jump to navigation

Secular news site blasts institutional Catholic media response to papal criticism October 6, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, episcopate, General Catholic, horror, It's all about the $$$, persecution, Revolution, scandals, self-serving, Society, SOD, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

Pretty interesting coverage from The Blaze, below.  They note the seeming persecution of Catholics who criticize the papacy in fairly strong terms by institutional Catholic media sites.  The implication of the piece is that Francis’ pontificate is forcing many Catholic media apostolates to reveal their true stripes, liberal or anti-liberal:

Directly following the papal visit to the U.S., the editor of conservative journal First Things announced he sacked a writer after she wrote a column critical of Pope Francis.

The announcement from First Things editor R. R. Reno is revealing……..[follows excerpt likening Maureen Mullarkey’s writing to conservative talk radio hosts, which I think is unfair and, yes, revealing]

It may surprise some that such anti-conservative clichés would come from a conservative publication like First Things. [Not me. This is the same site that has employed Damon Linker and Joseph (I heart gay marriage) Bottum] But Pope Francis’ pontificate is having that effect on more and more Catholic publications.

Adam Shaw lost his position at Catholic News Service after writing a critique of Pope Francis’s economic opinions. Patrick Archbold was sacked from National Catholic Register when he complained Pope Francis was alienating traditionalists. This writer was told to leave a Catholic publication after writing articles with a “tone” of “judgment” out of line with Pope Francis’s message of “welcome.” [This is a  most partial list]

It’s almost as if publications that are owned by or beholden to the Church are treating the Holy Father’s critics like whistleblowers uncovering an unsightly scandal. Perhaps because they are………

………Defending Pope Francis against the fired writer, Reno contends that “we need to have the moral and spiritual generosity to enter into our adversaries’ ways of thinking,” apparently implying that his adversary Maureen Mullarkey’s way of thinking is an exception to that rule.

And what rule is that? It is the “golden rule,” which Pope Francis proposed during his recent address to Congress. But Pope Francis applies the golden rule to battles between truth and dangerous error — rather than between neighbors as the Gospel recommends — and so it serves only as a defense of error against the truth. [Think on that a bit]

After all, when he spoke live to a world torn apart by error and moral chaos, what was the single “temptation” that Pope Francis said “we must especially guard against” in his address to Congress? “The simplistic reductionism which sees only good or evil; or, if you will, the righteous and the sinners.” [But Pope Francis’ opposition to hard doctrinal stands, which he decries as an “ideology,” is itself an ideology! He is the most rigidly ideologically pontiff most of us have ever experienced]

Instead of praising saints and admonishing sinners, we must “confront every form of polarization which would divide [the contemporary world] into these two camps” in the first place, the pontiff said. [What a disastrous statement.  This guy……..he’s not Catholic.  He doesn’t get it.  He doesn’t get Saints as sources of division and even bitter struggle, but favors a strumming the guitar around the campfire while smoking a J kind of Church]

Perhaps this is why Reno would choose to publically excoriate Maureen Mullarkey for criticizing the political coalition Pope Francis is building with the left, instead of, say, First Things contributor Elizabeth Scalia — who was broadcasting the “Virtuous Pedophile” movement long before even Salon.com would touch it[Yeah, uh…….no wonder I’ not such a fan of Patheos and their ilk]

This kind of thing has long been known. That’s one major reason why specifically “traditional” publications have emerged going back decades, because the mainstream or institutional media would simply not countenance these kinds of opinions.

There are two major reasons why I don’t collaborate well and keep this blog a small, one man operation (and why I don’t look to make money from it, thank God):  money makes people do things they don’t want to, it is a rare man who can resist the temptation of the almighty dollar to stick to his principles, and I don’t like being told what opinions I can or cannot express or whether it’s OK if I X, Y, or Z.  I’ve had some very fortunate collaborations (mostly years ago) involving Vicki Middleton and Rebecca Diserio who would kind and generous enough to let me do my spiel with a totally free hand (and found both made quite insightful contributions in their own right) but those kinds of collaborations are rare.  I think they worked because we weren’t exchanging money back and forth, and because the ladies had their own commitment to the fight.  Some others haven’t worked as well, mostly because I lost interest or just sort of like to do things my way.

