jump to navigation

Texas Catholic Culture – El Cristo de los Pescadores December 6, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in Art and Architecture, awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, episcopate, fun, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Interior Life, Restoration, the struggle for the Church.
2 comments

“Christ of the Fishermen.”  Reader LaGallina sent me the following description of a beautiful bit of Catholic culture, placed where the Brownsville Ship Channel meets the Gulf of Mexico (roughly).

From La Gallina:

The statue is called “el Cristo de los Pescadores” and is turned slightly to face the channel and greet the shrimp boats when they are coming back to shore. A Brownsville family brought this from Italy back in the 90s (I think) after they won a settlement with the shrimp boat company after their two sons were killed on the boat. They also hold a huge party on the grounds around the statue which includes a public rosary (with a gigantic rosary made by an elderly gent from Port Isabel), catered food for everyone (invited or not), fireworks, and of course the ever-present “matachines.” (Do you think the bishops before Vatican 2 had matachines dancers at their Catholic events?)

No, I don’t think so.

LaGallina also apprised me of Francis’ elevation of a Father Mario Alberto Aviles to be auxiliary Bishop of Brownsville.  This is noteworthy for the fact that Fr. Aviles comes from the Oratory of St. Philip Neri, which operates one of the few “canonically regular” TLM in the Rio Grande Valley area (the only other one of which I am aware is at the Brownsville cathedral, if that one is still going.  Perhaps LaGallina can confirm).

Bishop Daniel Flores of Brownsville is reputed to be pretty solidly orthodox and relatively friendly to the TLM.  Coming from a branch of the Oratorians based mostly in northern Mexico which is widely known for its liturgical and doctrinal orthodoxy (though it is quite small), it may be hoped that Bishop-elect Aviles may increase this disposition even more. I know several readers who have assisted at the St. Jude Thaddeus parish in Pfarr administered by the Oratorians, and they all speak highly of the beautiful TLM and solid catechesis offered there.

However, it should be noted that Bishop-elect Aviles hasn’t been pastor of St. Jude Thaddeus for 15  years, so I cannot really speak to his personal qualities or adherence to tradition.  I am told he seems down to earth and pretty solid overall.

Now, El Cristo de los Pescadores.  Very nice:

Statues like this, and even entire parishes, have long been dedicated to Catholic mariners in major ports around the world. For my money, one of the most beautiful parishes in the world, Our Lady of Bon Succours in Montreal, has a heavy nautical emphasis and a close association with the maritime trades.  Why, several of the Apostles including St. Peter were, of course, pescadores, themselves.

It’s another aspect of the still heartbreakingly deteriorating Catholic culture that deserves widespread revival.  Good on the family for dedicating a lovely statue like this to the shrimpers and other seafarers of the south Texas coast.

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:

Good Sermon on Sobriety and Drunkeness December 5, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, Domestic Church, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Latin Mass, Liturgical Year, Novenas, priests, Restoration, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
1 comment so far

A nice sermon from Padre Romo, who I guess I can identify since his website does the same.  As someone who has struggled with addiction to drink and drug, I always find the Catholic approach to the consumption of liquor and other intoxicating substances so wonderfully balanced and reasonable.  While I, due to my past excesses and the tendency, over many years, I developed to consume intoxicants to a sinful extent, can no longer partake of any drink or mind-altering drug, I appreciate the fact that the Church does not take the position of some protestants or the non-Christian Mormons, who excoriate all use of drink as sinful.  That is not the case.  How could it be, when our very Lord Himself confected wine out of water, when He uses wine as a means of transmitting His very being, Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity, in the Blessed Sacrament?

The issue, of course, is moderation.  Like all goods, they can be abused if consumed immoderately.  This may be basic for some, but I find in this sermon many helpful reminders, and a particularly timely one during this penitential season of Advent.  Speaking of, have you charted out a plan of penance for Advent?  Lenten penances get so much focus, but Advent as a penitential season is almost universally forgotten. I was particularly heartened and edified by the sermon a priest at out local parish gave this First Sunday of Advent on that very topic -what were we going to do for penance in this penitential season?  I’m particularly glad this year that my vacation schedule will start right before Christmas and then go through the 7th, meaning I am off work the entire 12 days of Christmas.  Thus, I hope to use Advent as the time of preparation for the joyous time to come, just as we should use this life as our time of preparation for our real life, or eternal life, which we pray will be in Heaven.

I also lacked the time yesterday to put up a post for the Novena of Our Lady of Guadalupe.  That Novena should have started Sunday or yesterday.  At any rate, just in case, here it is:

Our Lady of Guadalupe, according to THY message in Mexico I venerate THEE as the Virgin Mother of the true God for whom we live, the Creator of all the world, Maker of heaven and earth. In spirit I kneel before thy most holy image which thou didst miraculously imprint upon the cloak of the Indian Juan Diego, and with the faith of the countless numbers of pilgrims who visit thy shrine, I beg thy for this favor:

[Mention your request].

Remember, O Immaculate Virgin, the words thou hast spoken to thy devout client: “I am a merciful mother to thee and to all thy people who love me and trust in me and invoke my help. I listen to their lamentations and solace all their sorrows and sufferings.” I beg thee to be a merciful mother to me, because I sincerely love thee and trust in thee and invoke thy help. I entreat thee, our Lady of Guadalupe, to grant my request, if this should be the will of God, in order that I may bear witness to thy love, thy compassion, thy help and protection. Do not forsake me in my needs.

Recite “Our Lady of Guadalupe, pray for us” and Hail Mary three times.

Sermon on The Evil of Religious Liberty November 30, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, cultural marxism, Ecumenism, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, priests, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
comments closed

Reader MFG sent the following link, and a very helpful summary, on the following sermon regarding the grave error of so-called religious liberty.  The sermon generally follows the logic of Christopher Ferrara’s Liberty: The God That Failed.  It is especially harsh on the founding and ordering of the US government, wherein endarkenment deists established a government built upon Lockean principles, with the state stepping into the place of God as the supreme arbiter and ultimate object of allegiance.

But I thought MFGs summary was as concise and as good (or better) than anything I can write, so here it is, along with the sermon.  I add a few thoughts onto his.:

Wow – this is a quick but incisive sermon on religious liberty’s dangers. It’s from a slightly different angle than what’s covered in the past. We could unpackage it for weeks…Here are a few takeways.

  • Founding Fathers thought they needed to set limits on Christ’s reign [Informed by endarkenment philosophy, especially that of Locke and Hobbes, that was indeed the case]
  • They undid time and founded a government that was pre-Christian in its governing philosophy. [a return to paganism, undoing 1700 years of Christian civilization]
  • They founded a government which relied on man’s own reasoning unaided by revelation or sanctifying grace (i.e. based on darkness/blindness).
  • It was worse than the governments of the pre-Christian Jews who at least had revelation to guide [And had the excuse of ignorance]
  • The US Govt is like the Roman Pantheon – people can have their own gods as long as these gods are not exclusive or hostile to government (religious freedom) [But what matters most to the US gov’t, or where its cultural loyalties lie, can change radically over time. For the first 150 years, the US gov’t was more or less a mainline protestant gov’t, because that was the dominant culture.  But the seeds of that culture’s destruction were sewn in the US founding, so that 60 years or so ago sexular leftism became culturally dominant, and now the US gov’t serves to advance THAT culture, which is intrinsically hostile to Christianity.  Of course, it took decades of unprecedented, dedicated mass infiltration and undermining of existing cultural bulwarks to achieve that switch, but here we are, and I do not think there is any going back, not with this present form of gov’t.]
  • By keeping all religions equal, there needs to be a referee to manage or balance these religions – hence the government steps in.
  • To permit the govt. to be a referee, the people elevated government above religion
  • State becomes the supreme god. [yep]

My thoughts [MFG’s thoughts]: This accurately and deeply describes our situation – governing in blindness. It also explains why liberalism and to some extent conservativism (or GOP Republicanism) becomes its own orthodoxy and religion. When someone opposes a political policy that contradicts church’s teaching (unjust/unlimited wars for example), the person is treated like a heretic or apostate (whether on the left or right).

Shreds post-conciliar notions of ecumenism, don’t it?

