Huge homosexual clergy scandal about to break in Rome? – UPDATED June 27, 2013
Posted by Tantumblogo in disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, persecution, sadness, scandals, secularism, sexual depravity, sickness, unadulterated evil.comments closed
TG may not want to read this.
Is this what the Cardinals were called to deal with a couple of days ago? Wow, if even half of this is true, it’s going to be a Church-shaking shocker:
I wish I could say this is unimaginable, but it is not. It’s simply the very same depraved rot we’ve seen throughout the clergy in the West, which began with the concommitant explosion in acceptance of the dread heresy of modernism about 60 years go.
We’ll see how this develops.
UPDATE: More from Rorate. This looks confirmed.
During the news on “La7 on the 25th June (http://tg.la7.it/cronaca/video-i722957) we learned of an inquiry in course by the Roman Magistrates concerning a head-spinning ring of sexual encounters hosted by religious with minors. The denunciation which triggered off the investigation would contain around twenty names, among which is a papal master of ceremonies [Good Lord, not the current one, Guardini?] , a secretary to the Cardinal Vicar, four parish priests in charge of as many parishes to the north and west of Rome and other personalities of a high ecclesiastical level.
The behavior of certain ecclesiastical authorities confronted with scandals of this sort is astounding. When they learn of the existence of an immoral situation in a parish, in a college, in a seminary, they do not proceed to verify the truth, remove the guilty party and eliminate the filth, but manifest annoyance, if not reprobation towards those that have denounced the evil, and, in the best of cases, they limit themselves by taking into consideration that which may interest civil justice, for fear of being involved in judicial matters. They are silent about that which has purely a moral and canonical significance. The slogan could be “ zero tolerance” for the pedophiles, “maximum tolerance “ for homosexuals. The latter continue unperturbedly to occupy their places as parish priests, bishops, rectors of Colleges, forming that “homo-mafia” which Pope Francis defines as the “gay lobby.”
You keep using that word…..I don’t think it means what you think it means June 27, 2013
Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, disconcerting, error, General Catholic, Papa, persecution, Tradition.comments closed
Pelagianism has been a much used word in Catholic circles of late. Which is surprising, because as a formal heresy, it was fairly well stamped out 1500 years ago or so. Arianism actually persisted longer than Pelagianism.
Certainly, the Holy Father seems much enamored of the word. He used it a couple of weeks ago to describe traditionalists to some visitors from S. America. He just used it again yesterday, when he went a bit further:
Pope Francis drew a sharp contrast between “Christians of words” and “Christians of action” during his homily at a weekday Mass on June 27.
Commenting on the Gospel image of a house built on rock, the Pope said that true Christian faith is built on Jesus Christ. However, he said, “There has always been the temptation to live our Christianity not on the rock that is Christ.” This temptation toward “a Christianity without Jesus” is doomed to failure, the Holy Father remarked, because only Jesus gives the faithful the right to address God as Father.
Pope Francis said that the “Christians of words” fall into two categories: the gnostics, who “lives floating on the surface of the Christian life;” and the pelagians, who whose rigid approach puts them “in perpetual mourning.”
Both gnostics and pelagians “masquerade as Christians,” the Pope said, insofar as they do not base their faith on Jesus Christ. “The Holy Spirit has no place in their lives,” he added.
That’s a rather damning indictment from the Holy Father. Given that he just made rather plain two weeks ago that he sees this “pelagian” current in those traditionalists who gave him a spiritual bouquet, these latest remarks seem rather shocking.
But, be that as it may, I think from the Pope’s two statements we can begin to piece together how Pope Francis defines “pelagians.” He apparently feels they are rigorists who are joyless and think this life must be one of constant prayer and penance in order to have a chance of salvation. There is more than a slight implication that they don’t cooperate with Grace. Given that most all of the practices traditionalists adopt are simply those used by faithful Catholics for centuries, it’s fair to ask what esteem Pope Francis holds the centuries long Tradition of the Church.
I also have to quibble more than a bit with the definition of pelagianism used by Pope Francis. In the words of Inigo Montoya, “you keep using that word…….I don’t think it means what you think it means.”
