jump to navigation

Fr. Fidenzio Volpi, OFM, Cap has suffered a severe stroke May 6, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, Four Last Things, General Catholic, Holy suffering, Interior Life, persecution, religious, sadness, Tradition.
comments closed

The man at the center of the storm surrounding the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate, Fr. Fidenzio Volpi, OFM, Cap, has suffered an apparently severe stroke. Original reports indicated he had died, but apparently he is still alive but in grave condition.  Fr. Volpi was, of course, named Apostolic Administrator of the Franciscan Friars in 2013, and his time overseeing the order has been nothing if not controversial and upsetting to many faithful Catholics.  The news as follows via NLM:

“This morning news was circulated of the presumed death of Fr (Fidenzio) Volpi, reported to have happened yesterday after a stroke. It has been confirmed that Fr Fidenzio did suffer a stroke a few days ago, but the report of his death has been denied. Messa in Latino’s sources, persons close to the Capuchin, and very reliable, have confirmed to our editors that Fr Volpi is still alive, but in extremely serious condition. Let us pray for him.”

This report will be updated as events warrant.

Yes, I do pray for his recovery, and if he does recover, that he may perform his office with the FFIs in a quite different manner.  For now, I will stick to prayers for his recovery and that he have the time and ability to make a very good last Confession and receive Viaticum and Last Rites.  Should he die, I will pray for the repose of his soul.

Dear Lord – it really is 1972 all over again May 6, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in Art and Architecture, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, huh?, pr stunts, scandals, secularism, the return, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

Same explosion of secular modernism in the Church.  Same extreme confusion and error from the hierarchy.  Same chaos in the Church. Same freakishly dismal, nearly blasphemous art:

logo-e1430936537670

So this is the official logo for the Year of Mercy.  I think it would be an act of mercy if they would choose a different logo.

What is this, two-headed Jesus carrying a decapitated body? It took me a while to figure out what was going on. Do you notice there are only 3 eyes on the two heads, and one of them is bizarrely placed?  Could you even recognize it as Jesus without the holes in His hands?  Do we really have to return to the terrible art of 40 years ago that nobody like then and looks even more ridiculous now?

Oh, I get it.  It’s modern art, and requires the artiste to explain his…..ahhh……..unusual……..choices (apparent lack of talent not explained).  This is the reason for the shared eye:

The image, created by Jesuit Father Marko Rupnik, also shows one of Jesus’ eyes merged with the man’s to show how “Christ sees with the eyes of Adam, and Adam with the eyes of Christ.”

That really doesn’t make much sense, but seems evocative of a highly dysfunctional understanding of Christ and salvation.  Adam sees with the eyes of Christ?  Not after the Fall he didn’t.

I’m not going to try to apologize for the artist as the guy at the link did.  Look, the artist made what he made, but you know committee after committee had to approve this.  The blame really lies there.  Obviously, there are some highly influential people about in the Vatican now, including those involved in this ‘Year of Mercy,’ who really need a bass kicking want it to be 1972 all over again.  Back when they were young. Back when this kind of thing was fresh and hip. Wait…..no, it wasn’t.  It was never either.

If you want to be even more mortified, read the official press release that accompanied the unveiling of this artistic triumph from 1969.  Key quote:

The motto, “Merciful Like the Father,” he said, “serves as an invitation to follow the merciful example of the Father who asks us not to judge or condemn but to forgive and to give love and forgiveness without measure.”

I thought Our Blessed Lord also said we must repent and be converted.  That vital aspect – THE vital aspect – has been quite missing from all the rhetoric regarding mercy and never judging others.  But we constantly have to judge others.  This idea that the Father demands we never judge is a progressive whitewash of the Faith.  Of course we are called to judge, how on earth do we know who to emulate as holy and avoid as sinful and dangerous?

Ah, but if All Dogs Go To Heaven, then it is a sin to judge and this life is all about building a kumbayah one world hand-holding “keep the world company” fantasy land.

I am reliably informed this is the official theme for the Year of Mercy:

Coca-Cola Company is the official soft drink sponsor of the 2015-6 Year of Mercy.

No that’s not true, but it may as well be.

 

Photos of Biden at St. Thomas Aquinas May 6, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, damnable blasphemy, disaster, episcopate, error, Eucharist, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, scandals, secularism, sickness, Society.
comments closed

I’ve been given approval to post these photos of VP Joe Biden at St. Thomas Aquinas parish in Dallas this past Sunday.  No, they don’t show him receiving, but I am told by two people who were there that not only did he receive the Blessed Sacrament, he did so from the hand of the priest, I believe pastor Fr. John Libone.  Someone has promised me pics from the inside of the church but I haven’t received those, yet.  Nevertheless, it is certain Biden was at the 9 am Mass, and that he received the Blessed Sacrament without challenge.  So, yet another wound to our poor lacerated Lord:

biden sta 2

Compare photo location to this one of front facade of St. Thomas Aquinas:

765f919a218cf247b3c2d6c95a215fc6

Same double-double doors, same statue of the Angelic Doctor.

