jump to navigation

Federal judge throws out Texas marriage amendment February 26, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, Dallas Diocese, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, martyrdom, persecution, sadness, scandals, secularism, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

Thanks to commenter skeinster for bringing this to my attention.  Will we see a full-court press from the bishops to back marriage and the sanctity of the family in this state?

Yes, don’t hold your breath.

A federal district court judge – mimicking rulings in three other states – has thrown out the state constitutional amendment, approved by over 3/4 of the population, defining marriage according to God’s intent and Biblical edict.  As I said last summer, it would not be three years until this hideous abomination will be the law of the land. I was wildly overoptimistic, it won’t be 2 years:

A federal judge in San Antonio has overturned a 2005 amendment banning gay marriage. U.S. Judge Orlando Garcia joins a growing number of federal judges in states like Utah, Ohio, Oklahoma, Kentucky and, more recently, Virginia, who have declared bans on gay marriage are in violation of the United States Constitution. Currently, gay marriage is legal in 17 states.

In his official order, Garcia writes, “Today’s court decision is not made in defiance of the great people of Texas or the Texas Legislature, but in compliance with the U.S. Constitution and Supreme Court precedent.” You can read the ruling here.

The ruling was made after a lawsuit filed in October 2013 by Mark Phariss and Vic Holmes who, alongside another same sex couple, sued the state of Texas for the right to marry. Phariss and Holmes, who make their home in West Plano near Dallas……

The judge at least had the decency to stay his decision until the 5th circuit hears Texas’ appeal, but given that the Supreme Court said, in a formal ruling, that the only reason to oppose two sodomites pretending to be married is due to prejudice, it’s unlikely the appeals court will decide any differently.

A mighty retribution is coming, and it will not be pretty.  Pray you and I remain faithful! Pray we don’t try to flee the coming wrath!  As I have said elsewhere today – and how providential were those posts! – these folks will stop at nothing to crush any and all opposition, especially that which is religiously based.

As for this country, it’s done.  It is culturally and morally exhausted.

I thank again “Catholic” Anthony Kennedy for making this moment possible, just as he kept abortion legal, just as he overturned anti-sodomy laws……he’s been a Catholic for the ages, hasn’t he?!?  Yet, he remains a “Catholic in good standing” blaspheming the Holy Spirit and committing the gravest of sacrilege week in and week out when he presents for Communion.  And yet bishops and cardinals continue to hand it out to him, including Cardinal Burke.

I ask again, if Kennedy is not excommunicate, why does the Church even retain laws pertaining to excommunication on the books?

Oh, yes……I remember. For those crazy right wingers who get out of line from time to time.

Silly me.

Electra, TX in blue February 26, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, persecution, scandals, Society.
comments closed

Electra, Texas was named after the fabulously wealthy daughter of Dan Waggoner, who started the fabled Waggoner Ranch in West Texas.  Under his son, Tom, the ranch grew to rival the King Ranch in South Texas, exceeding 500,000 acres.  Today, it’s down to around 370,000 acres, I believe, and is either in danger of, or in the process of, being sold off by squabbling heirs.  The last heir to really have control of the entire ranch was Electra Waggoner Biggs, a famous beauty and sculptor after whom the Buick Electra was named, and the Lockheed Electra, as well. She died in 2001.

Most local readers who have driven to Colorado have driven through Electra as they pass west of Wichita Falls on US 287.  A year ago, a couple heading from Taos, NM back to the DFW area decided to pull over and switch drivers.  A perfectly normal thing to do.  Up to that point on their trip, the wife had been driving the entire way (which I will not comment on), and now the husband was going to take over for the home stretch.  For some reason, Electra, TX cops decided they needed to ascertain what was going on, and then proceeded to demand ID and in general harass the man – who had not ever driven in the State of Texas on this particular day.  It is questionable whether police can demand ID – in the form of name, address, etc – from someone who is not being arrested. It is incontestable they cannot demand picture ID.

I’m sure some folks will say the guy had it coming to him, and he certainly goes to great lengths to make a point, but I also believe we are witnessing the steady erosion (to the extent they even exist) of our rights in this supposed liberal society, rights which supposedly offset the immorality and general chaos we see all around us.  That’s the tradeoff, right?  Liberal society undermines religion and tradition, and in general leads to moral decay, but the up side is we all get to be free, free, free, to do our own thing, and especially from this kind of authoritarian interference in our lives.

Uh huh.

