jump to navigation

More on Wendy Davis’ immorality January 21, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, Basics, contraception, Dallas Diocese, disaster, error, family, foolishness, General Catholic, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society.
comments closed

Yesterday, we learned that Texas demonrat gubernatorial candidate Wendy Davis had greatly distorted about her life history, excluding small details such as giving up custody of her kids voluntarily to pursue her legal and political career, and the fact that her husband actually paid for most of her college expenses (she had presented herself as a single mom paying her way through college, including Harvard Law).

Now we learn that Davis’ ex-husband (the second one) sought a court order against her to prevent her from consuming illegal drugs or being otherwise intoxicated on her limited child visitations:

News has broken that Wendy Davis lied about her background. She is now playing victim blaming Greg Abbott.

It is her ex-husband who talked to a left-of-center Dallas reporter. It is also her ex-husband who asked a Texas District Court to issue a temporary restraining order against Wendy Davis in 2003.

In that order, the judge ordered that Wendy Davis “be immediately restrained from . . . using illegal drugs or consuming alcohol within 24 hours before or during the period of possession of or access to the child.”

Speaking of the child, at the time her daughter requested her father serve as her managing conservator.

It appears that Wendy Davis did not just leave out key details. Nor does it appear that Davis is just being held to a different standard than a man. It appears there is much more to Wendy Davis than meets the eye.

24 hours, eh?  I wonder if she had a crank habit.  A good hit of crank will last 12-24 hours, depending on how much tolerance one has. I can’t think of anything else with such a long half-life.  Or maybe it’s just an easy abstinence period to assign?

You picked a real princess, there, democrats.  I understand there is much more to come (one part I haven’t related, her husband dipped deeply into his 401k to pay for her Harvard Law-ing).  If so, she might not even make it to the nomination, let alone challenge Republican supremacy in statewide office.

Abortion and lies.  The two are inseparable.

The Doctrine of Jesus is the Doctrine of the Church January 21, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, Dallas Diocese, Ecumenism, error, General Catholic, Interior Life, Tradition, Virtue.
comments closed

From Divine Intimacy by Fr. Gabriel of St. Mary Magdalen OCD, Chapter 51:

The Truth Jesus taught is so important and essential that, to know it or not, to believe it or not, is a matter of life or of death.  His Doctrine is not optional; rather, it is so essential that we cannot attain to eternal life without it. [And since the Church alone contains ALL Truth revealed by Christ, and even the level of Truth normally necessary for salvation, Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus].  “Whosoever believeth in Him….may have life everlasting…….but he that doth not believe is already judged: because he believeth not in the Name of the only begotten Son of God.” (Jn 3:16,18)  Compared to the Truth taught by Jesus, all others are insufficient.

Because the Doctrine of Jesus is absolutely indispensable, He proved it’s truth by miracles in order to help our weak faith to adhere to it.  To the blindly obstinate Jews who refused to believe in Him, he said, “The works which the Father hath given Me to perfect’ the workds themselves which I do, give testimony of Me” (Jn 5:36)………..The Gospel almost always concludes a recital of the wonders performed by Jesus with such words as: “and His disciples believed in Him” (Jn 2:11); “All wondered and glorified God” (Mk 2:12).  Jesus is the only Teacher who can guaranteee with miracles the Truth of His Doctrine.  [Jesus’ miracles attest to His Divinity.  In the case of islam, Mohammad performed no miracles, except for one nobody saw, a supposed night flight to Jerusalem with the angel Gabriel.  But Jesus miracles were manifest to tens of thousands, possibly hundreds of thousands.  Thus, there were very many who were ready to believe in His Resurrection.  If He had just been a man, even a man who said many wonderful things, would so many have believed that He rose from the dead?  The miracles all confirmed belief in that Divinity, laying the groundwork for the greatest miracle of all, the God-man conquering death and rising to Heaven.]

Jesus wants everyone, even the simple and ignorant, to understand His Doctrine; He often said that He came especially to evangelize the poor.  Jesus is not another teacher seeking glory and praise; He seeks only the good of His disciples. He uses simple language which can be understood by all, and He illustrates the most sublime truths with very ordinary things…..Jesus explains His Doctrine in a manner which is adapted, not only to the mentality and needs of the people of 1st century Palestine, but also to that of all future generations.  His words are always living and timely, suited to the needs of every age and every people.  [For instance, when Jesus said to St. Peter in Matt 16: 16-18, that He would build His Church upon the Rock that was Peter…..He meant it!] 

