jump to navigation

Rorate – Pope originally planned to abdicate last year? February 13, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, episcopate, General Catholic, Interior Life, Papa, sadness, Society.
comments closed

In September of 2011, Rorate Caeli blog carried a translation of an Italian report on the Holy Father, in which unnamed sources stated that he was considering abdicating after his 85th birthday in April of 2012. A fairly well known Italian reporter researched this story and presented it as a prediction – the Holy Father would resign sometime after April 2012 (maybe this guy makes a big habit of guessing or throwing wild rumors around, but I don’t think so).  This, coupled with previous statements (and actions) on the subject from the Holy Father dating back to 2009, indicate this abdication had been considered for a long time:

Socci yesterday recalled his prediction, and added that the main reason that prevented the Pope from this act in 2012 was the explosion of the “Vatileaks” scandal – and that, as soon as the main aspects of the crisis were resolved (with the pardon granted to Paolo Gabriele), His Holiness decided to act. The troubling final cardinalatial report on Vatileaks, by the way, which is currently held in secrecy, apparently includes many names and information which could be of great use to the future Pontiff.

I don’t know that this changes much, although it may cast severe doubt on some of the more extreme claims I’ve read regarding the Pope’s abdication – for instance, Christoper Ferrara’s hypothesis that he did so to block the canonization of Pope John Paul II and the beatification of Pope Paul VI, both of which the Pope has, publicly at least, supported with significant gusto.

I think this abdication is what it is…..the Pope has for a long time been considering removing himself from the Papacy when he came to a  point that he felt he couldn’t perform the tasks required to his (or God’s?) satisfaction.  This Pontiff has certainly had a much more open mind regarding abdication than any I’ve ever read of (not that I am a particular expert), and probably had much less desire for the office than many who have received it. I don’t think he particularly enjoyed the office – far from it.  But does the fact that Pope Benedict seems to have been leaning in this direction, or strongly contemplating it, indicate that perhaps some personal desire to be finally done may have come into this decision-making process?   We’ll probably never know.  It seems I’m rather alone in finding this a subject of great import.

On a related note, Cardinal Arinze has some comments of interest and common-sense, I think:


We’re getting overwhelmed with anti-Catholic screeds February 13, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, Basics, error, foolishness, General Catholic, persecution, sadness, scandals, secularism, sickness, Society.
comments closed

Pope Benedict’s resignation has gotten the state-run and other leftist media falling all over themselves to promote anti-Catholic catholyc screeds against the Church. I’m not going to link to any of them, but I am going to share with you what LarryD wrote, which was in response to some apostasy from catholycs for Choice, but which could apply to the vast majority of catholycs the media is trotting out these days, telling the Church how it is doomed, DOOMED, DOOMED! unless it caves in to their preferred heresy.  I think Larry nailed this phenomenon that I’ve written about tons, but I don’t think ever so well:

There you go – the thing to remember with these people, is that they use no subtlety, no reflection, no humility.  They are as transparent as glass.  Unfortunately, because so many Catholics are poorly catechized, the things they say sound reasonable and seem sensible.  Well, so did the serpent in Eden, and we know where that got us.

Once you boil away the rhetoric, and strip away the puffery, you’re left with lies.  Pure and simple.

And here’s the funniest thing of all: no one is stopping any of them from sinning all they want!  Not a single person, least of all the Pope.  How is the Holy Father actually stopping anybody?  All he’s doing is safeguarding the deposit of Faith – safeguarding it from harridans and charlatans such as these people.  And that’s what angers them and fuels their rage.  Bottom line, they have free will, they have a conscience (what’s left of it anyway), and all the ability to slap on those condoms, or pop those birth control pills, or attend their Aunt Mabel’s fauxrdination, or celebrate Adam & Steve’s “wedding”, or drive their daughter to get their grandchild aborted.  Even if they get ex-communicated, they’re not made to wear a red “E”, or forced to sit in the back couple pews, or anything.  No priest stops them from receiving the sacraments.  No Swiss Guard patrols the prophylactic aisle at the drugstore. [I love that image!  I kind of wish they did!]  No one is stopping them.  Nobody.

Except their innate sense of right and wrong, of Good and Evil, pricks them constantly.  But rather than change their lives by eliminating the sin, they want certain behaviors no longer called sins, and thus remain in their sinful ways, thinking they’ve won.  They call it “advancement” or “enlightenment”, or “human progress” – just fancy names for pride.  They say we’ve outgrown the idea that masturbation is a sin, or that homosexual activity is evil – even abortion is called “choice”.  They say the Church really has no right to be involved in the public square or politics – unless the political issue is one they (the Catholycs for Choice crowd) support.

