The manifest injustice of pseudo-sodomarriage June 2, 2015
Posted by Tantumblogo in catachesis, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, paganism, persecution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, Spiritual Warfare, the enemy.comments closed
Reader and real time acquiantance JF turned me onto Robert Reilly’s fantastic book Making Gay Okay: How Rationalizing Homosexual Behavior is Changing Everything. While Reilly is certainly a Catholic, since so many in our society discount religious arguments from the start, he based this book length refutation of the perversion and evil abuse that is pseudo-sodomarriage solely on arguments from reason, without mention of a single verse of Scripture or tenet of Doctrine. Even though I thought I was pretty well steeped in all the arguments against this arrogation to redefine marriage, I have learned quite a few more from this book. I highly recommend it.
To give a fer instance of where I’ve learned much more regarding the evil of the attempted destruction of marriage as the foundational institution of society, here is an excerpt on the injustice of this redefinition from natural reason (pp. 47-9). Reilly shows that the kind of irrational, unjust society that can pretend people of the same sex can be married, is the kind of society where will to power dominates and eventually will lead to a barbaric authoritarian regime:
An injustice of similar magnitude is perpetuated by naming same-sex couplings “marriage.” Socrates and Plato said that a chaste loving relationship loving relationship between a man (erastes) and a male youth (eromenos) is morally superior to one in wih ch sexual touching takes place. Marriage for those who enggage in sodomy reverses this moral judgment, and laces sodomitical behavior on a higher moral plane than chastity. This inversion of the classical moral order cannot take place without a corresponding inversion of the classical definition of justice. One will give to things what is their due no longer according to what they are. In other words, justice will reside in one’s desires or will, rather than in the reality of what is. For same-sex marriage to be just, justice has to be whatever we say it is.
This is a very dangerous belief-that we get to make up what things are. If Nature is denied, then justice will necessarily be reduced to what is willed, which, in turn, becomes right as the rule of the stronger…….This is what tyrants do. What is arbitrary is by definition tyrannical. It is based upon pure will, unguided by reason. Those who wish to base their freedom upon the supposed purposelessness of things, which obtains in the absence of Nature, should face the consequences of this view. What seems unmitigated freedom is, in fact, the foundation of tyranny.
Unfortunately, this solipsistic view of reality has reached high places, as we shall see with regard to various Supreme Court rulings. For now, we excerpt this sentence from the 1992 Casey vs. Planned Parenthood ruling, in which the court opined that “at the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.” [This was the diabolical verbiage from Sandra Day O’Connor upon which this noxious decision hung. From there, she argued that contraception is the backbone of American society, with abortion its indispensable backstop. So, we pretend babies aren’t, and permit their murder in their millions. Diabolical, indeed] Well, actually not. The universe is already here. It has already been defined for us; otheriwse it would not be in existence. Our choice is not to make up the meaning of the universe but to discern its meaning and then either conformm ourselves to it or revolt against it.
The choice today is revolt. Igor Stravinsky wrote: “The old original sin was one of knowledge, the new original sin is one of non-acknowledgement.” It is the refusal to acknowledge anything outside the operation of the human will-most especially the good toward which the soul is ordered. The good is what must ultimately inform human justice. Therefore, moral relativism is inimical to justice, as it removes the epistemological ground for knowing the good….If what is good is relative to something other than itself, then it is not the good but the expression of some other interest that only claims to be the good. Claims of “good” then become transparent masks for self-interest. This is the surest path back to barbarism and the brutal doctrine of “right is the rule of the stronger.” The regression is not accidental. Relativism inevitably concludes in nihilism, and the ultimate expression of nihilism is the supremacy of the will.
————-End Quote————
I believe I have touched on many of these points in the past, but never with such eloquence or so cohesively. I have long believed that the direction of the sexular pagan culture, increasingly cut off from the Christian heritage that once informed it, is heading inexorably towards a nightmare of authoritarianism, barbarity, and the grossest immorality. Already we see the “transgender rights” movement trying to destroy the notion of sex as in inborn characteristic. Beyond that, polygamists, and, the ultimate demonic “prize,” child sex abuse, waits in the wings. It won’t be 10 years before we’ll see at least the former legal, and strong arguments being made for the latter. It will be literally hell on earth.
