jump to navigation

Ecumaniacs shocked – Cardinal says Trent “still in full force” January 29, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, Ecumenism, episcopate, General Catholic, manhood, sanctity, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
comments closed

As if it’s possible for a binding Council with dogmatic definitions and anathemas to somehow stop being effectual? But there are many in the Church, and world, today would would like to think so. Or maybe pretend so.

Apparently, Cardinal Willem Eijk of Utrecht has stirred up a firestorm by stating what in normal times would be utterly banal, a totally non-newsworthy item: yes, the Council of Trent is “still in full force.”

Violent polemics were triggered in the Netherlands with the words of the Catholic Archbishop of Utrecht, Willem Jacobus Cardinal Eijk. Here, the Cardinal had only reminded what is self-evident. He said in an interview during the Week of Prayer for Christian Unity that the Council of Trent still has full force and effect.   Because this self-evident fact has been very little heard any more in the past few decades, it is supposed to have caused a scandal that has provoked fierce reactions in Protestant as well as Catholic-ecumenical circles.

During the Week of Prayer for Christian Unity Calvinist  Reformatorisch Dagblad  published an interview with Cardinal Eijk, which was taken up by the daily newspaper Trouw on 20 January. Within, the Archbishop of Utrecht said that “the doctrine and the condemnations of the Council of Trent are still in full force.”  The newspaper wrote: “Cardinal Eijk is explicit in this respect: The Council of Trent’s teachings are still perfectly valid. This also applies to convictions which were adopted against those who reject the Council’s teachings. Like the Protestants.

…..Cardinal Eijk stressed in an interview that the Council of Trent was a sign of “the ability of the Roman Catholic Church for self-reform”, thanks to the “guidance of the Holy Spirit.” The Council of Trent, said the Archbishop of Utrecht, put and end to the many abuses which had crept in the late Middle Ages in the Church,  such as simony, an understanding of the pastoral office, which contradicted the biblical understanding.   But it put an end was put to the fundamental  lack of discipline of the clergy and in the monasteries: “When all decrees were implemented [the Council],  order was restored  in the Church,”  said the cardinal. [True.  Now, these abuses were overblown, severely, by protestants seeking to justify their heresies, but there were widespread problems.  This was due almost entirely to the secular power arrogating to itself the right to name bishops and priests for certain locales. This was a battle the Church fought for 1000 years, and it finally took the rending of Christendom for most of the abuse to be overcome.  There were many bad priests back then, too, men of poor moral fabric, but I don’t know if they were as widespread as today]

The Council of Trent also helped to define some “truths of faith” precisely related to the errors of the Reformation. The cardinal affirmed that these provisions continue to have perfect validity “such as transubstantiation and the essence of the Eucharistic Sacrament.” [And the nature of the priesthood, the Holy Sacrifice, ecclesial authority, justification, etc., etc. Trent was one of the great councils in Church history, and a sure sign of the presence of the Holy Spirit at a dogmatic Council.]

Well, good on Cardinal Eijk.

Ecumenism will always tend towards the lowest common denominator.  This is almost inevitable. Non-dogmatic, or weakly dogmatic, churches will impose upon the more dogmatic churches their requirements that the “offending” Dogmas be played down, if not expunged entirely.  You can see that plainly in the excerpts of that “Catholics” movie I posted Monday, where the liberal priest says plainly that constant Catholic Dogmas offended the Church’s “new ecumenical partners.”  So, they had to go. The same goes for strong definitions of Dogma vs. weak definitions in the sects.  The weak definition will be the one agreed to.   I don’t know why the Church, existing for at least 1500 years longer than the sects and with a far more clearly established line of Authority, cannot say to the protestants “look, we’ve always believed this, it’s you johnny come lately’s who deviated from what Christians – Catholic, Orthodox, Coptic, Nestorian, etc – have always believed, so you’re going to go with what the vast majority of Christians, living and dead, have always held true.”

I guess it all comes down to who has the stronger courage of conviction.  Too often, it seems it’s the Church caving, at least in the past 50 years.

I’m glad this Cardinal can make clear that what was Truth once, always is.

Cardinal Maradiaga hails from a “decadent diocese?” January 29, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Papa, persecution, religious, sadness, scandals, shocking, Spiritual Warfare, the return.
comments closed

It beats me……..Honduras is not one of those places that penetrates the cultural consciousness very much, nor do many Central American dioceses tend to have strong reputations in the Church universal.

But that is what top Italian Catholic journalist Antonio Socci claims, in a piece carried by Rorate Caeli.  Socci points to Maradiaga’s many disturbing statements as pointing towards a return to the very dark times of the 70s, when the revolution was in full bloom and the Church suffered immensely.  The Church has not managed to even partly recover from the effects of those terrible years.  At most, under the “conservative” pontificates of JPII and Benedict XVI, the bleeding had been mostly contained, but the wound was still gaping.  But while the faithful experienced great pain in those troubled times, the progressive elements in the Church were in full flower, reveling in their first taste of power.  According to Socci, some want to experience that taste again (emphasis and comments per usual, all mine):

There have been some great popes whose pontificates have been practically discarded by the errors of the clerics in their entourage. This risk is also present for the pontificate of Pope Francis.

In fact, there have been episodes, decisions and “bizarre outbursts” by some prelates that have been quite disturbing. I am thinking of Cardinal Maradiaga and Cardinal Braz de Aviz, who feel they are so powerful in the Vatican that they can ‘use the club’ on both the Prefect of the former Holy Office, Müller, as well as on the ‘Franciscans of the Immaculate.’

