Holy Father on ‘for many’ vs. ‘for all’…. May 9, 2012
Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, Dallas Diocese, episcopate, error, Eucharist, Liturgy, Papa, scandals.comments closed
….and, he practically begs for vastly improved catechesis of the faithful. I wonder if he moved the German bishop’s stony hearts.
In a letter to the German conference of bishops, the Pope demanded the use of the term ‘for many’ in the consecration of the Precious Blood, wherein it is stated that Jesus gave His Blood “for you and for many.” There has been great strum and drang in Germany over this issue, with Vatican and other commissions indicating that “for many” should be used, and even the Pope making this argument, and the Germans refusing to change the text from the current “for all.” It’s a completely analagous issue with what happened in the English-speaking nations with the recent new translations, except the liberals hold even more sway in the German countries than in the English, to their detriment.
The Pope’s explanation is long but very worth reading. As opposed to trying to excerpt his detailed arguments, I found another, simpler representation of the issue in St. Alphonsus Ligouri’s ascetical work on The Holy Eucharist:
This divine mystery is called Mystery of faith, not to exclude, not to exclude the reality of the blood of Jesus Christ, but to show that in it the faith shines forth in a wonderful manner, and triumphs over all the difficulties that may be raised by human reason, since it is here, says Innocent III, that we see one thing and believe another. We believe, he adds, that eth form that we read in the Canon was received from Jesus Christ by the Apostles, adn that they transmitted it to their successors. The Roman catechism, moreover, says that the words of consecration should be thus understood: It is My Blood hat is contained in the Chalice of the New Testament. This signifies that men recieve no longer the figure of the Blood of Jesus Christ, as was the case in the Old Law, but they really receive the True Blood of the New Testament. The words Pro vobis et pro multis (“For you and for many…..”) [this is the exact text in the Latin Canon of the Mass, the text from which all other languages are derived, and the Latin unequivocally says “for many”] are used to distinguish the virtue of the Blood of Christ from its fruits; for the blood of our Savior is of sufficient value to save all men, but its fruits are applicable only to a certain number and not to all, and this is their own fault.[!!] Or, as the theologians say, this Precious Blood is (in itself) sufficiently able to save all men, but (on our part) effectually it does not save all – it saves only those who cooperate with Grace. This is the explanation of St. Thomas, as quoted by Pope Benedict XIV. (De Sacrasancto Missae Sacrificio)
This is really the issue. Pope Benedict gives a detailed biblical exegesis to establish why “many” is used in the Latin text, and the Holy Father is of course correct and thorough in his analysis. But that’s not the point. The point is that “for all” was inserted to water down Catholic Dogma which says that not all are saved. This has been a major error that has come up in the past several decades, part of the modernist push to align Catholic belief with the mores of a sinful, fallen world. The world doesn’t want to think anyone could ever go to hell! I know…..let’s just pretend it doesn’t exist!
A lovely idea, but one divorced from reality. There is an elect. That elect was predestined by God from before creation. It’s not that God chose certain souls to be damned – those souls choose to damn themselves.
I pray pray pray I am not among them. I pray even more that my wife and children and parents and family and you are not among them.
Marriage wins again May 9, 2012
Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, General Catholic, sadness, sickness, Society, Virtue.comments closed
Marriage is now 31 for 31 in state constitutional amendments clarifying what would have seemed ridiculously obvious 15 years or so ago – yes, marriage really is between a man and a woman, and nothing else! North Carolina affirmed this little bit of the natural law, traditional morality, and the sanction of God last night:
By a 61%-39% margin, voters in North Carolina approved a constitutional amendment declaring that “marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this state.”
The amendment prevents the state legislature from one day legalizing same-sex marriage or civil unions.
The only ways – the ONLY ways – legal recognition of gays simulating marriage has managed to come into law is by legislative action or judicial fiat (and by far more of the latter than the former). Even in liberal California, voters determined to re-affirm marriage as such, and not radically redefine it. The only way the destruction of marriage becomes codified in all 50 states is if the Supreme Court somehow decides all these amendments of state constitutions violate the federal constitution. Given the current makeup of the court, I consider that pretty unlikely.