“O Lord, my God, Thou hast indeed the words of life, wherein, if we will seek it, we mortals shall all find what we desire. But what wonder is it, my God, that we should forget Thy words, when our evil deeds have made us so inform and foolish?  What is this, Lord?  How blind of us to seek repose where it cannot possibly be found!  Reflect that we do not understand ourselves, or know what we desire, nor are we able to ask as we should. Give us light, Lord. Behold, we need it more than the man who was blind from his birth, for he wished to see the light and could not, whereas nowadays, Lord, no one wished to see it.

“You alone, O Lord, teach us truth and show us the way of salvation. O unhappy are we, for well do we know and believe these truths, yet our inveterate habit of not reflecting upon them makes them so strange to our souls that we neither know them nor seek to know them.

“Grant, then, O Lord, that Your words may never be absent from my thoughts.” (St. Teresa of Avila, Exclamations of the Soul to God, 8-13).

O Jesus, do not permit me to allow myself to be attracted by maxims and doctrines that do not come from You.

———–End Quote———–

Readers have lamented of late that they have experienced, in their parishes, error being taught instead the Truth Christ has revealed through His Church.  They have related that the Truth which the Church possesses, whole and entire and far above what is necessary for salvation, is rejected for a nebulous “searching” for God or Jesus.  Of course, we know where the Christ resides, in our Catholic tabernacles (if we are blessed enough to have one).  But so many in the Church today, including far too many leaders in the Faith, posit these notions of searching, and, even worse, imply or directly state that the Church has much to learn from other false religions, heretical sects, or even the pagan, godless secular world.  This kind of thinking was part and parcel of the revolution unleashed on the Church in the 1960s.

It is all false.  No matter what worldly ecumenists may say, the Church  is THE Body instituted by Christ to be His repository of Truth on earth and the prime, normal means of salvation.  Yes, it is theoretically possible for souls outside the Church to be saved, but the vast majority of the Tradition and thinking of great Saints and theologians says this possibility is quite remote.  We do souls outside the Church no favors by pretending that their false religions contain great wisdom, truth, and even saving Grace.  This might make them feel better, but actually works against conversion and has dramatically undermined the Church’s prime goal of converting and saving as many souls as possible.

No matter how bad things get, however, we must cling to Holy Mother Church, as She is our sole barque of salvation, even if the captain seems unsteady and the ship has sprung a hundred leaks.  It’s still far, far better than being alone in the tempestuous sea of the world and all its errors.  Yes, our faith is sorely tried by all the scandal we are forced to see and experience.  But that means our perseverance in the Faith will be all that much more rewarded if we do remain within the bosom of our Holy Mother, the Church.

ladder of the cross

More quotes from Gamber’s The Reform of the Roman Liturgy January 21, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, disaster, episcopate, error, General Catholic, Latin Mass, Liturgy, Papa, sadness, scandals, secularism, Society, the return.
comments closed

I’ve got to say, I was surprised that a book endorsed by Pope Benedict, and which some claim represented his own views on the liturgical revolution, contains so many explosive quotes.  I’ve left some bits out that are just pretty provocative.  But what I’ve put below is pretty hard-hitting.

Just some more random-ish quotes from Msgr. Gamber’s The Reform of the Roman Liturgy:

One thing is certain: the new (liberal) theology was a major force behind the liturgical reforms…….Yet to assert, as is sometimes done, that the Novus Ordo Mass is “invalid” would be taking this argument too far.  What we can say is that ever since the liturgical reforms were introduced, the number of invalid Masses has certainly increased. [that may seem like a bald statement of fact to my readers, but if one thinks about this, it raises extremely disturbing implications.]

Neither the persistent  entreaties of distinguished cardinals, nor serious dogmatic points raised about the new liturgy, nor urgent appeals from around the world not to make the new Missal mandatory could stop Paul VI [from implementing the Novus Ordo and proclaiming the Mass, the eternal Mass, “abrogated.”]– a clear indication of his own, strong personal endorsement.  Even the threat of a new schism – the Lefebvre case – could not move him to have the traditional ritus Romanus at least coexist with the new rite – a simple gesture of pluralism and inclusiveness, which, in our day, certainly would have been the politic thing to do. [Two things, we can certainly see a lot of correlation between Gamber’s position and the stance adopted by Pope Benedict XVI, and we see how the tolerance so trumpeted by progressives never quite seems to extend to the traditional practice of the Faith.]