He gabbed around with Girl Scouts (a scandal in itself).  They’re lucky they weren’t groped:

biden sta 3

 

biden sta

Joltin’ Joe stepping out to Kenwood Ave.

He was there. He received the Blessed Sacrament. The Knights are in an uproar (as well they should be).  He is, after all, one of their number, since Supreme Knight Carl Andersen squashed all dissent and used heavy-handed tactics to prevent ANY KoC council from terminating the membership of a high-profile heretic political member like Biden.  Yes, his home and state councils in Delaware did try to act against him, but they were quite brusquely made to stand down by Andersen.

And it is for that very reason that I left the KoC.

I’ll post more as it becomes available.

Primate of England, Cardinal Nichols, to offer Mass for “gays” May 6, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, paganism, persecution, sadness, scandals, secularism, sickness, Society, SOD, the struggle for the Church, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

For the first time a Cardinal, a Prince of the Church, will offer Mass for souls who openly indicate, and advocate in favor of, their affinity for sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance. That is, the Cardinal is offering Mass deliberately and directly for individuals who persist publicly in a state of profound disorder and, in almost all cases, manifest grave sin.

It seems impossible not to state that the Church is descending into chaos and open tolerance of the gravest evils:

Cardinal Vincent Nichols will celebrate Mass for gay Catholics on Sunday in central London.

Same-sex attracted Catholics, along with their families, will attend the Mass at Farm Street Jesuit Church, in Mayfair on May 10 at 18:15.

The Mass will mark the first time a cardinal has celebrated Mass specifically for same-sex gay Catholics.

Are there any other than “same-sex gay” people?  Do people who not only fall into sin, but who openly advocate in its favor and who fall into such error that they reject even the idea that their perverse predilection constitutes a sin (thus they are heretics) deserve the name Catholic?  Isn’t that an unwarranted moniker and a very large part of the problem in the Church, the continuing abuse of language and plain meaning in publication after publication, source after source, falsely identifying those who reject the Doctrine of the Faith as Catholics, and always in the service of the radical modernist agenda?

As to the unimaginable scandal this Mass will cause – even over and above the regular weekly Mass offered specifically for these poor lost souls on a weekly basis, which only confirms them in the gravest of sins as they pile up blasphemy upon blasphemy re-crucifying Our Lord week after week – consider this a companion piece to the report on Joe Biden yesterday.  Readers have sent me absolute confirmation of his presence at Mass and reception of the Blessed Sacrament.  I cannot substantiate this next detail, yet, but the VP received from the hand of a priest.

So what are faithful Catholics to make of this more than mere failure of leadership, but scandal created by a positive, voluntary action taken by a major prelate?  Of course Nichols has long been known for his extreme progressive tendencies, but at a time when the Church in general and faithful souls in particular are experiencing dire persecution for their holding fast to the moral beliefs the Church has always held from her inception, this kind of action takes on a radical nature that appears aimed at supporting revolution within the Church.  I don’t see how it can be viewed any other way.  Certainly it is crass and self-serving, but given the scandal at the first session of the Synod and the full-court press on the Church and faithful Christians ongoing in the culture, the timing of this scandal and the nature of the act looks inescapably like a flag-planting, a declaration of a doctrinal stand.

Which, coming from a prince of the Church, is just an incredible betrayal. But it’s hardly the first one, we’ve been betrayed to death for decades now.

 

Educated beyond imbecility – Australian “philosophers” question value of family, state parents should feel guilty for spending time with kids May 6, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, Basics, disaster, error, family, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, paganism, persecution, sadness, scandals, secularism, shocking, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

There is no limit to the error and evil to which souls will descend when they reject God.  To explain the mind-numbing catalog of evils of the former Soviet system, the best Alexander Solzhenitsyn could do was to say: “people have forgotten about God.”  I can’t think of a much better one-phrase explanation for the accelerating descent into madness and barbarity that we see all around us.  This latest episode from some Australian philosophers is simply beyond description.  You have to read it to believe that people would actually think thoughts so inane.

Two Australian philosophers have posited that having an intact and healthy family life constitutes an “unfair advantage,” and that parents who spend time with children, for instance, by reading to them, should be wracked with guilt over their care, because there are other, slovenly parents who don’t do so, and isn’t it evil to create such a disparity?  This is cultural marxism to the Nth degree, courtesy of our insane academic class:

‘I got interested in this question because I was interested in equality of opportunity,’ he says.

