jump to navigation

Voris gets it all right July 2, 2012

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, Dallas Diocese, disaster, episcopate, error, General Catholic, Papa, sadness, scandals.
comments closed

And, I mean all, totally, 100%:

Most bishops just want to not be hassled.  They get hassled by their predominately liberal staff all the time.  Until faithful Catholics start making a bigger hassle for them than the liberals, things won’t change, much.  Oh, yes, there is the biological solution, but even then, a small cabal of liberals could keep a large majority of faithful priests and laity largely in check.  For one, instead of making Fr. Faithful Young Priest a pastor, they could make him “pastoral administrator” and assign him to the boondocks with very few canonical rights.  I’ve noted periodically on this blog for nearly 3 years that things will not change unless and until faithful Catholics begin to make a real uproar – I don’t mean occasionally sending a very polite letter, I mean stopping contributions and raucous demonstrations outside the chancery.   I mean getting organized and keeping concerted, organized pressure on.  We are at a tremendous disadvantage, because “they” are on the inside, and we are on the out with jobs to hold, families to raise, and a real faith-life to attend to.  But we’ve got to act.  Stay tuned on that.

Reminder – Latin Mass tonight at St. Mark July 2, 2012

Posted by Tantumblogo in Dallas Diocese, Latin Mass, North Deanery, priests.
comments closed

This is the first Monday, so the Mass will be a Requiem sung Mass.

Come offer up prayers at Mass for the souls suffering in Purgatory!  And maybe add an intention of reparation for all the unworthy Communions that take place around the world today!

Supporter of liberation theology named next head of CDF July 2, 2012

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, Dallas Diocese, disaster, Ecumenism, episcopate, error, horror, Papa, sadness, scandals.
comments closed

When I first heard of this, I prayed it would not come to pass.  I’ve been praying for it since.  Apparently, my prayers were not availing.  Archbishop Gerhard Muller has been named the next Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith:

The Holy Father, Benedict XVI, has named Gerhard Ludwig Müller, Bishop of Regensburg, new Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (as well as the related positions of President of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, President of the Pontifical Biblical Commission, and President of the International Theological Commission), upon accepting the resignation of Cardinal Levada, who reached the age limit.

Bishop Muller was a student of, and some indications say even a disciple of, Fr. Gutierrez, the man who concocted the disastrous notion of liberation theology in the first place.  Rorate Caeli has noted a number of other extremely concerning beliefs of Bishop Muller, unassociated with the, by itself, very concerning liberation theology:

On the Perpetual Virginity of the Most Blessed Virgin Mary:

In his 900-page work “Katholische Dogmatik. Für Studium und Praxis der Theologie” (Freiburg. 5th Edition, 2003), Müller denies the dogma of the Perpetual Virginity of the Blessed Virgin Mary claiming that the doctrine is “not so much concerned with specific physiological proprieties in the natural process of birth (such as the birth canal not having been opened, the hymen not being broken, or the absence of birth pangs), but with the healing and saving influence of the grace of the Savior on human nature).  [Even more concerning is the sort of “aside” statement regarding the birth pangs.  The Adam and Eve portion of Genesis reveal that the sufferings of birth came to women through Original Sin.  Mary is sinless, and, thus, escaped those pains.]

On the Real Presence of the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of the Lord in the transubstantiated Eucharistic species:

In 2002, bishop Müller published the book “Die Messe – Quelle des christlichen Lebens” (St. Ulrich Verlag, Augsburg). In this book, he speaks of the Sacrament of the Altar and warns against using the terms “body and blood” in this context. These terms would cause “misunderstandings”, “when flesh and blood are considered to mean the physical and biological components of the human Jesus. Neither is it simply the transfigured body of the resurrected Lord that is being designated.”

Bishop Müller continues: “In reality, the body and blood of Christ do not mean the material components of the human person of Jesus during his lifetime or in his transfigured corporality. Here, body and blood mean the presence of Christ in the signs of the medium of bread and wine.”[So……the Blessed Sacrament is just a “symbol.”]

