptians can move forward together to forge a strong and united Egypt.” [Yes, those darned violent Copts need to just cool it, don’t they?]

Incredibly, Obama is not only equating the deaths of peaceful protestors and their killers, but he is suggesting that Egypt’s increasingly persecuted Christian minority should show as much “restraint” as their tormentors and refrain from vigorously objecting to the growing abuse.

More than two dozen people, most of them Copts, were killed as security forces attacked demonstrators protesting the burning of a church.

Ever since the ouster of Mubarak, the Coptic minority in Egypt has come under increasing attack.  While the dominant muslims try to float bizaare stories of marauding bands of Copts assaulting innocent muslims (for which there is no evidence whatsoever), there have been Coptic churches burned, numerous murders, kidnappings, women raped and forced to submit to islam as 3rd, 4th wives or concubines (the reason why men come to enjoy islam is pretty obvious).   And yet, to our dork-in-chief, it’s time for everyone to chill out.   The man is as anti-Christian as any president ever elected.  Period.

I pray for the sake of millions of Christians in Syria and Lebanon that Assad, devil that he is, is not driven from power.  At least with his nominally secular regime in power, the radical muslims are not.  In the mideast today, any government not avowedly, militantly secular (and even some that are, or were, like Turkey’s) will soon be taken over by radicals of one form or another.

I thought Obamacare didn’t pay for abortion? October 14, 2011

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, asshatery, Dallas Diocese, disaster, episcopate, General Catholic, sadness, scandals, sickness, Society.
comments closed

Wait……..didn’t super Catholic Nancy Pelosi and other catholyc dems tell us that there was no way, not in a million years, that Obamacare would be used to pay for abortions?  Then why is she freaking out and saying Republicans want to leave the millions of women for dead by passing a bill that insures Obamacare won’t pay for abortion? 

You mean Nancy and Obama  lied to us?  They even lied to Sister Keehan and the Catholic Health Association (which, by the way, will never ‘admit’ Obamacare funds abortion, even if someone took a picture of Obama in a “woman’s wellness clinic” with the forceps in his hands).

Can botox toxicity lead to dain bramage?

PS – Here’s another demonrat claiming that this ‘Protect Life Act,’ which passed by the way, will lead to women shackled in caves.  They certainly seem concerned about something that ostensibly doesn’t exist, don’t they?

Luther – Prince of the heresiarchs October 14, 2011

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, Dallas Diocese, Ecumenism, episcopate, General Catholic, Interior Life, North Deanery, priests, sadness, scandals, sickness, Society.
comments closed

Via Rorate Caeli, and worthy of reprint almost in toto, excerpts from a paper delivered by a traditional priest in Italy at a conference:

In Nomine Patris et Filli et Spiritus Sancti. Amen

        In these times of great ignorance and radical confusion, and when even Catholics of the highest levels of the hierarchy are pleased to praise Martin Luther, we would like briefly to present and evaluate his theology.

I The theology of Martin Luther


        As Fr. Schmidberger of the SSPX points out in his article on the subject, the main features of Martin Luther’s theology may be summarized in his four doctrines: Sola Scriptura, Sola Fides, Sola Gratia, and Solus Deus.  Let us proceed to address these doctrines in the light of the Catholic Faith.
        1.Sola Scriptura
        The first doctrine, that of Sola Scriptura (Scripture alone), affirms that the Faith is based only on Holy Scripture and that it is Holy Scripture itself that interprets Holy Scripture. (which means, in effect, that the interpretation is left to the person reading it), while the Catholic Church, in a declaration from the Council of Trent (S.4, 1546), which was taken up again at the First Vatican Council (s.3c.2), teaches that the Faith is based on Divine Revelation (also called Depositum Fidei), and is comprised not only of Holy Scripture (the written part of Depositum Fidei), but also of “Tradition” (the oral part of Depositum Fidei). [Reducing faith to Scripture alone, and denying any  over-arching Authority with the right to interpret and disseminate the proper understanding of Scripture, has led to the 40,000 plus protestant denominations extant today.]

