jump to navigation

Blessed Pius IX on change in the Church August 19, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, error, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, paganism, Papa, scandals, secularism, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
comments closed

Frequent commenter DotDO sent me a link to Fr. Carota’s blog over the weekend.  Good Father Carota qoutes Blessed Pope Pius IX as below, considering doctrinal “change” and ideas, very prevalent in the mid 19th century as they were in the mid-20th, that the Church should open Herself up to the world and all its “marvels” and “progress.”  Blessed Pius IX, a truly titanic Pope, would have none of that (emphasis in original, my comments):

People also want the Catholic Church to change so they can get rid of the guilt that their guilty conscience is producing.  When there is still a Church saying, sin is sin, you want to get rid of that nagging voice that goes against your goal of selfish indulgence.  As that famous saying goes; “All that Catholic guilt stuff, yuk”.
No, no matter how you want things to change to fit your desires, your life style, the Church of Christ cannot change Biblical truths or dogmas given to us by God.  When will people wake up and realize they cannot and never will be able to change God.  [Absolutely.  Even if someone was convinced Church Dogma had changed, it would not matter a whit with regard to their eternal soul, because God would still be God, and His Truth, Truth.  People love to fool themselves that if they can only get the Church to do the impossible and “change Dogma,” then people will be free to do sin as they like, and everyone will be happy.  But such a disastrous event, like the allowance of those in two marriages at once to blasphemously receive the Blessed Sacrament, won’t change their sin and will only bring massive evil and suffering in its train]
Here is a great quote from Pope Pius IX on the absolute unchangeable Catholic Teachings.
For the Church of Christ, watchful guardian that she is, and defender of the dogmas deposited with her, never changes anything, never diminishes anything, never adds anything to them; but with all diligence she treats the ancient documents faithfully and wisely; if they really are of ancient origin and if the faith of the Fathers has transmitted them, she strives to investigate and explain them in such a way that the ancient dogmas of heavenly doctrine will be made evident and clear, but will retain their full, integral, and proper nature, and will grow only within their own genus – that is, within the same dogma, in the same sense and the same meaning.” — Pope Pius IX
In his times, this drive for change came mostly from outside pressures and the freemasons.  But now it is from outside and from inside the Catholic Church. [Well, those who claim to be “inside” the Church, but I will hazard that a great many of those are actually far, far outside, whether they are aware of it or not]
These enemies of divine revelation extol human progress to the skies, and with rash and sacrilegious daring would have it introduced into the Catholic religion as if this religion were not the work of God but of man, or some kind of philosophical discovery susceptible of perfection by human efforts.”– Pope Pius IX [What a sublime understanding of the progressive mentality!  I am convinced most progressives, including those “within” the Church, do not believe that Christ’s Church is truly a divine institution, but that it is merely a human construct.  And certainly all progressives tend to believe it is in this earthly life that we must work to develop the “perfect” society of “perfect” happiness, rather than hope for our basking in the eternal beatitude of the God’s glory.]
And if you fight “these enemies” that Pope Pius IX talks about, which any good followers of Jesus Christ must do,  we are automatically labelled as extremest and evil because we go against changing God’s laws.  Popes bishops, religious, priests and fellow Catholics call us evil traditionalist and write us off as eccentric.
Then that makes all the saints and popes before Vatican II “EXTREMIST, EVIL, ECCENTRIC AND TRADITIONALIST” too.   Maybe that is how almost everyone in the Catholic Church can change things that are never changed before, by justifying that everyone before them, including Pope Pius IX, was evil, extremist, eccentric and overboard traditionalists. [I don’t believe I need to comment]
No, the Bible is right, the Deposit of Faith given to the Church by the Apostles is right, and Catholic Dogma is still unchangeable.   And those who go against these Biblical morals and go along with changing of the Church teachings, are the ones who are WRONG.
As has been said before, in these evil end times, good will be seen as evil and evil as good.  We are so blessed to be educated traditional Catholics and to be saved from all these evil CHANGES.
————-End Quote————–
God bless Father Carota. I am sure he has a huge target on his back.  He deserves many prayers!  Lord, please protect him!  I think about Father Rodriguez, then I think about Father Carota, and I shudder.  Good and holy priests are satan’s greatest adversaries, and the evil one pursues them with a grim determination.  Good priests can save and convert thousands, even millions of souls.  Satan has been having a field day for a long time and doesn’t want that interrupted by some meddlesome priest.  And all too often, all too sadly, satan is able to use people within the Church, even many other priests and bishops, to either limit the effectiveness  of great priests like Father Carota or to destroy their apostolates entirely.
So please pray for Father Carota!  I am always edified and strengthened by his words!
As for Father Rodriguez, more tomorrow, God willing.

