jump to navigation

Early Flightline Friday: The Royal Navy back when it mattered September 24, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, awesomeness, Flightline Friday, fun, history, non squitur, silliness, Society, technology.
comments closed

That would be, the 60s and 70s (and 80s), but this footage is from the 60s and 70s:

I love the first video, footage of the WWII vintage HMS Victorious is so rare after he looong refit during the 50s, in which she was finally modernized to carry a fair sized complement of (then) modern jet fighters:  I’ve always loved how Victorious looks, and of course, the Brits have always had the greatest ship names:

HMS Ark Royal, Britain’s last semi-full-size carrier (retired in 1978), operating Phantoms FG.1s, Buccaneer S.2s, and Fairey Gannets (the horribly ugly prop birds):

More of the same video:

Ark Royal air wing bombing at the former US Navy bombing range on Vieques Island off Puerto Rico:

It is said that the F-4 Phantom II was the only widely used American aircraft ugly enough to be mistaken for a British type. It sure looked at home on the Royal Navy’s decks.

Bah! Need brain bleach! Latin “Gather Us In!” September 24, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, Liturgy, mortification, secularism, Society, Tradition.
comments closed

Everytime I hear the first three notes of this sickening tune I get it stuck in my head for days!  Eliot Bougis, look what you’ve done!

Well, if I’m going to suffer, so are you:

Some intriguing questions from the same source, different post:

1) What did Vatican II teach us that the Church did not already know? IOW, what would a Catholic who were never exposed to the documents of Vatican II lack as a Catholic?

2) What is the magisterial basis for the concept of “dialogue”? I am aware of the biblical arguments that might be brought forward, which can be discussed in their own right, but what I would like to know is where “dialogue” is promoted in the pre-V2 Magisterium.

1 – I would answer, in practical terms (meaning out of the realm of the more esoteric aspects of theology) nothing.

2 – I would describe the basis as “problematic” and counter to much of the prior Magisterium, and especially the writings/exhortations of numerous Saints.  There are some references in the pre-conciliar Church, starting from perhaps 1880 or so, and growing in frequency and urgency as you move towards 1962.  But, Magisterial pronouncements, I can think of none.

Y usted? (soy muy formal)

UPDATE: Heh, brainwash. Sheesh.  You guys get top, top commentary here.  Worth every penny.  This update will only make sense for those who saw the original lede.

Why is such unique hatred and loathing directed at the Traditional Mass? September 24, 2014

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

Boney at That The Bones You Have Crushed May Thrill asks a very pertinent question – why is the Traditional Mass the object of the greatest loathing from a very wide, and influential, part of the Church?  What is it about the TLM that inspires such fear and hatred?  In other words, it appears another Catholic is showing clear signs of “getting it:”

The sudden, powerful, self-propelling movement within the Church to limit, to disparage, to counteract, curtail or even stamp out, in places, or in parts of the Church, the Traditional Latin Mass is laced with fear not that the past is a threat to the present, but that it is what informs the future. The present can be so easily altered, the past can be so easily brushed aside, or erased, by those who wish to erase it, but when the memory and tradition of the past enters afresh once more into the present – and is suppressed, or feared, we can be sure that what is at stake is the future. [What did Big Brother say in 1984?  He who controls the past, controls the future, and he who controls the present controls the past?  Yes, it’s just like that in the Church, which is why the first thing the revolutionaries did during the Council, well before any “reforms” reached the people, was to disparage the Church of the past.  They still do that today as the core of justifying their program of constant novelty and destruction of faith]

