jump to navigation

This meditation struck me as appropriate….. March 14, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, Glory, Holy suffering, Interior Life, persecution, The Imitation of Christ, Tradition, Virtue.
comments closed

…..for what has occurred in the Church in the past few weeks.  This is from The Imitation of Christ by Thomas a Kempis, but this particular version I am quoting from the March 14 meditation from Laudamus Te Latin Mass magazine:

O Father, righteous and ever to be praised, the hour cometh when Thy servant is to be tried. O beloved Father, it is well that in this hour Thy servant suffer somewhat for Thy sake. O Father, evermore to be adored, as the hour cometh which Thou foreknew from everlasting, when for a little while Thy wervant should outwardly bow down, but always live inwardly with Thee; when for a little while he should be little regarded, humbled, and fail in the eyes of men; should be wasted with sufferings and weakensses, to rise again with Thee in the dawn of the new light, and be glorified in the heavenly places. O Holy Father, thou hast ordained it so, and so hast willed it; and that is done which Thou Thyself hast commanded.

For this is Thy favor to Thy friend, that he should suffer and be troubled in the world for Thy love’s sake, howsoever often, and by whomseover and whosoever Thou hast suffered it to be done. Without Thy counsel and providence, and without cause, nothing cometh to pass on the earth. It is good for me, Lord, that I had been in trouble, that I may learn Thy statutes and may cast away all pride of heart and presumption. It is profitable for me that confusion hath covered my face, that I may seek Thee for consolation rather than men. By this also I have learned to dread Thine unsearchable judgment, who afflictest the just with the wicked, but not without equity and justice.

———————————-End Quote———————————-

Here’s an odd story on the conclave March 14, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Papa, scandals, silliness, Society.
comments closed

Well, two actually.  One, a man associated with leading papal candidate Angelo Scola had his home and business raided by the police investigating medical fraud just hours be

Italian police raided the home and office of a close friend of Milan’s Cardinal Angelo Scola on March 12, just before the opening of a papal conclave that the cardinal entered as a leading candidate for the papacy.

Police detectives carried out a series of raids on the offices and homes of officials involved in the health-care industry in Milan and the surrounding region of Lombardy. Police spokesman said that they were investigating charges of corruption in the delivery of medical supplies.

The timing of the raids—perhaps not coincidentally—was awkward for Cardinal Scola, not only because the Catholic Church is heavily involved in health-care institutions in Milan, but also because his longtime friend Roberto Formigoni is the leading figure in the health-care industry in Lombardy. Formigoni is also a key figure in the Communion and Liberation movement, with which Cardinal Scola has had close ties.

fore the Conclave started.  CatholicCulture is trying to claim there is no way the Conclave knew of this, but I doubt that highly. [As does Pope Francis]

Next, the Italian bishops conference sent out a congratulary e-mail to Cardinal Scola on his being elected Pope.  Which, in the event, did not occur:

Officials of the Italian bishops’ conference were embarrassed on March 13 when they sent a congratulatory email message to Cardinal Angelo Scola, falsely believing that he had been elected as Pope.

Cardinal Scola had been regarded as the most likely papabileentering the conclave. The Italian episcopal conference evidently jumped to the conclusion that the early decision by the cardinal-electors meant that the prelate from Milan had been chosen.

When alerted to the error, the Italian bishops’ conference quickly sent a congratulatory message to Pope Francis.

Interesting………………………………..now don’t go thinking I’m trying to start conspiracy theories!

Shut me up – more about Pope Francis and the TLM March 14, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, episcopate, General Catholic, Latin Mass, Liturgy, Papa, persecution, priests, sadness, scandals, secularism.
comments closed

I just noted in another post that negative reports regarding the TLM in Buenos Aires on traditionalist sites may have been exaggerated.  Well, Rorate Caeli just came out with a post that establishes pretty clearly that then-Cardinal Bregoglio did truly oppose the TLM in his Archdiocese of Buenos Aires, and that even the one monthly TLM permitted was a butchered TLM-NO hybrid.  Not good:

And so what was the great and generous application of Summorum Pontificum in the Archdiocese of Buenos Aires? One Novus Ordo-TLM hybrid once a month. And, as it happens to any badly celebrated Latin Mass, the number of attending faithful fast dwindled from one hundred to a handful. And, naturally, it was discontinued. So, as correctly mentioned in WikiMissa, there is currently not a single actual Traditional Mass according to the 1962 Missal celebrated by diocesan priests of the Archdiocese of Buenos Aires. And every priest who tried to truly implement Summorum in his parish  – that is, out of their own initiative, without “authorization” from the Bishop – was ordered to stop. It is what happened to a poor priest who tried to do it in the chapel of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus, in October 2007, and was personally ordered by the Archbishop to stop in November 2007. [The complete post of this shameful event, also mentioned by Página Católica, in a 2011 post, will also be translated and posted shortly.]

