jump to navigation

Joseph Sciambra’s Inspiring, Heartbreaking Tale of Leaving the “Gay” Lifestyle May 15, 2018

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, Domestic Church, family, General Catholic, Grace, Interior Life, Latin Mass, sanctity, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, Virtue.
14 comments

Folks, I won’t be able to blog much anymore.  Even the little I have done has been too much for the powers that be.  I have to be careful what I say, as it is being watched by the people I work for.  So posting will be light and infrequent for the foreseeable future.

However, I saw these video interviews of Joseph Sciambra and felt compelled to share them.  For those who do not know, Joseph Sciambra was deeply involved in the perverse lifestyle of men using other men for sexual gratification for a number of years.  He went so far as to become involved in extreme acts I won’t go into, as well as prostitution and, I believe, appearing in some pornographic films.  But, through a miracle of Grace, he was able to escape his sins and develop a life of virtue and continence.  He has a website here.

The interviewer is a priest, Fr. Peregrino, who features in a number of sermons on Sensus Fidelium, who also posted this excellent interview.

Mr. Sciambra raises a number of excellent points.  One of the key themes is for fathers to love their sons in an appropriate, demonstrative, supportive way.  Hugging your son, letting him know that he always has your love and support, and demonstrating through frequent involvement in numerous activities, not only “manly” ones but even simple things like playing with him or reading to him, are hugely important for helping insure your son does not become one of the few who may fall into this most destructive, most difficult to escape lifestyle.  He rightly notes that not all boys who grow up with absent/distant or any other kind of “problematic” father will fall into this lifestyle, but some will, and that at root the problem of male homosexuality is one rooted in failed father-son relationships (the causes of the female variety are more varied).  Interestingly, however, Mr. Sciambra does not believe anyone is “born gay.”  He also rightly states that the true number of male “homosexuals” is 1-2% of the male population, and that many of these men, including himself, are at varying times and under different circumstances attracted to, and have relationships with, women.  But this we already knew.

Another point I found illuminating was the role the traditional practice of the Faith played in Mr. Sciambra’s conversion.  The Traditional Mass was very important in this, with its structure and its clear communication of numerous aspects of our belief, but the entire traditional practice of the Faith was instrumental in his conversion.  First of all – and I mentioned this interview was both inspiring and heartbreaking – it is in the TLM environment that Mr. Sciambra most found those priests who were willing to call the sins he had spent decades ensconced in just that – sins. He relates that on many occasions he had gone to Confession at Novus Ordo parishes and was told by priests that his inclination towards and commission of sodomy and other gravely immoral acts constituted no sin at all.  He was just “being himself.”  They might gently nudge him towards finding “one partner” to settle down with – apparently ignoring the fact that even “monogamous, committed” relationships between men almost invariably feature constant sex acts with others – but that was the most he would hear.  One must wonder how many of these priests were justifying their own sins and inclinations in this refusal to call sodomy, one of the four sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance, what it is.

It is also in the TLM and in the traditional practice of the Faith that Mr. Sciambra found a philosophy, a moral code, and a set of practices that were rigorous enough to satisfy his craving for masculine affirmation, a sort of set of rubrics for conducting oneself as a moral man.  This need is, when not totally ignored, almost always disparaged as “toxic masculinity” and other epithets in this sick and twisted age, but it is a real and important factor.  This huge craving for a firm moral order and the assertion of responsibility and duties over rights and unfulfilling, hedonistic “pleasure” is a major reason for the phenomenal success of Dr. Jordan Peterson, but he, sadly, only gives part of the truth almost all of us, but especially young men, need to hear these days (and it is also a truth mixed in with a certain measure of error, error that has the potential to derail Peterson’s followers off the road of upright living and back into the endless cul de sac of humanistic self-seeking.

Of course, scores of preceding generations of Catholics completely understood that the traditional, defined, orthodox practice of the Faith was absolutely necessary and vital for the right conduct of life and for the good of society generally, and that even slight deviations therefrom could, and almost certainly would, rapidly and quickly lead to disaster. I would add my personal opinion that the deviations seen in the Faith at, and since, Vatican II are far, far more substantial than many that were rightly and violently decried as heretical in previous generations of the Church.

The interviews do deal with subject matter that is not fit for children or those with particularly delicate consciences.  While Fr. Peregrino does an able job steering a fine line between too much detail and descent into prurient matter, and making the interview so bland and anodyne as to diminish its effect, it still deals at root with a subject matter that may be inappropriate for some adults and certainly younger children.

Joseph Sciambra is an excellent witness to our glorious Faith and gives great testimony to the destructiveness of the barbaric hedonism running rampant in our culture today.  May he continue to cooperate with Grace and do greater work to help souls lost in this intoxicating lifestyle (not least of which stems from the adulation the mass media and many cultural elements bestow on those within it) return to the practice of virtue and unity with the will of our Lord as revealed through Holy Mother Church.

Part 1:

Part 2:

Advertisements

Archbishop Sample’s Sermon Praising TLM, Criticizing Novus Ordo May 7, 2018

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, episcopate, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Latin Mass, Liturgy, Restoration, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
comments closed

Everyone else has done a post on this, I guess I may as well, too.

Actually, given the superlatives I’ve seen lauded on this sermon, I was a trifle disappointed.  It was very good, especially from a prelate in this age of the Church, and something that is very much appreciated, but I guess my expectations had been built up to the point that I thought I was going to get a Wolfe-ian or Rodriguezesque full throated takedown of the Novus Ordo, but that’s not quite what this was.  Still, it was very good.  We’ve known Archbishop Sample has been a strong supporter of the TLM for years, but he makes clear here that he sees the liturgical revolution – or the revolution against the authentic Liturgy – as a serious mistake and something from which the Church must pull back and, in essence, recover.  He also vociferously argues that the TLM is not the domain of an aging, nostalgic remnant but is strongly, one might even say overwhelmingly, the province of the young.  Which, good to note, the revolutionaries love their pat responses and easy misrepresentations, so the truth has to be repeated over and over to counter those.