If you feel the video is too long, you might want to just watch the last 5 minutes. It is extremely revealing, and I bet the city attorney is very uncomfortable, now, if not fired.  He basically called the cops out there inbred rednecks who are as great a threat to the innocent as to anyone else.  He also said rural justice is a joke, with those charged with crimes virtually inevitably convicted.  And the illegal body cavity searches continue……

What do we do about this, DDLG?


Cathedral of Cordoba’ to be stolen from Church and nationalized? February 26, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in Art and Architecture, Basics, Christendom, Ecumenism, General Catholic, persecution, pr stunts, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, the enemy.
comments closed

The much fought over Cathedral of Cordoba – first a church, then cathedral, then mosque, and, since the great victory in 1236 of San Fernando III, a cathedral again – is under threat of being stripped from the Church yet again, this time by the secularist, socialist government of Andalusia.  The threat may be minor for now – or not – but the government has circulated a petition eagerly signed by tens of thousands of muslims, calling for the cathedral to be taken from the Church and handed over to the state, to serve secular and ecumenical interests:

(Madrid) attacks against the Catholic Church have many faces. A recent venture appears in the style Cathedral-aerial-with-christian-modsof the French Revolution as a snappy “joke”.  In the Spanish Andalusia Church opponents want to expropriate the famous Catholic cathedral of Cordoba and “nationalize” it. The southern Spanish city’s cathedral is unique for architectural reasons. It has had an eventful history. Before the diocesan church was established  in 1236, it was used for several centuries an Islamic mosque, to be exact, the main mosque of the emirate and caliphate of Cordoba.

The Government of the Comunidad Autonoma de Analuciacan has legally examined whether there is a possibility of expropriation of the cathedral. The initiators of the expropriation action argue that the cathedral as a unique piece of architecture is a “World Heritage Site”.   But as such, it can not be owned by a religious community, and certainly not the Catholic Church, but must have its ownership  transferred to  the public. [This isn’t right, I don’t think.  Santiago de Compostella is a World Heritage Site but it is still operated, and I believe owned, by the Church.  I don’t know if this false assumption is being made by the article, or the Andalusian government.  Or, I could be wrong.]  Modern robber barons in the name of the State,  have a lot of experience in which revolutionaries and their epigones of all ages.  Andalusia has been  governed  by a Leftist majority since the return to democracy. The provincial government originates without exception since 1982 from the ranks of the Socialist Party (PSOE).

A few years ago the call came  to convert the Cathedral in deference to the Muslims to a place of dinterfaith worship. A claim, which was rejected by the Catholic Church. Therefore, the new venture aims to profanation and conversion of the church into a museum.

In their anti-clerical urge Spanish secularists making themselves spokesmen for Islamic interests under the heading “multiculturalism”. The fact that the Cathedral was previously a mosque, will be brought largely  into play, that a non-denominational solution  had to be sought by the state for the church. A secular group initiated two weeks with an Internet petition, seeking  the expropriation of the Cathedral. They will  rob, nationalize and profane the Catholic Church. The Cathedral of Cordoba should be made into a museum and become a kind of second Hagia Sophia in Istanbul. [Except, the Turks are going to turn Sancte Sophia back into a mosque.  Some time back, muslims and secular interests in Spain advocated for the Church/Archdiocese to voluntary relinquish the Cathedral for muslim services.  The Archdiocese politely said no.  But secularists rarely take no for an answer, at least for very long]

The petition was signed by 88,000 people. “A strange alliance” as a spokesman for the Committee for the Protection of the cathedral said.  It was initiated by the petition of the Spanish Left, and “free-thinkers”, but the majority of the signatures came from Muslims. Muslim groups and individuals have taken the ball and immediately mobilized for signing.

The petition has no legal relevance in itself. However, it was also signed by Maria Isabel Ambrosio, the competent Socialist government representative for the province of Cordoba. Ambrosio  also that gave a legal opinion in order to seek ways in which the cathedral could be expropriated and nationalized. [And turned into an indifferentist, secularist multi-culti shrine]

Against the Socialist expropriation a resistance is planning to upset it.  A few days ago they started collecting signatures for a petition on Internet. [Sign the petition!  It’s in Spanish, but just put in your first and last name and e-mail (correa electronica)]  In it, the government of Andalusia is asked to take care of the real problems of the Andalusians, “instead of thinking about how to rob the Cathedral of Cordoba and expropriate.”

