jump to navigation

Czech Gov’t to Citizens on How to Fight Islamist Terrorists – Shoot Them Yourselves January 13, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Ecumenism, family, firearms, General Catholic, Immigration, Restoration, Society, the enemy.
comments closed

That’s a novel approach, especially for Europe:

A couple of months ago, Czech President Milos Zeman made an unusual request: He urged citizens to arm themselves against a possible “super-Holocaust” carried out by Muslim terrorists.

Never mind that there are fewer than 4,000 Muslims in this country of 10 million people [that’s supposed to be a bad thing?!?  Good for the Czechs from keeping the invading hordes of military-age males out of their country]gun purchases spiked. One shop owner in East Bohemia, a region in the northern center of the Czech Republic, told a local paper that people were scared of a “wave of Islamists.”

Now the country’s interior ministry is pushing a constitutional change that would let citizens use guns against terrorists. Proponents say this could save lives if an attack occurs and police are delayed or unable to make their way to the scene. To become law, Parliament must approve the proposal; they’ll vote in the coming months.

The Czech Republic already has some of the most lenient gun policies in Europe. It’s home to about 800,000 registered firearms and 300,000 people with gun licenses. Obtaining a weapon is relatively easy: Residents must be 21, pass a gun knowledge check and have no criminal record. By law, Czechs can use their weapons to protect their property or when in danger, although they need to prove they faced a real threat.

This puts the country at odds with much of Europe, which has long supported much more stringent gun-control measures.  In the wake of the 2015 terror attacks in Paris, France pushed the European Union to enact even tougher policies. The European Commission’s initial proposal called for a complete ban on the sale of weapons like Kalashnikovs or AR-15s that are intended primarily for military use. Ammunition magazines would be limited to 20 rounds or less.

That bill subsequently passed in slightly modified form over the Czech government’s opposition, meaning that this vote is more than a bit of kabuki theater – the EU’s laws will supersede whatever laws the Czech government puts in place.  it also means a great many weapons currently legal in Czech and some other nations will soon be illegal.  If I were the Czechs, I’d be working towards a Czexit right now.

Most of Europe has long been much less free with basic human rights – like the right to self defense – than this nation has been.  While Europeans will giggle and say that’s why Europe has a lot fewer firearms deaths than the US, I would retort that the US also hasn’t ever had a concentration camp nor an endless cycle of totalitarian regimes.  The Czechs used to live under one of those.  That has more than a little to do with Czechs’ desire to own firearms, which is something I’ve seen personally (though I think the number of firearms and firearms owners listed above severely under-represents reality).

More and More (Curial) Priests Apparently Can’t Stand Francis January 13, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, disaster, episcopate, error, Francis, General Catholic, horror, priests, Revolution, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, the return, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

That’s what Damian Thompson says, anyway. Some interesting observations below – some revelations as to Francis’ character.  It might even be considered a bit psycho-analytical. I was not aware of Francis’ scandal in reinstating a scandalous progressive boy-raping priest that Benedict had previously defrocked.  That’s a damning indictment that Francis’ mercy extends only to perceived ideological allies, and not those whom he is most charged to shepherd and defend:

On 2 January, the Vatican published a letter from Pope Francis to the world’s bishops in which he reminded them that they must show ‘zero tolerance’ towards child abuse. The next day, the American Week magazine published an article that told the story of ‘Don Mercedes’ — Fr Mauro Inzoli, an Italian priest with a passion for expensive cars and underage boys.

In 2012, Pope Benedict stripped Inzoli of his priestly faculties, effectively defrocking him. In 2014, however, they were restored to him — by Pope Francis, who warned him to stay away from minors.

Then, finally, the Italian civil authorities caught up with this serial groper of teenagers in the confessional. Last summer Inzoli was sentenced to four years and nine months in jail for paedophile offences. The Vatican, under ‘zero-tolerance’ Francis, refused to supply evidence that prosecutors wanted…….. [I doubt he was guilty only of “groping,” and I hate how the media continues to soft-pedal these men’s crimes.  They, painfully and cruelly, rape young boys, destroying their irreplaceable innocence and scarring them for life. Those who suffer childhood sex abuse are never quite right again.  Reducing that to “groping” is yet another example of why so many of us have no respect for the media.  As for Francis, his “zero-tolerance” depends entirely on whether one is seen as an ally or not.  Leftism is always about power – those perceived as aiding that pursuit of power can never do any wrong, those who oppose it can never do any right.]

