Jubilee Year of Mercy a bust in Rome……. February 5, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, disaster, error, foolishness, Francis, General Catholic, scandals, secularism, self-serving, suicide, the struggle for the Church.
……..and, I would suspect, around the world. This is what comes from undermining sacred truths and loudly proclaiming that God is all mercy and makes no demands of us save for a vague commitment to progressive consciousness. If God is all mercy and no justice, why bother with getting an indulgence? I’m saved anyway, right? And Communion is something owed to everyone, so receiving it is not special at all.
Pope Francis Jubilee has been so far extremely disappointing, with incredibly few faithfuls showing up in Rome. Unbelievable! No one could forecast such a disappointing turnout of pilgrims. But it is the sad truth of the first two months of the Jubilee. It is time to draw a balance, and it’s a bitter one.
Things immediately started on the wrong foot on inauguration day, December 8, in the wake of the November 14 Paris shock. It was hoped that Christmas could go better, but so many people cancelled after the Paris terror attacks that nothing changed during the Winter holidays. January was even worse. The number of Catholics attending the Wednesday General Audiences plummeted below thinkable levels……..
……lines at security checks are short simply because so few people are coming to Rome. The mandatory reservations to cross the Holy Door was scrapped a couple of days after the start of the Jubilee as it was already clear that there was nearly noone around.
We’re not comparing this Jubilee’s figures with the last one in the year 2000. The current one was announced with a very short notice and it was conceived with very few key events and as a decentralised Jubilee, to be celebrated in each diocese. But the figures are so dismal that even a simple comparison with last year is puzzling: basically there is the same amount of people as last year. Major disappointment.
The Goddess of War Wants to Consume Our Daughters February 5, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, disaster, Domestic Church, error, family, General Catholic, horror, paganism, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society.
1 comment so far
Good commentary by Michael Matt on the recent support given by the politicians in uniform for opening registration for selective service to women. I’m a bit surprised this is happening, at least so soon, I thought there would be some uproar, but apparently, we’re too far gone for that. We can see how much 8 years of Obama have brought the military chiefs into line, with even the Commandant of the Marine Corps dutifully repeating the company line, even though his own service tests revealed the disastrous unsuitability of virtually all women for any kind of ground combat role. Long forgotten is even the faintest hint of the notion of women being the gentler sex, of being ordered for nurturing and bringing life into the world, not killing, and being protected from such evils as shedding blood for purposes of state policy:
“The top officers in the Army and Marine Corps testified on Tuesday that they believe it is time for women to register for future military drafts, following the Pentagon’s recent decision to open all jobs in combat units to female service members.
Gen. Mark A. Milley, chief of staff of the Army, and Gen. Robert B. Neller, the Marine Corps commandant, both said they were in favor of the change during an occasionally contentious Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on the full integration of women in the military. The generals, both infantry officers, offered their opinions in response to a question from Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), who said that she also is in favor of the change.
“Senator, I think that all eligible and qualified men and women should register for the draft,” said Milley, echoing the remarks of Neller. [Self-serving miscreants]
After the hearing, Neller added in a short interview that any young American as a rite of passage should have to register for Selective Service….
“Carter’s action allows women for the first time to apply for a variety of physically punishing positions, including Army and Marine Corps infantryman, as well as Special Operations jobs, including Navy SEAL and Green Beret. The Defense Department plans to begin implementing associated changes in training and evaluation by April 1.”
Before I get to Matt’s searing commentary, let me inform you how this will play out. Failure to have a certain number of women in “glamour slots” like the Green Berets, SEALs, or Marine Recon will be taken as evidence of sexism. Since zero women can qualify for those positions with their current standards, standards will be dramatically cut, if not obliterated. For a time, men will be held to the old, strict standard, and women to a new, much softer one. But eventually, if history is any guide, all standards will be dramatically lowered as men bring suits to bear. This has already happened across the military.
Even more, women can expect dramatically preferential treatment. In order to prove how un-sexist they are, careerist officers will insist that women show up on the top of proficiency tests like marksmanship, orienteering, and the like. This already happens with grim regularity today. But maybe a US military incapable of fighting is more of a feature, than a bug.
Some of Matt’s comments I found more choice:
I have five daughters, and the day that this increasingly demonic government attempts to drag them into combat is the day I take my family and leave this country. I don’t care what they do to me, but I fear the sick tortures of mind and body these globalist Christophobes have in store for my children and grandchildren……..
