jump to navigation

Priest predicts error to be adopted by Ordinary Synod on the Family, but……. July 23, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, catachesis, different religion, disconcerting, episcopate, General Catholic, Papa, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, SOD, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

………not to worry, because Synods carry very little doctrinal weight (if any), and there is precedent for synodal error in the past.  I agree completely with the prediction and the lack of doctrinal authority in the Synod itself, which, like a national conference, is simply a meeting of a small sub-set of the world’s bishops and very far from an ecumenical conference.  But what I am concerned about is the encyclical which will follow the Synod, and the degree to which enemies of the Faith/modernist Katholycs will use the Synod to lure still more souls into perdition.  I am also concerned about the shut up and pray sentiment Father Nix seems to close his article with.

Nevertheless, interesting commentary from Father Nix, via Fr. Peter Carota (my emphasis and comments):

One of the surprising things I have seen among priests and the faithful under the Pontificate of Pope Francis is that certain people who used to hate the word “obedience,” maybe five years ago, now go on quoting obedience like they were St. John of the Cross!………

……..There is excitement and concern, from the left and right respectively, that the October 2015 “Synod on the Family” will change Church teaching on divorced and remarried receiving Holy Communion as well as those in homosexual unions being allowed to receive Holy Communion.  You might imagine that I don’t participate in the excitement of “the left” that doctrine might change, but did you know that I don’t participate in the concern to “the right” either?……[I get what he’s trying to say, but I disagree with common attempts to portray faithful/traditional/orthodox Catholicism as being a phenomenon of the right.  It is true that much of the Doctrine of the Faith is embraced by modern conservatives, but that Doctrine both long predates the liberal/conservative divide (something that did not exist until the late 17th century) and stands above political concerns. And certain aspects of the Faith are embraced by the left (though in totality, the right has adopted far more than the left, at least until very recently). But the main thing is this, which is the ultimate trick modernists have managed to fool people with: that Catholicism as always understood and practiced is now some weird phenomenon of “integrists” and “traditionalists,” creatures of the “right” who are simply manipulating the Faith in the same way that modernist sexular pagans do.  There probably exist examples of people who do, in actuality, do this, but it is false to smear the entire remnant of Catholics with these labels. And having concerns over the Synod and/or Pope Francis is hardly something that puts a Catholic’s credibility or faithfulness in doubt. Anyway, moving on….]

……..However, a synod does not only not have the weight of infallibility, but there is precedent for error in a synod!  This synod was the 18th century  Synod of Pistoia where Jansenism was promoted.  It’s crafty that Satan may be tempting the Church nowadays more towards presumption of God’s mercy, than the despair of God’s mercy within the Jansenism of the 18th century.  He’s tricky with that pendulum swing! [There have been other problematic synods, as well.  That is one reason why they fell out of fashion.  There were synods in 18th century France that also embraced Jansenism to varying degrees, and synods before that which seemed to find much to like in other errors.]

I hope I’m wrong, but I predict error coming in the October 2015 Synod of the Family, followed by Divine Intervention.  This is not because I’m a Savonorola prophet of doom, but on a very natural level, because of the manifest and public, shameless teaching of the Cardinals who have been recently promoted in these matters, as reported byLife Site News[Father then lists many statements from cardinals and bishops appointed to the Synod – by Pope Francis himself – which are highly disconcerting.]

……Let me (Fr. Nix, now) be very clear that I am obedient to Rome and the Bishops, [why feel compelled to make this statement?]  but no Bishop can change the words of Jesus Christ and what He said about divorce or what the Holy Spirit has said through the Apostle Paul on acting out any sexual sin (heterosexual or homosexual.)  Pray hard that I’m wrong about error coming down the pipes of this October Synod, but if I’m not, just remember that a synod can not change the words of Jesus Christ.  This is not a Protestant who believes in Sola Scriptura.………. [Huh?  Where did that come from?  Am I wrong in detecting a bit of a slight against the Society of Saint Pius X in that statement?]

I hope I’m wrong, but if I’m right and the synod disseminates error, “the right” will frenzy on how to explain the doctrinal confusion and “the left” will frenzy on how to rejoice over the doctrinal confusion.Either approach would be both unnecessary and superfluous.  As I wrote above, there is precedent in history for error to be found in a synod, and no synod can change the articulated faith and morals of Holy Mother Church, especially as found in Scripture, Councils, Creeds, Patristics and Ex-Cathedral statements.  A synod is none of these.  [So Father seems to be saying that we should not worry ourselves over the promotion of rank error from the highest levels of the Church, under the direct supervision of the Bishop of Rome?!?!  Goodness, if this is not something to get concerned over, what is?  I can tell you, having read a bit of history, that there was great consternation and “frenzy” over the outcome of the Synod of Pistoia.  It was a huge international controversy.  Is it “frenzy” to denounce any errors that come forth from the Synod and remind souls of Catholic Truth?  Is it “frenzy” to be scandalized by error emanating from the highest echelons of the Church?]

