Fr. Pavone gets permission to leave town – UPDATED w/ video! January 26, 2012Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, Basics, episcopate, foolishness, General Catholic, sadness, scandals, sickness, Society.
It was supposed to have the video to start with! Here ’tis…..
BAH!! Still screwed it up! Trying again!
The town being Amarillo, but only for a short time at the March for Life. He did participate and speak at the March itself and various other events. Apparently, both Bishop Zurek and Fr. Pavone feel that their “problem” is now in the hands of Rome, which must be comforting to Bishop Zurek. It is unlikely Rome will decide anything in Fr. Pavone’s favor, but we’ll see. I guess I should retract my statement that Fr. Pavone will never serve publicly in a pro-life capacity again. I pray he is released from his limited circumstances on Bishop Zurek’s own authority – and not Rome’s – soon. That’s the only way I see Fr. Pavone returning to the kind of ministry he exercised previously.
I do think it important to have at least some priest or priests dedicated full time to the pro-life mission. Abortion is such a critical social evil that must be fought, surely the Church can spare a priest or three.
5/6 Catholics favor religious diversity January 26, 2012Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, Dallas Diocese, Ecumenism, error, foolishness, General Catholic, sadness, scandals, sickness, Society.
You can see what question is asked. It seemed reasonably clear to me, but the vast majority of Catholics apparently feel that religious pluralism is the ideal:
Much ado about nothing, or a telling sign of the formation Catholics have received over the last several decades? Why is it that in so many of these polls, Catholics seem less sure of their own religion, less willing to assert it as the best and only religion, and possess a tolerance bordering on indifference towards others? Is this the result of a conscious effort to weaken the faith of many, or just a product of the times? But if the latter, why do Catholics stand out more than protestant sects?
Is this the fruit of a runaway, wrong-headed ecumenism, that threw overboard over a millenia of Tradition in a desperate attempt to appeal to separated sects? It’s certainly disconcerting.
…….just another in an endless series of excuses to apostasize from the Church and yet protest that one is remaining, somehow, “faithful.”
Thomas Peters, making far more sense than his father of late, points out the hypocrisy of the “primacy of individual conscience” crowd, that includes the likes of Dr.Rick Gaillardetz, Bryan Cones, and Jon O’ Brien, president of “Catholics” for Choice. This group has justified their apostasy for years on the basis of a radical misinterpretation of a badly written section of VII, claiming that their conscience, no matter how poorly formed, gives them the right to reject the constant Doctrine of the Faith. The conscience, they claim, is supreme. But wait a minute……..the Obama HHS mandate forcing religious employers to purchase contraception and sterilization for all their employees is a massive violation of the conscience of millions. What about the conscience of those millions? And yet Jon O’ Brien, Gaillardetz, and the rest are four square in favor of this massive violation of my consciene, and that of almost all my readers and millions more.
So we see what “the primacy of the individual conscience” really is. It’s just another excuse – an incredibly hypocritcal one, at that – to reject the constant teaching of the Faith. These people, if they were honest, would leave the Church. I don’t wish that on any person, I pray they repent, but the scandal they cause through their horrific example, and the even greater scandal of the likes of O’Brien and the others being able to continue to call themselves “faithful Catholics” without any ecclesial discipline being imposed is of such magnitude that souls are being damaged, and even lost. That is why discipline in the Church, historically, was enforced, to prevent this enormous tragedy from occuring.
Yes, yes…….I’ve heard the arguments…..”shouldn’t we ‘keep them in play?'” Shouldn’t we try to “engage” with them? Sadly, many people are so lost in their sins they are beyond human means to reach. The faith of those who remain true to the Church must be protected. It is way, way past time to start enforcing ecclesial discipline, with formal excommunications or, at least, denials of the Blessed Sacrament for all this swath of dissenters, heretics, and apostates. True charity demands it.
And, I strongly suspect, that if discipline were to be enforced on something approaching a wide scale, many of these apostate “Catholics” would have a change of heart. They would be denied that “best of both worlds” situation they’ve been enjoying, where they can pretend to be faithful, keep the ‘cache’ of being Catholic, and yet work with all their might to subvert the Church and wreck the moral society (such as it is, today). Proper enforcement of ecclesial discipline would force the individuals in question to make a choice – either accept the Doctrine of the Faith, or continue to adhere to heterodox views. Faced with that stark decision, I pray that many would choose rightly, and thus greatly improve the likelihood of their personal salvation.
Too harsh? The loss of one soul is a tragedy that is incalculable. But keeping these few souls who are so radical “in the Church” poses grave danger to far, far more souls. It would be far better to inoculate the Body of Christ by removing this pathogen from its presence.
Alice von Hildebrand on Confession, the Council, etc. January 26, 2012Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, Dallas Diocese, disaster, episcopate, error, Eucharist, foolishness, General Catholic, Interior Life, Latin Mass, Liturgy, sadness, scandals, sickness, Society, Tradition.