……..God help us, what a monster this evil Goddess Liberty has turned out to be. Mothers, sisters and daughters in combat—how liberating! Here’s where their precious ‘pill’ has taken them, to a world robbed of the civilizing leaven of femininity, with no maternal heart, no womanly gentleness, no queenly grace, no beauty, no life. [And the pill is one major reason why they have to draft women into combat in the first place, as we’re short millions of young men that should exist due to contraception and abortion.]
Just an ugly, sterile, globalist prison filled with testosterone, crime, drugs and brutal sex. Not only is chivalry dead but its point and purpose no longer exists. [Testosterone, but not masculinity, and certainly not manhood]
The Godless ones are clearly transforming our world into a place where the sting of death may soon seem a small price to pay to get out, and where the living may well come to envy the dead.
This is the New World Order…and it will be no place to live. Everything true, good and beautiful is being systematically eradicated before our eyes, and now this modern Moloch wants to devour our little girls on the altar of Liberty.
They’ve taken God’s greatest gifts and urinated all over them all—from life, to love, to family, to innocence, to grace, to true liberty. I know I’m not the only one who’s grown supremely weary of the whole bloody reign of spiritual and moral terror. I cling to my faith, my rosary, my family—but I know the mob is coming to take them all away in due time.
Really well said. None of this is accidental. There has been a design at work for centuries, and all the things we see, from trying to make little girls play soldier to making little boys play Girl Scouts are not unintended consequences of the Revolution. It is the inevitable end-product of a godless, amoral society. And not to be a downer, but I don’t see it getting any better anytime soon, especially with the highest levels of the Church now seeming bent on caving.
What do you think of this list of the top twenty most dangerous Catholics? – UPDATED February 4, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, different religion, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, Francis, General Catholic, Papa, Revolution, scandals, secularism, the struggle for the Church.
So Church Militant TV has a new video up I both saw, and a reader sent to me, concerning a list of the top twenty most dangerous Catholics of the last 100 years.
Now, the list remains incomplete, only half has been released so far, but as I read it, I was quite surprised to find so few in the upper echelons of the hierarchy. The entire list is there if you take the survey. My mistake, I only read the article at Church Militant itself. So all the points made below stand. No popes listed, the names are heavily American, and almost no one in the curia or a major leader at Vatican II. For instance, Donald Wuerl is a politician, tends modernist (or is, whatever), and has given scandal on numerous occasions, but, really? Top 20 worst Catholics? Not even close. He’s nothing compared to some of the radicals in Europe, or some of those from the 60s-70s timeframe. To leave off Cardinal Martini is inexplicable to me. He’s the father of the current-day progressive wing in the Church. No de Chardin? No Congar? But bear in mind, some of those – de Chardin, Congar – received numerous plaudits from post-conciliar popes. Perhaps that played a role?
Here are some of the more prominent names:
Hans Urs von Balthasar
I’m struck by several things. For one, the list is overwhelmingly American. But many of the most destructive ideas have flowed out of Europe, and often, from high cardinals and others deeply entrenched at the highest levels of the Church. Most of the names listed here are priests, whose ideas, while certainly damnable, would not have had the impact they did had ecclesiastical authority not failed in its duty to discipline them or exclude them from the body of the faithful.
Now, the list is only half complete, so I’m hoping a whole slew of names – Martini, Frings, Alfrink, Bea, Congar, Suenens, Bugnini, etc., will make the list. Well, they didn’t. A list that does not include a number of the leading radicals from Vatican II – which includes those appointed by Paul VI to lead the Council – is woefully incomplete. And there are more top officials from today that I might include in my list – Koch, Schoenborn, Marx, Kasper…….basically the entire German episcopate.
But I’ll say something else. It is true that the crisis in the Church is a crisis of bishops. But who has appointed those bishops, and kept them in office, and even protected them, at times? If the list of “most dangerous Catholics” means those who have contributed the most to the crisis in the Church, can any list be complete that does not feature the names of Giovanni Montini and possibly Jose Bergoglio?
Look, I understand CMTVs editorial views. I know they are loathe to criticize any pontiff, especially the post-conciliar ones. I understand their viewpoint, even if I think it erroneous.
Having said that, from what limited study I’ve done of Vatican II, I am unable to conclude otherwise than that Pope Paul VI got the Council he wanted, more or less. John XXIII set the tone, but it was Paul VI who packed the all-important leadership/management with the Council almost entirely with thoroughgoing progressives. It was Paul VI who decided, at virtually every important logjam, in favor of the progressives, at least until the very end, when their excesses began to surprise and shock even him. And it was Paul VI who unleashed the Novus Ordo and deliberately put forth the notion that the TLM was abrogated, to the point of persecuting those priests who refused to go along. I could go on, HJA Sire and others have thoroughly criticized the pontificate of Paul VI in quite harsh terms.
