jump to navigation

Did St. Josephat die in vain? November 20, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, Christendom, Ecumenism, episcopate, General Catholic, Holy suffering, martyrdom, Revolution, sanctity, scandals, secularism, Society, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
comments closed

Via reader Skeinster, a really good post from Shameless Popery on St. Josephat and what it means to be Catholic and have Faith.  More to the point, with all the ecumania and doctrinal indifference, did St. Josephat and other martyrs to the Faith die in vain?

392 years ago today, Saint Josaphat, an Eastern Catholic bishop in Ukraine, was dragged out of his rectory and murdered by the Eastern Orthodox townspeople that he was trying to lead back into union with the Roman Catholic Church. The Church does not hesitate, in her prayers, to say that he poured out his blood like Christ. He died for the principle that it matterswhether we Christians are Catholics. My question for you today is did he die in vain?

After all, I frequently hear that it doesn’t matter whether or not someone is Catholic, as long as they’re Christian. They’ve got better music down the block, or you like the preaching better. Catholicism becomes just one denomination, just one option. Or perhaps we’ll go further and say that the Church itself doesn’t matter: all that matters is having a “personal relationship with Jesus Christ.” That personal relationship is obviously vital, but Cardinal Dolan has pointed out the folly of trying to have the Good Shepherd without the flock, trying to have the King of Kings without His Kingdom, trying to have the Head without the Body of Christ. So to answer my initial question, I ask you to consider four more questions:

The first question: Did Jesus intend to inaugurate the Kingdom of God on earth?Yes.

The very first words out of Jesus’ mouth in St. Mark’s Gospel are “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel” (Mk. 1:15). And we hear that again in today’s Gospel, when Jesus says that, although it has not yet arrived fully, the Kingdom of God is among us.

The second question: Did Jesus establish this Kingdom in His Church? Yes.

In the famous passage of Matthew 16:18-19, Jesus says to Peter, “you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” Note, He doesn’t say He’s giving the keys to the Kingdom to everyone, to all believers. Instead, Christ explicitly gives the keys to the Kingdom to St. Peter, the head of the Church, using the singular “you.”……

……….So where do we stand? Do we think the Church is dispensable? That it no longer has the protection of the Holy Spirit, or no longer has the fullness of truth? That Christ’s Church no longer has an earthly head? In short, do we think that St. Josaphat died in vain?

There’s two more questions and answers at the link. You know how I feel.  I think lack of charity and faith in the Church has placed tens if not hundreds of millions in grave jeopardy of hellfire.

Moral cowardice carries a very steep price.

Pretending Dignitatis Humanae can be interpreted according to Tradition is itself contrary to Tradition November 19, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, disaster, Ecumenism, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, pr stunts, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

What can I say?  More thought-provoking material from Phoenix from the Ashes by HJA Sire.  I think the material largely speaks for itself, but I do add emphasis and comments.

Below, Sire discusses one of the most problematic documents of Vatican II, the Declaration on Religious Liberty, Dignitatis Humanae.

Traditionalists [He appears to use the term pretty broadly, many self-described traditionalists would probably take umbrage with what he says here] who want to uphold the authority of the Council have argued that the declaration Dignitatis Humanae is acceptable if interpreted, as it must be, in the context of Catholic Tradition, and indeed the saving statements made at the beginning of the document give a basis for such an approach. [Saving statements meaning an introductory text and statement by Paul VI that claim DH does not intend to change Church Doctrine, right before the main body of the text appears to do just that] Nevertheless, that is not the way the Church has traditionally taken with suspect doctrines.  Its affinity is with the special pleading by which Newman, in his Tractarian days, [i.e., when Blessed John Henry Newman was still an Anglican]  sought to argue that the Thirty Nine Articles can be interpreted as part of Catholic tradition, ignoring the fact that they are the founding document of a heretical protestant sect.  The Catholic Church has always dismissed such evasions, exemplified by the attempts made by Hussites and Jansenists to disown the heretical doctrines attributed to them.  Against such hair-splitting, the Church’s view has been that the doctrine of a text is what it appears to be and what it is in practice, in the sense of the use made of it by its followers.  By that criterion, the teaching of Dignitatis Humanae is the one conveyed by the main part of the document, not that of the introductory statement or Paul VI’s covering statement.  The bulk of Catholics worldwide understand its teaching as declaring an absolute right of religious liberty and would be shocked to hear that the document begins with a statement that no such right exists. [The bulk of “Catholics” worldwide have never even heard of it, though they are probably just peachy with the very liberal interpretation and implementation its received] That is the humanistic reading that the declaration has, in fact, propagated; the philosophy it conveys, putting man before God, has been the prime agent in the corrupted Catholicism brought in by Vatican II, devastating the spiritual life of the Church and destroying its intellectual coherence. 

…..In fact, when the Declaration on Religious Liberty was discussed in the Council, the American bishops were to be found arguing for it on undisguisedly humanistic grounds, ad they were backed in Europe by out and out modernists such as Kung and Bishop de Smedt of Bruges.  In its eagerness to make a generous gesture to the world, the Council felt obliged to embrace this philosophy, since no less than a whole-hearted declaration would do justice to the ideals of openness and ecumenism; and by that ill-conceived intention it was led to adopt a teaching that destroys the basis of coherent religion.  