……A man who, when he took office, seemed endearingly informal — paying his own bill at his hotel, refusing to live in the Apostolic Palace, making surprise phone calls to members of the public — now cuts a less sympathetic figure.

He has broken with a far more significant papal tradition than living in the papal apartments or travelling in limousines. He has defied the convention that a pope, once elected, ceases to play nasty curial politics. [I’m shocked, shocked that a convicted Peronist would behave like a…..convicted Peronist]

Pope Benedict respected this convention. [Probably too much. It undermined his ability to effect any change – if he even wanted to.] Liberals who were worried that the ‘Rottweiler’ would harbour ancient grudges watched in amazement — and relief — as he turned into a virtual hermit. This created the factional chaos that led to his resignation — but right up until the end, Benedict was always ‘the Holy Father’.

That title has almost dropped out of use inside the Vatican under Francis, at least in everyday conversation. And, when you hear it, there is an edge of sarcasm. For example: ‘As the Holy Father so wisely says, we all have a natural tendency to eat shit.’

The priest in question is no fan of Francis. But the fact is that the Pope did say it — in public. Last month, he told the media to stop spreading fake stories because ‘people have a tendency towards the sickness of coprophagia’. Which means eating excrement.

Why did he say it? The traditionalist blog Rorate Caeli suggested that ‘ageing or an underlying medical issue’ was responsible for his ‘persistent anger, rancour, vituperation, use of uncouth words (which is known to be increasingly frequent in private)’. [Nah.  It’s just who he is. It’s who he’s always  been.  This is a severely intemperate man.  This is a man who is not in control of his appetites. Humility is what gives us the moral strength (and grace) to practice penance and limit our appetites.  Francis may or may not limit his physical, material appetite, but his appetite for more ethereal things like obeisance and the gathering of power appears voracious.]

Again, this is an opponent speaking. There is no evidence that the Pope is mentally ill. However, plenty of Vatican employees will testify to his outbursts of temper, rudeness towards subordinates and vulgar language. [Again, intemperance.  Intemperance also speaks to a lack of solid interior life driven by humility and devotion to prayer.]

He can also be genial, funny and compassionate. But this side of his personality is increasingly reserved for his inner circle and his allies.

All popes have inner circles, it goes without saying. What distinguishes Francis from his recent predecessors is the nature of the alliances he forms. He is far more brutal in the exercise of his power than, say, Pope John Paul II, who certainly had an authoritarian streak in him. [Indeed.  Some say Francis is even more authoritarian than Pius XII, the supposed epitome of the “bad old Church.”]

‘Bergoglio divides the church into those who are with him and those who are against him — and if he thinks you’re in the latter camp then he’ll come after you,’ says a priest who works in the curia. [Think that had much impact on the Franciscans of the Immaculate?]

‘Bergoglio’, note: he doesn’t even call him ‘Francis’. Tellingly, this priest used to be a fervent supporter of some of the Pope’s administrative reforms and he doesn’t look back nostalgically at the reign of Benedict, whom he blames for neglecting his papal duties.

But, like so many Vatican employees, he’s sick of Francis’s habit of telling the entire Roman curia that they are modern-day Pharisees — an analogy that casts the Argentinian pontiff in the role of Jesus. [Convenient, that.]

Clearly Francis believes that relaxing the rules on communion for Catholics in irregular marriages is an act of Christlike compassion. [Could there be more to it than that?  As a point of attack against the entire moral edifice of the Church, a more insidious one could hardly have been chosen.  I don’t think that’s accidental in the slightest.] This is also the view of the venerable liberal cardinals who campaigned to elect him. It is often said that he is enacting their agenda — and it’s true that Francis is well disposed to liberal demands for women deacons and married priests. [Thus the upcoming terror of Synod 2018.  Lord, please prevent this from taking place.]

He is not, however, their instrument. In the words of a Vatican observer who held an important position in Rome for many years, ‘He hasn’t taken on the old progressive mantle so much as created his own personality cult.’ Theological niceties bore him. Personal loyalty obsesses him — ‘and if the cardinal electors had done due diligence they would have discovered that he was an extraordinarily divisive figure among the Argentinian Jesuits’.

