jump to navigation

Doctor of the Church St. Alphonsus Maria Ligouri on Charity November 2, 2012

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, episcopate, General Catholic, Glory, Holy suffering, Interior Life, persecution, religious, sanctity, Virtue.
comments closed

From Vol. VI of The Ascetical Works, The Holy Eucharist, pp. 430-432.  It is not only about charity, but why so many fall away from the Faith, or refuse to accept it.  It comes down to my oft-repeated phrase, public heresy is invariably driven by private sin:

Faith is the foundation of charity; but faith afterwards receives its perfection from charity. His faith is most perfect whose love of God is most perfect. Charity produces in man not merely the faith of understanding, but the faith of the will, also; those who believe only with the understanding, but not with the will, as is the case with sinners who are perfectly convinced of the truths of the faith, but do not choose to live according to the Divine Commandments, – such as these have a very weak faith; for had they a more lively belief that the Grace of God is a priceless treasure, and that sin, because it robs us of this Grace, is the worst of evils, they would assuredly change their lives.  If, then, they prefer the miserable creatures of this earth to God, it is because they either do not believe, or because their faith is very weak. On the contrary, he who believes not only with the understanding, but also the will, so that he not only believes, but has the will to believe in God…..such a one has perfect faith, and consequently seeks to make his life conformable to the truths that he believes.

……..The weakness of the faith of many persons is to be traced to their wickedness of living. He who, rather than forego the enjoyment of hidden pleasures, scorns the divine friendship, would wish there were no law to forbid, and no chastisement to punish his sin; [In fact, according to Aquinas, he wishes God were dead]  on this account he strives to blind himself to the eternal truths of death, judgment, and hell, and of Divine Justice; and because such subjects strike too much terror into his heart, and are too apt to mix bitterness in his cup of pleasure, he sets his brain to work to discover proofs, which have at least the look of plausibility; and by which he allows himself to be flattered into the persuasion that there is no soul, no god, no hell, in order that he may live and die like the brute beasts, without laws and without reason.

And the laxity of morals is the source whence have issued, and still issue daily, so many books and systems of materialists, indifferentists, deists, and naturalists; some among them deny the Divine Existence, and some the Divine Providence, saying that God, after having created men, takes no further notice of them….[or, the most common among even ‘practicing’ Catholics today, is that God would surely never judge, or judge harshly, such a perfectly, wonderfully lovable creature as ourselves.]

Jesus Christ said: “Blessed are the poor; blessed are the sorrowful; blessed are the mortified; blessed are those whom men persecute, calumniate, and curse…….”……….This is the teaching of Jesus Christ in the Gospel. How, then, can it be said, that those believe in the Gospel who say: “Blessed are those who have money; blessed are those who suffer nothing; blessed are those who can spend all day amusing themselves; pitiable is the man that suffers persecution and ill treatment from others?” We must certainly say of such as these, that either they do not believe the Gospel, or that they believe only a part of it. He who believes it all esteems it his highest fortune, and a mark of the divine favor in this world, to be poor, to be sick, to be mortified, to be despised and ill-treated by men. Such is the belief, and such the language, of one who believes all that is said in the Gospel, and has a real love for Jesus Christ.

Are the bishops beginning to have an effect? November 2, 2012

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, Basics, contraception, episcopate, General Catholic, persecution, priests, scandals, sickness, Society, true leadership.
comments closed

More news today of another bishop making plain that Obama particularly and the democrat party generally stand in opposition to the right practice of the Faith. Bishop Daniel Jenky of Peoria has distributed a letter to be read at all weekend Masses (under pain of obedience) which makes plain that pro-abort democrats like Obama are guilty of grave sin, as are those who vote for them.

“By virtue of your vow of obedience to me as your Bishop, I require that this letter be personally read by each celebrating priest at each Weekend Mass,” Jenky wrote in a letter circulated to clergy in the Catholic Diocese of Peoria.

In the letter, Jenky cautions parishioners that Obama and a majority of U.S. senators will not reconsider the mandate that would require employers, including religious groups, to provide free birth control coverage in their health care plans. “This assault upon our religious freedom is simply without precedent in the American political and legal system,” Jenky wrote.

“Today, Catholic politicians, bureaucrats, and their electoral supporters who callously enable the destruction of innocent human life in the womb also thereby reject Jesus as their Lord,” Jenky added. “They are objectively guilty of grave sin.”

I found this statement made by the Vicar General of the Rockford Diocese particularly enlightening:

Furthermore, in the Rockford Diocese, Vicar General Eric Barr compared Obama’s support of religious freedom in Muslim countries to his lack of support for Catholic liberty.

“Meanwhile, Obamacare marches on, steamrolling Catholic morality and the First Amendment under its weight. How can that be tolerated by citizens?” Barr wrote.

“Nothing justifies this peculiar and unreal stance of the president,” he said.

