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

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

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

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

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

Taking up with some excerpts from Skojec’s review:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

———-End Excerpt————-

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

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

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

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

Poland Passes Bill to Eliminate Most Sunday Commerce by 2020 November 29, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, Christendom, Domestic Church, episcopate, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Interior Life, Restoration, sanctity, Society, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
comments closed

Poland continues its rapid ascent to become the most Catholic country in the world.  The lower house has passed a bill to ban most all Sunday shopping by 2020, and the Senate looks likely to approve.  Amazingly, the bishop’s conference is somewhat opposed to the bill, because it does not, in their minds, go far enough.  Can I imagine the USCCB taking such a strong, unequivocal stand?  Not very easily:

Polish MPs have approved a bill that will phase out Sunday shopping by 2020.

Initially proposed by trade unions, the idea received the support of the ruling conservative Law and Justice Party, who want to allow workers to spend more time with their families.

The Sejm, the lower house of Poland’s parliament, passed the bill by 254 to 156 to restrict Sunday shopping to the first and last Sunday of the month until the end of 2018, only on the last Sunday in the month in 2019, and to ban it totally starting in 2020. It will still be permitted, however, on the Sundays before major holidays such as Christmas. Some bakeries and online shops will also be exempt.

The bill will now pass to the Senate, and then to President Andzrej Duda for approval.

In a statement, the Polish bishops’ conference said the bill did not go far enough, and that everyone should be free from work on Sundays.

I don’t disagree, excepting those who perform vital public services, such as doctors and nurses at hospitals, emergency workers, and, of course, muslim or Hindu 24 hour convenience store/gas station attendants.

Seriously, I still remember a time when, on Christmas day at least, the streets were pretty much empty.  This would have been the late 80s, even after the Sunday blue laws had been repealed here in Texas (which I think happened around ’82 or ’83).  The only places that were open were a few gas station/convenience stores staffed by surly Sikhs.  How unimaginable it would have been, back then, at the height of the Cold War, to think that in 30 year’s time, formerly communist Poland would be leading at least some kind of Catholic restoration, while the United States and the West generally would be sinking into a soft leftist sexularist dystopia?

I don’t think these “extra” shopping days have boosted the economy at all, they’ve just transferred commerce from one day to another.  I find especially grating all these “Black Friday” and “Day After Christmas” sales that start at noon on the holiday itself (and soon, will probably just subsume the entire holiday).

I think allowing shopping on Sunday has had a deleterious effect on the sanctity of the Lord’s Day and people’s appreciation of it. I think it’s helped peel people away from Christianity, which is probably why it was pushed in the first place.  For most people, Sunday is just another day.  It no longer has any special significance, except maybe during football season or because it’s the 2nd day of the weekend.  There is little sense of family togetherness, even on a secular level, and barely any more religious significance to the day.

So good on the Poles for taking at least this first, partial step.  Hopefully they will move forward even more to end all non-essential trade on Sundays.

h/t reader MFG

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.

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.

Dallas Own “Ultraliberal” Cardinal Farrell Attacks Correctio Signers……. October 5, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, Basics, Dallas Diocese, different religion, episcopate, error, General Catholic, Liturgy, persecution, Revolution, scandals, self-serving, Society, the struggle for the Church, unbelievable BS.
comments closed

…….and thus serves his patron and master.  GloriaTV calls Farrell ultraliberal – an assessment I would have argued with once but not so much today (Farrell is a veritable weathervane for the ecclesiastical winds) – and notes his line of ad hominem attack against the signers of the Correctio Filialis:

Pope Francis “is not a heretic” according to the ultraliberal Curia Cardinal Kevin Farrell, 70. Taking to cruxnow.com on October 2, Farrell attacked the Filial Correction by launching personal attacks against the signatories rather than by responding to their arguments. According to him the signatories “use any excuse just to attack him [Francis].”

In response to the interview, one of the signatories, Deacon Nick Donnelly, states on twitter that Francis “is not accused of being a heretic, but of promulgating heresy”.

During a NCR-interview in 2016, Farrell insinuated that Amoris Laetitia has the same authority as the Bible, “Basically this is the Holy Spirit speaking to us.”

