jump to navigation

God’s Mercy is most evident in His Justice February 26, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, Bible, catachesis, episcopate, error, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Papa, persecution, scandals, secularism, SOD, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, Virtue.
comments closed

The Gospel for the First Monday of Lent in the Traditional Latin Mass is from Saint Matthew XXV:31-46, which is the parable of the sheep and the goats at the Last Judgment.  This parable in St. Matthew’s Gospel followed that of the servants given talents to dispose of while their master was on a journey.  Both parables make very clear that we shall be judged according to our use of the gifts God gives us and, fundamentally, on our love for each other.

Dom Prosper Gueranger has a brief exegesis on this Gospel and its relevance to Lent, wherein he touches on the subject that Our Lord, in the very act of exercising His Justice, is also exercising His Mercy, even if that true mercy is not the sentimentality and worldliness the worldlings would expect:

Our Lord there put forth every argument which love could devise, to persuade His lost sheep to return to Him; and here, on the very same day that the Church speaks to us of our God as being a gentle and compassionate Shepherd, she describes Him as an inflexible Judge. This loving Jesus, this charitable Physician of our souls, is seated on His dread tribunal, and cries out in His anger: Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire! (Matt XXV:41).  And where has the Church found this awful description? In the Gospel, that is, in the very Law of love. But if we read our passage attentively, we shall find that He who pronounces this terrible anathema is the same God, whom the prophet has been just portraying as a Shepherd full of mercy, patience, and zeal for His sheep.  Observe how He is still a Shepherd, even on His judgment seat: He separates the sheep from the goats; He sets the sheep on His right hand, and the goats on His left; the comparison of a flock is still kept up.  The Son of God will exercise His office of Shepherd even to the last day: only then, time will be at an end, and eternity will have begun; the reign of justice, too, will have succeeded the reign of mercy, for it is justice that will reward the good with the promised recompense, and that will punish impenitent sinners with eternal torments.  How can the Christian, who believes that we are all to stand before this tribunal, refuse the invitation of the Church, who now presses him to make satisfaction for his sins?  How can he hesitate to go through those easy penances, with which the Divine Mercy now deigns to be satisfied?  Truly, man is his own worst enemy, if he can disregard these words of Jesus, who now is his Savior, and then will be his Judge: “Unless ye do penance, ye shall all perish” (St. Luke XIII:3).

———-End Quote———

I found this to be the key bit: “The Son of God will exercise His office of Shepherd even to the last day……..the reign of justice, too, will have succeeded the reign of mercy, for it is justice that will reward the good with the promised recompense, and that will punish impenitent sinners with eternal torments.”

It is key, because it reveals that mercy can only be extended to the unrepentant by being unjust to the repentant.  That is to say, by extending blanket “mercy” (of a very worldly form) to those continuing unrepentant in grave sin, a grave injustice is being done to those have endured the great pain and difficulty of either eschewing, or repenting and, through Grace, overcoming, those sins.

Let alone the injury caused to God by just one sin, let alone heaping sacrilege upon sacrilege, sin upon sin, by admitting unrepentant souls guilty of grave, public sin to the Blessed Sacrament, this blind pursuit of pseudo-mercy (it won’t seem so merciful, I fear, at their judgment) is manifestly unjust to those who have always striven to observe the moral Doctrine of the Faith.

The parable of the prodigal son has been tossed around quite a bit lately, but almost every reference I have seen to it misses one incredibly key aspect, the aspect that defines the entire parable: the prodigal son was repentant!  Yes, he had sinned, but he repented, and was committed to sin no more.  So of course he received the Father’s mercy……but only AFTER he had repented, not before.  He did not say………”Father, I’ve blown my inheritance, after I declared you dead to me…….can’t I declare you double-dead and receive another chunk of inheritance, so I can fritter it away again?”  No, he said: “Father, I have sinned before you and before God. I am not worthy to be called your son.  Make me one of your servants…….”  But that repentance is inconvenient to the new sentiment masquerading as mercy, and so is forgotten.