So they’ve made the choice to sin – big whoop.  People do that every single minute of every single day.  It’s the sane and sensible people – the ones who rely on God and His grace – who recognize that changing the definitions doesn’t change the reality.  It’s obvious these people are neither sane nor sensible – that just because a majority of Catholics think birth control is okay, or premarital sex is fine, doesn’t make it so.  A sane and sensible person seeks Truth for its own sake, not create truths to satisfy their appetite or desires.  It means they’re on the wide path (in those particular areas of their lives, at least), and they want no one to tell them it’s the wrong path.  Not only do they want their ideas tolerated, they want them accepted.  And once they gain acceptance, they will seek dominance.  [dominance, perhaps, like the HHS Mandate, which doesn’t allow contraceptive use, it demands we pay for it!  As I said, revolutions eventually become the very thing they hate, the very thing they rebelled against, acting tyrannically in their own way] There is no compromise with sin and evil, which is why the Holy Father will never give in to such demands.

Why?  Because the Holy Father loves them as persons too much to disobey Christ, and risk theirs and his salvation.  It’s because he knows that giving in to their license will rob them of their freedom.  It has always been that way.

It’s ironic that they imagine the Pope is forcing them to behave in certain ways, yet they feel no compunction whatsoever in attempting to force the Church to accommodate their behaviors.

————————–End Quote—————————-

Yes, irony and hypocrisy abound.  It’s open season on the Church right now, and we are seeing just how much certain individuals and groups – within and without the Church – hate and despise Pope Benedict XVI.  That is, in reality, a good thing, because we are to be a sign of contradiction to a fallen, sinful world.  A Pope that is reviled is a Pope that is proclaiming the Gospel.  The sad part is how many “Catholics” have completely lost the script, and have fallen into the ways of the world.  Not only that, but so many of those who have fallen are invincibly sure that they are right and the Church is wrong, it is a veritable miracle of Grace to reach and convert even one of them.

Thank you, Papa, for standing as strong as you did.  I pray that the next Holy Father may be even stronger and preach Christ’s Truth to a dying world.


Karl Rahner, raving traditionalist February 13, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, episcopate, error, General Catholic, Holy suffering, Latin Mass, persecution, sadness, scandals, Tradition.
comments closed

I had put down Michael Davies’ Pope Paul’s New Mass some time ago, but picked it back up because I’m very stubborn when it comes to finishing books I’ve started. I rarely stop reading a book once I start, but Davies has a tendency to cover the same ground over and over again and I was frankly getting tired of it. But, I’m glad I decided to finish it, because there is some pretty good data in the back. One bit that just about floored me was an excerpt from Karl Rahner’s

Stare into the eyes of the dragon and despair!

Stare into the eyes of the dragon and despair!

book Studies in Modern Theology, pp. 394-5.  For those who don’t know, Rahner was probably the single most influential modernist theologian at Vatican II.  He and Schillebeeckx were  the two most influential progressives by far.  It was Rahner who drove the German-group of bishops to attack and ultimately destroy the orthodox schema that were prepared before the Council, replacing them with documents cobbled together on the fly which ultimately became what we know as the documents of Vatican II.  The German bishops had overwhelming influence at the council, and Rahner had overwhelming influence on the German bishops, so that the Council, in the words of Fr. Ralph Wiltgren, became in many parts almost a one man affair.  I note in passing that at that time a young priest named Josef Ratzinger was Rahner’s chief protege, but the two later split – Rahner continuing on his modernist path and Pope Benedict following much more along the lines of Tradition.

The quote, by Rahner:

Imagine that the Pope, as supreme pastor of the Church, issued a decree requiring all the Eastern Churches of the Near East to give up their Oriental liturgy and adopt the Roman Rite  [that being, the Maronite Rite, the Melkite Rite, would be replaced by the Mass used in most of the rest of the world]……The Pope would not exceed the competence of his jurisdictional primacy by such a decree, and the decree would be legally valid.