It’s not hard to detect a Latin American flavour to the deal-making and settling of scores that has become blatant over the past year. Most Catholic bishops had thought Francis was a plain-spoken and perhaps touchingly naive reformer. Instead, they are confronted by a pope who is simultaneously combative, charming, bad-tempered, idealistic and vengeful……..

Oh, I think the naivete is an act.  I think he – as the scion of those who elected him – knows exactly what he is doing and the impact it will have.  This is a man bent on remaking the Church in his own ideological image.  Niceties mean nothing to him, all that matters is the end result.

He’s a leftist Borgia, minus the appetites against the 6th and 9th Commandments.

TLM under threat from Francis? January 13, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, Basics, disaster, Francis, General Catholic, horror, Latin Mass, persecution, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

I have long suspected – and I think I have opined to this effect here on the blog in the past – that with the direction of Francis’ tenure as Bishop of Rome so apparent, Summorum Pontificum could not long be left standing.  The architects of the revolution in the Church did not accidentally make a full-on assault on the Mass their first priority.  They knew that was the key to changing people’s beliefs and ultimately to changing the Church into the worldly, secularized construct they so ardently desire.  The Mass has always been the key to the life of the Church.  It is the living embodiment of absolutely core elements of Catholic belief.  Change it, and anything is possible.

The last 50 years have been a clear witness to this.  The Church has been changed in ways that Catholics of prior generations could neither imagine nor believe – the vast majority would in fact be utterly aghast at what passes for liturgy, doctrine, morals, ecclesiology, etc. in vast swaths of the Church today.  Forcing changes on the Mass – whether to “modernize” it as was claimed, or to make it less “offensive” to protestants, or to simply wreak a revolution – was a master stroke by those who knew the Church well enough to know where to wound her most grievously.

Summorum Pontificum is a deadly threat to the entire post-conciliar construct.  I know there are readers who haven’t jumped on the TLM train, and I understand some of their particular reasons, but overall, allowing the TLM to exist outside a few isolated, persecuted ghettos, to allow it to spread, even with all the roadblocks and obstacles constructed by most dioceses against it, to allow it to be perceived as “normal” and “equal” to the Novus Ordo is to allow a counter-revolutionary element to exist in the Church of the highest effectiveness and the gravest import.  Over time, the revolutionaries know that even slightly free existence of the TLM will eventually cause the complete destruction of their Great Facade, the modernist-progressive construct successfully imposed on the Church in the 60s and 70s.

It simply cannot be allowed to exist, to be seen as an equally normative expression of the Sacred Liturgy (even though, in reality, it is the new Mass that is the oddball).  At some point the permissions granted under Summorum Pontificum and Universae Ecclesiae – as unfairly implemented and unreasonably blocked as they have been – MUST be repealed.  Already opposition is building to the Franciscan attempt to replay the revolution.  Even secular sites are noting this (OK, it is Damien Thompson, but what about this observation from the “manosphere?”).  The hope that Francis would mark a new period of progressive pontifical ascendancy may be misplaced.  Thus, the time to act is now, no matter how politically explosive this act may be, no matter how much of a repudiation of the signature achievement of the still-living former pontiff it would mark.

Thus, I was not surprised at all to read this post from Rorate:

This from the latest blog post by Italian vaticanist Sandro Magister (along with Marco Tosatti, the top vaticanist in the current pontificate):
There are those who fear that after the demolition of “Liturgiam Authenticam,” the next objective, of this or another commission, will be the correction of “Summorum Pontificum,” the document with which Benedict XVI liberalized the celebration of the Mass in the ancient rite.
The time to agitate is now: Traditionalists around the world must make clear the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum (which was not an act of “mercy,” but a mere recognition of justice and logic) cannot be touched.

I agree.  While overall I fear the difficulty of moving the committed ideologue, especially one with as many Machiavellian instincts as this one, I do think sufficient noise might scare them off.  I’m not certain what the best approach to achieve that is.  I’m open to suggestions.  Flood the Vatican with letters?  Go crazy on social media?  Enlist the aid of sympathetic alternative media with a large following? Deck the USS Missouri out in thousands of fiddlebacks and float it up the Tiber?  All of the above…….

Prayer and penance must be at the root of all such efforts, as in all things.  I don’t know how many times I have doubled down on my prayers for Francis and the prevention of any havoc in the Church, but it looks like it’s time again.