Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, Ecumenism, episcopate, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Latin Mass, Liturgy, priests, sanctity, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, Virtue.
With a hat tip to reader Camper for the link, Our Lady of the Atonement parish is, effective today, no longer a part of the Archdiocese of San Antonio and is now a part of Anglican Ordinariate, as the parish clergy and laity had requested.
I don’t know what this means for Fr. Phillips reinstatement, or whether that has already occurred ( I could find no news attesting to this because I am not on Facebook!, where everything seems to be these days. See update below, Fr. Phillips is back at Atonement with faculties in the Ordinariate), but I am certain there is great rejoicing today (but in actuality, there are signs the people of Atonement have been aware of the decision for at least a few days) among those who have such a great devotion to this reverent Anglican Use (and sometime Novus Ordo Latin) parish:
Brilliant News!!! The Holy See has directed that theTexan parish of Our Lady of the Atonement in San Antonio is, with effect from today, part of the Ordinariate of the Chair of S Peter, the American Ordinariate.
‘Atonement’ was the first (in 1983) of the parishes set up to perpetuate within the Roman Unity groups adhering to their Anglican Liturgy, Spirituality, and theological tradition. It was spectacularly successful, under its dynamic and charismatic Pastor Fr Christopher Phillips.
When the Ordinariates were set up, the position of parishes adhering to the ‘Anglican Use’, but operating as units within ordinary dioceses, became anomalous. After all, the Holy See had set up the Ordinariates specifically to include such communities.
The Archbishop of San Antonio was understandably anxious to keep such a vibrant parish and its academy within his own diocese and jurisdiction. But he is an honourable man. So he made it very clear that he would ensure the continuation at the Atonement of the provisions made by the Holy See for Anglicans who had entered the Catholic Church upon a certain understanding.
But that proposed arrangement misses the point. It treats the Anglican Use as merely something provided as a condescending kindness for ex-Anglicans or their descendants. This would mean that the Use could die out when the original ‘converts’ had died, unless new converts from Anglicanism had continued to trickle in so as to keep the arrangement on a life-support machine.
That is quite simply not how things can be allowed to be in a Church which takes Mission in any way seriously. A flourishing and orthodox Christian community will inevitably attract others, particularly those from the peripheries of the Church, where people may have a residual association with Catholicism but have grown disillusioned or alienated within the ‘mainstream’ or ‘diocesan’ Church.
It is a natural suspicion that Gerhard Cardinal Mueller has been involved in this wise decision, which is good news not only for the Atonement but for all members of the three Ordinariates. It demonstrates that the See of S Peter is as committed to Pope Benedict’s bold ecumenical experiment as ever it was. We were not ‘taken up’ just so that we could be ‘dropped’!
That’s certainly an ebullient opinion from Fr. Hunwicke, who I am certain is quite pleased.
This is about the best possible outcome for the vast majority of those associated with Atonement Parish and it’s school – this is very much what those souls wanted. It also does lend some credence to notions I’ve heard bandied about that much of the furball that developed in recent months with the removal of Fr. Phillips and the allegations against Deacon Orr was ideologically motivated. As I stated all along, that is most likely the case, though difficult to prove (as such things always tend to be in a Church dominated by secular modernists).
I’m very happy for the people of Atonement and the Archdiocese of San Antonio generally. Whatever Phillips’ future status, they have one more reverent and relatively orthodox option for liturgy, catechesis, and formal schooling. San Antonio is even more of a liturgical and catechetical wasteland than Dallas, which tells local readers something, anyway. I don’t know whether it’s surprising or not that Rome made this decision, and so quickly, but it certainly appears to be the right and just one.
A Deo Gratias for Atonement parish and the good people of the Archdiocese of San Antonio. I don’t know if this move has any implications for the TLM at St. Pius X parish or the SSPX at St. Joseph chapel, but we’ll see. For now it appears the good guys won one for once, to quote some of those in the comments.
UPDATE: Via commenter RM, the following comes from Fr. Phillips’ Facebook page, announcing his return as “pastor emeritus” at Atonement:
This has been an historic day. Our Lady of the Atonement is now a parish of the Personal Ordinariate of the Chair of St. Peter. Fr. Moore and I are incardinated as priests of the Ordinariate………
…………I return to the parish as Pastor Emeritus to carry on my regular pastoral, liturgical, and sacramental ministry, and especially what I love the most — back to my place in the school with our wonderful students.
“I am delighted with this! As I told some of our people today, “I get to continue to do all the things I love, and poor Fr. Perkins has to do all the hard stuff!”