The Fall 2011 issue of Latin Mass Magazine has a very good article by Dr. Alice von Hildebrand, well known philosopher and orthodox Catholic. The article is entitled “The Devil Never Sleeps.” I don’t see the article online, so I’ll type in some excerpts that I found particularly interesting:
A Defense of Confession
It is in no way surprising tha tthe confessionals today are often empty. The Good News spread by modernists is that everyone will be saved and that “it is almost impossible to commit a mortal sin.” [Shades of Fr. Barron! And, I’ve been told in the Confessional that it is almost impossible to commit a mortal sin. Once you hear that from a confessor, it’s time to move on] This is comforting indeed; but the comfort is a delusion. It requires courage to put one’s soul under a microscope and be “face to face” with one’s sinfulness and imperfections. It calls for a spiritual awakening that most of us dread.
Moreover – and this is a key protestant argument – why confess our sins to a priest who is himself a sinner? They should be confessed to the all-perfect God, Who alone can forgive man. The argument is clever, and like many false arguments seems very convincing. The reply, however, is to be found in the words of the Gospel, which protestants revere, claiming that sola scriptura is the only valid source of information, alone to be obeyed: “Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained” (Jn 20:23).
While knowing Scripture by heart, protestants often misread it – here, as elsewhere. (To take another example, their denial of the Real Presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist, so clearly stated in John 6). Or else they misinterpret the Divine Word. Yet the words of Christ, as recorded infallibly by Saint John, are luminous and not open to misinterpretation. Christ did say to His apostles that he sins they shall forgive shall be forgiven, and those they do not forgive shall not be forgiven.
In other words, Our Savior proclaimed clearly that He had delegated to His priests the power to grant or deny absolution for sin in His name. How can one read the Gospel and not see this? The answer is found in the Psalms: “they have eyes and do not see,” for the evil one has thrown dust into their eyes.
A point to be stressed: To confess one’s sins directly to God, as the protestants claim they do, si not deeply humiliating, for God already knows all our sins. But to reveal to another frail human being that we have committed serious offenses against God, our neighbors, and inevitably ourselves, is an act of humility that God knew to be spiritually beneficial – a blessed medicine precisely becasue of its being humiliating.
The Post-Conciliar Crisis
The evil one truly had a field day in the wake of Vatican II. Catholics the world over were in a state of euphoria over the Council, which was surely going to bring us a new and possibly never-ending “springtime” that would correct and eliminate all past errors of a “sinful Church.” [this “springtime” is more like January in Prudhoe Bay]
Of course, from the very beginning the Chruch was made up of sinners marked by original sin. We only need think of the twelve apostles hand-picked by Christ Himself: one was a traitor; another betrayed Him hours afger having sincerely declared that he would die for Him; all of them fled……….Our Holy Mother Church gives us all the spiritual means necessary to attain holiness, but those of us who have tried know that the way is very narrow, and few are those who make use of the means of sanctification that She offers her children [I could not agree more. The way is very narrow, and very hard].
….At the Council, many bishops convinced themselves that the Church was so powerful and spiritually healthy that a Council could only confirm the victories achieved and provide a noble encouragement to proceed on the same path. But the Enemy immediately perceived that he had been given a unique opportunity, by what I shall call “devilish chemistry,” to teach lethargic Bishops and faithful to misread the messages given. Needed corrections in the Church should not be interpreted as a warrant for revolution. Almost overnight, the faithful were informed by the news media [aided and abetted by ‘progressives’ like Fr. Francis X. Murphy, who helped create an impression of the Council as a radical break with Tradition], always on the lookout for sensationalism, that everything was about to change. The Church had finally perceived that she had to close Her doors to the Middle Ages and make a solemn entry in to the dooorway of the modern world, which, understandably, could not endorse a dogmatic or moral teaching no longer in harmony with “the spirit of the times.”
I need not go into details. Before those firmly rooted in the Sacred Traditions of the Church had awakened, a tsunami had taken place. Without any approval by the Council Fathers as a whole, modernists under the direction of the evil one [!! – I didn’t say it!, but……] made contributions which, interpreted by the Zeitgeist, not only allowed some radical changes but, in fact, directed them. The use of vulgar languages that had been approved for some part of the Liturgy was presented to the faithful as an order to abolish Latin altogether. The beautiful symbolism of kneeling was abolished; communion rails were destroyed with iconoclastic zeal; kneeling was no longer in harmony with man’s dignity. Very many homilies were spiced with heresy; anything and everything was put in doubt. Historicism was going to help us finally understand the true meaning of holy books misread becaues of our ignorance of the new science. The list of disastrous changes is discouragingly long.
Alas, at first sight the devil has won the battle. It is our strict duty to wake up, pray, and make sacrifice to prevent him from winning the war. Indeed, depressing as the situation has been, we have the blessed certainty that the gates of hell shall not prevail, adn the promise of Our Lord to Saint Peter shouls sing in our ears as a sacred refrain.
From self-assurance and illusion, deliver us O Lord!