There is much more interesting history of the Cathedral at Eponymous Flower, go over and check it out.

As our culture becomes decreasingly Christian and increasingly sexular and pagan, we can expect more and more of these kinds of acts.  I have read that in Europe the Church, once one of the dominant cultural players, receiving some deference even from Her enemies, is today largely discounted as an old relic.  Or a relic of old people.  Yet another fruit we have harvested of aggiornamento, listening and even accepting the “wisdom” of the world over the past 5 decades!



Terrified children, betrayed by parents and physicians, will soon be dying in Belgium February 26, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, Christendom, disaster, error, family, foolishness, General Catholic, Holy suffering, horror, martyrdom, sadness, scandals, self-serving, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

And, as yet, our Holy Father has not seen fit to make one criticism of the Belgian parliament’s decision to legalize child killing euthanasia.   Fr. George Rutler has some thoughts on the matter, and raises one salient hope.  Pray, pray that the King of Belgium, Philippe, will refuse to give the royal assent to this disastrous bill, provoking a “constitutional crisis” but also keeping it from going into law:

On February 13, when the Belgian Chamber of Deputies approved by a vote of 86 to 44 an amendment to its 2002 euthanasia law, extending its provisions to include the killing of children, a man in the gallery cried out, “Murderers!”  Again, no one mentioned the cry, but there was an awkward silence until the man himself was silenced for exhibiting bad taste.  He had dared to remove the linguistic fig leaf from the euphemism “euthanasia.”  A euphemism covers shame, a timid confession by syntax rather than by sacrament, for a euphemism wants approval and not absolution.

Others have cried out, including a faculty member of Leuven University, Tom Mortier, whose mother had been “euthanized” in April 2012 without his permission by Doctor Wim Distelmans because she was chronically depressed. [Someone chronically depressed is not in full possession of her faculties. And yet the state killed her.  This is so evil]  Since then, legislators decided that children should share with adults a supposed right to be euthanized, when their present life is judged by the state, parents and the children themselves to be “unworthy of life.” [I can’t even comment.  Satan is having one of his best centuries ever]  This resonates with the well known language of two university men, the jurist Karl Binding and the psychiatrist Alfred Hoche, whose 1920 treatise “Die Freigabe der Vernichtung Lebensunwertes Lebens” gave an academic veneer to the consequent and more impatient Nazi protocols for “destroying life unworthy of living.”  Soon enough, vehicles rounded up the unfit, adults and children, with covered windows and sealed doors so that those inside could not be seen or heard.  [Yes, we wouldn’t want the lucky living to have to “suffer” any uncomfortable reminders of what’s going on around them] In 1941, a teenaged cousin of Pope Benedict XVI, with Downs Syndrome, was taken away in that fashion by “therapists” despite his family’s pleas and never to be seen again.

The twentieth century was littered with failed utopias called worker’s paradises and others thousand year reichs……….

……By high irony, what was “Bleeding Belgium” at the end of World War I has voted to bleed itself to death with an admixture of extravagant utopianism and cynicism. King Albert II, father of the new king, Philippe, hoped that his son would be “an inspiration for Europe” as he was fit for the job “emotionally and intellectually,” having been at the Belgian Royal Military Academy, Oxford, and Stanford. Philippe’s saintly uncle, King Baudouin abdicated for one day in 2002 rather than sign the original euthanasia bill.  The King of the Belgians now has only moral influence, but moral influence outlasts political influence, even if victims of power do not. If Baudouin’s nephew confounds expectations and refuses to give the Royal Assent, he will honor his uncle who asked parliament, “Does freedom of conscience apply to everyone except the King?”  Should he yield, his figurehead role will be so disfigured that his picture will serve a purpose only on the other side of the postage stamps…… [Pray for this king!]

This is not only Belgium’s problem. Immediately after February 13, a regular columnist in the Los Angeles Times wrote that “for a child facing death in the short term, and in agony, we as a society should enable the child’s right to die with the least amount of suffering…. Even if the concept chills the bones.”  [Just shut up with your evil. I won’t even form an argument, should this not be so obviously evil that any non-psychotic could recognize it as such?  But such is the foundation legalized baby killing has laid]

…..There is a macabre risibility about the Belgian provision that says that when parents and physicians decide to kill, “the child must be conscious of their decision and understand the meaning of euthanasia.” [And, of course, some poor dying child would never be unduly influenced by the adults around them, telling the child what was best for them.  And by them, I mean the adults…..]

