jump to navigation

1 in 4 Americans Haven’t Read a Book in a Year, Can’t Name an Author…… December 6, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, Basics, cultural marxism, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, rank stupidity, reading, sadness, scandals, sickness, Society.
10 comments

…….and of those who can name an author, the vast majority of those name Danielle Steele, Stephen King, or some other living, pulp fiction writer. A substantial majority fail to name a single major literary figure.

So, the planned dumbing down of the West’s population, addicting them to the bread and circuses of the elite, continues apace?  There is no way educational systems this bad have not been deliberately contrived, especially after – or perhaps, because of – the trillions of taxpayer dollars pumped into them.  Common core?  Give me a break.  More effective methods were available over a century ago in Catholic National Readers.

Last fall, Pew Research found that 27 percent of Americans had not read a book in the preceding year.

Unfortunately, our friends across the pond aren’t much better in this respect. According to a 2014 survey, roughly 26 percent of adults in Great Britain admitted to not reading and finishing a book for pleasure.

One might be able to dismiss such statistics to busyness or other similar factors. But is it possible that the growing numbers of the non-reading public are instead a sign of the decline of knowledge about books and the canon of literature in general? A March 2017 survey suggests such might be the case. Produced by The Royal Society of Literature, the survey asked nearly 2,000 British adults about their literature reading habits. Similar to the aforementioned 2014 survey, roughly 1 in 4 British adults had not read a piece of literature in the previous six months. [Well I’m not clear what they mean by “literature?” Does reading books about Saints count, or is this only F. Scott Fitzgerald, de Cervantes, and the like?  I think they are speaking very broadly, as in Mickey Spillane would qualify.]

But even more interesting were the responses when researchers asked respondents to name an author of a literary work. As it turns out, 20 percent of respondents were unable to name even one. Of those who were able to name an author, more than half selected a modern, living author, such as J.K. Rowling. [Such pap]

Much of the world in which we live today is laid upon a foundation of knowledge. These ideas can be found in the great literary works of William Shakespeare, Jane Austen, Charles Dickens, and other men and women who are no longer with us. If many in today’s society can’t even name these authors, how can we expect them to participate in the “Great Conversation” of ideas, insights, and knowledge which still have profound effects on us today?

We can’t.  And that would be the point, my dear.  A population so ignorant is one that cannot think for itself, and must be led by the hand by its self-anointed “betters.”  Interestingly, however, in many cases the anointed are among the most ignorant among us, if the media and academia are any indication.  Oh, they know like religious mantras the left-liberal propaganda they’ve been indoctrinated in, but they are wholly ignorant of great sweeps of subjects, from history to geography to philosophy to theology…….you get the point.  The SAT and other deformations to our educational industry have created generations of clever regurgitators and test-takers who are thus marked, like a superior caste, for the college start of the path of elite credentialization that will chart their course to the new aristocracy, but not intelligent people who can think.  In fact, most of these JournoList types are blithering idiots, and prove it constantly.  I still want my chain saw bayonet option for the AK!

Present company excepted, of course, as I ride my high horse off to my ivory tower.

Reason number infinity plus one to homeschool.  One of the innumerable things of which I am proud of my kids, is that they are almost all avid readers.  The “least” of them is quite above average, while some are absolutely voracious and hard to keep stocked with books.  Having learned to read phonetically, they can read much faster than I can, and easily devour 2 or 3 books in a day. Half Price Books loves us.

Advertisements

An Open Letter to Michael Knowles        December 6, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, Basics, catachesis, error, General Catholic, horror, paganism, rank stupidity, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, Tradition, unadulterated evil.
4 comments

Not that he’ll ever read it, this post is more for my own benefit, and possibly yours.

Before I begin, I will note that I am taking Knowles straight up on his own declarations.  If he is practicing some weird and really obscure  form of “humor,” that would be a problem (and scandal) in and of itself, but a different one from what I identify below.

Who is Michael Knowles, and why should committed Catholics care?  He is the host of an internet podcast under Ben Shapiro’s Daily Wire umbrella.  He hosts several episodes a week.  He is a proud, at times even militant, Catholic.  Much of his program is dedicated to answering protestant “questions” regarding Catholicism, which means, in reality, refuting arrogant, ignorant charges from American evangelicals against the Church Jesus Christ – not Martin Luther, not John Calvin, not Henry VIII, not Mary Baker Eddy – founded.

And he does a good job.  In fact, he has at times given me to wonder whether he is a Trad, such is his strong grasp of catechesis, theology, etc.  He certainly presents liturgical sentiments which align quite well with the TLM and against the Novus Ordo.  He is well read in Church teaching and especially Church history. He’s pointed out on several occasions the way Francis, Bishop of Rome is at odds with Catholic Dogma. He provides such an interesting perspective I was really starting to wonder if we had the second (but better??) coming of Mike Church.

And then there was that moment……you know the one, the one where the needle goes from playing a lovely melody to sliding all the way across the record……yeah, that one.

That moment came when Knowles, in a spoken word commercial he gave for a mattress company during one of his podcasts, mentioned that he and his fiancée just love sharing a bed made of these wonderful mattresses.

That’s………..that’s a problem. That’s a very big problem.

I don’t ever like to peer into consciences and convict others of sin, but Knowles has done so himself.  He has declared that he is committing ongoing, grievous sin, at the very least by continuing to expose himself to incredible temptation by sharing a bed with a woman other than his wife, but more likely by advertising the fact that he and she are ongoing fornicators.  Even if they both sleep in PVC bodysuits that cover them head to foot, even if they’ve never so much as kissed, this situation would be sinful alone for the scandal it gives.  You are basically advertising for fornication, and proudly proclaiming yourself a Catholic while doing so.

I’m sorry, Mr. Knowles, but you are not the solution, but the problem.  This is the very crisis the Church has faced since the 60s, where public spokesman, whether they at one time had a formal mission from the Church  such as Fr. Charles Curran, or self-appointed ones like yourself (and me), publicly deviating from the Faith, even attacking and undermining it.  I have not so far heard you directly verbally challenge or undermine a Dogma or Doctrine……..at least until that mattress ad.  And then I heard several other mentions of your fiancée wherein you made clear your relationship is fundamentally indifferent from all the pagans of the world these days, lost in sin.

Which brings up an interesting point – while Knowles clearly acknowledges the evils Francis is visiting on the Church, is he at the same time positioning himself to be the beneficiary of some of this doctrinal reformulation, especially regarding reception of Communion while in a manifest state of grievous, probably mortal, sin?  Seems quite possible.

Are you receiving the Blessed Sacrament, Mr. Knowles, while persisting in this relationship with your fiancée?  Your podcast statements would seem to indicate so.  Thus, you have added sacrilege to fornication and scandal.  Don’t read I Cor xi:25-29 much?

I am really at a loss how a man so obviously well-formed can be openly and proudly persisting in a relationship that is grievously scandalous at best (and which he makes pains to announce in most episodes of late).  He seems to have a nearly Traditional level of formation, to the extent that I would almost wonder if he hasn’t received regular trad catechesis, and, one would tend to assume, Confession?  Has this never come up?  My experience of multiple FSSP/SSPX confessors would lead me to believe that any and all of them would instantly point out this massive moral problem, were they aware of it.

