jump to navigation

Cardinal Napier destroys Fr. Rosica in one tweet October 12, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, different religion, General Catholic, Interior Life, Papa, priests, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, SOD, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

I tell you, seeing this tweet is the best thing I’ve seen come out of the Synod thus far.  Cardinal Napier destroys Fr. Rosica/Salt and Light TV’s smug tweet about “meeting people where they are:”


What did Jesus say to the man who sat by the Pool of Siloam after he healed him?  He said “sin no more, lest some worse evil attach itself to you” (Jn v:14).  That angered the man he had healed, who subsequently ratted Christ out to the Pharisees for healing on the Sabbath.

What did Jesus say to the woman caught in adultery?  He said: “Go, and sin no more.” (Jn viii:11).

Certainly Christ forgives us…….if we have repentance.  But if we obstinately remain in our sins, if we are in adulterous second marriages or lead lives completely given over to perversions so grave they were utterly unheard of in polite company just a few short years ago, then He does not forgive. Thus, the entire synodal gambit being conducted by the modernists in charge is built on a foundation of sand.  The revolution proposed by these modernists will only please those they really seek the adulation of – the talking heads, the media, the elite in their soirees at Davos and Sundance.  It’s either they crave the approval of men, or they are willing harbingers of destruction, seeking to destroy the Church of Christ for destruction’s sake, in order to create a church of men more in accord with their own beliefs..

There is simply too much evidence to the contrary, from within the Church and without, to arrive at any other conclusion.  They have forgotten, per Dom Gueranger, that there is a perfect Judge, Whose record of our lives is equally perfect in its completeness, and that we will be judged for each careless word and each wasted moment, let alone causing souls to fall into hell like so many snowflakes, as Our Lady so perfectly prophesied would occur in this dark chapter of the Church’s history.


Pray for the consecration of Russia daily.  It is the only way to a restoration.

What Glory! Pray Novena for Sister Philomena’s final vows! October 12, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Latin Mass, religious, sanctity, Spiritual Warfare, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, true leadership, Victory, Virtue.
comments closed

A reader invites you to pray for a good religious as she prepares to take her final vows.  Please see the attached Novena to Sister Philomena of the Priory of Our Lady of Ephesus.

When the TLM was first being offered several years ago at San Juan Bautista parish in El Paso under the direction of Fr. Michael Rodriguez, this young lady said: “I know a good thing when I see it.”  She immediately embraced modesty and had such an energy of conversion that the entire community was affected for the better by her presence.  She was a significant driver behind a Catholic renaissance that graced El Paso for several years.  Very quickly she left to answer her call to the religious life, and was accepted by the Benedictines of Mary, Queen of Apostles as a late vocation.

A mother’s devout prayers figured in this most edifying history.  We never know the wonders that may result from our steadfastness in prayer.

The Novena is here!——–>>>>>Novena for Sister Philomena

I know she and all the Sisters of the Benedictines of Mary will be so pleased to have your prayers!  I feel blessed to know that they pray for me.  Such a grace to have women willing to give their lives to Christ in so total a fashion.  Each religious vocation like this is really a miracle.

More prophesy from Dom Gueranger on our times and, yes, the Synod October 12, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, different religion, episcopate, error, General Catholic, Grace, Interior Life, Papa, persecution, Revolution, Society, SOD, the struggle for the Church, Virtue.
comments closed

Another quote from Gueranger’s The Liturgical Year, Vol. 11, from the Twenty Second Sunday after Pentecost.  I believe you could take the below as both descriptive and a prescriptive, as in, a guide for how to respond to the unbelievable events now rocking the Church to her core.  If you’ve been one of those persecuted or blocked by certain media figures speaking for the Synod, this post is for you.  God bless those who are persecuted for bearing witness to the unchanging Truth of Jesus Christ.