Since the Council, with some exception for Benedict XVI, the dominant liberal interpretation of it has been allowed to stand, and even be promoted, by every pontiff of the intervening period, at least by silence and inaction if not by actual promotion (which, of course, has frequently occurred, as well). But you know all this already.
So I guess the question is…….can a list of the most “dangerous” Catholics of the last 100 years be complete without including any popes? Or is it tending too much towards scandal, with the wide audience CMTV has, to say so? (I tend to take more liberties, as I regard my readership as generally very well formed and steadfast, and able to stand “sterner stuff”).
And what of the many non-Americans/fathers of Vatican II who have contributed most to the collapse? And no Tielhard de Chardin? No Anibale Bugnini?
Nevertheless, while argument over who should be included could go on forever, I think the basic idea, to identify by name some of the most damaging Catholics of recent years is a pretty good one. While you or I might already be aware of most or all of these folks, many are not. It’s helpful to get those names out there. Who else would you have on your list?
How can ecumenism be reconciled with St. Paul and the entire pre-conciliar Magisterium? February 3, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, catachesis, different religion, disaster, Ecumenism, episcopate, error, General Catholic, horror, Papa, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, suicide, the struggle for the Church.
Older Catholics will tell you, they remember a day when it was clearly taught that to even step foot in a protestant church was a mortal sin. Participating in the kind of “joint ecumenical service” that Francis – and he is not the first post-conciliar pope to do so – would have been utterly unthinkable. The mind of the Church was guided by St. Paul’s 2nd Letter to the Corinthians:
Bear not the yoke together with unbelievers. For what participation hath justice with injustice? Or what fellowship hath light with darkness?
And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath the faithful with the unbeliever?
And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? *For you are the temple of the living God: as God saith: **I will dwell in them, and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
Wherefore, go out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing:
Pope Pius XI taught that Catholics were forbidden to engage in liturgical celebrations with protestants, and in doing so he was only reiterating what the Church had clearly taught for some 350 years. The post-conciliar Church has most frequently tried to pretend that protestants and Catholics both belong to some “invisible church” consisting of “believers” (usually reduced to a shared baptism), but this kind of thinking was rejected by numerous pre-conciliar popes. Thus very clear statements such as those by St. Paul, which served as justification for “fundamentalists” like Saint Athanasius to have no contact with, and to give no recognition to, even the heretical Arian “Catholics” of his day. St. Basil stated that the faithful should even go into the desert to offer Mass, rather than participate in the liturgies of the heretics of those days.
And yet here we are, 2000 years later, after a completely novel council, the first ever in the history of the Church to proclaim no dogma and declare no anathemas, with a radically changed mindset, a mindset that much more plays to worldly thinking and approval than to the constant belief and practice of the faith.
50 years ago, in the immediate wake of Vatican II, there was a great outburst of ecumenical efforts. Thank God, those efforts largely subsided under the previous two pontificates (obviously, there were some scandalous exceptions, like Assisi), but they have come roaring back under Francis and especially in this run up to the 500th anniversary of the outbreak of the protestant heresy cum revolution. It must be remembered that many leading lights at Vatican II were scandalous in their acceptance of protestant belief, from Congar to Bugnini, who felt that in many cases the protestants had got in more right than the early Church Fathers directly informed by the Apostles. Congar reverenced Luther greatly, and Bugnini desired to create a Mass so bowdlerized of Catholic content that it would never be offensive to protestants.
Michael Matt and Christopher Ferrara have a valuable video on this subject below. I found it providential that I read a biblical verse with a note that pointed me to II Cor vi:14-17 just hours before I saw this video show up in my Youtube feed. I especially like the early reference Matt makes to St. Thomas More and his excoriation of protestants for loathing order and seeking to create a society based on disorder and the triumph of the will (which, perhaps, makes subsequent German history rather less than surprising).
Some more important points regarding the below. I have already reported on the disturbingly pro-protestant nature of elements of this joint “liturgy” composed by uber-liberal Catholics in the Congregation for Christian Unity and the Lutheran World Federation. As Matt notes below, this Federation is exceedingly modernist/liberal in and of itself, and is rejected by more conservative Lutheran bodies like the Missouri Synod. So what this amounts to is a self-congratulatory confab of progressives in the two bodies patting themselves on the back for their progressive beliefs. But such has been the practical nature of the ecumenical movement since its inception, it’s far more about confirming progressives in their beliefs than it is concern for souls, arriving at the truth, or, most especially, conversion:
Is it too much saying that Francis is trying to destroy the Church, or complete its destruction? As I said, these kinds of things have gone on for years, though not always with such fanfare, with such high-level participants, or with as much significance as the quincentenary portends.