Holy Communion transmits according to Müller a “community with Jesus Christ, mediated by eating and drinking the bread and the wine. Even in the merely personal human sphere, something like a letter may represent the friendship between people and, that is to say, show and embody the sympathy of the sender for the receiver.” Bread and wine thus only become “symbols of his salvific presence”. [Symbol, again, and, more important, the “community meal” aspect of the Blessed Sacrament]

That is how Mgr Müller explains a “change of being” in the Eucharistic gifts:
“The essential definition of bread and wine has to be conceived in an anthropological way. [No.  No, it doesn’t.  It has to be considered in a supernatural way.  It has always been considered in a supernatural way, for it is the greatest miracle in the history of the universe.] The natural essence of these offerings [bread and wine] as the fruit of the earth and the work of human hands, as the unity of natural and cultural products consists in clarifying the nourishment and sustenance of man and the communion of the people in the sign of a common meal […]. This natural essence of bread and wine is transfigured by God in the sense that the essence of bread and wine is made to consist exclusively in showing and realizing the salvific communion with God.”

Well…….that’s just a bunch of modernism.  I read one report describing Muller as a theological “conservative…….” Compared to whom?  Rahner?  Kung?  There is much more troubling information at Rorate both at the link above and here.

Now, Cardinal Levada was hardly devoid of modernist beliefs, but I don’t believe he was so “out  n’ proud” about it as this guy seems to be.  I don’t know what that means.  As I mentioned in the post below, socialism almost universally equates with the death of faith.  And yet, “liberation theology” attempts to “meld” Christianity with communism.  In practice, that has led to the collapse of the Faith, in countries like Brazil, which was 95% Catholic in 1960 and are now about 60% Catholic (and even that is a gross overstatement, for the number of true, believing Catholics is likely in the single digits, percentage-wise).  Supposedly, Pope Benedict XVI chose this Muller because he is “comfortable” with him.  Again, I’m not sure what that  means, but it could be, perhaps should be, very troubling.

And now, this man will head the former Holy Office, with a huge influence on deciding what constitutes orthodox belief, or not.  I believe this move will likely kill the reconciliation with the FSSPX.

Well, at least he’s German.

 

Why we shouldn’t be surprised at the Supreme Court decision July 2, 2012

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, Dallas Diocese, General Catholic, Holy suffering, Interior Life, Latin Mass, persecution, priests, Tradition, Virtue.
comments closed

A local priest had some thoughts as to why he was utterly unsurprised at the Supreme Court decision.  It has to do with where we are as a culture and the total abandonment of God or anything seriously Christian.  And mostly, it has to do with the widespread embrace of the wicked by so many in our country.  While Pat Robertson was roundly mocked for claiming that the September 11 attacks were due to this country’s embrace of rampant immorality, dare we really claim we know God’s Will and Action so much that we can state that the economic and other disasters being visited on this country are not from Him?  Or, is it perhaps more accurate to say, God is just letting us do ourselves in – we’ve cut ourselves off from Him more and more, there is less and less Grace, and so He is letting nature take its course?

There are four sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance.  In this nation, we have embraced all four with a frightening eagerness.  To wit:

  1. The sins of Sodom and Gomorrah – I don’t think any explanation is required.  We have, collectively, reached levels of depravity not seen in millennia, if ever.
  2. The shedding of innocent blood –  the non-stop slaughter of the innocents in this country continues apace
  3. Denying a worker his wages – with illegal immigration, this occurs all the time.  I have read horror stories of illegal immigrants who do back-breaking jobs for weeks, even months, without pay, getting hustled by unscrupulous contractors and others.  Then, there is the whole issue of off-shoring manufacturing and engineering jobs, etc, to the extent that wages are greatly depressed (and further depressed by millions of illegal aliens).
  4. Oppression of the poor, especially women and children – The more statist our economic system becomes, the less wealth there will be, overall.  While statist wealth transfers may help some in the short term, in the long term they cause far more poverty than the alleviate.  But even more to the point, look on how we treat women and children with regard to exploitation of women through porn, strip clubs, general objectification and other evils.  The entire “hook-up” culture of the youth is fundamentally abusive of all involved.  We are debasing ourselves, becoming more and more pagan and animalistic, in constant search for the satisfaction of our basest desires.  There is an immense spiritual poverty in this land, and it grows more and more entrenched every day, spreading its fingers of misery wider and wider and bringing more souls into its hideous grip.  In so many cases, hopefully well-meaning but seriously deluded individuals even within the Church have played a great role in the advance of this spiritual destitution.

Given what we have become, should anyone be surprised at the state we’re in?  Should anyone be surprised that a Chief Justice of the Supreme Court went against his professed beliefs, beliefs established over decades, in order to win human adulation from certain circles?  Should we be surprised that it is a Catholic who has played THE pivotal role in finally, irrevocably bringing socialism to this country?

We have seen, through examples spread throughout the world, what socialism means for the Faith.  It means death.  It means the substitution of the Faith of Jesus Christ for faith in men and “welfare” programs that inoculate a population against hope in the future in trade for illusory pleasures given today.  It sells the very future of a society for the satisfaction of base desires today.  The death of faith associated with socialism is so universal, and so total, that I can only believe that it is closely associated with the father of lies himself.  But we have been laying the groundwork for this final transformation for decades.

All is not lost.  One never knows how God might work in situations like this.  We must keep the Faith in ever-shrinking – or growing – communities that adhere to the Truth Jesus Christ has revealed through His Church.   We must remember that our home is not in this world but in the next, and do all we can to help ourselves and as many others as we can to that eternal home.  That is what most strikes me about this decision – if we choose rightly, it will be utterly meaningless for us in the grand scheme of things.  I’m glad good Fr. —– brought that point home.

If we stay faithful, we win.  Period.

That’s all.

Roberts switched vote in May? July 2, 2012

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, asshatery, contraception, disaster, error, General Catholic, horror, persecution, scandals, sickness, Society.
comments closed

It’s CBS, so make of it what you will.  I tend to believe it.

Thomas, Scalia, Alito…….these men do not read the newspapers or attend elite cocktail parties.  Roberts apparently does both, and the latter with relish.  Thus, one Chief Justice of the Supreme Court rolled:

O’DONNELL:  We’ll start first Jan because you’ve done some reporting.  The big question was why did Chief Justice John Roberts do what he did? You’ve learned new details.

CRAWFORD:  That’s right, what was striking about this was that it was the conservative chief decisive vote, joining the liberal signature achievement and that was something no one would have expected in 2005 when President George W. Bush put him on the Supreme Court and that was something that not even the conservative justices expected back in march when the court heard arguments in this case. I am told by two sources with specific knowledge of the court’s deliberations that Roberts initially sided with the conservatives in this case and was prepared to strike down the heart of this law, the so-called individual mandate, of course, that requires all Americans to buy insurance or pay a penalty. but Roberts, I’m told by my sources, changed his views deciding to instead join with the liberals.  He withstood–I’m told by my sources–a month-long desperate campaign by the conservative justices to bring him back to the fold and that campaign was led, ironically, by Justice Anthony Kennedy[!!] and why that’s ironic is because it was Justice Kennedy that conservatives feared would be the one most effort, of course, was unsuccessful, Roberts didn’t budge, the conservatives wrote that astonishing joint dissent united in opposition and Roberts wrote the majority opinion with the four liberals to uphold the President’s signature achievement.

So, once again……..like Warren, Brennan, Blackmun, Powell, Stevens, O’Connor……a Repubnikan appointed Justice has played a central role in attacking morality, liberty, or otherwise advancing the leftist agenda.  Yet another conservative whose beliefs are, apparently, quite malleable.

Why does that always happen only one way, and not the other?  Why do once firebrand conservatives like Orrin Hatch (the left hated him in the 80s) wind up becoming squishy statists after a few years in DC?  Is it just the prevalence of leftists up there, with all their dinner parties and lobbyist friends, or is it something else? Besides the money, I mean.  And why so much with judges, who shouldn’t really be subject to lobbying, but apparently they are, and how.