Nevertheless, I still get a bit nervous when I hear talk of “mutual enrichment” – to me, the only enriching is the slow replacement of the Novus Ordo by the Mass of the Ages (which term I was very glad to see Archbishop Sample use).  +Sample did not indicate much at all how he felt the Novus Ordo might enrich the TLM, but I still feel the concept itself is flawed.  The liturgical reform to me was a mistake, a mistake in conception and, at best, horribly botched in execution (though I would also argue that the preponderance of the evidence makes clear that the revolutionaries got just about exactly what they wanted in the Novus Ordo, and that what they wanted was to protestantize the Mass as a first, giant step towards humanizing the Church – that is to say, turning the Church into a humanist construct, a religion more of man, than of God).  Yes there was some pushback and modification at the 11th hour, but later developments removed even much of that, at least in the form of some truly deplorable products such as Bugnini’s “children’s Mass.”

I also see basically no ways in which the Novus Ordo might enrich the TLM – I know this might be a harsh or extreme view, but having read a fair amount about how the propers have been butchered and even corrupted and the 3 year cycle of readings almost totally divorced from the ancient (and one might say, inspired) flow of the liturgical year, I don’t think it an unsupportable assertion.  That’s not to say that the Novus Ordo is always a disaster or a danger to one’s faith – there are Greenville’s and Hanceville’s and other locales where the Novus Ordo is offered in ways vastly superior to the standard offering in 99% of parishes, but those are all cases where the Novus Ordo was “enriched” by the traditional Mass, rather confirming the fact that “mutual enrichment” is a dead letter, a red herring, and quite likely a grave danger to be avoided.  The enrichment must run in one direction only.

It’s still a nice sermon in a lovely setting with a properly vested prelate, which is still far too rare a sight.  I am very glad Archbishop Sample offered this Mass and I pray he will continue drawing nearer and nearer to the traditional practice of the Faith and its authentic presentation in the Liturgy:

Coulombe Critiques the Novus Ordo and a Few Pics from Fatima Conference May 3, 2018

Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, different religion, Father Rodriguez, General Catholic, Liturgy, Restoration, Revolution, Spiritual Warfare, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, Virtue.
comments closed

A great excerpt from the weekly Tumblar House series of video Q&As with Charles Coulombe wherein Mr. Coulombe discusses the Novus Ordo and the problems with it.  He gives a fair and accurate assessment, though not as harsh and thoroughly critical as perhaps I might be.  He does note, quite rightly, that some “presentations” of the Novus Ordo are much better than others.  Indeed, the Novus Ordo in Latin, Ad Orientem, offered with great reverence with the Asperges and a solid priest giving good catechesis in the sermon with all the bells and smells, is what the Novus Ordo perhaps should have been, though I would argue that no change to the Mass was necessary and that humans are always on perilous ground in playing around with divine creations, which I would say the Mass largely is.  My family and I derived great fruit from just such a Mass for several years in the mid-2000s, and that experience paved the way for our eventual “transition” to the TLM.  Having said that, I strongly believe the TLM is the once and future Mass for the entire Church, but getting back there will likely take a very long time.

But what is generally offered in most parishes is a far, far cry from that relatively benign Novus Ordo experience.  In fact, what is offered in most parishes is a positive danger to the faith of many souls, especially those badly formed in the Faith (or formed well but in some false simulacrum of Catholicism).

What I really like in the analysis below, however, one thing Mr. Coulombe says: the Council did not address the problem truly affecting the Church, that the Mass did not need a radical makeover but that the penetration of Leftism into the minds and heart so most priests did, but this was ignored, as was the original driving force behind the Council, at least in the minds of the large majority of bishops polled before it took place – formally condemning communism as a philosophy and condemning those who embraced it.

I also very much appreciate the fact that many of the liturgical innovations that came as a result of the Council, though very few were called for in Sacraosanctum Concilium, already stood condemned before the Council took place!  These were condemned by Pius XII in his encyclicals Humanii Generis and Mediator Dei (which reminds me, I really need to re-read those).  Anyway, it’s a really good video and I hope you find watching it edifying:

Are those five Eucharistic miracles, or miracles associated with the Eucharist, he mentions above approved or clearly demonstrated?  I’m only familiar with one or two.

The pics below came from the March conference of Our Lady’s Army of Advocates at the DFW airport. It was a wonderful experience, not only for the talks, but for meeting so many good friends and readers of this blog.  The wonderful Rodriguez family of El Paso was there, and I got to take some pictures with members of their family, along with others.  The pics are a bit on the blurry side, but you takes what you gets.  Thank you to the kind Beatrice Rodriguez for sending these to me, and sorry it took so long to get them posted!

David Rodriguez, myself, Beatrice Rodriguez, and Father Michael Rodriguez

Michael Matt, Beatrice Rodriguez, me

Islam is the State Religion of Britain, While the Secular Pagan Religion Increasingly Falls Apart April 23, 2018

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, Christendom, disaster, Ecumenism, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, Immigration, persecution, Revolution, scandals, secularism, sickness, Society, unbelievable BS.
comments closed

A couple of brief videos for you, one from a fairly unlikely source, a professor of physics at UC-San Diego who presents an argument that modern science’s attempt to explain all creation through natural processes absent God is becoming increasingly frayed and desperate.  While it is not stated in the video, the key fact that is driving belief in the multi-verse is detailed study that has shown that for macro-evolution to work, and to have resulted in the diversity and advanced forms of life presently on earth, far, far more time would have to have elapsed than actually has, even by the enormous ages of “scientific time” (going back over 10 billion years) to have resulted through Darwinian “natural selection.”  That is because the “evolution” that can be actually observed directly takes place so agonizingly slow (for the scienticians), and major variations like severe mutations are almost always evolutionary dead ends, not major breakthroughs.

So major public scientists like Steven Weinberg and Steven Hawking have opined that, since evolution must be true (it is the cardinal belief the God-denying scientists, basically taking the place of God in this mode of thinking), but not nearly enough time has passed for all the multivariate forms of life now found on earth, there must be an infinity of universes out there (existing so that every possibility that can occur in a given situation does occur in one universe or another – like Star Trek’s Mirror, Mirror episode), each one somehow invisibly interconnected with the other, so that there is now plenty of time – indeed, an infinity of time – for evolution to take place.  Voila!  Problem solved.  But as the professor notes below, there is no way to prove these other universes exist, and thus, belief in the multiverse is just another article of faith for the God-denying sexular pagans (which, I would argue, evolution is, as well, since the “evidence” there is largely contrived, or fully explainable by other means):

In the next video, a young woman in Britain who has received numerous death threats for having the temerity to criticize islam (the invasion and subsequent conversion of Christendom by islam is far more advanced in Europe than here) is told by the state – in the form of the police – that it is acceptable to criticize Christianity but not islam.  Mind, she has not been told this by one police official, but by several.  Coupled with the state’s continued cover-up of muslim pedophile rape gangs that pray exclusively on non-muslim girls, general prohibition by cultural elites of any public criticism of islam as “hate speech,” and a growing kow-towing to islam in virtually every major sphere of life, it appears the successful devolution of Britain from “Our Lady’s Dowry” to muslim despotism is moving apace.  Note that gutting of Christianity both in concept/meaning and unity through the protestant revolution was a central part of this process, since protestantism led to a self-serving conception of God/Christ and our relation to them, which led to collapse of belief, which led to rationalism/endarkenment values, which led to where we are today.  Painting with a broad brush but I’ve written about this before.

Britain is simply ahead of the US by about 30 years, but the exact same process is at work, here.  Why do the powers that be allow hundreds of thousands of muslims to emigrate to this country a year (mostly legally), while legal immigration from the same countries for Christians, or from Christian-majority nations, is extremely arduous?  It’s all about replacing the native population, and, more importantly, the native culture, with a multi-culti dystopia.  Given the paltry progress on the wall so far, this nation is going to be a disaster for our children and grandchildren to inhabit (sorry for the bare shoulders, it ends pretty quick):

This ascendance of fealty, perhaps obeisance is a better word, towards islam, is a classic case of seeing cultural suzerainty in action.  Even though islam has grown at an explosive rate in Britain, it still constitutes a small minority.  Muslims constitute barely 5% of the British population, but their political and especially cultural influence far outweighs their numbers.  Why is this?  It’s because few in the “Christian” majority have any kind of certainty in their beliefs, while the muslims are very convicted.  Thus a small minority is dictating much of the cultural/societal norm to the vast majority, which, thus far, has gone rather sheepishly along with this, and has managed to completely co-opt the political class and cultural elites.  In terms of actual numbers, there may be far more devout muslims in Britain today than there are devout Christians.  Certainly, there are many muslims quite willing to impose their culture and their moral norms on Britain, and very few British willing to defend their rapidly deteriorating legacy culture.

Will the same happen in the United States? I think an argument can be built that it already is.  Secularization and collapse of Christian belief and practice has not gone so far in the US as it has in Britain, Canada, and the rest of the West, but it is still occurring, and rapidly.  Each generation becomes successively less Christian and, what is more, convicted in their beliefs.  I fear the process in the US could be especially ugly, since there may be enough Christian conviction, defusely spread, in the country, to lead to much more open conflict with the implacable demands of islam, which asserts its cultural dominance wherever it gains enough numbers (and, as we see, those numbers are very far from requiring a majority).  And Trump’s rise and election was due at least in part to resentment over the seeming flood of muslims into this country along with the unconstrained Hispanic immigration. But that, I fear, will just be the beginning.  The elites seem determined to play this most massive social experiment in history out, even though all of history and ethnography shouts that diversity plus proximity virtually always equals conflict, and very bloody conflict.

Perhaps that’s the end goal after all.  You can’t get to a “perfect” world population of 2 billion without breaking a few eggs, or heads.

By the way, on evolution, has anyone read Repairing the Breach?  I got a copy for Christmas but it will be some time before I can devote the effort to reading it. It’s a massive book, really like a textbook, and some reviews claim it to be THE most thorough attack on evolution that has yet been written.  I’m already pretty tied down in reading at the moment, trying to finish Solzhenitsyn, and that is no trivial task, in itself.  I think I’ve brought this up before, but if anyone has read Repairing the Breach and would like to provide a review, I’d very much appreciate it.

Some Helpful Prayers to St. Joseph April 23, 2018

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, Christendom, Domestic Church, family, General Catholic, Glory, Good St. Joseph, Grace, Interior Life, Saints, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
comments closed

I try to read at least one book on Good St. Joseph every year, and this year I found a very good one at the Our Lady’s Army Conference in DFW last month.  It’s The Divine Favors Granted to St. Joseph by Pere Binet.  It’s a very nice little book, containing more than just the usual history of devotion to St. Joseph or his small role in Scripture, but it is an extended examination of the divine favors he received as revealed through the revelations to various other Saints and the thoughts of many Church Fathers on the subject.

The book closes with a series of prayers to St. Joseph, some of which were new to me, at least, and I felt several of them deserved to be shared with a wider audience.  I will repeat again, as I always do when mentioning St. Joseph, my full concurrence with the great Saint and Doctor Teresa of Avila, that St. Joseph is an unbelievably powerful intercessor and helper to souls in need (which, of course, is all of us), and is unwaveringly loyal in seeing our requests through to fruition, provided they are in accord with God’s Will.  Just last night and today I had direct evidence of St. Joseph’s total effectiveness as an intercessor.  He’s especially helpful for husbands and fathers, but he helps all souls, of course.  He and Our Lady should be our first recourse when we have particular needs to offer up to Our Blessed Lord.

The first prayer is a prayer for the welfare of Holy Mother Church:

To thee, Blessed Joseph, do we have recourse in our tribulation, and having implored the help of thy thrice-holy Spouse, we confidently invoke thy patronage also.  By that charity wherewith thou wast united to the Immaculate Virgin Mother of God, and by that fatherly affection with which thou didst embrace the Child Jesus, we beseech thee and we humbly pray, that thou wouldst look graciously upon the inheritance which Jesus Christ hath purchased by His Blood, and assist us in our needs by thy power and strength.  Most watchful guardian of the Holy Family, protect the chosen people of Jesus Christ; keep far from us, most loving father, all blight of error and corruption; mercifully assist us from Heaven, most mighty defender, in his our conflict with the powers of darkness; and, even as of old thou didst rescue the Child Jesus from the snares of the enemy and from all adversity; keep us one and all under thy continual protection, that, supported by thine example and thine assistance, we may be enabled to lead a holy life, die a happy death, and come at least ot the possession of everlasting blessedness in Heaven.  Amen.

Next, a Prayer for the Triumph of the Church.  I can think of few prayers more needed in this time.

O glorious St. Joseph, chosen by God to be the foster-father of Jesus, the chaste spouse of Mary ever Virgin, and the head of the Holy Family, and then appointed by the Vicar of Christ to be the heavenly patron and defender of the Church founded by Jesus, most confidently do I implore thee at this moment thy powerful aid for all the Church Militant on earth.  Do thou shield with thy truly paternal love especially the Supreme Pontiff and all the bishops and priests who are in union with the Holy See of Peter from all error, stain of corruption, and deviation from the Truth of Jesus Christ.  Be the defender of all who labor for souls amidst the trials and tribulations of this life, and cause all the peoples of the earth to submit themselves in a docile spirit to that Church which is the sole ark of salvation for all men.

Be pleased also, dear St. Joseph, to accept this dedication of myself which I now make unto thee.  I dedicate myself wholly to thee, that thou mayest ever be my father, my patron and may guide in the way of salvation.  Obtain for me great purity of heart and a fervent devotion to the interior life.  Grant that, following thine example, I may direct all my actions to the greater glory of God, in union with the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary and in union with thee. Finally, pray for me, that I may be a partaker in the peace and joy which were thine at the hour of thy holy death.  Amen.

Prayer for a Happy Death.  I’ve seen similar prayers before, but I found this one to be especially beautiful:  

O glorious St. Joseph, behold I choose thee today for my special patron in life and at the hour of my death.  Preserve and increase in me the spirit of prayer and fervor in the service of God.  Remove far from me every kind of sin; obtain for me that my death may not come upon me unawares, but that I may have time to confess my sins sacramentally and have access to all the aids Holy Mother Church makes available to souls departing this life.  May I bewail all my sins with a most perfect understanding and a most sincere contrition, in order htat I may breathe forth my soul into the hands of Jesus and Mary.  Amen.

Finally, and I think also so vital in this time, a prayer to St. Joseph for purity.  No soul, saving except Our Lady, practiced purity and perfect continence so well as St. Joseph, who, though married, abstained from the marital bed and never engaged in acts suitable for the creation of new life.  I pray that St. Joseph may intercede with Our Blessed Lord to raise up many more such souls in this time of mass lasciviousness:

Saint Joseph, father and guardian of virgins, into whose faithful keeping were entrusted Innocence Itself, Christ Jesus, and Mary, the Virgin of virgins and sinless Mother of God, I pray and beseech thee, through Jesus and Mary, those pledges so dear to thee, to intercede for me that I may be kept from all uncleanness, and to grant that my mind may be untainted, my heart pure and my body chaste; help me always to serve Jesus and Mary in perfect chastity. Amen.

———-End———–

I pray you find these prayers useful!  As for me, I plan to make the Prayer for the Triumph of the Church a daily prayer of mine.  It’s not about what’s good for the earthly glory of the Church, but what is good for souls.

Some Wonderful Bits of Catholic Culture April 4, 2018

Posted by Tantumblogo in Art and Architecture, awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, Christendom, Ecumenism, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, history, Latin Mass, sanctity, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, Virtue.
comments closed

I’ve found a “new” channel on  Youtube called Holy Faith TV.  It’s not that new, it’s been around almost a  year, but it’s new to me.

They’ve got a lot of great traditional Catholic content and some really outstanding history.  How about this incredible color video of Venerable Pius XII:

And here is a video from what was then a mainstream educational film company on the jubilee year of 1950.  Can you imagine Scholastic doing a reverential and respectful video on the Church today?  How much, and how much for the worse, our society has changed since then.

“…….here lies a spiritual power that no godless philosophy may hope to vanquish.”  Take it to heart, leftists!

If an audience featuring Pius XII wasn’t good enough, how about Mass from 1948, offered in St. Peter’s. Sadly it is in black and white:

And here you go, marking the end of glory and the beginning of the auto-demolition of the Faith, a film on the death of Pius XII and coronation of John XXIII, before the fanon and sede gestatoria were scrapped by John’s successor:

 

It’s not all from the 50s.  There is content dating at least back to Saint Pius X. And some of it is more modern commentary, from a wide diversity of sources, from people known well to this blog like Fr. Michael Rodriguez and Bishop Athanasius Schneider, to more esoteric sources.  I can’t say I’ve watched much of the commentary, but as for the historical stuff, I love it.  So much more like that!

Apparently Youtube contains just part of the content, there is a website that ostensibly has more but I haven’t really had time to check it out.  Perhaps you will, and if you do, feel free to share anything of interest you may find!

As always, of course my happiness at finding this channel is not necessarily an endorsement of everything on it.  But I think there is quite a bit good to find there.

And it’s not all strictly Catholic.  There’s actually quite a bit from the Orthodox Church on the channel.  For an example, here is Patriarch Kirill, primate of the Russian Orthodox Church, taking on the cultural masters in a way the last six popes have generally failed to do, with occasional exceptions from John Paul II and Benedict.  In fact, he proclaims a truth that is readily apparent to most believing Christians of any Church, sect, or stripe: godless elites want to destroy Christianity:

The Awesome Fr. Isaac Mary Relyea at Our Lady’s Army of Advocates DFW March 30, 2018

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, Domestic Church, family, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Interior Life, Latin Mass, priests, religious, Restoration, Spiritual Warfare, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
comments closed

I haven’t the time to give much of a recap of the talk below, but I’ll wager this – once you start watching/listening, you won’t be able to stop.  I’d never seen Fr. Relyea give a talk below, but he was absolutely fabulous. It’s just crack cocaine for traditional homeschooling Catholics.  Give it two minutes and he’ll take you an hour-plus.

It’s also a wonderful palate cleanser from the post below.  If you could imagine Christopher Walken having a twin brother as a traditional Catholic priest, that would be Fr. Relyea.  Too bad he couldn’t come over to share some cigars with Dismas and me (that was another tremendous pleasure from the conference, meeting longtime reader and commenter Dismas).

We need more like this, captivating, motivating, exhilarating traditional Catholic priest-speakers.

More from the conference later.

Oh yeah, I forgot to mention the Disney stuff.  I’m not a big fan of Disney and we’ve generally disowned all that, but I do think demonic infiltration by underwear might – might – be a bit of a pious exaggeration. Perhaps pious exaggeration is a bit too strong, but it does strain credulity.  It could be totally legit but it might come across to the uninitiated as a bit extreme.  The Lord does work in mysterious ways, however, so who knows.

For the rest though I really enjoyed his talk.  He’s a fun and gregarious guy, just a prototypical Queens/Brooklyn type.

Heretic Pope – Francis Declares “There Is No Hell” March 30, 2018

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, catachesis, cultural marxism, different religion, disaster, error, Francis, General Catholic, horror, rank stupidity, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Spiritual Warfare, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

The Vatican has tried to sidestep this blatant declaration of heresy, but they have been very careful not to deny that he was accurately quoted.  So Francis outed himself as a blatant heretic for at least the 10th or 11th time:

In another informal interview with Italian atheist journalist (and founder of liberal newspaper Repubblica) Eugenio Scalfari, published today, Pope Francis reveals that “hell does not exist”.

His exact words below (full interview behind paywall here, most important excerpt below):

Title of the interview: “It is an honor for me to be called revolutionary.” [That is also a kind of heresy, at least given the condemnations of leftist revolutions from past pontiffs]4

Excerpt on hell:

[Scalfari:] Your Holiness, in our previous meeting you told me that our species will disappear in a certain moment and that God, still out of his creative force, will create new species. You have never spoken to me about the souls who died in sin and will go to hell to suffer it for eternity. You have however spoken to me of good souls, admitted to the contemplation of God. But what about bad souls? Where are they punished?

[Francis:] “They are not punished, those who repent obtain the forgiveness of God and enter the rank of souls who contemplate him, but those who do not repent and cannot therefore be forgiven disappear. There is no hell, there is the disappearance of sinful souls.”

 

Yeah, you wish.

The timing is no accident. Almost every year at Easter this creature occupying the Chair of Peter has taken perverse delight – diabolical delight – in showing his utter disdain for popular piety and the few tattered remains of Catholic tradition that exist outside the traditionalist-dominated remnant.  He loves to mock and usurp it.  His only use for the Faith he so obviously hates is as a vehicle to his own self-aggrandizement.

Of course, he also loves to be the star of his own self-directed drama, the movie of his mind where he is always the swashbuckling young Peronist waging constantly successful insurgency against the hidebound reactionaries of the Church and world of his imagination.  He cannot see that he and his ilk are now the hidebound reactionaries wreaking destruction and causing suffering at every turn (as they have throughout their sorry lives), as his generation corrupted from the false and illusory ideals of the 60s into just another ruling class blinded by its own self-interest.

I’d be really harsh, but this being Holy Week and all, I’ll lay off.  To me, really, this guy is a joke, elected by infinitely corrupted and corrupting old pederasts who themselves are more sorry and pathetic than anything else.  They’d be laughable if they hadn’t done so damn much damage to so damned many souls.  But my judgment is nothing.  I’m just a man, and probably a fool.  But God is eternal, and hell is real.

Francis will find that out to his absolute horror at some point in the not too distant future.

 

Blessed Are the Meek – But Who Are the Meek? Cornelius A Lapide Tells Us March 22, 2018

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, Bible, catachesis, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Interior Life, reading, sanctity, Spiritual Warfare, Tradition, Virtue.
comments closed

I’ve been reading – slowly – The Great Commentary by Cornelius a’ Lapide, in the Loreto Press version with the introduction by none other than Charles Coulombe.  It’s an excellent if exhaustive biblical commentary.  I can see why it is so often used by traditional priests – there are insights to Scripture I’ve never seen anywhere else, though a few are dated (like the medical references to the latest 16th century medicine).

Nevertheless, it’s an excellent if expensive biblical commentary. I strongly recommend it.

As I said, it’s an exhaustive commentary, a’ Lapide does not manage to cover all of St. Matthew’s Gospel in a single 600 page volume (not including a ~130 page introduction).  In fact, he doesn’t even make it halfway.  Sometimes it does get a bit draggy into really minute detail.  Overall, however, it’s the best Catholic biblical commentary available in English, at least until someone finishes translating Bellarmine, which hopefully Ryan Grant is working on (Mediatrix Press, by the way, has a 10% off sale for Lent. It’s a good time to save).

I haven’t done enough Lenten content this year due to circumstances, but here’s a nice exegesis on Saint Matthew Chapter V verse 4, Blessed are the Meek.  But who is meek, and what is meekness?  Aside from Christ’s exhortation to be meek, what role does meekness play in God’s plan for our salvation?  Divine Intimacy certainly provides many answers, but these from a’ Lapide are quite worth sharing, as well. I pray you find this useful:

Fittingly are the meek conjoined to the poor in spirit, because the poor and lowly are wont to be meek, as vice versa, the rich and the proud are often impatient and quarrelsome.  Poverty and meekness are neighbors, and related virtues………For “the meek,” says Chromatius, are “those who are gentle, humble, modest, simple in faith, patient under all injury, who set themselves to follow the precepts of the Gospel and imitate the Lord’s example of meekness.  Therefore, the meek are those who rule over impatience, anger, envy, vengefulness, and other disturbances and troubled movements of the soul, and do not murmur against God when He permits adversity, nor become indignant at injuries caused by neighbors, nor seek revenge upon those who harm them, but bear all things placidly in God’s providence, who orders all these things to His glory and for their salvation, when they practice resignation and acquiesce in them. This is why the meek, by the sweetness of their manners, reconcile to themselves the souls of all.

Christ alludes to what David says in Psalm xxxvi:11, The meek shall inherit the land, and shall delight in abundance of peace.

Meekness, therefore, makes us 1. pleasing to God and men 2. like Christ, Who says, Learn of Me, because I am meek, and humble in heart (Matt xi:29), 3. apt for wisdom and gaining celestial goods. For capable of receiving these is the heart which is meek, placid, and tranquil, as Psalm xxiv:9 says: He will guide the mild in judgment: He will teach the meek His ways.

The grades of meekness and the beatitude consequent upon it are these: 1. To converse with all with a meek heart and lips. 2. To break the anger of others by a meek reply. 3. To bear with gentleness all injuries and wrongs. 4. To rejoice in being injured and wronged. 5. By our meekness and kindness to overcome the malevolence of our enemies and those who are angry with us, and win them to be our friends. [This is very hard to do, especially in our proud and selfish age, where we are taught in ways subtle and gross to always exalt the self, to always get what we want, when we want it, and to take great offense if we do not. But this is not the way of Christ, or of the great Christendom that existed for many centuries. I count myself at the head of the list of those who fail in meekness.] 

Finally, Climacus gives the reason, indeed several reasons, why the meek are blessed when he says: “Meekness is the helpmate of obedience, the leader of religious community, a curb to those who steal, a power that expels the wrathful, the teacher of joy, the imitator of Christ, the property of the heavenly, fetters and bonds of demons, a shield against bitterness and harshness of spirit. The Lord rests in the hearts of the meek.  The turbulent soul is the nest of the devil.  The meek shall inherit the earth, or better, shall rule the lands, while the furious shall be driven our out of their lands……….

[This last bit is not entirely related, but it was so good i had to include it]……..Moses promised earthly goods to the Jews, but Christ promised heavenly goods to Christians.

Better and fuller with St. Jerome – by earth in this place, understand Heaven, which is the land of the living, since this earth is the land of the dying, as it is said in Psalm xxvi: “I believe to see the good things of the Lord in the land of the living.” [so meekness is a necessary to be with God in Heaven]

————End Quote———–

I think that’s it for today. I’m sure enjoying a Lapide – I only wish I had more time to read, to soak up this glorious Faith of ours, which always seems, providentially, to provide an answer to one’s yearnings, even if those yearnings were unrecognized.  Sometimes you don’t know what you need, or what really hurts, until God shows it to you.  May He be forever praised!

God bless you!

The Unbelievable Evil of Luther’s Ideology – Sin Much Better than Good Works March 7, 2018

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, Basics, catachesis, disaster, Ecumenism, episcopate, error, General Catholic, horror, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, the enemy, the struggle for the Church, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

I am reading a truly amazing book on Martin Luther and his beliefs, called The Facts About Luther by Msgr. Patrick O’Hare LLD. This book isn’t full of Catholic opinion regarding Luther’s belief; no, it is a book literally chock full of direct, in-context quotations from the diabolical heresiarch and his twisted ideology.