Having said all that, I plan, for a time, to start ignoring the many problematic statements emanating from the Vatican, and limit myself to discussion/analysis of actions. At this point, I think we, who pray we adhere to what the Church has always believed, know who and what this man is. We know his penchant for highly destructive rhetoric. To some degree, reporting on that is feeling like repetitive non-news (water is wet), and I also need to do so to preserve my own faith and sanity. This planned confab with Lutheran heretics, and modernist ones at that, is a concrete act of such monumental significance that it does merit a good deal of coverage. I pray somehow, by some miracle, there may be an end to all this, but I won’t hold my breath.
I think it important to stress that the ecumenical/interreligious dialogue movements are radically counter to the Church’s pre-conciliar approach, and serve as one of the prime indicators that the Council, no matter what was intended (those arguments are endless, and quite possibly were intended to be), ushered in an era where practice, and belief, was irreconcilable with the Catholic ethos before 1962. That’s the take-home point.
IOC to allow “transgender” men to compete in women’s events February 2, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, paganism, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, suicide, unbelievable BS.
Well, I suspect we’ll start seeing a whole lot of records being broken. Now any man who is quite athletic but not quite gold medal material can go on female hormones for a while and, voila, gold city.
Is there ever any end to the sickness? We haven’t even begun to adjust to the new, state-enforced “reality” of pseudo-sodo-marriage, and they’re already trying to force this mental illness of transgenderism down our throats. And what kind of a society lets men pretending to be women beat the living daylights out of a woman, and for prize money?!?
“I’ve never felt so overpowered in my life,” said female mixed martial arts fighterTamikka Brents. “I’ve fought a lot of women and have never felt the strength that I felt in a fight as I did that night. I can’t answer whether it’s because she was born a man or not, because I’m not a doctor. I can only say I’ve never felt so overpowered ever in my life, and I am an abnormally strong female.” [Go figure. The vast majority of men are stronger, an usually vastly so, than the vast majority of women. God designed us for different things.]
The woman Brents was referring to isn’t a woman at all, but transgender MMA fighter Fallon Fox, who fights as a woman against women. Brent felt the full weight of what it was like to fight a man, and even with all her training and strength, she quickly fell to Fox.
Transgenderism has invaded the public consciousness, raising awareness of gender dysphoria; but not as the disorder linked to depression and suicides at an alarmingly high rate, but a celebrated identity everyone must respect—or else. [Absolutely. Just as with the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah, the truth has to be buried and a lie carefully constructed to conceal the truth and advance the sexular pagan agenda] The concept of transgenderism has become so pervasive that a man can step into the ring with a woman and pummel her for money, and the media will cheer for him.
What Brents reportedly experienced at Fox’s hands was a concussion and a broken orbital bone that required staples. In other words, this woman was savaged by an opponent that was genetically advantaged with a thicker bone structure, longer reach, and denser musculature—or, put more simply, was a man. Fox was able to do this despite hormone treatments that made him more feminine in certain aspects. [Which treatments dramatically raise the risk of cancer and also cause a greatly increased reach of psychosis, or dramatically unstable behavior]
………it should be common sense to not pit men against women in any serious sporting event, regardless of any hormone treatment or any genital surgery. [It might make even more sense to bar men from beating up women, and those with severe mental problems from high-profile public events]
This has not been the opinion of the International Olympic Committee (IOC), however, which has been allowing transgender athletes to compete against athletes not of their sex since 2004. They had formerly allowed transgender athletes to compete if they had fully transitioned with cross-sex hormones and surgery. As Fox demonstrates, this transition makes very little difference to a fully trained athlete.
But now the IOC has recommended ending the surgery requirement. In the “IOC Consensus Meeting on Sex Reassignment and Hyperandrogenism” report, the committee recommends that a male-to-female transgender “must demonstrate that her total testosterone level in serum has been below 10 nmol/L for at least 12 months prior to her first competition.” Female-to-male transgendered athletes may register to compete with male athletes without restriction. [What a freaking disaster]
Insanity. The Western world has completely lost its mind. I know better than to ask whether there is any end. Christ or chaos. By rejecting God, there is no end to the depth of depravity to which individuals, and an entire culture, can sink.
But one would think, we have to be nearing some kind of tipping point, where things really begin to break down due to rampant insanity and unreality. So many people have constructed a view of the world so dramatically counter to reality that it is amazing they are able to function, but not only do they function, they have dictated to the rest of us how things will be as they have served as totems to advance the revolution against Christendom.
