jump to navigation

Help Request – translating priest’s sermon into English April 21, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, Art and Architecture, Francis, General Catholic, It's all about the $$$, Latin Mass, priests, Tradition, Virtue.
comments closed

Could TG or La Gallina – or anyone else – put either a transcript, or a fairly detailed summary, of Fr. Romanowski’s commentary on Amoris Laetitia into English?  From what I could pick up – more than half, but I could be missing key bits – I thought it was very good.  Would anyone like to volunteer to produce a summary/translation of this?  Not sure what I can offer in return.  I do have a gift I could send, if you’re interested in payment.

The talk is below:

Te gustas?

Hand-made wooden cross, laminated from exotic purple heart and white maple, approximately 28" long, normally sells for $200, special blog price $125

Hand-made wooden cross, laminated from exotic purple heart and white maple, approximately 28″ long, normally sells for $200, special blog price $125

You can see the purple better. Other crosses are approximately 15" tall. Two on the bottom are bloodwood and red oak. The top are leopardwood (left) and black palm (right). All types are available for sale. 15" crosses generally sell for $125 ($85 blog price, for now). I can make any size desired, from about 8" up to 48 or more. I am working on making proper crucifixes. Crosses without end caps cost $10 less.

You can see the purple better. Other crosses are approximately 15″ tall. Two on the bottom are both bloodwood (red wood) and red oak (blondish wood). The top are leopardwood (left) and black palm (right) with white maple. All types are available for sale. 15″ crosses generally sell for $125 ($85 blog price, for now). I can make any size desired, from about 8″ up to 48 or more. I am working on making proper crucifixes. Crosses without end caps (triangle pieces top/bottom-left/right) cost $10 less.

I am also building kneelers (prix dieu).  Very high quality, solid oak, artistic embellishments, $250.  Compare to major church supply houses, my kneelers generally run $100+ less and have better design.  I’ll try to add pics soon.

Orders take some weeks to fill.  Especially kneelers.

Oh, if you’re interested, leave a comment or e-mail me: larryr103 at gmail.com

 

Quick Hits – Boycott Target, Perverts for Equality, the Millenial Divorce Paradox April 21, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

Quick Hits – Boycott Target, Perverts for Equality, the Millenial Divorce Paradox

Cleaning out the inbox, a few quick hits for this Thursday arvonoon.  First up, Target has decided to let mentally unstable men into women’s rest rooms at all of their stores. Time for a boycott:

The American Family Association is calling for a boycott of Target after the retail giant said it would allow men to use the women’s restrooms and dressing rooms in their stores.

On its web site this week, Target announced, “[W]e welcome transgender team members and guests to use the restroom or fitting room facility that corresponds with their gender identity. …Everyone deserves to feel like they belong.”

This means a man can simply say he “feels like a woman today” and enter the women’s restroom…even if young girls or women are already in there. [This has occurred far too many times already]

Target’s policy is exactly how sexual predators get access to their victims. And with Target publicly boasting that men can enter women’s bathrooms, where do you think predators are going to go?

Clearly, Target’s dangerous new policy poses a danger to wives and daughters. We think many customers will agree. And we think the average Target customer is willing to pledge to boycott Target stores until it makes protecting women and children a priority. Target should keep separate facilities for men and women, but for the trans community and for those who simply like using the bathroom alone, a single occupancy unisex bathroom option should be provided. [Why?  This is precisely the problem. The longer we continue to reinforce these people’s grave mental problems and call them not just acceptable, but perfectly normal, the longer they will remain mired in a misery that will claim 30-40% of their lives through suicide, STD, or drug overdose. This is not charity, it is the cowardice masquerading as thoughtful concern.]

Take Action

Sign the pledge to boycott Target now! Target should not allow men to enter the women’s restrooms and dressing rooms.

After you sign the pledge, contact Target and let them know you’ve signed the Pledge. Call Target Guest Relations at 1-800-440-0680.

Next up, it seems one of the major figures pushing for dramatically increasing the risk of rape of women and children through his opposition to North Carolina’s sensible public restroom policy is himself a convicted boy rapist:

In late 2015, the Washington State Human Rights Commission quietly put forward a new rule requiring all public establishments to grant locker room, shower, and bathroom access to any individual, at any time, regardless of that individual’s biological realities.

The rule, which also curbed concerned citizens’ legal ability to ask “unwelcome questions” of an individual if they felt uncomfortable, has since been attempted in various forms and fashions in cities and states across the country.

When the Charlotte, N.C. City Council passed their version of the open-facilities ordinance earlier this year, the Charlotte LGBT Chamber of Commerce led the charge to make it happen.

And leading the Charlotte LGBT Chamber of Commerce was convicted sex offender Chad Sevearance-Turner.

The Spartanburg Herald-Journal reported that Chad Sevearance-Turner had been a youth minister at a church in Gaffney, South Carolina.  Sevearance-Turner was charged and convicted for “committing or attempting a lewd act upon a child under 16,” after taking advantage of a teenage church member while the child slept. [That’s what we’ve devolved to in this country – a moral climate where the perverse and sick dictate to the rest what is acceptable, and who are given the power by government to punish those who resist.  Satan, and Vladimir Lenin, couldn’t be prouder.]

He recently resigned from the LGBT Chamber of Commerce after his record as a sex-offender surfaced.