“As of today we return to being the parish family we have always been, but poised for even greater adventures. I am grateful for our years in the Archdiocese of San Antonio — it was the soil in which we grew and flourished. But I am now looking forward to new relationships in the Ordinariate, and to serving God under a new bishop, His Excellency, the Most Reverend Steven Lopes
Well it appears this ugly saga is behind Atonement, and good for them. With more coming out now, including what I am told privately is a dismissal of the allegations against Deacon Orr that surfaced earlier this month, it seems almost certain that what transpired in the removal of Fr. Phillips was the playing out of an ugly ideological agenda trying to keep a vibrant parish and its unusually valuable property from “leaving” the control of the Archdiocese, and in the process breaking the parish of most everything that made it unique. Of course, as the progressive modernists holding the reins of power in most dioceses are extremely adept at manipulating the system to their advantage, proving that is all but impossible, but the strange turn of events in public really speaks for itself.
Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, different religion, disaster, episcopate, error, Francis, General Catholic, horror, Latin Mass, Revolution, scandals, secularism, sickness, Society, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, true leadership.
While much of what the priest in the sermons below presents is somewhat old news to any who have been following developments in this pontificate with any closeness, it is still extremely handy to have it all gone over in detail and explained just exactly how pernicious, destructive, and even blasphemous Francis’ efforts to wholly remake (as in destroy) the moral edifice of the Church are.
It is also very edifying to know there are priests out there – I certainly won’t ID him, but non-SSPX, traditional priests – who are calling a spade a spade and demonstrating clearly that, given the choice between “the pope and Jesus Christ,” this priest, at least, intends to side firmly with Jesus Christ.
There is much good formation here. Both sermons are well worth your time and constitute elements of a 6 part sermon that has all been uploaded to the Sensus Fidelium channel on Youtube.
Sermon one reviews the travesty that is Amoris Laetitia, and the clear “interpretations” Francis has given to bishops in Argentina, Malta, and other locales, which clearly demonstrate the revolutionary intent of this unprecedented encyclical. There are many clear judgments and hard-hitting phrases that we most certainly need to be hearing from our priests:
The second sermon deals with the reaction to Amoris Laetitia in the form of the dubia submitted by 4 cardinals asking very pointed and clear questions of Francis. As is already widely known, Francis has chosen to simply ignore this dubia. One hopes eventually the cardinals will then take the issue to the next level, which is to publicly examine Francis’ works in the light of Tradition, but we shall have to see:
I disagree slightly with this excellent priest in one area, that is in referring to this as a “real Henry VIII moment in the Church.” Elsewhere, he says more correctly, to my mind, that the Church has never, ever, in her entire recorded history had a pontiff make such direct, destructive attacks on the Doctrine of the Faith.
We are in a completely unprecedented situation. This post-modernist crisis is the worst the Church has ever seen for the completeness of the embrace of error and the tiny scope of the remnant faithful, but Francis has taken it to an entirely new and different level.
But while Henry VIII was certainly a lout, a glutton, a destroyer of religion, and a persecutor of the Church, he was, after all, a layman. He started the process of destruction of the Faith in one country and was rightly excommunicated for his crimes, but what we have in Francis is something entirely different. Here it is an attack from within, from the highest office in the Church, the man given such enormous torrents of Grace to correspond faithfully to the tenets of his office and the Doctrine of the Faith that his heart must be as hard as diamond to be executing the plan he is so obviously carrying out. Not only is the scope of destruction Francis can achieve infinitely larger than anything Henry VIII could have done, but after decades of neglect and collapse the forces of orthodoxy and resistance are so much smaller than they have been at probably any other time in the history of the Church.
To me, Francis’ destructive potential is greater than Henry VIII, Elizabeth I, Luther, Calvin, Melanchthon, Zwinglii, and all the rest combined, because he presents himself as not only within the House of God but as its head! Catholics will for decades to come be fighting off arguments from protestants, atheists, etc., based on the errors that Francis has introduced. Even worse is the aid, comfort, and intellectual armament being conferred on those modernists within the Church. Now we shall be forever quoting pope against pope in trying to defend the Faith.
And we haven’t even begun to see this play out. Francis will be gone in a few years, more than likely, but what will follow in his wake? Even if that next pope is not as radical as Francis, will he roll back any of the revolutionary changes already under way? Or will he allow them to persist and continue to rot the Church from within, as the appeasement of the use of contraception did to the Church during the 70s, 80s, 90s, etc?
The only way forward for the Church, then, is for some future pope to deliberately refute the errors abounding today and anathematize the current resident of the
Vatican Doma Sancta Martha. We have got to pray that such a future pope, with enough backbone and love of Christ to do so, emerges.
On a lighter note, is not this priest a most effective, practiced speaker? Few other priests use so much inflection, emotion, and vary their meter as much as this one does.
Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, disaster, episcopate, error, General Catholic, horror, scandals, sexual depravity, shocking, sickness, Society, the struggle for the Church.
