Best picture of the day and a thought on Father’s Day June 17, 2013
Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, awesomeness, Domestic Church, Eucharist, family, General Catholic, Glory, manhood, Sacraments, Saints.comments closed
The best picture of the day:
Thanks, Mundabor.
Upon reflection, I have decided the best thing about Father’s Day is getting hugs and kisses from your daughters. And son, although he’s a bit young and boyish to do much of that, voluntarily. Having many daughters makes it especially sweet. Having a spouse make you a wonderful dinner is also very special, but I must say the hugs come first.
Bishops need to stop asking, and start demanding June 17, 2013
Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Abortion, Basics, contraception, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, sadness, scandals, secularism, sexual depravity, shocking.comments closed
This post contains a necessarily descriptive photo you might want to avoid.
Two quick items via Creative Minority Report. First, Bishop Alexander Sample, who is one of most orthodox and Tradition-friendly bishops in the US, has asked a Portland parish to stop carrying their parish banner in the Portland parade of sexual indecency and soul-destroying depravity homosexual “pride” parade. The parish’s response? Of course we won’t obey you, Bishop Sample:
This year, members of St. Andrew Catholic Church, who have been participating in the parade since 2001, were asked specifically not to carry a banner representing the church.
But they did just that. [Of course they did. Decades of experience have taught “dissenters” there is no penalty for dissent, only cultural approbation and the adulation of the media. What’s to lose? Well, besides their souls, but I mean, c’mon! Who takes any of that Catholic hocus pocus seriously?]
“It has been a very important part of our ministry and our outreach,” said parishioner Joy Wallace, who is co-chair of the Welcoming the Whole Family Committee. [No, it’s a very important way for you to signal your trendy lefty assumptions of “enlightenment” and superiority over the hoi polloi, which is what it’s really about.]
She said many parishioners were surprised when newly installed Archbishop Alexander K. Sample asked the church to skip the parade this year. [“Surprised by Truth!” It’ll sneak up on you, that constant 2000 years of belief straight out of inspired, inerrant Scripture!]
“The archbishop would prefer no parishes be in the gay pride parade and be identified as a parish,” said Wallace. “As individuals we could walk but not as an identified church.”
But parishioners say representing their church is the whole point. That’s why church leaders made the decision to march in the parade despite the archbishop’s request. [Of course they did. Because there is absolutely no consequence for failing to abide by the request]
“It isn’t a case where we are trying to be disobedient,” [No, not at all. You’re just being obedient to a different master.] said parishioner Jerry Deas, who is also a co-chair of the Welcoming the Whole Family Committee. “We’re trying to be obedient to the gospels and obedient to this mission.”
Of course! Everyone knows probably the greatest Apostle of all (Paul) was just evidencing his rampant heteronormativity when he repeatedly condemned homosexual acts and even the “effeminate,” which was actually a reference to men who dressed as women and behaved in feminine ways. 2000 years of constant belief and practice were also just a big ooopsie on the part of the Holy Spirit. I’m sure Perfection will get it right next time, with help from radical homosexual activists and a government gun.
I warn you, do not click on this picture
I compose a little letter below.Dear Bishops:
When will you realize that merely asking when it comes to thoroughly radicalized parishes like St. Andrews only leads to embarrassing displays of impotency? When will you start demanding, and following up the demands with actual ecclesiastical penalties, like dismissals, interdicts, and/or excommunications? See the immorality on the right? That was featured in this parade. Is that something Christ would have taken part in, a veritable street festival of sexular paganism? Yes, we are called to be salt and light and to engage with the world, but we don’t have to engage on the world’s terms, nor support immorality in order to do so, which is exactly what this St. Andrew’s parish was doing. They are signalling that they find nothing wrong in acts of grave depravity, and in fact condone and support those committing such acts. That is calling sin “good” and a complete repudiation of what Christ came to earth to teach. Christ forgave, but he also said “go and sin no more.” It is a terrible scandal, a grave evil, for Christ’s Church, his very Body, to appear to condone sin that cries out to Heaven for vengeance. How about a little consistency, and treating these sexular pagan leftist groups “in the Church” with the same ferocity you have treated many traditional, orthodox Catholics over the years?