Again, the point that must be stressed is that God is being merciful even in the execution of His Justice.  God is incapable of being unmerciful.  By sending the goats to the everlasting fire, he was giving them what they wanted, what they had spent their life pursuing – an existence without God.  He is being doubly merciful to the sheep, as they are brought to eternal bliss, yes, but also by preserving them from being scandalized at seeing the goats admitted to their presence without repentance.  In fact, you can parse this down to several other levels of mercy, but I’ll skip that for now.

God IS Mercy and God IS Love and God IS Justice……..and the 200o year development of the Doctrine of the Faith is the recognition and explication of that undeniable fact.  Anyone that cuts against that Doctrine, or undermines it, is striving to dismember God from Himself.

ISIS calls for terror alliance with radical left to conquer Rome – by 2020 February 26, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, Christendom, disaster, Ecumenism, error, General Catholic, horror, martyrdom, persecution, secularism, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

The radical left hasn’t answered, yet, but this is more or less what I expected to happen: the radical left and islam would eventually come together to work to crush their most dread enemy, Christendom.  Or what remains of Christendom.

Lord, have mercy on all of us:

The Islamist terrorist group ISIS is instructing Muslim sympathizers in Europe (and presumably the United States) to seek out leftist activists to form an “armed combat” alliance.

The armed alliance against European governments will further ISIS’s goal to conquer Rome by 2020.

The call to recruit leftists is in an eBook entitled Black Flags from Rome. The eBook is the subject of a two part report by Bridget Johnson at PJ Media. (Excellent reporting in bothpart one and part two.)

While Western leftist groups like Obama funder group Code Pink , ANSWER , and ISM have given political support and humanitarian aid to Islamist terrorists, there have been no readily apparent instances of Western leftists joining Islamist terrorist groups in committing terrorist acts in recent years.

Leftist terrorism in the West of late has been largely about the environment and animal rights. There were some attacks planned by leftists allied with the Occupy movement that were mostly ineffective or were disrupted by law enforcement. The anarchist Black Bloc groups have mainly attacked property and mostly used non-lethal weapons in protests.

……ISIS writes that a good place to recruit leftists is at anti-Israel protests. [Well they’re nothing if not practical.  Pretty astute tactic]

ISIS is counting on frustration among some leftists at their inability to change the system combined with admiration for the strength of Islamists “to fight against the injustices of the world” to prove fertile in recruiting them to form a terror alliance against the West………

I had an offline discussion a while back with a reader who thought that eventually the Left would rise up in opposition to islam and fight it, because islam is so repressive of so many cherished Leftist shibboleths.  I thought that wrong, the political Left, and especially its extreme wing, is based on self-loathing and a visceral hatred for the established order of Western culture, based on the Catholic Faith, reason, the rights of the individual, and ownership of private property.  Their hatred is stronger than their love.  And, deep down, even committed leftists know the worldly, materialist, sexualist lifestyle they promote is unfulfilling and bereft of meaning.  Fundamentally, the left’s greatest enemy, going back to well before the French Revolution, is the Catholic Church/Christianity.  It is thus a diabolical movement at least to some degree, and many on the left, I believe, will willingly submit to islam when it comes down to it.  In fact, many are already doing so today, it is not young men (and women) of the right who are joining ISIS in large numbers from Europe, but mostly those on the left and the disaffected.

Yes, there will be committed leftists of a more libertarian stripe who will be violently opposed to an encroaching islam, but many will eagerly hop on what they perceive as the “strong horse” either out of conviction or convenience.  We may even get to see in our lifetime former libertines who used to advance the grossest immoralities calling for women to wear the hijab (or burqa) and barbaric repression of sodomites.

Anyway…….I think that a greater likelihood than some great left wing resistance to the advance of islam.  What resistance there is will come from Christians, because only a competing religious conviction can stand against another.

May the blood of all the Catholic martyrs of islamic atrocities, and their prayers, lead to the restoration of our Church!

The black flag of jihad flying over St. Peter's in a photoshopped image.  Will we  let this happen?

The black flag of jihad flying over St. Peter’s in a photoshopped image. Will we let this happen?