As I posted in January, popular pastor Fr. Christopher Phillips was removed by Archbishop Gustavo Garcia-Siller rather suddenly and to the great shock and dismay of the people of the Anglican use Atonement Parish in San Antonio. Many could not fathom why the Archdiocese would take this action. There has been some speculation that it could have been due to Atonement seeking to join the Ordinariate and therefore a turf war over ownership of the really fabulous physical plant of the parish began. Having said that, and having heard very impassioned (and detailed) complaints against a certain Deacon James Orr from current and former parishioners of Atonement going back some time, I have wondered, largely to myself, whether or not an abuse allegation was not somehow involved.
Now, something has emerged regarding retired Deacon James Orr that could have been the instigation behind the San Antonio Archdiocese’s intervention at Atonement Parish. I have heard very troubling reports from family and others who have been a part of Atonement in the past regarding this deacon’s behavior around pre-teen and teenage boys. When I queried someone involved in the parish back in January, who seemed to have some first hand knowledge of the removal of Fr. Phillips, whether this matter of Deacon Orr could have played a part in the situation, this individual rather bluntly derided the idea.
But then there’s this:
I have strong indications from a confidential source who works in the Archdiocese that this may not be the only abuse complaint made against Deacon Orr. Others, of a more recent nature, may be forthcoming.
This puts a very different spin on the dismissal of Fr. Phillips. I feel more confident in coming forward with what I have heard for years, from people I know extremely well and explicitly trust, which is that Deacon Orr routinely had inappropriate relationships with young boys at the parish, involving, at the least, what some parents viewed as encouragement of alienation from their family and subsequent provision of financial support on the part of the Deacon when these boys had a final falling out with their parents and moved out of the family home. Some of these relationships were short, others have persisted for years. Some very pointed complaints regarding Deacon Orr’s activities have been made to Father Phillips , again, going back years. I was certainly not a party to any of those conversations, but I know at least some people associated with Atonement felt that Phillips failed to adequately address these concerns and may have even given the impression of dismissing them. Through it all, Phillips steadfastly defended this deacon.
This is the situation as I understand it, as has been related to me numerous times from multiple, independent sources.
I should stress that most people at Atonement have a great love for Father Phillips and continue to support him. But I would be remiss in not bringing up the very serious and mutually substantiating concerns of a minority whose complaints generally centered around Deacon Orr.
I do not know the specifics of the allegation made in February of this year. From what I understand, none of the inappropriate behavior of which I have been aware (as I describe above) ever degenerated to the level of actual physical abuse. I would like to caution everyone not to engage in either excessive demonization of Deacon Orr nor excessive defenses of Fr. Phillips in attacking those who have felt they have had very legitimate concerns for years, and whose concerns now seem to be amply justified.
We’ll have to see how this shakes out, but I was always a little suspicious that the Archdiocese of San Antonio would make a naked power play for several million dollars worth of real estate without some serious complaint behind them to back them up. This appears to be it. That doesn’t mean an ideology is not being served. That may well be the case, but it could be there were situations ongoing that had to be addressed. It’s difficult to say at this point.
PS – Some will say that the Archdiocese moved against Phillips in January, before this allegation was formally made in February. But I would be a hefty sum the Archdiocese knew of the coming allegation before it was officially made, and that may explain the timing.
Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, different religion, Endless Corruption, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, It's all about the $$$, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, the struggle for the Church, unbelievable BS.
I saw the following excerpt of a lengthy interview Archbishop Lori gave to the Catholic Register recently on the subject of the new presidency and the prospects it brings to the Church, and in addition to being generally disappointed with the bishop’s general view of much of the Trump agenda he was queried about, I was very surprised by this particular excerpt:
What is your assessment of the president’s proposal to eliminate the Johnson Amendment?
That’s, of course, a very complex question. We would certainly want to see, more specifically, what the president might have in mind. As a general rule, it is not a good idea for churches to engage in partisan politics. I believe that, generally, that proves to be a great distraction from our central task and mission, which is to preach the Gospel. Furthermore, I think it would have a tendency to unnecessarily divide our congregations.
I would recognize that the Johnson Amendment is lived out fairly unevenly, across religious lines, but in general, I think we would eye the adjustment of this amendment warily. I think that’s the best adverb I can give you. We are looking at this carefully and warily.
The Johnson Amendment, for those who don’t know, was something created by the corrupt, racist Lyndon Johnson in 1954 and tacked onto a defense appropriations bill to punish the churches who had opposed his 1952 candidacy to the US Senate from Texas. Johnson only won by literally manufacturing votes in magical ballot boxes, but he had faced criticism from various churches for some of his stands and he did not want to have to deal with that again. So, he created an amendment that churches that endorse or oppose specific candidates would lose their precious tax-exempt status. The amendment was shockingly non-controversial at the time, but it has had enormous ramifications.
Now why would the bishops not favor being freed from this restriction on their ability to speak freely and endorse the most moral, most worthy candidates, and oppose those who are unworthy? There are two reasons, really – money, and ideology.