For those who don’t know, Pelagius was a 4th/5th century priest or religious type from what is now Britain who taught a rather complex heresy. St. Augustine spent many years combatting this heresy. I could attempt to define Pelagianism, but I think Marius Mercator, close friend and colleague of St. Augustine, does better. Mercator spent years fighting this heresy, as well, and wrote a compendium of errors held by Pelagians. This from p. 185 of Jurgen’s Faith of the Early Fathers, Vol. 3:
[Pelagians hold errors such as these (every single statement is an error):]….Adam was created mortal and he would have died whether he had sinned or not. The sin of Adam injured himself alone and not the whole human race. When infants are born they are in the state in which Adam was before the Fall. Since not everyone belonging to the human race dies through Adam’s death, neither does everyone belonging to the human race rise up through Christ’s Resurrection. Infants have eternal life even if they are not baptized. These five headings are productive of one most impious and abominable opinion [or, here is what Pelagians believed in a nutshell]: he adds, moreover, that a man is able to be without sin, and can easily keep the commandments of God…….
That last bit really defines the core of Pelagianism – that man can pretty easily keep the commandments and achieve eternal life. Which is pretty much the opposite, I think, of what the Pope is accusing his “pelagians” of believing: he sees rigid souls who think we have to just suffer and work ourselves to death to have a faint hope of achieving salvation. Which also doesn’t exactly make them “Christians of words,” they’re simply Christians of a type of action the Pope does not find to his liking. St. Augustine, of course, defined Pelagianism similarly to Marius Mercator above. I will say, in the Holy Father’s defense, that there are some modern sources that define Pelagianism down to being a philosophy of “working one’s way to Heaven,” but that’s really not an accurate definition, although Pelagians did, sort of, believe that.
What the Pope is really repeating is the protestant critique of traditional (pre-conciliar) Catholicism, that Catholics have this belief we could work our way to Heaven independent of Grace. First of all, the protestants were wrong, the Church has never believed that. Secondly, that’s not the heresy he keeps bringing up.
I won’t say much else, because I don’t want to belabor the point. But I will say this: I think the Church has really gotten into a great deal of trouble over the past several decades for operating in an either/or mentality – some emphasize Scripture, others Tradition, some emphasize the active life, some the contemplative, some are involved in catachesis, others take a missionary approach which forbids catachesis, etc. My view is that the Church is the Body of the great “both-and:” we reverence Scripture AND Tradition, the active AND the contemplative, etc. On more than a couple occasions, the Holy Father has indicated, in pretty marked terms, that he holds the more cerebral, contemplative side of the Church in something approaching a low regard. For instance, he told that same group of S. American religious above that one should be a priest or a college professor, but not both. Which, the previous Pope was both!
Yes, it’s a very Jesuit point of view. That’s all I’ll say about that.
Sickening – CCHD head has close ties to pro-abort senator Wendy Davis June 27, 2013
Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Abortion, contraception, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, scandals, secularism, shocking, Society.comments closed
Tuesday, radical pro-abort senator from Ft. Worth, Wendy Davis, managed, for the time being, to talk to death Senate Bill 5, which would have imposed very reasonable and necessary limitations on abortion in this state. Fortunately, Governor Rick Perry has called another session of the legislature, and Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst has said SB 5 will be the first order of business in the coming session. I pray they bring in about 500 troopers and Texas Rangers and post them around the entrances to the capitol building.
However, that same Wendy Davis, radical pro-abort, has close ties to one Ralph McCloud, current head of the always problematic, always leftist Catholic Campaign for Human Development (CCHD). Thanks to reader John B for sending this in:
It’s hard to believe the long and sad story of the Catholic Campaign For Human Development’s partnership with the abortion industry could be even more sickening. But today it got even worse.
On Tuesday June 25, a Democratic in Texas Sen. Wendy Davis, attempted to filibuster a pro-life bill that would save thousands of lives. Sen. Davis attempted to stand for 13 straight hours in an effort to put an end to a bill that would have banned the killing of persons in the womb after 20 weeks.
Sen. Davis and her allies in the abortion industry have used this filibuster to mock children in the womb and continue to destroy human life.
Mr. Ralph McCloud, while he was head of the Catholic Campaign For Human Development, was the campaign treasurer for pro-abort Wendy Davis in her successful run in 2008 for the Texas State Senate.
Not only has the Catholic Campaign For Human Development pumped millions of dollars into abortion promoting organizations the head of the CCHD worked long and hard, while head of CCHD, to elect one of the most pro-baby killing public officials in America.
As reader John B noted to me:
The campaign he worked for (Wendy Davis, a democrat State Senator from Ft. Worth), defeated an incumbent pro-life politician and received hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations from such pro-abort groups as Emily’s List, Planned Parenthood, and ACORN in 2008. Planned Parenthood of North Texas was fined by the Texas Ethics Commission for illegal contributions to Davis’ campaign, of which CCHD’s own Ralph McLoud was treasurer. Shameful.