Please don’t tell me what good things Bishop Farrell did while he was here.  First, that was then, this is now, but even more, he did a heckuva lot of bad things like totally ghettoizing the TLM and even blocking priests from offering Mass partially in Latin, Ad Orientem, or basically anything that substantially improved the reverence of the Mass. And that’s only his malfeasance with regard to the Liturgy.  He did a few things better than his seminary but on the grand scale – and as we find out more and more after his departure – he was just what you would expect a creature of McCarrick would be.

I will say that there is scant difference between “promulgating heresy” and being a heretic.  I suppose one can maintain the pious hope that Francis is acting in ignorant innocence with his manifold attacks upon the ancient Faith (get ready for further attacks on the Liturgy and Communion for protestants!), but I believe the massive evidence we have accrued in less than 5 years indicates that invincible ignorance is out of the question.  I am also becoming increasingly aware of very poignant, pained, and emotional personal interventions made by good souls to Francis to amend his ways, but he has coldly and brusquely dismissed all of these.  Perhaps some of these will make it to print one day, unfortunately what I have learned is too much of hearsay and unsubstantiated to print.

For some good news, Cardinal Farrell maintains that his small advisory role at the  Apostolic Signatura will not prevent him from pursuing formal correction of Francis should the situation demand it:

The nomination as a member of the Apostolic Signatura is “not a full-time position”, Cardinal Raymond Burke told journalists on Monday. He will assist in the work and serve as a judge when asked to do so.

Burke further stated according to Vaticanista Edward Pentin, that the nomination will not change nor delay his plans to issue a fraternal correction of Pope Francis if he further declines to answer the dubia.

I’d say the time for that correction is now, good Cardinal Burke.  However, I can understand delay if you are having difficulty finding others to join you in this correction, though I suspect with the Correctio out there are gathering support, now is about as good as time as you will find.

Please pray for Cardinal Burke and all those who are working to stop the total dissolution of the Church.  They need much support for strength.  I am personally praying that more bishops – especially some active ones- will sign the Correctio and then join Burke in his own correction.  Where things go from there will be in God’s hands, but I pray the truth may see the light of day and the Lord’s will be done.

Matt: Cardinal Burke Did Not “Betray” Traditional Movement with SSPX Comments October 4, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, episcopate, error, General Catholic, Latin Mass, Restoration, sadness, SSPX, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, Virtue.
comments closed

If you’re fortunate,  you’ve probably been spared the drama over some comments Cardinal Burke made at a conference back in June or July regarding the SSPX.  When asked specifically whether lay Catholics should or could attend an SSPX parish, Cardinal Burke said (in main point) they were schismatic, and that while their Masses were valid they were not licit and should be avoided.  This is the 100% mainstream conservative opinion in the Church, and the one that was espoused by the Pope Emeritus.

Some folks took grave exception to this commentary and opined that Cardinal Burke had somehow exposed himself as a true modernist at heart, or that he had failed the traditional movement, or that he is now rather suspect and not a good friend of traditional Catholics.

I think Michael Matt sums up my sentiments more or less exactly.  I am not surprised at what Cardinal Burke said in the slightest.  As I said, it’s pretty much the default position of the hierarchical Church, what these men in positions of power are taught and expected to say.  This doesn’t make Cardinal Burke a bad person or somehow a turncoat.  The good things he has done remain.  He remains the chief opponent of Francis in the ecclesiastical hierarchy, the author of the Dubia, and a very good friend of the Traditional Latin Mass.  But, like all of us, he’s far from perfect, and probably does not, nor ever will, align with our every desire as a perfect Catholic prelate (we all know there has only ever been one perfect prelate, and ever will be – Marcel Lefebvre).

Personally, I was neither exercised by the cardinal’s comments, nor by the reaction.  In fact, I completely expected the reaction.  If Matt’s video below did not so well accord with my own views and provide sensible counsel, I would not have covered the matter at all.  I don’t want to see the comments turn into one of those endless SSPX/anti-SSPX imbroglios.  They are boring and have already been done to death 1000 times over.  You are welcome to your opinion and to express it, but if the tete a tete’s get to extensive and descend into incivility I will terminate the comments (but not take any action against particular commenters, especially those who have been around a long time).  Experience has taught that anything touching on the SSPX tends to lead to great passions on all sides.  Let’s try to keep things cool.