Regarding the money, the USCCB – and Lori was speaking in at least a semi-official capacity for the USCCB in this interview – is wholly dependent on federal funding for almost all of their activities, activities which have come to be thoroughly politicized by this very same funding. Something like 90% of Catholic Charities and 92% of Catholic Relief Services funding comes directly from US taxpayers. One could imagine that, if freed of the Johnson Amendment the bishops would be placed in a very difficult position, not wanting to anger either party by openly opposing some or many (or all) of their candidates. Such politicking could place their precious, precious billions at risk. Can’t have that.
In addition, one can easily forecast how divided and lukewarm the bishops would be in determining which candidates to endorse or oppose.
Think how many very difficult, uncomfortable stands out milquetoast bishops would have to take should the Johnson Amendment be repealed. The house divided they worry about is their own conference’s alienation from faithful souls. Either way they went, they’d be angering a large proportion of their sharply divided flock, but in most of these cases, there is a clear, Catholic moral imperative to support one candidate and oppose another. Right now, they have the perfect excuse not to speak out much more forcefully against pro-abort, pro-contraception, pro-perversion, etc., candidates. They simply can’t speak out for fear of losing that “holy” tax exempt status. It’s great cover.
But it’s also a huge shirking of duty and conduct unworthy of a shepherd of souls. In fact, much of the division among those in this country who apply the name Catholic to themselves stems precisely from the bishop’s unwillingness to take clear stands on moral issues, and, more importantly, impose ecclesiastical penalties against politicians and others of notoriety who advocate for positions contrary to the Doctrine of the Faith. How many pro-abort politicians have been denied Communion, for instance? How many have been condemned by name? How many morally worthless, mealy-mouthed “voting guides” have been trotted out over the years, always containing just enough morally ambiguous language to give a shade of cover for those who want to vote for politicians who advance morally reprehensible positions?
Overall, this commentary reveals the moral corruption at the heart of the USCCB and most national episcopal conferences. Not only do they try to enforce a rigid conformity, blocking individual ordinary’s ability to speak out by imposing penalties against those who do, they also reveal a bureaucratic contractor more concerned with getting paid than saving souls. Repealing the Johnson Amendment would allow the Church and the protestant sects and others to have a stronger impact on the electoral landscape than they’ve had in decades, and thus materially improve the moral condition of this nation. In point of fact, one can trace the steady decline in morals in this country almost in a direct line back to 1954 – that is to say, the silencing of the churches played a significant role in the subsequent moral collapse of this nation.
But perhaps many of our shepherds today consider that much more of a feature, than a bug. Whatever keeps the gravy train rolling……is that their primary concern? And how many of them favor the Church to be a mute, subservient, loyal and dutiful NGO-type contractor to the government, rather than the radically countercultural Body of Christ and vehicle of salvation she is intended by our Lord to be?
Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, Ecumenism, episcopate, error, Francis, General Catholic, horror, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, Spiritual Warfare, the struggle for the Church.
In posting this video, The Remnant asks why St. Augustine called the Cross “satan’s trap?”
Strange question, isn’t it? How could the Cross, the very vehicle of our salvation, be a “trap” for faithful souls?
Watch the video, and see if you can figure it out:
From the standpoint of this very good sermon, the “trap” was satan’s belief that he could undo this Messiah by having him killed. Satan was unable to determine that Christ was truly God, and so erred in believing engineering the most horrific, shameful death possible would destroy all the good this Messiah was intending to accomplish.
But I think the analogy works on another level, too. How else can the Cross possibly be a trap? We have no need but to look at the present Bishop of Rome, and, shuddering, find the reason.
The Cross also becomes a trap when people reduce the act of salvation to it, and it alone. When protestants, and their unimaginative emulators in the Church, proclaim that one is saved, wholly and entirely, by Christ’s salvific Sacrifice, independent of one’s actions, this is a terrible error that has led countless millions of souls to their eternal doom.
Personified in the totally novel, made in America phrase (invented in the late 19th century) “once saved always saved,” this pernicious error has grown and multiplied until it has come to dominate most sects and made very deep inroads into the Church herself. This is the opposite error of Pelagianism, which posits that it is possible to earn salvation entirely by one’s own efforts at virtue, independent of God’s Grace flowing through that one-time but constantly re-presented Sacrifice.
Salvation through a one time proclamation that Christ is one’s “personal Lord and Savior” is refuted numerous times in Scripture, most notably I Cor xv:31, Heb iii:13 and especially Mt xxv:31-46, but the supposedly “scriptural” protestants have twisted it to their own destruction, as St. Peter warned they would.
Of course, Catholics know the truth, that we are saved through Christ’s Sacrifice, yes, but also by cooperation with Grace through the good works we do and the sins we avoid. Christ tells us repeatedly through Scripture that we establish the fact of our existence in the state of Grace through good works, and that those works are necessary for our salvation. Christ’s Sacrifice offers us the potential for salvation, which was all but impossible before, but does not guarantee it based on a silly one time altar call. Such an American concept, anyway, that salvation is like placing an order in a drive thru.