————–End Quote—————

What follows the excerpt above is perhaps the best exegesis I’ve read on the difference between the illusory modern notion of human rights, and the Catholic concept of human dignity.  That runs about 1800 words and I really haven’t time today to type all that in. Plus, I’m afraid Sire is going to fly over and break my fingers so I stop ripping off his copyright. So, perhaps tomorrow. If I don’t find something even better to share in the interim.

I’m also holding off on excerpting more of the book, because I’d like to switch gears now and provide a practical application of how Dignitatis Humanae (or its application) has radically disfigured a right understanding and practice of the Faith, perhaps especially among the hierarchy.  In the Nov. 13 2015 edition of Texas Catholic, the newspaper of the Diocese of Dallas, there is an article on the a the recent “Eugene McDermott Lecture” sponsored by the University of Dallas.  This lecture glorified the 50th anniversary of another highly controversial Vatican II document, Nostra Aetate, which revolutionized the Church’s formal approach towards the Jewish religion.  Dallas Bishop Kevin Farrell must have been in fine fettle, he had his older brother Brian flown in to also speak at the event.

Some excerpts from the article below:

Bishop Brian Farrell, head of the Vatican’s Pontifical Council for Christian Unity……..spoke to the crowd and praised the results Nostra Aetate has produced:

[Watch how he denigrates the Truth, and 2000 years of Catholic belief and practice…..]“It introduced a fundamental change of attitude of attitude from negative stereotypes and prejudices to a positive respect for and close collaboration between Catholics and Jews for the good of the entire human family…” [“I am the way, and the truth, and the life.  No one can come to the Father except through me.”  “If you do not eat my flesh and drink my blood, you do not have life within you.”  “He that believeth in the Son, hath life everlasting; but he that believeth not the Son, shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.”  You ecumaniacs are content to leave Jews in their obsolete, supernaturally useless religion, all so you can have warm feelings from a few worldly accolades. Disgraceful.  Where is your charity?  Probably the same place you sent your faith] 

Bishop Farrell and Rabbi Rosen  said that for the most of its history, Christianity had viewed the Jewish people as being rejected and condemned by God as a result of Christ’s crucifixion. [That’s a pretty neat trick?  Who rejected Whom?  And who crucified Whom?  Do the biblical statements above mean anything?  If they don’t why bother being Catholic?]  Rabbi Rosen said the normative thought was this: because the Jews did not recognize Jesus Christ [Umm, they did a bit more than that] they were punished and left wandering without a homeland as a “continual testimony of what happens to you when you reject the Christian dispensation and to be an eternal warning until the end of time.” [Once again, what does Scripture say?  Did our Blessed Lord not say that the Jews would be punished, their city and temple crushed, their sacrificial religion destroyed, in his prophecy recorded in the Synoptic Gospels? (Lk xix:44)]

As a result, Christians had come to see themselves as having replaced the Jews as God’s Chosen People. [“You are a chosen people, a royal priesthood” (I Pet ii:9). Also Gal ii:14-16 – “by the works of the {old} law no one will be justified”]

Nostra Aetate, he said, turned that completely around. [So much the worse for Nostra Aetate, then]

…..Today, Bishop Farrell said, the church [sic] insists on understanding and embracing the Jewish roots of the Christian faith.  Catholics cannot understand Jesus without his [sic] Jewish background. [That doesn’t mean the Jews have a valid covenant, or that conversion is not imperative for them]

“Jesus was a Jew,” he said.  “Mary was a Jew.  The first disciples were Jewish.  All were immersed in the Jewish traditions of their time.”  [That’s right……They were Jews.  Then they became Christians.  And were saved on that basis. Notice the constant use of sleight of hand by these guys]

……Rabbi Rosen said he advocates that Nostra Aetate be part of seminary formation around the world [Of course!  It’s the greatest boon to the Jewish faith since Theodore Herzl.  But that’s not the same as being best for their souls, but who cares about that anymore, since we pretend everyone goes to Heaven anyway, right?!?]  Bishop Brian Farrell reiterated the document’s firm rejection of any discrimination and anti-Semitism as part of any catechesis done in the Catholic Church. [Note that both these men consider even telling Jews their covenant is obsolete/invalid and that they must convert to be saved to be “anti-semitism.”] 

Different religion.  And I don’t particularly care for it.  Not because I’m attached to some Jew-hatred.  It’s because I like to think I care just a bit about the eternal destination of souls, and this “let’s all pretend nothing matters and we’re all saved and let’s just all have a great big huggy warm feeling good time” leaves souls in an incredibly precarious position by every indication from Scripture and Tradition.  Notwithstanding what Vatican II has to say on the subject, it is contradicted by literally hundreds if not thousands of declarations from Scripture and Tradition and I am inclined to give those much more credence than the late Council.


If that makes me a heretic, so be it.

Rampant heresy in the Church directly attributable to the Second Vatican Council November 18, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, different religion, disaster, Ecumenism, episcopate, General Catholic, horror, Papa, scandals, secularism, Society, the struggle for the Church, Tradition.
comments closed

I have been wanting to excerpt portions from Phoenix from the Ashes for some time. The problem I’ve had is that the material is so dense and involved (in a good way) that a lot of excerpts, to make sense, would run 2000 words or more. And I know posts that long tend not to get read very much.