Which would strongly imply that McCloud helped direct these illegal pro-abort contributions, which were instrumental in getting this Davis character elected. He’s a peach of a man, surely just the kind of very faithful, very virtuous soul Catholics would expect at the head of a major diocesan agency.
McCloud also worked for the Diocese of Ft. Worth for 14 years, which I think should give every pious soul pause.
In the video below, which John B, a true pro-life stalwart in the area, also sent on, you can see Ralph McCloud speaking at a 2008 Gamaliel Foundation fundraiser. The Gamaliel Foundation is one of many leftist groups started by Saul Alinsky himself, which formed the very model for the CCHD. The CCHD in turn, fools Catholics into believing they are “alleviating poverty” with their annual fundraiser, and then turn around and funnel the money to left wing political activist groups like Gamaliel and its hundreds of front organizations. CCHD does NOTHING to feed, clothe, or house the poor. It is an organization created for one purpose: to advocate for radical leftist causes using funds taken from Catholics under largely false pretenses. CCHD collections are frequently described as “helping the poor,” or “helping the poor help themselves,” which on the surface, sounds like they provide direct care services or job training and the like. Nothing could be further from the Truth – CCHD’s vision of “empowering” the poor is a strictly left-wing vision, directing money to almost exclusively left-wing groups, many of which, again, radically oppose Catholic belief.
McCloud let the crowd know in 2008 that Obama’s election portended “a great day…..where we will realize a new Jerusalem and justice will flow like water.”
Most galling of all regarding this latest revelation regarding CCHD, is it comes in the wake of the clumsy, prevaricating, and obtuse PR effort by CCHD and its aging radical supporters to “push back” against the well-earned criticism the organization has received. In this latest defense, CCHD supporters weren’t in the slightest bit apologetic regarding the organization’s founding purpose, to “empower” the poor by funnelling money to left wing advocacy groups. Even though many of those groups support things directly counter to the belief and practice of the Faith. The PR blitz was really just a campaign of shooting the messenger, the messenger in this case being pro-life faithful Catholics who have been pointing up the scandal of CCHD for years.
When that collection basket for CCHD comes around Nov. 23-24, will you give? I, for one, will not. Ever.
Slutty Housewives and Pop Psychology – Catholic school catachesis in the late 60s June 27, 2013
Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, catachesis, Dallas Diocese, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, persecution, priests, religious, sadness, scandals, self-serving, sexual depravity, shocking, Society.comments closed
If you are a Catholic convert like me, you may have struggled with the question – how did it all fall apart? How on earth could the Church, especially in Europe and the Americas, go from being such a strong, cohesive, and vibrant institution, to one of collapse, division, and near universal apathy? There are many reasons, of course.
But I don’t think it any exaggeration to claim that, aside from the massive problems in the Liturgy and failure to enforce ecclesiastical discipline, catachesis is quite possibly the area where the most profound damage has been done to the faith of millions of Catholics. And catachesis – teaching Catholics, especially children, the Faith – remains a huge problem today. Especially in Catholic schools, where the modernist mentality seems epidemic and deeply rooted. So, how did catachesis collapse?
Well, in short, through mass acceptance and popularization of the devastating modernist beliefs of people like Teilhard de Chardin and pop psychologists like Freud and Jung, which spread like wildfire through the religious orders that then operated Catholic schools and from the religious to the lay teachers and administrators who replaced them (and right or wrong, the Council was used as the justification for all of this). By the late 60s, many if not most all Catholic schools were teaching beliefs that would hvae been regarded as damnable heresy just a 5 or 6 years before. I won’t get into why and how the religious orders, lay priests, and the laity themselves fell so deep and so hard right now, but I will provide some evidence for my claim via this textbook on religion, Growth in Christ, which was widely used in the late 60s in Catholic high schools. It was written by Brother Andrew Panzarella, FSC (a Christian Brother, which order ran so many schools in the northeast and midwest, and which was also very widely implicated in the boy-rape scandal), and was part of a number of catechetical books the Christian Brothers wrote around that time. Just a note, most of the authors of these books subsequently went on to leave the priesthood/religious life, and some got quite involved in “alternative lifestyles.”