Luther is a case study of the lengths to which one can fall when given over to endless pride, overarching pomposity, and intractable stubbornness. Luther was in essence a Pelagian, or wanted to be a Pelagian – someone who wanted to be so very good on his own merits, even without God’s help or Grace, which he constantly refused, that he could attain Heaven on his own efforts.  For nearly a decade prior to his final break into full blown heresy in 1517, he had been warned by religious superiors and others that he was on a path towards destruction with his way, way over-the-top fastings, mortifications, penitential exercises, etc.  When he finally became exhausted from this superhuman effort and realized he couldn’t attain Heaven on his own efforts, did he pause and find some humility and beg God for his aid?  Of course not.  From a family known for its volcanic temperament and unyielding stubbornness for many generations, he instead found blame with first God, and then the Church. It was the whole economy of salvation and system of Grace that was wrong, not Martin Luther!  Of course!  And so he invented the most noxious single error in the history of Christendom – justification by “faith*” alone.

Naturally, if one was saved by “faith” alone, and works were useless, then the whole system of the Law, the commission of good works and avoidance of sin, must be not just rotten but sinful and destructive of souls, as well.  Thus Luther inverted the Faith and invented his own diabolical doctrine.

And of course, being one of history’s most unhinged temperaments, he compulsively attacked not just the Church, not just popes and Saints and Fathers, but even much of the Bible itself upon which he supposedly based his entire conception of the Faith!  He had a special hatred for the 10 Commandments and its human transcriber, Moses.

Below I will place a number of quotes from Luther illustrating the perversity of his beliefs and, thus, the entire protestant project (which was significantly, majorly revamped during the Catholic Counter-Reformation, when great Jesuits and others like Charles Borremeo, Peter Canisius, and Francis Borgia utterly decimated Luther and Calvin’s noxious doctrine, showing how unscriptural and contrary to the early Faith it was, so that later protestants had to substantially re-Catholicize their sects in order to keep them intact).

These come from pp. 108-130 cut and paste to try to form an understandable whole.

As I said, Luther came to positively hate God when he found he could not maintain his Pelagian system of salvation by works alone: “the moral duties [the Law] enjoined were impossible of fulfillment and incited not love, but hatred of God” [speak for yourself, heresiarch]

To claim that the fulfillment of the Law is impossible is as impious as it is blasphemous, inasmuch as it imputes to God the injustice of commanding us to do something not just above our strength, but positively contrary to our eternal good.  It is also contrary to Christ – “What shall I do to be saved? If thou wilt enter into life keep the Commandments” (St. Matt xix:17).

Luther further remarked regarding the 10 Commandments: “If we allow them [the Ten Commandments] any influence in our conscience, they become the cloak of all evil, heresies, and blasphemies.” Further – “That shall serve you as a true rule, that wherever the Scriptures order and command to do good works, you must so understand it that the Scriptures forbid good works.” “If you should not sin against the Gospel, then be on your guard against good works; avoid them as one avoids a pest.” [Thus, Christ is a liar and Scripture is full of impossible to penetrate, contrary meanings, and yet should be the sole rule of faith and open to the interpretation of all, and not subject to the understanding of the Church.  What a crock.]

Under what circumstances is it allowable for a “man of God” and a “Reformer” to say of Moses, God’s chosen servant, that he should be looked upon “with suspicion as the worst heretic, as a damned and excommunicated person; yea, worse than the Pope and the devil?” [Such unspeakable blasphemy and boundless effrontery]

Luther again – “A pure heart enlightened by God must not dirty, soil itself with the Law. Thus let the Christian understand that it matters not whether he keeps it or not; yea, he may do what is forbidden and leave undone what is commanded, for neither is a sin.” [Counseling avoidance of virtue and welcoming of sin? – Believe me, it gets much, much worse]

“To the gallows with Moses.”

“I will not have Moses with his Law, for he is the enemy of the Lord Christ….we must put away thoughts and disputes about the Law, whenever the conscience becomes terrified and fells God’s anger against sin. Instead of that, it will be better to sing, to eat, to drink, to sleep, to be merry in spite of the devil.” [Luther constantly conflated the pangs of his conscience with the promptings of the devil. In fact, as we shall see later, Luther was very aware that he was doing satan’s work and did so without compunction]

“Poor soul, you have temptations, they must be overcome. When the devil comes to tempt and harass you with thoughts of the kind you allude to, have recourse at once to conversation, drink more freely, be jocose and playful and even indulge some sin in hatred of the evil spirit………If the “devil” [by which he really means his conscience] says to you,’Will you not stop drinking, answer him: I will drink all the more because you forbid it; I will drink great draughts in the name and to the honor of Jesus Christ.’ Imitate me.  I never drink so well, I never eat so much, I never enjoy myself so well at table as when vexing the “devil” who is prepared to mock and harass me. Oh, that I could paint sin in a fair light, so as to mock the devil and make him see that I acknowledge no sin and am not conscious of having committed any!  I tell you, we must put all the Ten Commandments, with which the “devil” tempts and plagues us so greatly, out of sight and out of mind.  If the devil upbraids us with our sins and declares us to be deserving of death and Hell, then we must say: ‘I confess that I have merited death and hell,’ but what then?  Are you for that reason to be damned eternally?……..” [Quite possibly, yes, if you do not repent and confess your sins]

“How often,” Luther said, “have I taken with my “wife” [a rebel nun who, like Luther, violated her sacred vows and simulated marriage outside the Church] those liberties which nature permits, merely in order to get rid of Satan’s temptations [that’s a pretty cold commentary on his concubine].  Yet all to no purpose, for he refused to depart; for Satan, as the author of death, has depraved our nature to such an extent that we will not admit any consolation. [I did not know satan had such power over us, at least those of us who do not give ourselves over to him. I would say, once again, Luther is speaking of his own conscience, his own guardian angel, calling him back to sanity and repentance] Hence I advise everyone who is able to drive away these Satanic thoughts by diverting his mind to do so, for instance, by thinking of a pretty girl, of money-making, or of drink, or, in fine, by means of some other vivid emotion.”