That is how the then-Archbishop applied Summorum in his diocese. Now, will that have any influence in his current Supreme position? We shall see. We certainly do have a very liturgical new pope, with determined liturgical views, implemented from his very first minutes as pope. Whether these views will be pleasing to some who are now criticizing us is an altogether different matter. On the other hand, those who are used to bending will certainly have no problem with the changes.
*** This is also important: the diocesan Traditional Masses mentioned by dear Fr. Finigan as occurring in Argentina do not include any in the Archdiocese of Buenos Aires precisely because there is not any there, which is limited to the Federal Capital (Autonomous City of Buenos Aires, which, despite the name, is outside Buenos Aires Province, in a comparable situation to the District of Columbia and Maryland). The three mentioned by him are in Buenos Aires Province: Villa Celina (La Matanza Partido, Diocese of Lomas de Zamora), Rawson (Chacabuco Partido, Diocese of Mercedes-Luján), and La Plata (Capital of the Province of Buenos Aires, Archdiocese of La Plata). The Archbishop’s territory became a Summorum-free zone.
So, my comments regarding Pope Francis not being focused on liturgical matters may be inoperative from the start.  It appears he may have a definitive hostility towards the traditional Mass and favors liturgical innovations/abuses very highly.
How many liturgical dancers could St. Peter’s accomdate?
On a more serious note, will this switch in attitude at the highest level of the Church undo the progress made under Summorum Pontificum?  Does anyone thing Pope Francis would actually repeal Summorum Pontificum/Universae Ecclesiae?  Certainly, those bishops who had responded coldly to those motu proprios are now even less likely to be generous.  Hmmmm…….

Some good and some not so good regarding Pope Francis March 14, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, Dallas Diocese, episcopate, General Catholic, Liturgy, Papa, sanctity, true leadership, Virtue.
comments closed

First, some good.  He’s obviously a man of great humility, who tries to practice virtue.  Here is a photo of him washing and kissing the feet of those with AIDS:


He definitely has the common touch.  He went in a single car to render honor to our Blessed Mother this morning, and he paid for his hotel bill in person and got his own luggage.  He certainly isn’t one to get lost in the trappings of his new office.  On the down side, however, there is something to be said for allowing those trappings to serve a purpose, to help reinforce the image of the Pope as the unique Vicar of Christ and Shepherd of the Universal Church, in people’s minds.

He seems to stand very strong on most moral issues of our time, like abortion (opposing it in all cases, as our Church does), and of course opposing state recognition of gays simulating marriage.  I have not found an explicit statement by him regarding contraception.  But, I did read an analysis of his beliefs which says he opposes contraception, he opposes euthanasia, he opposes fake women priests, and all those cultural touchstones.  He seems to be a man who takes his role very seriously – he ostensibly begged God to forgive the cardinals who had elected him for what they had done.  He is not reported to have campaigned for the Chair of Peter, at all.  So, he seems a very honest, straightforward man.

He is reputed to be a man of very strong interest in the “social justice” issues.  Being from South America, that is hardly surprising, those issues tend to dominate there.  While he has reportedly denounced the error of liberation theology, he has made statements quite hostile to capitalism and at least somewhat warm towards a heavy state hand in redistributing wealth.  Does that mean we can expect encyclicals like Populorum Progressio?  I guess we’ll have to see.  But, perhaps he’ll give the Church very solid theoretical and practical lessons in how to conduct true Catholic social justice on the individual level, without automatic deference or recourse to the state?  That could be quite beneficial.

He comes from a nice Catholic family:


I don’t know what else we would expect, but it’s reassuring nonetheless.  He seems perhaps a bit like Pope John XXIII, in that he is a man of modest means who has a great love of the Faith and strives to live a life of virtue in all that he does.  I don’t know if that comparison is reassuring, however.

Now for some downside.  He is reputed to have told an Anglican in Argentina that the Anglican Ordinariate was a mistake:

He called me to have breakfast with him one morning and told me very clearly that the Ordinariate [creating by the Catholic Church to accommodate alienated Anglicans] was quite unnecessary and that the church needs us as Anglicans.

That is rather disconcerting, and goes along with other things we’ve learned of new Pope Francis, the kneeling for a “blessing” by TV evangelists in Argentina, the participation in a Hannukah celebration with Jews there, etc.  It reveals a very modern sensibility regarding ecumenism, not a view that says that non-Catholics must convert to save their eternal souls,  but one that says the Church is a repository of “truth” among many, and that the Church is best served by Anglicans being good Anglicans, Lutherans good Lutherans, and the like. In this sense, he is actually quite a bit like Pope John Paul II, “the great.”

