jump to navigation

Saint John Vianney: Temptation Necessary to Recognize Our Nothingness August 2, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Holy suffering, Interior Life, priests, Saints, sanctity, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
comments closed

From The Sermons of the Cure’ of Ars, some catechesis on our nothingness before God, and our total need for His Grace in order to grow in sanctity.  This is not to say that our works avail nothing, per the protestant heresies, but it is critical to note that works done absent Grace – if we are not Catholic, or if we have fallen into mortal sin – avail us nothing, so long as we persist in that fallen state.  But if we are in the state of Grace, our works avail much, and are indeed necessary for salvation, as Our Blessed Lord made very clear in St. Matthew Chapter 25.

Spiritual pride, however, can greatly undermine the efficacy of our good works, by encouraging us to deny God the praise He is due for every good thing we are able to accomplish in Grace.  Thus, temptations can actually be a source of great good, by reminding us of our littleness and our absolute need for the God’s Grace to sustain us in this life and make happiness eternity a possibility.

Temptation is necessary to us to make us realize that we are nothing in ourselves.  St. Augustine tells us that we should thank God as much for the sins from which He has preserved us as for those which He has had the charity to forgive us.  If we have the misfortune to fall so often into the snares of the devil, we set ourselves up again too much on the strength of our own resolutions and promises and too little upon the strength of God.  This is very true.

When we do nothing to be ashamed of, when everything is going along according to our wishes, we dare to believe that nothing could make us fall.  We forget our own nothingness and our utter weakness.  We make the most delightful protestations that we are ready to die rather than to allow ourselves to be conquered.  We see a splendid example of this in St. Peter, who told Our Lord that although all others might be scandalized in Him, yet he would never deny Him.

Alas!  To show him how man, left to himself, is nothing at all, God made us, not of kings or princes or weapons, but simply of the voice of a maidservant, who even appeared to speak to him n a very indifferent sort of way.  A moment ago, he was ready to die for Him, and now Peter protests that he does not even know Him………..To assure them even more vehemently that he does not know Him, he swears an oath about it.  Dear Lord, what we are capable of when we are left to ourselves!

There are some who, in their own words, are envious of the Saints who did great penances.  They believe that they could do as well.  When we read the lives of some of the martyrs, we would, we think, be ready to suffer all that they suffered for God; the moment is shortlived, we say, for an eternity of reward.  But what does God do to teach us to know ourselves or, rather, to know that we are nothing?  This is all He does: He allows the devil to come a little closer to us.  Look at this Christian who a moment ago was quite envious of the hermit  who lived solely on roots and herbs and who made the stern resolution to treat his body as harshly.  Alas!  A slight headache, a prick of a pin, makes him as big and strong has he is, sorry for himself.  He is very upset.  He cries with pain.  A moment ago he would have been willing to do all the penances of the anchorites – and the merest trifle makes him despair!

Look at this other one, who seems to want to give his whole life for God, whose ardor all the torments there are cannot damp.  A tiny bit of scandalmongering, a word of calumny, even a slightly cold reception or a small injustice done to him…immediately gives birth in him to feelings of hatred, of revenge, of dislike, to the point, often, of his wishing never to see his neighbor again or at least of treating coldly with an air which shows very plainly what is going on in his heart. And how many times is this his waking thought, just as it was the thought that almost prevents him from sleeping?  Alas, my dear brethren, we are poor stuff, and we should count very little upon our good resolutions!

———-End Quote———

Instead, trust in God, and in His Grace and Mercy!  Implore them at all times, or at least, many times throughout the day.

If you’re anything like me, you are probably all too aware of how many times you’ve failed in resolutions solemnly made – before cooperation with Grace.  But with Grace, these things often become fare easier, though God may leave us with a thorn or two in our sides in order to keep us from thinking a bit too much of ourselves.  The next sermon from Saint John Vianney in the book goes on at length about the benefits of temptations (so long as we do not fall to them!), arguing that a lack of temptations is something to fear, because it could mean we are already in satan’s power through some unacknowledged sin.

But this is enough for today.


Bergoglio establishes commission to study diaconate of women August 2, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in different religion, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, paganism, priests, Revolution, scandals, secularism, Society, suicide, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

If this study goes anything like the Synods, we can safely assume not only has the matter already been decided, but the papers announcing the change in policy after the close of the study are already written, or at least well underway:

On May 12, 2016, the Holy Father, in the course of the meeting — in the format of dialogue in the Paul VI Hall — with the participants at the Plenary Assembly of Superiors-General, expressed his intention of “establishing an official commission that can study the question” of the Diaconate of women, “especially regarding the first years of the Church”.
After intense prayer and mature reflection, His Holiness has decided to institute the Commission for the Study of the Diaconate of Women……..
There follows the list of individuals making up the study group, including 6 women and 6 men, plus a president from the CDF.  I know only a few names on the list – the ones I know lean heavily liberal, including Phyllis Zagano, who has written for the Apostate Reporter for  years.