This is so evil it almost gives me a panic attack.  Literally, when I think of some poor, sweet, very sick and in pain 6 year old girl, with her teddy bears and other indicators of her youth around her, being told by her parents (as the law demands) how  killing her is really the very best thing, and that she should be a good girl and lay there and take her death easily, the better to spare the parents suffering (which is what this is really all about, this is not compassion, it is the worst kind of selfish dereliction of duty).  I can imagine the panic the child would feel at this betrayal.  It makes me want to scream and cry at the same time.  I almost can’t stand it.  It’s just too much.

And yet, right now, it appears the State of Massachusetts is doing all it can to kill a formerly perfectly healthy teenage girl.  In reality, involuntary euthanasia, AKA murder, occurs all the time in hospitals, of old,  young, and in between.  We live in a utilitarian society, and if someone who has authority over you in a hospital, be it a nurse, doctor, administrator, or whomever, decides its time for you to die, unless you have family or other advocates watching like a hawk, they will kill you.  That is the state of the medical profession, and our society, today.

A warning from an LGBTQRSXYZ activist – “make their lives hell” February 26, 2014

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

A “top commenter” pro-sodomy activist on Facebook posted a little warm and fuzzy diatribe about the bare majority – or large plurality – of Americans who still oppose recognizing fake marriages between people of the same sex, or who in general oppose the radical homosex agenda.  10 years ago, one was safely within the mainstream understanding marriage was between a man and a woman.  Brig. Gen. Pete Knight, USAF, Ret, then a California state assemblyman for then very conservative Lancaster-Palmdale, managed to get a state law passed defining marriage as between a man and a woman – and by a large majority.  10 years later, those who still oppose same sex marriage are defined as “homophobes.”  And you won’t be left in peace in your opposition.  Now, any who oppose the radical sodomite agenda will be crushed, and brutally so.  So sayeth the shepherd, so sayeth the flock (language warning):



A diabolical shepherd, that is.  

In other words, shut up, they said. Pro-homosex arguments are starting to wear thin, and it appears they have rolled over most of those who can be easily rolled, and are starting to meet more intractable resistance.  Thus, the rhetoric shifts from plays on emotion and Hollywood propaganda, to naked force.  This is a perfect model of Alinskyite communist tactics – pick the target, freeze it, “frame” it (that means, destroy it), etc.  

As another blogger commented, one can have gone from a stalwart supporter of the sodom-gomorrah agenda 10 years ago, by favoring so-called civil unions, to a hateful bigot, all while standing still.  These activists never answer whether their lord and savior Barack Obama is a bigot, or was a bigot, for ostensibly opposing same sex marriage just a year or two ago.  

Where does all this end?  Where will the demands of the activists of sodom stop?  Michael Rose, in Goodbye, Good Men, gives us a clue in his coverage of the travails of one Joseph Kellenyi, who suffered through terrible persecution and wanton advances throughout his time in seminary (he later filed a sexual harassment lawsuit).  Kellenyi relates how some radical sodomites behave when given positions of power, and what it is they crave:

The issue was never one of my suitability for ordination,” Kellenyi explained. “Rather it was that the gay clique had been given veto power over who got ordained in Chicago. [This was during the time of Cardinal Bernadin, and shortly after his death.  May God have mercy on his soul.]Furthermore, the faculty members  in question were not willing to settle for tolerance from me, which I could give.  What they wanted was affirmation and my respect, which I could not give……And the rector even admitted that gay men don’t like people like me.[that would be strong, masculine men]This of course raises the question of heterophobia………when gays come into positions of power, they knowingly and consistently appoint gay men to important key positions.

Of course they do.  They cannot tolerate opposition (that is, orthodoxy), and they are threatened by straight, orthodox seminarians and priests.  But there is much, much more, which I fear may point to the ultimate goal of all this activism:

Kellenyi, who retained dozens of pages of documentary evidence, was expelled from the American College at Loivain[subsequently closed after it became unsustainable due to lack of seminarians.  What a tragedy, once a beacon of orthodoxy, by 2010 there were essentially no students, after so many good students had been run off by events  just like this.  When a seminary falls to a certain, pathetic level, it can only be shut down]  after refusing to submit to an “intimate relationship” that was demanded by a senior seminarian. After he declined the gay seminarian’s offer in no uncertain terms, he was labeled “homophobic,” and denounced for not being “open to embracing gay and lesbian issues.” 