So, I won’t be listening to him anymore.  Until he recognizes the huge scandal he has given and indicates some public contrition, he is actually a very dangerous man, all the more so due to his talents and gifts of formation. He sounds like the real deal.  He sounds like a really authentic Catholic, and he is reaching out to tens of thousands of protestants and giving them a very bad idea of what the Catholic Church is all about.  I haven’t listened to many of his shows – maybe 7 or 8 – but I’ve never heard him called out for his scandal, even from hostile protestants (which probably shows how virtually all of them are so morally confused in this age of error that they see nothing wrong with a little pre-marital fornication).

I would advise readers to stay far away from this charlatan. He certainly had me fooled.  Once one is confronted with a figure mixing truth and error, consuming their product becomes risky, at best.  Given the other excellent sources available, there is no reason to expose oneself to this risk.

I will pray for him, and especially pray that some really good traditional priest reaches out to him and shakes him from his morally damnable situation, and convinces him to make some public act of contrition for the scandal he is causing on an ongoing basis.

Mr. Knowles, if you read this, reach out to me and I will get you in touch with multiple very solid priests who will make abundantly clear the grave danger to which you are exposing your soul, and that of your fiancee. It’s all well and good to declare ourselves committed Catholics so long as that commitment costs us little – it is when it costs us dear is where the rubber meets the road. Take up your cross and follow Christ.  Deus Vult.

For the declaration upon which this post is based, see the below, if you must, at 8:28:

New Book Blasts Francis and His Wholesale Inappropriateness for the Chair of Peter December 5, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, cultural marxism, disaster, episcopate, fightback, Francis, General Catholic, horror, reading, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, the struggle for the Church.
4 comments

Via Steve Skojec at One Peter Five comes a review of a short (141 pp) book on Francis, his seedy and troubling past life, his outlook, his philosophical and psychological shortcomings, and his disastrous agenda.  The review is quite long, about 4000 words, so I’ll only hit some high points.  In summation, however, the author of this book, who is anonymous (and has apparently caused a furious response in Rome and a search for his identity) but who goes by the deliciously Catholic name of Marcantonio Collona (the leader of the fleet of the Papal States at Lepanto), ties together much already known about Francis and his hard left agenda, while at the same time delving into his past and revealing a very great deal about Francis’ apparently nasty personality, his carefully crafted image as a great humble man (note the contradiction), and the mysterious twists and turns that led a man who was lambasted by his superiors in the post-conciliar Jesuit order as wholly unfit for high office (think about that) to become Pope. This naturally includes a great deal about the deceased Cardinal Martini, long-time leader of the leftist/anti-Catholic “Bologna School” of misfits and miscreants in the Church otherwise known as the “St. Gallen Mafia.”

The name of this new book is The Dictator Pope, and it is available for purchase online, but only in Kindle and similar e-formats.  I look forward to purchasing the book once it is available in print, if a publisher can be found (and believe me, with this pontificate, that will not be an easy task).

Taking up with some excerpts from Skojec’s review:

The book promises a look “behind the mask” of Francis, the alleged “genial man of the people,” revealing how he “consolidated his position as a dictator who rules by fear and has allied himself with the most corrupt elements in the Vatican to prevent and reverse the reforms that were expected of him.” [Indeed.  Whatever happened to the reform of the Vatican Bank (IOR), or the advancing of even stiffer penalties and interdictions against abusive priests, or men unsuited to the priesthood due to their addiction to perversion, or the financial reform of numerous corrupt Roman ministries, especially those associated with the disgustingly corrupt Cardinal Angelo Sodano and the entire group of high prelates and curial officials who were given enormous graft from Maciel Maciel to cover up his hideous abuses and double life?  And these barely scratch the surface.  In point of fact, after battling mightily to undo the tremendous power Sodano had accumulated under Pope JPII, Benedict has had to live to see this wholly corrupt and heterodox creature not just restored to his former power and influence, but perhaps more influential than ever.  These are the kinds of creatures Francis has chosen to surround himself with, since they will OK any ideological agenda so long as their nests continue to be feathered.]

The book promises a look “behind the mask” of Francis, the alleged “genial man of the people,” revealing how he “consolidated his position as a dictator who rules by fear and has allied himself with the most corrupt elements in the Vatican to prevent and reverse the reforms that were expected of him.”

OnePeterFive has obtained an advance copy of the English text, and I am still working my way through it. Although most of its contents will be at least cursorily familiar to those who have followed this unusual pontificate, it treats in detail many of the most important topics we have covered in these pages, providing the additional benefit of collecting them all in one place.

The author of the work is listed as Marcantonio Colonna — a transparently clever pen name laden with meaning for the Catholic history buff; the historical Colonna was an Italian nobleman who served as admiral of the papal fleet at the Battle of Lepanto. His author bio tells us he is an Oxford graduate with extensive experience in historical research who has been living in Rome since the beginning of the Francis pontificate, and whose contact with Vatican insiders — including Cardinals and other important figures — helped piece together this particular puzzle. The level of potential controversy associated with the book has seemingly led some journalists in Rome to be wary of broaching the book’s existence publicly (though it is said to be very much a topic of private conversation), whether for fear of retribution — the Vatican has recently been known to exclude or mistreat journalists it suspects of hostility — or for some other reason, remains unclear. Notable exceptions to this conspicuous silence include the stalwart Marco Tosatti — who has already begun unpacking the text at his website, Stilum Curae — and Professor Roberto de Mattei, who writes that the book confirms Cardinal Müller’s recent remarks that there is a “magic circle” around the pope which “prevents an open and balanced debate on the doctrinal problems raised” by objections like the dubia and Filial Correction, and that there is also “a climate of espionage and delusion” in Francis’ Vatican.

Some sources have even told me that the Vatican, incensed by the book’s claims, is so ardently pursuing information about the author’s true identity that they’ve been seeking out and badgering anyone they think might have knowledge of the matter. The Italian version of the book’s website has already gone down since its launch. The reason, as one particularly credible rumor has it, is that its disappearance was a result of the harassment of its designer, even though that person had nothing to do with the book other than having been hired to put it online.

If these sound like thuggish tactics, the book wastes no time in confirming that this pope — and those who support him — are not at all above such things. Colonna introduces his text by way of an ominous portrait of Francis himself, describing a “miraculous change that has taken over” Bergoglio since his election — a change that Catholics of his native Buenos Aires noticed immediately:

Their dour, unsmiling archbishop was turned overnight into the smiling, jolly Pope Francis, the idol of the people with whom he so fully identifies. If you speak to anyone working in the Vatican, they will tell you about the miracle in reverse. When the publicity cameras are off him, Pope Francis turns into a different figure: arrogant, dismissive of people, prodigal of bad language and notorious for furious outbursts of temper which are known to everyone from the cardinals to the chauffeurs.