The targets of their “club-beatings” (given obviously in the name of mercy) are those who, for different reasons, have been targeted as paladins of Catholic orthodoxy and have had dealings with Pope Benedict XVI.  [Perhaps. They could also be incidental….You can draw your own conclusions based on the arguments Socci makes below]
The real target in fact, appears actually to be him: “guilty” of so many things: from his historical condemnation of Liberation Theology and the defense of correct doctrine, to the Motu Proprio on the liturgy.  [Well, the real target could be Catholic orthodoxy, which Pope Benedict defended pretty well for the most part. In that sense, Pope Benedict would simply be “getting in the way,” if you will, of the real target]
Cardinal Oscar Maradiaga is Archbishop of Tegucigalpa, in Honduras – a decadent diocese. But the prelate, who is running around the stages of the world’s mass-media, [Of that, there is no doubt. I originally thought Maradiaga must have been commissioned by Pope Francis to engage in this worldwide PR blitz – that was Rocco Palmo’s belief, as well – but now I’m not so sure.  He could be free-lancing, but then why no “calling back”?]  recently caused an uproar because of the interview he gave to a German newspaper, where – along with new-age rubbish and third-world banalities – he publically attacked the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Archbishop Müller, to whom the Pope has just given the cardinal’s hat. This is also scandalous seeing that Maradiaga is the head of the commission which should reform the Curia. [Yes it is, and it is exceedingly significant. It was this highly unusual internecine strife that made me start to think maybe Maradiaga is just a wild bull right now, not acting at Francis’ behest but just running wild]

What had happened? Müller, who was called to that office by Benedict XVI and confirmed by Francis, had reaffirmed in recent months that – even though new pastoral ways may be sought (already indicated by Benedict XVI) – the upcoming Synod on the Family, cannot subvert the law of God with “a false call to mercy” with regard to the man-woman family, which was established by Jesus in the Gospel and which has always been taught by the Church.

Müller, who had already been personally attacked by Hans Küng, has [now] been liquidated by Maradiaga with these words: “he is German and also a German professor of theology. There is only true and false in his mentality. That’s all. But I say: my brother, the world is not like this, you should be a little more flexible.” Words that have scandalized many of the faithful. Above all, because the allusion to “the German professor of theology” inevitably brings to mind that perhaps the target is Benedict XVI, who called Müller to that office. Also because a public attack between cardinals is completely out of order, as if Muller was there to sustain his own personal theology and not the constant teaching of the Church and all of the popes. [It’s a fair point – by lambasting supposedly rigid German theology (again – are you kidding?  Luther, Malencthon, Rahner, etc), that could be taken as a shot at Pope Benedict.  Convincing?]
In the end, according to Maradiaga, it would be wrong to examine reality in terms of true and false – he forgets that Jesus Christ in the Gospel gave this precise commandment: “But let your speech be yea, yea: no, no: and that which is over and above these, is from evil.” (Mt. 5,37).
Does Maradiaga prefer “that which is over and above these” to the proclamation of the Truth? On the themes regarding the family, where [now] we have an ideological attack similar to the Marxist one of the Seventies, various ecclesiastics are ready – as they were then – to cave in shamefully. [And the idea that there can be “pastoral solutions” that somehow preserve doctrine – in theory – while allowing for its complete abandonment in practice are nothing but sophisms aimed at plausible deniability, a shameful tactic for a prelate of Holy Mother Church.]
And they do it with Maradiaga’s sophisms, which state that, yes, Jesus’ words on marriage are binding, “but they can be interpreted” as today there are many new situations of cohabitation and “answers which can no longer be based on authoritarianism and moralism” are needed.  [Cardinal Maradiaga obviously has forgotten his Ecclesiastes……”there is nothing new under the sun.” To pretend there are any new moral situations today that just haven’t been thought through enough by the Church is ludicrous, and simply a pandering attempt to undermine or even reject Doctrine.  And a lot of this garbage thought is rooted in personalism.]
This sentence alone liquidates the entire Magisterium of the Church: evidently according to Maradiaga even Jesus was authoritarian and moralistic since He expressed Himself with great clarity.
But what does “more pastoral care than doctrine” mean? Every great pastor, from St. Ambrose to St. Charles [Borromeo], from Don Bosco to Padre Pio, have been paladins of doctrine.
Maradiaga says that what is needed for the family are “answers suitable for the world of today.” These are empty, elusive words which foster confusion and doubt. And this is the typical way which is spreading in the Church today, to raise questions without providing answers.
Concerning such things, St. Thomas Aquinas had this to say: “Well, these ones are false prophets, or false doctors, inasmuch as, raising a doubt without resolving it is the same as conceding to it.” (Sermon “Attendite a falsis prophetis”). [This is a really effective critique of Maradiaga’s arguments, such as they are. In fact, this analysis is shattering.  In spite of its rhetorical effectiveness, it likely won’t make a whit of difference.]
Today there are those in the Church who prefer the famous questionnaire associated with the Synod (which was sent to all the dioceses of the world and is presented by some as a survey) to the words of Jesus reported in the Gospel – as if revealed Truth should be substituted by the most diverse opinions. [Ouch.  But is he wrong?]

————-End Quote————

There was another part of the article, that dealt with Cardinal Bras de Aziz and the treatment the FFIs have been getting.  I won’t include that because I’ve already stolen enough, and I also got some information yesterday regarding the internal problems of the FFIs that somewhat undermine the “jealous progressives attacking an orthodox order” meme.  I say somewhat, because even if the allegations are true (they may be, but I have seen no other support for them, and unfortunately, I cannot share them), the response has been totally disproportionate to the alleged crime.  What I was told was basically an unfortunate error of excessive zeal, along with perhaps a too great acceptance of certain traditional critiques of the Novus Ordo.  I know some FFIs, and they have never even slightly revealed such beliefs as were related to me.  But, there may be some truth to it, which means there was a problem to be dealt with (which, I think there has been some understanding of that, even on this blog, notorious for its simple-mindedness), but to me it was nothing that required the cruel breaking of an order, the draconian steps taken against it, and its public excoriation as a group absolutely run amok.