People wonder why we see the left behaving more and more openly in repressive, authoritarian manners. This is why. The closer they get to their end goal of the complete and total destruction of even the few remaining shreds of moral decency, at least insofar as their precious if sterile gonads are concerned, the more openly authoritarian they behave. They do this not only because that is the nature of leftism always, but also because each incremental step towards evil requires greater and greater repression of those who object. Reilly explains the motives behind this repression in detail – I hope to address those later, God willing.
As a final note, in 1997, the radical marxist lesbian barbara findlay (she spells her name without caps) declared: “‘the legal struggle for queer rights will one day be a showdown between freedom of religion versus sexual orientation.” But incredibly, few in the Church today, especially in positions of leadership, are capable of viewing the ongoing cultural warfare in these stark terms. Most would rather these problems at least go away, if they are not four square on the wrong side. But no matter how they try flee from the issue, they will be made to care.
The other side has known what it’s about all along . Do we?
BETRAYAL! Fallen Jesuit Saint Louis University to remove statue of the holy Fr. Peter de Smet! June 2, 2015
Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, Interior Life, paganism, persecution, priests, religious, sadness, sanctity, scandals, secularism, sickness, Society.comments closed
As Patrick Buchanan rightly notes, the cultural cleansing of Christianity continues apace. But this is too much. I have been blessed to read the biography of Fr. de Smet, one of the greatest apostles to heathen peoples this nation has ever seen. I have blogged about him here, here, here, and here. He evangelized, baptized, and fully converted thousands of “native American” indians. He was, for a period of 30 years or so, almost always the first priest to make contact with distant tribes. He crossed 2/3 of this nation on foot too many times to count. And he finished his days in Saint Louis, where the Jesuit university he helped found is now utterly turning its back on him as being inconvenient to the leftist sexular pagan overculture (I add emphasis and comments):
The culture war against Christianity is picking up speed.
Last week came word Saint Louis University will remove a heroic-sized statue of Fr. Pierre-Jean De Smet S.J. from the front of Fusz Hall, where it has stood for 60 years. [What wretched souls to so besmirch the memory of such a great, saintly priest, who gave himself totally to the good of others.]
The statue depicts Fr. De Smet holding aloft a crucifix as he ministers to two American Indians, one of whom is kneeling. [And kneel they did, and rightly so! They revered Fr. de Smet and the other blackrobes beyond measure because they brought them salvation through the message of Christ. That message resonated with them because the law of God is written on every man’s heart. While the North American missions certainly had their successes and failures, they were enormously important in saving thousands upon thousands of souls]
Historically, the statue is accurate. Fr. De Smet, “Blackrobe,” as he was known, was a 19th-century missionary to Indian tribes who converted thousands. A friend of Sitting Bull, he spent his last years in St. Louis. [And mediated some of the few periods of peace between the aggrieved natives and the land-hungry Americans. You would think he would be appreciated at least on that worldly basis. He was enormously respected by even the most militant natives for just that reason. But leftism is founded upon ignorance of history, so I am not surprised.]
And as the mission of this Jesuit university is, presumably, to instruct the Catholic young in their faith and send them out into the world to bring the good news of Jesus Christ as Lord and savior to nonbelievers, what exactly is the problem here? [The problem is, the university, students, faculty, and staff, have almost to a man converted to a different, implacably hostile religion]
According to SLU Assistant Vice President for Communications Clayton Berry, “some faculty and staff … raised questions about whether the sculpture is culturally sensitive.” Senior Ryan McKinley is more specific: “The statue of De Smet depicts a history of colonialism, imperialism, racism and of Christian and white supremacy.” [I would like to respond as Fr. de Smet would, with humility and great charity, but these wicked calumnies must be refuted. The man whose reputation is being drug through the mud was magnificent, charitable, giving, tireless, and devoted. He served others constantly without thought of self. He endured dangers and hardship that would make this anti-Catholic bigot Ryan McKinley wet himself at the mere thought. That university exists largely due to Father de Smet (his fundraising trips to Europe saved the university and the entire province on multiple occasions), and this is the thanks he gets, from some ignorant leftist dufus.]
But if the founder of Christianity is the Son of God, then Christianity is a superior religion. What Ryan and those faculty and staff seem to be ashamed of, uncomfortable with, or unable to defend, is the truth for which Saint Louis University was supposed to stand. [Ding ding. We have a winner.]
But simply because they are cowardly, or politically correct, why should that statue be going into the SLU art museum? Why should not they themselves depart for another institution where their sensitivities will not be assaulted by artistic expressions of religious truths? [Because the revolution inherently hates the Church and wants to see it crushed. And if the Church, or its institutions like Saint Louis University (note the name) are stupid enough to allow her most bitter enemies within her bosom to attack her from within, then more’s the better.
The message the SLU president should have given the dissenters is simple: We are a Catholic university that welcomes students and faculty not of the faith. But if you find our identity objectionable, then go somewhere else. We are not changing who we are. [They’ve already changed. They all belong to a competing, implacably hostile foreign religion, leftism. And they are being allowed to destroy almost all the Church’s most hallowed institutions from within]
———End Quote———
Father de Smet, pray for me, that I may have the kind of magnanimous charity you had. And pray for the university you helped found, and the order you gave such glory to, that they may return to the Catholic Faith they have so plainly departed, and so plainly despise.
I firmly believe, even though not yet canonized, you look down on this sad spectacle from Heaven. Pray for our Church, that sanity may return, especially in her leadership, and that we faithful may practice such prayer and penance as to be worthy of far better leaders.
What a hideous affront to such a noble man. I would ask why the local bishop did not intervene, but since Catholic bishops have largely abrogated their oversight of Catholic universities, that’s one major reason why things like this happen.
h/t CMR
Father Hunwicke on the Synod’s strange secrecy June 2, 2015
Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, Dallas Diocese, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, Papa, scandals, secularism, self-serving, shocking, SOD, the return, the struggle for the Church.comments closed
Some interesting thoughts from Fr. Hunwicke on the Synod’s secret conduct. He specifically has concern over Pope Francis’ statement that the Synod must be conducted in secret, with no names attached to interventions hearteningly orthodox or wretchedly radical, in order for the Holy Ghost to do its work. Otherwise, the Council Fathers would be far too concerned with what people might think of their heterodox or heretical statements? Few previous Synods and councils have been conducted not only in secrecy at that time, but also after the fact, with a ban on reporting who said what, who belonged to which faction, etc. Certainly, pontiffs have judged it prudent to bar the press from reporting on major Church Councils to prevent the press from hijacking them (would that would have occured in 1962!) while they were in session, but this is different: no attribution, ever, if it can be avoided. We still only have bits and pieces, rarely confirmed, from the first session of the Synod.
Fr. Hunwicke:
Here is the passage which I find enormously difficult.
“A synod without freedom is not a synod. It is a conference. The synod, instead, is a protected space in which the Holy Spirit can work. And for this reason the persons must be free. This is why I will not allow the things that each one says to be published with name and surname. No, it should not be known who has said it. I have no problem with revealing what has been said, but not who has said it, in such a way that one may feel free to say what one wishes.”In order to explain, stage by stage, why I find this so very frightening, let me (1) remind you of a key sentence in the Decrees of the First Vatican Council; “Neque enim Petri successoribus Spiritus Sanctus promissus est, ut eo revelante novam doctrinam patefacerent, sed ut, eo assistente, traditam per Apostolos revelationem seu fidei depositum sancte custodirent et fideliter exponerent.” [The Holy Spirit was not promised to the successors of Peter in order that, by his revelation, they might disclose new teaching, but so that, by his assistance, they might devoutly guard the revelation handed down through the Apostles, the Deposit of Faith, and might faithfully set it forth.]
[Father Hunwicke raises 4 other important concerns. Go read them there. I skip to the conclusion:
CONCLUSION
A bishop is not a distinguished individual; he is episcopus in et cum Ecclesia sua. Episcopacy is not a personal fashion accessory. I can think of few things more disgracefully clericalist, more ecclesiologically corrupt, than bishops meeting privately “in a protected space” in which they believe themselves free to stitch together something which might not be according to the traditam per Apostolos revelationem seu fidei depositum; and to do this without any element of the discipline and responsibility which comes from it being publicly known what each has said. Have their diocesan priests, deacons, and layfolk no rights whatsoever? Is Episcopacy simply a matter of lording it over the flock of Christ (I Peter 5:3) without oneself being answerable to the plebs sancta Dei? I am reminded of what an English poet called Kipling once said to an English Press Baron called Beaverbrook: “Power without responsibility – the prerogative of the harlot throughout the ages”. I pray that at least the English bishops at the synod will behave like (and I borrow here a phrase Newman used about his own greatly loved bishop Ullathorne) ‘straightforward Englishmen’ as well as like Catholic bishops, and publish openly outside the aula, whatever they have said privately within it.
