jump to navigation

Fr. Peter Carota on how Vatican II led to Roe v. Wade January 23, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Abortion, Basics, disaster, error, family, foolishness, General Catholic, sadness, scandals, sexual depravity, sickness, Society.
comments closed

Abortion seems the theme this week, and rightly so.  Yesterday this nation – at least, those with souls less than dead – mourned the diabolical decision of a small junta of men to make the murder of babies in a mother’s womb legal.  But this decision did not come about as if by accident, nor did it happen in a vacuum.  There was extensive groundwork laid for the legalized murder of babies. 

Fr. Peter Carota, a priest in good standing in the Archdiocese of Phoenix, examines that groundwork, and states the obvious: Vatican II played a substantial role, at least as far as Catholics are concerned, in the debacle that is known as Roe v. Wade (as usual I add emphasis and comments):

In the last 40 years world wide there have been 1.72 Billion Pre Born babies murdered.  In China there have been 336 million.  196 million sterilizations and 403 million IUDs inserted. Here in the United States there have been 55 million lives lost….

…..All these “vulnerable” babies have been murdered because of not wanting the greatest gift  God could ever give us, a child.  It is like this: I want to bless you with 1 million dollars, well, maybe 2 million, or maybe 3 million or I will really bless you with 20 million dollars.  Who would say, no I would rather have just 2 or at the most 3 million.  They would have to be crazy.

But when it comes to the greatest gift ever, children, we say, please, no more blessings, in fact they are “no longer blessings” after I have my boy and girl.

It all started in the Catholic Church when the Pope Paul VI formed a commission study the good and bad of birth control.   My parents very good friends, Pat and Patty Crowley, were on that committee.  Just bringing up the idea of questioning if birth control is good or bad by a pope, opened up the door to questioning all Catholic doctrine.  How could a pope even ask a committee to study the change of christian doctrine? [Indeed, merely asking the question of whether an extremely well established Dogma like the evil of contraception could be somehow changed sends the message that the Truth is up for debate.  And that immediately creates in people’s minds the impression that the Truth – all Truth – is suddenly passe’, obsolete, or at least debatable. And entire generation of Catholics had their formation essentially ruined by the prospect that a constant belief of the Faith – one that affected people’s lives most intimately – might change.  Millions affected by this potential shift never recovered from that.]  This is the work of modernism. [Dang right. It’s good to say it.] We have evolved to now see that what was wrong before is now good for families and society.

When Pope Paul VI later decided against birth control, bishops, priests, religious, theologians, teachers and Catholics went wild. [Boy did they.  And many still are running wild, like it’s still 1968. Grow up!] They then went on to protest the pope’s encyclical “Humanae Vitae”.  So the mere questioning about established Catholic doctrine and morals, automatically calls into question the validity of Catholic doctrine and moral that were always held before.

But this “climate of questioning everything Catholic” had already been fomented by the way Vatican II was run.  Everything seemed to be up for grabs.  We were now “the new educated generation of Catholics” who could now clearly throw away medieval doctrine and come up with “modern” christianity that would be “relevant” to “modern man”.  And we see this in the wording of some of the councils documents.   They used words that changed the meaning of what the Church had always taught before, like on ecumenism, collegiality, and freedom of religion. [I wholeheartedly agree. It is, seemingly, impossible, without doing intellectual backflips, to reconcile portions of Vatican II with the previous dogmatic statements of the Magisterium.  Pope Benedict XVI described Vatican II as an “anti-syllabus,” referring to the dogmatic declarations of error made by Blessed Pius IX in 1864. The Council constantly billed itself – and was so described by the two popes who oversaw it – as non-dogmatic, non-defintional, strictly “pastoral.”  That is the only way some of the more problematic documents passed – bishops were assured nothing would really change, because no Dogma was being defined.  But as Fr. Ray Blake has pointed out, since the Council did not make any formal definitions of belief or error, the entire thing has come to be promoted as Dogmatic by its partisans.  But there are others who say no, the Council is only dogmatic where it re-states the previous Magisterium.  And I am referring to Cardinals, princes of the Church, holding these disparate opinions!  How are the lay people to understand Vatican II when even Cardinals disagree fundamentally on what it means!]

Many, many bishops, priests, religious and theologians began publicly and privately to dissented from the Church’s prohibition of the use of birth control.   I have read over and over their statements of dissent.  Most of you are too young to have lived through these times. [See the notorious “Winnipeg Statement,” still never formally renounced by the Canadian bishop’s conference. There are hundreds more examples.]

This is of utmost importance, because it set the foundation for the murdering of pre born babies.  As the Catholic couple starts being the one who chooses how many, if any, children to have, in stead of God, they open the door to not wanting children after the number they have arbitrarily decided on.  Once this mentality has set in, children become a commodity that can be chosen or rejected and disposed of, depending on the parents whims.