Colonna writes, too, of the “buyer’s remorse” that some of the cardinals who elected Bergoglio are experiencing as his pontificate approaches its fifth anniversary: “Francis is showing,” writes Colonna, “that he is not the democratic, liberal ruler that the cardinals thought they were electing in 2013, but a papal tyrant the like of whom has not been seen for many centuries.”  [Gee, a hardcore leftist ideologue who is also an out and out tyrant.  Who would have known?  I thought these Vaticanistas and high cardinals were political sharpshooters?  How could they be so naïve?  Maybe they are not so sharp as they like to think.]

Colonna then transitions to an opening chapter exposing the work of the so-called St. Gallen “Mafia” — the group of cardinals who had been conspiring for decades to see to it that a pope of their liking — a pope like Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio was capable of becoming — would be elected. Formed in 1996 (with precursor meetings between progressive European prelates giving initial shape to the group as early as the 1980s) in St. Gallen, Switzerland [notice how leftists, supposed friends of the common/downtrodden man, always seem to ensconce themselves in luxury when given the chance], the St. Gallen Mafia was originally headed up by the infamous late archbishop of Milan, Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini. The group roster was a rogue’s gallery of heterodox prelates with a list of ecclesiastical accomplishments that reads more like a rap sheet than a curriculum vitae. (In the case of Godfried Danneels, implicated in some way in about 50 of 475 dossiers on clerical sexual abuse allegations that mysteriously disappeared after evidence seized by Belgian police was inexplicably declared inadmissible in court, this comparison transcends analogy.)[Yep.  Look, the Leftists in the Church thought they were electing a fellow-traveler, at least, in naming a relatively unknown from Poland – a product of the sainted “Ostpolitik “ of Paul VI – as pope in 1978.  But he turned out to be much more conservative (relatively) than they wished.  So they began an illicit, illegal (in Church law) conspiracy, basically, to make sure a pope to their liking would be elected after JPII.  They didn’t quite succeed in 2005, but managed to send Benedict XVI running for fear of the wolves (under threat of the financial ruination of the Church?) and finally got their man in 2013.  The fact that any such collusion prior to an enclave automatically invalidates that enclave AND results in the excommunication of the participants didn’t bother them a whit. Why would it?  They’d have the power if their man got in, and the media would always have their back if they didn’t.  It was low-risk for them.  And since when has a pontiff had the stones to cast out large swaths of the episcopate for being heretics/schismatics, anyway?  The last time was 1908-10, wasn’t it?]

The names of some of the most prominent members of the group — many of which would have been unknown to even relatively well-informed Catholics just a decade ago — have become uncomfortably familiar in recent years: Cardinals Martini, Danneels, Kasper, Lehman, and (Cormac) Murphy O’Connor have all risen in profile considerably since their protege was elevated to the Petrine throne. After a controversial career, Walter Kasper had already begun fading into obscurity before he was unexpectedly praised in the new pope’s first Angelus address on March 17, 2013. Francis spoke admiringly of Kasper’s book on the topic of mercy — a theme that would become a defining touchstone of his pontificate. When Kasper was subsequently tapped to present the Keynote at the February 14, 2014 consistory of cardinals, the advancement of his proposal to create a path for Communion for the divorced and remarried thrust him further into the spotlight. The so-called “Kasper proposal” launched expectations for the two synods that would follow on marriage and the family and provided the substrate for the post-synodal apostolic exhortation, Amoris Laetitia, around which there has been a theological and philosophical debate the likes of which has not seen in the living memory of the Church. For his part, Danneels, who retired his position as Archbishop of Brussels under “a cloud of scandal” in 2010, even went so far as to declare that the 2013 conclave result represented for him “a personal resurrection experience.” [What kind of creature would frame anything like that, let alone the election of a pope, and most of all, this pope?  Oh, right, the same kind of man that would at least cover up, if not directly participate in, mass boy rape for decades]

And what was the goal of the St. Gallen group?

Originally, their agenda was to bring about a “much more modern” Church. That goal finally crystalized around opposition to the anticipated election of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger to the papacy — a battle in which they were narrowly defeated during the 2005 conclave, when, according to an undisclosed source within the curia, the penultimate ballot showed a count of 40 votes for Bergoglio and 72 for Ratzinger. Colonna cites German Catholic journalist Paul Badde in saying that it was the late Cardinal Joachim Meisner — later one of the four “dubia” cardinals — who “passionately fought” the Gallen Mafia in favor of the election of Ratzinger. After this loss, the Gallen Mafia officially disbanded. But although Cardinal Martini died in 2012, they staged a comeback — and eventually won the day — on Wednesday, March 13, 2013. For it was on that day that Jorge Mario Bergoglio stepped out onto the loggia of St. Peter’s Basilica, victorious, as Pope Francis the First. Those paying attention would take note that one Cardinal Godfried Danneels of Belgium stood triumphantly by his side.

———-End Excerpt————-

There is much more at the link, but I’ve taken too much already. Skojec will take a tire iron to my shooting hand if I take anymore.

But he goes into quite a bit about Francis’ emulation of his youthful political paramour, Juan Perón, and how, aside from a sort of reflexive populist leftism, little informed that man’s career save for his own lust for power.  Readers should take from this a cold shot of reality against any hopes that Franky George Bergoglio will follow his predecessor into abdication.  Quite the contrary, having access to power will probably lengthen his life by 5-10 years.  That’s how these things seem to go.  Look at finally deposed 94 year old Robert Mugabe.

Also reviewed are the synods, which I would argue were doctrinally meaningless, and the subsequent deconstruction of the Church’s moral edifice through Amoris Laetitia.

Sounds like an excellent book. I look forward to reading it, even as I wonder, just what, if anything, of the human element of the Church will be left if Francis lives another 10 years?  I fear the Franciscans of the Immaculate are our guide for the future of the Church under Francis.

Francis – “Denying” Climate Change “Perverse” November 16, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, Basics, cultural marxism, disaster, error, Francis, General Catholic, Interior Life, rank stupidity, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

Sodomy – who am I to judge?  Adulterers committing the gravest of sacrilege in sacrilegiously receiving the Blessed Sacrament – no problem.  But denying the sacred doctrine of anthropocentric global cooling warming climate change – such perversion, such heresy!, has no place in the Church.

Rorate nailed it on the day after his election – welcome to the pontificate of Paul VI, redux:

Pope Francis on Thursday rebuked those who deny the science behind global warming and urged negotiators at climate talks in Germany to avoid falling prey to such “perverse attitudes” and instead accelerate efforts to curb greenhouse gas emissions. [no major industrialized nation has reduced carbon emissions more over the past 10 years than has the United States. This was just reported a day or two ago.  Even if the United States went back to a 17th century economy with the attendant death of 90+% of the population, carbon emissions worldwide would still grow rapidly due to the unabated output of India, China, and similar nations.  The entire project, then, is just a joke.]