Bah. I could go on forever. I’ve said all this before. It’s just sick. And, BTW, the NCAA is considering adopting the IOC’s position.
Wow. Via Eponymous Flower, one of the most disturbing statements emanating from Francis I’ve read to date. Speaking before the Italian Committee on Bioethics recently, Pope Francis had this to say, according to Vatican Insider:
Francis said: “Everyone is aware of how sensitive the Church is to ethical issues but perhaps it is not clear to everyone that the Church does not lay claim to a privileged voice in this field; [Whaaa?!?!] in fact it is a source of great satisfaction for the Church when civic responsibility at different levels is able to reflect, discern and act according to a free and open way of thinking and inspired by integral human and social values. This mature civic responsibility is a sign that the seed of the Gospel – which has been revealed and entrusted to the Church – has produced fruits, successfully fostering the search for truth and good in complex human and ethical questions” [This last statement might seem to ameliorate the first a bit, but what is he saying? He seems to be saying that “integral human and social values” are Gospel values, and they are, but that is such a reductive view of the Gospel, which is first and foremost about SALVATION. The first statement – that the Church does not lay claim to a privileged voice in ethical – or moral – matters is incredible, inexplicable, and indefensible. Like “who am I to judge,” this can be used by enemies of the constant belief and practice of the Faith within the Church for many years to come. How dare you speak out against abortion, or usury, or anything else? The Church doesn’t have a privileged voice, after all.]
…….Pope Francis said in a meeting with the Italian Committee for Bioethics today, highlighting the risk of utility and profit being the only reference points for developments in science and biological and medical technologies. He urged this advisory body of the Italian government, headed by Francesco Paolo Casavola, a Catholic, to look further into environmental degradation, “disability and the marginalisation of vulnerable individuals”. [Purely humanistic concerns. But what about the state’s role in fostering good morals and even an environment conducive to the salvation of souls, something so many previous Pope’s have highlighted?] He asked them in other words to tackle the challenge of countering today’s “throwaway culture” which “takes on many forms, including treating human embryos as disposable material, as well as sick and elderly people approaching the end”. The Pope also asked them to harmonise standards and norms in the biological and medical fields.
Francis seems increasingly to exist in a world I might call fantastic, or something like a fantasy-land. At a time when the Christian influence on the culture, especially in the post-Christian West, is falling away more rapidly than at anytime in recorded history, he points at integral human and social values in bioethics – a highly morally troubled field, to be kind – as evidence of Gospel influence? Yes, tilting one’s head sideways and ignoring a great deal of contrary evidence, there is a bit of truth to that, but implying that modern-day progressive humanist values as strongly Gospel-inspired is simply incredible.
I guess more concerning – more obviously substantial – is his correlation of humanism with the Gospel. Again, that is true, to a point, but there are no distinctions made, no rebuke against the grave errors that inhabit the mind of many “ethicists” (this is the same profession, after all, that has told us that post-birth abortion “aka murder” of children up to five is perfectly acceptable), no demarcating a clear line of distinction between the positive humanism of Jesus Christ and the profoundly negative, materialist, soul-destroying humanism of the modern-day progressive outlook.
And on top of it all, the statement that the Church has no privileged voice when it comes to public ethics! No wonder he looks down upon those praying outside abortion mills as interloping busy bodies! No wonder he opposed the effort of tens of thousands of Italian Catholics to stop their nation from accepting the lie of pseudo-sodo-marriage! Little wonder he lists “environmental degradation” as one of the most grave evils to combat!
This is well beyond even anything that Pope Paul VI was willing to advocate, heretofore far and away the most secular-minded, progressive pope in history. It is the veritable opposite of what virtually every single other predecessor of his in his vital office has ever decreed, such as Pope Leo XIII stating: “The Church of Christ is the true and sole teacher of virtue and guardian of morals.” However, this kind of declaration is in line with how a secular left-leaning individual views the Church. In fact, it is entirely in context with what we have seen of this entire agenda to remake the Church into what Francis somehow claims to loathe – just another worldly, money-funneling, occasionally-do-some-good NGO.
I’m quite surprised this comment hasn’t received far more attention than it has, because it’s really shocking. Have we already become inured to such declarations? That’s a potential follow-on effect of this pontificate, that it reshape the views of even those doubtful, or openly opposed, to its course in ways they themselves don’t quite realize. Thus the revolution embodied -and, according to many of his collaborators, intended – by this pontificate can become deeply ingrained in the Catholic psyche, affecting the sensus fidei of millions for years or decades to come And as I said, this can even trickle down to those who have grave concerns.