But we can also pose an entirely different question. Would it be morally licit for the Pope to issue such a decree? Any reasonable man and any true Christian would have to answer “no.” Any confessor of the Pope would have to tell him that in the concrete situation of the Church today such a decree, despite its legal validity, would be subjectively and objectively an extremely grave moral offence against charity, against the unity of the Church rightly understood (which does not demand uniformity), against possible reunion of the Orthodox with the Roman Catholic Church, etc., a mortal sin from which the Pope could be absolved only if he revoked the decree. [my emphasis]

From this example one can readily gather the heart of the matter. It can, of course, be pointed out more fundamentally and abstractly in a theological demonstration:

  1. The exercise of papal jurisdictional primacy remains even when it isi legal, subject to moral norms, which are not necessarily satisfied merely because a given act of jurisdiction is legal. Even an act of j urisdiction which legally binds its subjects can offend against moral principles.
  2. To point out and protest against the possible infringement against moral norms of an act which must respect these norms is not to deny or question the legal competence of the man passing the jurisdiction.

———————–End Quote———————-

This simply amazing on many fronts. For those who don’t know, Pope Paul VI took exactly this kind of action, which Rahner describes as being so morally unjust as to be mortally sinful, when he approved Conferentiarum Episcopalium, which forbade the use of the Missal of St. Pius V or the Traditional Latin rahnerMass.  From that date, until at least 1988 when Blessed Pope John Paul II issued Ecclesia Dei, it was technically “illegal” or a violation of Church norms to offer the Traditional Mass.  This ban on the TLM was one of the key issues that led to the formal standing up as a sort of separate group by the SSPX.  I should note that the above was written by Rahner in 1964/65, while the Council was still ongoing and well before the promulgation of the new Mass. To my knowledge, Rahner never spoke out against the abrogation of the TLM.

Pope Benedict XVI has formally declared that the Traditional Latin Mass, or Mass according to the 1962 Missal, was never legally abrogated and has always remained a “valid” Rite.

The moral problem with this act is that it is a violation of the rights of the faithful to conduct their faith according to immemorial custom, and is an unnecessary assault on Sacred Tradition.  What Rahner (and many others I’ve read) claim is that the Pope has all the authority he needs to make such an act, from a standpoint of Church law and the power of his office. But it is morally unacceptable to use the power of his office in such a way, to assault the rites of the faithful.  Many tradional-type Catholics argued exactly this for a decade and a half before the situation even began to be ameliorated by Pope JPII. It was in fact then Cardinal Ratzinger that requested then Bishop Charles Grahmann to permit an Ecclesia Dei community – the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter – to offer the TLM in Dallas, one of the first if not the first such authorized Mass by the FSSP in the US.

The reason for Rahner’s seeming uncharacteristic (for he was a huge modernist) defense of Tradition is because with him, and many other modernists, ecumenism trumped even attempts to reformulate the Mass or various doctrinal formulations.  Obviously, such arguments holding sway would be beneficial to an ecumenical movement that sought to appeal to schismatic Churches and heretical sects, assuring them they could retain their own liturgy.

But, even a stopped clock is right twice a day.  Rahner is exactly correct in this argument, no matter his particular motivation.  He was actually very correct on a number of matters related to the Faith, but he was off the reservation on just about as many others.  Unfortunately, in the situation which existed in the years following Vatican II, many priests were persecuted, lost their incardination, and were even driven from public ministry due to their refusal to offer the Novus Ordo.  All of which was not an abuse of power, but still morally unjustifiable.  According to Karl Rahner, der ubermensch rad-trad.


Today Begins the Great Fast February 13, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, Dallas Diocese, Domestic Church, General Catholic, Grace, Interior Life, Lent, North Deanery, sanctity, Tradition, Virtue.
comments closed

Most everything below taken from the very helpful Ars Orandi site.  What is presented below is a rundown on traditional Catholic fasting during Lent – from prior to the most recent Council.

As we prepare for Lent in this Septuagesmima season, it is good to review the
nature and requirements of the traditional Lenten Fast. The Current Code ofIN_ICT~1
Canon Law requires that Ash Wednesday and Good Friday be days of abstinence and
fast, and all Fridays of Lent (like all other Fridays of the year) are days of
abstinence. However, this modern Lenten observance is laughable in its laxity,
and only goes to show how far removed the modern, novus ordo establishment has removed itself
from all things authentically Catholic. One might as well not even observe the
season Lent at all!

However, the observance of fasting on all weekdays of
Lent is the traditional method of observing the Lenten fast, and is strongly
recommended for all traditional Catholics. It is also our hope that the more
ancient and spiritually efficacious traditional Lenten Fast will be soon
restored to universal practice, for the good of the Church, and the greater
glory of God.

