jump to navigation

Michael Voris destroys Pat Robertson August 6, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, Basics, contraception, disaster, Ecumenism, error, foolishness, General Catholic, secularism, self-serving, Society, Voris.
comments closed

There goes Michael, being all “Church-belligerant” instead of “Church militant.” Which is a bit of a joke, actually. But he absolutely pants Pat Robertson below.

I had a friend growing up who was a cradle Catholic. Of course, at that time, I was a protestant.  His mom really sort of wanted to be a protestant, too, but her husband retained just barely enough Catholicism from his upbringing to keep the family, overall, going to Mass every week.  That was about the extent of their faith. But my friend’s mom, she was kind of odd, she stayed up half the night or more watching all these televangelists on channel 39 here in Dallas. Pat Robertson, Jimmy Swaggart, “God is gonna call me home if you don’t give me $8 million” Oral Roberts, Jim and Tammy Faye Baker, Jim Robertson, PTL, all that ridiculous garbage. The cruxt of it is, the neo-modernist Catholicism my best friend got at St. Mark in Plano, and the confusing exposure to hypocritical televangelists, led both he and his sister into becoming, today, militant atheists.   They think Christianity is a joke, and these hypocritical, multi-millioinaire televangelists played a leading role in driving these precious souls from the Faith.

I don’t know how anyone can watch that stuff for more than 5 minutes without just rolling their eyes and laughing out loud. Back when we still had TV, I would stop down some late night and watch, uh……very silly men…….. like Jack Van Impe say, for the 20th year straight, that the 2nd coming was just around the corner, and look at these quotes from the Prophet Joel, and won’t you send me $49.99 for my new video (same as all the others) that tells you all the signs and portents of the coming apocalypse?  Don’t be left behind!

I guess I’m belligerant, too.  Good.


Protestantism is, ultimately, at the root of the cultural collapse of Christendom.  Protestantism, which extolled private judgement above all, begat rationalism, which begat the enlightenment, which begat liberalism, which begat modernism, which begat atheism and sexular paganism.  It is a straight line from Wurttemberg in 1517 to fake homosexual marriage.  And the worst is yet to come.

And yet these are the focii of the Church’s ecumenical efforts!

Some quotes from Saints and Doctors against homosexual acts August 6, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, Dallas Diocese, General Catholic, Saints, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

Mind you, when most of these quotes were made, there was no such thing as “homosexuality,” which is an invention of the 20th century.  Prior to that, no one ever had conceived of the idea that someone might have a “lifestyle” that involved sodomy – they simply committed incredibly sinful acts, acts that cried out to Heaven and resulted in the destruction of several cities now residing at the bottom of the Dead Sea.

However, Tan books has a site that contains many gems of Catholic doctrine, including this one on sodomy.  Given the incredible amount of self-serving propaganda out there these days on this subject, I think it important to get the Church’s traditional viewpoint on this subject. One thing before I begin with the quotes, the Tan site notes, as I have estimated myself, that there are about 2 dozen specific condemnations of homosexual acts in Scripture, both Old and New Testament (they list them all, chapter and verse).  While some aspects of the old law were abrogated after the coming of Christ, rejection of perverse sexual activities was not one of them:

Saint John Chrysostom denounces homosexual acts as being contrary to nature.  Commenting on the Epistle to the Romans (1:26-27), he says that the pleasures of sodomy are an unpardonable offense to nature and are doubly destructive, since they threaten the species by deviating the sexual organs away from their primary procreative end and they sow disharmony between men and women, who no longer are inclined by physical desire to live together in peace.

Saint Pius V is no less rigorous in the Constitution Horrendum Illud Scelus of August 30, 1568. He teaches: “That horrible crime, on account of which corrupt and obscene cities were burned by virtue of divine condemnation, causes Us most bitter sorrow and shocks Our mind, impelling it to repress such a crime with the highest possible zeal. [Note: not “tolerate,” not “who am I to judge,” but “repress such a crime with the highest possible zeal.”  So, would some today claim St. Pius V was uncharitable?  Or, did he act from true charity, willing to use ALL means to preserve morality as well as individual souls from perdition?]

Saint Augustine is categorical in the combat against sodomy and similar vices. The great Bishop of Hippo writes: “Sins against nature, therefore, like the sin of Sodom, are abominable and deserve punishment whenever and wherever they are committed. If all nations Saint_Augustine_by_Philippe_de_Champaignecommitted them, all alike would be held guilty of the same charge in God’s law, for our Maker did not prescribe that we should use each other in this way. In fact, the relationship that we ought to have with God is itself violated when our nature, of which He is Author, is desecrated by perverted lust.” [Thus, the relative popularity for sodomy has no bearing on whether or not it must be opposed. Even should the entire world, outside the Church, commit them (and, frankly, given the depredations that occur in so many married couples today, it is probable that a very large part of the world has committed, or is committing, these acts]

Saint Albert the Great gives four reasons why he considers homosexual acts as the most detestable ones: They are born from an ardent frenzy; they are disgustingly foul; those who become addicted to them are seldom freed from that vice; [amazing how prescient the great Doctors of the Church are. But that’s because human nature never changes. Even 900 years ago, those who fall into this worst of vices find it extremely difficult to escape from it]  they are as contagious as disease, passing quickly from one person to another.