Feature or bug?
Mass failure: Brooklyn parish holds “Star Wars” Mass February 1, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, Basics, different religion, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, Liturgy, sadness, scandals, secularism, Society, the struggle for the Church.
St. Bernard Parish in Brooklyn scheduled, and apparently yesterday held, a “fun” Star Wars themed Mass. Kids were invited to dress as their favorite characters – many adherents to a Buddhist-Shintoist religion, some of whom are guilty of genocide and other acts of depravity on an unimaginable scale – and further denigrate the sanctity and vitality of the Mass:
The theme in the Church these past few decades really seems to be: when you totally run out of ideas, ape pop culture! Pop culture is popular! Maybe some of that popularity will rub off on us!
We wish this was just a joke. It is not. It is pure sacrilege taking place in a parish in Brooklyn, New York. Not only does the Diocese of Brooklyn know about this abomination … it actually helped advertise it on facebook!…….
……..According to the advertisement, the Mass itself was to be “Star Wars” themed.
First, this Mass did take place. Parishioners have confirmed it did.
Some of those tried to downplay the event, saying the Mass was not Star Wars-themed, itself, except for the kids dressed up like little Sith and Jedi. They say there was a Star Wars party concurrent and after the Mass, instead. But the flyer clearly spoke of a Star Wars themed Mass, so……..
As I said, when the Mass undergoes a transformation from the re-presentation of the Sacrifice of Calvary, the confecting of the Real Presence of Our Lord Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity, into a closed circle celebration of us, awesome, awesome US, this kind of thing is bound to happen. Indeed, it is almost inevitable, and there is even room to argue it is surprising it doesn’t happen more often than it does (instead, we tend to see a proliferation of not-so-obvious abuses). Such a fundamental dereliction of the ends of the Mass, from Adoration, Contrition, Thanksgiving, and Supplication, to “let’s cheer for the choir,” Eucharistic Prayer II, and “active participation means everyone scurry around” reveals a profoundly humanistic, even attention-seeking ethos. Instead of reaching children by sharing with them the unspeakable glory of the Gift God makes available to us every time we assist at Mass, we get Star Wars, clown, and balloon Masses.
And the vast majority of those kids fall away. 50 years of abject failure have proven that to an irrefutable degree. Instead, those in the vast majority of the Church, be they lay, priest, or bishop, continue to try absolutely anything, no matter how disordered, no matter how irreverent, except that which worked – demonstrably, provably – so very well for 1950 years, give or take a few.
It’s very difficult to see in that steadfast refusal to return to what worked so well, for so long, something other than a revolutionary intent revealing the mindset of an incompatible religion. It was through the Liturgy that I first came to recognize the crisis in the Church, and that continues through to this day.
Hideous, glowing WaPo report on “homosexual” priests February 1, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, different religion, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, priests, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
Uff da. They may be right that half or more of current clergy are inclined to same-sex attraction, but that only indicts the horrific dereliction that has afflicted seminaries and dioceses going back decades, to before the Council. Suffice it to say, a cadre of ideologically motivated and perversely inclined men started entering the priesthood in deliberate, focused fashion in the mid-20th century, rose to occupy many levers of power in the Church, and remade the institutions they controlled into something radically different from what they were intended to be. Their presence was a key element in the revolution within the Church. The continuing influence of avowedly “gay” priests is a cancer eating away at the heart of the Church, as these men are ultimately living a lie and are, on some fundamental level, gravely handicapped, if not totally unsuited, for the sacred office they hold (happily celibate men who eschew their disordered inclination are a special case I won’t get into in this post. I’m speaking of the unapologetic types identified below).