But, I found a few brief bits that convey a whole lot in a blog-friendly length.  Author HJA Sire really explodes the notion of female fauxrdination, and in so doing exposes the heresy that is inherent in the post-conciliar ethos.  The Council opened the Church, doctrinally, to numerous modernist notions, including feminist ones.  That relatively narrow conciliar opening has metastasized into numerous areas, one of the most malicious being the notion that women could be ordained to the priesthood.  Even worse, however, has been the corruption of the entire idea of the priesthood.  Ultimately, the Council bears great responsibility for this and many other widely prevalent errors:

Next to the denial of defined dogmas, there is no clearer case of heresy than the advocacy of female ordination: it rejects not only the tradition of the Church from its origins, but divine institution itself; it ignores the condemnations that have declared female ordination heretical, and implies a blasphemous view of Christ’s wisdom and justice in instituting the priesthood in the male sex.  No heresy more comprehensively discards every principle by which Christian doctrine is decided.  The orthodox teaching has been repeated most recently by John Paul II’s Apostolic Letter Ordinatio sacerdotalis of 1994, in which he wrote: “We declare that the Church has no authority whatever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful.”  As one would expect in the modern Church, the ruling has been entirely disregarded.  In June 1997 the Catholic Theological Society of America voted by a majority of 216 to 22 that the pope should reconsider the question of women’s ordination.  This evidence that nine out of ten official theologians in the United States are heretics comes as no surprise; nor does one imagine that their unorthodoxy is confined to that sole point. In 2011  likewise some 200 Austrian clergy signed a manifesto demanding female ordination.  In the general run of seminaries, professors reject the orthodox teaching privately and often publicly, and the priests they train treat it as simply another conservative relic that is due for change.  We see here exemplified the contempt in the present-day Church for Scripture, Tradition, and authority, and we see, too, the harvest of submission to modern ideology that the Church sowed in the Second Vatican Council and is now reaping.  [I should add, prior to this paragraph, Sire had spent several pages explaining exactly HOW Vatican II, through the documents produced and approved, provide such a huge opening to error/heresy.  It is a very thorough discussion but one too long to blog effectively]


To put the preaching function of the priest before the sacramental [i.e., the sacrificial nature of the Mass] is a monstrosity in antithesis to religious realities. Yet simply to condemn that error in itself would be to miss its true significance; the intention of the Council in teaching this was to move the Church towards a protestant concept of the ministry, a doctrine that rejects the sacramental office of the priest and substitutes a ministry of the word.  That lead has been used by the modernists to promote an evangelical doctrine (in the sectarian sense of the word) that empties the priesthood of theological meaning. [by turning the priest into an educator, an administrator, a “presider,” and even a first among equals, sacramentally] 

Thus the constitution De Presbyterorum Ministerio et Vita [The Vatican II document on the priesthood] stands as one of the main contradictions to the notion that the documents of the Second Vatican Council, as its apologists like to argue, are of a faultlessly orthodox nature.  Its teaching is not traditional and was not intended to be traditional. With an ill-conceived aim of ecumenism, the Council allowed itself to be imposed on by those whose program was to diminish the Catholic theology of the priesthood.  The intentions of that party have been developed in practice, producing priests whose view of their office is in complete rejection of Catholic Doctrine.  When the Church comes to judge the Second Vatican Council in the light of true tradition, the constitution on the priesthood will be one of the documents that most call for disavowal and condemnation.  

———End Quote———

HJA Sire has now, 3/4 of the way through the book, shown glaring problems in several of the documents of Vatican II. As he notes, it is possible – though unbearably boring – to read large sections of Vatican II and find no problems at all.  But that’s like saying a serial killer is really just a nice, quiet guy, except for those 3 hours a month when he butchers someone.  It is meaningless. The problem in Vatican II is not with the orthodox majority, it is with the nebulous, problematic, and even erroneous majority.  Not perhaps erroneous by direct promotion of error, but by being so nebulous and so open to radical interpretation that it permitted – and almost demanded – radically modernist/heretical consequences to flow from the documents.

There is a tremendous amount of gold in Phoenix from the Ashes.  I am not done, yet, but it’s 97% awesomeness with occasional odd rants thrown in.  I guess we trads are not without our little foibles.

Consider the above possibly some useful information when confronted with individuals who insist that there is nothing wrong with the documents of Vatican II, but only their unorthodox interpretation.  Sire’s prime contention (similar to previous authors like Michael Davies, though Sire is much more forceful and to the point) is that the nebulous bits, and how to draw them out into formal error, radically changing the Church, were always intended by the modernists at Vatican II, and are inseparable from the documents as produced.  I am inclined to agree with him, for whatever that’s worth.  I think this is absolutely critical information to know, for the restoration of the Church must be based on a clear understanding of the ultimate source of the errors that have caused such devastation in the Church.