I think Matt’s video could be easily summed up as: don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.  Sure, Cardinal Burke may have said something you or I or we don’t like, or wish he had said another way, but he does a great deal of good at the same time.

Hope Amidst Horror in the Bergoglian Church September 27, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, different religion, episcopate, Francis, General Catholic, Holy suffering, Our Lady, persecution, Restoration, Society, Spiritual Warfare, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
comments closed

A really excellent video analyzing the current state of the Church from Michael Matt.  He incidentally gets in some digs at that operation in Detroit that still, apparently – I haven’t watched any of their product in years, for a number of reasons – is refusing to address the 900 bazillion ton elephant in the room, while spending enormous effort/volume of fire shooting at various mice and cockaroaches.  Sure those latter must be opposed and drug into the daylight, but the house will still be destroyed so long as the elephant is free to rampage, and the damage done by the former is orders of magnitude greater than the latter.

But the main point of the video is not just to expostulate on the dire situation in the Church, a situation likely unprecedented in Her 2000 year history, but also to give hope to know that God is still in charge, that His promise to never abandon His Church and the faithful still applies, and that we must have recourse to Our Blessed Mother as our ultimate intercessor with God to have mercy on His Church and restore sanity to the Church.

Both Matt, and, I should add, Bishop Gracida note that this lay intercession is a necessary step in the path towards a formal correction issuing from a certain body of Cardinals, which, I pray, will be more than two.  Bishop Gracida believes that Cardinal Burke, the obvious leader of the cardinalatial “resistance,” should do so before the end of the year.  Even if the cardinals do nothing, either because they are unwilling or unable to do so (for instance, if no other cardinal will join Burke), the lay correction still has great value.  Francis has been corrected. He has been called out.  Future generations, once sanity has been restored to the Church, can and will make use of the historical record this correction provides – and if I were the authors of the correction, I would disseminate hard copies to every chancery and every major Catholic university in the world.  The electronic pseudo-records may not be around forever.

The key role for the laity in all of this however is two fold – to keep the Faith, and to pray.  We cannot allow ourselves to be drawn into extremes of thought or action because of the daily uber-scandals inflicted upon us.  We cannot allow our hearts to become hard and to lose Faith in the Lord.  This too shall pass.  Not perhaps in our lifetimes, but eventually.  And if not, perhaps our children or grandchildren will be witness to the glory of the Lord again on this earth in the Second Coming.  Our Lord Himself told us in inspired and inerrant Scripture that at the end of times, the Faith would be all but dead in the hearts of men.

In the interim, we must be doing all we can – more than we presently think we can – in terms of prayer and sacrifice, and in particular prayer for the intercession of Our Lady. Perhaps this October 13 will witness another unprecedented miracle, but perhaps not.  Either way, Our Lady’s intercession is our best recourse for bringing about the restoration of Holy Mother Church and, just as importantly, the conversion of so many billions of dead, hardened souls.  Even in times when the Faith was infinitely more alive in the hearts of men, at least in parts of the world (the 13th century), the Lord’s hand of judgment was stayed through the enormous piety and noble acts of a handful of great Saints, especially St. Vincent Ferrer.  The fewness of the number of the remnant matters not, what matters is their fervor of faith and cooperation with Grace.  In this respect, some of us, and I certainly include myself in this number, have not been doing all we possibly can, preferring instead to cast aspersions at the failures of others rather than take out the beam in my own eye.

You may have already seen the video, but if you have not, I strongly recommend you watch it.  It’s extremely good.  As a final aside, in the interest of time, I have developed the habit of watching videos at 1.25 or 1.5x speed, which makes a 24 minute video last 16 minutes.  Any faster and they either sound ridiculous or I can’t keep up.

Pray.  And reserve some mercy in your hearts even for those who so despise the truths of our Faith and work so hard to endanger souls – we must, as Catholics, love all, even those who wound us so deeply and spread so much obvious destruction.