Saint Thomas Aquinas, writing about sins against nature, explains: “However, they are called passions of ignominy because they are not worthy of being named, according to that passage in Ephesians (5:12): ‘For the things that are done by them in secret, it is a shame even to speak of.’ For if the sins of the flesh are commonly censurable because they lead man to that which is bestial in him, much more so is the sin against nature, by which man debases himself lower than even his animal nature.”

Saint Catherine of Siena, a religious mystic of the 14th century, relays words  of Our Lord Jesus Christ about the vice against nature, which contaminated part of the clergy in her time. Referring to sacred ministers, He says: “They not only fail from resisting this frailty [of fallen humansaint catherine of sienna small nature] . . . but do even worse as they commit the cursed sin against nature. Like the blind and stupid, having dimmed the light of their understanding, they do not recognize the disease and misery in which they find themselves. For this not only causes Me nausea, but displeases even the demons themselves, whom these miserable creatures have chosen as their lords. For Me, this sin against nature is so abominable that, for it alone, five cities were submersed, by virtue of the judgment of My Divine Justice, which could no longer bear them. . . . It is disagreeable to the demons, not because evil displeases them and they find pleasure in good, but because their nature is angelic and thus is repulsed upon seeing such an enormous sin being committed. It is true that it is the demon who hits the sinner with the poisoned arrow of lust, but when a man carries out such a sinful act, the demon leaves.” [probably because the person has now descended to the state of brute animal rutting, as St. Thomas Aquinas describes, and possibly also because they are now so far gone, naturally, supernatural oppression may no longer be necessary?

——————–End Quotes———————-

There is much more at the Tan site.  Folks, the Church didn’t just make this stuff up because it doesn’t like a certain kind of person, or even certain acts. These acts have been deplored because they have corrosive impact not only on individual souls, but on society at large. The more this is tolerated, the sooner we can expect inevitable calamity on an uprecedented level.

Domine, miserere nobis!

Start Novena to St. Maximilian Kolbe today! August 6, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, Domestic Church, family, fun, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Interior Life, Novenas, sanctity, Tradition.
comments closed

I don’t want to overlook those who adhere to the Novus Ordo calendar. Thanks to MJD for sending this to me, here is a Novena for the Feast of St. Maximilian Kolbe, which is on Aug. 14 in the Novus Ordo calendar (he’s not in the TLM calendar, as he was not a Saint, yet, when the calendar was last updated in 1962).

I can attest that St. Maximilian’s intercessions are quite powerful.

Why call on this saint for help?

Because he is known as the patron of our difficult age and a heavenly intercessor for:

  1. drug, alcohol and sexual addictions
  2. eating disorders
  3. the pro-life movement
  4. healing,spiritual, mental and physical conversionsFr_Maximilian_Kolbe_1936
  5. families
  6. prisoners
  7. success in a new ministry

Start novena prayer today!

O St. Maximilian Kolbe,

faithful follower of St. Francis,

inflamed by the love of God

you dedicated your life to the practice of virtue

and to works of the apostolate.

Look down with favor upon us

who devoutly confide in your intercession, especially for:

(here mention your special requests)

Having consecrated yourself to the Immaculate Virgin Mary,

you inspired countless souls to a holy life

and various forms of the apostolate

in order to do good to others

and to spread the kingdom of God.

Obtain for us the grace by our lives and labors img-20080513194124-maximilian-kolbe

to draw many souls to Christ.

In your close conformity to our Divine Savior

you reached such an intense degree of love

that you offered your life to save a fellow prisoner.

Implore God that we,

inflamed by such ardent charity,

may through our living faith and our apostolic works

witness Christ to others,

and thus merit to join you in the blessed vision of God.


There is another longer Novena here.

Leftist redefinition of language strikes again August 6, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, asshatery, Basics, Christendom, contraception, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Interior Life, sadness, scandals, secularism, sexual depravity, sickness, Society.
comments closed

I first saw this new leftist psychosexual term – “cissex” – about a month ago.  Some poor little college girl had been thoroughly brainwashed by her warped professors and had to make sure everyone knew she’s a “cissex” woman – that is, a woman born with girl parts.  Then, I saw the article Creative Minority Report quotes below, wherein in a hyper-liberal PhD type laments the awful scourge of “cissexism” among pro-aborts. That’s right, not knuckle-dragging pro-lifers, but pro-abort leftists aren’t on the transcisgenderbalkanization bandwagon:

The last month has been particularly brutal for abortion rights activists and women’s health advocates, as state after state has proposed and/or passed various bills that restrict abortion access and undermine abortion care. In response, there has been a re-energized reproductive rights movement, with many across the nation stating that they “Stand With Texas Women” or “Stand With North Carolina Women.” But in this response, abortion rights activists have overlooked and dismissed a very important reality: Not everyone who has an abortion is a woman……..