Francis issued a message to the Bonn meeting, which is working to implement the 2015 Paris accord aimed at capping global emissions. [And how many kilotons of carbon were spewed into the atmosphere by thousands of activists, plutocrats, and bureaucrats jetting into Bonn from around the world?] In it, Francis called climate change “one of the most worrisome phenomena that humanity is facing.” He urged negotiators to take action free of special interests and political or economic pressures, and to instead engage in an honest dialogue about the future of the planet. [For the leftist, “dialogue”=doing what I want. By “special interests,” Francis means those with very justifiable concerns not only about the faulty theory of human-caused climate change, but the murderous, impoverishing impact of sudden and draconian limits on emissions of what is an entirely natural substance]

Francis didn’t cite any countries by name, but the United States has announced it is withdrawing from the Paris accord, and President Donald Trump has nominated several people in his administration who question scientists’ conclusions that human activity is behind the global rise in temperatures. At the same time, the U.S. administration has promoted the use of fossil fuels like coal for U.S. energy needs.

In his landmark 2015 environmental encyclical, Francis said global warming is “mainly” due to human activity and he called for fossil fuels to be progressively phased out without delay. [Thus we have a Bishop of Rome, heir of St. Peter, endorsing, in a doctrinal document, a dubious and highly contentious scientific theorem.  This will only turn out badly, and should global warming be decisively refuted by a mass return to sanity and de-funding of government-directed scientific propaganda “research,” it will be used by enemies of the Church forever anon.]

In his message, the Argentine pope denounced that efforts to combat climate change are often frustrated by those who deny the science behind it or are indifferent to it, those who are resigned to it or think it can be solved by technical solutions, which he termed “inadequate.” [Said the doctrinaire liberal with absolutely no scientific training or credibility]

“We must avoid falling into these four perverse attitudes, which certainly don’t help honest research and sincere, productive dialogue,” he said.

Well there you go, you perverts.  You get the sense Francis is building towards something, a great and thorough rebuke of the Church That Was.  I mean, the Vatican is issuing stamps celebrating the worst, most destructive heresy in the history of the Church.  It seems more and more plausible this man wants a decisive, open break with the Church and the Tradition upon which it is founded. I mean much, much further than the things he’s already done.  Something like nailing his own figurative 99 theses on the door of the Vatican, an open, unmistakable embrace of Protestantism and call for the Church to repent of its “errors.”

I don’t mean to become overwrought over this latest, relatively minor upturned middle phalanges at the dwindling number of faithful.  It’s more the whole sweep of this pontificate, nearly 5 years old now, that I’m talking about.

h/t reader TT

USCCB Bishops – Immigration Not a Matter of Prudential Judgment       November 15, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, catachesis, cultural marxism, Dallas Diocese, disaster, episcopate, error, General Catholic, Immigration, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, the struggle for the Church, unbelievable BS.
comments closed

At least, maybe, when it comes to the canard of instant mass deportation.

But in reality, in their recent confab discussing the hot-button topic of immigration, what was presented an attempt to basically refute lay complaints that the US bishops – reverting to unfortunate, damaging, hurtful stands they took in the 70s and 80s – are infringing upon lay rights by insisting upon specific policy prescriptions as being the only doctrinally acceptable approach.  This echoes the dark days of the “Bernadin”-dominated US episcopate, when supposed paeans to “peace” and “justice” were in reality little more than far left talking points and anti-Reagan, anti-US defense rhetoric.

Well, personnel is policy, and Francis has been busy remaking the US episcopate in his own image and likeness.  With men like Blaise Cupich in positions of great influence, and the sidelining of more (relatively) conservative forces like Conley and  Chaput, this is hardly surprising.  Francis’ influence will likely be felt in the US episcopate for a decade or more to come, depending on how long he reigns, and how replaces him.

At any rate, here’s what the bishops, including the liturgical aesthete Cordileone, had to say about the laity and their uppity opinions regarding prudential judgment. I’ll provide a little color commentary along the way:

As the conclusion of a lengthy discussion on migration, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops decided Monday to draft a statement from their president expressing the need for humane and just immigration reform.

The Nov. 13 proposal was first floated by Archbishop Michael Sheehan, Archbishop Emeritus of Santa Fe. After debating how to go about preparing a statement, it was agreed by oral assent that Cardinal Daniel DiNardo of Galveston-Houston, president of the conference, would issue a statement with the assistance of the Committee on Migration, chaired by Bishop Joe Vasquez of Austin, assisted by Archbishop Jose Gomez of Los Angeles.

The discussion followed brief presentations from Archbishop Gomez and Bishop Vasquez. The Los Angeles archbishop outlined the principles which guide the US bishops’ work on migration, which come from Strangers No Longer, a 2003 pastoral letter issued jointly by the US and Mexican bishops’ conferences……… [That is a poor, and in many ways politically extremist, document.  It is on a par with “Always Our Children,” which tacitly or openly endorsed most of the sodomite agenda, for bad documents written by bishops in the past 20 years.  It insists upon basically a free right for Mexican and other Latin American nationals to have free access, on demand, to US jobs, welfare benefits, and services, with nothing more than lip service, and even that slight, to the extremely negative impact mass immigration of low-skill, benefits-seeking, poorly-educated has on native workers in a post-industrial economy.  This is not 1890.  We don’t have millions of manufacturing jobs suitable for a 3rd grade intellect anymore. The bishops are living in a fantasy land, constructed from their near total disconnect with the flock they lead and their needs.  The robust economy and abundant riches they refer to constantly as the driving moral imperative in favor of ceaseless mass immigration with virtually no limit or control no longer exists.  Trump was elected precisely because millions of Americans, more and more of them formerly solidly middle class, can no longer find work.  Their wages are horribly depressed by competition from illegal and other foreign workers imported into this country specifically for the purpose of driving down the cost of wages. Thus the bishops, contrary to their rhetoric, are not really so concerned about the little man – there are millions of Americans suffering gravely from the immigration pandemic – they are actually carrying water for the transnational globalist elite, who want a large and ignorant labor force that makes little more than $5 an hour. This is an environment in which everyone suffers, including the immigrants, the vast majority of which lose their faith, and generally also their moral compass, in crossing the Rio Grande. I am being harsh, the bishops may simply be naïve and myopic, but a very solid argument can be constructed that they are deliberately acting in behest of powerful interests, all the while clothing themselves in the garment of “friend of the little guy” (so long as he is not a native-born American)].

……..Bishop Oscar Cantu of Las Cruces raised the question of how to counter charges that immigration policy is a matter of prudential judgement, and that the faithful may therefore in good conscience come to a judgement which differs from that of the bishops.

Bishop Thomas Wenski of Miami responded that “we’re making our prudential judgement, too … in the light of Catholic teaching.” He emphasized that “immigrants are not problems, but brothers and sisters; strangers, but strangers who should be embraced as brothers and sisters. We’re offering what we think is best, not only for the immigrants, but for our society as a whole. We can make America great, but you don’t make America great by making America mean.”

Immigration reform, he maintained, must “include the common good of everyone: Americans and those who wish to be Americans.” [OK, that’s your opinion, but many Catholic laity believe it is not only wrong, it is destructive and harmful and in many ways achieves the opposite of its intent (i.e., worse outcomes for Americans AND illegal immigrants).  We can certainly disagree in prudence.]