…..Since the conclusion of the Council, has our liturgical worship become more attractive to the faithful?  Did the new  liturgy contribute to strengthening the faith and piety among our people? Hardly! Even during the short time that has elapsed since the introduction of the Novus Ordo in 1969, our churches have become emptier, the number of our priests and religious continues to decline steadily and decline at an alarming rate.  The reasons for these developments are many and varied, but we must admit that the liturgical reforms failed to arrest the negative trends they were to remedy, and that, more likely than not, they helped make them significantly worse.   [I don’t think there is even a slight doubt, the massive changes in the liturgy have dramatically undermined the faith of tens or hundreds of millions of Catholics.]

……the three new versions of the Eucharistic Prayer, also known as the three Canons, constitute a complete break with the traditional rite; they have been newly created using Oriental and Gallican texts as models. They are truly alien to the Roman Rite….More importantly, theologians have expressed concerns about some of the formulations used in the prayers. [Especially the highly problematic EPII, the one the vast majority of the faithful experience when at Mass.  True story: at a local parish with a very liberal pastor, at one Sunday Mass the priest so rushed through the prayers of Consecration that the entire period from the end of the Offertory to the start of the Our Father took less than 3 minutes.  At a Sunday Mass.  That included intoning the Sanctus.]

……The question we must ask is what was to be gained by all these petty changes? Was it just to realize the pet ideas of some liturgy experts at the expense of a rite founded on a  tradition of 1500 years?  Or are these changes to be understood as the deliberate destruction of the traditional order? – because the newly placed accents clearly contradict the traditional faith from which the traditional rite was developed.  In either case, as we have seen, concerning the pastoral care of the faithful – which, of course, was the Council’s major objective – most of the reforms have proved to be simply unnecessary and positively destructive. 

….Although the argument is used over and over again by the people responsible for creating the new Mass, they cannot claim that what they have done is what the Council actually wanted. [I don’t think this claim can be so neatly made….] The instructions given by the Liturgy Commission were general in nature, and they opened up many possible ways for implementing what the Commission had stipulated, but one statement we can make with certainty is that the new Ordo of the Mass that has now emerged would not have been endorsed by the majority of the Council Fathers. [….because of what Msgr. Gamber just said here. He  just told us the conciliar “instructions” for the reform of the Mass were vague.  That’s an understatement. They were not just vague, but frequently self-contradictory, and were so nebulous in places that carte blanche for the reformers/revolutionists could be reasonably claimed, and they took full advantage of that lack of clarity. I do tend to agree that the post-conciliar liturgy was not at all what the Council fathers had in mind, but they did, at the same time, approve documents which could be so easily misconstrued and manipulated. Even more, you had the conciliar Pope driving all these changes, and who could better interpret the will of the Council than he?  As Msgr. Gamber said, the Liturgy we got was certainly the one Pope Paul wanted, if not the entire Council.]

————–End Quote————–


Two troubling articles on the attack on the family January 21, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Abortion, contraception, Dallas Diocese, disaster, Domestic Church, error, family, General Catholic, horror, scandals, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

I have just stumbled across two very troubling articles regarding views prevalent within the Church and society regarding marriage and the family. They are troubling because they are so full of error. The first is particularly egregious, as the source was a priest in what I imagine was a typical “large suburban parish.”  I kind of hate to post this, because I get the sense some of my posting has discouraged folks whose only recourse is the typical Novus Ordo “product” that is out there.  But it’s very important to be able to deal with, and refute, these kinds of errors when they come up, and they are likely to come up more and more, so I’m pressing ahead.

First up, a priest advocating for a highly distorted, one might even say, heretical understanding of marriage and the family:

The Sunday after Christmas I walked out of church furious—not part of my original plan. The theme was family as in the Holy Family—Joseph, Mary, and Jesus. In his welcome, the pastor told the congregation, “Love, not biology makes a family.” That made me sit up and take notice. His sermon elaborated. “What is a normal family any more?” he asked jovially repeating his mantra that “Love, not biology makes a family.” [Some might say this approach had some applicability due to Joseph not being the biological father of Jesus, but comparing the dire state of so many families today to the Holy Family is something I consider perverse.  When all these broken families are sinless, then we can try to normalize them.]