Bishop Gracida: Prepare to Live like Catholics under the English Persecution September 27, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, different religion, episcopate, error, fightback, Francis, General Catholic, Holy suffering, Latin Mass, manhood, persecution, Revolution, Society, Spiritual Warfare, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
comments closed

I think this is a most insightful commentary, and one that I agree with.  The persecution of Catholics in Tudor/Jacobian England in the 16th and 17th centuries gives us a very clear picture of what it is like to suffer through a Church  that allows itself to be whored out to the opinions, desires, and whims of the powers that be.  This is precisely what many feel has happened to our beautiful Holy Mother Church in recent decades (though they would probably have the decency and good sense not to use such an awful term, but I feel that is the one that is the most descriptive), and we can expect the faithful remnant – a term I was surprised to see Bishop Gracida, whom I had failed to read for many months, using over and over again on his blog – to be treated as badly or worse by the establishment church as were the “recusants” of Merrye Ol’ several centuries ago.

The tactics, liturgical changes, and theology are virtually identical to the most militant, leftist wing of the protestant revolutionaries of Elizabethan times, too.

But I’ll let Bishop Gracida make his points, and add a few comments.  This commentary was an answer to a question asked by a 70 year old Catholic regarding that septuagenarian’s sense that the Church of today is not the one he grew up in – when the Church fails, where do we go?:

Don’t you realize that you have become part of the Remnant?

Your situation, our situation, is analogous to the situation in which Catholics found themselves in 16th Century England.  All of a sudden Catholics woke up and found that the Church in which they had grown up had changed.  The head of the Church in England, the Archbishop of Canterbury had come under the influence of liberals and progressives like Martin Luther and John Calvin.  Worse, the King, Henry VIII, had become a serial adulterer and he felt it was ok for him to ‘re-marry’ and still receive Holy Communion while living in an adulterous relationship because the good of the Nation required it. [or the good of the groin -as Henry fell deeper and deeper into total incontinence, even the pretense he was doing all his adulterating for “the good of the nation” dropped away]   And to put a proper face on it the King declared himself the Head of the Church, the Liturgy of the Mass changed with the genius [“genius”] of Archbishop Cranmer and all of a sudden Catholics in England woke up and found that they had become Anglicans.

Well, not ALL Catholics.  Some, like the author of the above article still considered themselves to be Catholics, not Anglicans and because they now constituted a small number of people compared to their Anglican neighbors they became a Remnant of the Catholic Church.

That is what you are.  That is what many of us are.

And as a consequence, we are going to experience persecution.  Not the same kind of persecution that English Catholics experienced under Henry VIII and Elizabeth I. [Ummm……wait and see. It might get pretty close, at least so far as being treated as heretics, schismatics, outsiders, and hateful bigots] You will cherish the Traditional Latin Mass when you can find it and you will learn to avoid the absurdities liberal priests and bishops introduce into the Novus Ordo Masses.

Just as English Catholics learned to avoid Anglican Masses celebrated by priests who were ordained not to offer the sacrifice of Jesus Christ but to set the table for a community meal, you will seek out priests, bishops (yes, and even popes) who manifest their belief in the Incarnate Lord Jesus Christ who suffered and died for us and who revealed his plan for us in the 2000 year magisterium of the Church we have possessed up to the present pontificate.

More from Bishop Gracida here, on why he signed the filial correction.

Lord, what good could be done with a few more such men.  Of course, he’s retired, and so it’s a lot easier for him to speak – and probably therein lies very much of the problem.

I’m not quite certain what the good bishop means about seeking out “popes who manifest their belief in the Incarnate Lord….” except that I’m certain he doesn’t meaning finding our own little Pope Michaels, et. al., to follow.  I am sure he means we turn to the popes of the past, the holy fathers who safely guided the Church with a far surer hand than the present trustee of the diocese of Rome.

At any rate it seems Bishop Gracida has become much more clear in his appreciation of the crisis facing the Church and the reality of the tiny number of the faithful. But our paucity of numbers is not a reason to lose hope, as I pray the next post may elucidate unsurreptitiously.

Today I can use my big boy words!