So we see, at least in this particular case, when sodomites feel they have sufficient power, they demand not just “tolerance,” not just affirmation, but fawning respect and even – it is unthinkable – submission to their out of control concupiscence.  This is extremely troubling, even as a mere indication of what may come.  

At present, it is obvious radical homosexual activists are not sated with mere tolerance of their perversion.  They demand everyone accept and AFFIRM them, the better, they hope, to still that quiet voice that torments them in the night.  From affirmation it is a short walk to submission, to God knows what.  As this movement develops, I think it not implausible that there could come a time when failure to submit to sexual advances will be construed as homophobia, and people easily cowed may give in. Thus, the tie in with the hateful, wrathful rhetoric above.  The opposition must be totally crushed to make this cultural abomination a reality.

I have said it before, but there are no limits to the depravity to which people can sink once they cut out God from their lives.  And persisting in a state so visibly and completely opposed to not just the Divine Positive Law, but the natural law, is surely tantamount to cutting God out of one’s life.  That is one thing that makes this “movement” so dangerous.  There is no limit to where it could go.  And even more, there is a powerful motivation in these folks to crush the reminders, ANY reminders that what they are doing is not just wrong, but so completely, horribly wrong as to be an abomination in God’s eyes and something always and everywhere opposed to His Will.  

Scripture is clear – there are over 2 dozen denunciations of homosexual acts in both Old Testament and New. Even the sin of Onan is an implicit repudiation of sterile, homosexual gratification.  The Tradition is clear.  What is unclear, at present, is the will of God-fearing and God-loving people to resist this cultural onslaught.  It is amazing what incredible damage such a tiny portion of the population is capable of doing, but they be doing it, and in spades.

Are all Catholics traditional? February 26, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, Christendom, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Latin Mass, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Tradition, Virtue.
comments closed

Sorry for no posts yesterday, I was under the weather.  I am beginning to wonder if I have inherited my mom’s tendencies towards migraine headaches.  I’ve now had two in the past 6 or 8 months.

I had meant to get to this post Monday, but had too many other things develop. Over the weekend, Rorate had a great guest post by Dr. Peter Kwasniewski of Wyoming Catholic College, and a good friend of the Traditional Latin Mass.  In this post, Dr. Kwasniewski makes the point that many of those violently castigating Tradition and proposing radical new “evangelical church” constructs for the One True Faith are themselves proposing far more problematic things than anything to come out of “traditional” Catholics in the past 50 years.  He also asks whether all Catholics are “traditional.”  Some try to say so, but Kwas makes a rather compelling argument.  See below, I add emphasis and comments:

It is sometimes asserted that traditional Catholicism is bound up with a prideful attitude—that it is impossible to profess traditionalism without being pharisaical. Some even object to the phrase “traditional Catholic,” as if it were redundant: Aren’t Catholics by definition adherents of Catholic tradition—and thus, any Roman Catholic has as much right to be called “traditional” as he has to be called “Roman”?
How nice it would be if this were true, but alas, it is far from being the case. [Incredibly far.  How can some active homosexual seminary formation director blackballing orthodox men and insisting that women can be ordained be seen as adhering to Tradition?  Or Deacon Sandy, for that matter?]

First, the psychology of the issue. There is a danger of pride or pharisaism in any possible true description of oneself: Christian, Catholic, Roman Catholic, traditionalist. To say “I am a Christian” is a genuine boast for St. Paul and for every martyr who has died for Jesus Christ, including the God-fearing victims of Islamic extremism in Syria and elsewhere. Are we to say that because someone might revel too much in the title of Christian and think himself better than his unbelieving neighbor, the very title ought to be abolished? One might just as well avoid baptism, which, thanks to no merits of our own, truly makes us better than we were before, and far better off than any unbeliever.  [Pharisaism is just a convenient club with which to bash traditionals, which grows more effective the less contact one has had with those who adhere to the traditional practice of the Faith.  But NO Latin types get tarred with the same brush.  Anything that deviates from the great ecumenical post-conciliar line gets labeled “pharisaism.”]