A fairly balanced assessment of the new Doctor of the Church February 26, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in disconcerting, Ecumenism, episcopate, General Catholic, huh?, Papa, pr stunts, religious, scandals, secularism, Society, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

I think  many were surprised when Pope Francis announced the 36th Doctor of the Church was not even a Catholic, but a member of the Armenian Orthodox Church.  I know Ann Barnhart has addressed this matter in her usual detached and understated way, but I thought Eliot Bougis’ coverage might be a bit more balanced.

What do we know of this Saint few in the Western Church had heard of before Sunday, Gregory of Narek (ca. 950-1005)?  Well, we know he was a stgregorymember of the Armenian Orthodox Church, which has oft been described as a Monophysite Church that failed to approve the Council of Chalcedon, rather like many Coptic churches.  However, the Armenians dispute this and claim to be Miaphysites, holding a nuanced position between that adopted at Chalcedon and the condemned heresy of Monophysitism. Both positions have to do with not the personage of Christ, but his nature.  Catholics believe Christ is both God and man with a divine and human nature, whereas monophysites hold that Christ may have been God and man but only had one (divine) nature.  Miaphysites occupy a position somewhat in between.  All of these discussions on the person, nature, and will of Christ can become very complex very fast and very small differences in language (including the effects of translation) can have a big impact.  If you want a strong opinion on Miaphysitism, read Barnhart’s piece.

With that background, some thoughts and questions from Mr. (Dr.?) Bougis, who doesn’t reject the elevation on the grounds of heresy, but does wonder how this can be reconciled with many troubling factors:

The AOC, the body to which Gregory belonged, has formally and persistently rejected the authority of the Council of Chalcedon, was not in communion with Rome during Gregory’s life, and highly venerates Gregory, who was (as Ann Barnhardt strongly emphasizes) a miaphysite. “The main difference,” notes the just cited AOC website, “between the Byzantine tradition, also known as Chalcedonian churches and the Armenian Church, (together with other non-Chalcedonian churches) has been on the issue of Christology, i.e., the dogma related to Christ’s Divine and Human natures.”……

……..So, a saint venerated in a fellowship that has for centuries rejected Chalcedon–a council universally binding on the Catholic Church–is considered a Doctor of the Catholic Church. Are there any other councils that one might reject while still enjoying exemplary ecclesial status–say, Trent or Vatican II[Great points. Traditionally, rejection of an ecumenical Council, especially one of the famous first four, was seen as admission of heresy and status as excommunicate.  But we all know all the old rules have been thrown out and we’re just sort of making things up as we go along]

Does this elevation not also canonize Gregory? How could it not? If he is but a provincially revered saint in an ancient but schismatic Christian communion, how can he be considered a universal Doctor? Are there any other Doctors of the Church who are not also celebrated in her liturgy as saints?* Are there any other Doctors who belonged to schismatic bodies? [Uh…….no]

………Am I the only one who thinks this cause, which had been underway for some time, was executed with such celerity in order to throw a grim but timely light on one of Pope Francis’s favorite themes, “the ecumenism of blood”? As he most recently put it: “Be they Catholic, Orthodox, Copts, Lutherans, it doesn’t matter: They’re Christian! The blood is the same: It is the blood which confesses Christ”. [I had not seen this quote before.  This is one of the most clearly problematic statements I’ve seen from Pope Francis, and seems very difficult to comprehend as other than representing a distressing indifference]

* [I’ve since learned that Gregory is in fact in the Church’s most recent martyrology, but not in the earlier edition, and is mentioned as a saint in the CCC, so this just confirms my instinct to see something beautiful here, regardless of how it might be spun for this or that ideological fetish. {Further research leaves me uncertain once more. Did Rome recognize Gregory of Narek’s sanctity as recently and suddenly as 2001/2005? What’s going on here?}]

Personally, I find this elevation at the least quite imprudent, and at worst, gravely scandalous.  This is sort of “ecumenism” by default – sure, we don’t safe_imagebelieve the same things, but we’ll just paper over the differences and pretend we do!  Then, we’ll elevate each other’s holy people to “saints!”