I think we’ve seen a heckuva lot of people go off the rails over the matter of money (and, possibly, fame) over the years.  Some people stop making sense, or they fall away entirely.  But I’m glad there is explicitly traditional, unyielding media that point out the crisis – and its roots – and refuse to be bullied into silence.  They are financially independent and don’t depend on the good graces of Bishop X or Group Y to make their money.  All the better.  Nothing seems to lead to mixed motives and moral compromises that direct Church-sponsorship.  None of that for me.


Archbold: It was the Pope what done it October 6, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, Papa, Revolution, sadness, scandals, secularism, Society, SOD, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

Patrick Archbold has a piece at notorious ecclesiastical porn site The Remnant regarding the construction of the Synod and how that was achieved.  As is obvious from the evidence, if the Synod arrives at some unprecedented conclusion, or if some incredible document/statement/speech follows, it will be because that’s what Pope Francis wanted to achieve all along:

So let’s look at some basic facts. It was Pope Francis who called for the Synod on the Family. It is the Pope who is the President of the Synod. It was Pope Francis who selected Cardinal Kasper to deliver the preparatory speech in February of last year, the speech that put the question of communion for the divorced and remarried front and center. [It was Pope Francis who extolled the “Kasper proposal” from his very first Angelus address the 2nd week of his pontificate!]

The Pope saw and approved the contents of that speech in advance, according to Cardinal Kasper.

It was Pope Francis who appointed Italian Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri, general secretary of the Synod of Bishops, the Cardinal who later publicly bragged about how he would manipulate the Synod to nefarious ends.

It was Pope Francis who appointed the rest of the Synod leadership, the leadership that produced the disastrous and un-Catholic Instrumentem Laboris of 2014.

It was Pope Francis who approved that disastrous Instrumentem Laboris.

It was Pope Francis who reviewed and approved the disgusting and heretical Relatio Post Disceptationem, a document rightly called by the group Voice of the Family “one of the worst official documents drafted in Church history”.

It was the Pope, who allowed the initial attempt by Cardinal Baldisseri to prevent the reaction to that document by the Synod Fathers from publication, before being shouted down by them and relenting.

It was the Pope, who by his sole authority, ordered the publication of troubling non-Catholic paragraphs stricken by the Synod Fathers in the final document of the 2014 Synod.

It was Pope Francis who approved the equally troubling Instrumentem Laboris for the 2015 Synod. [Which goes beyond divorce, remarriage, homosexuality, and includes contraception and other elements]

It was Pope Francis who just this past month ordered changes to the annulment process, changes opposed by many Synod Fathers, which will undoubtedly lead to widespread abuse and the continued weakening of marriage.

[It was Pope Francis who waived the age limitation requirement for participation in the Synod and appointed the disastrously heterodox and manipulative Cardinal Daneels. It was Pope Francis who appointed a who’s who of Church liberals and politicians to the final committee]

And now, if recent reports are to be believed, these very same Synod leaders who did all of the above, have entirely changed the rules of the 2015 Synod, eliminating entirely documents and discussions of the Synod being published. Instead, there will be no interim document published (the document which caused all the controversy in 2014). There will be no discussions published; in fact there will not even be any general discussion, but only small groups that cannot communicate with each other. There will not even be a final document voted upon and published by the Synod Fathers. No, instead, there will only be a closing address by the Holy Father. [Pope Francis confirmed the above today and stated to Synod fathers that all these highly controversial things were his bidding]

And that’s it. And then the Pope can do whatever he wants following the Synod.

Why the changes? Why would the very same people with the very same goals as 2014 now change the rules of the 2015 Synod so dramatically and invest all results in the will of the Pope if they did not have at least some confidence that the Pope desires the same ends?

With all respect to Mr. Keating, there are plenty of reasons to suspect that Pope Francis wants the heretical innovators to prevail. There is also good reason to suspect that the innovators have that same expectation.

None of this suggests that I know what the Pope will do. I don’t even know if the Pope knows what he will do.

Further, there is always the possibility of a Holy Spirit moment from out of the blue, for which I pray daily. But there are very good reasons to be suspect about the upcoming Synod and what the Pope wishes to prevail.

Let us keep praying for that! I suppose the rest is out of our hands.