Epochal History: Faithful Deliver Charge of Heresy against Francis, Bishop of Rome September 25, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, cultural marxism, different religion, episcopate, error, Francis, General Catholic, manhood, priests, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, Spiritual Warfare, the struggle for the Church, true leadership, Virtue.
comments closed

I’m sure all readers are already well aware of the unprecedented submittal to Pope Francis of a letter of Filial Correction against heresy from several dozen people, clerical and lay, this past weekend.  I say the letter is unprecedented, because while, once, in the long history of the Church, a living pope has been formally corrected by his subordinates on a matter related to faith or morals, that was on one, very specific, and rather detailed, matter.  The correction of John XXII (and thus it was 645 years before that name was taken by a sovereign pontiff again, and isn’t THAT revealing) had to deal with whether the saints in Heaven partake of the Beatific Vision at death, or only at the last judgment (John XXII erroneously believed the latter).  This was not heavy, vital to the every day life of the Church kind of stuff.

No, the matter with Francis is entirely different.  He is accused of promoting errors which, if allowed to stand and metastasize as they inevitably must, will, with shocking speed, result in the destruction of the entire moral edifice of the Faith. Francis intends a revolution so radical that, as his closest allies contend, no roll back will be possible. He intends to change how the Church believes and practices, root and branch.  That some people still do not see this, still refuse to see this, shows just how deeply the papalotry has become.

Several specific errors were challenged in the letter called Correctio Filialis.  I will not go into those in detail, but they all revolve around the entirely novel, and erroneous, contentions put forward in Amoris Laetitia that people in the manifest state of mortal sin through adultery (aka attempted bigamy) may receive the Blessed Sacrament as if they were in the state of grace.  That this destructive proposition is Francis’ intent with the document is amply supported by his direct intervention with two episcopal conferences -those of Argentina and Malta – directing them, when asked whether to implement Amoris Laetitia (AL) in line with the constant belief and practice of the Faith – that is, to continue denying the Blessed Sacrament to public adulterers – or to allow these adulterers to receive, as they read AL to mean, Francis both times answered that the adulterers were to be allowed to receive.  Thus Henry VIII becomes a “saint” in the new church of Francis?

The authors of the correction further note that Francis, in AL and in many other regards, appears to operate under the influence of two condemned heresies – modernism and Lutheranism.  This is, from all the available evidence, an extremely difficult accusation for Francis to disprove, as are the detailed points of accusation regarding AL.

So, Francis has chosen to respond as he usually does to those questioning his authority and his doctrinal integrity, with personal silence (for over a month since the letter was first delivered) and an orchestrated campaign of character assassination by his allies, within and without the Church, against his “enemies” (enemies who are striving with great might to inspire him to convert and, almost certainly, save his soul).  However, that campaign is being conducted, thus far, almost entirely by “inside baseball” publications, websites, and social media networks.  The leftist state media have chosen to almost wholly embargo this massively important development, the first time a reigning Bishop of Rome has been formally accused of error amounting to heresy in nearly 700 years (actually, that was the case until just an hour or two ago, when a rash of articles appeared).  Time will tell how this will play out, but, so far, the media is largely presenting this correction as coming from a kooky fringe, invoking quotes from the usual sources, but never, in the slightest, actually attempting to argue against what the letter of correction actually claims.

A further note regarding the letter of correction: it is claimed that no (save one) bishops or cardinals signed the letter of correction because they were not asked.  That would be a fine and possibly sensible response, but why, then, did Bishop Fellay sign?  He was invited to sign, but no others were?  The first line of attack by the leftists against this correction is that it comes from a tiny element with no influence in the Church and no support from any bishops or cardinals – to this absence may lessen its influence. Similarly interesting – one might say concerning, even frustrating – to me, was the fact that no priests of the Fraternity of St. Peter signed.  I know that this is an extremely difficult issue for the, the Fraternity’s very founding was based at least in part on a perceived need to be “more” obedient or submissive to the Holy See than those in the SSPX, but I also know there are a number of priests in the FSSP who are as aghast at and opposed to the errors emanating from this pontificate as anyone. Perhaps no one in the FSSP was asked, then, either.  Some diocesan priests were, as were a number of theologians.  Good on you, Philip Blosser. I pray this doesn’t cost you your job at Sacred  Heart seminary in Detroit.