Well, the first session of the Synod would seem to make this a forlorn hope. But prayer can overcome all things, so I will join Father Hunwicke in this prayer.
As for his conclusion, I think Fr. Hunwicke asks quite trenchant questions, questions that deserve an honest answer. From my limited reading of Church history, I would hazard the opinion that the Church since the Council, far from empowering the laity as promissed, has instead advanced a most insidious form of clericalism which is as elitist as all get out while having the audacity to pretend not to be. Just try to get an appointment with your local ordinary in virtually any diocese in the country (and assuming you are not an exceedingly well-heeled insider, known never to raise troubling questions) to see this in practice.
I know reading political models into the Church is supposed to be a fallacy, but sadly, the Church has been infiltrated by thoroughly political men (probably always, but especially now). It is difficult for me not to see in the “empowering” rhetoric of the post-VII period, juxtaposed with the reality of that insidious clericalism, just the same kind of tactics that progressive political masters have used for a century or more to get their way. These progressive politicians, by and large, speak of helping the little guy and serving their interests, all the while amassing power and wealth for themselves at the expense of the little guy. There has been quite a bit of this in the Church in the past several decades. The German episcopate and their behavior of late is a prime example.
To the more disconcerting matter of a Synod conducted in secrecy before, during, and after the fact, I again have a hard time seeing this as the actions of those who seek to uphold and defend the imutable Faith as it has always been handed on from one generation to the next. Hiding attribution of specific interventions and the leadership of the various cabals who may seek to radically change Church practice – and inevitably Doctrine – in ways contrary to even the direct command of our Blessed Lord speak to me of conspiracy. Perhaps that’s a failing on my part, but I think I am far from the only one to feel that way. I also have to agree that it is disgraceful and beneath the dignity of bishops, let alone the Bishop of Rome, to conduct themselves in this manner.
But there are those who claim this is all simply a matter of a bad translation…..how they explain the near-total blackout on attributable interventions at the first session of the Synod to translation, I do not know.
Aging US nuns from dead orders turn to Jewish nursing home June 2, 2015
Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, catachesis, disaster, Ecumenism, error, foolishness, General Catholic, paganism, religious, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, the struggle for the Church.comments closed
And, I’m sure you’ll be shocked to learn, they find themselves really digging all those Jewish practices! The fulfillment of the interreligious dream?
More broadly, this article relates how these sisters, whose radicalism and rejection of traditional modes of religiouis life and piety were primary causes in the collapse of their orders, are seeing the glorious, vibrant orders they inherited off to extinction. This is a tragedy beyond human reckoning, because pious religious are the backbone of a healthy Church:
She always thought she would live out her days as she had for decades, in a convent under the time-honored Roman Catholic tradition of younger nuns dutifully caring for their older sisters.
But with few young women choosing religious life, her church superiors were forced to look elsewhere for care, and in the past year have sent Rooney and dozens of other nuns to Jewish Home Lifecare, a geriatric-care complex in the Bronx founded as a nursing home for elderly Jews.
“I wanted my convent, my great big chapel, my Stations of the Cross,” Rooney said. “The very name ‘Jewish Home’ turned me off. … I don’t think anyone came here with a heavier heart than me.”
Rooney and 57 other sisters, ages 73 to 98, have since adjusted nicely to their new accommodations and neighbors, becoming an active part of classes and continuing their ministry with good deeds like holding the hands of dying patients on the hospice floor…..