Suffice it to say, the “errors” of the FFIs, if they existed, were trivial compared to the rank heresies being promoted – with full approval of ecclesiastical leadership! – at the vast majority of religious orders in the Church today.  Cardinal Bras de Aziz (why, oh why, did Pope Benedict promote him to this office?!?) has seen fit to turn the investigation of the LCWR into a whitewash with absolutely no penalties for even the most far out neo-pagan wicca lesbian saphos worshippers.  Socci notes that religious vocations continue to plummet in Italy, yet the one order that was growing and vibrant gets broken.

Please. All this tells me there were elements lying in wait for an excuse to dismantle this order. And their closeness to Benedict XVI (may God have mercy on him) does perhaps confirm some of Socci’s argument – that what we are witnessing is a progressive reaction against the former papacy, which they made no bones about despising.


I’m going to throw away my new TV January 28, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, sadness, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society.
comments closed

As I said in the comments, we have been without an incoming TV signal since the conversion to HD several years ago. We still watched VHS and DVDs, but we did not have anything else.  I was actually pretty OK with that. But my 24 year old 20″ TV has about flaked out, and my wife got offered a very nice 37″ or so flat screen HDTV for next to nothing, so she brought it home.  I hooked up the rabbit ears, and we had TV for the first time since Benedict was born, or so.

I flipped around, and it seems that it’s 90% Spanish, televangelist, or shopping/infomercials.  There were a couple new channels with actual, you know, content. But I really just got it hooked up and then went on to something else. I did see something like a cartoon channel for the kids, but that may be a curse.

The only thing I had really missed on TV was college football.  I did think it might be fun to see the Olympics/Russian security crackdowns.  Seriously, I doubt we watch it much – it’s in our bedroom for now, for one thing – but it might be nice to watch some of the less problematic shows and events from time to time.  That is, if we can mute/shut off the commercials……

But when readers started mentioning this, I began to think maybe Fr. Wolfe is right, and the best thing to do with a TV is to use it as target practice (warning, you may not want to watch the first video, it contains acts of immorality):

Oh, so they got some poor souls to make spectacles of themselves with this sad charade.  That’s about as far from a Sacrament as you can get.  It is amazing what people will do for even 1 1/2 seconds of a national TV camera pointing at their back.  Marriage, more and more, seems to be about the party, and little else.

All the awards shows are nothing but pointless exercises in self-congratulation.  All are heavily compromised by rigged voting and constant kowtowing to the cultural lowest common denominator – even still, the Grammy’s have always been seen as the worst, the most egregious of this kind of self-serving tripe, as the Simpson’s made plain years ago, before that show jumped the shark:

Nevertheless, it’s pretty sad that a mainstream, if yute oriented, program like this can stand so stridently in favor of a highly divisive social issue.  It means the forces of darkness have really carried the day with the next generation.  More and more, I see an increasingly perverse, unChristian or even anti-Christian culture rising, with a small remnant of faithful Catholics and othodox believers from the sects and other churches growing more and more isolated.  I was reading in that poor book The Decline and Fall of the Catholic Church in the USA about how the old ghetto was supposedly so bad. At this point, the ghetto seems like a happy, far off dream – can you imagine if we could actually carve out little Catholic communities for ourselves?!?  Wouldn’t that be so much better than what so many of us face now, living awash in a hostile culture with almost no  support?

Anyway, I’m going home and shooting the TV.

A wonderful sermon from St. John Chrysostom for our times January 28, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, Christendom, episcopate, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Holy suffering, Liturgical Year, persecution, Saints, Tradition, Virtue.
comments closed

We live in extremely troubled times. The faithful have not had to suffer such great disorientation in centuries.  Not only do we have to contend with massive heresy run rampant in the Church, we also have to contend with an increasingly hostile pagan culture.  We may soon face the worst of both worlds – a Church rocked by error and division facing a hateful world.

But the Church shall survive. Until Christ comes again, His beloved Spouse will remain His Body on earth. St. John Chrysostom lived through similarly troubled times – the Arian heresy was still around, and even though many were Christian and the formal persecutions had ended, the state power still tried to subjugate the Church.  That conflict between Church and state eventually cost the great Doctor his life.  As he was leaving for the exile that would be his death, St. John Chrysostom left the many faithful who loved him with these words (from The Liturgical Year, Vol. III, pp. 421-3, Dom Prosper Gueranger):SJOO_C~1

Many are the waves, and threatening are the storms, which surround me; but I fear them not; for I am standing on the Rock. Let the sea roar, it cannot wash me away from the Rock: Let the billows mount as they will; they cannot sink the Barque of Our Lord Jesus Christ. And tell me, what would you have me fear?  Death? To me, to live is Christ, and to die is gain (Phil 1:21).  Exile? The earth is the Lord’s and the fulness thereof (Ps 23:1).  Confiscation of my goods? We brought nothing into this world, and certainly we can carry nothing out (1 Tim 6:7).  No-the evils of this world are contemptible, and its goods deserve but to be laughed at. I fear not poverty, I desire not riches; I neither fear to die, nor wish to live, save for your advantage. Your interest alone induces me to speak of these things, and to ask fo you, by the love you bear me, to take courage.