It just slides off the tongue: “Love makes a family.” Who could possibly disagree? After all, as he said, there are lots of blended families where husbands and wives are raising their spouse’s children. These families have come together because of love, not biology ergo “Love, not biology makes a family.” [And how many lives were wrecked in the process of this coming together?]

I can’t help wondering how many other Christians including readers of this column believe this sentimental twaddle or at least think they believe it because they’ve never thought it through.

“Love, not biology makes a family,” is among the vilest and most pernicious lies floating around infecting culture today. And it’s a particularly good lie since it contains more than a grain of truth. Marriage begins in love and that’s a good thing. Children should be conceived, welcomed, and reared in love. Lack of love indicates a failing family and children cared for out of duty rather than love don’t thrive. The loving sacrificing for a spouse’s biological children should be applauded, not condemned.

But consider the cultural and legal outcomes of “Love, not biology makes a family.” [You mean, there’s a down side to this simplistic slogan?]

Take opening marriage up to same-sex couples. Who cares about biology (though they must be called “reproductive organs” for some reason) as long as two people love each other? In fact, “Love makes a family” is a focus-group-tested vote-getter for gay marriage. [Could the priest in question not be aware of this?  That seems dubious, at best.]

“Every child a wanted child,” has been a rallying cry among the pro-abortion crowd for years. If love, not biology makes a family and an unborn child is not loved or wanted, while that child may be biologically connected, but is by definition not part of the family. Thus the unwanted child becomes a dead child.

If love, not biology makes a family, when one spouse decides he or she is no longer in love, he or she is entitled to tear apart the marriage and family. No-fault divorce laws across the country allow the no-longer-in-love spouse to end the marriage even against the other spouse’s objections. The couple may have promised, “as long as we both shall live,” but we know that means, “as long as we both shall love.” [A searing indictment, but one well earned, I must say.  There are some limited situations where divorce is the best alternative, such as real physical abuse or severe neglect.  But the vast majority of divorces have nothing to do with that, they have to do with far more self-serving reasons.  No one wins in these kinds of divorces, not the divorcee, and certainly not the children, who are traumatized and deeply wounded in the vast majority of cases.  Children are the silent sufferers of our permissive divorce culture, but hardly anyone cares.]

Finally if love, not biology makes a family, no one can object to polygamy (one man with multiple wives), polyandry (one woman with multiple husbands), or polyamory (multiple “spouses”—male, female, or any combination). Logically, if love, not biology makes a family, anything goes as long as the people involved love each other. (Demands for polyamorist rights are on the way. Expect them.)

————End Quote————–

Which leads to my next link, a new bit of idiocy AND prevarication from Time Magazine, one of the vanguards of the cultural left, advocating for that polyandry described above, as being in the economic best interests of women:

“It Makes Economic Sense for a Woman to Have More Than One Husband,” the headline clearly states. They say that by having many men it provides more incomes and “combats child poverty.”

Oh, yes, certainly, the experience of black women in particular has shown just how eager men are to support the children they conceive out of wedlock, especially if that woman has multiple partners and is never entirely sure, short of a DNA test, just who the fathers of her children are.  Why, men are just lined up around the block in their eagerness to economically support these children!

What a crock.  What this is about is encouraging even more promiscuity in young women, encouraging more incorrigibly decadent behavior in men, and leaving ever growing numbers of children in the dire straights of being raised by single mothers.  A very high percentage of these single mothers currently rely on the state as their “replacement man,” or primary source of income, so what Time is really advocating for is raising up more and more children totally dependent on the state for their, ahem, welfare.  More demonrat/statist voters assured!  Can anyone really be so blindly ideological, so callously indifferent to the true welfare of children (and women), and so utterly blind to the historical data regarding the extremely bad statistical outcomes of children of single mothers, as to advocate for this?  Apparently so.  This kind of lunacy is the fruit of the rejection of God as Source and Summit of all Truth.

