jump to navigation

SHOCK! Higher contraception rates coincide with higher abortion rates! December 10, 2012

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, Basics, contraception, Dallas Diocese, demographics, error, foolishness, General Catholic, scandals, sickness, Society.
comments closed

The academic world is stunned, floored, flummoxed over mind-boggling findings that higher contraception rates don’t lower the rate of abortion, they actually increase it.  Because no matter how “free” or available contraception is, it still is prone to fail, and the mindset it creates (I will not be burdened with a child, no matter how much sex I have) provides such a disconnect from the sexual act and its proper end (procreation) that abortion is not only a possibility, it’s a near certainty for many:

A new study from Russia has revealed that, contrary to the claims of abortion advocates, Russia continues to have one of the world’s highest abortion rates despite higher contraception rates.

Researchers at Moscow State University studied changes in birth control practices in Russia, Belarus, and Ukraine, and correlated the prevalence of “modern methods” of contraceptive use to trends in abortion.

They found that while Russian women have the highest rate of contraceptive use compared to those in Belarus and Ukraine, they also have the highest abortion rate.

Researchers were perplexed by this, calling the findings “contradictory,” “unexpected,” and “paradoxical.”

But they’re not paradoxical at all, unless you have a mindset that defines contraception as an unalloyed good and abortion as a “choice.”  As the article goes on to note, this “stunning” result isn’t exactly unexpected, or even newsworthy:

Scores of studies have shown that increased use of contraception results in greater sexual activity and, because contraception fails so consistently, in more “unwanted” pregnancies. This in turn leads to more abortions.

A ten-year study in Spain, published in the January 2011 issue of the journal Contraception, showed that the abortion rate in the country doubled between 1997 and 2007, even as 60 percent more women used contraceptive methods. The researchers concluded, “The factors responsible for the increased rate of elective abortion need further investigation.”

The left loves to present contraception as this wonderful, perfectly harmless way to prevent people from being burdened with children while enjoying all the (frequently) immoral sex they want to.  This is, of course, a lie, one of the more monstrous ones the left has built itself up on. Catholics know the truth – that contraception is a very harmful act that God opposes as it frustrates the end for which he created sexuality – the procreation of children.  The number of harmful side effects of contraception is endless: in addition to the very negative health effects (the latest one – the plummeting of male sperm counts due to very high estrogen levels in our water supplies), contraception has been directly involved in the destruction of the family, skyrocketing adultery rates, fornication, bastardry, the attack on the very notion of marriage, disastrous economic effects…. I’ve been over all this before.  I personally believe that contraception is the most widely accepted grave evil of our times. In terms of how destructive it has been, and how widely it is used – with even the large majority of “Christians” using it with abandon, nary a thought to the contrary – I would rate contraception as the core moral evil of our time.

But “researchers” can’t reach that conclusion.  To do so would mean career death and total ostracism from elite opinion.  So, it’s a total mystery.  Maybe they should put Perry Mason or Matlock on the case to solve it.

Anti-Voris Faction gets fired up about upcoming cruise-retreat December 10, 2012

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, blogfoolery, General Catholic, Grace, Holy suffering, Interior Life, persecution, scandals, silliness, Virtue.
comments closed

I’ll admit, when I first heard about this, my reaction was……..”That’s sort of an interesting but also an odd idea…..and I have absolutely no interest.”  Then I moved on.  I have no interest not because of the fact that it’s a retreat with Voris and Fr. Zuhlsdorf,

Self-portrait of author

Self-portrait of author, ca. 2022

nor because it’s in Lent, but because it’s on a cruise ship, and a cruise is one thing I’ve resolutely decided never to do, unless it’s in the Meditterranean, and it’s on a naval vessel (a 120,000 ton aircraft carrier, preferably), and the navy is mine, as Autocrat of all the Russias, and I’m sailing into my newly acquired Grand Harbor on Malta. This being after, of course, the Pope has consecrated Russia to Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart and the entire vast land converted.  And also after my Russia has conquered and converted all the lands of the Byzantine Empire circa AD 600, plus all of Europe between the Baltic, Rhine and Alps and some more to boot.

But there are those for whom Michael Voris has become a positive bugaboo, the very apotheosis of everything that is wrong, has ever been wrong, and will ever  be wrong not only with the Church but with humanity and even creation generally.  He is to them, if not evil incarnate, very close.