As Padre Pio said, “Pray, Hope and Don’t worry.”  God will straighten it out and we’ll all be fine. Chilax, as the niños say, even if things go down bad in October.

————–End Quote—————

I wish I could be as blissfully confident as Father Nix is as to the outcome of this Synod.  My concern is that souls will fall away in great numbers (and not only in the fallen West, but in places where the Faith is still relatively vigorous), either through the adoption of immoral acts “pastorally” made “moral” through a Synodal sleight of hand, or through scandal and wind up in one of the sects.  Pope Francis’ popularity is plummeting, especially among conservatives. More and more Catholics are becoming even further confused and scandalized.  While you and I and other souls may be blessed to stay faithful, what of those who won’t?  Absolutely prayer should be the bedrock of our faith, and excessive worry is unhealthful, but when the likelihood exists that errors promoted will lead to catastrophic consequences for potentially millions of souls, I’m afraid I cannot simply “chillax.”  If that makes me a bad, frenzied Catholic of the right, may God have mercy on me, but I doubt that’s the case.

I get that Father is probably trying to prevent souls being scandalized out of the Faith through his advice to calmly ignore the results of the Synod, but I think he takes his prescription a bit too far, and has fallen into common traps in slapping political labels onto what, up until recent decades, was simply Catholicism.

Your thoughts?

New lay altar service apostolate founded by Sons of the Most Holy Redeemer! July 23, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, episcopate, Eucharist, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Latin Mass, Liturgy, manhood, sanctity, Tradition, Victory, Virtue.
comments closed

Well this is a most positive development.  The Transalpine Redemptorists/Sons of the Most Holy Redeemer from Papa Stronsay, Scotland and Christchurch, NZ, have, under the sponsorship of Bishop Basil Meeking, DD, founded the Knights of the Eucharistic Heart of Jesus.  This is an organization dedicated to providing solid formation for boys and men who wish to serve Our Blessed Lord at His altar.  More:

The Knights of the Eucharistic Heart of Jesus is an organization which has been formed by the Congregation of the Sons of the Most Holy Redeemer. Its object is to provide a solid formation for boys and men who wish to serve Our Blessed Lord at His altar. It has been created in response to the need to train boys and men worthy of the duty of serving at the Traditional Rite of Holy Mass. A society called Knights of the Altar was begun under St John Bosco in 1858, and this name was used in the United States of America by a Fr Benz in 1939, who formed an Altar serving society. Our Society is largely based on the Knights of the Altar.

Why Knights?

Medieval Knighthood, in the service of manor lords, calls forth such ideals as honour, loyalty, justice, chivalry, and respect for all. In the use of the term knight, the Altar Server is reminded of his duty to serve the Lord of lords with fidelity and honour, to treat others with respect and justice, and to live an upright personal life, defending always the rights of God and His Holy Church. In the names page and squire, the server is reminded again of the years of practice and study that went into the training of a knight and should consider with what devotion and perseverance he should attend to his own training in the service of the Altar. The chevalierwas a travelling knight, which should remind the server that he should be ever travelling toward his heavenly goal.

Purpose of the Society

(1) To form a worthy guard of honour to our Divine Eucharistic King in whose service we willingly assume the dignity and honour of becoming Knights of the Eucharistic Heart of Jesus;

(2) To render faithful, reverent and edifying service to God by assisting His visible representatives, the Bishops and Priests, in offering the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and in all other liturgical and devotional functions;

(3) To enkindle in the hearts of the faithful whom we represent at the altar, greater piety and devotion by reverently performing the duties of our holy office and by giving good example in our daily lives;

(4) Finally, to ensure the continued and efficient function of the Knights of the Eucharistic Heart of Jesus as a society by attending meetings and giving of our service to the Church.

The young men inducted into this society made the following pledge:

“We, the Knights of the Eucharistic Heart of Jesus, pledge allegiance to our Lord and Master, Jesus Christ, to His representatives on earth, and to Mary, our Queen Immaculate, whom we will serve faithfully until we attain eternal triumph in heaven. We pledge ourselves to form a worthy guard of honour to our Divine Eucharistic King in whose service we willingly assume the dignity and honour of becoming Knights of the Eucharistic Heart of Jesus; to render faithful, reverent and edifying service to God by assisting His visible representatives, the Bishops and Priests, in offering the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and in all other liturgical and devotional functions; to enkindle in the hearts of the faithful, whom we represent at the altar, greater piety and devotion by reverently performing the duties of our holy office and by giving good example in our daily lives.”

