jump to navigation

Francis says Church Must Apologize to and Beg Forgiveness of “Gays” June 27, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, disaster, episcopate, error, General Catholic, horror, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, the struggle for the Church, unbelievable BS.
comments closed

I haven’t time to write now, so a link to Steve Skojec’s piece at One Peter Five.  Once again, Francis turns Scripture and Tradition on its head, literally inverting good and evil, in what has become a nonstop full-frontal attack on the entire doctrinal edifice of the Church, the entire moral order, and even the natural law.  Incredible.  The key quotes, from his in-flight press conference when traveling from Armenia back to Rome:

The problem is a person that has a condition, that has good will and who seeks God, who are we to judge…….

……One can condemn, but not for theological reasons, but for reasons of political behavior [so Francis finds political behavior more offensive than actual sin.  Gotcha]

…….I think that the Church must not only ask forgiveness – like that “Marxist Cardinal” said (laughs) – must not only ask forgiveness to the gay person who is offended. But she must ask forgiveness to the poor too, to women who are exploited, to children who are exploited for labor. She must ask forgiveness for having blessed so many weapons. The Church must ask forgiveness for not behaving many times – when I say the Church, I mean Christians!……

………..I remember from my childhood the culture in Buenos Aires, the closed Catholic culture. I go over there, eh! A divorced family couldn’t enter the house, and I’m speaking of 80 years ago. The culture has changed, thanks be to God. Christians must ask forgiveness for many things, not just these. Forgiveness, not just apologies. Forgive, Lord.

Skojec has a lot of good analysis. I hope to update this or write another post tomorrow.

At this point, I’m at a loss.  Virtually everything this man thinks is a sin, really isn’t, and that which he thinks isn’t, actually is.  That’s what I mean by turning the entire moral order on its head.  Sodomites now occupy the commanding heights of virtue while pious souls must beg their forgiveness?!?

And that’s not all. On the same flight, Francis also declared that Lutheran Doctrine on Justification is correct and the Church shares it, which is also incredibly problematic, to say the least, in spite of the disastrous 1999 “joint declaration” that said the same.

You get the impression things are spinning out of control.  Maybe I need to go back and update the post below, reaching a different conclusion.  Sheesh. It just never freaking ends with this guy!  And EVEN STILL the apologists are out  there finding “gold” fool’s gold in this giant pile of manure.  Oh, he didn’t mean that, and look at this other thing he said, and SQUIRREL!

These apologists are greasing the skids to hell for far, far more souls than even the most spittle-flecked trad or sede vacantist. And yet we’re the bad guys, for pointing out the plain truth.  What a crock.

“Enough is Enough: It Is Time for Francis to Resign” June 27, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, disaster, error, foolishness, Francis, General Catholic, horror, Revolution, scandals, Society, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, Virtue.
comments closed

I didn’t say it; a writer at Fox News did, meaning the concerns over Francis’ pontificate are spreading beyond the trad community and even conservative corners of the Church, and into the mainstream.  However, I find the notion of papal resignation, reinvigorated by the star-crossed Pope Benedict, to be deplorable, sending a very wrong message about the message of the papacy as an administrative role filled for a time and not a specific office created by Our Blessed Lord for a chosen individual to fulfill faithfully for life (among other things).

Nevertheless, this is an extremely interesting piece, as the author notes several problems with Francis’ most recent outrageous (and destructive, if not overtly heterodox) statements on most marriages being invalid (my emphasis and (too many) comments):

For a “pope of the people” he certainly doesn’t give Catholics much credit. For a Catholic marriage to be valid all that is needed is the freedom to marry, consent from both parties, and the intention to marry for life and be open to children. That’s it…….[I would simply add that virtually all progressives have an extremely low view of their fellow man, in spite of – or perhaps generating – their protestations to the contrary.  That’s why they are progressives, they want the almighty state (made up of individuals, the same they hold in such low repute) to be almighty, because they basically believe people are too stupid and dangerous to conduct their own affairs.  Which, again, may be more a reflection of themselves than anything else]

For Pope Francis to say the great majority of marriages are null implies that the great majority of Catholic are ignorant fools who cannot understand the responsibilities of a bedrock of society that has existed for thousands of years. [Indeed.  For hundreds of years, even the most illiterate peasants were able to comprehend what marriage is and faithfully live out the Sacrament over their lives.  Now, I know the modern education system is awful, but I don’t think most people are quite that ignorant, yet, at least in developed countries. And yet we’re still going to pretend that marriage is just too hard to understand?  Please.  What this is really about is ideology, and remaking the Church into a progressive, worldly construct. The deconstruction of marriage is just a convenient weapon in that war.]