It is terrifying to contemplate that the man elected to the Chair of Peter so openly seems to hold protestant beliefs as much superior to the Sacred Doctrine of the Faith. Francis has heaped praise on the sects and feted numerous sect leaders, and seems to never tire of heaping scorn and derision on faithful Catholics. It is the inversion of the Truth and the damage being done to souls is incalculable by human means.
Our Lady, however, revealed the answer, at least figuratively, at Fatima, when she showed Lucia, Jacinta, and Francisco the souls falling into hell like snowflakes.
Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, disaster, episcopate, Francis, General Catholic, horror, paganism, Revolution, scandals, self-serving, sexual depravity, the enemy, the struggle for the Church, unadulterated evil.
And, beyond that, features himself in what is an obviously perverse and blasphemous work of “art.” Paglia is one of several well known extreme modernist bishops from the Italian episcopate that have experienced a rapid rise during Francis’ pontificate. Particularly shocking is the fact that this same archbishop who seems to tip his hand quite obviously regarding his own proclivities and, quite probably, extracurricular activities, has been made the president of the John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and the Family and the head of the Pontifical Academy for Life. These appointments are part of a clear trend under the current Bishop of Rome to grant cover and partronage to the sodomite underworld prevalent in the clery, as Francis’ recent rollbacks of penalties put into place for priest sex abuse have helped underscore.
Many wondered how Francis would deal with this lavendar mafia. Little did they know the several-hundred page dossier on pervert priests compiled under Benedict would be used by Francis as recommendations for promotions and advancement. Of course, given the tight correlation between sodomy and hatred for the constant belief and practice of the Faith, it is probable that much of Francis’ most fervent support within the episcopate comes from those lost in this reprobate lifestyle. In spite of the fact that this archbishop and his painting were very controversial within Italy, Francis has still seen fit to give him two plum and highly influential assignments, both centering on what appears to all the world to be an attempt to undermine and ultimately destroy the moral edifice of the Faith:
The archbishop now at the helm of the Pontifical Academy for Life paid a homosexual artist to paint a blasphemous homoerotic mural in his cathedral church in 2007. The mural includes an image of the archbishop himself.
The archbishop, Vincenzo Paglia, was also recently appointed by Pope Francis as president of the Pontifical Pope John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family.
The massive mural still covers the opposite side of the facade of the cathedral church of the Diocese of Terni-Narni-Amelia. It depicts Jesus carrying nets to heaven filled with naked and semi-nude homosexuals, transsexuals, prostitutes, and drug dealers, jumbled together in erotic interactions.
Included in one of the nets is Paglia, the then diocesan bishop. The image of the Savior is painted with the face of a local male hairdresser, and his private parts can be seen through his translucent garb.According to the artist, a homosexual Argentinean named Ricardo Cinalli who is known for his paintings of male bodies, Bishop Paglia selected him out of a list of ten internationally-known artists specifically for the task of painting the inner wall of the facade. Bishop Paglia, along with one Fr. Fabio Leonardis, oversaw every detail of Cinalli’s work, according to Cinalli, who approvingly notes that Paglia never asked him if he believed in the Christian doctrine of salvation.
“Working with him was humanly and professionally fantastic,” Cinalli told the Italian newspaper La Repubblica in March of last year. “Never, in four months, during which we saw each other almost three times each week, did Paglia ever ask me if I believed in salvation. He never placed me in an uncomfortable position.” [Of course not! We wouldn’t want to disrupt all that pleasant “accompaniment” and “welcoming” with any talk of such a minor and trivial subject as the state of one’s eternal soul!]
“There was no detail that was done freely, at random,” added Cinalli. “Everything was analyzed. Everything was discussed. They never allowed me to work on my own.” [Ergo, Paglia endorsed every portion of the monstrosity, which you can view below]
Cinalli admits to La Repubblica that the naked people in the nets are meant to be “erotic,” although Bishop Paglia drew the line when Cinalli proposed to show people actually copulating.“In this case, there was not – in this sense – a sexual intention, but erotic, yes,” said Cinalli. “I think that the erotic aspect is the most notable among the people inside the nets.” He later added, “The one thing that they didn’t permit me to insert was the copulation of two people within this net where everything is permitted.” [In a sane Church, this artist would never have been considered. This is the reduction of the Church to mere platform for the advancing of worldly left-wing ideals and, more importantly, the personal vanity of an unworthy prelate.]
The reason he wasn’t allowed to be so explicit, says Cinalli, is that his painting had already done enough to demonstrate the notion that man has “freedom” in this life and even in the next, apparently to engage in whatever sexual behavior he deems appropriate. “The bishop and Fr. Leonardis . . . told me that they didn’t think it was necessary to arrive at that extreme to demonstrate the freedom that man, in reality, has in this world and in the next.” [Orwellian. Slavery is freedom. God condones sodomy, prostitution, and drug use in “heaven.” Please. All this does is reveal to total immorality of Paglia, the priests involved, and the artist. It says nothing to anyone about God, sin, redemption, the human condition, etc.]