‘For no one can separate us; no human power can part what God has united. It is said of husband and wife: Wherefore a man shall leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and they shall be two in one flesh (Gen 2:24).  Therefore what God hath joined together, let no man put asunder (Matt 19:6).  Thou canst not, O man, dissolve the nuptial tie: how hopest thou to divide the Church of God? It is She whom thou attackest, because thou canst not reach him whom thou fain wouldst strike. [All hatred of the Church and persecution of the faithful ultimately is misdirected hatred of God]  Thou makest me more glorious, and thou dost but waste thy 748PX-~1strength in warring against me, for it is hard for thee to kick against the sharp goad (Act 9:6).  Thou canst not blunt its point and thou makest thine own foot bleed, just as the billows, when they dash against the rock, fall back mere empty froth.

Believe me, o man, there is no power like the power of the Church. Cease thy battling, lest thou lost they strength; wage not war with Heaven. When it is with man thou warrest, thou mayst win or lose; but when thy fighting is against the Church, it is impossible thou shouldst conquer, for God is above all in strength. Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than He? (1 Cor 10:22) God founded, God gave firmness: who shall be so bold as to attempt to pull down? Knowest thou not His power? He looketh upon the earth, and maketh it tremble  (Ps 103:32).  He gives His order, and that which trembled is made firm again. If He made firm the City after an earthquake had shaken it, how much more could He not give firmness to the Church? [The great Saint is here referring to an earthquake that struck Constantinople after a previous attempt to banish him.  In the wake of the earthquake, the people rose, demanding the Saint’s return, and the Empress Eudoxia, the source of all the trouble, had to welcome him back, ashen-faced]  The Church is stronger than Heaven itself: Heaven and earth shall pass away , but my words shall not pass away (Matt 24:35). What words? Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I shall build My Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it (Matt 16:18).

If thou wilt not believe his word, believe facts. How many tyrants have sought to crush the Church? They had their gridirons and fiery furnaces, and wild beasts, and swords – and all failed. Where are those enemies now? Buried and forgotten.  And the Church? Brighter than the sun. All they had is agios-ioannis-chrysostomosnow past; but her riches are immortal.  If the Christians conquered when they were but few in number, canst thou hope to vanquish them, now that they whole earth is filled with they holy religion? Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass. Wonder not at it; for the Church is dearer unto God than the very heavens.  He took flesh not from Heaven, but from His Church on earth; and Heaven is for the Church, not the Church for Heaven. [!!]

Be not troubled at what has happened. I ask this favour of you – be firm in your faith. Have you not observed that when Peter was walking on the waters, and began to fear, he was in danger of sinking, not because the sea was rough, but because his faith was weak? Have I been raised to this dignity by human intrigue? Was it man that brought me to it, or can man no depose me? I say not this from arrogance or boasting; God forbid! I say it from the desire of calming your trouble.

………[satan] could not vanquish one woman, nor one girlish martyr, and yet thou hopest to vanquish a whole people! Has thou not heart these words of the Lord: Where there are two or three gathered together in my name, there am I in Saint John Chrysostom Relic Translationthe midst of them (Matt 18:20)?  And thinkest thou he will not be in the midst of a numerous people, united together by the ties of charity?

I have his pledge and on that I truest, not on my own strength. I have his written promise. That is my my staff, and my guarantee, and my tranquil port. What matters it to me if the whole world be upset – have I not his written word? Have I not His letters? There is my rampart, and there my defence.  What letters? I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world (Matt 28:20).  Christ is with me – of whom shall I be afraid? Thou stormy billows should rise up against me, though the sea should open to swallow me, though the wrath of kings should be enkindled against me, I will heed them no more than if they were so many spider’s webs. Had not my love for you kept me, I would have started this very day on my exile, for this is my constant prayer: “O Lord, thy will be done!” (Matt 6:10)  I will do thy will; not what such or such an one may will, but what thou willest. This is my tower of strength, this is my firm rock, this is my trusty staff. If God will that I go, I will go. If he will me to remain here, I will give him thanks. yea withersoever he will me to go, I will bless his Holy Name!

———–End Quote———-

Lord, please send us great shepherds like St. John Chrysostom, and many of them!  Please have mercy on us, give us not the shepherds we deserve, but those we need!  Especially as the time of trial approaches!  Give us shepherds willing to speak Your Truth to worldly power!

Domine, miserere nobis!


Dueling pro-life videos January 28, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, Basics, contraception, disaster, Ecumenism, error, General Catholic, horror, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, the enemy.
comments closed

The TFP folks have a nice video from the March for Life, as well as some accompanying data that shows the progress the pro-life movement has made in the past few  years in making abortion more difficult to obtain. It is still very far from where we need to be, and there are still great divisions within the pro-life movement which are often ignored (such as the willingness of most pro-lifers to accept contraceptive use, even though we’ll never be rid of abortion so long as widespread contraceptive use remains).  As a sign of this division – the importance of which has spurred some heated debates – witness the two videos below.  The TFP Student Action guys interview some young pro-lifers at the March for Life who oppose fake same-sex marriage:

Michael Voris, meanwhile, spoke with other marchers who were less convicted:

When I first saw Michael’s video, I had several problems with it.  First of all, not all people at the March for Life are Catholic.  In fact, a large number are not.  I don’t know if it’s clear whether those interviewed self-identified as Catholic.  Non-Catholics have neither the great treasures of Grace nor the entire Truth, so it should not be surprising when they err.  Second, Michael ignores something called expectation bias, which I think was very important in this case.  Expectation bias is a sociological term for what occurs when someone is put on the spot in a certain way (it can be public, as in this case, or private, in terms of a phone poll, say), and they give what they feel is the culturally correct response to a divisive or culturally loaded question.  Young people  in particular today are surrounded by a cohort that is massively immoral and overwhelmingly in favor of pretend rights for those lost in sins of sexual deviancy.  If you watch the girl at roughly 2:20 above, I think she wants to give what she knows is the correct answer – that so-called same-sex marriage is wrong – but she has been culturally conditioned to say that it is OK.  She really seems to struggle with the answer.  Some others struggled to greater or lesser degrees. I think this was a case of expectation bias, as these people did not want to be lambasted as the dreaded “homophobes.”