Meanwhile, it seems millenials think divorce is bad,  even though they are marrying less than any generation in American history.  Pundits can comprehend the dichotomy, but it’s very clear to me:

Respondents were asked whether they agreed or disagreed with the statement that “Divorce is usually the best solution when a couple can’t seem to work out their marriage problems.” In 2002, about half of Americans disagreed. Within a decade, the share had risen to more than 60 percent. In the most recent data, younger Americans — a cohort with the lowest marriage rates on record, mind you — were especially likely to perceive divorce as an unacceptable response to marital strain.

Several hypotheses were floated to try to explain the seeming dichotomy between millenials “famous” liberalism, their low marriage rates, and their disdain for divorce.

It’s no mystery to me, and it has little to do with liberalism.  Millenials are children of rampant divorce.  That drives them to have a whole host of psychoses, ranging from fear of commitment (low marriage rates) to a tendency to low-rent promiscuity.  But it also probably makes them find divorce abhorrent, as they have suffered its effects.  That doesn’t mean they won’t divorce with abandon themselves, once they finally start getting married, if ever.  Children raised in broken homes are far more likely to have unstable marriages and later divorce, for a whole host of reasons.

But hypothetically speaking, they know the devastation divorce causes children (i.e., themselves), and  they have seen that many of the reasons adults offer to children to justify their divorce are hollow and self-serving.  They rightly feel that there is really no justification for divorce in most cases.  Too bad they are likely too emotionally scarred to have the wherewithal to put their generic belief into specific practice.

Federal judge OK’s Dallas ban on Exxxotica Expo at Convention Center           April 21, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, Dallas Diocese, episcopate, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, North Deanery, Revolution, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, Tradition, true leadership, Victory, Virtue.
comments closed

Federal Judge Sidney Fitzwater issued a judgment early this morning declaring the Dallas’ City Council’s refusal to permit a repeat of last year’s disastrous Exxxotica pornucopia to be legal and constitutional.  Please be aware of the link, there are manifestly immoral images.  Note also, Dallas Morning News opinionist Robert Wilonsky is a secular pagan leftist, or at the least leans heavily that way.  His coverage is far from unbiased (he leans in favor of the “expo”).

I did not get to cover during my break from blogging the news that Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings, and the majority of the City Council, had moved to block the “sexpo” from recurring.  This was in the face of very strong public opposition to this immoral activity, where, it is reported, instances of public nudity, immoral acts, and prostitution were observed.  It has not been reported, yet, whether Exxxotica will attempt to appeal this decision.  What the decision does mean, however, is that the event planned for next month has been definitively cancelled:

A federal judge has decided the Dallas City Council is within its rights to ban a sex expo from returning to the city-owned convention center.

In a 32-page opinion issued early Thursday, U.S. District Judge Sidney Fitzwater denied Exxxotica’s request for a preliminary injunction, which was filed in February after seven members of the Dallas City Council sided with Mayor Mike Rawlings’ resolution banning the porn expo from returning to the Kay Bailey Hutchison Convention Center.

Exxxotica had hoped to return next month, following last August’s Dallas debut. Today’s ruling means that will not happen.

Exxxotica might appeal the ruling, or simply allow the case to go to trial. We are awaiting comment from its attorneys and organizers.

In a prepared statement, Rawlings said he was “pleased” with the judge’s decision, and said that w”hile this case is not over and this ruling does not guarantee what would happen at trial, I am extremely proud of the seven City Council members who had the courage to support this ban.”…..

…….“As lawyers who litigate constitutional issues, we were convinced that Exxxotica was advancing a unjustifiably expansive view of the First Amendment,” said Rob Walters, who represents the Dallas Citizens Council, which last week filed an amicus brief in support of the city’s position. “We applaud Judge Fitzwater for his careful and well-reasoned opinion and Mayor Rawlings and General Paxton and the State of Texas for their leadership on this important issue.”

Paxton added in a prepared statement that he was “happy to join the Dallas Citizens Council in this effort that allows the city of Dallas to be a place where businesses can continue to flourish.”

I’d like to thank, without naming them, the local parishioners who made up part of the legal team defending the City Council decision.  Dallas’ city attorneys, in another display of the pernicious infiltration of leftists into every imaginable nook and cranny of governance at all levels, had refused to defend the case in court, finding the ban supposedly unconstitutional.  Thus, the city has had to retain private attorneys to argue the case.

I’d like to also note that, contra the rhetoric we’ve heard from city officials in Oklahoma City, it does seem a city can fight a First Amendment case and even win, from time to time.  Prior to all the atrocities committed by satanists against the Lord, His Mother, and His Church in OKC, we were told repeatedly by the mayor and other elected officials that it was simply impossible to stop a black mass or a desecration of a statue of Our Lady because, ummm……First Amendment!  That was always bullocks, as I argued at the time, cities certainly do argue First Amendment cases all the time. We can see from the above that the black mass especially could have been blocked, as it occurred on city property. The fact of the matter is, the WILL to stop the blasphemy from occurring did not exist.

I remain convinced that the heavily evangelical OKC leadership simply did not care to stop this blasphemy due to their latent anti-Catholic bias.  Had it been a more protestant ox being gored, the reaction may well have been different.

I feel I now have even more evidence to support that supposition.  I, therefore, continue to believe that Oklahoma City is a hotbed of seething anti-Catholic bigotry, and should be boycotted by all faithful souls to the maximum extent possible.

I should add that it was up to Catholic laity (and other Christians and even secular groups) to oppose this moral monstrosity. Bishop Farrell was silent, as usual, presumably because the matter did not touch on prudential matters such as guns or immigration, only acts which can send souls  to hell for all eternity.  One must have one’s priorities, after all.