The article then goes on to note how Paglia has moved to undermine the Doctrine of the Faith on numerous occasions since his pontifical appointments, including this:
In July of 2016, still under the direction of Paglia, the Pontifical Council for the Family issued a new sex-ed program that includes lascivious and pornographic images so disturbing that one psychologist suggested that the archbishop be evaluated by a review board in accordance with norms of the Dallas Charter, which are meant to protect children from sexual abuse.
The images in question, which, quite frankly, are of an amateur level of quality and boringly progressive in their message. I wish these geriatric progressive perverts would understand just how tired and predictable their attempts at shocking have become (beware these images contain nudity and are, as stated above, obviously intended to be erotic:
Paglia circled. The image is obviously intended to leave vague whether it be Christ or some male love uplifting the bishop
Yes there are drug dealers and prostitutes and people obviously getting it on if out and out penetration is not show. SOOOO appropriate for a church and children. Consider how diligent a man who has no problem bombarding children with homo-erotic art every day in what should be the sanctuary of the Lord is going to be about protecting children’s innocence generally, or from predatory priests in particular.
And yet Francis has seen fit to install this man over pontifical departments dedicated to upholding the family and the sanctity of life.
Outrage doesn’t begin to describe it.
Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Immigration, It's all about the $$$, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society.
……..policy over which they have never expressed much concern. Cynical, much? The Mexican government constantly and quite roughly deports any and all illegal immigrants they catch coming over their southern border – that is, if those immigrants don’t have sufficient inducements with which to bribe Mexican officials, not all of which involve money, if you know what I mean. The Mexican Church has had very little to say about that.
But in a sense, this very much makes sense, as bishops for a given country should have as their primary concern the well-being of their own citizens. Of course, Mexicans in the US have in a very real way repudiated their citizenship and as often as not rejected the Church (either there or here, huge numbers are walking away from the Faith). I can understand some degree of loyalty, but for the most part, this just seems like ugly politicking of a most base kind.
See what you think:
The Catholic Church in Mexico has accused the government of adopting an attitude of fear and “submission” over US President Donald Trump’s immigration measures, which it labeled “terrorism.”
Mexican authorities “only make declarations and promises, their reactions are lukewarm and they also show fear and even worse, submission,” read an editorial in the Church’s From the Faith weekly.
The editorial, entitled “Migrant Terrorism,” criticized Trump’s immigration measures, which aim to expel millions of undocumented migrants from the United States.
The Trump administration issued tough new orders Tuesday for a sweeping crackdown on illegal immigrants……..[Umm, the only ones really under threat of deportation are those who have criminal records]
“What Mr Trump does is not only apply inhuman legalism, but a real act of terror,” the editorial said. [But the Mexican government does any different? And why aren’t you castigating your government for its corruption and horrific policy which has driven so many Mexicans to flee in the first place. Most importantly – how much income does the Church in Mexico derive from remittances from Mexican expatriates living in the US? I bet it is not insubstantial]
The new rules make it easier for US Border Patrol and immigration officers to quickly deport any illegal immigrants they find, with only a few exceptions, principally children.
But on Thursday, US Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson met with Mexican ministers promising no “mass deportations” or use of military force to expel immigrants.
Trump has infuriated Mexico by insisting the country pay for a border wall to keep undocumented immigrants out. Mexico’s foreign minister has warned that his country will impose tariffs on US products if the United States taxes Mexican imports to finance a the wall. [Good luck keeping your collapsing oil industry alive if you do that]
Posted by Tantumblogo in disaster, Ecumenism, episcopate, error, foolishness, Francis, General Catholic, Holy suffering, horror, persecution, sadness, scandals, sickness, Society, the enemy, unadulterated evil.
I’d say that’s about right. The article below details recent muslim atrocities against Christians around the world, focusing on the near total destruction of the ancient Christian communities of Assyria, which were all but obliterated by the invasion of ISIS into this region in 2014. Now that ISIS is being forced out of Assyria in a very half-hearted, desultory manner, some Christians are returning to relate the horrors they experienced at the hands of this terror group, which the US originally helped back and arm when it was thought, among our unqualified, really dumb “elites,” that ‘anybody but Assad’ was an appropriate policy for Syria and the Mideast:
Reports of Christian life under the Islamic State (ISIS) continued throughout November. Many of these came from the ancient Christian towns surrounding Mosul, such as Batnaya and Qaraqosh, conquered by ISIS in August, 2014, and liberated in late October, 2016.