A quick second note via CMR. Rush Limbaugh thinks he’s had an epiphany: abortion is at the root of our cultural collapse. You’re getting warmer, Rush, and I’ll always admire you, but you need to study the Church a bit more. Contraception and the selfish, hedonist attitude towards intimacy is really at the root of our cultural collapse, all stemming from a rejection of the Truth Christ has revealed through His Church. But if Rush condemns contraception, he’ll lose 90% of his audience overnight. So, don’t look for such condemnations any time soon, but we can always pray, and would that not be a tremendous witness to the Truth, and a great way for Rush to announce: “I’m converting to the One, True, Holy, Apostolic and Catholic Faith!”
St. Augustine on sin, sodomy, protestants June 17, 2013
Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, error, General Catholic, Saints, sanctity, secularism, sexual depravity, Society, Tradition, true leadership.comments closed
I don’t know if anyone else is appreciating these posts I’m doing on St. Augustine, but I’m sure enjoying reading him. Thanks to WA Jurgens, God rest his soul, for putting his books together, including the 3rd volume:
First quote, from St. Augustine’s Homilies on the Epistles of John to the Parthians:
So long as he is in the flesh, a man is not able to be without sins, at least the lesser ones; [Yikes! How many priests of a certain “spirit” pretend as if personal sin does not exist?] but do not make light even of those sins called lesser. If you make light of them when you weigh them, be terrified when you count them. Many lesser ones make one big one; many drops fill a river; many grains make a lump. And what hope is there? Before all, Confession; lest anyone suppose himself just, and in the eyes of God, who sees things as they are, a man who did not exist and who now does exist is lifting up his neck in pride-before all, therefore, there is Confession; then there is love; for what is it that is said about love? “Love covers over a multitude of sins” (1 Pet 4:8).
2nd quote, from the same document:
Such is the force of love that, as you can see, it alone separates, it alone distinguishes the actions of men. We said this is the case where the actions are similar. Where they are different we can find a man made savage by love and another made gentle by iniquity. A father beats a boy, and a seducer of boys caresses; if you but name the two actions, who would not choose the caresses and decline the blows? But if you take note of the person whose actions they are, it is love that beats the boy and iniquity [really, the Latin word is stronger, it conveys something more like barbarism, a shameful, horrific act] that caresses him. See then what we are insisting upon: that the deeds of men are discerned only by reason of love…..A short precept, therefore, is given you: Love, and do what you will. If you are silent, be silent for love. or if you cry out, cry out for love. If you chastise, chastise for love; if you spare, spare for love. [Thus, it is quite possible for Michael Voris and all the other voices of orthodoxy out there to be acting eminently in charity, even though they are often criticized for being “harsh” or “uncharitable.” You want to know what’s really uncharitable? Leaving souls to die in their sins.]
Third quote, from the Discourse tothe people of the Church at Caeserea. This discourse, written 1100 years before Luther nailed his heresy to the door of the Wittemburg Cathedral, seems a prophetic refutation of both protestantism and the Eastern Orthodox, the latter of whom, in spite of Augustine’s writing, do recognize him as a Saint:
A man cannot have salvation, except in the Catholic Church. Outside the Catholic Church he can have everything except salvation. He can have honor, he can have the Sacraments, he can sing alleluia, he can answer amen, he can possess the Gospel, he can have and preach faith in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost; but never except in the Catholic Church will he be able to find salvation.
As I was typing that, I was also struck by how much a refutation this statement is of evangelical protestantism, who hang everything upon the Gospel and preaching in the name of Jesus Christ. But Christ only established one Church, not 80,000 or whatever number they’re up to now.