“The Tale of Those Nasty Liberals Who Hijacked Poor Ol’ Vatican Two” August 19, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, the return.
comments closed

I am dreadfully short on time this week, being virtually forced to devote essentially all my time towards improving the speed and reliability of the internet I have a much better claim to inventing than Al Gore, but wouldn’t you know Eliot Bougis would come through with a great post on VII for me.  It’s more than just a discussion on Vatican II, EB asks some very trenchant questions regarding famous hermeneutics and inexplicable conspiracy theories.  I add a lot of emphasis (because of the general awesomeness) and a few comments:

When the spirit of a council dictates, almost from day one, how the documents of a council are to be read and applied, then that spirit is the true fruit of the council, regardless what the documents may say. Luckily, the Church has never fallen into this trap, so keep calm and party on, right? [heh]

This is the conservative paradox: the same people who are blamed for “hijacking The Council” are those to whom pious submission must be given in the implementation of The Council.  [Can it be said Paul VI hijacked Vatican II?  But if you read some actual history, rather than opinion of the same, it becomes clear very quickly that Paul VI was a major proponent of that “spirit.”]  Conspiracy theories are generally taboo among conservatives, but The Tale of Those Nasty Liberals Who Hijacked Poor Ol’ Vatican Two is one conspiracy theory still very much in vogue. The documents have borne the fruits we see (and will probably keep seeing, for a long time to come) because the seeds of said fruit are embedded in the documents themselves. This is why, as Bp. Schneider reminds us, the documents must be subjected to a thorough magisterial pruning, so that the vigor of the Pastoral Mandate can be matched by the tradition of doctrinal security.

Meanwhile, the unrelenting cry for MOAR COUNCIL has a bizarre way of leading to the very abuses which The Council is supposed to have saved us. [Like, for instance, an insidious and deep-seeded tendency towards clericalism, shut up and do as your told, etc.  Certainly, some avenues have opened for more lay involvement, but either question those or step outside the new boundaries, and one finds a clericalism that its seems hard to imagine could have been much worse in the bad old pre-conciliar days]  The Council cannot be a final harbor. It was a milestone, but the Church keeps moving, and I think the Church needs to either enforce the documents with a zeal that any “rad trad” would admire, or needs to admit that The V2 Experiment has failed. The Church will–and must–go on, but, pragmatically speaking, The Spirit of The Council is the clear winner these days. It is heroic of laymen to hold the magisterial line, but it is properly the duty of the episcopal college to get the led out and get our house in order. No “pastoral” strategy is guaranteed infallible immunity. [It’s frankly a sad joke for laymen to try to “uphold” Doctrine.  How can we?  We can cajole, scream, embarrass, shame, but we have no power whatsoever.  We are a flea on an elephant’s butt.  But I do wonder, somewhat in disagreement to the above, whether it might not be better to shun this non-dogmatic, pastoral Council?]

At the same time, I’m floored that unflinching defenders of Vatican II at least admit that the V2 documents shouldn’t but in fact can be read in a discontinuous, heterodox way. Can the same be said of any prior council? [Yes, yes, YES!  That’s the other million dollar quote.  I can’t think of any other Council that is full of texts so ambiguous, open to interpretation, and available to be abused as so many of the documents of Vatican II, even – or perhaps especially – the more “official” ones like Apostolic Constitutions, etc.  In fact, the texts from other Councils from Trent to Nicaea are remarkable for their clarity, and precision.  Compare Trent or the Syllabus to significant parts of Vatican II, and it’s like night and day.  That fact alone makes Vatican II an entirely novel departure from the preceding Magisterium. ]  And even if it could be, it was the purpose of a later council authoritatively to rectify such problems. No one in the hierarchy is seriously calling for such a correction. Everything Is Awesome. Except, darn it, this time we need to really implement The Council. There’s that creeping conspiracy theory again. [Yes, it certainly does seem that Vatican II, for all its awesomeness, is the most difficult to implement Council in the history of the Church.  One main problem being, there remains massive disagreement over what such an implementation would even look like, due to the vagaries of the texts themselves.  Modernists thrive on ambiguity and lack of clarity, they detest precision and hard definitions.]