‘I had done some work on social mobility and the evidence is overwhelmingly that the reason why children born to different families have very different chances in life is because of what happens in those families.’   [Well, duh!  We need a PhD to tell us that. Sure earning your salary there, bud]

Once he got thinking, Swift could see that the issue stretches well beyond the fact that some families can afford private schooling, nannies, tutors, and houses in good suburbs. Functional family interactions—from going to the cricket to reading bedtime stories—form a largely unseen but palpable fault line between families. The consequence is a gap in social mobility and equality that can last for generations……. [The poor you will always have with you.  But the left would destroy the family not to aid the poor as they purport, but to serve themselves. The family is the final block to ultimate leftist power.  See how the family was destroyed in the old USSR]

……One way philosophers might think about solving the social justice problem would be by simply abolishing the family. If the family is this source of unfairness in society then it looks plausible to think that if we abolished the family there would be a more level playing field.’   [But at what cost?  Just because Plato argued in favor of a limited application of this theory (he was refuted by the far more moral, and brilliant, Aristotle) doesn’t make it reasonable. I know a woman who adopted a child raised in a post-Soviet Russian orphanage. There were tens or hundreds of thousands of children abandoned by their mothers in the wake of the Soviet collapse. So many of those children received the level of care one would expect from a communist orphanage. Left alone in their cribs for week, with no love, no comforting caress, the vast majority of them developed life-long attachment disorders and profound psychological problems.  The boy I know, and so many like him, will never be remotely right. They will in fact be a future source of suffering for others, either through their cruelty and criminal activities or through their inability to truly love and care for someone else. And this is what this philosopher sees as “good,” a bunch of devastated, broken human zombies.]

…..‘What we realised we needed was a way of thinking about what it was we wanted to allow parents to do for their children, and what it was that we didn’t need to allow parents to do for their children, if allowing those activities would create unfairnesses for other people’s children’. [Remember how I said this was all about power and control.  Believe me now?  So they’ll decide what parents are allowed to do.  You think homeschooling is high on their list of allowables?]

The test they devised was based on what they term ‘familial relationship goods’; those unique and identifiable things that arise within the family unit and contribute to the flourishing of family members.  

For Swift, there’s one particular choice that fails the test.

Private schooling cannot be justified by appeal to these familial relationship goods,’ he says. ‘It’s just not the case that in order for a family to realise these intimate, loving, authoritative, affectionate, love-based relationships you need to be able to send your child to an elite private school.’…… [No, of course not. All children must attend the same government-run conformity centers public schools!  You can bet they have an even more negative view of homseschooling] 

……..So should parents snuggling up for one last story before lights out be even a little concerned about the advantage they might be conferring?

‘I don’t think parents reading their children bedtime stories should constantly have in their minds the way that they are unfairly disadvantaging other people’s children, but I think they should have that thought occasionally,’…… [And remember the mandatory self-flagellation for contributing to inequality!]

……Then, does the child have a right to be parented by her biological parents? Swift has a ready answer.

‘It’s true that in the societies in which we live, biological origins do tend to form an important part of people’s identities, but that is largely a social and cultural construction. So you could imagine societies in which the parent-child relationship could go really well even without there being this biological link.’ [Yes, having bored, disinterested, low-paid government employees raise children would surely be better.  Sure worked out well for my friend’s Russian adoptee!]

From this realisation arises another twist: two is not the only number.

‘Nothing in our theory assumes two parents: there might be two, there might be three, and there might be four,’ says Swift[And I think you can now see what this entire effort has been about all along – rationalizing perverse individuals adopting or making frankenstein babies and “diverse living arrangements.”  Sick.]

It’s here that the traditional notions of what constitutes the family come apart. [Only in the mind of a leftist academic.  For billions of people around the world, what constitutes family is crystal clear.]  A necessary product of the Swift and Brighouse analytical defence is the calling into question of some rigid definitions…….

We do want to defend the family against complete fragmentation and dissolution,’ he says. ‘If you start to think about a child having 10 parents, then that’s looking like a committee rearing a child; there aren’t any parents there at all.’

Oh bull!  That’s just another arbitrary distinction with no fundamental basis. If you are going to argue that groups of casually-related people (primarily through sex) can constitute a family, there is no upper limit to the number.  Saying “10 is too many” is a completely arbitrary distinction and doesn’t stand the slightest scrutiny.

None of the above does.  I am reminded of the fact that the satanic “ethicist” Peter Singer has advocated for child-murder on children up to five years old, simply because mom or dad feel like it.  Because a child’s life is worth nothing, but an ethicist’s is.  But why stop at 5?  Singer actually has a point, in that the distinction presently made between killing children in the womb or those outside it is as artificial as the limit on the number of parents above, once you destroy the concept of the family as mother, father, and children.  Singer based his entire argument on the fact that abortion is legal, so why not child murder?  Personally, I’d prefer we pare down the number of academics by a few hundred thousand.

And the critical part is that all of this insanely perverse, diabolically evil thinking stems from one central fact: rejection of God and a transcendent source of Truth.  When men try to be god and reject that truth, there is no limit to the insanity and depravity that will follow, as the above so aptly demonstrates (which, believe it or not, was part of a broader effort to somehow “justify” the existence of the family as such a horrid source of inequality.  And the (forgive me, Lord) idiotic reporter just sat there and lapped it up uncritically.  Gashats.