You know I’m a former episcopalian.  The Anglican Church has its own calendar of “saints,” and quite a calendar it is!  It includes such notable non-Anglicans as Martin Luther King and Ghandi (among many, many others, including a number of post-Reformation Catholics!). Over time, it has become an increasingly worldly list, with an always leftist drift.  Is that what we can look forward to in the steady episcopalianizing of the Catholic Church?  Will we have Saint Cesar Chavez and Saint Barack Obama one day?  How about a “Saint Mohammad?”

I know the ecumenical dimension probably was dominant in this act, but I cannot help but think an almost equally important aspect was the sowing of enormous confusion.  Can we not even trust Doctors of the Church anymore?  And is the standard not getting watered down quite a bit?  For over 1500 years, there were always recognized 8 Doctors, four Latin and four Greek.  Two more, Aquinas and Bonaventure, were added in the 16th century. Since that time, and especially since 1925, the title has proliferated and now it seems every Pope must name at least one (if not several) Doctors.  Certainly I download (3)have no problem with the likes of Teresa of Avila or Robert Bellarmine being accorded such an honor, but I do think the rapid proliferation of the awarding of this distinction is tending to water down its import.  It took 1900 years to recognize 23 Doctors, whereas 13 have been recognized in less than 100 years.  I note the only modern popes (since Pius VII) NOT to name a Doctor of the Church have been Gregory XVI and Saint Pius X – both incredibly holy men not much given to hubris.

Maybe I’m getting too crotchety.  I don’t know, what’s not to like about another Doctor of the Church?  Why do I always have to complain?  It just seems a bit too cute, a bit too……worldly?

What’s funny, is that just four years ago I read a book The Thirty Three Doctors of the Church.  Just in a few years, that book has become quite out of date.

 

Obama Administration demands Catholic charities provide abortion for immigrant children February 26, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, Basics, contraception, disaster, episcopate, error, General Catholic, horror, Immigration, persecution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, the struggle for the Church, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

I am sorry to say, before getting into the latest act of barbarity enacted by Obama against the Church (and believing Christians generally – and compare this to his approach to muslims, with the kid gloves on ISIS and constant apologias and “fabric of the country” and all that – I still cannot believe that most mainstream conservative commentators view calling Obama a marxist muslim Manchurian candidate out of bounds), I should say this: do we not know how this will play out?  Even with public demonstrations of opposition and most likely court challenges, do we not know that Amchurch, and especially the charitable organizations associated with the USCCB, already cooperate with the federal agenda of evangelizing for the sexular pagan religion and already cooperate with abortion providers and distributors of contraception (including abortifacients) on a wide basis?  Is that not what the continual scandals coming out of Catholic Relief Services tell us?  Even more, have not CRS and other organs basically said they have to cooperate with the sexular pagan agenda (in the form of these wicked collaborating organizations) in order to maintain that oh-so-wonderful federal funding?

Maybe I’m getting jaded, but while I’m sure the USCCB and other Church authorities and others pray hope the courts may provide some relief, if push comes to shove, I am pretty skeptical that Catholic organs will stand on sacred Doctrine and take the admittedly huge hit of losing federal funding should it actually come to that.  I think Obama knows this, which is why he continues to press and press and press.

Anyway, the report:

The Obama administration is getting ready to issue new rules requiring charities to provide abortions to child refugees entering the US without their parents. Faith-based groups say this is a contravention of the rights of parents and a violation of the conscience rights of faith-based groups helping resettle the children.

The public has until Monday to comment on the fast-tracked new rules, which were issued on Christmas Eve.  [Obama is fast-tracking everything in his bid to “fundamentally transform” this nation into a muslim communist kleptocracy] The administration says it would be “contrary to the public interest” to wait “until a public notice and comment process is complete.” [Meaning, contrary to his political interest] The administration also asserts that no Congressional review is required and that there is no issue with federalism or any impact on families in the new guidance.

The rules require faith-based providers to make referrals for emergency contraception, partner with groups which provide abortion, or notify the federal government which would make arrangements for the abortion. If groups do not do so, they are not eligible for federal aid. Staff associated with Catholic agencies told the Friday Fax that they had conveyed their objection to the new rules to the Obama administration. They are required to comply no later than June 24, 2015.