Dear Fr. Rosica, please tell us again how Allahu Akbar is not a cry of Jihad……UPDATED November 18, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, disaster, Ecumenism, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, Immigration, persecution, Revolution, scandals, sickness, Society, the enemy, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

…….when last night at a soccer match in Turkey Turkish fans made the cry during the moment of silence requested for the victims of Paris.  BTW, another terror attack was apparently foiled at the last minute this morning in St. Denis:

It is getting comical watching left wingers engage in more and more bizarre acts of denial, literally descending into near-dementia, to keep from having to recognize reality.

Islam is on the march.  They don’t care whether leftists can “deal” with that or not, they are coming for them – and for us – either way.

I think we can also dispense with the “radical fringe” error regarding islam, as well, unless someone wants to posit that this soccer match was somehow attended primarily by jihadists.  No. This is increasingly the mainstream of muslim thought.  The West is old, decadent, and weak.  Islam is young and vigorous.  Europe is practically handing their territory over to islam voluntarily.

The strong horse theory again.  Muslims either at your throat or feet.  Appear strong and morally certain, and you get the latter, appear weak and indecisive, and you get the latter.

What do you think this clown communicates to islam?


UPDATE: For those complaining over my lack of accuracy, a peak at my schedule for the day:


Gee, maybe you’re lucky to get anything. I never intentionally misrepresent events. If I get a wrong impression in a very quick scan of someone’s twitter account, consider it an occupational hazard of the kind of blogging I am frequently forced to do.  Or, I could just not put out anything.  Your choice.

Wait till you check out the ‘Year of Mercy’ chasuble for sale in Rome’s premier priest vestment shop November 17, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, Basics, different religion, disaster, Ecumenism, foolishness, General Catholic, priests, rank stupidity, scandals, secularism, self-serving, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

Sodomize much?


Via Bones, this is for sale in Mancinelli’s, one of the top, if not the top, source of priestly vestments and clothing for the Diocese of Rome.

The question is, is this just a one off in horrible taste, or is it the prototype for the Year of Mercy, at least in Rome?

Meanwhile, Fr. Thomas Rosica, English-language spokesman for the pontificate of Francis, claims that “allahu akbar” was never a call to violence, but is…….??????

“Allahu akbar” was never a call to violence & destruction.

This in spite of the fact that it has been quoted for centuries by islamists on jihad.  It was used by the Mahdi in the Sudan rebellion that Churchill covered as a war correspondent in the 1890s, it was used on the Northwest Frontier of India, it was used at Lepanto, and it is used daily in muslim atrocities from Paris to Mosul and beyond.  Please.

Modernists trade on ignorance.  They trade on people’s general ignorance of the topics on which they make their outrageous claims. Whether that topic be liturgy, or early Church history, or the historic barbarism of other religions, they always depend on ignorance to at least cause people to doubt whenever they make utterly fabulous claims like the above.  Ignorance is the fabric out of which modernists weave fables to support their noxious, destructive, and self-serving fables.

The modus operandi is this: start with a desired sociological/cultural goal (advancing leftism), search for means to advance that goal (weaken the priesthood, institute a New Mass much less edifying than the old, attack the accuracy of Scripture, etc), and then create evidence, often out of thin air or at best the most mendacious “scholarship,” and then run with it.  Be ever so bold, get groups of like-minded individuals to fervently support your claims, castigate those who doubt or reject them in the strongest terms as dolts, fundamentalists, integrists, etc. (all clearly described by St. Pius X in Pascendi), and get the friendly media to trumpet your absolute novelties as new, unimpeachable “knowledge.”

Fortunately, the internet, and a number of good books examining the falsehoods that have been peddled for 100 years, and especially in the past 50, in a critical light is having a significant impact.  The internet has largely ended the monopoly on information that existed prior in the progressive media, and the intellectual resources increasingly available arm faithful souls with more and more resources to point up the lack of real historical, evidentiary support for modernist claims.

Common sense also plays a vital role.  In this case, Fr. Rosica’s fantasies are contradicted by far too many current and historical examples to ignore.

Consider: Archbishop Parolin’s statement regarding islam on the Year of Mercy, and now Fr. Rosica’s patently false statement. We are being fed Pope Francis’ response to the Paris terror attacks, and that response could not be more clear: nothing will change, the cult of interreligious dialogue will continue unimpeded, the push towards a great, indifferent religious “reconciliation” grounded in a false conception of mercy will move forward.


Protestant lack of proper Liturgy has de-sacralized the entire culture November 17, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, Ecumenism, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Latin Mass, Liturgy, scandals, secularism, Society, SOD, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

Some edifying thoughts from Dom Prosper Gueranger below (from Vol. 1 of the Liturgical Year).  I’m also reading Phoenix From the Ashes as many readers will also know, but also A Sense of the Sacred on the medieval liturgy.  Both completely detonate all the modernist myths, drawn from faulty, faked, or tendentious “scholarship,” regarding the supposedly “impure” Liturgy of Trent and the modern “reform” movement that gave us the Novus Ordo.  The only way the modernist revolution was able to happen was widespread ignorance within the Church of long-past liturgical forms and doctrinal evolution.  They basically made it up as they went along, often creating extremely “weak” evidence to support their claims. I especially enjoyed the destruction of the ridiculous notion of the priest “presiding” at Mass, like a “first among equals” from an 18th century Congregationalist revival meeting.