It is in the liturgy department that our new pope is perhaps most concerning.  It is widely reported (on traditionalist sites, I must add) that he has not faithfully implemented Summorum Pontificum, at all, but that he has to the contrary persecuted priests who are attracted to the traditional Mass.  Having said that, Eponymous Flower has a map up showing that there were at least 4 parishes offering the TLM in the Archdiocese of Buenos Aires under his leadership, one of which was the traditionalist order Institute of the Good Shepherd.  In addition, a local FSSP priest reports that a member of the Fraternity is actually on quite close terms with Pope Francis.  If true, that would seem odd from a man who allegedly despises Tradition.  I wonder if the truth is that, this is a man who is much more concerned about social issues, practicing personal virtue, and ministering to the poor and outcast, than being a doctrinal or liturgical specialist who has great concerns in these areas, like the former pope. Only time will tell.  But I get the impression this is not a doctrinal or liturgical warrior, determined to make sweeping changes or undo them, but that his focus will be elsewhere – perhaps on healing the grave wounds in the Church caused by rampant sexual immorality in the priesthood and even episcopate.  That, would be quite an accomplishment in itself.

I must add, however, that the Mass below, now widely reported, is hardly reassuring.  But I would imagine that at least half the cardinal-electors have participated in such a monstrosity, and that such are very common in South America.  When will our prelates learn that playing at charismatic pentecostalist doesn’t “satisfy” some pent up demand for such, it just makes people wander away seeking the “real thing?”

All in all, there is no question those with an affinity for Tradition or orthodox practice of the Faith could have done much worse.  This is a man with many attractive qualities, and some that are disconcerting.  Frankly, there were only a few men in the College of Cardinals that would come even close to being as Tradition-friendly as Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI.  Perhaps it is up to us, with our prayers and penance, to aid him in being a great, saintly Pope?  Perhaps, with sufficient prayerful aid, he might even surprise himself.

Senate committee OKs assault weapon ban March 14, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, Dallas Diocese, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, self-serving, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

The Diane Feinstein led Sentate Judiciary Committee passed an unconstitutional ban on assault weap0ns and magazines larger than 10 rounds on entirely party lines.  Apparently, Ted Cruz gave her hell, good for you, Ted:

A Senate committee approved an assault weapons ban Thursday on a party-line vote that signaled how difficult it will be for the proposal to survive in the full Senate.

The Democratic-led Senate Judiciary Committee approved the bill on a 10-8 vote after rejecting a series of Republican amendments aimed at exempting victims of sexual abuse, people living along the Southwest border and others from the prohibition. The GOP proposals were also defeated along party lines……..

…….Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein and others have argued that such firearms are used in a disproportionate number of mass shootings and shouldn’t be available to civilians.

The prohibition is one of the most controversial of the gun restrictions being considered in Congress. Its foes say law-abiding citizens should not lose their Second Amendment right to own the weapons, which they say are popular for self-defense, hunting and collecting.

Thursday’s debate included a fiery clash between Feinstein, D-Calif., the ban’s author, and outspoken freshman conservative Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas. Cruz said Feinstein’s bill would create exceptions to the Second Amendment and asked her if she would favor exemptions to the First Amendment’s freedom of speech by denying that right to certain books.

“I’m not a sixth-grader,” said a visibly upset Feinstein. She described her decades in Congress involved in gun control debates and said, “I’m reasonably well-educated, and thank you for the lecture.”

No, you’re not a sixth-grader at all, Madame Chairwoman, you’re merely a leftist who has an armed security detail for life, paid for by the taxpayer, who couldn’t give a flip about the rights of others, so long as you and your leftist pals get yours. Some “rights” – like the right to have ones acts of wanton depravity approved by the government as equal to marriage – are obviously much more equal than others in our brave new world of progressive statism.

To commemorate this passage, I bought several large capacity magazines and many hundreds of rounds of 7.62×39 ammo at Cheaper Then Dirt.  FOR MY EVIL ASSAULT WEAPON OF DEATH!  BWAAHAAHAAHAAHAAAHAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!

Fortunately, this bill has little chance of passing the full Senate and especially the House.  Pray God we keep a Rethuglican majority in the House at 2014, at least to keep the greater insanities from being unleashed upon us.