A contributor to the New Liturgical Movement website recently opined on the justifications used for restricting or denying anyone who asks for it, the Mass of Ages which, like a body, was ‘knit together’ in our Mother’s womb, our Mother, of course, being the Church Herself. Like a body, like a soul, like life itself, it is Sacred. We are told indeed that there is nothing more sacred on Earth than the Mass because there is nothing so sacred as God and the worship of God. [Beautiful paragraph]
It would appear that for some, even for many, the Traditional Latin Mass upsets the entire order of the Church, perhaps an entire belief system……….[Exactly!  And if the TLM offends their belief system, and the TLM defines, in a sense, the pre-conciliar Church, what does that mean?]
…….It seems to me that what the Mass of Ages undermines is ‘the project’. I do not mean this in terms of conspiracy theory, but the ‘project’ that the Church has committed itself to since the Second Vatican Council, in which everything is the same, and yet the emphasis is seemingly entirely different, made in man’s image. [If it’s made in man’s image, then it’s not the same, is it?!  This is unprecedented territory for the Church, at least since the Albigensian heresy!  And it’s not a conspiracy theory if it’s true!  Was there not a concerted group of revolutionaries before, at, and after VII?  Did and do they not occupy the levers of power, for the most part?]  We have heard from those who defend it and who promote it that the EF Mass has a Christo-centric emphasis – and emphasis on the Sacred that cannot be removed without removing the entire Mass itself. It cannot be easily added to, nor anything easily taken away. It requires nothing of the Priest but obedience to the text and the learning of some rubrics. The focus is entirely on Jesus Christ and, in particular, on the Divinity of Christ expressed in many different ways, through genuflections, through a dignity and reverence which is not translated in the Novus Ordo in quite the same way. The Latin Mass points to the things that are not of this world but the next or the Other. It treats the things of God with huge importance and respect.
We need only to look at the general emphasis of the Catholic Church in England and Wales, in the US and Europe, even in Rome itself, to see that over the past 40 or 50 years, the whole emphasis has, with the attending ‘new rite’ changed within the Church into something new, but with an emphasis clearly ‘of this world’…….[Quite.  There is an ancient saying in the Church, about building a religion to please men and not God.  In fact, that saying pre-dates the Church, because it has been the constant temptation of mankind since the Fall.…….let’s face it, no Catholic Bishop who celebrates the Traditional Latin Mass would wish to stamp out the Novus Ordo – not one. And yet resistance the other way round is palpable as to be keeping those priests who celebrate the EF Mass awake at night. ‘When will the Commissars be visiting my parish?’, they must think!……..
……..Why is this EF Mass such a threat? So many Churchmen are committed to the ‘project’ of what was envisaged by the Second Vatican Council but is truly yet to be seen – a new ‘springtime’ in the Church – that they are no longer interested in examining what the ‘project’ really is and whether it is even satisfying to the Christian…….
————-End Quote————-
I’ve stolen enough, please go read the rest, there is much more great content at the link.  That last bit is fascinating, and I think, very revealing of why so many nominally decent men – and there are still quite a few in the Church – are utterly blind to the effects the post-conciliar revolution has visited upon the Church.  There are a lot of committed revolutionaries, there are a lot of go along to get along types, but there are also some quite decent people who just can’t seem to acknowledge that something is very severely out of whack in the Church, and that something dates back precisely to 1962!  Those people seem to have become so focused on the process of “renewal,” on the implementation of the “new springtime,” that they can’t recognize the death and devastation around them.  I like to think that anyway, it helps explain some otherwise inexplicable situations and attitudes.
Everyone has to come to their own appraisal regarding the present condition of our beloved Church. Some folks simply cannot handle the idea that the Church might be in crisis.  Others can only see external adversaries. Some pretend the Church has no adversaries!  And others realize that the most deadly enemies are those within.  It’s always interesting seeing people work out this thought process for themselves.
And for some of us it’s still ongoing!  We’re none too quick!

Profiles in hate: Dallas woman hates Rush Limbaugh sooooo much….. September 24, 2014

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

…….she donated $4000 in tips she received from him while working as a waitress at swanky Nick and Sam’s steakhouse to an organization dedicated to paying for abortions of women who allegedly cannot afford them.  Which is a laugh, at least half the women I’ve spoken to outside mills had their abortions paid for by you and I, through Medicaid.  Now, they can get it through Obamacare, since over 1000 Obamacare plans pay for abortion, in spite of his lying executive order supposedly banning them.

But how much do you have to hate someone to take their very generous tip and turn it over to an organization dedicated to child murder?  This is not a rational reaction, but then again, the religion of sexular paganism will brook no heresy:

Tierce used to get some high rollers at the restaurant, including conservative talk show mogul Rush Limbaugh. Tierce waited on Limbaugh twice (both times he came in with Al Michaels, who was in town to call Cowboys games). Both times Limbaugh left her $2,000 tips on modest-size checks, once with twenty $100 bills.  “That was like blood money to me,” says Tierce, who does not share Limbaugh’s social views.

Tierce was also executive director of the TEA Fund, which provides money to women who can’t afford to get abortions. (She’s still active in the abortion rights world; you can read her recent New York Times Op-Ed piece on the subject here). So she did the only logical thing with Limbaugh’s cash. She donated a sizable chunk of it to the TEA Fund.

“It felt like laundering the money in a good way,” she says. “He’s such an obvious target for any feminist or sane person. It was really bizarre to me that he gave me $2,000, and he’s evil incarnate in some ways.” [Most intelligent people recognize oxymoron’s when they see one, like “feminist” and “sane person.”]

How screwed up does your thinking have to be, to feel that receiving money from a conservative commentator is “blood money,” while giving money to people who kill babies is…….not?  But that’s sexular paganism for you, up is down, black is white, evil good, and virtue vice.  It is the antithesis of Christianity – which it was deliberately designed to be.  What is frightening is that, today, there may well be more die-hard, truly committed adherents to sexular paganism than there are to Christianity of any stripe, let alone Catholicism.  We live in terrifyingly dark times.

But, we have the Light of the World.  So we shall not be afraid.  But her reaction is telling: it’s not based on reason, it’s based on pure emotion.  I tell you, leftists are the among the most religiously dogmatic people in the world today.  And I would know!

A couple more thoughts: Do you know how many women I’ve spoken to outside mills that had trouble paying for the abortion?  None.  I often hear they can’t afford to keep a baby, but never that they can’t afford the abortion. THAT’S WHY THEY’RE THERE!  And I doubt it’s this “TEAfund” that’s paying for any but a handful of them, if that.  TEAFund is less an organization to pay for abortion, than it is just another of the dozens dedicated to baby killing advocacy, trying to normalize and de-horrify the unspeakable abomination of abortion in most people’s minds.  It is also dedicated to trying to perpetuate the myth that most women who receive abortions are so desperately poor they haven’t $300 for a first trimester murder, which is also garbage.

Let’s see, a joyless, humorless, dogmatic lockstep feminist leftist with obvious daddy issues. Boy I bet this gal is just a barrel full of laughs.