In reading Dr. Warren Carroll’s final volume on the history of Christendom dealing with the 19th and 20th centuries, Dr. Carroll views the 20th century as a time when satan was allowed to run absolutely rampant.  He held out pious hope that the magical “new springtime” of Vatican II and the example of John Paul II “the great” would make the 21st century a period of wonderful Catholic renewal. I have to say, I think Dr. Carroll was engaging in some pious wishful thinking here, from all signs and portents, the coming century is going to make the 20th century look like a walk in the park for Christians.  I think we are entering the darkest times since the Church began, and I am becoming increasingly convinced we are in the early stages of the great apostasy.

Be strong and pray.

Solemn Pontifical High Mass with Bishop Slattery in Okleyhomey Feb. 2 January 21, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, episcopate, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Latin Mass, Liturgy, Novenas, sanctity, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
comments closed

I actually really like eastern Oklahoma. It’s beautiful up there.  So I shouldn’t tease.

The far above average, in our present circumstances, Bishop Edward Slattery (amazingly, Bishop Slattery is actually available to the public, I have spoken to him) is offering a Solemn Pontifical Mass in Prague Oklahoma at the National Shrine of the Infant Jesus of Prague on February 2.  Prague, OK is about 40 miles east of OKC off of I-40, so it is reasonably accessible to local readers.  Mass begins at 10 am.

More info below:

On the Feast of the Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary, The Most Rev Edward J Slattery will be celebrating a pontifical Solemn Mass, with the blessing of candles beforehand, at the National Shrine of the Infant of Prague in Prague, OK. This will be one of the first solemn pontifical Masses celebrated at the Shrine in more than 50 years, and this year, the shrine celebrates 65 years of existence. The Mass will be on February 2nd.
It may also be noted that Bishop Slattery is a great supporter of both the Extraordinary Form, as well as the reform of the reform, as it relates to the Ordinary Form. He now celebrates his Ordinary Form Masses ad orientem in his Cathedral, and also celebrates the Extraordinary Form there as well (he celebrated a pontifical Mass there as recently as October of this year!).
Additionally, it is a day of indulgence at the shrine for those who attend and fulfill the normal requirements.

It is also likely that the Mass will be broadcast on EWTN. More details will be provided here as we receive them.

Update: The rector has just informed me that they will indeed carry it on EWTN. They are just unsure whether it will be taped or live. Also, he has some additional information about the shrine where this Mass will be celebrated:

This National Shrine was established in 1949, at the end of WWII, when the local pastor needed to build a new church and entrusted his need to the Infant of Prague; the local bishop, being prophetic, and knowing that communism had swept across Europe and thus blocking pilgrims from going to Prague Czechoslovokia, told the pastor to write to Rome to request permission for pilgrims to make their way to a town of the same name, so as to accomplish the devotions to the Holy Infant here in the states. In a town of 2300 people, and a parish of less than 100 families, the Shrine now has over 8000 members from all 50 states and 15 foreign countries, and has an annual attendance of over 75,000 people. Devotees from everywhere come to honor the Infant King and to seek His blessings and special favors, knowing, “the more you honor me, the more I will bless you,” (the lesson learned in the 16th century when the Carmelites of Prague received the original image from the Crown Princess who married the Grand Duke of Bohemia and gave the then 600 year old statue to the Order).

This year, the 65th anniversary will see several celebrations marking it. The Carmelite Generalate, who in August 1949 established the Shrine, gave the Shrine 29 days of Indulgence, including the Feast of the Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Most shrines, cathedrals and basilicas are given just one or two. The National Shrine of the Infant of Prague is so blessed and richly enhanced with so many days of indulgence. Many pilgrims come seeking the Lord’s blessings and hearings. The church, the grounds and the bookstore welcome pilgrims from all over the world. Situated on the boundaries between the Archdiocese of Oklahoma City and the Diocese of Tulsa, it is one of the best kept secrets in the midwest.

The image of Our Lady of Mt. Carmel, the most important image of Our Lady for the Carmelite community will be crowned by Bishop Slattery at the end of the Mass. She is a gift to the Shrine from Shrine members in the Dallas/Ft. Worth area. Our Lady of Mt. Carmel is the only image from when Our Blessed Mother appeared on earth, holding Her beloved Son, and the only time she ever spoke English (as an approved apparition), when she spoke to St. Simon Stock on Mt. Carmel.