[And that’s not all!…..] The rules also require care provider facilities to train their staff in “LGBTQI” and identifying “transgender and intersex” unaccompanied children. The rules assert that “‘Gender’ refers to the attitudes, feelings, and behaviors that a given culture associates with a person’s biological sex,” and that “This term is not to be confused with ‘sex’ [which] refers to a person’s biological status and is typically categorized as male, female, or intersex.” [And, if that “transgender” 10 year old demands hormone treatment, under rules approved by the Obama administration recently, the aid agency would be required to provide those, too. This is beyond incredible, and, with abortion on demand for underage youth and even gender mutilation being provided gratis per the American taxpayer (my God this Obama hates this country with white hot passion), what enormous new avenues will be available to the child sex trade!  Not only will the Obama administration make it incredibly easy to sneak children into this country and allow them to stay permanently, but with no parental involvement slave traders can get them abortions when pregnant, get boys turned into more lucrative girls, etc.  Has anyone even remotely thought of the potential for the gravest evils in all this?  Or is that bug actually a feature?  How many times has Bill Clinton been to “pedophile island?”]

I hate this sick world more and more and more.  I’m sure the USCCB will go to court, and may even win.  But if they somehow don’t…….don’t you imagine a papered over face saving non-change “change” and then continuation with business as usual?

Scandal!? Vatican official intercepted orthodox book at 2014 Synod? February 26, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, persecution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, SOD, the return, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

The report below is getting wide coverage.  Something may come along to refute or cast doubt on it, but, then again, we have seen apologias for pretty much iron-clad events for the past two  years solid.

The book Remaining in the Faith of Christ, an anthology of contributions from relatively orthodox sources such as Cardinal Burke, Cardinal Muller, and others, which was intended to be distributed to all Synod members this past October, was apparently intercepted by Pope Francis’ hand-picked Synod administrator, Cardinal Baldisseri, who asserted that the book would “interfere” with the conduct of the Synod.

The source for the below is the generally reliable Edward Pentin.  If true, this is utterly amazing, and rather puts the lie both to the talk of “mercy” we’ve been hearing as well as the calls for “open and honest” discussion.  Apparently, “open” discussion can only be had from one side:

A Vatican department allegedly intercepted over a hundred copies of a new book written by five cardinals to prevent it being read by the majority of participants of a synod last October called by Pope Francis.

“Remaining in the Truth of Christ,” a commercially successful book reaffirming Catholic teaching on marriage and the family, was mailed to all the synod fathers in the Paul VI Hall, where the meeting was taking place.

Reliable and high level sources allege the head of secretariat of the synod of bishops, Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri, ordered they be intercepted because they would “interfere with the synod.”
A source told me that Baldisseri was “furious” the book had been mailed to the participants and ordered staff at the Vatican post office to ensure they did not reach the Paul VI Hall.

Those responsible for mailing the books meticulously tried to avoid interception, ensuring the copies were sent through the proper channels within the Italian and Vatican postal systems. The synod secretariat nevertheless claims they were mailed “irregularly,” without going through the Vatican post office, and so had a right to intercept them.

The book’s mailers strongly refute this, saying they were legitimately mailed. Some copies were successfully delivered…….
…….Sources say it’s not clear where the intercepted copies of the book ended up, but believe they may have been destroyed. Asked in December about the claims, Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi said he “knew nothing” about the allegations and said the sources did not seem to him to be “serious and objective.”

Since then the allegations have become more widely known and have been corroborated at the highest levels of the church.

My goodness.  We’ve learned a fair amount of Cardinal Baldisseri, of late, including his arguments with groups defending the family that they need to get with the modernist program.

Is this not stunningly similar to the “lost votes” scandal of Vatican II, when a progressive apparatchik deliberately misplaced the requests of many more orthodox council fathers regarding concerns over the document that became Dignitatis Humanae?  Several hundred interventions were made, but then claimed to be lost, later found, after the deadline for submittal had expired?  Am I remembering that right?

Is this not the kind of thing that occurs more when you have a predetermined outcome you’re trying to arrive at, rather than during “open and honest” discussion?  And is it not strongly indicative that maybe many Synod members, even, are not terribly well formed in the Faith, that this book would be considered dangerous enough to block?

Amazing. Just amazing.