Pics of the solemn event:

IMG_2205

IMG_2245

IMG_2257

IMG_2364

IMG_2338

I’m not sure how this society is intended to grow.  Perhaps contact the Transalpine Redemptorists to see how this society could be expanded to your locale, and what is involved.  Note that they did have a bishop emeritus mark the formal entrance of some 14 young men into this society.  It seems very formal, but I have little idea of the ceremony – or the commitment – involved.  Is it much beyond regular service at the altar in a traditional parish?

Perhaps a Transalpine Redemptorist would be kind enough to provide some elucidation?

Irrespective, more like this.

Mexican Revolution directed by a cabal of radical freemasons/American exploiters July 23, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, disaster, General Catholic, history, Holy suffering, horror, paganism, persecution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, Spiritual Warfare, the struggle for the Church, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

I have, good readers, been blessed to read several good histories on the persecution of Catholics in Mexico.  Blood Drenched Altars, Mexican Martyrdom, The Power and the Glory by Graham Greene, and the writings of Gary Potter all helped shape at least a basic knowledge of the course of the terrible persecution that afflicted the Catholic Church in Mexico over the period 1815 – 1940.

However, I must say, none of these books have established so clearly the near total involvement of highly anti-Catholic radical Masons at the top of the Mexican revolutionary leadership throughout this time period, and the deliberate 51tVnzCvRzL._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_
intervention of the United States government in favor of these Masons, as Father Michael Kenny SJ’s book No God Next Door.  From Joel R. Poinsett’s initial formation of a joint Mexican-American Supreme Masonic Council in New Orleans in 1827 – which set the course for the Mexican revolution for the next century, and thoroughly inculcated its anti-Catholic character – to Woodrow Wilson’s constant intervention in favor of the most radical, Church-hating elements in the disastrous “Tampico Affair” and other acts, this American-influenced (and at times dominated) Masonic cabal was the vital instigator of the vicious persecution of the Church and the subsequent secularization of Mexican life, which largely persists to this day.

There is far too much vital history contained in this book to cover in one post.  You really need to read the book.  But I can give some excerpts that will help establish the reality of American Masonic (and racist, anti-Catholic US Southerner) involvement in the savage, century-long persecution of the Church.  First, I’ll establish the personage of Joel R. Poinsett: Southerner, dedicated to establishing a great southern expansion of the United States (realized after the unjust war of 1846) mexiko_erschiessung-jpgfor the purposes of preserving the relative power of the slave states against the increasingly abolitionist North, Poinsett was appointed the first representative of the federal government to recently independent Mexico in 1825.  He immediately began gathering around himself all the radical, disaffected elements he could find, men dedicated both to turning Mexico into an American-type representative democracy, and, even more, dedicated to breaking the influence of the Catholic Church over Mexican life.  Thus, an early example of “nation-building” American hubris, almost two centuries before our adventures in the Middle East, attempting to impose on an unwilling and, even more, indisposed population the same kind of government that required centuries of development (and protestant/endarkenment) errors to bring to fruition in the United States.

When Poinsett was informed that Mexico was not then (nor is not now?) a suitable land for American-type democracy by Mexican leaders, he began organizing plots to overthrow that leadership and instigate an American-backed progressive revolution. His plan was to install a liberal democracy so friendly and beholden to the US for its power that it would willingly trade away most of Mexico’s land so that they might rule the rump state that remained. His actions caused great scandals, and he was subsequently recalled to the US under a dark cloud of shame, and his co-conspirators were exiled with him.

But Poinsett was a determined man.  He gathered around himself in New Orleans the revolutionary friends he had made in Mexico, and introduced them to the Lodge.  The Lodge would become the meeting place, nexus of communications, and Miguel_Pro_volleysource of diabolical inspiration for the Revolution for the next 120 years.  We take up this seminal secret meeting at the Grand Lodge La Luz in New Orleans held in 1827 under Poinsett’s direction:

Poinsett and the pro-American liberal party he had organized adopted in secret session of the Grand Lodge La Luz in New Orleans, 1827, the following preamble and platform:

“Convinced that the clergy, inasmuch as it opposes colonization (of Mexico, by Americans), is a permanent obstacle to reform; that it impedes the diffusion of light, [i.e., endarkenment ideals promoted by Masonry] provokes antagonism towards foreigners (i.e., Joel R. Poinsett)….the Mexican National Rite adopts in all its parts the political plan and program of reform proposed by progressive men (i.e., Joel R. Poinsett), which should be initiated in Congress as soon as possible by the Masons who hold seats there…….because being based on the principles taught by Masonry, the Rite should redouble its efforts to make it effective in accordance with the terms in which it is conceived, namely:

1. Absolute freedom of opinion and abrogation of all laws censoring the press
2. Abolition of special privilege for the clergy…..
3. Suppression of monastic institutions and all laws recognizing the intervention of the clergy in civil business, such as the marriage contract, etc.
4. Improvement of the moral condition of the people by depriving the clergy of its monopoly on public education by increasing educational facilities and inculcating social duties by means of the foundation of…….secular educational institutions for classic literature, science, and morals” [Education was in the hands of the Church because, to that time, no other entity could be bothered to provide it.  Education was free or incredibly cheap, and had been a substantial expense for the Church which operated schools, seminaries, and colleges at her own expense for the good of the people.  But since those schools naturally conveyed a Catholic viewpoint and the Doctrine of the Faith, along with all the other subjects, it had to be destroyed as an obstacle to “progress.”]

victoriano_ramirez-jpgSo what did this lead to?  With the practically communist 1917 Constitution – never voted on or approved by the people, but rammed through an unelected Congress under threat of violence – all of these anti-Church provisions and more were put in place.  And it was the United States government that assured the victory of the most radical elements in the long Mexican revolution:

“Article 3 of the 1917 Mexican Constitution is the main avenue that Calles [bastard child, never baptized, likely not even qualified to hold office as the son of a foreigner, he was also a brigand, murderer, insatiable thief, and manifest failure at all he tried before he became, for his enormous hatred of the Church, a powerful figure in the Revolution] has seized for the permanent uprooting of religion from the minds and hearts of Mexico.  This article abrogates the parents right to provide for the education of their offspring; and on this quite justifying basis, Calles proclaimed, and by organic law has since executed, his purpose, “to enter into and take possession of the consciences of children, of the consciences of youth,” and compel all Mexico “to belong to the revolution.”

Thus, also was finally realized in its fullness the plan of action set by Joel R. Poinsett and adopted in 1827 by the joint Mexican and American Supreme Masonic Councils in New Orleans, namely, to abolish the privileges of the clergy and all laws recognizing intervention of the clergy, and “to deprive the clergy of its monopoly on public education.”

This meant, as the context obviously shows, that the Church must be kept out of the schools, and religion out of all education, so that the State shall mould the pupils to its will.  This was precisely the purpose of the Farias decrees of 1833, of the Juarez code of 1857, of the Queretaro Constitution of 1817, as of the Calles amendments of 1934 and of the high Masonic Councils before and after 1827.  And all were based on the same ground, that the child belongs to the state, and that the state alone has the right to educate him, the parent not at all.  [Turning parents, in effect, into slaves of the state, slaves enjoined to provide offspring that the state will then take and mold according to its will.  How similar to the rhetoric of leftists of our own time (it takes a village).  There is nothing new under the sun, or Son.]Fr._Francisco_Vera_1927

……..That the child belongs to the state, and that the state has the sole right to educate him, and that all religion must be excluded from his teaching, is a primary Masonic doctrine, not only in Mexico and Latin countries, but here in the US, as well.  In Spain and France and other Latin lands the first sign of Masonic dominance is the exclusion of the crucifix from the school and its replacement with anti-Christian teachings.  United States Scottish Rite Masonry has always been in union with the Grant Orient and in sympathy with this policy, and all American masonry is in formal union with it now.…….

…….The Supreme Council of the Thirty Third Degree in Washington and the Imperial Council of Oregon, having resolved in 1920 that education in religionless public schools must be made compulsory, on all, both started an agitation for a law in Oregon compelling public school attendance for all children from 8 to 16. They assumed credit for its adoption in 1922 and had similar bills ready for other states……..