One Christian man, Esam, from Qaraqosh, related what ISIS did after his sister’s husband refused to convert to Islam: “He was crucified and tortured in front of his wife and children, who were forced to watch. They [ISIS] told him that if he loved Jesus that much, he would die like Jesus.” The Islamic militants tortured his brother-in-law from 6 in the evening until 11: “[T]hey cut his stomach open and shot him before leaving him hanging, crucified.” Two other members of Esam’s family, a Christian couple, were abducted and separated by ISIS. To this day, the husband does not know where his wife is; he only knows that she was turned into a concubine, a sex-slave…….
………Another handful of Christians told how they “were threatened, forced to spit on a crucifix or convert to Islam,” but they “miraculously survived more than two years under Islamic State group rule.”……
……..Before being driven out of these now-liberated Christian towns around Mosul, ISIS plantedexplosive devices in teddy bears and toys that would be detonated when children picked them up, “killing unsuspecting families.”
Those who survived ISIS, accused former U.S. President Barack Hussein Obama of doing nothing when Iraq’s largest Christian city, Qaraqosh, fell to the Islamic terrorists more than two years ago, when its Christian population was over 50,000. One man said, “Obama has never helped the Christians. In fact, he despises them. In the last 26 months, he has shown he despises all of them. But we have hope in the new president, Trump.” A Catholic priest said: “The US government led by President Obama could have protected us – or at least helped us to protect ourselves. But unfortunately Obama abandoned us.” A young girl wearing a cross added: “We hope this new guy called Trump will help us more than Obama did.” [I would add, given the scale of the tragedy, Francis and the Church at large have been far too silent on the horrific persecutions Christians and Catholics in particular are suffering around the world]
Hey, muslims take care of their own. I know with complete certitude that Obama is no Christian, and I believe the evidence that he is either a practicing muslim or overwhelmingly sympathetic to them is overwhelming.
The article goes on to list an amazing list of atrocities perpetrated by muslims against Christians, which all occurred in one month, November 2016. There are over 20 separate attacks listed, and this list is most likely quite partial.
If one didn’t know better, you’d almost think there’s a religiously motivated war going on, but thank goodness, we know that’s not the case. Francis has told us so, even going so far as to claim that there is no such thing as “muslim terror.”
Francis will probably be dead and buried before the folly of his interreligious fantasizing really becomes apparent, with large sections of Europe being overrun by the forces of islam. Whether Rome will be one of those remains to be seen, but given the large and increasingly radical “refugee” populace there, the Church’s ancient home may eventually become untenable. That seems unthinkable, but given the trends abroad in the world, the unthinkable is becoming increasingly likely.
Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, different religion, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, Francis, General Catholic, horror, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, the return, the struggle for the Church.
A lot of people hold the pious hope that this Francis phenomenon will simply be a short lived nightmare, a sort of slumbering return to the horrifying days of the late 60s and 70s before we wake up and get back to “normality,” meaning something more conservative-ish like JPII and Benedict (leaving aside how much these two pontiffs leave to be desired compared to, say, a Gregory XVI or Leo XIII, let alone a Pius V).
I have been trying to steel folks in my inner circle – and, to some degree, readers of the blog – to the fact that Francis and those who elected him are not at all satisfied with a trip down memory lane to their salad days as bead wearing long haired hippy revolutionaries in the Church. They mean to make the revolution they’ve always sought permanent. Even though Francis has behaved almost frenetically in trying to impose this agenda, he’s old and his pontificate could end at any moment. More importantly, he could be replaced by someone sane and possessed of a Catholic sensus fidei, and the dream would go into remission, again.
Unless, of course, they can so arrange things that Francis is simply the first of an endless line of progressive pontiffs who will “sing their new church into being.” Rorate holds similar concerns, as expressed below, considering the rumors that arch-liberal Cardinal Tagle of Manila is going to replace Cardinal Muller at the CDF and thus have a powerful resume for the next conclave:
To the recent reports from other sources that Cardinal Müller has already offered his resignation from CDF, Rorate can now add, from its own very well-placed sources, that there is a plan at the highest levels to replace Müller as Prefect of CDF with no less than the Asian “Pope Francis”, the man seen by many as Francis’ dauphin, Luis Antonio Cardinal Tagle.
Müller, appointed Prefect in July 2012, has been effectively marginalized in the past years over the Family Synods and most importantly over Amoris Laetitia
. Questions about his future in the Roman Curia have been persistent through the years. It remains to be seen whether he will eventually be sent back to Germany to take the still-vacant see of Mainz (traditionally a red-hat see), or be tossed to a ceremonial position, or whether, like Stanisław Cardinal Ryłko last year
, he will simply be retired long before turning 75.
Tagle’s own theological oeuvre
is very thin and his academic reputation rests mainly on the essays he wrote as part of the Bologna School’s History of Vatican II. It is his slick promotion by the mainstream Catholic media, his reliably progressivist views (couched in “moderate” language) coupled with his stint at the International Theological Commission and the patronage he received from Joseph Ratzinger, first as CDF Prefect then as Pope, that have combined to give him an aura of learning far beyond what is supported by his real output. His election
as President of both the Catholic Biblical Federation (in 2014) and Caritas International (in 2015) and his designation as one of three Delegate Presidents of the Extraordinary Synod of 2014 further guaranteed his prominence in the universal Church.