……We must acknowledge and come to terms with the implicit cissexism in assuming that only women have abortions. Trans men have abortions. People who do not identify as women have abortions. They deserve to be represented in our advocacy and activist framework. Honestly, I am guilty of perpetuating that harmful myth, both in my rhetoric and framing. I often frame abortion restrictions as misogynistic attacks meant to control women’s reproductive lives, and that is true. But abortion restrictions also affect the lives of people who aren’t women, and they hinder trans men and gender-non-conforming people and others who were Designated Female at Birth (DFAB) from accessing abortion care, as well.

“Stand with Ohio Women” and the “War on Women” may be great rallying cries, but they also very clearly reiterate the notion that abortion is both solely a women’s issue and that only women have abortions…..

I actually hope this PhD Lauren Rankin is successful in her crusade. One of the most sadly successful lines of rhetoric the pro-aborts have is this notion of baby-crazy men subjugating women through their reproductive systems. This rhetoric really does convince a lot of people that women should be allowed to “choose” to murder their child.  The idea that women have the right to “control their bodies,” up to an including having the separate life in their bodies killed, sells pretty well in our amoral culture. But this line of thought could seriously derail that – I don’t think, even in our present very low state of cultural morality, that many people will respond well to exclamations like “stop the war on cisgendered women and transgendered men!”  I think people would, for the most part, be disgusted.

And yet, I cannot pass over in silence yet another attempt to radically redefine both language and elemental being. The very definition of female is associated with their biological ability to reproduce.  Womanhood has always been tied to motherhood.  Those who are born female, barring rare abnormalities, have the ability to reproduce.  A “transgender man” is really a very confused woman, as this other post at CMR makes plain.  The numbers of those who truly have mixed gender organs at birth is vanishingly rare. But this ludicrous notion of “cisgender” – those who “identify” as the sex that corresponds with the body parts they were born with – is simply another leftist attempt to redefine reality and turn those often afflicted with severe disorders into reliable parts of the leftwing coalition.

Homosexuals make up 2 or 3 percent of the population – at most!  Much data shows even this definition is highly fluid, with many who identify as homosexual at one point in their lives later identifying as heterosexual (and, I know, I don’t like the term “homosexual” either, it’s another word made up by leftists, but it’s simply in the vernacular now).  The percentage of those who think they are transgendered is a small percentage of those who claim homosexuality.  So, for some miniscule fragment of the population – almost certainly far less than 1% – we’re going to add all kinds of balkanizing terms like “cisgender” so that noone is ever offended?

Amazingly, this turn of events may have been inevitable. The very father of the modern, “enlightened” secular state, John Locke, wrote repeatedly that the MOST important element of his “enlightened” society would be its very tolerance, that is, it’s constant catering to the aggrieved, especially those aggrieved who rejected traditional morality.  Such views of tolerance – devised specifically to undermine adherence to traditional Christian (and especially Catholic) belief and practice – were essentially “baked into” the secular liberal state that first emerged in the US, and later most of the world.  It took a little bit of time, but we see today in our culture where “intolerance” is virtually the only sin, and the only apostasy is adhering to traditional Catholic morality, the ultimate result of that “englightened” thinking.

There are many, many more grave problems with the “enlightened” secular democratic state, which I hope to explore, God willing, in the near future.

Start Novena for the Assumption today, Aug 6! August 6, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, Domestic Church, family, fun, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Novenas, Our Lady, sanctity, Tradition.
comments closed

Start your Novena for the Assumption today, Aug. 6. The Feast of the Assumption – A Holy Day of Obligation – is Thursday, August 15!

You can follow the Novena form here at A Catholic Life. The prayers of the Assumption Novena change from day to day.

A shorter Novena for the Assumption is below:

Mary, Queen Assumed into Heaven, I rejoice that after years of heroic martyrdom on earth, Thou hast at last been taken to the throne
prepared for Thee in heaven by the Holy Trinity.

Lift my heart with Thee in the glory of Thy Assumption above the dreadful touch of sin and impurity. Teach me how small earth becomes when viewed from heaven. Make me realize that death is the triumphant gate
through which I shall pass to Thy Son, and that someday my body shall rejoin my soul in the unending bliss of heaven.