It also suggests severe doubt in the mercy and grace of God. The rule of thumb when the validity of sacraments, whether it be marriage, the Eucharist or the priesthood, is concerned, is to assume validity unless something clearly contradicts that….[And this used to be virtually impossible to prove, and still is in most countries, that don’t have annulment mill policies like in the US. But let’s face it, annulment mills didn’t appear because people suddenly became fundamentally able to properly commit in the Sacrament, they occurred because millions were choosing divorce and wanted to still be counted as good and devout Catholics. The progressive desire to make a paradise on earth is, in itself, a “severe doubt in the mercy….of God.”]

Francis’ words put the devil’s doubt into the hearts and minds of good Catholic couples who may be going through a rough time, and who instead of saying “We’re Catholic, we’re married, this is until death parts us,” may now say, “Well, the pope says most marriages aren’t valid anyway…maybe ours isn’t either” and give up. [Yep]

Francis’ statement demonstrates a lack of faith in the Church and its ability to vet couples seeking marriage, to teach them about what marriage is, and to administer the sacraments effectively. If most marriages are invalid because couples don’t understand a life-long commitment, does that mean most priestly ordinations are invalid too? If so, are most masses invalid? Most confessions? [Great questions. Does Franky George Bergoglio really want to open the Pandora’s box of questions regarding the validity of Novus Ordo Masses or whole chains of ordinations/consecrations from bad bishops?]

The Church’s authority rests, in part, on its claim to be able to communicate the sacraments and the teachings of Christ. Francis has cast doubt on the former, has done a poor job of the latter, and by doing so has brought the Church’s legitimacy into question. [One more: simply by proclaiming radical new opinions so at odds with the solemn Doctrine of the Faith dating back centuries, Francis communicates that the Church has no idea what it’s talking about now, or then, or never did.  And so many souls conclude: it’s a fake, and they’re better off anywhere else.]

His comments come after he dealt more confusion to Catholic marriages by allowing the liberal Cardinal Walter Kasper to take control of last year’s Synod of the Family — who turned the whole thing into a referendum on gay people and communion for divorced and remarried Catholics.

Francis made things worse this year with his vague document on the family — Amoris Laetitia — in which he buried the hot topic of divorced and remarried Catholics in a footnote, and muddied the waters some more by saying that such couples could receive sacraments “in certain cases.”  When asked to clarify he said “I don’t remember the footnote.” Wonderful. [Did he really say that? If so, it’s probably because the document was written by his gay kissing ghost writer Tucho Fernandez. I also note that lack of intellectual curiosity or mental laziness is a hallmark of the modern left]

Once upon a time Catholics would have been stuck with a bad pope, but since Pope Emeritus Benedict opened the door for a pope resigning when he can no longer do his job, it is time for the faithful to look at Francis and ask — “is this man able to lead the Holy Catholic Church?”

At this point it is clear, Bergoglio has repeatedly proven himself unable to lead, and is doing incalculable damage to the Church that will take decades to heal.

Pope Francis should resign, and Catholics should demand it, so the Church can begin recovering from the havoc his ill-advised and arrogant papacy has wrought.

Look, I get it.  Resignation is a quick fix, or feels like one (but will never happen with this guy, who will hold onto power with a grim determination).  Enormous damage is being done everyday, and even though another resignation would also harm the office, it might harm it less than this radical pontificate continuing for several more years.  Heck, it probably would.

But two wrongs don’t make a right. I will always believe Pope Benedict acted wrongly when he abdicated, that he violated two millennia of tradition and undermined the very nature of the office with his act (even if he was “forced” to do so).  Every day he continues to live and function quite well, especially intellectually, the state reasons for his abdication look more and more spare.  If Francis resigned (which, he won’t), it would turn a very bad one-off into something of a precedent, the start of a trend, a trend that could do even more damage to the papacy than his day to day promulgation of error.

So, I don’t pray for God to make Francis to resign. I don’t call on him to resign.  I also don’t beg God to strike Francis dead. I just ask Him to have mercy on His Church.  He sees infinitely more than we ever will, and He knows what His Church needs, and how this will all fit in the plan of salvation for each one of us and the judgment of the world in general.  I certainly don’t believe the Lord “picked” Francis in some positive way, but He will use Francis as He uses everything else, to His ultimate end.