“Traditional Catholic,” likewise, is no redundancy, because there are so many Catholics who are, intentionally or not, modernists in their thinking and their practices. In an ideal world, the Christian ought to be the Catholic, just as the Catholic ought to be traditional; but even as not every Christian is Catholic, not every Catholic is traditional in a meaningful sense of the word.
Pursuing this point, we would be deceiving ourselves if we did not recognize that it is quite possible today—in a startling and unprecedented way—for Catholics not to be traditional, not to be thinking and living in accordance with major elements of their 2,000-year tradition, such as asceticism, liturgical praxis, and adherence to orthodox doctrine. For the first time, we have seen the widespread acceptance of an interpretation of Catholicism that is anti-traditional, that considers itself free from tradition, free to reshape itself according to indeterminable “modern needs.” Apropos the concept of aggiornamento, Karl Barth apparently asked the Catholic Church this uncomfortable question in 1966: “When will you know if the Church is sufficiently updated?”   [That’s a great line, and exposes the revolution for what it is.  The answer – never openly communicated but obvious if one observes trends over the past 50 years, is never. The revolution is never finished.  The work of destruction is never done – at least until the last pious soul hangs up their Rosary and the last parish closes.  Just as in that “Catholics” movie I posted bits of a few weeks ago, where the “Fourth Vatican Council” had just declared the Blessed Sacrament a SYMBOL…..even if fiction, it makes faithful Catholics very uncomfortable, because they fear some similar crazy development in reality.] This is the Achilles’ heel of every Weigel-style critique of traditional Catholicism: just like Bugnini in his liturgical reform, Weigel has to pick and choose what’s worth keeping and what ought to be discarded in his evangelical re-envisioning of the Church, as if he were standing outside of tradition, history, and papal teaching, standing over it rather than submitting to be formed, measured, and judged by all of it.  [And, naturally, Mr. Weigel, who only ever wrote a few so-so biographies, will be one of those picking and choosing what portions of tradition and liturgy remain.  He has been doing so for a year or more now.]
If there are dangers of pride in any state or way of life, there is no less a danger of being proud of one’s very open-mindedness, one’s freedom from ideology, one’s immunity to the error of judgmentalism, one’s superbly balanced apprehension of reality.One can be a Pharisee of open-mindedness, an ideologue of dialogue, a dogmatist about refusing to dogmatize. One can be simplistic by seeing everyone who takes a strong line as a simpleton[And one can surely be a partisan of Americanism (as in the heresy), as Mr. Weigel appears to be]
The only one who can escape pride, judgmentalism, and ideology is the one who completely submits his mind to an objective external standard, one who submits his heart to another whom he loves without qualification. The traditional Catholic is one who says: There is such a standard, and it is Divine Revelation, communicated to us in Scripture and Tradition and guarded by the perennial Magisterium. [I agree.  This is the basis upon which I try to build my understanding and practice of the Faith, even if I fail often.]
The traditionalist desires to receive humbly what the Lord has given us, to open wide his heart to his blessed inheritance that is always so much greater than his own limited mind can comprehend, much less improve upon. The pridefulness of the modern(ist) Catholic consists in thinking himself superior to his Catholic inheritance—in a position, one might say, of “self-absorbed promethean neopelagian” creativity towards what has been devotedly handed down, century upon century. [And even more, to pick and choose which aspects of the pre-conciliar Magisterium they will accept.  One belief frequently thrown out the window, or reduced to meaninglessness, is the Social Reign of Christ the King.  That declaration makes Americanists like Weigel very nervous, even upset, because it is very difficult – some might say impossible – to reconcile the enthronement of Jesus Christ as the arbiter and goal of all social/governmental activity with the conciliar notions of “primacy of conscience” and Weigel’s fantasies of liberty.]  The judgmentalism of the modern Catholic can be seen in his dismissive attitude towards traditions and the traditionalist who loves them, whom he refuses to see as a lover of the full breadth and depth of Christ and of His Church, and whom he finds it easy to caricature as narrow-minded, rigid, joyless Pelagian, et cetera……….

……Indeed, something worse has come upon us: a return to the open denigration, marginalization, and persecution of traditionalists. It is as if, in the wake of the Emancipation Proclamation, there were a new regime intent on reintroducing slavery or, at best, arranging strict segregation and second-class citizenship.

———-End Quote———-

The last comment above speaks of the changes that seem to be occurring in the Church, with lightning speed, since the abdication of Pope Benedict XVI, a day I grow increasingly certain will in the future be lamented by many faithful Catholics.

There is a good deal more to the piece at Rorate, if you haven’t already read it.  The conclusion is quite good, if unnerving. But probably many of you have already read this piece and digested it.  If so, maybe my comments provide a little benefit, maybe not.

Must move on for now, but Dr. Kwasniewski continues to illustrate why he is one of my favorite Catholic writers.