Sodo-state moving to collect $135,000 fine from Christian bakers October 6, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Holy suffering, horror, It's all about the $$$, persecution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

Latest developments in the ongoing persecution of Oregon bakers Aaron and Melissa Klein for their refusal to supply a cake to a fake wedding.  There are some very interesting revelations below, including claims from the gomorrist couple in question that they seek no money from the Klein’s.  This appears completely a politically motivated persecution by a single unelected government official who is trying to make a name for himself (in pursuit of higher office, surely) as a crusader for sodomites.  And if a good Christian couple must be broken in the process…….well, a political career omelette doesn’t get made without breaking a few Christian eggs, does it?

The agency that ordered Aaron and Melissa Klein to pay $135,000 in damages for refusing to bake a cake for a same-sex couple began the legal process last week to seize the money the Oregon bakers are refusing to pay.

“Our agency has docketed the judgment and is exploring collection options,” Charlie Burr, communications director for the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries, told The Daily Signal. “They are entitled to a full and fair review of the case, but do not have the right to disregard a legally binding order.”

Docketing the judgment is a preliminary step the agency must take in order to seize the Kleins’ house, property, or other assets in lieu of payment.

On July 2, Brad Avakian, commissioner of the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries, ordered the Kleins to pay $135,000 for the emotional, physical, and psychological damages they caused Rachel and Laurel Bowman-Cryer for refusing to make a wedding cake.

Since then, the Kleins have been vocal about their plans to resist the order, and they told The Daily Signal they have no intention of backing down.

“There’s legal reasons and there’s also kind of personal reasons,” Aaron Klein told The Daily Signal in a phone interview. “If a civil court or a circuit court judge had made this order, I would consider it legally binding. But when a bureaucracy does it and I didn’t get due process, I don’t call it legally binding.”

Talking about the personal reasons, Aaron cited a July interview in Willamette Week, where the complainants suggested that the case wasn’t about money.

“We didn’t have a choice in how this was prosecuted,” Rachel Bowman-Cryer said. “We didn’t have a choice in the fine. If we had been given the option, we probably would have said: ‘Just apologize. Just say you’re sorry and go away.’” [i think this is re-writing history.  The gomorrists have been active complainants and came up with a whole laundry list of complaints that they said equaled $150k in “suffering.”  I’ve covered this before.  So now to turn around and say “oh, we sought nothing, just an apology, is frankly pretty cheeky.  I think the winds of sentiment have changed, and more now side with the Klein’s than this perverse couple (and feel the judgment against the Klein’s egregious), and they’re looking for cover]

Herwife[person she acts out with] Laurel, added, “[W]e’re not asking for anything. We’ve never asked for a penny from anybody.”

“When you have these girls come out and say we never wanted the money,” Aaron said, “it wasn’t about the money and we don’t need the money … and I say this isn’t right, I shouldn’t have to pay this money, and the only person saying the money should exchange hands seems to be Brad Avakian.” [an unelected official administering an “administrative court” without usual standards of evidence or appeal. Basically he is given carte blanche to rule in any way he feels like, and he feels like making an example of some Christo-fascist bible humpers who had the audacity to stand in the way of the sexular pagan zeitgeist.]

Lesson to Christians: move out of leftist states if at all possible.  Congregate in the most conservative, Christian-friendly states you can find (except Texas, we’re full, try Alabama or Mississippi, they’re very nice, you’ll love them).

There was more at the link, including the video below, which contains evidence of the “girls” seeking extensive damages:

Sexular paganism, or satanic progressivism, and the Christian Faith, cannot coexist.  Historically in the West, the Faith was ascendant, but over the past 200 years, that has changed, to the point where now it is leftism that is ascendant, and don’t think they don’t mean to very much enjoy this power for however long it lasts.

Sheesh I wish that guy would lose the earrings.  A lot of us have been there, buddy, but we also turned 25 or 28 and put such things away.

Secular Conservative “The Week:” Does Pope Francis Fear God? October 6, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, different religion, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, Papa, Revolution, Sacraments, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, SOD, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

OK, it’s a self-described traddie writing at The Week, but it is still something to see a secular conservative publication asking the $1 million question: does Pope Francis have the Faith handed on by the Apostles?  Perhaps asking the question is to answer it.  I add emphasis and comments:

In the next three weeks, I fully expect the leadership of my own One Holy and Apostolic Catholic Church to fall into apostasy, at the conclusion of the Synod on the Family that begins today in Rome. This is the outcome Pope Francis has shaped over the entirety of his pontificate, and particularly with his recent appointments. An event like this —heresy promulgated by the Pope and his bishops — is believed by most Catholics to be impossible. But they should be prepared for it anyway. This is not an ordinary religious conference, but one to be dreaded.