Octogenarian sister lashes out at Vatican over LCWR May 9, 2012
Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, Basics, Dallas Diocese, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, Papa, sadness, scandals.comments closed
Talk about your cliched headline – which octogenarian nun sister hasn’t lashed out at the Vatican? That’s not entirely fair, I know, but boy howdy does there seem to be a certain age breakdown when it comes to dissent and rank heresy among those who once consecrated themselves to God and His Church.
A certain Sister Brigid McDonald, whose bare appearance inspires great temptation to be nasty, has strong words for the Vatican’s latest effort to impose some doctrinal oversight on the wayward, dissenting, far-left p0liticking, gaia-loving, neo-wicca Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR). Just reading her comments says all that needs to be said regarding the need for some discipline for this group, long run amok (the article is written as a Q&A, taken from a Minnesotta newspaper, I add emphasis and comments). It’s a long post, mostly because this woman loves to talk. Sorry David R, but you should really read it!
As a rule, Sister Brigid McDonald tries not to pay too much attention to papal pronouncements, [that’s an enormous problem right there] but Pope Benedict XVI’s recent decision to rein in American nuns, [so, then, they do need “reining in?”] found by a Vatican investigation to harbor “radical feminist themes incompatible with the Catholic faith,” caught her attention.
McDonald recently shared her personal reaction to the news with MinnPost. What follows is an edited transcript of that conversation.
MinnPost: What are you hearing in your community about the decision?
Sister Brigid McDonald: Well, some are shocked that he would go that far, you know, to start using his power. To me, it is a misuse of power, a misuse of authority where he can step into religious communities and dictate how they should speak about these issues. [Already with the marxist power dynamics, the only thing these sisters seem to understand or care about. It is a sad fact that Papal authority in the form of enforcement of doctrinal discipline has been sadly lacking these last several decades, but it’s a huge stretch to be shocked that the Pope has finally decided to act]
MP: When you say “he,” you are talking about Benedict?
SBM: Yes. I still call him Ratzinger. That fits him better. But that is just a personal bias. [it’s also stupid and infantile]
…..I can’t even begin to imagine what he could say or do that would change religious women’s beliefs. I don’t know how he plans to change that. That is of concern. That could be scary — what will he do to change our beliefs. You know, that scares me. [How about he reduces you to the lay state? That’s a possibility. You don’t have to change your thinking at all. You just don’t get to play at “sister” anymore]
MP: Can you speak a little bit more about that, the difference between changing your belief and silencing you, and where that line gets murky?
SBM: You are right, those are two different issues. If he wants us just to shut up about how we believe and don’t put it out in public, that is one issue. Or if he is really trying to get us to make statements that are opposite of our beliefs, I don’t know what his motivation is for this. Other than control, I don’t know what his motivation is. [Perhaps love, and a burning desire to save your immortal soul before your life ends, which could be at any moment? I’m sure you don’t believe any such stuffy, “pre-Vatican II” thinking, but the Pope does, and so do I. I pray for your heartfelt conversion, but I fear such conversion is beyond human means. You are totally dependent on God’s Mercy]
I think it is pretty impossible for us to all change our beliefs on these issues to coincide with his beliefs. That sounds impossible. [So, you specifically reject believing as the Pope, as the Church, does. Therefore, you admit your apostasy, and you are outside the Church, no matter what order you belong to or what vows you once took, surely long ago repudiated and forgotten]
MP: Can you stay silent about a belief that you hold in good faith?
SBM: I personally would never choose to……[Holy Father, you have your work cut out for you. Let us pray for the conversion of people who think like this – she just admitted that not only will she not change her apostate beliefs, but she won’t stop proclaiming them in public, causing massive scandal and undermining the faith of others. This woman is a grave danger to the Faith]
MP: Can you tell me what you are hearing? Are people afraid?
SBM: It is interesting. The nuns that I talk to aren’t really afraid, because they can’t see or they can’t imagine what he would do to change us. I mean, like, excommunication? That is a thing of the past. You can’t excommunicate hundreds of nuns……[Absolutely he can. He can also place your community under interdict. He can reduce you to the lay state. The Holy Father can do many things, all perfectly within the authority of his Office and his role as chief defender of the Faith]
MP: One thing that I have been told is a bishop will now screen all of the speakers at your meetings. Will that have any practical effect?