Now when you already have “the children you have decided is good for you”, additional children are unwanted and seen as a burden rather than a blessing.  So you use birth control to determine how many children you will have.  And this separates (divorces) [good term. There is no question in my mind that the explosion in divorce in the late 60s and early 70s was a by-product of separating sex from reproduction, which began to eat away at the fabric of millions of marriages.] biology from sex, or children coming from the reproductive organs.  After the 2-3 children have been born, sex becomes only for pleasure.

Before we knew it, sex has almost become totally separated from procreation.  It has become only for sexual pleasure, as is now seen in the prevalent perspective today in society. [and that is why people now seek to redefine marriage to include abominations that would have been unthinkable a few decades ago.]

So when sex was divorced from producing children by birth control, a pregnancy accidentally occurs, a terrible crisis comes about.  You were doing everything “correct” in your “safe sex” and now a terrible thing has happened. [and all forms of contraception have failure rates, which over a lifetime of use equal unity.  That has been shown already – so “unexpected” pregnancies are virtually guaranteed even with correct contraceptive use over a period of 10 or 20 years, and frequently far less. And most people do not use their contraception reliably, dramatically increasing the failure rate.]  This is when abortion becomes an option.  And this is what has actual happened, and more and more every day……

……So when we start with separating sex from its natural effect of producing children, it becomes predominately a source of pleasure.  Then when the natural effect happens, it is seen as a problem and has to be “resolved” by killing the child.  The child is an inconvenience for the couple having sex for sexual gratification. [what a sick state of affairs this is.]

So the beginning of all the 1.72 billion babies murdered in the wombs of their mothers started with birth control.  The “contraceptive mentality” leads to the murder of unwanted babies. [And this is a major division in the pro-life movement.  The vast majority of protestants, and even most Catholics, in the pro-life movement are pro-contraception, or they want to keep silent about it, because it is feared that to start to tell the masses that their contraceptive use is immoral will get the pro-life movement labeled as crazy and extreme. And they are unfortunately probably correct about this, but 40 years ago it was “crazy” to call a life in the womb a child, and to protest its killing. Now, after 40 years of effort, it is not a dominant opinion, but it is generally respected and treated as a serious point of view.  We must start laying similar groundwork with respect to contraception – we’ll never be rid of abortion as a national nightmare as long as people contracept in large numbers.]

All this bares repeating and studying, because we can help people realize that God was right after all when He taught through His Catholic Church, that sex is sacred and to be between a man and a woman in marriage to receive the greatest gift God can give this side of heaven, a child…..

…..And this is why we are traditional Catholics.  Because we know that trying to change Catholic doctrine to fit “modern man” only leads to death and doom. [And thus, the fallacies underlying mentality so much of what the most recent Council declared are exposed.] God is love and His rules are only for the our good. [Great closing.]

You could kind of look at this post as a corollary to the one below: how did Catholic formation and catechesis get so screwed up?  Well, the process of events explored above gives at least a big part of the answer – humanly speaking.  As for the rest, we won’t know definitively until we shuffle off this mortal coil. 

Flightline Friday Thursday edition (esp. for Blaine) January 23, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, awesomeness, Basics, Flightline Friday, fun, General Catholic, silliness, Society.
comments closed

I stumbled across a really cool hi-def video of a live fire exercise out of USMC Yuma featuring a ride along on a UH-1Y “Venom,” the latest and possibly final version of the incredibly venerable, but still useful, UH-1 Iroquois, known universally as the Huey.

You can also see some incidental footage of Whiskey and Zulu Cobras as a bonus.

The UH-1Y is the Marine’s latest version of the UH-1 for light transport and attack roles.  It features two 1800 hp T700 engines, each twice as powerful as the Vietnam-era UH-1B’s single T53 engine.

The UH-1Y is being used to replace the Vietnam-era (early 70s) UH-1Ns which are really about ready to fall out of the sky.

Some real nice footage of the flight deck below.  A fully modernized and up to date instrument panel, featuring large flat panel displays.  Cool stuff.

Th weapons being fired are 7 round 2.75 inch rocket launchers  and a Ma Deuce M2 .50 cal machine gun on the port side, and an M134 7.62 mm minigun on the starboard side.

The clunky looking helmets the pilots are wearing are helmet mounted displays for improved targeting, navigation, etc.

A photo of a similarly equipped UH-1Y but with 19 round rocket launchers:

UH-1Y_HMLAT-303_Camp_Pendleton_2008

Detail of helmet mounted site.

800px-AH-1Z_pilots_with_helmet_mounted_displays

Now maybe I should do a post on the MH-60R?