The Apostles…….in order to make charity grow in the world, they gave it a rich sowing of Truth.  Every new ray of light they put into their disciples’ hearts was an intensifying of their love; [so what a great lack of love there has been in the failure to teach the Faith these past several decades] and these disciples, having by Baptism become themselves light, were most determined to have nothing to do with the darkness. In those days, to deny the truth was the greatest of crimes; to expose themselves, by a want of vigilance, to infringe on the rights of truth, even in the slightest degree, was the height of imprudence.  When Christianity first shone upon mankind, it found error supreme mistress of the world.  having, then, to deal with a universe that was rooted in death, Christianity adopted no other plan for giving it salvation than that of making the light as bright as could be; its only policy was to proclaim the power which truth alone has of saving this world.  The triumph of the Gospel was the result. It came after three centuries of struggle – a struggle intense and violent on the side of darkness, which declared itself to be supreme, and was resolved to keep so; but a struggle most patient and glorious on the side of the Christians, the torrents of whose blood did but add fresh joy to the brave army, for it became the strongest possible foundation of the united kingdom of love and truth.  [In fact, as soon as the Church had shaken off the shackles of persecution from the State in opposition to the Truth of Jesus Christ, persecution from within became the gravest threat the Church faced.  Heresy after heresy emerged to divorce men from that Truth.  Satan has always known that the Church is a Church of ideals, a Church of beliefs, and that to break her of her supreme efficacy in saving men’s souls, she would have to be divorced from her truth.  Satan tried and failed at this for 2000 years, it is only in the last few decades that the human element of the Church has, by and large, fallen from that sacred Truth]

But now, with the connivance of those whose Baptism made them, too, children of light, and even more, of those whose office should make them the greatest defenders of truth, error has regained its pretended rights.  As a natural consequence, the charity of an immense number has grown cold in proportion; darkness is again thickening over the world, as though it were in the chill of its last agony.  The children of light (Eph v:8), who would live up to their dignity, must behave exactly as did the early Christians.  They must not fear, not be troubled: but, like their forefathers and the Apostles, they must be proud to suffer for Jesus’ sake, and prize the Word of Life as the dearest thing they possess; for they are convinced that, so long as Truth is kept up in the world, so long is there hope for it.  As their only care is, to make their manner of life worthy of the Gospel of Christ (Phil i:27), they go on, with all the simplicity of children of God, faithfully fulfilling the duties of their state of life, in the midst of a wicked and perverse generation, as stars of the firmament shine in the night (Phil ii:15).  ‘The stars shine in the night,’ says St. John Chrysostom, ‘they glitter in the dark; so far from growing dim amidst the gloom that surrounds them,m they seem all the more brilliant. So will it be with thee, if thou art more virtuous amidst the wicked; thy light will shine so much the more clearly.’  “As the stars,” says St. Augustine, “keep on their course in the track marked out for them by God, and grow not tired of sending forth their light in the midst of darkness, neither heed they the calamities which may be happening on earth; so should do those holy ones whose conversation is truly in Heaven; they should pay no more attention to what is said or done against them, than the stars do.

———-End Quote———-

It is the TRUTH that has always been the target. What the innovators refuse to accept, but which was something ALL the Church Fathers and great Saints have known, you cannot separate the Person of Jesus Christ from His Message, from His Truth.  That is the “fire,” the fire of Pentecost, that Christ brought to the earth.  It’s taken 2000 years, but enough men’s hearts have now grown cold that they want to try to rip Christ apart, to rip the Truth that is His essence away from Him.  The most heart-breaking part is that it is the very souls He has given enormous special graces to in his priests and prelates who are most responsible for this attempt to dismember Our Blessed Lord from Himself.  They will not succeed, but they can and have inflicted enormous pain and suffering in His Holy Body, the Church.

“I came to cast a fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled!  But I have a baptism to undergo, and what constraint I am under until it is completed.  Do you think I came to bring peace on earth?  I tell you no, but division.  From henceforth there will be in one house divided, three against one and two against three.  They will be divided father against son and son against father………” (Lk xii:49-53b).