My prediction is that, after much fixing and machinations by its leaders, the Synod on the Family will declare that the Holy Spirit led them to a new understanding of the truth. The Synod’s leaders will adopt the position that those living in second marriages, irrespective of the status of their first marriage, should be admitted to Holy Communion. This is commonly called the “Kasper proposal” after its author, the German Cardinal Walter Kasper. The Synod will likely leave the details of a “penitential period of reflection” for these souls up to local bishops and parish priests The leading bishops will assure critics that in fact no doctrine has been changed, only a discipline — even if these will make no sense when considered together. [Doctrine cannot be separated from practice. This is the thinnest – and frankly, falsest – of fig leafs.  In reality, it’s a joke.  Doctrine is nothing without its being put into practice, and practice that contradicts Doctrine winds up destroying that Doctrine, no matter what the paper may say. Fr. Rosica has helpfully informed us this has been the point all along.]

But make no mistake, the Synod will make the sacrilege of the Eucharist St. Paul warns against an official policy of the Roman Catholic Church. And in the process the Synod will encourage the breakup of more marriages. [I continue praying for a miracle]

Certain theologians will cheer this as a radical break. They will declare this change of discipline to be what the critics alleged all along: a rupture within the tradition of the church, a change in doctrine. They will say that this glorious event proves the church is capable not only of developing its doctrines, but also of evolving them into something new, even something that contradicts the old. Those who had made themselves enemies of papal authority for decades will become a new kind of ultramontanist. The papacy that had been the final guardian of the faith will now become an ongoing oracle, dispensing new gospel teachings that our Lord and the Apostles missed. [And I don’t know how we recover from that, should it come to pass]

The editorial is long, but I encourage you to read all of it.  Author Michael Dougherty goes on to describe how the synodal process has been manipulated, with last year’s most controversial figures making up the majority of the “final committee” that will pretend to process the synodal discussions and inform the Pope of their contents.  But since it is already known that another, more secret group is already working on some post-synodal encyclical or other “doctrinal” effort, even the final committee stacked through and through with modernist/progressives appears to be a Potemkin village construct.  And just today, Pope Francis answered “conservative” complaints over the synodal process and the makeup of its leadership that the entire process and the makeup of all the key leadership posts were all his direct decision.  Even more terrifying, there were apparently proposals today to grant “general absolution” during the Year of Mercy to the entire Church, a complete and total ecclesiastical and theological novelty which would make a mockery of sacramental Confession.

Modernists fear men, not God.  That is the apotheosis of modernism, a religion of men for men with the pleasing of men as its final end.   Their religion constructs a new “god” on the rotting corpse of Western civilization, with opinion polling the source of “revelation” and a life of self-indulgence and worldly feel-good rhetoric its process of “sanctification.”  Hundreds of millions have already fallen away from this meaningless, inefficacious pretense of religion, and hundreds of millions more will do so in the coming years.  Leftists constantly project their “hidden” sins onto others, so in all the recent diatribes against “ideology,” it must always be born in mind that for modernists, their religion is their ideology.

May God have mercy on us all. The Barque of Peter appears headed into truly uncharted waters, and I don’t know how some future pilot can plot a course of return.

Ann Barnhardt takes apart weak-willed bishop October 6, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, catachesis, disaster, episcopate, error, family, foolishness, General Catholic, Papa, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, SOD, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

There is a very handy new site administered by Hilary White to cover all things related to the Synod, called, sensically enough, “What’s Up With The Synod?”  Well, a lot of bad stuff, of which more later, but before we get to that, Ann Barnhardt made a contribution to WUWTS retelling an interaction she had with a bishop at a small conference on marriage and the family.  In her usual low-key, almost embarrassed style, Barnhardt managed to point out the nakedness of our episcopal emperors:

So back to the conference I recently attended. At the end of the laywoman’s presentation about the extreme injustice of both the no-fault civil divorce culture in North America, as well as the push within the Church to make the annulment process into de facto Catholic no-fault divorce, she touched very briefly on the September 8th Motu Proprio and how it was simply moving the entire Church toward the North American model of “annulment on demand”. There was a Q&A period, and there were two visiting bishops present in the audience, one from the Middle East somewhere and one from subsaharan Africa somewhere.