How have we gotten to this point? January 23, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Our Lady, sadness, Saints, sanctity, scandals, secularism, self-serving.
comments closed

Creative Minority Report had a little blurb from a news article about a woman who wants to become a priestette.  First, the blurb, then the woman’s background, then my bewailing this diabolical state of affairs:

She regularly attends Episcopal services in Capitola, but still considers herself a devout Catholic.

Only with respect to the Catholic Church is someone allowed to say something as asinine as this, and taken seriously.  If you read that someone attended a mosque with a radical, fire-breathing imam, but that they considered themselves a pacifist buddhist, you’d dismiss them out of hand.  And yet, these people are taken seriously.

Her background:

Fahrenbach, 58, was raised outside Chicago in a staunchly Catholic family, attended parochial schools and studied theology at the University of Notre Dame in Indiana.

She also holds a master’s degree in divinity from the Jesuit School of Theology in Berkeley.

Following her faith, Fahrenbach taught religion classes at the all-girls Mercy High School in San Francisco in the 1980s.

So here’s a few questions I have. How has catechesis, the dissemination of the Faith, gotten so deranged that a woman so highly educated could come to believe both theological impossibilities like womyn’s fauxrdination and “attends an episcopal church but considers herself a devout Catholic?”  When exactly did this woman get led out of the Faith?  She’s 58, born in 55, then, and probably was exposed to radical heresy starting in high school.  The Catholic religious orders running schools, especially high schools, were some of the first to embrace the radical left wing revolution in the Church.  100 years ago, or even 70, we could expect someone with her education to have been a pillar of the Church.  Instead, we have to wonder if she was led to this self-serving, whatever-pleases-me understanding of the Faith in her Catholic high school, at Notre Dame, or at Berkeley.

She had no chance.  Given the places she matriculated, even a great Saint would have been hard pressed not to fall into error or vice.  All three of those institutions – Catholic high school, Notre Dame, and Jesuit Berkeley are among the most perverse purveyors or dissent and heresy in the entire Church.

How can this be?  How can a university named after Our Lady now be best known among faithful Catholics as a font of heresy?  How can the Jesuit Order, the very bulwark of the Church against the protestant revolt and the subsequent errors of rationalism, the enlightenment, and their wicked step-child, the culturo-political left, become most known for being the religious order most infested with heresy, abuse, dissent, and collapse?

Pope Leo XIII prophesied in 1888 that satan would be unleashed on the world and the Church in the coming 20th century.  Our Lady told the children at Fatima – it is widely believed – that the Church would fall into a great heresy, most likely invading the highest levels, starting around 1960.  Our Lady of Quito prophesied the same.  That is the only explanation – satan has been permitted a free hand in response – so all these prophecies say – to the wickedness and unfaithfulness of modern, materialist man.

It is possible to get discouraged when considering how many unfaithful, immoral people are out there, even among those who assist at Mass every Sunday.  How can the few faithful possibly offset this mass of wickedness and aid Our Lady in staying the vengeful hand of God?  Humanly speaking, it is impossible.  But with Grace, everything is possible.  Even a handful of Saints can completely change a culture, turning it away from its self-seeking evil and towards the embrace of the Good God. It has happened before.  It happened 2000 years ago, and it’s occurred in dozens of places, in contexts worse than our own.  All that is necessary is a few Saints.

But who will be those Saints?  They will have to come from the ranks of the faithful.  It could be you.  Or your child.  Or your best friend.  Or spouse.  But we can’t wait and hope others will become Saints.  WE must strive to be those Saints.   That thought terrifies me, because I know how far I am from sanctity.  But I also know that if we love our fellow man, our families and friends and the many we know who have fallen away or refuse the embrace of Holy Mother Church – and if we really love ourselves – we MUST overcome our fears and do our best to be Saints.

In reality, we don’t have much to do. We really cannot make ourselves Saints, only Christ can.  Christ alone can overcome our fears, our sinful natures, our failings – all those things that keep us from sanctity.  But only if cooperate with that Grace that is made available to us.  Will you?  Will I?  I pray so.

Please pray for me!

Pro-life movie to support January 23, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, contraception, Domestic Church, family, General Catholic, Holy suffering, persecution, sadness, scandals, Society.
comments closed

I really don’t know much about this movie.  Other than seeing the trailer, that’s it.  However, a person I know who is really involved in the local pro-life community has seen it and given it a very strong recommendation.  She says the movie is very pro-life and deserving of support.  It opens this Friday in theaters in the area.  You can see a list of the theaters below.

Maybe take your wife out for a date?  Or vice versa?  Husbands like breaks, too.

The list of theaters:

TheatersWhereGimmeShelterIsPlaying

Alot of us complain that there are no good Catholic movies around.  This movie looks maybe a bit rough for the whole family, but adults could see it.  If we don’t support movies with a moral message we can support, no more will be made.  But I cannot recommend this movie unreservedly as I have not seen it, but I think given the endorsement I’ve received it’s a pretty safe bet.

God bless you.