SBM: Now that could affect our college, the St. Catherine University. And we do still have some high schools. But they have stepped in before to say we can’t talk about this or that
But I know he has tried to silence people in our schools. [That was not the Pope, it was the local bishop or even a pastor. She has made a booeyman of the Pope, and I would guess that her feelings towards him border on hatred] That could be a very severe possibility, to silence some of the voices, really the social justice voices, you know……….[There we go again, trying to make this attempt to stop apostasy and save these women’s souls about the Vatican’s uncaring for the poor. Give me a break. It won’t play.]
Why is he picking old nuns? More than half of us are over 75. We are almost an endangered species now……[I wonder if she has ever stopped to think about why that is – why her order is dying off, why she is one of an increasingly ancient order with no vocations? Probably not.]
He should start with getting his priests together and try to help them through some of their problems. He should get after them for molestation. [No one has done more to oppose the horrible abuse, largely by homosexual men on teenage boys, than Pope Benedict. This is just a cheap, low, vicious shot.]
MP: Somebody suggested to me that nuns in the past had enjoyed some latitude because you were thought to be powerless, and that in a strange way, this might be recognition that your ministry is powerful. [This is also a stupid, Marxist power-dynamics question. The Vatican has been trying to stop the apostasy of this group for decades, but hasn’t had the will to do so. I think this time they do – and so do these women religious, and they are scared]
SBM: That is good insight. Because [before] we were just school teachers and we just had nice little kids in front of us, you know, and we just emptied bed pans in the nursing homes and in the hospitals. [Which are obviously low occupations unworthy of the new, liberated women religious of the radical feminist type] But now they are right, we are out there in the different movements. We help with the Occupy movement and the right-to-choice movements.[This woman makes me so sad. She has so forgotten God in her pride and arrogance that she actually helps kill the most innocent among us. What a tragedy. What a perversion of what may have once been a true vocation]
It is giving us more credibility in the public. Lots of times people will call and seek out our opinions about certain issues, where it never was that way when I entered the convent….[This is the key. It underscores the entire mentality. These women do not value humility. They do not value serving Christ in some manner they feel unworthy of them, some “low” occupation. They want notoriety. They want fame. And you can also see how much damage they do, as they are sought out for their apostate opinions, so they can further the goals of the leftism of the self-anointed elites. She has exchanged God for mammon]
MP: The other thing people have said is possibly dangerous about nuns is that you understand church teachings and can talk about the ways in which they might be being subverted or perverted.
[I’m not even going to print her arrogant response. You can read it at the link. But her response makes plain, as so much of the above has, that what really motivates this woman, and I am believe much of the LCWR leadership and many rank and file, is a truly sad, warped view of male-female relations and their enormous envy at men. They seek to undermine the traditional “power structure” of the Church and replace it with a matriarchal one. This is all very far left lesbian feminist power dynamics, all completely incompatible with the Faith, let alone a religious vocation! It is no wonder these orders are the walking dead]
MP: Who do you think will be hurt by this move?
SBM: I have a feeling women theologians who are partners with the nuns and some of our teachers in our schools will be really hurt. It will be a fear hurt and they may not feel free to speak out. [It’s funny how these women use the “poor defenseless nuns” routine, when in other times they would angrily insist on being called “women religious.” What happened to “I am woman, hear me roar?!?” Note also the tacit admission that the women religious of her ilk won’t be around much longer, thus the concern about the role of lay women]
I am suspicious of the motivation. I don’t think it is for the common good. They are trying to get us back, bring us back, as it was in the beginning and now as it will ever be, amen, or something like that. They want us back in the habits and being obedient. [No one has said anything like that. They just want Catholic religious to……you know……believe and practice the Catholic Faith. I know, it’s an amazing concept!]
Notice also the sneering contempt for traditional religious, and the disregard for the “lowly” roles of serving silently and in humility in some truly necessary and Grace-filled, but unpleasant, tasks that lack the worldly rewards of being a raging left wing feminist.