That’s not to say that there aren’t many young folks seriously screwed up, morally.  In particular, those who have gone to public or private schools and then university have had enormous pressures brought to bear upon them on this specific issue. These pressures range from the beliefs of their peers, indoctrination from teachers, textbooks, professors, counselors, etc., all to perpetuate the dominant sexular-liberal-pagan agenda (even if some of those doing the perpetuating, especially at the lower levels, have themselves been more or less forced to accept this immorality foisted on them by the media and cultural elites, often quite unconsciously).

We also have to keep in mind that the people interviewed are quite y0ung, and the young tend to hold dumb liberal ideas.  Many of these folks will, hopefully, outgrow their juvenile obeisance to the dominant culture.  But then again, perhaps I am being overly hopeful, as there is so much confusion and diabolical disorientation abroad in our culture.

But for now, via TFP, a summation of some of the positive results the pro-life movement has obtained in recent years:

But the Culture of Death is losing ground.   According to a study by Operation Rescue, a record number of 87 abortion clinics have closed down in 2013.  Another telling survey published by the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute has tracked over 200 legislative losses for the abortion industry over the last three years.  In fact, more abortion restrictions were passed by state legislatures in 2011-2013 than in the previous ten years combined.

That is why Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards, speaking of recent legislation restricting abortions in Texas, voiced her concern to The New York Times on January 3: “Any one of the restrictions passed in the last several years would be bad, but taken together, we are witnessing a catastrophe for Texas women,” she said.

Those who make a living by denying unborn children the right to survive beyond their mother’s womb are on the defensive.  Ilyse Hogue, the president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, recently confessed:  “…we play a lot of defense. After all, the fundamental right to choose is enshrined in the Constitution, and our opponents are constantly developing innovative new strategies to chip away at that right. But a permanent defensive posture is a losing strategy. You win some battles, you lose others, but you’re only ever ceding ground.

While pro-lifers literally covered Capitol Hill, dozens of smaller marches were held at regional or state levels.  This type of innovation is what NARAL doesn’t want.  The Walk for Life in San Francisco (of all places) is a good example of the vitality and dynamism of the pro-life movement.  It just keeps growing.  Last year 55,000 attended.  And when this march first started in 2005, the president of Golden Gate Planned Parenthood, Dian Harrison, was a bit stunned:  “We couldn’t believe that they had the nerve to come to San Francisco.”

God bless that nerve.  The more the better.  

Over 80 years ago, men predicted the coming homosexualization of the culture January 28, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Abortion, Basics, contraception, disaster, Ecumenism, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, sadness, scandals, self-serving, sickness, Society.
comments closed

When the Anglican church at the Lambeth Conference of 1930 became the first Christian church or sect to break ranks with the 2000 year belief and practice of the Christian Faith regarding contraception, there was massive scandal in religious circles.  The breech in doctrine was roundly derided even by most other “mainline” liberal protestant sects.  Of course, Pope Pius XI responded with the seminal Casti Connubii, which just absolutely castigated the Anglican position and still is the most comprehensive Magisterial statement on the evils of contraception and the “sex for pleasure” mentality that has ever been released.  All Catholics should read it – the differences between Casti Connubii and Humanae Vitae are stark.

Even still, the breech created by the Lambeth declaration was minuscule compared to the gaping departures from Christian belief embraced by most protestants and Catholics today.  Lambeth allowed married couples only to discern, in concert with a minister, whether they might use contraception due to some ostensibly serious reason for what was intended to be a limited period of time (the precise same reasoning used to justify Natural Family Planning).  But a breech once made in a matter of Dogma soon turns into a chasm.  Even though many protestant sects originally protested the Lambeth decision, some vehemently, it wasn’t even 5 years before many began to issue their own, similar statements.  Within 20 years, permission for use of contraception had become pretty much blanket within the sects.  Within 30 years, you had major theologians in numerous protestant sects claiming that not only was contraception acceptable, it was a positive good, and such a good that ALL responsible people were obligated to use it.  And at the same time, you had protestant theologians also embracing the “good” of abortion in that same timeframe.

That is to say, the slippery slope fallacy is one that often proves true in a religious context.  What is interesting to me is that some orthodox faithful, inside and outside the Church, predicted this rapid demise of Christian moral doctrine as soon as the Lambeth declaration was made.  And even more, they foresaw that separating the possibility of procreation from the marital act would even lead to a societal acceptance of sodomy and sodomites.  There were even Anglican bishops who saw this connection, such as a Bishop Gore.  Even the Washington Post, in an editorial printed on March 22 1931 (taken from p. 471 of The Crisis of Christendom) observed that this seemingly small rejection of Dogma would lead to massive repercussions:

The departures from Christian teachings are astounding in many cases, leaving the beholder aghast at the willingness of some churches to discard the ancient injunction to teach “Christ and Him crucified.”…..Carried to its logical conclusion, the committee’s report……….would sound the deathknell of marriage as a holy institution by establishing degrading practices which would encourage indiscriminate immorality.  The suggestion that the use of legalized contraceptives would be “careful and restrained” is preposterous.

Is that not precisely what has occurred?  Over 80 years ago, men saw precisely what would happen if the marital act were separated from the possibility of procreation, as God has ordained.  They saw it would inevitably lead to the destruction of marriage and even societal acceptance of what had always been considered an absolute abomination – acts of sodomy and the female equivalent.  I pointed out last week that Churchill spoke as if societal acceptance of sodomy would be the very worst event imaginable.  That was mainstream thinking 80-100 years ago.

I imagine people from that time would be surprised at how accurate their predictions were – in fact, even these dire forecasts were rather happy visions compared to the reality we are faced with today.  Not only is the family all but destroyed, not only is marriage reduced to an economic arrangement of convenience, not only are about as many kids born bastards (remember when that was a great scandal?) as are born in marriage, but now we have gone even further, to pretending two sodomites can marry each other, or a person and a dog, or that even children can serve as fodder for an adults sexual gratification. Animal lust, pretend-marriage between groups of near-strangers who happen to exchange bodily fluids……mark my words, all those things are coming.  There will come a time when parents will have to guard their children almost like prisoners, to keep them from the predations of sickos whom the law will no longer see as deviant or criminal.  Who knows what further evil is possible…..when society rejects God, the depth of the evil is endless.

Where is the bottom? Where will it all end?  I’m afraid men will have to suffer mightily before they will return to God.  The sins are so great, people are so comfortable in their wickedness, the merciful chastisement  to shake them from their stupor will be awesome. That is, if our Blessed Lord doesn’t return, first.

The funny thing is, all these liberal sects thought being permissive would reverse the decline in their membership, but the opposite has proven true.  In fact, history has shown over and over again that the more permissive and liberal a church becomes, the more irrelevant it becomes and the more its membership collapses.

I personally pray this is a lesson our dear Holy Mother Church learns very well.

Corporatist woman hates on marriage, children January 28, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society.
comments closed

We live in diabolical times. We live in times when a woman will say blatantly outrageous things – very likely, even disingenuous things – in order to get a few hits for her sad writing gig.  Well, guess what, if I suspect you’re just link-whoring, you get no link.  But I will copy your post as an exhibit of all that is wrong with our culture today.

Is there anything more perverse than a woman who mocks motherhood and openly despises children?  I’m not talking about a woman who has had some heartbreak, or who just never found the right person, and has led a single life of necessity.  I’m talking about the materialist, militantly feminist type who (almost certainly as a psychological defense mechanism) not only scorns motherhood for herself, but rips women who so lower themselves as to have kids and stay at home to raise them – also known as, God’s intended design for woman.  But as this culture careens ever further out of control, as it drifts farther and farther from God, the lies, the hatred, and the foolishness just get deeper and deeper.  To wit:

Do people really think that a stay at home mom is really on equal footing with a woman who works and takes care of herself? There’s no way those two things are the same. It’s hard for me to believe it’s not just verbally placating these people so they don’t get in trouble with the mommy bloggers. [Takes care of herself?  And her husband, children (if she’s Catholic, possibly a good number of children), and perhaps even teaches.  Only a blind fool would claim that being a mom is not hard work.  I suspect this woman is so terrified of the prospect she has to denigrate it to protect her fragile psyche.]

Having kids and getting married are considered life milestones. We have baby showers and wedding parties as if it’s a huge accomplishment and cause for celebration to be able to get knocked up or find someone to walk down the aisle with. These aren’t accomplishments, they are actually super easy tasks, literally anyone can do them.  [Apparently you can’t, darling]  They are the most common thing, ever, in the history of the world. They are, by definition, average. And here’s the thing, why on earth are we settling for average?  [Being a good mother is anything but “average.”  As is successfully remaining married over a lifetime.  These events are marked because they are exceedingly significant, they literally redefine one’s life, as all sane people have recognized for centuries.]

I want to have a shower for a woman when she backpacks on her own through Asia, gets a promotion, or lands a dream job [LOL!  These are the exceedingly average things!  Just about anyone can backpack, virtually ANYONE can get a promotion, or a “dream” job.  What a joke.  This woman is going to have one miserable old age.  This is the kind of woman who yells at my very well behaving kids for not making noise at the bookstore.]  not when she stays inside the box and does the house and kids thing which is the path of least resistance.  [Staying home and raising kids is anything but the culturally expected thing to do these days…..as you so trenchantly reveal.  Who on earth thinks raising children to be good people is not one of the greatest accomplishments possible?  Methinks this woman had a traumatic childhood.]

You will never have the time, energy, freedom or mobility to be exceptional if you have a husband and kids.  [And…..I think we see through the veneer now.  me, Me, ME!!  It’s all about ME!  I would say that being a good, virtuous mother and wife is an infinitely greater calling than being a mere corporate career climber.  Please.  I am tempted to say things about this woman’s appearance (I’ve seen pics) and sexuality, but I’ll demure]

I hear women talk about how “hard” it is to raise kids and manage a household all the time. I never hear men talk about this.  [Uh, dip$&!#, that’s because few men stay home to raise kids, but those that do, they complain]  It’s because women secretly like to talk about how hard managing a household is so they don’t have to explain their lack of real accomplishments.  [“Real accomplishments.”  It’s idiocy like this that has me mostly convinced this is just a woman desperately trolling for hits and the income they generate. There is no reason to be so stupidly off base or insultingly provocative.  But she has doubled and tripled down in follow-up posts, so maybe she’s genuine. In that case, let me introduce you to my stay-at-home wife/environmental engineer with a PE license in multiple states.  What a maroon.]  Men don’t care to “manage a household.” They aren’t conditioned to think stupid things like that are “important.”

Women will be equal with men when we stop demanding that it be considered equally important to do housework and real work.  Doing laundry will never be as important as being a doctor or an engineer or building a business. [Do you notice how she completely leaves out what stay at home moms really do all day – i.e., the caring and rearing of children?  This woman has a warped definition of what moms do, at least the good moms I have in mind.]

Sheesh.  Incredible. An entirely materialist conception of the world. Marx would be proud, even if this woman is a raving capitalist.

Two weeks after this woman dies, her life will be as if it never existed.

Head of G-8 cardinals tells CDF head to get with the real world, aka Cardinal Maradiaga is at it again January 27, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, disconcerting, episcopate, foolishness, General Catholic, Papa, Sacraments, sadness, scandals, secularism, the return.
comments closed

I guess I missed this last week. Perhaps this is old news to you, but it’s new to me, so I’m going to afflict you with it.

Cardinal Red-riguez Maradiaga is the head of Pope Francis’ hand-picked group of 8 advisory or “super-” cardinals. He has made some rather amazing statements in the past.  This past week, in an interview with a German newspaper, Cardinal Maradiaga chided cardinal-designate Muller, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, for his hidebound and inflexible attitude towards divorce and re-marriage.  Via ProtectthePope:

‘Cardinal Oscar Rodriguez Maradiaga, the head of a “kitchen cabinet” the pope created to draw up reform proposals, said that Archbishop Gerhard Mueller (sic) – who has opposed any loosening of Church rules on divorce – was a classic German theology professor who thought too much in rigid black-and-white terms. [Classic, eh?  Like Martin Luther, Cardinal Alfrink, Karl Rahner, von Baltasar, Schillebeeckx, Heidigger, et. al?]

“The world isn’t like that, my brother,” Rodriguez said in a German newspaper interview, rhetorically addressing Mueller (sic) in a rare public criticism among senior Church figures. ”You should be a bit flexible when you hear other voices, so you don’t just listen and say, ‘here is the wall’,” Rodriguez said in an interview with the daily Koelner Stadt-Anzeiger……. [It is difficult not to see this comment from Cardinal Maradiaga as openly supporting the extremely problematic, if not heretical and schismatic, actions of the German bishops conference, who have opened the Blessed Sacrament to divorced and remarried Catholics (with no annulment), in spite of directives from Rome not to do so.  The German bishops hope to solve their financial problems by wooing more Catholics to sign up for the state tax used to support the Church through this act.  In a sign of their immense compassion, German Catholics who fail to pay the state tax have been declared automatically excommunicated by the same conference].

…….‘In perhaps the most surprising part of the interview, Cardinal Rodriguez voiced a public disagreement with another leading prelate when he made clear his disagreement with Archbishop Gerhard Müller, the prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, regarding proposals to allow divorced and remarried Catholics to receive Communion. Last October, in a strongly worded article published in the official Vatican newspaperL’Osservatore Romano, Archbishop Müller cautioned German bishops against assuming a change in the Church’s policy, emphasizing the constant teaching that a marital bond is permanent an inviolable. [I believe it is. In fact, if this belief isn’t inviolable, which isn’t?]

Cardinal Rodriquez did not disagree with the Church’s teaching. “The Church is bound by God’s commandments,” he told the German newspaper. “What God has joined together, man must not divide. That is clear.” However, he said, “there are many approaches to interpret it.” Some couples may not truly be married in the eyes of God, he said, and the Church might reconsider the requirements of a binding Christian commitment. He suggested that Archbishop Müller should be open to discussion of the problem, because “maybe you’re right, but maybe you’re wrong.” Oddly enough, Cardinal Rodriguez admitted that he had not spoken directly with Archbishop Müller, the Vatican’s chief doctrinal spokesman, about the question.’ [he also apparently did not read Muller’s own declaration on the subject from last October, wherein he plainly alluded to the fact that some marriages may be invalid from the start.  This is the “American” solution to divorce, declaring essentially any marriage that ends in divorce invalid.  A very clever solution, but it has not failed to gravely weaken the Catholic conception of marriage.]

It’s a bit condescending, isn’t it, one cardinal reminding another how the real world ostensibly works?  But if we’re talking isolation from daily events, one would be hard put to find individuals more isolated from the ebb and flow of the lives of the vast majority of the laity than cardinals. This isn’t about pastoral approaches. This is about hard ideology, and the progressives are determined to finish the work they began 50 years ago – in my opinion.

When it comes to defending core Catholic doctrines, even Dogmas, like the indissolubility of marriage, the evil of adultery, the sanctity of human life and the destruction wrought by contraception, can one be too “black and white?”  Do we instead need to revel in the 50 shades of grey?  Who stands and defends the Truth Christ reveals through His Church?

The Catholic Church, and, for it’s first 1500 years, the Christian religion, were always and foremost dogmatic religions. The Catholic Faith proposes a set of beliefs to souls, beliefs revealed by Christ and confirmed by constant miracles from the Wedding at Cana until today.  One can either accept those beliefs fully, intellectually, and practice them to the best of one’s ability, or one can reject them.  One places one within the Body of Christ, the other excludes one from it.  That has always – until the last 50-100 years – been the kind of basic understanding EVERY even semi-educated Catholic shared.  And yet today, it is openly questioned even by princes of the Church.