Bishop Soto responded that deportations do not fall under the category of prudential judgement, but rather were included by St. John Paul II in his 1995 encyclical [sic] Evangelium vitae among the sins which cry out to heaven, and so is not merely “consistent with Church teaching,” but “to discard it as a prudential judgement doesn’t reflect our tradition.” [First of all, this is a red herring. No one is seriously advocating, or seriously expects, mass deportations to begin this year, or next, or the year after that.  I for one am single-minded – build the dang wall, worry about what to do with those here after that.  We must control the situation, the inflow, before we try to reverse it.  Once the crisis is passed, we can talk sensibly about how to deal with those here.  Secondly, there are four sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance.  An encyclical is an important document but not the place for novel de fide definitions.  Thirdly, Evangelium Vitae, which focused primarily on abortion and contraception as evils against human life, mentions deportation once, in quoting Guadium Et Spes, the 3rd worst document of Vatican II, for a list of evils which are “infamies.”  Whether an “infamy” equals one of the four sins that cry out to Heaven for justice is quite unclear.  If so, Vatican II added about 30 other sins to that list, because Guadium Et Spes 27 condemned, equally, and without distinction, everything from genocide and abortion to “living conditions” and “where people are treated as mere instruments of gain rather than as free and responsible persons.”  That is to say, while GeS 27 sounds impressive, it’s theological import and meaning are muddled, at best.  Naturally, then, it would be a favorite of a progressive bishop.]

Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone of San Francisco recommended the five principles from Strangers No Longer as a sine qua non, on which “there can be no disagreement” among Catholics. “While there’s room for prudential judgement, it’s not something that can be taken lightly” because it “involves such basic considerations of justice.” [But justice to whom?  Aquinas and Augustine would indicate that justice begins with those closest to home.  When there are periods of abundance, or when economic and cultural circumstances permit, there can be quite liberal approaches to immigration. With prolonged economic depression and cultural disassociation growing to the level of near open conflict, however, prudence would indicate, even demand, a much more conservative approach.  This has been the situation in the US for over 200 years, with periods of mass immigration leading to problems followed by periods of restricted immigration allowing for cultural and economic assimilation.]

———-End Quote————

But let’s be honest, this issue of mass immigration in the present context, is at least as much – and I mean this from the bishop’s perspective, as well – about insuring permanent ascendance for progressive/leftist politics in this country as it is about any purported concern for the huddled masses yearning to breathe free (and is in fact probably much, much more about the former than the latter).

Correspondent MFG sent me this link, and he notes – quite intelligently – that this seems an attempt by the bishops to up their rhetoric and try to squash lay arguments against the bishop’s very liberal pro-immigration stance.  The prudential judgment argument has been a powerful one, and they seem to be trying to take that away.  As MFG notes, the way to combat this attempt is by returning to first sources and principles, going back to Aquinas, Augustine, Peter Canisius, and others to demonstrate the proper Catholic understanding of the role of government, of citizens of a land’s duties to one another and to those of other countries, of Catholic moral principles (in a hierarchical sense), and all such related topics.

Doing this in a systematic fashion will show that Catholics of any stripe, lay, clergy, whatever, are fully  within their rights to advocate for much more limited immigration than the status quo of the past 50 years, and to preserve the culture and heritage of the land they love, which they see slipping away faster and faster all the time.  This latest bit of rhetorical weaponry from the bishops is frankly very ugly, very manipulative and smacks of desperation.

UPDATE: Commenter CMatt makes a great point that I failed to address (in my defense, I covered quite a bit, anyway) – these are bishops talking, yes, but not necessarily YOUR bishop, and their authority over you as a soul is basically non-existent.  It only exists to the extent that the bishops unanimously approve documents or actions of the Conference, and even in that situation it is more of a tacit authority, something novel in the history of the Church and of dubious significance for souls.  That is the huge problem with episcopal conferences, and why Pope Leo XIII found them far from his liking – they muddy the lines of authority greatly and cause tremendous confusion when their actions are contrary to the Doctrine of the Faith.  Much of Testem Benovolentae, Leo XIIIs encyclical denouncing the heresy of Americanism (which the US bishops have never faithfully implemented) has to do with these manifest problems that emerge from such conferences – bureaucratization, secularization, inordinate focus on money/funding, an excessive interest in the material works of mercy vice the spiritual works, etc.

Cremation is Implicitly a Negation of the Faith and Always Disordered November 9, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, catachesis, cultural marxism, error, Four Last Things, General Catholic, Interior Life, Revolution, scandals, secularism, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, Virtue.
comments closed

So says Father Albert of the traditional Dominicans of Belgium in the question and answer video below from The Fatima Center.

The question as originally asked is a bit on the silly side, asking if God can bodily resurrect those bodies that have been reduced to ashes through cremation. Goodness.  God is the Lord and Creator of the universe, of all that is, was, and ever shall be – if one decided to ride a Mk 17 20 MT nuclear bomb down to initiation a la Colonel Kong in Dr. Strangelove so that not even components of atoms remained after death, God could still resurrect that body.  God’s power is infinitely greater than our puny human acts, and nothing we could possibly do could ever interrupt His Will.

Having said that, on a philosophical, moral, and theological level, there are severe problems with the entire concept of cremation, which is why the Church opposed the practice for centuries.  Indeed, from a standpoint of historical etymology, cremation was first advanced by several anti-Catholic sects during the long history of the Church as a way to deny core Catholic Doctrines, such as the Christ’s Resurrection and Ascension and His role as our unique Savior.

Father expounds at some length on the dual nature of the human person, that of the soul united to the body, and the unique role each plays in man’s natural and supernatural existence. In this present life, the supernatural is more confined to the soul, and initially after death we shall be disembodied souls, but after the general Resurrection, both shall be united and we shall be complete, in a sense, again.  This is the promise revealed to us by divinely inspired and inerrant Scripture, and the constant belief and practice of the Faith. But even more, from a standpoint of logic, man was created by God out of matter to have a physical body, and shall not be complete after death until body and soul are reunited.  Thus, man’s ultimate end cannot be achieved until this Resurrection has taken place.

Note that the increased permission for cremation was tied into the general collapse of moral, theological, and ecclesiastical standards that were ushered in under John XXIII, even before the disastrous Council of the 1960s.  It can never be stated enough, Vatican II was not orchestrated in a vacuum, while much sleight of hand, subterfuge, and even immoral methods may have been used to produce the various approved documents, approved they were, and almost unanimously by thousands of bishops who should have, must have, known better.  Wheels were flying off all over the place even before the first session met.  But of course Vatican II advanced this process immensely, solidified it, and left us with a human element of the Church as broken as it has ever been.