Should this latest plan come to pass, Cardinal Tagle, who will turn 60 in June, will have an enviable “CV” for a conclave frontrunner: a long stint (more than 15 years and counting) as diocesan bishop then archbishop, followed by a stint as head of a Curial dicastery.
We shall see. We don’t know much of what the 2013 conclave was like, internally (though we have much evidence that the reason why it ended so quickly was because of illicit collaboration among progressives that some think even invalidate the results), but I think we can be sure the next one is going to be really fierce and take a lot longer. I’m sure the progressives will try to repeat their trick, but their opponents will likely be a lot more organized, if still badly outnumbered. I’m sure – or I hope? – it would be a heck of a fight.
We can do a great deal by praying like mad not only for some kind of miracle with this pontificate but even more for the next one. Men have to be open to Grace for prayer to work on them……..I think I’m not alone in wondering just how open this present occupant may be.
Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Abortion, asshatery, Basics, contraception, cultural marxism, disaster, episcopate, Francis, General Catholic, It's all about the $$$, persecution, scandals, secularism, sexual depravity, Society, the struggle for the Church.
A bit more data on the attempts to reduce Cardinal Burke’s formal role and thus influence in the Church, the notorious Albrecht von Boeselager, the man at the center of the controversy within the Knights of Malta for his involvement in the distribution of condoms, has claimed that Cardinal Burke is “de facto” suspended. Well, it’s certainly clear that at this point, with his dismissal by Francis from his former post as Cardinal Patron of the order, Cardinal Burke lacks any clear apostolate or formal role in the Church. He’s also, of course, been shuttled off to Guam. Francis intervened decisively in Boeselager’s favor, not only reinstating a man who had taken gravely immoral actions entirely contrary to the Doctrine of the Faith, but deposing the former leadership of the Knights and instituting direct Vatican control over what had been, throughout its 500 year history, always a lay-led and run organization.
That’s what you call a decisive intervention. There are many prurient reasons for this intervention, not the least of which being the Boeselager’s wealth and their involvement in the often corrupt Vatican bank, but don’t think the issue of contraception did not play a significant role. I’m quite certain it did. In fact, this entire issue may have been orchestrated in order to further isolate and ostracize Cardinal Burke, the most effective leader to date of opposition to Francis, at least publically among the episcopate. The report, via LifeSiteNews:
The Knights of Malta official at the center of controversy over the Order’s Catholic identity and sovereignty says its patron, Cardinal Raymond Burke, has been “de facto” suspended.
Albrecht von Boeselager, a German aristocrat, was removed from his post as Grand Chancellor on the grounds that he violated his promise of obedience. He hadn’t submitted to his superiors’ request that he resign after it was revealed he had overseen the distribution of contraception in the developing world. The Catholic Church teaches that contraception is intrinsically evil.
After Boeslager’s removal caused a kerfuffle, Pope Francis personally stepped in, reinstating Boeselager to his former position. The pope also asked Grand Master Matthew Festing, the order’s highest-ranking official who had removed Boeselager, to resign. This was unusual because the order of Malta is a sovereign state. [It’s also the first time such a demand – and it was a demand, done under great pressure, not a request – has ever been made in the 500 year history of the order.]
The pontiff then appointed a “papal delegate” to run the order.
In comments translated by The Tablet, Von Boeselager told the Archdiocese of Cologne’s website, domradio.de, that delegate Archbishop Angelo Becciu is now fulfilling Cardinal Burke’s role.
Becciu “has the full confidence of the Pope and is his spokesman,” von Boeselager said. [Gee, you figure?] “That means that Cardinal Burke as Cardinal Patron of the Order is now de facto suspended.” [Is that, suspended as Cardinal Patron, or suspended in a more general sense?]
Von Boeselager said it’s a “completely unfounded accusation” that Pope Francis undermined the Order’s sovereignty by demanding Festing’s resignation. [This is BS. All other reports have indicated Francis went on one of his epic tirades when Festing was summoned to the Doma Sancta Marthae and insisted on a most groveling “resignation” on the spot, directing Festing to blame Burke for the entire affair. But spinners gonna spin]
“The Pope acted at the Order’s wish and he took great care that the Order’s sovereignty was in no way violated or impaired,” [as he unprecedentedly violated a sovereign order’s sovereignty] he said. “He asked the Grand Master to step down, his resignation was carried out according to the Order’s regulations and was accepted. The appointment of the Holy Father’s delegate is expressly limited to the spiritual side of the Order and has nothing to do with its activities as a sovereign power.”
We shall see what further action is taken against Cardinal Burke. With this most vindictive and ideological of Bishops of Rome, there is no chance he’s done trying to humiliate him and break his influence.
Something tells me these efforts will backfire, however.