No sooner had the Supreme Court [in 1934] ruled out the Masonic doctrine as the direct antithesis of our “fundamental theory of liberty,” that the Supreme Council of the Thirty Third Degree issued in Washington a counter pronouncement in download (15)defiance of the Supreme Court of the nation…………issuing a profession of principles which Calles and his Mexican Masons could not better:

“We are, therefore, justified in continuing to assert and maintain our belief in the value of the compulsory requirement of attendance of all children upon the public schools.  We cannot at this time but insist upon the existence of the principle that the right of the child to avail himself of the educational opportunities of the public school is superior to the right of the parent or of any corporation, secular or religious, to shape islam-overview-universe-next-door-chapter-10-13-638in advance his intellectual allegiance and we should be alert to unite with every movement which tends to the maintenance of this right.” [It certainly seems that in this year of our Lord 2015 the Masons have essentially achieved their goal of “de-mythologizing” virtually all young people in this country and so many others – thus paving the way for our conquest by islam]

———–End Quote———–

Sorry, this post is becoming longer than I planned, so I’ll cut it off there.  Still later in the book, no less a personage than Theodore Roosevelt denounced the favoritism and direct aid given to the worst, most anti-Catholic revolutionaries by several American administrations, especially democrat ones. It is no accident that the Revolution in Mexico made its greatest gains, and consolidated its cruel anti-Church policies to the utmost, under the administrations of Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt.  Father Kenny shows that it was Wilson’s repeated intervention on the side of the revolutionaries Carranza, et. al., that allowed them to triumph over the much more moderate government of Huerta, among others.  Even the fruitless “punitive expedition” of Pershing against Pancho Villa could be seen as an effort to aid the by-then established Miguel_Pro_prayingradical government consolidate its power.  It certainly could not be due to Villa’s attack on the US in Columbus, NM, since Wilson (and others) had looked the other way on numerous previous occasions when such depredations occurred (as in, when Calles ordered the murder of three men in Laredo, TX), and even more, allowed free passage to armed revolutionary columns through US soil, all the while seeing to it that they were well supplied in arms, ammunition, food, and money, while blockading all such vital materials to the more conservative elements.

US influence was so decisive that even the arrival of US warships in Mexican ports could instigate the fall of a government, Miguel_Prodepending on the vagaries of the political situation.  Throughout Calles reign, US diplomats like the racist southerner Josephus Daniels (long-time friend of FDR since Wilson administration days and an ardent supporter of Jim Crow laws in the South) provided him with most vociferous, unequivocal support, while dismissing concerns that he was repressive or dictatorial in any way.  They did this due to both a similarity of political outlook – progressives always reward and never criticize their “friends” – and because US industry with billion dollar concessions in Mexico demanded it.

Poor Mexico, so far from God, so close to the United States!

Final thought – could the current enormous influx of immigrants from Mexico, to the point where they will likely constitute a majority in most of the Southwest of the US within a few decades, be poetic justice for US treatment of Mexico for so many years?  God works in mysterious ways, but never fails to punish those who attack His own.

Something to consider, anyway.

When will bishops excommunicate Planned Barrenhood members/employees/supporters? July 23, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Abortion, Basics, contraception, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, Society, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

This video below from American Life League got me thinking: given the sweeping condemnations that popes and bishops in times past have issued against avowed enemies of the Church like freemasons, Nazis, and communists, when will the US bishops excommunicate all Planned Barrenhood staff, members and financial supporters?  Bishop Bruskewitz did so two decades ago in Lincoln.  And that wasn’t the first time Planned Barrenhood staff had been so treated.

But, then again, most of the blanket excommunications (very rightfully made) were well before the unleashing of modernist secular humanism in the Church starting in 1958.  It is widely believed that the USCCB presently has a secret, unpublished policy to ostracize any member who enforces Canon 915 against a Catholic politician, for instance.  I would tend to imagine there are also blanket “prohibitions” against interdicting other anti-Catholic organizations – just like Banned Parenthood.

So we have gone from a Church – or at least its human hierarchy – that took very seriously its mission to oppose evil, avoid scandal, and protect the faithful throughout almost the entirety of her long history, to where we have today an emasculated leadership who seem terrified to act, when they aren’t actively promoting things always held to be antithetical to the Faith.

What could have happened?

Révolution_de_1830_-_Combat_devant_l'hôtel_de_ville_-_28.07.1830

french-revolution-the-radical-phase-43-728

How often have we heard in the past 50 years that the Church must now be reasonable, that to exhort souls to follow the Faith as it was practiced for so many centuries is now unreasonable and too bizarre for the world to bear?  We don’t want to be fanatical “integrists,” right?

Sorry, I’m taking off on a tangent from the video below but there is a reason why Planned Barrenhood has so much freedom to conduct its hateful, diabolical campaign.  It is due to lack of resistance from the Church.  And need I remind that Cardinal Cushing collaborated with Planned Barrenhood of Greater Boston to overcome Catholic legislative resistance (from lay Catholic legislators) and get contraception legalized in Massachusetts!?  Very similar occurred in Connecticut and Rhode Island.

And where is the mass resistance and constant exhortations from the leadership against the latest descent into hedonist debauchery via pretended “same-sex marriage?”

Anyway, the video: