jump to navigation

Cardinal Burke goes on the offensive against revolutionary Synod October 15, 2015

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

LifeSiteNews has released a video interview of Cardinal Burke, which looks like it was done in conjunction with Voice of the Family and recorded in Rome.  He speaks out in particular against the concept floated in particular by the German speaking group at the Synod, that decisions affecting doctrine as practiced could be devolved down to the national episcopal conferences – bodies which, canonically speaking, have very little authority to speak on doctrinal matters (and what authority they do have, would flow “up” from unanimous votes of the bishops constituting the various conferences).

Cardinal Burke, as is his wont, speaks clearly and truthfully.  He describes this idea of doctrinal nationalism as a grave affront to the Church’s unity and something that is “simply contrary” to the Doctrine of the Faith:

So, Cardinal Burke is obviously incensed.  He is pulling no punches.  A few quotes (my emphasis and comments):

I’d also like to comment on this idea of what is “pastoral.”

In much of the discussion which has taken place, beginning with the infamous presentation [thank you!] of Cardinal Walter Kasper in the Extraordinary Consistory on February 20 and 21 of 2014, centered around this idea that somehow doctrine and pastoral practice are in conflict with one another.

This is absurd. The pastoral practice exists to help us to live the truths of the faith, to live the doctrine of the faith in our daily lives. You can’t have a conflict [between these]. You can’t have the Church teaching, for instance, that marriage is indissoluble and then someone claiming at the same time for ‘pastoral’ reasons that a person who is living in an irregular union is able to receive the sacraments, which would mean that marriage isn’t indissoluble. These are just false distinctions — false contrasts — that we really need to clear up because it’s causing an immense confusion among the faithful and, of course, ultimately can lead people into serious error with great harm to their spiritual life and their eternal salvation. [This is a throwing down of the gauntlet.]

Cardinal Burke may not be perfect, he may not be a hero on a par with a Bellarmine or Borromeo……but he is obviously a man who grasps the essential truths of the Faith and who has a basically orthodox sensus fidei.  He is no modernist.  And he seems to be growing in orthodoxy and comprehension of the importance of Tradition as the years go by.


I say to people who are very anxious, because it seems in this time that there is simply a lot of confusion and statements that are really quite stunning about the faith, that we should remain serene. Because, in the Catholic Church, we have teaching authority, which is expressed, for instance, in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, and we simply need to study those things more deeply, adhere to them more ardently, and not be led astray by false teaching, from whatever source it comes.

……….. I understand that there are very strong disagreements within the Synod. Given the discussion which has proceeded the Synod — and also, given the Instrumentum Laboris [Synod working document] with the very serious difficulties with that document — I would find it difficult to believe that there wouldn’t be strong disagreement……

Ouch. Cardinal Burke is all but naming the source of all this confusion and chaos. The Instrumentum was declared – by Pope Francis himself – to be the ONLY basis for discussion at the Synod. In fact, after Cardinal Peter Erdo of Hungary, on the Syond’s first day, gave a speech far more orthodox in orientation outlining discussion points, it was Pope Francis who the next day personally intervened and made clear that only the Instrumentum Laboris could be used for discussion. And yet, it is riddled with problematic, even openly erroneous notions.  So Cardinal Burke’s comments here have to be taken as a direct criticism of Pope Francis.  It was, after all, Pope Francis who ordered, oversaw the production of, and approved the Instrumentum – even though in contained many elements rejected by the Synod’s bishops in the Extraordinary session last  year!

We also know that it is Pope Francis who has driven the rise of Cardinal Kasper since his first week in office!  It was at his very first Angelus address that Pope Francis declared Cardinal Kasper’s heretical work “serene” and “theology done on the knees.”  He has promoted it from his first days in office, and constantly since.

Furthermore…….and most importantly…….it is Pope Francis who has most relentlessly pushed the toxic notion that it is possible to separate “doctrine” from practice, or “pastoral application.”  As Cardinal Burke notes above, “these are false distinctions, false contrasts.”  To take an example from criminal law, what Pope Francis is basically proposing is that, even though laws may stipulate a minimum 20 years for a first degree murder conviction, “in practice” they simply be let off scot free, while leaving the law on the books.  Such would obviously be seen as essentially declaring murder to be legal.

What we have with regard to this revolution against the Faith is even worse, for it involves soul-murder, and heaping sacrilege upon sacrilege.

We must pray for these lost men.  Yes, there is hardly anyone less likely to convert than an aged ideologue who has pursued a heterodox agenda for decades, but we must try, nonetheless. It is our sacred duty, and miracles do happen.  May God have mercy on their souls.


No one should fear hell more than wicked, heterodox bishops October 15, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, different religion, episcopate, error, Four Last Things, General Catholic, horror, religious, Saints, scandals, secularism, Society, SOD, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

Beato-Colomba-José-Marmion-2That’s the takeaway I had from this wonderful excerpt from Blessed Columba Marmion that “Father Parochus” posted at What’s Up With The Synod.”  There is much for all of us to reflect on, but given the abject failure of episcopal leadership of the past 50-plus years, the crisis that has directly resulted, and the incredibly rigorous standards according to which bishops shall be judged…….no matter how frustrated and disappointed we may be with them at times, we really should pray for our bishops, they face a truly awful accounting (emphasis/emphasis in original):

Much, much greater is the responsibility of a bishop. He is personally responsible for the preaching and teaching of all priests and deacons who give a Sunday homily in his diocese. They cannot speak a word without the authority that the bishop-ordinary gives them. And I am only mentioning one of the many and grave duties of a successor of the Apostles.

Here is a word of Blessed Abbot Marmion, whose feast was about a week ago, that is filled with grace and a warning for us all:

Here is another terrifying aspect of the pains of hell: the lost soul is given over to the power of the demons. The nature of these spirits, which is absolutely simple, has been irrevocably deformed. They are entirely evil; their only occupation is to hate and to injure. Although, here on earth, their power is restricted, Holy Scripture describes them none the less as beings to be feared “like lions seeking whom they may devour” (I Pet 5:8). But, in hell, where the damned, abandoned by God, are given entirely into their power, into this exterior darkness, in hell the devils have free play. They cast themselves upon their prey to plague them without respite, to inflict upon them indescribable evils.

Their implacable fury is concentrated especially on the Christian, for in him they see the image of the Man-God. And if the damned soul be that of a priest, its torments will be augmented beyond all description.

In the priest, Satan sees one who formerly, in the name of Jesus Christ, had the mission of thwarting his reign among men. Formerly he was obliged to respect him on account of the priestly character imprinted on his soul. Now that the priest is fallen. rejected by God and deprived of all his power. the devil makes him his plaything.

The mere thought of being thus abandoned without any protection and for all eternity to the rage of the devil is sufficient to chill us with fear. From the bottom of my heart I appeal to you in the name of Jesus Christ: Vigilate: Be vigilant!

And if a bishop were silent before the promotion of a sin that “cries out to heaven for vengeance”? Or, if here coddling it and defending it?

The more I learn about hell, the more implacably certain I am that I absolutely do not want to wind up there.  One would think that, knowing the x-marm-1888terrible reality of hell, I would be holier than I am.  I always love your prayers.  Thank you.

Speaking of rank failures of duty by bishops, another post at WUWTS by Hilary White lists the manifest failures of uber-liberal Irish Archbishop Diarmind Martin, including a recent statement by him that “abstract doctrine” was just too darned complex for modern minds to comprehend.  Hilary notes the irony of a situation the bishops are directly responsible for (a few noted exceptions aside) – having failed to teach doctrine for 50+ years, they now claim it beyond people’s capacity to comprehend what they haven’t bothered to teach:

The refrain is getting tiresome from these loathsome men. They spent 50 years refusing to teach the doctrine that they so obviously reject and hated, and then, when no one believes any more because of their willful and culpable neglect, they sit back with a barely suppressed grin and say, “Well, we just need to dump it, because sophisticated contemporary people don’t believe it any more.”

Lord, we could desperately use a new Chrysostom, Augustine, Damascene, or Vincent right now!!  I know we I have been been sinful, I know we I have been cold, but have mercy on your Church and send her great Saints to save souls and restore some sanity in the world, and Your Church.


British judges plan to outlaw climate change denial – FIXED October 15, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, It's all about the $$$, persecution, rank stupidity, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society.
comments closed

UPDATE: Sorry, that was the nastiest .html I’ve ever imported into a post, ever. It completely destroyed the format of my blog.  What a mess.  The Torygraph should be ashamed, what a nasty website they run.  Sorry!

If you think we get biased coverage and climate change hysteria in the US, you ought to see how it is in Europe.  British media in particular may be some of the most unhinged, frenzied partisans of anthropocentric global warming anywhere on earth.  While there is certainly opposition in Britain to the watermelon warmist’s agenda, they are generally derided and regarded as kooks and extremists…….more so than is the case in the US.  Among British elites……politicians, business leaders, academics, media personalities, etc……..there is even greater bias in favor of drastic action in response to supposed “warming” and a concomitant disregard for any and all opposition.  That is to say, British “officialdom” is even more in the tank for this leftist plot to centrally plan economies and reduce hundreds of millions to levels of abject poverty not seen in decades in the West (while they, of course, continue to enjoy all the comforts of 21st century living) than their American counterparts are.

So, it is probably no surprise that a semi-secret cabal of judges met to plan using legal decrees from unelected, unaccountable jurists to make so-called climate change denial illegal:

We might think that a semi-secret, international conference of top judges, held in the highest courtroom in Britain, to propose that it should be made illegal for anyone to question the scientific evidence for man-made global warming, was odd enough to be worthy of front-page coverage.

Including senior judges and lawyers from across the world, the three-day conference on “Climate Change and the Law” was staged in London’s Supreme Court. It was funded, inter alia, by the Supreme Court itself, the UK government and the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP)…… [Now why would an ostensibly non-biased judicial body be engaged in policy formation and political agitation?  All of those involved should and must be named, and must recuse themselves from any future cases having anything to do with climate change policy and the environment, generally.  But this is how corrupt our institutions in the West have become, they are increasingly self-serving politicized advocacy groups]

…..The purpose of this strange get-together was outlined in a keynote speech (visible on YouTube) by Philippe Sands, a QC from Cherie Blair’s [for US audience, wife of former British labor (liberal) PM Tony Blair] Matrix Chambers and professor of law at University College, London. Since it is now unlikely that the world will agree in Paris to a legally binding treaty to limit the rise in global temperatures to no more than 2 degrees C from pre-industrial levels, [based on which measurements? The satellite data that has shown zero global temp rise in 20 years, or the manipulated ground-station data that is constantly fudged to show warming?] his theme was that it is now time for the courts to step in, to enforce this as worldwide law.

Although his audience, Sands said, would agree that the scientific evidence for man-made climate change was “overwhelming”, there were still “scientifically qualified, knowledgeable and influential individuals” continuing to deny “the warming of the atmosphere, the melting of the ice and the rising of the seas”, and that this is all due to our emissions of CO2. The world’s courts, led by the International Court of Justice, said Sands, could play a vital role “in finally scotching these claims”. [I love how the left always pretends to declare themselves the rational ones, the Worshipers of the Holy Grail of Sciencism, but when some important data, produced by unbiased researchers, contradicts the political agenda, suddenly we see their Sciencism for what it is, just another denomination of the religion of unholy leftism, seeking always unlimited power for themselves]

“The most important thing the courts could do,” he said, was to hold a top-level “finding of fact”, to settle these “scientific disputes” once and for all: so that it could then be made illegal for any government, corporation (or presumably individual scientist) ever to question the agreed “science” again. Furthermore, he went on, once “the scientific evidence” thus has the force of binding international law, it could be used to compel all governments to make “the emissions reductions that are needed”, including the phasing out of fossil fuels, to halt global warming in its tracks.

This is actually worst than when I first read it.  He admits there is divergence of opinion among reasonably well credentialed individuals. He realizes there is an ongoing scientific dispute.  He just doesn’t care.  His – really – religious impulse in favor of centralized economic planning and ever-increasing amounts of power given over to socialistic government (meaning, he and his friends, he hopes) overrides everything else. The “science” is just a cover, as we’ve always known.

But on the off-chance he really thinks global warming is “scientifically proven” and critics are just oil-company funded hacks…….how many other near 100% consensus beliefs of science (which global warming most certainly is NOT, there is wide disagreement on whether warming is even occurring, and if humans are causing it) from the past were proven to be not just a bit wrong, but 100% wrong?  Scores, hundreds, maybe most.  To name a few: the rejection of germ theory, complete nonsense regarding heat transfer (“ether”), firm claims that there could be no particle smaller than an atom, impossibility of nuclear fission, human flight is impossible, heliocentric view of the universe (sun at center), fingerprints as 100% lock-solid ID for every individual, all the contradictory studies of medical science (cigarettes are GOOD for you!)……..I could go on.

Science is constantly refuting itself, constantly refining and even overturning theories, constantly overthrowing what had once been lock-solid conventional wisdom.  The idea that certain opinions should be outlawed – OUTLAWED, as in made ILLEGAL! – because they are contrary to what is purported to be the current “consensus” (especially galling since I do not believe that consensus exists)…….that’s not science.  That’s (very bad, very false) religion.  And there are few more feverishly religious in our culture today than the acolytes of the religion of satanic progressivism.

The thing is, in actuality, scientific skepticism of gerbil worming is actually on the increase. The so-called consensus is breaking down, and fast. One major reason is that “pause” in warming mentioned above. Another is the complete destruction of the work of some of the most fervent climate change advocates, like Dr. Michael Mann, and continuing revelations of falsified data and unrepeatable “studies” and “simulations” among other leading lights.  So I have little doubt that this open call for authoritarian “solutions” to the climate change debate are really about getting this nonsense fixed in law before the “consensus” claim becomes even more  untenable than it already is.  Or it’s just another useful weapon in the hands of the always radical left.

And to think……..we now have a Church encyclical that accepts this widely criticized and rejected theory as some kind of metaphysical truth.  Thanks, Pope Francis!

Francis ally lashes out at 13 Cardinal’s critical letter; Pope Benedict defends Doctrine October 15, 2015

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

The plot starts to thicken a bit.  I think anyone who has followed some of Pope Francis’ most devoted allies knew there would be a nasty response to the letter of the 13 cardinals criticizing the management and direction of the Synod for Divorce and Sodomy.  Well, it came earlier today, apparently, as Bishop Semeraro of Albano, who is very close to Pope Francis, lambasted the cardinal’s whose letter was made public, essentially blaming them for its leak, and denouncing their hidebound old stick in the mud Catholic views.  One wonders what such a man would say were Jesus Christ to appear today and reiterate that Doctrine He has made so clear:

Bishop of Albano, Marcello Semeraro, secretary of the  C9-Cardinal Advisors, expressed his disquiet that the complaint letter was published by 13 Cardinals.  I sense a feeling of revulsion about the publishing of the letter,” said the Bishop.  He then corrected himself and spoke for the entire synod. “That is the general opinion.”  [Among the groupies running the show, probably.  Among the rank and file…….I’m dubious]

Bishop Semeraro belongs to a circle of confidants around the Pope. His outburst is difficult to separate from his job in the Synod. He belongs to that group of whom the Cardinals had been directly critical. Semeraro is a member of the ten member editing committee of the  Relatio finalis, whom Pope  Franziskus named publicly on the 2nd of October. [So he was indirectly criticized in the letter.  No wonder he took offense.  Recall that this group was stood up before the Synod even began and works outside and separate from whatever deliberations are going on.  Given its makeup, progressive from head to foot, those 13 cardinals were quite right to be very concerned over what product might come out of the Synod]

The Cardinals had criticized in their letter  that the membership of the committees gave a “decisive majority” to the  partisans of the “new mercy”, as  Vaticanista  Sandro Magister noted. Cardinal  Napier, one of the signatories of the letter said, “We preferred not to see the same kind of person there, who had already caused us pain previously.“ What was meant were the passages on remarried divorced and homosexuality in the middle report and in the final report of the Synod of 2014.

Semeraro’s  provided  evidence that the  Cardinal’s criticism was understood. The bishop chose offense as the best defense and was encouraged [attempted?] to downplay the significance of the critique.  By showing disapproval of form and procedure, he  distracted from the vital content.

To make the complaint letter public had  “not been  proper,” and did not “serve a noble purpose,”  says Semeraro. [This from the party of Vatileaks.] It really looked like a, “disruptive action.” The critic pointed his finger at the Vaticanista  Sandro Magister, without naming him, but he really meant the signer of the complaint letter, no less than  Gerhard Müller, the Prefect of the CDF.  [It was actually the papal camp that leaked it!  Their man Andrea Tornielli was the one who leaked it!] Despite the apodoctic condemnation, the bishop clarified himself in the next sentence. “I don’t understand this letter.”….. [So, he doesn’t undestand it, but he’s against it, anyway.  Gotcha]

……As to the question of Communion for the remarried divorced  Bishop  Semeraro considers it “open,” but “there is really still no  answer yet.”  A onesided party of papal intimates, for which the signers of the complaint letter is not an open question, because the changing of doctrines “is impossible.” [I think this sentence was meant to describe opposition to the revolutionaries. Rough translation]  It is a new question and the life of the Church will not be handled on a theoretical basis.  In the direction of the critics, he said: “Above all it is to be avoided to portray those, who don’t think as I do, heretics.”

Well if the shoe, fits, Bishop!  These are the same kind of men, ecumaniacs all, who believe it just a horrible offense to call Luther or Calvin a heretic. For them, there are no heretics.  There is only endless, pointless discussion, almost always in posh settings with wonderful catering.

OK, so there’s that.  Now, Antonio Socci had this tidbit in a long editorial translated by Rorate, which is very good in itself and worthy to be read. It seems that at last year’s Synod, where Pope Benedict was present, the abdicated pontiff declared that Doctrine must be preserved at all costs:

Last week the American Vatican reporter Edward Pentin [I missed that] revealed the response that Pope Benedict gave (at the last Synod) to a German prelate who asked him what should be done faced with the storm raging in the Church: “Halten Sie sich unbedingt an die Lehre!” (Remain absolutely firm on doctrine!)

It seems the Pope Emeritus doesn’t have a great deal of influence over the pontificate of his homeland. There are a handful of fair German prelates, but the vast majority are thoroughgoing modernists just spoiling for a chance to bask in their riches unhassled by petty little things like Truth and Catholicity.  Just think how well they could get on if they could shuck even the outward appearance of priestly simplicity.  They have billions!  They could live like the Renaissance princes they so desire to be.

Having said that, one wonders if Pope Benedict is playing any role at this Synod?  I know it’s supposed to be one of those things that just isn’t done, I know the media would lose their minds, and I know it would probably resulted in that hated n’ feared division…..but still would there not be some enormous benefit to hear the Pope Emeritus speak out if push comes to shove as we all fear it will in the coming weeks?

Eh, I won’t hold my breath.  That’s the thing about the Church and the world, the modernists/progressives/freemasons get to be as wildly amoral as they like, but we Catholics must obey virtue at all times.  We must trust that God will work all this out so long as we do our part.  In His good time, I know He will.

With the Synod, a Line Must Be Drawn October 15, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, episcopate, General Catholic, Latin Mass, manhood, Papa, priests, Revolution, secularism, Society, SOD, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, Virtue.
comments closed

A priest from the Archdiocese of Minneapolis-St. Paul gave a very good sermon on the Synod this past Sunday.  The Remnant has uploaded that sermon for the edification of the many souls confused and scandalized by the ongoing reports from the Synod, where, it appears more and more likely, a heterodox minority is attempting to run roughshod over a (relatively) orthodox majority, using procedural schemes, manipulation of the media, and the support of those in highest authority to drive the Synod to a certain, predetermined conclusion.

I am very glad to see this video.  No matter how solid one is with their faith and grounding in Scripture and Tradition, seeing the myriad scandalous reports emanating from the Synod is surely disconcerting, to say the least.  It is incredibly consoling to know that we are not crazed extremists, turning against the Holy Ghost working through an unprecedented Pope, but that we are in fact right to be scandalized and concerned and all the rest.  Having a priest recognize our concerns as justified is so very welcome and needed right now.

I cannot emphasize how important I think this is.  I understand that many priests do not want to be seen as somehow standing in opposition to the Pope, but for Heaven’s sake this is the biggest issue of the day in the Church by far, and silence is simply not acceptable on these unbelievably important matters!  At this point, we’re more than halfway in, and the direction of at least those placed in positions of authority at the Synod is more than clear.  It is clear that Baldiserri, Forte, Rosica, Spadaro, and others desire a revolution in practice AND doctrine which they believe will irrevocably alter the Church into something she has never been, and in truth cannot be.

The time for silence is past.  Souls desperately need the edification and consolation of their priests to make clear that it is possible that the Synod could – and very probably will – cross a line that faithful souls cannot accept, and they need to know that resistance to any diktats contrary to the belief and practice of the Faith is not only acceptable, but a moral imperative.  We should be hearing the voices of priests attached to the Traditional Mass in particular rising up in righteous indignation and furious anger at the revolutionary ideals being pursued in Rome.  To my mind, this is a good priest’s minimum duty to the souls in his charge.  To do otherwise is to leave their flocks helpless and prone to despair in the face of the utterly unacceptable.

May God bless this brave priest.  May we have many more like him, and may the silence many are experiencing from their shepherds on this matter of paramount importance cease forthwith.