So when Church Militant TV (I miss the old name, too) started advertising for what I’m sure will be a very good time, a Caribbean cruise/retreat with Michael and Fr. Z, I figured those who have demonstrated their profound antipathy towards Michael for years now would open fire on him relentlessly.  Because it’s not really about Michael, it’s about a competing vision for the Church.   I’ve been surprised, however, that the free-fire zone has been expanded to include Fr. Z, who I thought pretty much everyone liked and respected at least moderately well, even though some traditional types find him a bit too squishy.  Apparently, the “Catholic BFF thCAAO0W6TGroupblog,” headquartered at Catholic and not showing it Enjoying It, is rather more like a high school girl’s clique – stay on the reservation and you’re fine, wonderful, you’ll get links galore!  But if you stray outside, that’s it sister, your new prom date is Milhouse Van Houten.

Once again, I won’t link to any of this junk, but you can get to it through Larry D’s.  I’ve been at this 3 years, and one thing I’ve assiduously tried to avoid is getting involved in either the sordid self-promoting Catholic Superfriends Club, nor the pointless time wasting “look at the stupid/erroneous/heretical thing this so-called Catholic blogger said.  Let’s pound ’em into submission!”  OK, I’ve done some of the latter, even gratuitously, but mostly with very big name folks who are much more than bloggers, people like Fr. Barron.  In reality, I do it because this blog was founded on the premise that error must be corrected.  I probably fail in charity in doing so, I pray God be merciful with me.  For the most part, though, I’ve tried hard to avoid the silly intra-blog squabbles that some seem to thrive on, and which are a well-known ways to spike one’s traffic.

But as I said, this is really about competing personalities and visions for the Church.  There are many Catholics who, for all their thCAGRHJGUorthodoxy (and it is at times considerable), still fundamentally adhere to an accomodationist viewpoint with regard to this very fallen, corrupt world/culture.  This view of the Church and world is the predominant view in the post-Vatican II Church, and indeed MUST be held if one is going to have any kind of career as a lay, “professional” Catholic.  The other vision, which I must admit I share, is much more confrontational toward the world, and tends to reject its false wisdom and destructive illusions. This vision, which was dominant prior to Vatican II and for hundreds of years before, is characterized by strict adherence to doctrinal and liturgical orthodoxy, a focus on the Church as an eternal, ethereal, other-worldly construct to which we belong not by right but by Grace, and a frank hostility towards the many errors which have permeated the Church in the last several decades, especially the errors of false ecumenism and illusory “rights” and “freedoms.”

At times, the rhetoric on both sides can be quite unedifying.  But Michael Voris, because of his tremendous visibility and success (through cooperation with Grace, I would add), is a favorite target.  And so I read claims that Michael must surely be a repressed homosexual, because he condemns homosexual acts. Or that he surely has a violent temper, and terrible misogynistic streak, because he is inclined towards Tradition, and opposes fake female ordination.  Etc., etc. ad nauseum.  The thing is, I actually know Michael, and had the distinct pleasure of spending a number of hours with him in conversation, and unless he’s a way better actor than anyone who wins an Academy Award these days, he’s as genuine an essentially good, concerned Catholic as I’ve met.  But I know it’s no act. He loves the Church, he is striving to serve this call he feels is inspired (and I certainly think it is), and he does so with a great deal of grace and skill.  And charity.  I see many comments that seem to think that Michael is motivated by some baser emotion, but I strongly disagree, I think he’s motivated primarily by a great concern for souls, including those millions who have left the Church in the wake of the disastrous “spirit of Vatican II.”  I know I am far from alone in my assessment of Michael, and fastingthat assessment is shared by some of the best Catholics – lay and clergy – that I know.

I would add a few more thoughts. A cruise may not be the setting that pops to mind as most conducive for Lent, but it could actually be an awesome opportunity to practice mortification.  Instead of partaking of all the normal cruise time activities and even excesses, maintaining a temperate Catholic existence or even foregoing most or all of the “fun” for some self-denial and very focused prayer could be quite edifying.  It’s certainly not beyond the realm of the possible.  And, for those eager to attack the notion, perhaps their time would be better spent contemplating not only their Lenten mortification, but their ongoing self-denial and submission to the Divine Will.  It’s something we should all focus much more on, me especially.

3 years, suckas December 10, 2012

Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, awesomeness, Dallas Diocese, North Deanery.
comments closed

Whether it’s been a blessing or a curse, this blog is 3 years old, which in my experience is when kids really start getting fired up with the tantrums and insanity.  So, get ready.  If you thought this blog was annoying before……..heh.  I’ve just been getting started.

In 3 years I’ve made 3197 posts that have attracted 4992 comments (low) but had 450,489 unique visitors. I average around 800-1000 people a weekday viewing the site now, whereas at the very beginning, there were days when 3, 6, 8 people would visit.