I just try more and more everyday to focus on on that reality, on the goodness of our Lord and His mercy for His Church.  I am mortified by the damage being done but God is permitting it for some reason.  We are deep into the Passion of the Church, which must come before Our Savior may return.  Just as with our Blessed Lord and His Passion, the worst persecutions and betrayals come from those within.

May God have mercy on His Church, and bring her the leadership she needs, not what which the world deserves.

St. John Vianney on Envy and other Hidden Sins June 27, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Interior Life, mortification, reading, Saints, Society, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
comments closed

From the Sermons of the Cure of Ars, some helpful direction on the sin of envy, and other sins we often try to hide from ourselves, with satan’s help.  The focus of this excerpt is more on that tendency to deny our sins to ourselves.  Certain sins we may readily admit: others we may seek to explain away or pretend are not.  This was the failing of the Pharisee in the parable of the Pharisee and the publican, his inability to see his own sin of pride.  Envy, in this age of relative plenty (and even superabundance), may not be the problem it was in St. John Vianney’s day (or, it may be worse), but if you’re anything like me, you will, over time, find more and more deeply buried sins as you go through the process of eradicating some of the more obvious ones:

We have already seen that this vice [envy]  indicates a mean and petty spirit.  That is so true that on one will admit to feeling envy, or at least no one wants to believe that he has been attacked by it.  People will employ a hundred and one devices to conceal their envy from others.  If someone speaks well of another in our presence, we keep silence: we are upset and annoyed.  If we must say something, we do so in the coldest and most unenthusiastic fashion.  No, my dear children, there is not a particle of charity in the envious heart.  St. Paul has told us that we must rejoice in the good which befalls our neighbor.  Joy, my dear brethren, is what Christian charity should inspire in us for one another.  But the sentiments of the envious are vastly different.

I do not believe that there is a more ugly and dangerous sin than envy because it is hidden and is often covered by the attractive mantle of virtue….Envy is a public plague which spares no one.

We are leading ourselves to hell without realizing it.

But how are we then to cure ourselves of this vice if we do not think we are guilty of it?  I am quite certain that of the thousands of envious souls honestly examining their consciences, there would not be one ready to believe himself belonging to that company.  It is the least recognized of sins.  Some people are so profoundly ignorant that they do not recognize a quarter of their ordinary sins.  And since the sin of envy is more difficult to know, it is not surprising that so few confess it and correct it.  Because they are not guilty of the big public sins committed by coarse and and brutalized people, they think that the sins of envy are only little defects in charity, when, in fact, for the most part, these are serious and deadly sins which they are harboring and tending in their hearts, often without fully recognizing them.  

“But,” you may be thinking in your own minds, “if I really recognized them, I would do my best to correct them.”

If you want to be able to recognize them, my dear brethren, you must ask the Holy Ghost for His light.  He alone will give you this grace. No one could, with impunity, point out these sins to  you; you would not wish to agree nor to accept them; you would always find something which would convince you that you had made no mistake in thinking and acting the way you did.  Do you know yet what will help to make you know the state of your soul and to uncover this evil sin hidden in the secret resources of your heart? It is humility. Just as price will hide it from you, so will humility reveal it to you.

———–End Quote———–

Again, there isn’t a hidden purpose to this point, I simply found the notion of unacknowledged sins a valuable one to convey.  It’s not a topic one finds frequently addressed even in very good literature on the spiritual life.

And now, on a side note, I found a truly deplorable book on St. Catherine of Siena for you to avoid.  The book is called St. Catherine of Siena by Alfred W. Pollard, and it rather nastily attacks so many of the Saint’s great miracles and devotions as either false or ridiculous excesses of fervor that I must warn everyone to avoid this book.  The book was bought in the bookstore of a certain traditional parish, which would normally be a seal of approval, but I have to say I think a mistake has been made in this case. Even most of the author’s “compliments” towards the Saint are backhanded at best, and takes an excessive interest in the political dimensions of the great Dominican tertiary’s activities, which formed only a very small part of her life (and uses those activities to attack the papacy and the notion of the Papal States, generally).  I am not entirely certain whether the author was Anglican or not, but the book carries no imprimatur or nihil obstat and was published in London, so it’s quite possible he was.  Anyway, I recommend all stay far from this book except maybe those already very well versed in the Saint’s life who can dissect fact from opinion, derogation from endorsement.