The source is the Washington Post, so you can expect these men – who entered the priesthood knowing the Church’s clear Doctrine on the disordered nature of same-sex attraction and the manifest evil of sodomy – receive a sympathetic ear. This is in fact a push piece intended to stir up sodomitical radicalism in the Church, but it’s important to know what we’re up against (my emphasis and comments):
At a time when the phrase “coming out” is starting to sound almost quaint, the Catholic priesthood may be one of the last remaining closets — and it’s a crowded one. People who study gay clergy believe gay men make up a significant percentage of the 40,000 ordained priests in the United States, including some who believe they may even be the majority…….[Maybe. Which doesn’t make it OK, it just shows the depths of the crisis and the derangement that has afflicted the Church in the past few decades]
The Catholic Church is in the throes of a historic period of debate about homosexuality. Between Pope Francis’s now-famous “Who am I to judge?” line and two high-profile, global meetings he called in the past year to open up discussion about sex and family, there has perhaps never been as much dialogue among Catholics about how far to extend the welcome mat to gay people. [We shall never be rid of that damnable statement. It will continue to scandalize and serve as justification for noxious sin and revolution in the Church for decades to come]
……..Gay priests are invisible in this debate; the church does not research the topic. However, interviews with a dozen priests and former seminarians who are gay, and experts on gay priests, reveal a group of men mostly comfortable with their sexuality. Many express no urgency for the church to accept it. Some, however, say the priesthood remains sexually repressive; one said there is an “invisible wall” around the topic among priests. [Chastity is not repression. Sheesh the worldliness, the hedonism of these guys. I’ll just add that some of the worst child abusers in the priesthood – like those at St. John’s Abbey in Minnesota – were those who “embraced” their sexuality and had no shame whatsoever about it.]
……..The Rev. Warren Hall decided to join the tiny number of out priests after he was removed as campus minister of Seton Hall University last May. Officials noted he had supported a group on Facebook that advocates for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and racial justice……..
…….“Priests want to be good priests, they want to do their job,” said Hall, who was reassigned to a Hoboken, N.J., parish. [So he’s still in service. C’MON!]
………Priests who have come out — in some cases citing the need to confront anti-LGBT discrimination — say they have found scant support among other priests.
“Parishioners were very supportive. [Gee, a priest with a huge skeleton, something that he knows is not rightly ordered to the priesthood, raises up morally indifferent people. Color me shocked!] Religious women were very supportive. [The most disordered cohort in the Church. Shocked!] One group that was silent were my brother priests. Gay as well as straight,” said the Rev. Fred Daley, a Syracuse, N.Y., priest who came out in 2004 after he was angered by people blaming gay priests for the global clergy sex abuse crisis…….[Please. Nearly 90% of the victims were boys. Give me a break. And yet another open priest still in service. Is he celibate? Note that Syracuse in the disastrously liberal upstate NY dioceses]
The mixture of fealty to God and the church and concern about harming parishioners or their standing in the priesthood has led some gay priests to gauge each situation before opening up. [So then on some level they are fundamentally dishonest. Is that a desirable characteristic in a priest? Notice how all this revolves around THEM. More below]
A New York priest says he comes out only in rare private circumstances, when counseling someone struggling to accept their homosexuality. “I’ve been in multiple situations where someone will say: ‘I’m a piece of s—.’ I’ll say: ‘Do I look like a piece of s— to you? God made me this way.’ ”[I am so tired of hearing this. This priest is destroying who knows how many souls, as an authority figure who invincibly convinces them that their sins are No. Big. Deal. Most will never overcome that tragic experience]
A Pennsylvania priest says he’s “quietly subversive,” speaking acceptingly of gay people but not to just anyone. Even the confessional is not a truly safe place for him to tell someone who is gay that it’s not a bad thing. “We have too much to lose. I’ve invested my life in this business.”
That last bit really encapsulates the, I would say diabolical, nature of these men. First, it’s all about him, again. Second, we see the self-serving revolutionary mentality, “quietly subversive.” Thirdly, we see his incredibly disordered approach to the priesthood – “this business.” Fourth, we see a mentality that defines self around one’s sexual predilections to a disconcerting degree, which weighs heavily against the right conduct of a priestly office. But that’s what many priests have been formed to be, mid-level managers in Amchurchcorp and occasional “sacramental administrators,” whose personal life is held to be as inconsequential as that of a McDonald’s manager.
A self-identified “gay” priest argues towards the end of the article that the newer generation of priests is more conservative but just as “gay” as the preceding generations. Which, I pray is not true, but I would not be shocked to know that the lavender mafia controlling the vast majority of seminaries continues to weed out non-disordered men. I really do tend to think this kind of thing is much less prevalent in the few traditional seminaries, but I’m sure the crisis extends even there but to a dramatically lesser degree. We should bear in mind, however, the self-serving nature of the priest’s claim – he has an obvious ax to grind, his conduct of the priesthood is bolstered if he feels like it’s inevitable, “everyone is doing it,” and even the more conservative priests are “just as bad.” It could be BS.
BUT…….reports like this do highlight the grave crisis afflicting the priesthood. It’s going to take a long time for this consuming illness afflicting the priesthood to recede to more historic norms, if not be excised almost entirely. Unfortunately, with the culture losing its mind and all but trumpeting this inclination as not just equivalent to, but in many ways superior to a well-ordered, moral life, it may well get still worse. That seems incredible, but we live in unprecedented times.