There were deaconesses in the early Church.  Their role, however, was strictly limited, and nothing like the modern role of the deacon, especially in the Novus Ordo realm.  Since baptism in the early Church involved full immersion and little clothing, women assistants were needed to perform them to prevent the risk of scandal and sin.

I think we can rest assured this study will ignore the true historical realities, and instead try to invent out of whole cloth a sweeping mandate for an expansive list of female diaconal duties.  I have to believe, in spite of Bergoglio’s statements to the contrary, that this is ultimately about paving the way for false women priestesses.  That is what this “movement” (of a very small number of disaffected women and some ignorant, worldly hangers on) has been driving at all along, since the scourge of feminism first burst into reality in the Church in the late 60s.  Thankfully most of the women clamoring for this are quite elderly and they are not being replaced by younger followers.   But a female diaconate could breathe new life into an increasingly moribund effort.

Will something like this only continue to expand the growing divide between the traditional practice of the Faith, centered on the TLM, and the Novus Ordo practice?  It is impossible that it would not, unless it is planned to unleash all the recent novelties of the NO on the TLM at some point (or just do away with “permission” for the TLM outright).

Either way, it’s disconcerting.  Some may say “you’re over-reacting,” but all I can say is, look how the Synods went, and what is planned for future ones.  The Left telegraphs its objectives well in advance.  I don’t think I’m over-reacting at all, I think I’m making a sober assessment of the situation.

Which may soon look like this:

Oh, bring it on……and while you’re at it, do tell me all about your absent father and bullying at school.  Quite the rich tapestry, I’m sure.

So how do you reconcile this with a sudden breakthrough with the Society?  How could the Society accept?

“Practicing” Catholic Joe Biden Officiates Pseudo-sodo-wedding August 2, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, asshatery, contraception, Dallas Diocese, disaster, General Catholic, horror, It's all about the $$$, paganism, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

So Joe Biden pretended to marry two men recently.  Will any bishop have the temerity to not only perhaps say a vague word of condemnation, but to actually ban the VP – who travels all over the country regularly – from receiving the Blessed Sacrament in his diocese?  We had the scandal of Biden receiving the Eucharist here in Dallas a couple of years ago, of course, no one at the chancery said anything, publicly, at least.

Vice President Joe Biden can now add “wedding officiant” to his resume.

Biden married a same-sex couple — both White House staffers — on Monday.

He tweeted: “Proud to marry Brian and Joe at my house. Couldn’t be happier, two longtime White House staffers, two great guys.” [So will your endorsement be so strong when they “divorce” in 27 months?]

According tomediareports, it was Biden’s first time officiating a wedding.

Jill Biden tweeted, “Love is love!” [No, lust is lust, and sentimentality is sentimentality, but neither are love]

Biden officiating a same-sex wedding shouldn’t be surprising.

“This is all about a simple proposition: Who do you love?” Biden said during an interview on “Meet the Press.” “I am absolutely comfortable with the fact that men marrying men, women marrying women and heterosexual men and women marrying are entitled to the same exact rights.”

Is there anything leftist pretend-Catholics could do to fall out of “communion?”  Of course not…….unless they should convert and start exhorting souls regarding Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus or the virtues of the SSPX.  But don’t think it’s cowardice that keeps bishops from excommunicating the likes of Biden.  That’s the case with a few, they may hold orthodox views but too fear the secular power to take public action against manifest heretics, but most don’t use ecclesial sanction against Biden for being pro-abort or supporting pseudo-sodo-marriage because they share the exact same views.

Biden, of course, is just one of many self-described Catholics who continue to undermine the moral order and attack the Doctrine of the Faith, not all of which carry a “D” after their name.  Probably no single Catholic in the US has done more to injure the Church and the good of souls than Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, appointed by “Saint” Ronald Reagan.  He has single-handedly kept abortion legal, struck down common sense health and safety requirements for abortion mills, declared sodomy to be legal, and then imposed pseudo-sodo-marriage at the federal and state levels.  He’s a regular Catholic superhero.  And yet, fully in communion, or so it appears.