Thanks for your support.  It is interesting how many viewers I have from Russia, and Thailand, and Portugal, and other non-English speaking countries.  Say hello!

I’ve changed a bunch over these 3 years.  This blog has been a vehicle for me to learn more about the Faith than I ever thought I’d know.  I’ve gone from being entirely a vernacular Novus Ordo guy who tried to get to Latin Novus Ordo on Sunday, to a 3 day a week TLM guy who is really struggling with the liturgy in most parishes. That was never the plan. Perhaps it was inevitable once I started really learning the glories of our Church.

God willing, I’ll learn much more.  I hope you enjoy the blog as much as I enjoy writing it!

Another note from The Desolate City – FSSP once promised a bishop? December 10, 2012

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, episcopate, General Catholic, Holy suffering, Latin Mass, priests, religious, sanctity, Tradition, Virtue.
comments closed

I’ve written some previous posts covering items of interest from Anne Roche Muggeridge’s book, The Desolate City.  I was reading an article about the talks between the Holy See and the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), and that jogged my memory to recall another item from the book.  The item was this: Muggeridge claims that the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP), the group of priests who left the SSPX when the episcopal ordinations took place in 1988, and remained in union with Rome, was promised their own bishop in the process.

The background is this: Rome and the SSPX, in the person of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, had been engaged in talks for years regarding the status of the Society.  As the years went by, both Rome and Archbishop Lefebvre began to feel impatient, or at least the press of events and the passage of time, and pressed for a conclusion.  In May 1988, Archbishop Lefebvre signed an accord with Rome “normalizing” the Society’s status in the Church, but soon felt compelled to renege on that accord (some say this was due to careless statements by Cardinal Ratzinger, implying that the SSPX, if normalized, would have to offer the Novus Ordo Mass and incorporate other changes from the Council). In July, Archbishop Lefebvre ordained 4 SSPX priests as bishops, and Rome formally excommunicated all the bishops – existing and newly ordained – who took part in the illicit ordination. At that point, a dozen priests of the Society broke away, choosing to stand up a new society which would enjoy “normal” status in the Church and relations with Rome.

During the course of the negotiations, the SSPX had been promised at least one bishop of their own to govern the Society.  Lefebvre pressed for 3 – he thought 1 bishop insufficient.  Muggeridge claims that the FSSP were also offered a bishop.  I have been trying to dig up data on this, but there isn’t much.  And much of it is filled with unedifying dogfights between supporters of the SSPX and the FSSP.  But what I have found is that there does seem to have been some promise that FSSP would get a bishop very early on in the process of standing up the Fraternity, but that went away fairly quickly as being unnecessary.  Which, I think it is today, but I do know that early in its existence FSSP had to scramble around a lot to find bishops who would ordain their priests. There being many bishops who, for reasons truly unfathomable, developed a tremendous antipathy to the Mass of their youth, and who would have nothing to do with it.  But, apparently, they managed to make due.

I should note that congregations of apostolic life, religious orders, etc., are generally not governed by a bishop, although the superiors of these organizations have many powers of a bishop.  But it was the power to ordain that was the key – Lefebvre was very concerned that the Society would be strangled into oblivion after his death due to an unwillingness of bishops to ordain SSPX priests.  It basically comes down to independence – having their “own bishop” conveys a tremendous increase in independence to any entity in the Church.  Without one, even with the powers of a religious superior, there is always the threat that outside forces could weigh against the group to direct it in some way they don’t want to go, that could even be contrary to their very formation.

 

The unseriousness of our times December 10, 2012

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, Dallas Diocese, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, sadness, Society.
comments closed

Bill Whittle tends a bit libertarian, and misses some items that are of import to Catholics, but I had to post this video for the best line I’ve heard all month.  In reference to our political leadership, who act like addicts in spending our money, Whittle rhetorically asks “how much coke will a coke addict do?  ALL OF IT.”  That is so true. I don’t know anyone who ever quit using while they still had a mighty stash.  You quit when you run out and your options for more are bleak.  And so true of our political system.  Somehow, we must stop feeding the beast. But not with our present national leadership, a class which is born and raised on the government teat.  They have no interest in seeing government get smaller, or be sustainable.  They won’t face any personal consequences from an economic implosion, that’s for sure – at least not any of any significance.  It’s in their interest to ride the gravy train to the last possible second – just as it is, I believe, in at least 50.1% of the American public – before the collapse.  Then, they’ll be there to tell us how wonderfully they’re going to “fix” things.

Let it burn?