As I said above, this a surrender of the Faith for mammon. May God have mercy on her soul, and the souls of her fellow women who have so destroyed religious life. God will not be mocked. That is why her order won’t exist in 10-15 years.
Dallas Ursulines “all for” Melinda Gates billion dollar contraception effort May 9, 2012
Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, asshatery, contraception, Dallas Diocese, disaster, error, General Catholic, horror, religious, scandals.comments closed
I’ve said it before, but perhaps not quite so plainly, nor as a lede – sending your kids to Catholic schools in these days just about insures they’ll reject the Faith sooner or later. Catholic schools are a breeding ground for apostasy:
There’s currently very little investment in contraceptive research and development [My God, we can’t fall behind in contraceptive technologies! As it stands now, there are only about 800 forms of contraception – we must have millions!] . The single biggest funder, Darmstadt says, is the U.S. government, through the National Institutes of Health. “It’s an area that’s really kind of stagnated,” he says. “One of the things that we see that we can do is to try to really stimulate that space.”
For reproductive-health advocates, this is terrific news. For some conservatives, though, it will likely seem almost dystopian. Indeed, in response to an item about contraceptive research on the Gates Foundation website, The Catholic Herald’s Phillips wrote, “A horrid image comes to mind, of white-coated boffins hard at work in diabolical laboratories, devising new ways of depriving men and women of their conjugal dignity, their culture and their traditions.”
Yet Gates can take comfort in the fact that even if the church hierarchy and its traditionalists don’t support what she’s doing, plenty of ordinary Catholics do. During her TEDxChange talk, she spoke of the Ursuline nuns who taught at her Dallas Catholic high school, nuns who “made service and social justice a high priority.” Through her work with the foundation, Gates said, “I believe that I’m applying the lessons that I learned in high school.” [And thus, we see how, as Carl Olson says, bad catechesis and a rotten, materialist, modernist Catholyc education leads to untold consequences years later – in this case, a completely worldly Catholyc assaulting the Church and human dignity with her husband’s billions] Within an hour of returning to her hotel, she received a message from some of those nuns. “It was fantastic,” she says, her eyes misting for a moment. “They said, ‘We’re all for you. We know this is a difficult issue to speak on, but we absolutely believe that you’re living under Catholic values.’ And it was just so heartening.” [What are the odds that Gates got the message from those Dallas Ursuline nuns who taught her there on Walnut Hill Lane that contraceptive use was OK…….heck, that ANYTHING was OK so long as you threw a little money to the poor, or volunteered for some feel-good cause, or even felt “empathy” for those less fortunate than you? Anyone want to take a bet on that?]
Well, I personally thank Melinda Gates for providing the 1,978,452nd piece of information absolutely damning Catholyc schools. And she’s a proud Catholyc:
Perhaps more importantly, there’s her Catholic faith, which has always informed her work. “From the very beginning, we said that as a foundation we will not support abortion, because we don’t believe in funding it,” she says. She’s long disagreed with the church’s position on contraception, and the Gates Foundation did some family-planning funding early in its history. Still, she went through a lot of soul-searching before she was ready to champion the issue publicly. “I had to wrestle with which pieces of religion do I use and believe in my life, what would I counsel my daughters to do,” she says. Defying church teachings was difficult, she adds, but also came to seem morally necessary. Otherwise, she says, “we’re not serving the other piece of the Catholic mission, which is social justice.”
What Gates and the good Dallas Ursulines have done, after exhausting themselves “wrestling with their conscience” to wind up at the exact same belief they had before (what a coincidence!), is made sure that whatever “pro-life” work they do is completely useless. Without attacking the satanic beast of contraception, pro-life efforts are due to minor successes, at best.
Contraception paves the way for abortion. When contraception fails – and most people who get abortions were USING contraception the month they became pregnant – people who want to fornicate without consequence look for “alternatives,” even if that “alternative” involves a soul-destroying murder. Gates will help make millions more such murders possible. And, by extension, so have the sisters on Walnut Hill Lane.
We see now, that feel-good Catholyc belief has grave consequences……..
A Blog for Dallas Area Catholics 