Obama Admin to Name US Navy Ship after Pedophile Harvey Milk August 2, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, Basics, disaster, error, foolishness, horror, paganism, rank stupidity, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, Society, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

US Naval ships had a very long history of receiving honorable, relevant names. Cruisers were named after cities, destroyers and frigates after naval heroes (most of whom had died in combat), battleships and ballistic missile submarines after states, and aircraft carriers mostly after either earlier historic ships or significant historical battles.

This 200 year tradition was upset in the 1990s, when the Clinton Administration first started giving very heavily politicized names – like the USS Jimmah Cartah, SSN-23 – to naval ships.  Yes, there were a few previous similar examples, but the politicized naming conventions really ramped up under Clinton, and were somewhat continued under Bush ’43, especially naming carriers after former Republicrat presidents. But the naming has really gone off the rails under the Obama cabal, which has taken to naming ships after political allies and democrat cronies, such as:

  • USS Gabrielle Giffords
  • USNS John Lewis
  • USNS Earl Warren
  • USS John P. Murtha [easily one of the most corrupt, disgusting politicians of the late 20th century]
  • USNS Medgar Evers
  • USNS Cesar Chavez
  • USNS Sojourner Truth [no, really!  Can’t you imagine how bursting with pride the sailors that come aboard leftist activist Sojourner Truth will feel!]

A new low has been reached, however, with the recommendation from Navy Secretary Ray Mabus – who has probably done more damage to the USN than any other individual in history, perhaps excluding Elmo Zumwalt – that a ship be named after sodomite activist and admitted pedophile Harvey Milk.  Milk served briefly in the Navy in the 1950s, but the naming has nothing to do with that, and is all about appeasing one of the demonrats core constituencies – the sexually perverse:

The Navy is set to name a ship after the late homosexual rights icon and San Francisco politician Harvey Milk, according to a Congressional notification obtained by USNI News.

The July 14, 2016 notification, signed by Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus, indicated he intended to name a planned Military Sealift Command fleet oiler USNS Harvey Milk (T-AO-206).

Harvey Milk was the first homosexual activist elected to public office in the United States and was assassinated in 1978. That record plus the fact that Milk, who bragged about being a pedophile, served in the Navy at a time it was illegal for homosexuals to do so, apparently justifies naming a Navy ship in his honor.
Harvey Milk was a sexual predator who preyed upon teen boys. According to The Mayor of Castro Street, Milk’s very favorable biography by Randy Shilts, in 1963, when Milk was 33, he took in “Jack” Galen McKinley, a 16-year-old runaway in New York City “who was looking for some kind of father figure,” to live with him as a lover.[This “daddy-son” dynamic is a central part of most sodomite relations and reveals the deep psychological disturbances that underlie them]

While Jack was still a minor, Milk moved him to San Francisco. However, when Jack matured beyond Milk’s taste for young guys, Milk dropped him. [They’re called “twinks” and the tastes tend to run very  young, well below 18.  That’s why the push is already on to open up children down to 4 or 5 to sexual predators like this lost perverse soul Milk.  Thus it is perhaps more than a little significant that the US gov’t would see fit to name a US naval ship after a known pedophile.  Far less has been cited for precedent-setting court decisions]

Jack McKinney was highly disturbed and frequently suicidal after being rejected by Milk. [He was almost certainly highly disturbed before, which is what led him down this dark path in the first place]The Mayor of Castro Street records Milk’s shocking coldness when told of his former boy lover’s suicide threat. “Tell him not to make a mess,” Milk said. Eventually Jack died in a fall from the eighth floor of a building, in an apparent suicide.

He wasn’t the only one Milk destroyed, or helped destroy.  Milk was a thoroughly despicable man, one totally unworthy of having a naval ship named after him, even a support ship normally manned by civilians.

The repeal of “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” in 2011 has marked a sea change in the life and conduct of the US military.  It is almost impossible to convey how radical the changes in the military have been, but in short the US military is no longer a place for any believing Christians to serve.  The leftist indoctrination is constant, as are the dangers to one’s career.  Upset one social justice warrior – and there are thousands in the US military today – and a career can be wrecked, even if totally innocent.  But the pro-sodomite activism has pushed things up beyond another notch, to outright advocacy along with the persecution of Christians.

It will be interesting to see who wins the race: at some point the public stand of islam against sodomy in the West is going to come into strong conflict with the pro-sodomy movement.  It ain’t going to be pretty when that finally happens, in spite of many male muslim’s secret (or open) taste for boys).

ISIS explains why they hate us, crushes liberal fantasies……. August 2, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, disaster, Ecumenism, error, foolishness, Francis, General Catholic, horror, paganism, scandals, secularism, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

…….but mostly crushes liberal fantasies regarding the “religion of peace.”