I pray we will see many more signatories in the days to come (In fact, we have.  The wonderful Bishop Emeritus Rene Gracida of Corpus Christi has signed.  This is a great credit to this steadfast bishop and friend of Tradition, but it does also indicate that, while bishops perhaps were not asked in advance to sign the Correctio, basically none so far have volunteered to do so).  I know of at least one wonderful, traditional priest who has submitted his name for inclusion.  I pray some bishops do wind up signing, but I’m sure the vast majority will sit tight and see which way the wind blows.  True heirs of St. Paul.  Not.

The question is being asked by some: is this a big deal? Will this have any real effect?  The answer to the former is, yes, it is a YUGE deal for all kinds of reasons.  It is huge historically. It is huge doctrinally and ecclesiastically.  It is hugely significant as a sign of formal, PUBLIC resistance to the revolutionary leftist agenda in the Church, something that was notably absent during the first outbreak of full-on revolution in the period 1958-78.  Thousands of people attempted private interventions with Pope Paul VI, and hundreds or thousands have done so with Francis, but these private interventions have had no effect.  Cardinals have publicly questioned the pope’s doctrine – the next step was for a group of laity to do so in an even more detailed manner.  If there is no adequate response or change in behavior, the step after this is, given Francis’ response to the Dubia and his seeming total resistance to the effect of prayer and sacrifice on the part of so many, for cardinals to move from question to accusation (probably using this Correctio Filialis for support), and from accusation to judgment.  I am certain Cardinal Burke is striving to find collaborators in this process right now, and I pray he has the health and faith to continue on with formal opposition to Francischurch.  To the extent he succeeds or fails will determine whether this interim step of filial correction will have any real effect on the life of the Church.

And that, I think, will very much depend on priests but, particularly, bishops and cardinals to be willing to man up and add their name to the Correctio.  However, recent history, where over a thousand priests worldwide publicly proclaimed that they would not administer the Blessed Sacrament in accordance with Amoral Laetitia had no apparent effect on Francis, does not make me sanguine at the possibilities. Furthermore, I doubt a single further American bishop signs, and I will be surprised if more than a handful worldwide do.  Perhaps there will be several hundred priests sign, but that is unlikely to have much effect.

It is opposition from bishops that is most key.  We’re 4 1/2 years into this pontificate, with Francis’ appointments growing always in numbers, and there has yet to have been any significant public opposition from the episcopate to Francis and his revolution.  Even privately, during the sin-nods, opposition was wholly insufficient (it should have been practically unanimous).  I am not certain what we as laity can do to inspire bishops to start defending the Faith (for some, for the first time in their lives) beyond always trying to increase prayer and sacrifice.  I’m all for cutting off funds in a very public and concerted way, but tying cutting off the local bishop to lack of opposition to Francis would be a really far stretch for a lot of people.

There are some easy things you can do, right now, to witness to  your own appreciation of the Faith, to indicate your solidarity with the Correctio, and to hopefully inspire more priests and some bishops to do the same: you can sign the petition supporting the Correctio here. You can follow who has signed the letter at this site here.

Beyond that, I think far more Catholics need to start publicly voicing their opposition to Francis and his pontificate.  Refusing to give to Peter’s Pence is one thing, but getting active on social media or out in the real world with activities to support and defend the Faith while politely noting opposition to the revolutionary direction emanating from Rome is something more people should consider getting behind – and I don’t mean just leaving comments on blogs like this one.  Heck, start your own.  Send a polite letter to your bishop. Ask your priest to unequivocally address this crisis – at our local parish, little has been said of late, sadly.

Make your own suggestions in the comments. I have spent much of the afternoon on this post and I’m out of time.  Man do I love Bishop Gracida, though. Since our local ordinaries have never seen fit to offer Confirmation at our TLM parish, maybe we should extend an invitation to Bishop Gracida?  I have no idea if he would come, but he’s a rock and deserves our support, prayers, and love, as do all those who are willing to take the most uncomfortable step, for any Catholic, of accusing their very father, their spiritual father, of error amounting to the horror of heresy.  What a tragic time we live in.