So I raised my hand and asked the final question of the session. My question was this:

“The disastrous September 8th Motu Proprio contains a list of criteria that could be cited as grounds for declaring a marriage null, including “lack of faith”, which is a universal condition. I myself am already receiving questions from orthodox faithful Catholics who are happily married who are now questioning whether or not they are even married because one or both of the spouses was “nervous” on the morning of the wedding, perhaps indicating a “lack of faith” per the Motu Proprio. This is the diabolical fruit of the September 8th disaster. My question is, what can we do or say to people to assure them that they are, in fact, sacramentally married and should not doubt this?”

The laywoman gave a polite but not terribly helpful answer because there really was nothing she could say.

Then the bishop from the Middle East stood up, wheeled around, and glaringly addressed me.

He started with, “Why do you refer to the Motu Proprio as “September 8th”, like it was “September 11th”?

To which I instantly snapped back, “You’re right. It is far, far worse than September 11th.”

Some of you, dear readers, might be taken aback at my saying this. Make no mistake: the September 8th Motu Proprio is the attempted de facto abrogation of a Sacrament. If you can’t see how that is worse than a sneak attack in an earthly war that resulted in earthly losses, you need to sit down and think about it until it becomes clear……

……Still glaring at me, the bishop then launched into the first of his two defenses of the September 8th catastrophic Motu Proprio. First, he complained about the “stack of paperwork” backlogged on his desk from all of the annulment requests he had to deal with.

I interrupted him with, “Yeah, that’s just awful – almost as bad as being nailed to a cross….”  [Smash.  Sit down, bishop, you’ve just been publicly crushed beyond the point of humiliation.  Your failure is laid bare]

Thus ended the episcopal bitch-fest about the unbearable existential burden of backlogged paperwork.

Then he moved to his second point, which is even worse. He said that if he doesn’t grant people annulments they will get mad at him and go to the Eastern Orthodox or apostasize to the … wait for it… MUSLOIDS in order to get their “divorce”.

Barnhardt did not get a chance to respond at the conference, but gives the response she would have given at the link.

I think the problems with this response should be readily apparent, and they cut to the core of the post-conciliar collapse.  The most apparent aspect of this response is the near total lack of Faith in Jesus Christ and His Church, that if the whole Truth is taught with firmness and charity, Christ will do the rest.  Instead, virtually all bishops, whether out of a commitment to modernist revolution, or simply through lack of faith, believe they are smarter than God and must change the Church’s message because “it just doesn’t work anymore,” or the people will go elsewhere, etc. We have seen the fruit of that over the past 50 years…….hundreds of millions have fallen away, and the Church is in the midst of the worst crisis of her history.

This bishop obviously desires pleasing men more than God.  I wish he were named, because I believe we must start holding individual bishops to account for their heterodox viewpoints and manifest lack of faith.  But more to the point, if a bishop preaches all the Truth of the Church in season and out, and reforms his diocese to insist his priests do the same, and some people fall away….well, that’s on them. He’s done his duty, and must trust in the Holy Trinity for the rest (which is the meaning of Lk 12:31: “But seek ye first the kingdom of God and his justice, and all these things shall be added unto you.”)

Of course, the truth hasn’t been taught for decades outside a very few locales, less as a result of accident than of deliberate policy. So it takes a special kind of gumption for a bishop to claim he fears souls falling away as a result of a doctrine he has likely never tried to convey or “enforce.”  Reason #1 why the crisis in the Church is a crisis of bishops.  And when confronted, instead of admitting their manifest failure and facing up to it, they turn around and lash out at their critics.

Such are our heirs of the Apostles.  And don’t tell me about the Twelve running away, that was before the Descent of the Holy Ghost (TWICE!- Once called down in protean form by Our Lord before His Ascension, and secondly, in definitive form, at Pentecost, after which the Apostles were changed men), before the Resurrection, and before two thousand years of miracles, Saints, and the whole run of Christendom.