Anyway, Dom Gueranger, writing ~150 years ago, notes how protestant impoverishment of the notion of liturgy has played a substantial role in the de-sacralization of the former Christendom:

But in nothing is the excellency of the Liturgy so apparent, as in its being mild for children, and solid food for the strong; thus resembling the miraculous bread of the desert, and taking every kind of taste according to the different disposition of those who eat.  It is, indeed, a divine property, which has not unfrequently been noticed even by those who are not of the true fold, and has forced them to acknowledge that the Catholic Church alone knows the secret of prayer.  

Nay, might it not be said that the reason that the protestants have no ascetic writers, is that they have no real liturgical prayer? [Name one.  Bonhoeffer?  Was he really ascetical, or polemical?  There is no equivalent of Teresa of Avila, John of the Cross, Alphonsus Liguori, or many others among the sects.] It is true that a sufficient explanation of the absolute want of transcendent spirituality, which characterizes all that the reformation has produced, is to be found in its denying the Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist, which is the center of all religion: but this is virtually the same as saying that protestants have no liturgical prayer, inasmuch as the Liturgy is so essentially and intimately connected with the Eucharist.  So true is this, that wheresoever the dogma of the Real Presence has ceased to be believed, there also have the canonical Hours ceased, and could not but cease.

———End Quote———

Wow.  Now think on that a bit.  Wheresoever the dogma of the Real Presence has ceased to be believed, there also have the canonical hours ceased.  Is this not the situation in the Church today, where most frequently by the deliberate mal-intent of the teachers, belief in the Real Presence has almost totally collapsed, and along with it, the prayer of the Divine Breviary.  You might say, aren’t the Liturgy of the Hours the same?  The answer I would give is no, absolutely no, as the Divine Breviary developed over centuries with the input of thousands of Saints known and unknown, while the Liturgy of the Hours was constructed in barely 30 months as a banal, manufactured product of committee, with heavy influence from modernist heretics.  So, in a very real sense, Gueranger is exactly right, and he is right as regards the Church.  Praying the Breviary has collapsed almost entirely along with disbelief in the Real Presence.

Which…..duh.  The “reformers” themselves, from Bugnini on down, made plain their intent to make the new Liturgy – which encompasses much more than the Mass – as inoffensive to protestants as possible. Those were the days of great ecumenical dreams of the immediate implementation of the indifferentist one world church.  Bugnini and company did all they could to bring that about, and went far more than halfway in brutalizing the Liturgy and destroying the faith of millions in the process of protestantizing the Mass and all the other sacramental rites.

Maybe the lede was a bit off target. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that official Catholic conniving in protestant rejection of the Liturgy has played the decisive role in the final desacralization of the culture?

Vatican response to Paris terror attacks – more sucking up to Muslims! November 17, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, different religion, disaster, Ecumenism, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Papa, scandals, secularism, Society, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

Rorate had this post yesterday.  The extremely left-wing Secretary of Vatican State, Pietro Parolin, issued a statement in response to the Paris terror attacks wherein he declared the proper response to unyielding, unremitting muslim atrocities was more of the same failed kumbayah policies that have worked so well over the past 40 years.  If muslims are either at one’s feet or at one’s neck, as Churchill maintained (and he had extensive experience in the matter, having fought in two wars against islam), and if muslims are heavily influenced by perceptions of overt strength (the strong horse theory), this kind of indifferentism run wild will likely only encourage further muslims acts of barbarity.

But there is great joy in Francis’ Vatican Mudville, the Year of Mercy is “open to muslims:”

The Secretary of the Vatican State, Pietro Parolin, has confirmed that the Jubilee (from December 8th 2015 to November 20th 2016) is on schedule, as the spokesman for the Holy See, Padre Lombardi had already said, and that, in fact, will be open also to Muslims. “In a world torn by violence, it is the right time to launch the campaign of mercy” said the Cardinal in an interview with the French Catholic  newspaper La Croix. “It is understandable that there are sentiments of revenge after the attacks, but we really need to resist them. The Pope wants the Jubilee to be used for people to meet each other, understand each other and  rise above hate”, explains the Secretary of the Vatican State.

After the attacks, this endeavor appears more pressing. We receive the mercy of God in order to adopt this behavior with others. Mercy is also the most beautiful name of God for Muslims, who can also be involved in the Holy Year, as this is what the Pope wants.” … [So maybe more muslim prayers in St. Peter’s.  But don’t hold your breath on Catholic prayers in Mecca. “Dialogue” with muslims is always a one way street.]
The attacks in France show that “nobody can think they are safe from terrorism. The Vatican may be a target for its religious importance. We are able to increase the level of security measures in the Vatican and its surroundings. Let’s not allow ourselves to be paralyzed by fear” Parolin added.
“These events change nothing in the Pope’s agenda.”……[Of course…….]
How do you dialogue with a force that for 1400 years has waged unremitting war against Christendom?  The Byzantine Empire occasionally tried dialogue with islam, but always had to have recourse to force of arms for 800 years to keep from being washed away in the sea of muslim conquest.  Islam is unique among all major world religions in only and ever being spread by the sword.  Islam has attacked Christianity orders of magnitude more times than Christendom reacted in kind.  For centuries people along the Mediterranean coast from Gibraltar to Constantinople lived in constant fear of muslim raids and invasions. Millions were killed or carted off as slaves in these raids.
Nothing has changed on the side of islam. Islam is re-energized and has a renewed commitment to armed combat.  Only Christendom has imploded and even the Church fails to possess the moral certitude sufficient to stem this rising tide of islamic jihad.  Instead, we offer bland platitudes about “mercy” and “meeting people,” as if such meetings are anything but opportunities to murder for sword-wielding, head-chopping jihadis.
This will not end well.  There is at present NO moral or physical defense of the Vatican sufficient to keep it from being overrun at some future date by the forces of the jihad.
isis-vaticano-300x250 dabiq-islam-stato-islamico