So much for the kumbayah “if we only jettison doctrine everyone will love us and flock to our dying Church crowd.”  Christ has always been, fundamentally, irrevocably divisive.  As a number of cardinals have pointed out, we have only to look to the episcopalians and other liberal protestant sects to see how this revolution will work out in practical terms. That is why so many have come to believe that destruction is the very purpose of the revolution against Doctrine – the fact that it will only further the collapse of the Church is so widely known, it seems impossible that its authors cannot see this fact.  Ergo, they must consciously seek that destruction.

But then again, there is none so blind as the ideologue.


“The distinction between sin and sinner no longer works” October 12, 2015

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

“The distinction between sin and sinner no longer works.”  Such was the statement the ever-useful (to the modernists) Fr. Tom Rosica chose to highlight at the mid-day synodal press conference today.  Of course, the modernists having become even more cagey and unscrupulous since the 60s, they now consider it wise to not attach names to any of the particular interventions, so we don’t know which boneheaded prelate made this atrocious comment.  I suppose it doesn’t matter, but I think it where possible we need to start publicly castigating those prelates who openly hold heretical viewpoints.  A bit more from Hilary White:

At the midday press conference organized by the Vatican press office, Father Thomas Rosica emphasized this statement made ​​by a Synodal Father during Saturday’s discussion on the third part of the Instrumentum laboris (while the second part is being examined by circuli minores since Monday morning):

“The distinction between sin and sinner no longer works. ” 

This sentence had already been highlighted by the rapporteur in Italian which brought in substance: The differentiation between sin and sinner no longer works because sexuality is an integral part of the person.

Father Rosica added: “We must express these things in a new way so that people can understand them. “

The distinction between the person and the act is indeed a classic theology and Catholic morality; we are invited to “love the person and hate the sin.”

It is a distinction increasingly challenged because to hate sin is tantamount to stigmatizing those who commit it, not to say that homosexual act according to their “nature” as explained Mgr. Charamska.

I’m going to attack this on two levels.  First, once again, we see a bald, totally unsupported assertion from the modernists that human beings/society are simply SOOO different today that the “old rules” or old beliefs can no longer work.  Of course, this is balderdash, and what they really mean is, they don’t like the old beliefs, 2/3 of them are sinning against them constantly and unrepentantly, and they want them changed for those reasons.  Look at the asinine reasoning above: what year did sexuality suddenly become an “integral part of the person,” so that the “old rules” stopped applying? Was in 1991?  2005?  1273?

Of course, it’s always been an integral part of the person, but that has also made absolutely no difference, because sin remains sin.  This is just a particularly thin cover to justify the unjustifiable, to pretend that sin, somehow, is not.  And by the language, I am certain whichever bishop made this quote was referring to sodomy, because only sodomy gets identified these days as being so “integral” and “unchangeable.”

But speaking a bit more broadly, they have a point.  I’ve always had a bit of a problem with “love the sinner, hate the sin” because in many types of sin, the sinner winds up becoming the sin.  That is to say, a bandit so far gone into a life of banditry, murder, theft, rapine, etc., and committed so many heinous crimes, that while we may love his eternal soul and hope for his conversion, we basically hate his entire mode of life/conduct, and rightly so.

My problem with “love the sin/hate the sinner” is that I have often seen it form a sort of excuse system for those lost in grave sin. Maybe excuse system is too hard, maybe a ring of rationalization is better, but the end point has been – both in the sects and in the Church – a systematic softening of attitudes towards sin and even more, those who perform sin routinely and without remorse.  This applies especially to the dominant sexual sins of our times but we see it in other areas, too.  This mentality also ties in with some of the all-pervasive thinking of the progressive overculture, which publicly hates a few sins (ostensible greed, lack of charity, etc) while excusing others.  I don’t think the vast majority of people who are plugged into the overculture through the media/entertainment complex have any idea how influenced they are by it.  This is, after all, the vehicle by which about 1/3 of the American populace came to find two men ripping each other’s bodies apart in sodomy to be the “equivalent” of marriage.  A lot of well-meaning Christians have taken “love the sinner, hate the sin” into something very close to “never, ever, ever judge anyone’s conduct.”