I really liked MFG’s summary and hope it turns into a basis for discussion. As he noted, this is a very complex subject and could take many hours of argument to fully analyze, but even as it stands, I think the sermon very much worth listening to (it’s only about 15 minutes) and considering.  Another great upload from Sensus Fidelium.  At core, it reveals we get the society we make.  If we turn away from God and try to create a secular humanist paradise, human “paradise” (as in not) is what we will get.

Whether one agrees or disagrees with the notion that the US as founded was disordered at best and a diabolical inversion of right government at worst, the key point to take away, I think, is that any government, any human society, not oriented with Jesus Christ as its visible Head and King is doomed to failure.  All human creations fail.  Only the Church, wounded though she presently is (and has been at a few times in the past), has survived, because the Church is not a human construct.  It has a human element, prone to failure and corruption, but it will always retain its supernatural, perfect, indestructible element.

If we wish to create human societies that will endure, we shall have to do the same. But it’s been often said, our fallen natures make us prey to self-destruction.

 

 

 

 

Beautiful Exegesis on St. Joseph as Patron of Family and Educators November 29, 2017

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

As to educators, that most certainly includes homeschooling parents.

From a long book called A Manual of Practical Devotion to St. Joseph by Fr. Patrignani, SJ (don’t worry, the book was published in 1865, a century forty years before the Jesuits lost their minds), some excerpts from pp. 48-51 on the benefits of cultivating a strong devotion to St. Joseph.  I know I have extolled the virtues of such devotion on many occasions, but it never  hurts to hear a reminder.  From personal experience, I can attest to the incredible efficacy of St. Joseph’s intercession in numerous matters, but especially those related closely to the family and raising of children.  I pray you find this little meditation useful!  It also contains discussion on turning to Saint Joseph as both a model and intercessor for a successful Catholic marriage.  Would that more couples had made recourse to such devotion over the past 60 years or so, the Church (and world) would not be in the terrible shape it is in, where the Catholic (or “Catholic”) divorce rate exceeds that of the general population!

At any rate, begin excerpt:

The world may be compared to a vast ocean, agitated by a tempest, and the most dangerous rock within its bosom is the marriage state, for scarcely a day passes on which we do not therein witness some new wreck; whence it follows, that those who are exposed to such a danger, would require a good pilot to conduct them safely into port; and where meet a more experienced one than our glorious Saint, who, in accordance with the designs of God, embraced that state, and is a model for those who desire to render it conducive both to their temporal and their eternal welfare?  Scripture informs us that the patriarch Joseph brought down the benediction of Heaven not only on Potiphar’s household, but also on Pharaoh’s court and the entire kingdom.  This prosperity continued as long as the king followed the advice of Joseph, his prime minister; but when, on the accession of a new sovereign, Joseph was dismissed from office, how changed was the scene!  “A new king over Egypt, that knew not Joseph” (Ex i).

Does not this metaphor clearly indicate to all Christian families, that God will give a special blessing to those who duly honor the second Joseph, who is as superior to the former, as the substance is to the shadow?  You then, heads of families, if you wish your children to be well brought up, if you wish to ensure peace in your married state, fidelity in your servants, patience in tribulations, in a word, if you desire that your household should be well regulated, and live in peace and tranquility, place it under the protection of him whom God has constituted head of the Holy Family.  Let Joseph be your counselor, your steward, your example; God Himself has appointed him such for those who are engaged in the married state……

……Those who are charged with the instruction and education of children, are particularly called upon to choose St. Joseph as their guide and patron in an employment so useful to religion; since having been the master and guardian of the Most High, he has received from Him peculiar graces and favors for the protection of youth.  The young Tobias had an angel as his guardian,but Jesus would have no other guardian than St. Joseph [no other earthly guardian recorded in Scripture, aside from being ministered to by angels during His agony. Beyond that, there is a great deal of speculation regarding the degree to which Heaven aided Christ at various points in His ministry, and whether, or to what degree, He enjoyed special/supernatural protections or aid].  Hence, the brothers of the Christian schools, and many other societies, have placed their schools, especially those for young children, under the special protection of St. Joseph. The interpreters of Scripture and ecclesiastical writers, have given him various names, as those of father, foster-father, guardian, guide of Jesus Christ.  All these functions which he fulfilled towards an Infant-God, he still continues to exercise in favor of those colleges and seminaries which are entrusted to his paternal vigilance. Superiors and masters may learn of him the charity, prudence, vigilance, and the other virtues, requisite for governing well. On their side, likewise, the pupils may receive from the Child Jesus the most perfect examples of docility, respect, and love, towards their masters and superiors.

———–End Quote————

I can only repeat the great personal benefits I have received through devotion to St. Joseph, in both the material and spiritual sense.  I cannot stress enough what great benefits derive from St. Joseph’s intercession, and what an ideal model he makes for fatherhood and as a husband.  If you want to implement Ephesians v:25 appropriately, there is no greater model than St. Joseph.  He loved Our Lady as perfectly as a man can, through His love for his Son, Jesus Christ.

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.

Lack of Belief in Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus at Root of Crisis in Church November 14, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, Christendom, Ecumenism, fightback, General Catholic, Latin Mass, manhood, Restoration, Spiritual Warfare, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
comments closed

You either believe visible communion/right membership in the Church is vital, even required, for salvation, or you don’t.  20th century quasi-modernist formulations aside, both the vast majority of theologians/bishops/fathers/doctors and the vast majority of the laity over numerous centuries took the doctrinal declaration of “no salvation outside the Church” quite literally.  This was the understanding that fired the superhuman efforts at evangelization (even, my oh my, proselytization) the Church undertook for many long centuries, converting most of the world, at least in part.  This was the understanding that led to thousands upon thousands of martyrdoms, where Catholics refused to burn a pinch of incense to Caesar or partake in an English protestant worship service with its barren table altar and iconoclastic environment (rather like most parishes built since 1950).

Extra ecclesiam nulla salus, or rejection thereof, is one of those doctrines at the very core of the crisis in the Church.  In many respects the so-called Feeneyites were right, they were simply both a bit extreme, and a bit late, perhaps.  Had they come to the fore in 1890 instead of 1945, they might have elicited much more of a  yawn than the ecclesiastical hammer blows a hierarchy (especially an American hierarchy) seeking an accommodation with protestantism at any cost delivered.

A priest of the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest delivers a solid sermon on this vital matter below.  He is quite correct in noting the foundational role rejection of EENS has played in the past 60 odd years of Church auto-demolition:

The sermon might be more review for many readers of this nutty blog, but if you’re anything like me, it’s good to hear reminders of stuff you “already” know from time to time.  Otherwise, I tend to lose them.

AND, I think this is a topic that can’t get enough coverage.  Even among traditional Catholic priest, Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus seems to be viewed as a bit of a minefield.  Some Fraternity priests give real clear catechesis on this subject, but others wouldn’t touch it with a cane pole.  So I think it merits coverage on that point, as well.

 

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.

 

Blessed Clemens von Galen on the Right Ordering and Purpose Catholic Education October 19, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, Domestic Church, episcopate, family, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, manhood, sanctity, Society, Spiritual Warfare, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
comments closed

Clemens von Galen was beatified as a confessor, for the witness of the Faith, and defense of his flock, he gave during the rise and fall of the evil Nazi regime.

The Nazis, as the Left has been doing in this country for a few decades, attempted to kill the Faith by a thousand cuts. Contra the communists, they simply didn’t outlaw the Church on day one and declare all faithful, and especially clergy, enemies of the state.  They operated more by craft, deception, and moderate, but constant application of many means just short of force (though having recourse to force more and more as their ends became more and more obvious – the destruction of the Church – and more and more individuals rose up to oppose them.

As we all know, Vatican Council II did not burst on the Church from a vacuum.  The rot, pointed out by Pope St. Pius X already 30 years before von Galen, was already quite deep.  As such, there were huge debates in the German hierarchy as to how to respond to the Nazi regime.  The slight majority of bishops favored general public science and acquiescence, seeking to influence the regime by endless private dialogue behind the scenes, while a large minority, led in part by von Galen, favored a much more public, confrontational approach.  Because all the bishops, including for a time von Galen, were convinced they could only have effect if they spoke in total unanimity, all the bishops were kept more or less silent for a time by the ineffectual dialogue faction.  Eventually as the persecution became more and more severe, von Galen and others broke with the demand for unanimity and began operating more and more on their own.

Nowhere was the persecution of the Church more apparent than in the area of education.  Like everything else Church-related in crazy Germany, the Catholic schools were state funded.  Well, that gave the Nazis a perfect opening to do just what they pleased with them.  Then they simply started closing all the parochial schools and forcing kids into government Hitler Youth indoctrination camps (remember, the modern public school system and structure is a largely German, and progressive, invention).

This gave rise to von Galen writing an extensive pastoral letter to his flock on the right nature of Catholic education, to try to give them arms with which to protect their children.  It’s really quite good – so good, I can imagine virtually no American prelate uttering words of even close to the same effect.  Maybe Burke, but even that’s dubious in part.

The point of this post is: compare von Galen’s description of a proper Catholic school and education, and compare to the Catholic schools you know.  See how they line up.

Excerpted from various parts of pp. 148-157 of The Lion of Münster:

A Catholic confessional school, according to von Galen, is a school in which Catholic children are taught by believing Catholic teachers, in accordance with the principles of the Catholic Church. [Already we see a massive variance with today’s “Catholic” schools – many children aren’t Catholic, the teachers often are not Catholic and many reject vast swaths of the Faith even if they are, and they are more and more rarely taught according to Catholic Truth.]  Religion influences every aspect of education……….

He urged parents not to be fooled by the different names that might be used in the propaganda for the new state schools, whether it be “the community school,” “the German school,” or “the German confessional school.” Demand instead: the Catholic confessional school.  Then he gave clear, simple, straightforward answers to the standard arguments in favor of the new community schools.  Perhaps, he said, parents would be told that in Catholic areas, everything would remain the same in the new schools. “That is not true,” was the response. “If all were to remain the same, then why all the pressure and advertising for a new school? Will all remain the same if teachers can be assigned to your schools who are not Catholic, or who have left the Catholic Church, or who deny the articles of her faith?“……….

To the claim that the new schools would still have religious instruction, the bishop replied that a brief class on religion each day does not constitute a Catholic education, if for the rest of the day, the educational philosophy was based on a non-Christian spirit and if there were no more prayer and celebration of feast days.  He reminded parents that already, teachers who no longer believed in the Catholic Faith were teaching in Catholic schools……….[Wow. It’s almost as if he’s describing the vast majority of Catholic schools today.  Or, put another way, the Catholic school of today is closer to the Nazi model than the Catholic one?  How many children go through 12 years of Catholic schooling and emerge knowing basically nothing of the Faith, except the same sneering derision for many of its moral precepts they learned from their teachers?]

[But it’s not all on bad Catholic schools……]……No school could make up for parents’ neglect in their children’s religious education.  They should be sure to keep good religious writings in the home and to watch carefully the teaching their children received in the school.

Consecrate your family by means of your parental office so that it will be an acceptable offering to God! Be conscientious about the divine service of communal prayer in your houses!  The father as the head of the family should be its delegate and its representative before God.  Plant the spirit of the fear of the Lord and reverence for the Saints in the hearts of your children! The cross should have the place of honor in a Christian home!……..[Awesome advice]

……….Guard your authority! Give your children healthy spiritual nourishment and genuine joy!  Do not tolerate any poisoning of their loyalty to the Church or disparaging of the Faith by slanders [from those given authority over them as teachers.  Better yet, don’t give unworthy people that authority!]

………God had given [parents] a sacred responsibility, he told fathers and mothers, a responsibility for which they were consecrated by the Sacrament of Matrimony.  The great importance of this Sacrament was becoming even more clear in their own days.  Neither the Church nor the state could absolve them of their duty as educators of their children, nor could the schools take responsibility from them.  He urged them to recall the words of St. Peter: “He who has an office, let him fulfill it in the strength hat God supplies” (I Pet iv:11)……..

[In fact]…….Better NO religion classes in the schools than religion classes that destroy rather than build up, that poison rather than heal!  Keep watch, Christian parents, and observe carefully whether your children are learning the true faith in the school, and are being directed in the truly Christian way of life! [I think after decades of experience, a few worthy exceptions aside, that we can conclude that virtually all Catholic schools are to be assiduously avoided, for they destroy rather than build up, and poison rather than heal.]

————-End Quotes————

Well, as I said, simply compare and contrast what passes for Catholic education these days in virtually all diocesan or religious-run schools, with what Blessed Clemens von Galen describes as both good and bad in proper formation of children.  No wonder, as Venerable Fulton Sheen and many others have said, the absolute last place you want to send your child for Catholic education is a Catholic school (or college/university, for that matter).  Yes, there are a handful of exceptions, but even those exceptions carry with them certain dangers.

Father Rodriguez on Fatima and the Filial Correction of Francis October 10, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, different religion, Father Rodriguez, fightback, Francis, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Interior Life, Our Lady, sanctity, Spiritual Warfare, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
comments closed

This is a must-listen to contribution from Father Rodriguez.  Thanks to JMJHF Productions for uploading this to Youtube, and so quickly.

I am pressed for time, so the description comes from Youtube:

This is a talk given by Fr. Michael Rodríguez on October 6, 2017, in observance of the Feast of Our Lady of the Rosary (Oct. 7th) and the 100th Anniversary of the Miracle of the Sun (Oct. 13th). The talk covers three main themes: A Terrible Crisis in the Papacy, the Letter of Filial Correction, and the 100th Anniversary of the Fatima Apparitions.

Fr. Rodríguez makes an urgent plea to all of the world’s Catholics, especially those who are not familiar with the Traditional Latin Mass, but do have a sincere desire to be good and faithful Catholics. Fr. Rodríguez explains three great signs which God is giving us, thereby calling us to convert back to Him and to the true Catholic religion of 2000 years. These three signs from Heaven are: (1) the frightening crisis in the Papacy, (2) the historic “Letter of Filial Correction” and (3) the 100th Anniversary of the Miracle of the Sun.

[Tantumblogo adds a bit more – Father also, and very critically, establishes the bases upon which Catholic Truth is established (Tradition and Scripture), and their unalterable nature.  This is absolutely key, for it reveals the core element of the crisis afflicting the papacy.  I think it is also quite important to meditate on the quite likely supernatural correlation of events and dates – Francis, elected in 2013, the Fatima Apparitions, occurring on the 13th of each month, 2017 being the 100th anniversary of those anniversaries, dubia against Amoris Laetitia coming in 2017, along with a Filial Correction and, quite possibly, a fraternal correction from Cardinals.  There is likely much more to come.  Our Lord does not always work by exact dates, but 100th anniversaries of Marian apparitions have figured large in prior history, such as the failure of Louis XIV to consecrate France to the Sacred Heart in 1689, with the French Revolution breaking out exactly a century later. We must adhere to this Faith of the ages and reject the modernized, protestantized “new Catholicism” of the past 50 years.]

Fr. Rodríguez is one of the signatories of the Letter of Filial Correction of Pope Francis. Fr. Rodríguez explains both the Letter of Filial Correction, and how faithful Catholics must respond to the present, nearly unprecedented, crisis in the Papacy. He concludes with a brief teaching on the Message of Our Lady of Fatima. This is a must see video for all Catholics who desire to be faithful to God and the Church in the midst of a terrible crisis in the papacy.

SIGN THE PETITION: Here is a petition which all can sign in support of the filial correction, linked here: https://www.change.org/p/petition-sup…

The 3 websites mentioned by Fr. Rodriguez:
correctiofilialis.org
fatima.org

[I can’t do justice to a condensation in the time I have, this video is close to an hour long but is extremely important – if you watch/listen to one video this week, let it be this one! God bless you and may this post and Father Rodriguez’ efforts all be Ad Maiorum Dei Gloriam. Please keep Father, Francis, and the entire hierarchy always in your prayers, and implore God to have mercy on our Holy Mother Church!]

I should have also added, that Father Rodriguez makes note that one of the specific matters of error emanating from this papacy is a statement from the increasingly notorious Cardinal Farrell that the awarding of manifest grave sinners with a prize for their sin (see, guys, we can turn this argument you love to use on its head) in the Eucharist for divorced and civilly remarried Catholics constitutes: “a process of discernment and conscience.” Uh huh.