         It is not the individual person that has authority over the Depositum Fidei, but the Church.  The Church has established which books belong to Holy Scripture, and the Church interprets these books and the data of oral Tradition to define the Dogmas of the Faith.  The Ascension is an example of a dogma defined by the Church on the basis of Holy Scripture;  the Assumption is an example of a dogma defined by the Church on the basis of oral Tradition. [Luther expunged from ‘his bible’ several books from the Old Testament, partly on the basis that at that time, no Hebrew translation for the books could be found, but also (primarily) because these books ran counter to his view of faith, especially 2 Maccabees.  There were numerous psychological reasons for Luther’s apostasy, a prime one being his inability to remain chaste – he struggled with impurity throughout his religious life, which led him to believe in Grace and Faith alone]        
        2.Sola Fides
         The second doctrine, Sola Fides ( Faith alone) affirms that in order to be saved  Faith alone is necessary, and not Faith and works as the Church teaches. In this connection, the sacred Council of Trent (s.6 c.10) cites the following words from the Epistle of St. James, 2,24 “Do you see that by works a man is justified; and not by faith only?” [Faith alone powers the simplistic ‘altar calls’ and ‘once saved always saved’ mentality that underlies most American protestantism today.]
         Therefore, both Faith and Charity (or works of Charity) are necessary for salvation, and while the false ecumenists act as if Charity alone were necessary, Martin Luther  claims that only Faith is. Luther’s response to the Epistle of St. James, which clearly expresses Catholic Doctrine, was that of cancelling it from his new canon of Holy Scripture defining it simply as a “an epistle of straw”. From this we can see how Luther was less motivated by the Holy Scripture than by his own subjectivist presuppositions.  The same goes for other parts of the Bible that were cancelled by him.
         Moreover, it is necessary to keep in mind that Luther understands Faith in a very different way from  Catholics.  According to Luther, Faith consists in trusting that God in His mercy will forgive man on account of Christ, while the Church teaches that the Faith consists in accepting Revelation on the authority of God Who reveals it. 
         Luther anyway had already completely lost the Catholic Faith from the moment that he denied a single article of Faith, because he who denies even one article of Faith, denies the authority of God Who has revealed it. [Contrary to what that sad ‘Catholic Update‘ stated, one cannot deny, or even hold persistent, ongoing doubts over, an article of Faith held by the Church.  To be Catholic means to accept the Unity of belief that proceeds from a supernatural union with God in a state of Grace.  If we reject what the Church believes, we cut off that union, declaring ourselves our own ‘gods’ determining our own ‘truth,’ and we place ourselves outside the Body of Christ, which is His Church]
        3.Sola Gratia
        In the third doctrine, Sola Gratia, ( Grace alone), Luther affirms that through Original Sin human nature was totally corrupted, so that man became incapable of knowing religious truth and of acting freely and morally, with the result that Grace could not heal man, but only cover his sinfulness.  Whereas the Church teaches that human nature is only fallen and wounded, and can be healed with Grace; man can know the truth and possesses free will by means of which he collaborates with Grace in order to act morally, even if this often requires a great struggle. [Think about Luther’s decades long struggle with purity, and then this belief he developed]
        4. Solus Deus
        The fourth doctrine, Solus Deus, (God alone), means that salvation comes directly from God and not through the Church, the Priesthood, the Sacraments, the intercession of the Most Blessed Virgin Mary and the Saints.  Luther claims that there is direct access to God. He does not recognize the intimate union between God and the Church: God in His Divinity and God in the Person of Our Lord Jesus Christ+………………[It was convenient to Luther’s purposes, both theologically and politically, to deny any Authority in a Church.  As such, many power hungry German princes were eager to deny the True Faith and sign on, with Luther’s development of ‘state churches’ that were led by earthly princes being particularly appealing.  Many a Germanic prince was enriched by seizing the properties of the Church and claiming them for the state.  Luther knew this would be the case – in fact, without it, his heresy would have likely faded after a few decades like most]
II The heretical nature of Luther’s theology

         So here we have a brief synthesis of Martin Luther’s doctrine contained  in the forty-one Articles condemned by Pope Leo X with the “Damnatio in globo” in the Bull “Exsurge Domine” 1520, “…as heretical, false, scandalous, or offensive to pious ears, as seductive of simple minds, originating with false exponents of the faith who in their proud curiosity yearn for the world’s glory, and contrary to the Apostle’s teaching, wish to be wiser than they should be.”
         Now, according to the Code of Canon Law (CIC 1983 Can.751) “ heresy is the obstinate denial, after having received Baptism, of any truth to be believed by Divine and Catholic faith, or obstinate doubt regarding it…” Having denied the truth of the Faith, Martin Luther is heretical, that is a formal heretic. Indeed, in virtue of the quantity of heresies that he conceived and taught, the number of protestant sects that he generated, and the consequent damage he wrought for the Catholic Church, he merits the name of heresiarch, or prince of the heresiarchs, or the heresiarch par excellence
I could go on, but this post is already quite long.  It is unbelievably sad, actually, inconceivably tragic, that many Catholics today cannot recognize that the Faith they have been given is any different from that of Luther’s, or Zwingli’s, or Calvin’s, etc.  It is even worse that many cannot defend or explain their Faith.  We desperately need proper catechesis starting from the top down.

Pavone a no-show for meeting with bishop – UPDATED October 14, 2011

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, Basics, Dallas Diocese, episcopate, foolishness, General Catholic, North Deanery, priests, sadness, scandals.
comments closed

I’m finding it difficult to find a charitable explanation for this:

Father Frank Pavone failed to show up for an October 13 meeting with Bishop Patrick Zurek of Amarillo.

Bishop Zurek announced on October 6 that he was inviting Father Pavone to meet with him on October 13, exactly one month after he recalled the pro-life leader to Amarillo. The bishop said that he had asked Father Pavone to spend some time in prayer and reflection on his priesthood, and would speak to him about his “spiritual progress” during that period.

“I would welcome a meeting with Father Pavone, face to face, a meeting as his bishop,” Bishop Zurek said. “I am still waiting for a favorable response to that.”

…….“In this case, right now, a real concern for me is Father Pavone.”

Perhaps rightly so.  I don’t know why Pavone would not show up to the meeting. 

Could be that Bishop Zurek was perfectly correct in everything he said in his letter and in all actions taken thus far.  I would say, however, the Priests for Life is much more than just Fr. Frank Pavone.

UPDATE: Pavone says he did not show because Bishop Zurek insisted the meeting be one on one, with no canon lawyer present.  Knowing what I know of priests who have been shanghaied in the past, going to such a meeting with a bishop without benefit of counsel can lead to disastrous consequences for the priest.  This was really a no-win situation for Pavone.  If he shows without a canon lawyer, the bishop could maneuver him into a very difficult position, or even take steps to end his ministry.  But by not showing, Pavone now looks uncooperative in the eyes of public opinion.

As I said before, barring some intervention on his behalf by the higher authority of Rome (which almost never happens), Pavone is unlikely to ever have a public role again.