How to assist someone in making an act of perfect contrition June 17, 2013
Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, Dallas Diocese, family, Four Last Things, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Interior Life, priests, Sacraments, Society, the enemy, Tradition, Virtue.comments closed
I have written many times regarding the fear I feel for souls close to me who are not visible members of the Catholic Church. I believe very strongly in Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus, or, outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation. This is assuredly a Dogma of the Faith, proclaimed formally by Popes on several occasions and confirmed by Church Councils. One point I have made repeatedly is that for someone who is outside the Catholic Church to be saved, in the event they have committed any mortal sin, they must have perfect contrition for that sin, since they do not have access to the Sacrament of Confession. This, too, is accepted Doctrine.
So, then, for people like me who have many loved ones who are not Catholic, the issue of perfect contrition becomes pretty significant. I have generally understood that perfect contrition is something that is very difficult for a person to obtain. My impressions on this have been formed by certain authors I’ve read and definitely from the words of Fr. Corapi, before his sad demise as a priest. My understanding of perfect contrition was that it involved having sorrow for sin based solely on the reason of having offended God who is Great and Perfect and infinitely loveable (and deserving of love), and for having caused His Son to suffer so horrifically for our sins. No personal interest can enter into this sorrow, such as concern for salvation or the desire for some other benefit, in order for it to be perfect. And I had always believed and understood that was a pretty hard thing to do, to have perfect contrition. Our fallen natures make us fall easily into self-interest. And having led a liftetime cut off from God, or in grave error, it had seemed to me that suddenly, at the moment of death, having that kind of contrition would be unlikely. And I’ve argued such on this blog. That is one of the reasons why the Church instituted Confession, since only imperfect contrition is required for the sins confessed in that Sacrament to be absolved.
But the priest in the sermon below argues that might not be the case. Although I might argue that the case of David was very special one and that he had immense practice of virtue (generally) and many special Graces as one specifically chosen by God to lead his people, nonetheless, I appreciate very much the very hopeful tone of the priest’s council, which is that we can help people make an act of contrition that we may also hope may be perfect. This is primarily a practical sermon, and one very worth listening to (and again and again) for the steps that can be taken by Catholics to, we may pray, bring those who are outside the Church into salvation through a perfect contrition for their sins. The priest does not spend time arguing at great depth what really constitutes perfect contrition, but he does argue that perfect contrition is an act that every person, even the weakest, can make. Which I agree with, I’m just afraid that many people, without some aid, do not understand how to make such an act, or do not even have the desire to do so. So, we have to help them, which is where most of the sermon comes in.
Oh, Lord, please allow me and all whom I love to have perfect contrition for all our sins!
Do yourself a favor and listen to this prayer, the contents of which one is unlikely to ever hear anywhere outside a traditional parish!
Just be be clear, there will be Latin Mass at St. Mark tonight June 17, 2013
Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin.comments closed
I know several hundred folks get the posts via e-mail, and if they don’d read the text of the post announcing the Novus Ordo Latin Mass at St. Mark tonight, they are likely get the wrong impression. There IS Latin Mass tonight! Sorry for the bad headline!
Novus Ordo Latin Mass back at St. Mark tonight June 17, 2013
Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, Dallas Diocese, General Catholic, Latin Mass, North Deanery.comments closed
For the first time in a month, there will be a Novus Ordo Latin Mass at St. Mark parish in Plano at 7pm tonight, Monday, June 17. This will be a Requiem-type Mass. There was no announcement in the bulletin, so Fr. Hopka has asked me to get the word out. Which I always do, anyways. Because I’m awesome like that.
Sorry, I fixed the title. My abbreviating Novus Ordo to NO gave the exact opposite impression I intended!
US Mexico border fence could never, ever work June 17, 2013
Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, Basics, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Immigration, scandals, self-serving, Society, the return.comments closed
After all, Israel has constructed a fence between itself and Egypt along the 144 miles Sinai border, across which tons of terrorists and arms used to flow into Gaza and the West Bank. And it was a complete, total failure!