“Be a sinner, and sin boldly, but “believe” more boldly still……We must sin as long as we are what we are…..sin shall not drag us away from Him even should we commit fornication, or murder, thousands and thousands of times a day provided we only believe.”  We must take Luther’s words to mean, as they manifestly indicate, a recommendation, an exhortation and an injunction to mutiny, rebellion, and disobedience to the Supreme Lawgiver, who directed all to observe and not disrespect His Commandments.

Luther counsels that sin is better than good works – “The way to Heaven is narrow; if you wish to pas through it, throw away your good works. Those pious souls, who do good to gain the Kingdom of Heaven, not only will never succeed, but they must even be reckoned among the impious; and it is more important to guard them against good works than against sin.” Thus good works, the practice of piety, and the observance of the divine Commandments – the only way, according to Jesus Christ, which leads to eternal life – are in his estimation troublesome superfluities, of which Christian liberty must rid us. Rather, according to this false teacher, they are invincible obstacles to salvation if one places the least reliance upon them. “Faith alone,” said he, “is necessary for justification: nothing else is commanded or forbidden.” [but remember, it’s a false conception of faith]

Luther knew that his doctrine had led to collapse of morals among protestants and that sin, crime, social upheaval, and moral degradation had spread like wildfire in the wake of his teachings.  He admitted this plainly, that is counsel to sin had been taken up, and that indeed it was primarily the license his false religion gave that was its prime selling point: “Since the downfall of Popery and the cessation of excommunications and spiritual penalties, the people have learned to despise the word of God. They care no longer for the churches; they have ceased to fear and honor God………I would wish, if it were possible, to leave these men without preacher and pastor and let them live like swine. [such noble concern for souls]  There is no longer any fear or love of God among them. After throwing off the yoke of the Pope, everyone wishes to live as he pleases.” [Isn’t that exactly what you counseled them to do?]

So notorious was the debauchery of the followers of Luther that it became a common saying when persons proposed to engage in drunkenness and revelry: “We will spend the day like Lutherans.”

The new Gospel did not make Luther himself better.  He said: “I confess…….that I am more negligent than I was under the Pope and there is now nowhere such an amount of earnestness under the Gospel as was formerly seen among monks and priests.” “If God,” he says, “had not closed my eyes, and if I had foreseen these scandals, I would never have begun to teach the Gospel.”[Luther was horribly inconsistent – he counseled men to sin but then lamented its effects.  Basically he wanted everyone to follow him, to be proved to be always right and greater than the pope, for himself to be able to sin freely, but for everyone else to remain as holy or better than they were as Catholics.  An impossible double standard.]

Finally, Luther had frequent encounters with satan, which he freely admitted, and he found that satan very much approved of his new doctrine, and somehow did not find that troubling –

Faith and good works are the only terms on which men can purchase happiness here and hereafter; every other scheme is a deceit of Lucifer to draw souls away from the love and service of God.

This statement is not made without foundation. Read Luther’s work against “The Mass and the Ordination of Priests (Erl. 31, 311 ff.) where he tells of his famous disputation with the “father of lies” who accosted him at “midnight” and spoke to him with “a deep, powerful voice,” causing “the sweat to break forth” from his brow and his “heart to tremble and palpitate.” In that celebrated conference, of which he was an unexceptionable witness and about which he never entertained the slightest doubt, he says plainly and unmistakingly that “the devil spoke against the Mass, and Mary and the Saints” and that, moreover, Satan gave him “the most unqualified approval of his doctrine on justification by faith alone.”  Who now, we ask in all sincerity, can be found, except those appallingly blind to truth, to accept such a man, approved by the enemy of souls, as a spiritual teacher and entrust to his guidance their eternal welfare? [And who sold his false religion by creating a giant strawman of the Catholic Faith, so that his twisted notions would make some sense by comparison]

———End Quote———

I would just add in conclusion – this is the man the horrid conciliar father Yves Congar knelt before in fealty, and wished to erect a statue to his wonderful works within St. Peter’s.  This is the man Francis of Rome has repeatedly lionized.  This is the man, and the tens of thousands of sects he has fathered, the ecumaniacs can’t wait to suborn Catholic Truth for in order to flatter.  This is the man the revolutionaries within the Church have constantly lionized and sought to emulate in every possible way, probably because they are as lost in their own sins as he was, for the past several decades.  The smoke of satan has entered the Church, indeed – and the man who made that statement did as much or more than anyone to allow those filthy sulfurous fumes to enter.

Before reading this book, I knew Luther was incredibly bad, that he wrought endless destruction of souls (and the material world), that he was the ultimate author of most everything wrong in the world today economically, socially, intellectually, philosophically, and morally, but I still did not know the depths of his depravity.  He was quite literally, and happily, the spawn of satan.  He is a tremendous warning to me of what unyielding pride and self-pity must lead to.  The thing is, he knew better, he constantly kept at least a shred of his Catholic conscience, which he drowned in drink, gluttony, prurient lusts, and every other means he could think of.  But still, he knew, he knew what he was doing, and sought company in eternal perdition for himself by trying to convince as many others as possible to join him.

Well that’s all I’m going to have time for today.  Hope to post tomorrow on the hole the Texas bishops, and possibly even the USCCB, have dug for themselves in that Texas Right to Life mess.  Such a tragedy, once again the bishops allow themselves to become the political pawns of paid bureaucrats in this nightmare bureaucracy they have unnecessarily set up, and which Pope Leo XIII explicitly warned against.

*- Even Luther’s understanding of faith was corrupt. He substituted “fiduciary faith” – a false confidence that one is saved by Christ’s merits in spite of all sin and lack of virtue –  for the dogmatic faith in the saving Doctrine of Jesus Christ of the Church.