Isn’t this surreal in light of that movie I shared earlier?  Do you know that later in that movie, the unfaithful liberal “priest” played by Martin Sheen chastises the abbot of the traditional monastery for having auricular confession!  Because a priest playing Christ and absolving people, personally, from their sins, is a grave offense to the great ecumenical Church that the Catholic Faith, in that movie, belongs!  That is to say, there is NO limit to what the worldly and progressive are willing to undo, unteach, and reduce.

Was the selection of Cardinal Maradiaga to head the Group of 8 just a horrible mistake, or is it horrifying significant? I really don’t know…..but here is a quote from Pope Francis from last week:

‘Engaging in dialogue does not mean renouncing our own ideas and traditions, but the claim that they alone are valid or absolute.’

As Laurence England notes at the link above:

Herein lies the Francis enigma, that the Successor of St Peter gives the impression that the Catholic Church does not necessarily contain the fullness of truth and inerrancy in Her teaching. Is this not precisely what the Devil, through his agents, and his whisperings, proposes to mankind in this century, as in previous centuries, that there can exist no absolute truths which can be trusted – not even those insisted upon by the Bride of Christ? Why is Pope Francis reticent to proclaim that the Church has the fullness of truth or that such a thing as ‘Absolute Truth’ exists? 

I don’t know.  Mr. England says more than I would, but taking all the Pope’s myriad words on ecumenism and how to approach the world  in toto, one begins to note a disconcerting trend towards, if not doubt, at least a lack of assurance that the Catholic Church is indeed the one entity uniquely instituted by Christ to be His Body on earth.

BTW, if anyone thinks I am “obsessed” with Pope Francis, you should check out Mr. England’s site!  And I don’t call that obsession, I call that due focus to an incredibly important matter.  I’ve been a piker by comparison.

Margaret Sanger – one of history’s greatest monsters January 27, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, contraception, disaster, error, General Catholic, horror, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

I have mentioned I have been reading Dr. Warren Carroll’s sixth and final volume to his history of Christendom series, The Crisis of Christendom.   Just last night, I was reading a section that dealt with the incredibly pernicious, destructive, and one might even say demonic actions of Margaret Sanger.  It was interesting to read – again – just how morally corrupt and dissolute she personally was.  While she did mother three children into the world, she then went on to become an adulterous harlot who used men for the money and connections they could bring to her movement.

To say this woman was perverse would be an understatement. But her life and beliefs confirm for me, yet again, the old saying attributed to several great Saints, that public heresy is almost always a manifestation of some private sin. In that case, Margaret Sanger must be one of history’s great sinners, as she espoused some of the darkest, most diabolical ideas the world has ever seen.

Now, the below is a bad photoshop, but it does convey a real event that happened – Margaret Sanger did speak, very happily, to numerous Ku Klux Klan and other racist, eugenicist groups.  In fact, eugenics was very much in vogue among wealthy white liberal “elites” prior to WWII, and Sanger was their darling.  Unfortunately for them, Hitler rather ruined eugenics reputation in the immediate post-war years, so she changed the name of her organization to Planned Parenthood.



As I read in Dr. Carroll’s book last night, Sanger favored sterilization for 70% of the American population, and probably far higher levels for much of the world.  She wanted a world where only people like her – “thoroughbreds,” as she liked to call them, wealthy, white, liberal elites – would be allowed to reproduce.  She even favored the creation of a permanent standing army of 15-20 million (about 10% of the total population at that time) to herd the rest of us into concentration camps where we would be worked to death  – after our mandatory sterilization.

I was going to transcribe some sections of Dr. Carroll’s book, but I forgot to bring it.  Providentially, I got sent a link today that contains very similar material, so I’ll share that with you, instead:

“I accepted an invitation to talk to the women’s branch of the Ku Klux Klan…I saw through the door dim figures parading with banners and illuminated crosses…I was escorted to the platform, was introduced, and began to speak…In the end, through simple illustrations I believed I had accomplished my purpose. A dozen invitations to speak to similar groups were proffered.” 
–Margaret Sanger: An Autobiography, P.366 

I think the greatest sin in the world is bringing children into this world…” 
–Margaret Sanger  [Think about the mentality that would say such a thing, the self-serving evil behind it]

“Colored people are like human weeds and are to be exterminated.” So said Margaret Sanger……. [Ditto]

It goes on and on like that with Sanger.  She really viewed people like cattle, at best. In fact, I think most ranchers have much more compassion for their cattle than Sanger did for her fellow humans.  But that’s just it, she, and her numerous disciples today, don’t view vast swaths of humanity as really human.  Certainly the unborn don’t count, nor do those with serious physical or mental problems (thus, we hear the rhetoric about a life being “not worth living”), nor even those who don’t live their life according to the manner liberals feel fitting or necessary.  When you get done with all the paring down, there are darn few of us left.

That this is a satanic mentality should be obvious to anyone with even the faintest glimmer of sanctifying Grace in their soul.  Unfortunately, that excludes more and more people today……

There is no end to the evil people will believe absent God.


Thanks to Branch – some folkish but awesome Catholic music January 27, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in Art and Architecture, awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, fun, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Latin Mass, manhood, sanctity, Tradition, Virtue.
comments closed

Hey, not everyone can write a sublime bit of chant.  “Laurence England,” or the guy who blogs at That the Bones You Have Crushed May Thrill, has posted some original compositions to Youtube, and they are pretty awesome.  I wonder how this would play at the parish parish talent show?  I have been known to pick up the guitar, but I’m not nearly as good as Mr. England Bone Crush.

Thanks to commenter Branch for pointing this out:

This guy is a parishioner at Fr. Ray Blake’s parish in Brighton.  Something must be going right there.

Here’s another – My Sins Crucified Our Lord:

What do you think?