[I really shouldn’t steal so much, but it’s just so darned good……] I don’t see how we can have it both ways. If V2 is to be judged not as a dogmatic intervention but as a pastoral endeavor, and should therefore not be held to such rigorous intellectual standards as prior councils, then the manifest deterioration and disorientation of the Church in certain ways should suffice to show how the pastoral endeavor has been derailed on its own terms. [Indeed.] Rather than being read in an orthodox sense, the conciliar ambiguity in question reverses the entire hermeneutic by subjecting past teaching to endless debate and doubt in the superdogma event horizon that V2 has, despite its intended “humility”, become. [Everything is read through the prism of Vatican II or anything post-conciliar.  Therefore, Casti Connubbi gets frequently cast aside in favor of Humanae Vitae. The Mass of Ages replaced by a manufactured (and clumsily, at that) product.  Everything that existed prior to VII, from vestments to the role of laity to Dogma (in practice) to music to the Liturgy, etc., ad nauseum, had to be re-examined, “renewed,” and generally reshaped, often from the ground up, in light of the Vatican II supercouncil. Just a brilliant summation.] To cite prior councils is to be labeled a rad trad, which is pretty astounding a charge. As Brunero Gherardini had persuasively argued, what is need is not a declamation of continuity, but a demonstration of it, and the only possible resources for such a demonstration reside in the very things that get one labeled a rad trad. [That is, reference to all the other ecumenical Councils and everything “pre-conciliar”] V2 is the most self-referential council in the Church’s history, which is why, like any spiraling mass, it sucks everything else into its gravitational pull, and contorts it all into a shape of its own making.

———–End Quote———–

Just fantastic, Mr. Bougis.  Have mercy on me for going well beyond fair use.

I cannot help but note but it was the dawning realization of so much of the above, especially as evident in their willingness to honestly examine the work of Monsignor Brunero Gherardini, that led to the sacking of the Franciscans of the Immaculate.  Apparently, the ultimate super-dogma of the day, the new first and highest commandment, is: “Thou shalt not question, doubt, or cast umbrage on any sacred jot and tittle of Vatican II.”  And viewing Vatican II as the super-dogmatic prism through which all else must be viewed is the fundamental assumption of those who defend that sacking and insist that the founder and previous leadership were deadly threats not just to the “poor, deluded souls” who made up the vast majority of the the membership of the FIs, but the entire Church Herself.

Which gets back to a theme I’ve been pressing of late, which is that the “new” Church, the “post-conciliar Church,” gives every indication of being something radically different from, and irrepressibly hostile towards, the “old” or “pre-conciliar” Church.  This is evidenced in 100,000 different ways and is something, I have said, that must simply be acknowledged, accepted, and then dealt with as best as we can in our individual states in life.

I’m not saying I have an answer or a solution, other than to pray that someday (soon!) we have a Pope that is “beyond” the Council, if you will, that was not directly involved in it or predominately shaped by that “spirit,” and who is willing to examine and clarify its many, many claims against the great guide God has given us in the Magisterial Tradition of the Church.  That’s the only way doctrinal orthodoxy and catechetical clarity can ever really be restored in the Church.

Carmelite Greatness – the Hermits of Christoval continue to grow! August 19, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, fun, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Latin Mass, religious, sanctity, Tradition, Virtue.
comments closed

The Carmelite Hermits of Christoval, TX are not traditional, per se’, but they are very orthodox and are leaning more and more traditional. A conversation I had with the Father Prior last summer revealed to me that they were working then to offer the TLM at least on special occasions, and head towards being a fully bi-ritual order.  You know how that tends to go, though, once the awesome sublimity of the TLM starts working its Grace in souls, they often wind up becoming much more TLM-centric than not.  But we’ll see.  A very good order, irrespective.