And then there is this, and it’s something noticed by a good number of Saints and Fathers: there is such a thing as a reprobate sense.  A person can become so lost in sin as to, in a very real sense, become the sin. I’d say that was certainly the case with me when I was in active addiction. One of the poor lost souls Joseph Sciambra encounters at the Folsom St Fair is probably as close to becoming “sodomy” as one can imagine.  Yes they remain a child of God redeemable by Grace – anyone is! – but so long as they remain so esconced in that lifestyle, the distinction between “sinner” and “sin” becomes academic, at best.  That’s why “loving the sinner” historically mean praying for them above all, but also counseling, even chastising them over their sin.

But that is precisely where I think the “love the sinner, hate the sin” mentality winds up, far too often: endlessly excusing abhorrent behavior and pretending souls are not to be held accountable for their actions.  Of course they are, and by a far more perfectly just Judge than us.

So, surprisingly, I actually agree a bit with the surely progressive prelate who is quoted above, but for the very opposite reasons.  “Love the sinner, hate the sin” has too often transformed into “love the sinner, deny the sin exists” and this has been a major means by which progressives/modernists in the Church and out have managed to weaken the Christian moral ethos that once suffused society.  What they’ve done is to convince people that it is impermissible to hold people to account for their bad actions.  They’ve also managed to get people to lose sight of the fact that leaving someone mired in sin by refusing to hold their person to account for their serious sins is the worst kind of hatred one could have.  And that’s what the Saints of old understood, it is absolutely critical for society to have standards and to have some non-judicial forms of behavioral control to use with people for some of the most common sins, FOR THEIR OWN GOOD.  But that kind of thinking went out the window, depending on the sin, decades to centuries ago.




Cardinals send scathing letter to Pope Francis re: Synod, then run for cover when the story breaks? October 12, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, Christendom, different religion, disaster, Ecumenism, episcopate, General Catholic, horror, Papa, persecution, Revolution, secularism, sexual depravity, Society, SOD, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

Sandro Magister conveyed the text of a letter (which I got from Rorate) allegedly sent by 13 cardinals to Pope Francis regarding their dyspepsia over the management and direction of the Synod.  This letter was allegedly sent on October 5, well before some of the more egregious abuses had even occurred (but who knows how much is going on behind closed doors of which we remain ignorant?).   Now several of the alleged signers have run for cover, claiming they never did so (see text of letter below) or even that such a letter doesn’t even exist.  Much of the Francis-courting Vatican press quickly claimed the claim of a letter being sent was false.  However, Cardinal Pell, in an all too rare display of episcopal backbone, has now confirmed that a letter was sent and that he signed it (however, his spokesman does say some of the reported text was wrong, as was some of the list of signatories).  Edward Pentin is now saying that the Pope’s unscheduled intervention on the second day of the Sin-nod was in response to this letter.

Oh what tangled webs we weave!

The (alleged) text of the letter, via Rorate, with my emphasis and comments:

Your Holiness,
As the Synod on the Family begins, and with a desire to see it fruitfully serve the Church and your ministry, we respectfully ask you to consider a number of concerns we have heard from other synod fathers, and which we share.
While the synod’s preparatory document, the “Instrumentum Laboris,” has admirable elements, [throwaway, “required” praise] it also has sections that would benefit from substantial reflection and reworking. [translation: they are disordered tending towards heterodox deliberately designed for misinterpretation.  Just like Guadium Et Spes and others] The new procedures guiding the synod seem to guarantee it excessive influence on the synod’s deliberations and on the final synodal document. As it stands, and given the concerns we have already heard from many of the fathers about its various problematic sections, the “Instrumentum” cannot adequately serve as a guiding text or the foundation of a final document. [And yet the modernists running the show at the Synod, including Cardinal Baldiserri, have claimed that the Instrumentum can be the only basis for discussion]
The new synodal procedures will be seen in some quarters as lacking openness and genuine collegiality. [translation: it is obvious to everyone with half a brain this synod is a railroad job, with the outcome predetermined] In the past, the process of offering propositions and voting on them served the valuable purpose of taking the measure of the synod fathers’ minds. The absence of propositions and their related discussions and voting seems to discourage open debate and to confine discussion to small groups; [this is a damning indictment. It is exploding the whole myth of this synod, the bishops might as well have stayed home] thus it seems urgent to us that the crafting of propositions to be voted on by the entire synod should be restored. Voting on a final document comes too late in the process for a full review and serious adjustment of the text.
Additionally, the lack of input by the synod fathers in the composition of the drafting committee has created considerable unease. Members have been appointed, not elected, without consultation.  Likewise, anyone drafting anything at the level of the small circles should be elected, not appointed. [Are you crazy?!?  If they allowed that, the “synod” might arrive at the wrong conclusions, meaning the irreformable Doctrine of the Faith!]
In turn, these things have created a concern that the new procedures are not true to the traditional spirit and purpose of a synod. It is unclear why these procedural changes are necessary. A number of fathers feel the new process seems designed to facilitate predetermined results on important disputed questions. [As much as I like to see this said, this statement here causes me to doubt a bit the authenticity of this letter.  Things are rarely said this directly in Church correspondence.  This is basically taking a leather glove and slapping Pope Francis across the face.  It just seems a bit too on the nose for the kind of highly diplomatic, evasive language that has dominated inter-Church discourse at the highest levels for decades.  I pray they actually said it, someone needed to, but this causes my skeptic’s antenna to perk up a bit]
Finally and perhaps most urgently, various fathers have expressed concern that a synod designed to address a vital pastoral matter – reinforcing the dignity of marriage and family – may become dominated by the theological/doctrinal issue of Communion for the divorced and civilly remarried. [And sodomy, and polygamy, and the entire gamut of leftist fixation on perversion and sin] If so, this will inevitably raise even more fundamental issues about how the Church, going forward, should interpret and apply the Word of God, her doctrines and her disciplines to changes in culture. The collapse of liberal Protestant churches in the modern era, accelerated by their abandonment of key elements of Christian belief and practice in the name of pastoral adaptation, warrants great caution in our own synodal discussions. [Again, in the age of ecumenism, would a prelate speak like that?  Would they point out just how naked the ecumenical emperor is?  This reads to me a bit more like a lay person’s analysis of something in the Church than actual Church-speak from a prelate.  I would be immensely gratified to know there actually are a dozen-odd cardinals who do recognize the utter idiocy of ecumenism and the wilder edge of the post-conciliar revolution]

Your Holiness, we offer these thoughts in a spirit of fidelity, and we thank you for considering them.


Faithfully yours in Jesus Christ.

Now the relevant portion of the statement from Pell’s spokesman via Edward Pentin:

A private letter should remain private but it seems that there are errors in both the content and the list of signatories.

That to me is a non-denial denial. It is so general and blandly stated that it sort of turns me back to the letter being genuine, if not perhaps correct in every single detail. A bland statement like this just gives a bit of public cover to each individual signatory.  Who, by the way, if correct, was a long list of major powers in the cardinalate:

Caffara, Collins, Dolan, Eijk, Erdo, Muller, Napier, Pell, Piacenza, Sarah, Scola, Savino, Vingt-Trois [What, no Maradiaga?  Heh]

That’s the head of the CDF, CDW, Secretariat for the Economy, Congregation of Clergy and Major Penitentiary.  This is, as Damian Thompson notes, very unusual, very public rebellion.

It reminds one of the Ottaviani intervention regarding the Novus Ordo.  That was to have been signed by two dozen or so cardinals, but an early leak of the contents limited the signatories to Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci.  I wonder if the same dynamic is in play here.

No wonder Pope Francis directly intervened and spoke bizarrely of conspiracies last Tuesday.  This effort is a huge threat not only to the Synod but it is a rebuke of his pontificate.  I say that even if the text is erroneous in detail above, but if it was of the same general spirit.

As the fate of the Church and world hang in the balance, I personally hope there was such an intervention, and that it was signed by more than 13.  I guess the list was supposed to be limited to actual attendees of the Synod, otherwise why would +Burke’s name not be among the signatories?