Yes, that’s quite revealing, isn’t it?  Obama stands four square in favor of Muslim liberty, even the radical kind, whereas he seems to have a different standard when it comes to Catholics.

Are the many statements from various bishops having an effect?  Brietbart reports that Obama’s support among Catholics is cratering:

In September, the left and the media were exultant when the Pew poll seemed to show a surge for Obama among Catholic voters. He led by fifteen points, 54-39.

Today, that bubble has burst completely, and Obama is back down to a two-point lead, 48-46. (Few headlines this time from the mainstream media.)  [It is tragic and horrific that, for all his evil and after all he has done to persecute the Church, Obama would be getting ANY support from Catholics]

Among white Catholics, Romney has jumped to a 14-point lead (54-40) after being tied with Obama in September in the poll. [so, most of Obama’s support is coming from hispanics.  I would expect most of the undecideds in this poll to break for Romney, it is very unusual for undecideds to go with the incumbent this late]

To understand just how significant that is, consider that in 2008, Obama won Catholics by 9 percent (54 to 45) and lost white Catholics by just 5 percent (47 to 52). In 2004, the Catholic vote went narrowly to Bush overall (more widely among white Catholics), and in 2000 it went narrowly to Gore (and narrowly to Bush among white Catholics).

The 14-point lead Romney currently enjoys among white Catholics is almost without precedent.

Catholic voters are abandoning Obama for the same reason many other voters are: the sluggish economy, Romney’s strong performance in the presidential debates, Obama’s dishonesty and failure in Benghazi.

So, the bishops are probably not having that great an effect, after all.  Which is sad, but to be expected, since the vast majority of self-described Catholics are so utterly uninvolved in their faith, far more likely to get their understanding of the Church from secular sources than from the Church herself.

Still, for those of us who are involved, it is heartening to see 10-15% of bishops taking relatively strong stands in this election – it is a great improvement over what has occurred in the past, but it should be 100% of bishops taking far stronger stands in defense of the Faith.  I note, once again, the Dallas’ Bishop Farrell has not made anything like the statements in defense of the Faith we’ve seen from other bishops this election.  Perhaps he feels his joint statement with Bishop Vann in 2008 was enough.  I tend to disagree, people have short memories.

Maybe I should have known, it was Barzini Vann all along.

h/t culturewarenotes

Obama pastor: “All whites going to hell” November 2, 2012

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, blogfoolery, error, foolishness, General Catholic, sadness, scandals, sickness, silliness, Society.
comments closed

Wow.  I guess we’ll have to de-canonize 95+% of the Saints, and all Doctors of the Church:

All white people are going to hell, longtime African-American civil rights advocate Rev. Joseph Lowery told an audience at a get-out-the-vote event held Oct. 27 in Georgia.

Lowery, who gave the benediction at the January 2009 inauguration of President Barack Obama, told the audience of up to 300 African-Americans “that when he was a young militant, he used to say all white folks were going to hell. Then he mellowed and just said most of them were. Now, he said, he is back to where he was,” according to an Oct. 31 report in the Monroe County Reporter newspaper.

Wait, you mean racism is a two-way street?  How is that possible?  Is it really possible for anyone to be a bigot?  Hmmm…….

I think I’ll keep my deference to the Church’s judgment on this, and not this “Rev.” Joseph Lowery.

Bill Whittle argues against protest voting November 2, 2012

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, Basics, contraception, Dallas Diocese, General Catholic, North Deanery, persecution, sickness, Society.
comments closed

I’ve liked Bill Whittle for a long time.  He’s produced a video where he appeals to the principles of those who may be favoring a vote for a third party candidate (or not voting at all) rather than “compromise” by voting for Mitt Romney.  While he argues based on what some may see as flawed reasoning – the principles of liberty and personal freedom, I think his points can be translated to more Catholic concerns, as well.  While Mitt Romney may not be as pro-life as we like, there is nothing in his past to suggest he will be the dedicated pro-abort pro-contracept idealogue that Obama is.  Or, pick another issue. The thinking remains the same

I think the key point, for me, comes down to this: I agree with Whittle that, should Obama be re-elected, that will be it for any chance for reforming this nation along moral virtue and principles that are can be supported by faithful Catholics.  The only thing to do if Obama is re-elected, is to wait for the collapse, but there will be massive persecution and suffering in the intervening years or decades.  While Mitt Romney’s prior beliefs are enough to give any faithful Catholic pause, and it is morally acceptable to vote third party or abstain, I still feel that he (and Paul Ryan) represent a radically better choice than Obama.  It’s not quite “anybody but Obama,” but I am willing to take Romney at his present word that he will do at least some minimal pro-life things (like reinstate the Mexico City policy), and I see nothing in his background that indicates to me he will be a rabid pro-abort or Church-persecutor. That is enough to earn my vote in the present circumstances.  It is perhaps less a vote in favor of one person than it is against another.  But I am developing a sense that Romney may very pleasantly surprise many people.