……There are now more sisters over age 90 than under age 60, said Mary Gautier, a researcher at the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate at Georgetown University. The center’s 2009 study found that 80 percent of the nuns in the country were over 60. [Most of the mainstream orders will no longer exist in 10-20 years. Some of the most storied names in the history of the Church in this country will be no more. Yes there have been cultural factors that have precipitated the decline, but the fact that there are a good number of orders, much more faithful to the traditional practice of religious life, who are burgeoning with beautiful young souls shows it is not simply a matter of culture…….these orders committed suicide by embracing a toxic blend of pagan piety, leftist politics, and worldly practices.]
“Their model of caring for their older sisters is no longer sustainable,” said Robin Eggert, president of the Realm consulting group, which has worked with several nuns’ orders to find solutions…..
……..The Sisters of Charity of New York has seen its numbers decline from a 1960s peak of 1,350 to 270 today, and no new sisters had joined in the U.S. in 20 years. It was the first order to put out a request for proposals that was answered by the nonprofit Jewish Home Lifecare. Two other orders based in Manhattan, the Franciscan Handmaids of the Most Pure Heart of Mary and the Missionary Sisters of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, followed…….
……. While Jewish Home Lifecare is now nondenominational — most residents are Christian — its Jewish heritage remains apparent, with a resident rabbi and kosher-style meals in the independent living residences.
“I miss the bacon,” Richards said. Added Sister Maria Goretti Mannix, 83: “I notice that we never get ham or pork chops. The food is good, though.” [It is tragic that there is no Catholic alternative. Many of these orders stopped living in communal life years ago, so their current mode of living one to a room isn’t a huge shift for some]
[The most important part……]As the oldest nun to make the move, the once-skeptical [98 yo] Rooney said she has, in a sense, been “converted” by the kind welcome the nuns received.
“Now I go to the Jewish services as well as the Mass.”
—————End Quote—————
I think poor Sister Rooney could not have demonstrated the reason for her predicament, and that of the vast majority of religious orders, any more concisely or accurately. That kind of worldly kum bay yah, any religion is as good as any other tripe has infected women’s religious orders particularly. But if that is the case, if any religion is about as good as any other, who would possibly answer a call to live a life of radical poverty and devotion to Jesus Christ? The reason for the unprecedented implosion of religious life in this country is contained in that sentence. And while Sister Rooney may be a wonderful person, she and those like her bear a huge and damning responsibility for all but destroying religious life in this country.
As I noted above, there are religious orders, male and female, that are growing and flourishing, and they do so because they continue to believe and act like faith in Jesus Christ is necessary for salvation, that complete dedication to the interior life and self-denial is the path to holiness, and that the Catholic Church is the sole body established on earth by Christ for the betterment and salvation of souls. In short, they never drank the leftist KoolAid, and are blessed with many vocations as a result. The worldly, “spirit of Vatican II” orders are on an express train to extinction.
Some say these religious orders were led astray by radical Jesuits and others, but faith is a choice, and so is the embrace of something other than the Faith. No one put a gun to anyone’s head. If some of these orders or individual religious were duped into embracing novelties and radical practices by bad, unholy men, that doesn’t remove all culpability. And the collapse of women’s religious life in particular has been so injurious to souls, to the institution of religious life generally, and to the Church as a whole……these women bear an awful, terrible responsibility.
They really do need a lot of prayers.
Blogging may be light – computer issues June 2, 2015
Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, blogfoolery, rank stupidity, unadulterated evil, Uncategorized.comments closed
I got a really nasty virus called a “sinkhole” in what the admins are calling a “drive by” attack, meaning I just happened to land on the wrong page at the wrong time. I didn’t do anything stupid, like respond to a fake alert that I needed to update my anti-virus software or anything like that. Trend Micro just started sending out all kinds of alerts, and was apparently blocking literally hundreds of attempts to launch really bad websites. Glad I did not see any of those. The admins also said viruses are getting so advanced, act so quickly, and can mirror all your normal functions so exactly, even while proxying you out to some other platform, that the protection software is falling badly behind and it’s basically down to wiping your hard drive and starting over again. Great.
Also, we’re going through our ninth layoff in the last 7 years at work, so I have that going for me. I would really appreciate your prayers, at this point, anyone resembling “dead wood” was let go long ago, and they’re cutting deeply into muscle and sinew.
Having said that, I do have a backup machine right now so I may be able to get out a few things today.
A Blog for Dallas Area Catholics 