ISIS has a slick and glossy magazine called Dabik or something.  It’s basically a propaganda piece.  It does contain a number of semi-scholarly articles on subjects related to islam – how many white Christian slaves a jihadist is entitled to, the do’s and don’ts of raping the promised virgins of paradise, how to sell slaves in a buyer’s market, that kind of thing. Mostly, though, it argues for the islamist’s vision of islam, and justifies jihad as the quintessential muslim act.

The latest issue has very harsh words for Western liberals committed, by dogma, to seeing islam as a “religion of peace” in spite of mountains of historical evidence to the contrary, and the testimony of our own lyin’ eyes.  It’s an interesting analysis of the pathologies of Western culture from an outsider’s perspective, even noting the profoundly political nature of Western elite’s refusal to recognize the reality of islam.  That is to say, Western leaders – including those within the Church – refuse to see the violence endemic to islam as a political act, because they believe recognizing the truth about islam would be highly inconvenient to their true religion political program:

The 15th issue of Dabiq, published on July 31, is titled “Break The Cross” and appears to be primarily directed at those that ISIS considers its enemies, particularly Christians. One section is devoted to the words and actions of Pope Francis and is headlined “In The Words Of Our Enemies.” An editorial titled “Why We Hate You and Why We Fight You” takes aim at Westerners and “apostate ‘Imams’ in the West” who refuse to define ISIS’ motivation as being Islamic. ISIS calls this rhetoric purely political. [Yes, Christ told us to be kind to our enemies, but that is on a personal basis.  When we have responsibilities for the safety and faith of others, we also have a responsibility to oppose, even to the level of physical violence, those who would threaten both in those too weak to defend themselves.]

“Many Westerners, however, are already aware that claiming the attacks of the mujahidin to be senseless and questioning incessantly as to why we hate the West and why we fight them is nothing more than a political act and a propaganda tool,” the article says. “The politicians will say it regardless of how much it stands in opposition to facts and common sense just to garner as many votes as they can for the next election cycle.”

The argument echoes a current debate in the U.S. between some on the right who have been vocal about challenging high-ranking left-leaning politicians to specifically label the ISIS threat as “radical Islamic terror.” President Obama has said on multiple occasions that he has refused to use the term in an effort to avoid lending religious legitimacy to the terror group.

The ISIS author of the “Why We Hate You” piece aims to settle the argument, and “clarify” in “unequivocal terms” that ISIS is Islamic. The author says that those on the “social fringe” who identify Islam with ISIS are correct.

While it is perhaps arguable that ISIS represents “true islam,” what cannot be argued is the evidence from history and modern-day sociology: the more involved, committed a muslim, the more they tend to embrace the notion of violent conquest and the subjugation of islam’s enemies.  There are exceptions, of course, there always are, but what is even more troubling concerning islam is the tendency of the more “moderate,” less convicted members of this false man-made religion to give the jihadist a free hand, to almost never rise up in opposition to them, and, more importantly, to secretly agree with many of their goals: the imposition of sharia, the expansion of the ummah, and the right of islam to be imposed on unwilling peoples.

So, even to the extent that islam has a large, non-combatant element, it is immaterial, as this large cohort almost always defers to the demands of the most convicted, when push comes to shove.  The most convicted are able to paint themselves as the “best muslims,” and there are few within islam who are willing to strenuously argue against this.

In the end, then, it makes no difference whether the jihadists are the “true muslims” or not.  Again, the testimony of both history and current events is irrefutable: Western attempts to appease and “dialogue” with islam are doomed to failure.  There is nothing in the modern West that can provide sufficient motivation to resist the steady encroachments of islam outside of Catholicism, which has been roundly rejected by almost all Westerners, even those who claim the name of Catholic for themselves.  We also have to bear in mind at all times taqqiyah, islam’s “holy lying,” wherein it is not only permissible, but even expected, to lie to the infidel in order to advance the spread of islam.  Thus, “moderate” muslim leaders claiming to seek dialogue on an equal footing – and there are very few of those! – have precious little credibility, as they could simply be seeking to serve islam’s expansionist interests in a different manner.

Thus all attempts at appeasing islam by Christian and especially Catholic leaders are not only foolish and fruitless, they are actually damnable in that they only demonstrate to islam the West’s weakness and lack of belief and its readiness for conquest.  That is to say, they only encourage the violent elements within islam, while undermining the morale of the few Westerners still possessed of enough determination to stand in opposition to islam.  There is essentially zero practical up-side to dialogue with islam, and the downside grows more hideous every day.  But the aforementioned is based on having a Catholic outlook; those belonging to different religions, such as sexular paganism, will likely draw very different conclusions.