Christ-less culture descending into inevitable chaos; where are calls in Church for penance/conversion? November 16, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, different religion, disaster, Ecumenism, episcopate, error, General Catholic, horror, Immigration, paganism, persecution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, Spiritual Warfare, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

Really good video below from Michael Matt, commenting on the terror attacks in Paris.  I guess Mr. Matt gets around more than I do, he reports that some traditionally-inclined souls are attributing this terror attack to some kind of governmental false flag operation.  I agree with Mr. Matt when he notes the extreme unlikelihood of this, but far more importantly, with his diagnosis of the ultimate cause of the Paris attacks and all else going on in the world today: the rejection of Christ by people and nations from one corner of the globe to another.

But it goes much further than that.  The world has always been in thrall to its master and hostile to the Church, even if there have been periods of time when peoples and nations have shaken off the cruel yoke of satan and found a much sweeter, lighter burden under Jesus Christ.  Today, in contrast, the hostility to Christ and His Church is found not only in the world, but in the Church herself.  The true reason for all the chaos in the world today, Matt notes, is the (institutional) Church’s refusal to be herself and to perform her duty, such as obedience to Our Lady of Fatima in consecrating Russia properly to her Immaculate Heart.

As illustration of this fact, where are the calls for repentance and conversion, even within the Church?  I have perused a number of sites, I’ve even checked out some traditional parishes and sermon sites, and Matt’s was the first I’d seen of any call to repentance and conversion as a formal response to these attacks.  Having read much Church history and the lives of the Saints, I can say that such calls were in the past most often the very first recourse faithful leaders and pious souls had when confronted with such evil.  Surely our Lord has allowed this evil due to our own wickedness and coldness of heart.  Surely God has allowed the ancient enemy of Christendom to be revitalized and grow daily in the threat it represents due to the weakness of faith so dominant in the Church today.  Yes there are other explanations, much more natural ones, but I am ashamed to admit I did not think of personal repentance and conversion in response to these attacks until I heard Matt utter the words.

Obviously, the agents of the progressive sexular pagan agenda – the New World Order, I suppose – plan a Christ-less future.  If so, I agree with Matt, they can look forward to much, much more evil, barbarism, suffering, and general chaos. Christ or chaos.  That is the world’s choice.

At present, it seems the world has chosen to endure a new dark ages rather than admit its evil and convert its stone cold heart:

Get ready for unbelievable chaos.  Steel your families for the coming days.  They will not be happy.  Don’t waste time figuring out chem trails or who is flying black helicopters, spend every waking possible moment in prayer and penance!  Don’t despair, don’t freak out, know that it is unavoidable that the world should descend into chaos as it rejects Jesus Christ and His Church, and keep praying!

We may not able to save the world, but we can be saved through Jesus Christ if we remain steadfast in the Faith.

Thanks to Mr. Matt for this most edifying video.

Pope Francis says Lutheranism, Catholicism essentially same, Lutherans can ‘discern’ to receive Eucharist? November 16, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, different religion, disaster, Ecumenism, episcopate, General Catholic, horror, Papa, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

By the time this guy is done, will there be anything left?

Pope Francis visited the Evangelical Lutheran community in Rome yesterday.  Yes, all 137 of them.  He was asked some questions by the audience.  This was his response to a question regarding whether a “faithful” Lutheran woman married to a “faithful” Catholic husband could not receive the Blessed Sacrament in the Church.  The answer is scandalous, and seems to lean positive:

When asked together to share the Lord’s Supper, it is not easy for me to answer you, especially not in the presence of theologians like Cardinal Kasper! I’m afraid! [laughs;laughter; Applause]  [OK, first, the question was phrased in the highly misleading protestant phraseology regarding “partaking the Lord’s Supper.”  This kind of language was deliberately adopted by the protestant revolutionaries due to their explicit rejection of Catholic Eucharistic theology – the essence of our Faith – regarding the Sacrificial nature of the Mass, the Real Presence, the sacerdotal priesthood, and all the rest.  So the question was phrased in a way that should have been offensive to pious Catholic ears from the start, and really merited a response on that basis alone.  But that is not what happened, sadly……]

I think that the Lord has told us when he gave us this mandate: “Do this in remembrance of me”. And if we share the Lord’s Supper, remember and imitate him, we do the same, that the Lord Jesus has done. And the Lord’s supper, there will be the last banquet in the New Jerusalem, but that will be the last. On the way, however, I wonder – and I do not know how to answer, but  will make your question my own – I ask myself: Is this common Lord’s Supper the goal of a path or it is to go the provision for the road to go together? I leave the question to the theologians, those who understand something of it. [What kind of shepherd – especially Vicar of Christ – constantly waves his hands in the air, turning problems not even over to especially delegated authority, but to nameless, faceless “theologians?”  What role have they ever played in really formulating doctrine? The vast majority have no particular office at all.  OH, but they would love to arrogate to themselves doctrinal authority, which Pope Francis seems quite willing – when it suits his audience – to endorse.]

It is true that in some ways  that there are no differences between us; that we have the same doctrine [No, we don’t]  – I underline the word, a difficult-to-understand word – but I wonder: But have we not the same baptism? And if we have the same baptism, then we have to go together. [What?!?  No one aside extreme progressives have ever pretended that  baptism is a sufficient basis for faith, for establishing essential equivalence between the Church and sects.  This is incredible]

………When you pray together, this baptism is growing strongly; if you teach your children who Jesus is, why Jesus came, what Jesus has done for us, you are doing the same whether in the Lutheran language or in the Catholic language, but it is the same. [No, it isn’t.  I’m a former protestant.  The Catholic Church and protestantism are NOT THE SAME. They can NEVER be the same. The fact that the Pope seems to think they are breaks my heart, and causes me to have the strongest possible doubts regarding his fitness to hold such an august office]The Question: And the Supper? There are issues on which one, if one is honest with himself and with the few theological “Lumina”, which I have, nonetheless must respond, see for yourself. “This is my body, this is my blood,” the Lord has said, “do this in remembrance of me”, and that’s a provision on the way which helps us to go. I had a great friendship with a 48-year-old, married Anglican bishop [he’s referring to Tony Parker.  And he was a “bishop”] with two children and he had this difficulty: a Catholic wife, Catholic children, himself a bishop. He accompanied his wife and children on Sunday for Mass, then went and directed the worship with his community. It was a step of participation in the Lord’s Supper. Then he was gone, the Lord has called him, a righteous man. [Wow, so I guess we needn’t pray for him?] On your question I will pose to you  only one question: How can I go with my husband, so that the Lord’s Supper [Stop with “Lord’s Supper!”  That is an incredibly loaded phrase in a protestant milieu.  They mean something radically different than traditional Catholic Eucharistic theology.  AND THAT IS WHY THEY CANNOT RECEIVE!!!] accompanies me on my way? This is a problem that everyone must answer. But a pastor friend told me: “We believe that the Lord is there at present. He is present. You believe that the Lord is present. And where is the difference?” —- “Ah, there are the statements, interpretations … “. [No, Lutherans believe in consubstantiation, a very different thing from transubstantiation.  And it depends very much which variety of Lutheran you are speaking to – many reject the Real Presence outright, con- or trans-, just as many Catholics do]

Life is greater than the explanations and interpretations. Take always with respect to the baptism: “One faith, one baptism, one Lord,” Paul   tells us, and draw the consequences. I’ll never dare to give permission to do this, because it is not my responsibility. One baptism, one Lord, one faith. Speak with the Lord and continue. I do not dare to say more.

So there it is, isn’t it?  Isn’t he basically telling her “I can’t tell you what to do [what a lie!] but I can wink wink nudge nudge suggest you might give it a try wink nudge. Can you imagine a pope speaking in this way?  This is the second time he’s said, directly, I’m basically speaking error here, even heresy, but gosh darnit I just can’t help myself!  Speaking of which, this post from several months ago is most important to reconsider, is it not?

Am I being too harsh?  Is this yet another step on the Francis error train – first it was mortally sinful Catholics being admitted to Communion, now it’s protestants, pretty soon, will it be the entire world?  And what sacredness, what uniqueness, will the Blessed Sacrament have when it’s available to everyone including dogs and Chinamen, when it is a veritable “reward” for bad behavior?

It is amazing what is going on.  I would not believe it, if I did not have to live it every day.

PS – Phoenix from the Ashes, the book by HJA Sire I’ve blogged on a few times, really, totally destroys the modernist inventions regarding the Mass and the priesthood, especially notions like the “Lord’s Supper” theology laid out in the heretical 1969 General Instruction of the Roman Missal for the 1969 Mass and allied items. I hope to get to some of that this week, but it’s pretty hard to condense to a post.  I shall try, however.

UPDATE:  Some comments on this from Vox Cantoris.  I know some commenters feel very strongly that Pope Francis is, for certain, a heretic.  I simply cannot allow myself to make that kind of judgment, for reasons that are as personal as they are my understanding of how the Church works.  But the below, I can and do very much agree with.  Good job DD for putting this so well.

Jorge Bergoglio, stop this insanity. You are the Bishop of Rome! You are creating division and anxiety amongst the Catholic faithful. You are creating confusion. You are playing with heresy. You have told this woman to commit sacrilege. 

Step back from the brink of heresy

Bergloglio is on the verge of heresy. History will condemn him.

Is this enough for Bishops and Cardinals to intervene?