Ranting to the choir, I am.  However, while there were hugely impacting individual elements of the 1960s conciliar revolution, much of the damage to the faith of millions came from a sort of death of a thousand cuts.  Cremation may, taken entirely by itself, not have a huge impact on the belief and practice of many Catholics (at the same time, however, it may well) who opt for it, but as part of a general process of disbelief, rejection of Tradition, and acceptance of cultural mores, it just becomes one more injury to the foundation of faith.  And in the present context, where tens of millions of self-described practicing Catholics are, in actuality, practicing heretics if not outright apostates, this practice can be a warning sign of seriously deranged belief.

I think Father Albert sums it up quite well when he says cremation is implicitly a negation of faith in the bodily resurrection and a dangerous, disordered practice.

So sayeth the shepherd, so sayeth the flock.

 

Fusion GPS Dossier Classic Example of Leftism in Action (Lie, Project, Double-Down) October 27, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, cultural marxism, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, Immigration, It's all about the $$$, paganism, rank stupidity, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, the enemy, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

A quick and dirty (I mean, his language is atrocious) but quite helpful synopsis from Paul Joseph Watson:

If you want to figure out what evils, what dirty tricks, what law-breaking the DNC and the Left generally are most involved in, most committed to, and which they feel is both one of their most powerful tools of malfeasance as well as one of the greatest dangers to their position of power, just look at what they accuse the other side of.

And it’s not just this fake (and frankly stupid, and disgusting) dossier contrived by a deep state apparatchik – it’s also things like the Harvey Weinstein scandal and the emerging masses of reports indicating that many leftist men, who constantly reproach normal men for their “toxic masculinity” and hateful, antiquated views towards women, are, in fact, serial rapists and abusers of women themselves.  Sargon apparently has a massive expose coming on this subject this weekend.

The three, invariable rules: leftists always lie, leftists always project, leftists always double down.

Now that the “Russian collusion” meme has been shown to be a massive conspiracy and illegality engaged in by the DNC, Hillary campaign, Deep State apparatchiks, and their media leftist running dog lackeys, it is suddenly to be flushed down the memory hole.

But in future, always remember, the very accusations themselves are a total giveaway of the evils the Left is wholly immersed in.

I felt this “Trump pee-party dossier” thing was a massive redirect and information op from the beginning.  And indeed, that’s finally, painfully slowly, what has been revealed.

How deep this goes is anyone’s guess.  It is already known the Obama administration, through its wholly corrupt and politicized Eric Holder/Loretta Lynch InJustice Department, is knee deep in this scandal.  How far up the chain of command involvement goes is easy to guess by how furiously the Dems are trying to prevent further investigation of not only Fusion GPS, but also the very strange scandal of Debbie Wasserman-Schultz’ muslim former IT admin, who happened to abscond with several terabytes of classified data from now totally wiped computer hard drives.  The dems have been using all their power to keep that data from being subpoenaed………why?  What will it show?  Will it show, for instance, Obama’s direct involvement in the 2016 presidential election and deep corruption/collusion with the Russian government?

Why did the democrat establishment react like spurned lovers when Russia became involved in Ukraine in 2014?  We heard more bellicose war talk, even up to and including a full-on invasion/nuclear exchange, from leading democrats after Russia illegally invaded and continues to occupy large parts of the Ukraine.  Democrats normally wouldn’t give two blanks about something like that, but they totally lost their minds.  Is it because they felt like Putin had backstabbed them on a massive quid pro quo involving billions of dollars in kickbacks and massive undermining of US national security, a la the “Uranium One” deal?

These guys are in a full on blind panic.  They went all-in, well past the point of Watergate and into commission of probably hundreds of felonious offenses, to insure Hillary’s election.  Is that not just because they wanted their side to win, but because they knew if someone outside the Deep State apparatchiks was elected, it might blow the lid off their decade-plus run of unbelievable corruption, treason, and wholesale lack of care for the good of the United States and, much more importantly, the ordinary run of the mill citizen?

I don’t think we have any idea how deep this goes, or just what was sold or compromised, but the Left will inevitably tells us (some) as they try another redirect against Trump and conservatives generally.

And it’s not just Obama.  This Deep State/Leftist penetration of power and solidification began under Clinton, became entrenched under the (laughably inept and tone deaf) Bush 43 (thanks for giving your stalwart supporters a great big middle finger the other day, we sure appreciate it!  Guess we know where your loyalties lie.  Skull n Bones take care of their own, no?), and reached apotheosis under Obama.  I don’t know whether it is even possible at this point to deconstruct it.

Back to the rampant sexual abuse on the Left, up to and including massive pedophilia rings in their centers of power (just HOW many times did Clinton dump the Secret Service and fly to pedophile island?), Corey Feldman threatened to start naming names in Hollywood, and all of a sudden he gets slapped with a marijuana possession charge.  In CALIFORNIA?!?

The scandals are coming so thick and fast they are overwhelming, as, indeed, they are intended to be.  Scandals 10 times the importance and scope of Watergate pass by almost daily now, with the bought-n-paid for corporate/Deep State media telling us “nothing to see here.”  Or simply refusing to cover this at all.

But none of this should be surprising.  The fact that presidents of the United States colluded with global adversaries, repeatedly sold out the American people, and placed national security at grave risk in order to feather their nests to the tune of hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars, is exactly what one would expect from a cohort of people who have made their rejection of God and His Law, their very public despising of the Church and everything it stands for, the core part of their message and their very being.

This is what comes from an “elite” that rejects God and Our Savior Jesus Christ.  Pagan societies always devolve into endless self-aggrandizement, corruption, and wholesale ineffectiveness/incompetence.  People devoid of any sense of a law greater than themselves feel zero compunction over robbing citizens blind, colluding with deadly enemies, raping little children and forever destroying their sacred innocence, or the wholesale slaughter of very nearly 1 in 3 babies conceived in this nation over the past 44 years.  Indeed, the last point is the most telling – abortion has brought a curse down upon America, and, most particularly, on those “elites” who have done the most to keep it legal and the blood sacrifices to satan flowing.

Surely the apparatchiks, after reading the last two paragraphs, just an unhinged screed!, would conclude that I am an extremist, I am totally whacked and just totally unworthy of any credit.

But that, again, is the point.  The elites subscribe to an inveterately hostile, alien religion, which I call sexular paganism.  It is simply the latest manifestation of the false religion of leftist secular humanism which tries to put man in the place of God.  Christianity and sexular paganism are completely irreconcilable. Adherents to one cannot be adherents of the other.  One must choose between God and Mammon.

Incredibly, historically, philosophically, theologically, and historically speaking, the Church has played a huge role in the ascendance of sexular paganism among the cultural elites. By surrendering all the firm dictates and sublime, impervious moral and theological aspects of the “bad old faith” (e.g., “razing the bastions”), Church leadership not only left the Church open to further penetration by the forces of sexular paganism, but gave many wavering souls both perfect cover, and the perfect excuse, to make the final, irrevocable choice between God and Mammon.  By utterly neutering the Church’s unique power and voice, that leadership – some of which consisted of double agents of Mammon, but much of which were simply men to weak to resist – the choice of God or Mammon was made elementary, obvious for millions of lost souls, especially those with great ambitions and access to all the “delights” of power, money, and renown the world can offer.