According to the traditional Lenten Fast:

*all days
of Lent are days of fast and partial abstinence, except:

*Ash Wednesday
and the Wednesday in the Lenten Embertide, which are days of fast and

*Fridays and Saturdays, which are fast and

*Sundays, which are neither fast nor abstinence.

Abstinence: In the Latin Church, abstinence
means refraining from eating flesh meat, or in other words, meat from mammals or
fowl. This includes soup or gravy made from these kinds of meats. Meat from cold
blooded animals is allowed, however, such as fish. This is why Fridays are known
as “Fish Fridays.” Traditionally, the laws of abstinence apply to all aged 7 and
over, but the new Code of Canon Law applies it to all who have completed their
14th year.

Partial abstinence:
Flesh meat, and soup or gravy made from flesh meat, may be eaten only onceFINIS_~1
during the course of the day, at the principle meal.

Fasting: Eating only one full meal (which may
include meat) and two smaller, meatless meals that don’t equal the large one
meal. No eating is allowed between meals, but various beverages such as water,
milk, tea, coffee, and juices can be consumed. Meat can be eaten, usually for
the principle meal, but only if the day is not a day of abstinence as well as a
fast day. Traditionally, everyone over 21 years of age and under 59 years of age
is bound to observe the law of fast; but the present Code of Canon Law sets the
ages of 18 and 59 as the limits.

As in all things, we need to practice
the virtue of prudence. All situations should be weighed in the light of
Christ’s love. Traditional Catholics fast in order to share in the sacrifice of
Christ and to discipline the body. Our bodily discipline should be directed
toward the cultivation of virtue, not an indulgence in austerities for the sake
of show or false pretenses.

If our fasting doesn’t help us to cultivate virtue, bring us to distrust the
self, and, most importantly, help us love God and become completely dependent
upon Him in all aspects of our lives, then our fasting and abstaining is a
futile exercise that will lead us farther from God. Indeed, it would have been
better if we hadn’t fasted at all. Bodily mortification gains us nothing if we
allow vices to go unchecked, and virtues remain stagnant. The first fast, the
primary abstinence, must be the fasting and abstinence from sins and all
occasions and causes for these sins.

One needs to be careful that fasting
doesn’t bring one to spiritual pride, one of the most cunning traps of our
adversary. Our fasting can be an occasion of scandal if we bang a gong or blow a
horn. Once again, we should use prudence to discern all the various, and
sometimes uncomfortable, situations in which we might find ourselves during this
Lenten season. We need to remember that not everyone with whom we come into
contact at work or at social events are Catholic, and we need to weigh betweenArt-Painting-Mythology-Hell-probably-Italian
giving offense or giving scandal, between our station and civil obligations, and
our obligations to Christ and His Church.

We should also consider various
health needs that differ from individual to individual. Those who must engage in
strenuous physical activity throughout their workday have different nutritional
needs than someone who works in an office or classroom. Pregnant mothers and
those suffering from illnesses have nutritional needs that mitigate a portion or
all of the fasting and abstinence requirements of the Church. If in doubt, don’t
hesitate to ask a pastor or spiritual director for guidance.

Lastly, we
should all strive equally, if not harder, to cultivate the virtues during this
Lenten Fast by increased prayer and mediation, lectio divina, spiritual reading, and acts of
charity. Cultivating a new devotion, praying the 30 days prayer, or drawing
closer to Our Blessed Lord’s Sacred Heart and Precious Blood, and Our Sorrowful
Mother, are exercises that greatly benefit our spiritual lives. Helping to build
our various Latin Mass communities, by making and hanging fliers, inviting
friends and family to the Traditional Latin Mass, donating a little extra for
new vestments or altar furniture, volunteering for the choir, or lending your
talents to the parish would all be great ways to contribute to your Lenten

New website selling headcoverings with much more to come February 13, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, awesomeness, Dallas Diocese, fun, General Catholic, Interior Life, North Deanery, Virtue.
comments closed

My wife is quite a seamstress.  She has made many dresses for my girls that have received a huge number of compliments, along with many inquiries as to where one could buy such a dress.  She also makes what I will call workaday or all day sort of headcoverings for women.  She’s started a site called Marymyway where you can order a variety of headcoverings.  Dresses will be available online at a later date, in addition to crosses and other things I make.   My wife has found there seems to be a very small but growing number of women who are wearing these types of headcoverings for reasons of virtue and practicality, some part time, some throughout the day.  There are also some chapel type veils. I hope you check out the site.  Some samples:





I think you’ll find the veils/headcoverings are pretty reasonably priced – in the $10-12 range.  Please check out the site – Marymyway!