Texas and 6 other states so far refuse to accept any “Syrian refugees” November 16, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, Christendom, disaster, Ecumenism, episcopate, foolishness, General Catholic, Immigration, persecution, Revolution, Society.
comments closed

Very few of them are actual refugees.  Even fewer are persecuted Christians.  The vast majority are predatory economic migrant males of military age.  They are migrating less for jobs than for a slice of that sweet (but fast imploding) European welfare state.  How many are committed jihadis is anyone’s guess – ISIS claims thousands if not tens of thousands.

So now Texas Governor Greg Abbot and 6 other states* – including, interestingly, Michigan, which has one of the largest muslim populations in the country – have decreed they will accept no Syrian “refugees” in spite of Obama’s plans to bring tens of thousands here. Of course, the vast majority of these predatory migrants are not even Syrian, though many carry Syrian passports (pathetically easy to get, since Syria’s government exists more in name than reality at present).  Will these states also ban “refugees” from Turkey, Pakistan, Niger, Cameroon, etc?

Texas will not participate in the resettlement of Syrian refugees in the wake of the Paris terrorist attack, Gov. Greg Abbott announced on Monday.

The governor wrote to President Barack Obama to express concerns about the vetting process to resettle refugees in the U.S. Citing the possibility that one of the terrorists in Paris was a Syrian refugee, Abbott said that “American humanitarian compassion could be exploited.”

“Neither you nor any federal official can guarantee that Syrian refugees will not be part of any terroristic activity,” Abbott, a Republican, wrote. “As such, opening our door to them irresponsibly exposes our fellow Americans to unacceptable peril.”

Abbott joined Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder and Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley – both Republicans – to announce such a policy in recent days. The Republican governors insix other states did the same on Monday.

I’m a bit of two minds of this. I have no problem whatsoever barring admission of muslims, whether actual Syrian refugees or not, from this state or the entire country (though I’m not certain what real effect these states’ actions will have, since immigration is a federal and not a state matter).  However I do think this nation in particular owes a moral debt to persecuted Iraqi, Syrian, and now Lebanese Christians and especially Catholics.  This nation created, through disastrous policy decisions and ineptly fought wars, the ongoing genocide of Christians out of some of our most ancient ancestral homes.  I am quite certain a government with the resources of the United States could, if it had the will, not only separate the muslim from the Christian (the chaff from the wheat, as it were), but manage to relocate a goodly number of those Christians to this country.  Not that our government has the slightest interest in doing so.  This administration in particular seems to take a perverse joy in seeing the persecution of Christians, if they are to be judged by their inaction and even paucity of rhetoric.

We’ve got to get over this cultural marxism. It’s killing us.  I’m sure the governors in question are too afraid to declare their welcome to Syrian Christians but not muslims for fear of being castigated as “islamophobes” (or it is at least a substantial factor).  I think given the number of random acts of violence and terror muslims have perpetrated over the past 40 odd  years everyone in their right mind is quite justified in having a phobia towards islam and its adherents.  That kind of truth, however, is too destructive of the cultural marxist’s agenda to be permitted in public.  So, it must be declared verboten, and the body bags continue to pile up.

*- including at present Michigan, Indiana, Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, and Arkansas

Meanwhile, in Paris’ 11th Arrondissement, or administrative district, many denizens are just wrenching their hearts over Friday’s attacks. Not because they are enraged at the muslim perpetrators, but at themselves, for allowing the conditions that have driven these normally sweet and kind if slightly misguided souls to such acts of desperation:

But they aren’t angry, at least not at the perpetrators. “They’re stupid, but they aren’t evil,” their friend Sabrina, an administrative worker in one of the theaters in the 11th arrondissement, said. “They are victims of a system that excluded them from society, that’s why they felt this doesn’t belong to them and they could attack. There are those who live here in alienation, and we are all to blame for this alienation.”

“After the attacks in January, they said we should unite, but that essentially meant that we should be together and not think independently,” says Clemens Mama, a teacher. “They don’t want us to think that maybe it’s connected to the policies of our government and of the United States in the Middle East.” No, she wasn’t surprised that the attackers apparently included people who were born and raised in France. “These are people the government gave up on, and you have to ask why,” she said.

……..It was hard to find anyone at this gathering who would say a bad word about the attackers, and expressions of patriotism were restrained. Perhaps it should be no surprise in this part of town. Most residents of the 11th arrondissement are what the French call “bobo,” bohemian and bourgeois, middle-class academics in their 30s and 40s with clearly leftist leanings.

Two ways I look at this: their communist leanings cause them to hate Western society and desire its downfall.  Anything that contributes to that cannot really be bad. The other thought is that they are in reality so utterly terrified of muslim terror they have to pretend it does not exist, that Islam is not the scorpion of the old proverb to France’s, uh…….frog…….really attacking them for WHO THEY ARE, and not what they do.  Admitting the former would be too painful, as it would mean the obliteration of their entire world view. So they pretend the threat does not really exist, or, in the height of hubris, is not really about muslim’s, but about themselves (the French intellectual left) and their “failure” to create a sufficiently anesthetizing environment to put even militant muslims to sleep, as they have put everyone else.

One thing’s for sure.  Saint Louis IX would have no truck with the great  unwashed French of today.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 547 other followers