It was a slam dunk.  So, the wind has been sown, and we are now reaping the whirlwind.  I wish I could posit a happy outcome for all this, but all I can foresee is ever increasing calamity, chaos, and confusion culminating in collapse (and that awesome alliteration alone is worth the price of the post).  Trump is great as a hopeful sign, but I fear the process has gone on much too long, and the rot is far too deep, for any man, or any series of men, to correct.  Lord, that I may be wrong, because I have a lot of love left for this country, or what it used to be, and my children and (pray God) grandchildren shall have to live here.

Now, if you want a more hopeful view, from a man deep in the fight, see the great talk given by Steve Bannon to the California GOP (yes, amazingly, it apparently still exists) below (h/t MFG):

He explains the problem, but gives many reasons to stay in the fight, and to hold out hope for a restoration of this country along constitutional lines.  I’m not overly sanguine on the likelihood of his effort being successful, but perhaps he gives some reasons to hope.

There, I’ve been out all week but now I give you a nice, long, overly wordy post.

The World is Upside Down: High Priests of Secular Paganism Promise to “Punish the Wicked” October 19, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, cultural marxism, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, persecution, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

Guess who a sodomite activist thinks the wicked are?  You got it:  you and me.

With gay ersatzrimony having the imprimatur of the State, and homosexuality enjoying a positive swing in popular opinion, the only thing standing athwart homosexualism is the Church, which is finding itself increasingly the object of neosexualist agitations.

Two weeks after Obergefell v. Hodges, a liberal firestorm erupted when a Catholic priest in Louisiana withheld communion from Tim Ardillo during his mother’s funeral because of his “marriage” to another man. Apologies (!) from the Diocese of Baton Rouge and Archbishop of New Orleans quickly followed. [So which religion do these bishops truly worship?  Sexular paganism and the world, or Catholicism?]

Channeling Pope Francis, a diocesan spokesman, opined, “We don’t deny people communion… Who are we to judge whether they believe [the church’s teachings on the communion] or not?” (Emphasis added.)

………..What’s more, mea culpas and accommodationist overtones have little purchase in the fever swamps where religious objections are considered bigotry parading in clerical vestments. [Do you think they would say the same about, say, an extreme racist?]

Take Tim Gill a mega-rich LGBT activist who vowed “We’re going to punish the wicked,” which, according to his moral lights is anyone (person, business, or organization) wanting an exemption from participating in same-sex ceremonies. Or Equality Ohio, a LGBT activist group that announced it will go after churches—in particular, Catholic churches—that refuse to make their facilities available for events contrary to their religious beliefs. Or Columbia Law School’s Center for Gender and Sexuality that sponsored a colloquium of experts “to contest and reframe the utilization of religious exemptions to civil rights laws.”

……….The Equality Act, as it’s called, amends the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by including “sexual orientation and gender identity” (SOGI) as protected classes, equivalent to “race.” The proposed legislation includes protections not just for employment, but for housing, public education, credit, jury service, federal funding, and public accommodations. Despite its noble label, The Equality Act is anything but. By giving special protections to concocted classes of individuals, it abrogates the constitutional freedoms of others, creating inequality.

For starters, the bill prohibits appeal to the Religious Freedom Restoration Act as a basis for discriminating against LGBT folk. So if, for example, you are an employee or owner/manager of a private or public business, your constitutional rights to freedom of conscience, speech, and association take the back seat to someone else’s socially constructed “right” to your acceptance of their sexual expression…..

……Obergefell presaged the day when Caesar, having consecrated gay “marriage” as a civil right, will no more tolerate a church that refuses to marry same-sex couples or allow non-celibate homosexuals as members, communicants, leaders, or staffers than it would for a church that refuses the same for ethnic minorities. [It’s true.  And “Catholic in good standing,” receiving Communion at least annually from the hands of Cardinals, made it all possible. One man, deciding the persecution of churches.  And why not?  His own reasoning in approving pseudo-sodo-marriage declared that the ONLY possible reason to oppose it was blind, unyielding bigotry.  And bigotry, as the Left defines it, must always be stamped out, especially in the churches.]

The introduction of The Equality Act is a signal that that day is coming. How soon, depends on how the Supreme Court decides the religious liberty case before it, Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission.

And when that day comes, churches acquiescing to the neosexualist agenda will be legitimized and officially recognized by the State and allowed to keep their tax exempt status. Churches refusing to comply will lose that exemption, causing many to become financially unsustainable, driving them, the confessing Church, underground.

What the “punished” get and their “punishers” don’t, will be something similar to the early Church despite its outlaw status: explosive growth. [You think so?  Maybe.  Do you think the institutional Church will stand firm in opposition to acceptance of sodomy, or will it cave?  Or hasn’t it caved already?  Perhaps it is time for the human element of the institution founded by Christ to die of its own gluttony-induced atherosclerosis, and the Faith to be born anew from the ground up.  But wither “canonically regular” traditional parishes? ]

I’m reading a book called When the Wicked Seize a City.  It’s about the sodomite political takeover of San Francisco. It was written 25 years ago by an evangelical pastor, one of the few Christians in Sodom by the Bay that actually worked to oppose the sodomite agenda.  All the evils, all the tactics, all the means of imposing their will on the majority, were developed, refined, practiced, and implemented decades ago in San Francisco.  But Christians were not paying attention, or couldn’t be bothered to care.

Too bad. They will make you care.  Whether it’s you, or your son or daughter, they are coming for you.  These are deeply wounded people who have an infinite need for not just acceptance, but unending affirmation, even glorification, and ending in total obeisance.  They will not stop until you are on your knees, practically worshiping them.

But in the book, which side was always kind, patient, prayerful, and giving?  And which side tried several times to murder the evangelical pastor, set fire to his house, attacked his children, constantly vandalized his home and church, and engaged in shout downs and even more physical forms of intimidation on a constant basis?  You got it.  The “good” guys.  Sodomites are one of the extremes of the Left, and the Left has convinced itself that everything it does, no matter how heinous, no matter how evil, is good by definition.

There are no limits to the extremes, to the utter depravity to which people so convinced will sink.  This movement must either be crushed, or they will crush us.

Is it time to split this country up?

Cardinal Farrell: Priests Have No Role to Play in Marriage Prep October 10, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, cultural marxism, Dallas Diocese, disaster, error, family, foolishness, Francis, General Catholic, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, the struggle for the Church, unbelievable BS.
comments closed

Hey, that cardinal’s hat wasn’t going to land on his head all by itself.  It had to be earned.  Kevin Farrell may not pray much, have a great depth of spirituality, or even know much theology, but he sure as heck know who the piper is, and what tune is being called.

There are actually two aspects to this report.  One is the outrageous statement made by former Dallas bishop and now Cardinal Farrell, and the other is how the Catholic media presented this statement, at least in the form of the headline.