How the crisis broke in the Church March 14, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, Society.
comments closed

I know most Catholic news sites and blogs are all Pope Francis all the time, but I’m going to diverge from that a bit and continue with a theme I’ve been on for some time, relating how the radical changes that occurred in the Church in the 60s and 70s came about.  Today, we’ll look at what Roberto de Mattei describes as “The Explosion of the Crisis,” the development and promulgation of the “Dutch Catechism” of 1965.  The main driver of this very problematic catechism and the concommitant heresy and unspoken schism in the Dutch Church, which Pope John Paul II went to extraordinary lengths to try to reign in early in his pontificate, was Cardinal Jan Alfrink, one of the dominant leaders of the progressive faction at Vatican II and one-time ally of Pope Paul VI. Of course, when Paul VI promulgated Humanae Vitae, that friendship ended and Alfrink became a bitter enemy of the Pope.  The below is from pp. 512-514 of The Second Vatican Council: An Unwritten Story:

The new centralization of power [associated with Paul VI’s reorginization of the Curia] did not manage to containe the centrifugal forces that were running throug the body of the Church……….In July of 1965, the English Jesuit magazine The Month published a worrisome analysis of the situation of the Church in Holland, describing it as “the heaviest crisis since the Reformation” and identifying the greatest dangers as “a certain dogmatic relativism, together with a sham ecumenism, and the disappearance of a personal life of prayer among a large number of the Catholic people. [And note, this was long before the 4th and final session of Vatican II even began, wherein most of the documents that gave more traditional Catholics the most concern were approved]

The Dutch crisis exploded in October 1966 with the publication, sponsored by the bishops of the Netherlands, of the new Dutch Catechism containing profoundly ambiguous statements about sin, redemption, the Eucharist, Our Lady’s virginity, the role of the Church and of the pope: in other words, on almost all the essential points of the Catholic Faith. An ad hoc commission of cardinals chosen by Paul VI, in dialogue with the cardinals and bishops of that nation, proposed a series of modifications and supplements to the new Dutch Catechism, conversationally and without any ultimatum. The observations were openly contested by a large part of the Dutch Catholic establishment, headed by the cardinal primate Jan Alfrink, the principle defender of the new Dutch Catechism.

In early January 1969, in Noordwijkerhout, on the North Sea, there was a meeting of the Dutch Pastoral Council, an organization created in 1967, which included more than one hundred representatives of the bishops, the priests, and the lay faithful. The nine bishops who were members of the council – including Cardinal Alfrink – voted in favor of the so-called “Declaration of Independence,” in which Dutch Catholics were invited to reject the teaching of the encyclical Humanae Vitae.  [This, then, was an open declaration of schism] On that same occasion the Dutch Pastoral Council……aligned itself in favor of the new Dutch Catechism, rejecting the corrections suggested by Rome and asking that the Church remain open to “radical new approaches” to moral topics, which were not mentioned in the final motion yet emerged from the proceedings of the council, such as pre-marital relations, homosexual unions, abortion, and euthanasia. [All of which Holland has adopted with a glee, or vehemence, unseen virtually anywhere else – and long before almost anywhere else]

The result of Holland’s “Declaration of Independence” from Rome were disastrous.  In 1966, the year of the publication of the new Dutch Catechism, 25% of the inhabitants of Holland declared some affiliation with the Catholic Church. In 2006 there were fewer than half that many, down to 16%. Today Holland is the Western country in which the Christian identity is the most diluted and the muslim presence the most aggressive and invasive.

Bishop Joannes Gijsen, who was consecrated bishop of Roermond by Paul VI in 1972, wrote: “It is not surprising that all this would change the very life of the Church, like a revolution: church attendance fell off rapidly; Confession was considered superfluous and was replaced by communal ‘penance services’; piety lost its depth and flickered out; the value of the rich Catholic heritage was barely acknowledged. Slowly the idea spread that the Catholic Church soudl associate with other Christian churches and form with them a generic church……..”

———————–End Quote—————————

Thus, the beginning of the deluge.  It is little surprise the revolution in the local churches began in earnest in Holland.  At the Council, by far the most consistently radical element of the conciliar membership – and, amazingly, leadership – came from Holland and its twin, Belgium. Cardinal Alfrink repeatedly advanced some of the most novel concepts at the Council, from a near-total repudiation of the definitions of Vatican I regarding the Primacy of the Pope to a similar rejection of the liturgical formulations of Trent.  He was only exceeded in this by Bishop de Smedt, a fellow Dutchman who was frequently point man for some of the most radical proposals.  I share with Cardinal Siri the view that many of the central/northern European prelates who were the hardcore of the “European alliance” of progressive elements at the council had never fully shaken off the influence of protestantism in their thinking.

Whatever the cause, however, the Church in these countries – Holland, Belgium, France, Germany, Austria, and Switzerland – is all but dead.  In France, it is very likely that within 10-15 years the SSPX and other traditionalist groups will make up half the Church there, since the “regular” Church is absolutely moribund and the traditionalist groups continue their steady, natural growth.  These countries formed the heartland of the revolution that swept through the Church in the 60s and 70s, the focal point for rejection of dogma after dogma, papal declaration after papal declaration. As has been shown conclusively historically, when other revolutions – or heresies – swept through local areas of the Church, the result is always the same: collapsed faith, shuttered churches, scant vocations, and a long process of rebuilding.  What is different in this case is that instead of the heresy being confined to a region of the Church, this time it was universal.