“Catholic” Kennedy Strikes Again as Supreme Court Overturns Texas Abortion Restrictions June 27, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, asshatery, Basics, contraception, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, paganism, scandals, self-serving, SOD, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

“Catholic” Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy- for the umpteenth time – cast the deciding vote on a matter deciding issues gravely against the moral order yet again today.  Kennedy voted in favor of overturning Texas’ extremely successful 2013 abortion restrictions, restrictions that had led to the closure of about 60% of the state’s mills.  Thus, it is expected that many mills will re-open, or new ones start up, and abortion will be far more available in Texas than it had been for the past 3 years.  Kennedy’s ruling overturned a lower-court verdict by the 5th Circuit finding the provisions of 2013’s House Bill 2 to be constitutional.  Just as in Casey vs. Planned Parenthood, Kennedy will go to his death with the blood of millions on his soft, manicured hands.

But I’m certain he’ll remain a “Catholic in good standing” and continue to receive the feting from high prelates from one end of this land to the other.  He’ll probably even receive the Blessed Sacrament from the hand of Cardinal Burke himself, as he already has in the past.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court struck down Texas’ widely replicated regulation of abortion clinics Monday in the court’s biggest abortion case in nearly a quarter century.

The justices voted 5-3 in favor of Texas clinics that had argued the regulations were only a veiled attempt to make it harder for women to get abortions in the nation’s second-most populous state.

Justice Stephen Breyer’s majority opinion for the court held that the regulations are medically unnecessary and unconstitutionally limit a woman’s right to an abortion. [thanks for letting us know they are medically unnecessary, Doctor Breyer]

Texas had argued that its 2013 law and subsequent regulations were needed to protect women’s health. The rules required doctors who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals and forced clinics to meet hospital-like standards for outpatient surgery.

Breyer wrote that “the surgical-center requirement, like the admitting privileges requirement, provides few, if any, health benefits for women, poses a substantial obstacle to women seeking abortions and constitutes an ‘undue burden’ on their constitutional right to do so.” [So the entire bill has pretty much been struck down, which had been doing so much good. You think Breyer based his judgment on real medical evidence, or liberal medical opinion?]

Justices Anthony Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan joined Breyer. [Because of course they did. It’s only ever a question which way a “conservative” justice will approach, it’s never, ever a question how a leftist democrat-appointed one will]

……..Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented. [For all the good in the world it did them]

………Abortion providers said the rules would have cut the number of abortion clinics in Texas by three-fourths if they had been allowed to take full effect.

When then-Gov. Rick Perry signed the law in 2013, there were about 40 clinics throughout the state. That number dropped to under 20 and would have been cut in half again if the law had taken full effect, the clinics said.

Texas passed a broad bill  imposing several abortion restrictions in 2013 [because this was the plain will of the people]. Texas clinics sued immediately to block it, contending it impermissibly interfered with a woman’s constitutional right to an abortion. [See – You have no constitutional right to a firearm, in spite of what the 2nd Amendment plainly says, but women have a “constitutional right” to murder their children, because it’s absolutely nowhere in the document, but “emanating from the penumbras”] The clinics won several favorable rulings in a federal district court [in front of a leftist judge in Austin] Texas. But each time, the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the state, at first allowing challenged provisions to take effect and then upholding the law with only slight exceptions.

Excuse me, but what the heck is the point of “democracy” when one unelected lawyer can totally obviate the will of a large majority of citizens?  The federal courts have become the prime means by which the amoral anti-Christian agenda of the sexular pagan leftists has been imposed on this country, often against the will of the people.  One man basically has gotten to decide whether millions of people would live, or die.  More and more, we appear ruled by an unelected, unaccountable oligarchy that privileges the state-sanctioned killing of children above all else.

A bit of context on the Texas bill might be helpful.  It was written as the Kermit Gosnell murder-house case was coming to light.  Gosnell’s mill was a horror show of filthy conditions and botched procedures, with many dying as a result.  So, increasing health and safety requirements for abortion mills was both timely and sensical.

Abortion and porn: the only industries the left doesn’t want to regulate to death, probably because they avail themselves of them so often.

When, oh when, will Anthony Kennedy finally be excommunicated, or at least threatened with it, for all the manifest evil he has done?