To cover the claim, first:

Marriage ministry needs to be done by married couples because priests have “no credibility in this area,” Cardinal Kevin Farrell, prefect of the Dicastery for Laity, Family and Life, told a church gathering. [So, marriage is in the direct area of responsibility for Cardinal Farrell]

Delivering the keynote address to 500 delegates from the Diocese of Down and Connor at the Faith and Life convention in Belfast Sept. 30, Farrell discussed Pope Francis’ 2016 apostolic exhortation “Amoris Laetitia” (“The Joy of Love”) and appealed to parishes to establish study groups on the document and to train couples to teach, prepare, guide and accompany married couples. [Giving a talk to a large group of laity concerning “Faith and Life,” Cardinal Farrell chose to make a bold statement]

On the role of priests in marriage accompaniment and preparation, he said they had “no credibility when it comes to living the reality of marriage” even though they may know the principles, the philosophy and the theology. [This is manifestly incorrect.  Priests have the primary responsibility to train and form lay people in every aspect of life, but especially regarding the Seven Sacraments. More in a second.]

Speaking to Catholic News Service afterward, the Dublin-born former bishop of Dallas said parishes would have to be prepared to train laypeople for such a role, which he saw as a new model of accompaniment in line with the pope’s vision for the church…….[So is this really about what’s best for couples, or who provides the best catechesis, or is it about implementing an ideological agenda in the Church?]

……..Ministering by couples to couples is better done by “people who have walked in their shoes,” the cardinal said. He admitted he did not “have a clue” how to answer some of the questions on couples’ difficulties, which his own nieces and nephews had put to him. [Well that’s more the shame for you and your family, not to mention the Diocese of Dallas which you led for nearly a decade, and now the entire Church.  This claim is based on a logical fallacy, that only those who live an experience can speak sensibly on it. In point of fact, being buried knee deep in an experience can actually warp one to a point that making a sensible, helpful contribution on it is impossible – one is simply too close to the problem.  Even though Cardinal Farrell makes some statements about the laity needing to be trained, lay-led catechesis in the vast majority of the Church (re: Novus Ordo world) has been and remains a disaster.  Most laity are very poorly and narrowly educated, and what education they have received has been dominated by leftist/modernist suppositions.  It is very hard not to see this as yet another avenue by which to undermine the sanctity of marriage.  And, by the way, Cardinal, lay people have been doing the lion’s share of what a paltry excuse for “marriage prep” exists in the Church today.  Priests, largely sequestered in their offices as administrators and occasional “sacramental administrators,” have only rarely played a substantial role in marriage prep for decades.  Indeed, my wife and I received exceedingly poor marriage prep, consisting of two 1 1/2 hour meetings, from an old hippy couple in Austin, both divorced and remarried.  What shining example we received!  We didn’t learn diddly squat, except that sex is groovy and we should contracept.  There are exceptions to this sad practice, which has done so much already to undermine marriage in the Church, and turn American Catholics into creatures indistinguishable from the broader culture when it comes to marriage, and now you wish to visit the American/Western disaster upon the broader world (or has Cardinal Farrell so adopted his beloved leader’s ideology that he has convinced himself that it’s 1955 again, and mean old priests, casting poor divorced souls out of church left and right, refusing to hear their confessions, are giving lay people really severe, strict, morally impossible catechesis. What planet do these guys live on – or are their arguments really so weak they must create a straw man Church)?  Anyway,  those exceptions are far too rare, and generally concentrated in traditional parishes and the few brave, persecuted, orthodox Novus Ordo priests.]

“I have no experience of that and the majority of priests don’t have that experience,” Farrell said, noting that many of the married couples who attended the 2014 and 2015 Synod of Bishops on the family insisted that more lay couples be involved in marriage ministry. [Priests absolutely DO have, or CAN have, experience of a beautifully lived marital vocation, in the form of the witness provided by their parents!  This is where many great Saints and moral theologians, such as Alphonsus Maria de Ligouri, gained their experience, and it was sufficient to guide dozens of generations of married Catholics to sanctity.  It is only in this period of cold hearts and dead faith that the leadership of the Church find it necessary to invent all kinds of new failed programs to replace the old, successful ones, the ones that were given up for dead because they failed to “resonate with the new man.”  But the new man is the same as the old, it is only the faith of the new men in leadership which has failed.]

Well, we can certainly see that in Cardinal Farrell, Francis found the right man for his job of remaking the Church in his own image.

Now, if you’re like me, Cardinal Farrell was speaking quite boldly, even definitively.  He left no doubt that he feels that priests “have no credibility in this area.”  That’s a quite definitive statement.

So how did the Catholic press, especially Catholic News Service writer Sarah MacDonald, report this really remarkable declaration from Farrell?  Get this headline: “Prefect suggests couples can be better at marriage prep than priests.”  Hmmm.  Is that your takeaway from this?  That Cardinal Farrell suggested that priests could be better at marriage prep than priests? It read to me like he just came out and said it, like a bald statement of fact.

And so we see that fake news is not limited to the secular world!  That’s how you got Trump, Mzzz. MacDonald.

Beyond the differences, he is a Peronist Pope” – Lieutenant Governor of Buenos Aires, March 14, 2013, the day after Francis was elected Pope.

You’ll get one or two posts today, and like it!

Correctio Filialis Signature List Grows, but Still Few Traditional Priests….. October 4, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, different religion, Father Rodriguez, fightback, Francis, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Latin Mass, persecution, priests, secularism, Spiritual Warfare, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
comments closed

……..and zero from the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter, that I can tell.

Fr. Michael Rodriguez was added with the latest update of signatories from Monday.  I have a hope that the organizers of the Correctio Filialis will reach out to some other priests I suggested.  Then we might see some Fraternity priests on the list, if they have the gumption to sign.

One or two additional FSSPX priests signed.  That’s fine, but there seems little broad-based movement there to endorse this filial correction.

I can certainly imagine some reasons why traditional priests would not want to sign. Indeed, there may exist directives in their orders not to do so.

But I pray the list of signatories will explode from far beyond the current 219 (which is wonderful and a great blessing in and of itself, but more would be far better).  From my standpoint – and I’m sure there would be repercussions I would not like – every single traditional priest should sign this filial correction.  But Catholic moral behavior is not governed strictly by consequences.  If something is right and just and even a moral imperative to perform (which I would argue, given the threat posed by the errors emanating from this pontificate and the potential for far worse in the future, this is a moral imperative), it must be performed, the consequences be damned.  At least, that’s what I always hear when I am told I have to be obedient to the post-conciliar establishment, no matter how disastrous the result of that obedience has been.

Surely, that argument cuts both ways?  Or was it always just about expedience?

Here is a golden opportunity for tradition-loving priests to take a concrete action against the continued rape of Holy Mother Church and possibly towards a restoration of same………sign the @#$%&*!! petition.  Or never bemoan the state of the Church again? (or, for tender ears, I could say it nicer: if you do not, how can you expect the laity to listen to  your later complaints regarding the increasingly sad state of the Church?).

And yes, your prudential reasons for not signing have been considered and found wanting.  Tantrumstompo has spoken.

Rant concluded……….maybe.  No don’t watch that movie.