From this earth, over which I tread as a pilgrim, I look to Thee for help. I ask for this favor:

(State your intention here…)

When my hour of death has come, lead me safely to the presence of Jesus to enjoy the vision of my God for all eternity together with Thee.

assumption of mary

Praying Novenas as a family/group is especially efficacious of Grace! I highly recommend adding Novenas to your family’s nightly prayers!

More details on official FFI response to wicked calumnies and the ban on the TLM August 6, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, Basics, disaster, foolishness, General Catholic, Latin Mass, martyrdom, persecution, priests, religious, scandals, shocking, the return.
comments closed

Rorate has posted a more detailed version of the communiques issued in the past few days by the Franciscans of the Immaculate.  These additional details confirm what I stated yesterday in my post, and shed further light on the canonical sanctions imposed on the order.  These latest details make clear that Pope Benedict did not order the investigation of the FFIs, but that the investigation was started by the Prefect for the Congregation of Religious.  The official replies from FFI leadership make plain there has been a campaign of….at the least……one-sided presentation of the “facts” of the case by certain parties highly interested in the matter, including certain American FFIs prominent in blogs and comboxes.  One key bit of information that has been mentioned nowhere heretofore is that the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, which oversees the implementation of Summorum Pontificum and the operations of various communities attached to the Traditional Rite, gave the FFIs what amounts to a “clean bill of health” with regard to how the FFIs were offering the Novus Ordo and TLM in the light of the papal documents Summorum Pontificum and Universae Ecclesiae.  This rescript of at least tacit approval was given only last year!

The statement from the FFI leadership makes plain that neither the founder Fr. Manelli, nor anyone else in the leadership, had ever demanded or “required” the TLM to be the normative form of the Mass in any community.  The exasperation in the response below, which refutes the claim that “the majority of FFIs wanted to “keep” the Novus Ordo normative,” is palpable:

In any case, if the “majority” of the friars [So far as we are aware, there has not been any survey involving all the members of the Institute. Therefore, survey-based affirmations as to the will of the majority of the friars appear to us to be completely baseless] prefers to celebrate according to the Novus Ordo (Holy Mass and Breviary), it could perfectly well continue to do so, as it has in the past. Furthermore, Fr. Manelli himself principally celebrates the Novus Ordo (Holy Mass and Breviary).
Speaking of palpable (and justifiable) exasperation, the FFI leadership refutes some of these claims about the founder Fr. Stefan Manelli as outright lies and calumnies.  That is language rarely used in these matters, so I would imagine they feel their position unassailable.
Ergo, there was never a particular privileging of one form of the Mass over the other, or if there was, it wasn’t coming from the founder or prime leadership.  It sounds to me like a number of FFIs got themselves into a tizzy over, at best, a misunderstanding.  It could be that there were baser motivations than that.
Further key information presented is that at a general chapter as recent as May 2012 – shortly before the investigation began – it was decided to continue the provision for offering both TLM and NO.  At least from the standpoint of these recent “official responses” from the leadership of the FFIs, male and female, it is very difficult to see the necessity of the course of action taken against them.
If you read the responses carefully, I think you will also find quite apparent, but between the lines, the opinion of the FFI leadership that this matter is, chiefly, about the TLM and the degree to which it will be available.  The replies qouted at Rorate go to great lengths to refute several errors that have been spread abroad, the chief of which is that the FFI’s leadership was promoting the TLM to a tremendous degree and putting heavy pressure on the various FFI apostolates to cease use of the Novus Ordo (totally false).  But there have been other errors promoted as well, errors which consistently weigh against not the FFIs so much, as against Summorum Pontificum.  That is to say, there are “interpretations” of Summorum being bandied about very broadly in major Catholic and “secular” media that try to put onerous limitations on the availability of the TLM, limitations Pope Benedict certainly did not intend. These include statements that Summorum Pontificum does not apply to communities founded after Vatican II, which is just silly. Given how consistently these claims have been repeated, it does raise the question of whether these claims are part of some coordinated effort to “define Summorum down” to some very limited guidance document that affects only the Ecclesia Dei communities (FSSP, ICK, Good Shepherd, etc).
I think we are far from hearing the last of this situation.  The more information that becomes available, the more untenable the “this is all about the FFIs and has nothing to do with Summorum” position becomes, in my opinion.
I’ll repeat one more little bit: far from what has been claimed in the press and by the false, unofficial “spokesman” for the FFI (in actuality, he was spokesman for the small progressive faction), my understanding of which form of the Mass most FFIs prefer is clear. They definitely favor the TLM. But I also haven’t spoken to any FFIs who don’t see value in keeping the order bi-ritual.  So, I’m really not seeing the evidence that there was some plot to “change” the order or to “force” the TLM on poor unsuspecting souls.  No, the only unsuspecting souls forced to suffer now are those who love the TLM and have been denied it.