This week, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has touted the success of a new border fence that Israel built along its boundary with Egypt to stop illegal infiltrators. In a statement posted at his government website, Netanyahu reported that illegal crossings had declined 99.9%, from 2,000 per month to only two. [Netanhayu has a vested interest in selling the success of the fence, but I have no doubt illegal crossings have plummeted]
“The fence that we built in the south is achieving the result for which it was erected,” Netanyahu said. “As opposed to the over 2,000 infiltrators who entered Israel exactly one year ago and dispersed to various cities, in May 2013 exactly two infiltrators crossed the border and were detained. Now we need to focus on repatriating the illegal infiltrators who are here, and we will meet this task as well.”
The main, 144-mile section of the fence was completed in early 2013, according to a January report by the Wall Street Journal. It is sixteen feet high and includes “barbed wire, surveillance cameras and radar.” By comparison, the U.S.-Mexico border is roughly 2,000 miles long, and only about a third is fenced off. The Israeli fence’s construction was accelerated due to security concerns in the years since Egyptian autocrat Hosni Mubarak left power, leaving a vacuum eventually filled by a Muslim Brotherhood government.
The new Israeli fence is separate from the fence that runs along, and partially inside, the West Bank, which has successfully stopped infiltrations by suicide bombers.
Wait, you mean TWO fences work? That unpossible!
That is the real reason why there is so much vehement opposition to any US-Mexico border fence among immigration proponents and all those who favor unconstrainted immigration. Nothing works like a fence. If you want to make it difficult for people and materials to cross your border, what’s the first
thing governments do? They build a fence. Why did Kruschev erect the Berlin Wall? Because tens of thousands of East Germans were fleeing to West Germany every month. After the erection of the Berlin Wall and East German border fence? The exodus fell to a couple dozen a year, with hundreds more being caught making the attempt (poor souls). That’s not to say we need machine guns and guard dogs, just a fence. Illegal immigration would fall by 90% or more, and the leftists know this. That’s why they’ll do anything to block the construction of a border fence, and their slightly less leftist Repubnikan “adversaries” will do the same.
My stars, wouldn’t a 2000 mile fence be expensive? Not really, it’s nothing compared to the current expense of providing benefits and services to illegal immigrants.
But I am also totally convinced there will never be a fence, not even a 3 ft high white picket one with roses and azaleas planted all along it, because the political and economic powers that be have absolutely no interest in it. I suspect those economic interests are a bit panicky right now, trying to force through 
this latest attempt at shamnesty, in the hopes of increasing immigration to former levels. I don’t think it will happen, I don’t think there is the population in Mexico to drive the huge waves of immigration that went on from ~1970 – 2007. But that doesn’t mean the Repubniks won’t hand a permanent electoral majority to the democrats in a blind and hopeless attempt to curry favor with a disinterested group. The vast majority of hispanics do not want what Repubniks are selling. And the democrats and their media allies have completely goaded the stupid party into going down this blind alley that will leave them permanently prostrate (perhaps that is the point? to better pave the way for our permanent Euro-socialist government?).
Ann Coulter says this attempt to curry favor with hispanics, goaded by democrats, is like the democrats trying to curry favor with pro-lifers by coming out with a plan to declare all contraception illegal. While I’d be in favor of that, Coulter rightly notes the vast majority of pro-lifers wouldn’t be moved at all, because they love their contraception and they’ll never trust the democrats on the life issues, just as most hispanics have no desire to support Republicans no matter what moves they take. I think she’s completely right. But the big money donors who give us nominees like Mitt Romney demand amnesty, so amnesty we shall have.
As an aside, I’d posit that a border fence would do more to block terrorist attacks on this c0untry than all the NSA wiretaps ever will.
I’d like to apologize to those conservative/orthodox Catholic readers whom I challenged regarding not voting for Romney. You were right, I was wrong. The Republican party deserves to die, horribly and with great suffering.
A Blog for Dallas Area Catholics 