This book was extremely heavy on (now almost entirely discredited) popular theories of psychology and, as I mentioned, the new age cosmic pantheistic indifferentist heresies of Teilhard de Chardin. Here is how one orthodox Catholic writer described the book*:
By the late 60s, irate parents were asking just what all these wild theories of psychology had to do with the Catholic religion being taught their children. They saw that Growth in Christ wreaked havoc among the students exposed to it in Catholic high schools (esp. those administered by the Christian Brothers). Catechetical texts were the causus belli in the conservative reaction to the excesses following the Council. And texts like Br. Panzarella’s gave every indication that what the parents pursued qualified as a just war. “Only recently,” Panzarella wrote in the book’s introduction, “has theology, like a cautious housewife sizing up a salesman, opened the door slightly to hear what modern psychology and sociology have to offer” [Remember, this book was intended for Catholic CHILDREN]
If caution was prescribed here, Panzarella seems not to have noticed. Of the three books teachers are recommended to read before commencing teaching this course, all are texts on psychology: Man’s Search for Meaning; A Primer of Freudian Psychology; and, Man for Himself. The main source of inspiration for Growth in Christ, according to Panzarella’s own account, was “the viewpoint which Erich Fromm has stated so well in his book Man for Himself: An Inquiry into the Psychology of Ethics.” That Fromm’s combining of the insights of Marx and Freud might be [no, I would say, surely IS] completely incompatible with the beliefs of the Catholic Church is an issue which never gets raised. What Br. Panzarella does tell us, though, is that the perennial philosophy, the one recommended by virtually every modern pope beginning with Pope Leo XIII, was hopelessly out of date and superseded by more recent insights. [Well, that is straight Teilhardian nonsense]
“There is no reason,” Panzarella continued, “why we should continue to settle for the psychology of the thirteenth century. In our own times psychology has developed in scope and depth to a degree unimagined by St. Thomas.”
End quote. Which, I’m afriad, was completely meaningless, since St. Thomas was arguing and teaching theology and philosophy at a level so sublime these 20th century dunderheads couldn’t remotely grasp it. But I would further argue that the Angelic Doctor knew more of true human psychology than all the pop theorists of the 20th century combined. These radicals really thought that “science” and the religion of evolution had truly stumped the Church, that the Church had no answer for these latest “scientific facts,” and thus, the Church must change to accomodate “science.” This, in brief, is the Teilhardian synthesis, the massive error that the Jesuit de Chardin was able, somehow, to disseminate widely in the Church in the first part of the 20th century, so that, by 1962, most religious orders were just eat up with this garbage.
Towards the end of the 400 page book, Panzarella makes his Teilhard-worship quite plain:
“[Teilhard’s] theory of evolution is not without its flaws, but it stands out as the prophetic vision of the twentieth century…
“What is really new in Teilhard’s theory of evolution is the idea that evolution is moving towards a goal. Evolution is not just haphazard change but well ordered change moving toward the goal of the fulfillment of the universe…….”
“………Mankind is building the kingdom of God. We are participating in God’s creative activity by marshaling the elements of the universe into new forms, so that all forces material, social and cultural nourish an emerging mankind. We participate in God’s redeeming activity by ceaseless war against the forces of evil in our physical world, in our biological and psychological organisms, in our social structures, and in our culture……” [For de Chardin and his modernist/leftist followers, personal sin does not exist, only “public” sins like capitalism, environmental damage, etc]
Some other quotes:
“In adolescence a person rejects many childish religious notions on the basis of his experiences of life. This is a good and necessary part of religious growth” [This was very, very widely taught – you can’t be a faithful Catholic if you adhere to traditional religious beliefs. That Rosary just shows how “spiritually immature” you are, while yoga shows you’re at a Teresian level of spirituality. Please.]
“Is a person religious if he keeps various religious practices and assents to various religious beliefs but does not take a stand on social issues? Can a person be religious if he does not go to church but is involved in social issues?” [No. But you can see in protean form ALL the silly beliefs catholycs hold, and all the clumsy misrepresentations of leftism as Catholicism]
“What Christ left behind was an infant Church; it has been and is going to continue to mature…People who cannot get over the shock of having their superstitious idea of the Church destroyed are becoming bitter and hostile. They think that the Church is going to ruins…” [Yes, yes, the new springtime. Said Br. Panzarella as he left the Church a few years later. I think we can see, 50 years on, just what blind ideological illusions these poor sick men operated under. And this was supposed to be catachesis! It’s nothing more than a 400 page diatribe against the Faith! And yet, bishops across the country OK’d this book for use! The reasons for that would take a whole ‘nuther post]
So, there you go. Some data points for why the wheels came off at a frightening pace in the period 1965 – 1975. And to think, that generation that has wreaked so much distruction is still chomping at the bit to prove themselves right! It appears no amount of evidence of devastation will convince them of their error. The pride these people operate under…..ay yai yai, it’s a disaster. Pray for them. They have so much to account for. And it continues today.
A Blog for Dallas Area Catholics 