For now,one man started his postulancy this summer and two more their aspirancy, so this good order of Hill Country Carmelites continues to grow.  In fact, Brother Alan Le formally started his aspirancy on the Feast of the Assumption this past Friday.  Some photos from the Hermitage website:

Br. Alan 014


Br_Isaac_Post 060

Br. Alan 121crop


Br. Alan 091


Remember, you can support this very good group of Carmelites by perusing their online gift shop!  They make and sell many breads, jams, and similar items.  Also, their incense is awesome!  It is a cut way above the chemical melange  you get on most commercial sites.  It’s very good, very real myrrh, frankincense, sage, rose, etc.

Catholic Bioethics discussion tonight! August 19, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, Basics, catachesis, contraception, Dallas Diocese, fun, General Catholic, North Deanery, scandals, secularism, sexual depravity, sickness, Society.
comments closed

There will be a presentation by a Catholic bio-ethicist at Prince of Peace parish in Plano tonight, Aug 19, from 7p-8:30p.  The talk will be in the Saint James Hall.  The talk is being sponsored by the Prince of Peace Young Adult Ministry which is administered by my friend Josh Schwartz.  See below for all details.  A bit about the speaker:

Our presenter, Brandon P. Brown, studied political philosophy as an undergraduate at the University of Dallas. He completed his MD and MA through a joint degree program in philosophy and medicine at Indiana University. He is a past fellow of the Indiana University Center for Bioethics, and performed research on brain death at the Pontifical University Regina Apostolorum in Rome, Italy. He is actively involved in undergraduate and graduate medical education in Indiana, serves as faculty in the School of Medicine, and has spoken on topics including beginning of life ethics, personhood, embryo adoption, and medical education.

Dr. Brown practices pediatric radiology at Riley Hospital for Children in Indianapolis, IN where he specializes in prenatal imaging. At IU, he is Assistant Professor of Radiology, Medical Humanities, and Philosophy.

I know nothing of the presenter other than the above, but I do know Josh is very solid and has been doing some very good work in local parishes.  It was Josh and Father Rangel who organized the Good Friday Procession from downtown Dallas to north Plano this year, passing and praying outside some local mills and strip joints along the way.  I really hope to participate next year!  And I love Father Rangel!

Anyway, if you’re interested in bio-ethics or have questions about in vitro and all the Frankensteinian behavior of the medical community today, it might not be a bad presentation to attend.


Support White Rose Women’s Center – dinner with Rick Santorum August 19, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, contraception, Dallas Diocese, fun, General Catholic, mortification, sadness, sickness, Society, true leadership, Virtue.
comments closed

You can say what  you will about former Senator Santorum’s politics overall, he was very pro-life in the Senate and there is not a better organization to support, locally.  White Rose Women’s Center, whose two locations provide crisis pregnancy services to women being pressured to kill their child, is always in need of support.  Their only limitation in helping women and families in need is their resources.  Major fundraising efforts like this result in more abortions stopped, more lives saved, and more souls converted, if not to a life of virtue at least from the depths that led them to contemplate abortion.  Many souls reached by White Rose either do convert, or practice their Catholic Faith in a much more pious and faithful manner after interacting with this great charitable service.

The dinner is Friday October 24 at 7 pm at the Dallas Country Club.   You can register here at the White Rose site.



The only question I have is whether fish will be served.  Of course it will, right?!

You can also contact the below for reservations:

Cheryl Kubic

No, I have no idea of the price.  But remember it’s for a very, very good cause.

Contemplating the above made me think what some of the crisis pregnancy centers will do once the mills shutting down under HB2 are gone.  Two are next to mills that won’t exist in a couple of weeks, God willing.  And there will be the new Planned Barrenhood super abortuary to contend with. I’m sure there will be a CPC near that PB abortuary soon.  As for the other locations, I wonder if they will close?

What a great day, though, when their won’t be mills next to some of the crisis pregnancy centers, because they’ve gone!  If HB2 isn’t overturned between now and then, I’m going to have a party on Sept 1!