On the bright side, we will never run out of things to pray for.
Is the barbaric behavior of muslim “immigrants” a sign of ignorance, or is it a sign of domination? January 29, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Immigration, persecution, sadness, scandals, secularism, Society, suicide, the enemy.
A little of column A, and a little of column B, perhaps?
Bookworm notes that many of Europe’s governments from the local to the national level seem to be operating on the belief that the incredibly offensive, timorous behavior of many recent immigrants stems from the ignorance and barbarism of the immigrants themselves. Thus, there are mass campaigns underway to try to educate these immigrants in Western-ways, to, in effect, de-islamify and de-barbarize them.
But Bookworm posits another theory. These muslims are not so backwards that they do not know that doing despicable things – like defecating in public swimming pools and gang raping women – is not acceptable behavior. They are doing these things deliberately, and to a specific end:
Open any website dealing with the Muslim refugees in Europe, and you’re sure to find two different kinds of stories. The first kind of story tells about Muslims engaged in all sorts of inappropriate behavior, such as assaulting women,urinating or defecating in swimming pools, raping little boys, or just plain old killing people. The second kind of story tells aboutthe ways in which Europe intends to address these decidedly anti-social behaviors: They’re educating the refugees. The sophisticated Europeans have concluded that the refugees are so stupid and simplistic that they need to be taught good manners. Otherwise, how will they know not to rape, poop, or kill?
It strikes me that the really stupid, naive, unsophisticated people here are the Europeans who actually believe that this anti-social Muslim behavior comes about because Muslims are primitive people who are, for the first time, confronting an advanced society. To hold this position, Europeans must be willfully blind. Didn’t any of them notice the number of migrants who showed up with smart phones intact?…….
……….Here’s what I think is going on: The refugees are acting as they are, not because they see themselves as charity cases, but because they see themselves as conquerors. They know perfectly well that one doesn’t defecate in a pool in which people (especially children) are swimming. They’re doing it because they are performing the literal equivalent of the expression “I don’t give a —- about you.” They know you’re not supposed to rape women . . . that is, unless those women are the products of conquest, in which case raping them is one of Mohamed’s commandments.
I think Bookworm is onto something here. These millions of migrants see themselves changing Europe forever. I’m certain more than a few – probably those who engage in such disgusting behavior – see themselves as conquerors. That doesn’t mean they are, yet, anyway. But they could become so if policies are not reversed or if there is not some kind of reaction, much more than government signs and pamphlets begging immigrants not to behave in atrocious ways.
Is it too much to see in this developing crisis similarities to the fall of Rome? Note that the barbarian invaders did not have to outnumber the native, Romanized population when they started pouring through the no longer defended frontier in the 5th century. There had been barbarians in the Empire for years, for a number of reasons, but that rapidly accelerated in the 400s and led, within a lifetime, to the total collapse of the Western Empire. By the time they reached 10% of the population, the Western Empire was finished.
There have been barbarians/immigrants in Europe for years in this modern context, but now, suddenly, something has happened and the floodgates have opened. I don’t mean to say that Europe is finished at this point, but I am saying that each day this invasion in permitted to continue increases the likelihood of at least a nightmare internecine conflict as incompatible peoples sort themselves out, if not the actual implosion of Europe as bastion of Western civilization (such as remains, anyway).
At this point, I’m really not certain which is more likely to play out – a nativist awakening and struggle to eject (or at least contain) the invaders, or the gradual slipping away of all that has made Europe, Europe. It’s really up to the Europeans. Not that we are in substantially better shape. Our country, too, has been largely remade through immigration over the past 50 years, but it has been immigration of a much different, and less problematic, type. Having said that, there is no way Ronald Reagan could be elected governor of California today. That California is gone.
Migrant harassment of women as sign of Western emasculation January 29, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, disaster, Ecumenism, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, Immigration, paganism, rank stupidity, secularism, self-serving, Society, suicide.
A couple of interesting tidbits from Mark Steyn. The Anglican (ahem) Bishop of London has recommended his ministers grow muslim beards and wear muslim garb, the better to conduct “outreach” and fruitful “dialogue.” Another way of looking at this is the islamification of the Church of England:
One of the priests praised by the Bishop of London, the Rev. Atkinson told The Telegraph he found having a beard had helped provide a connection with many people in his parish, around 85 per cent of whom are Muslim…
He said he had forged new links with people after growing his facial hair.
He explained: ‘It is an icebreaker – St Paul said “I become all things to all men that by all possible means I might save some”…[Well St. Paul did not partake in pagan orgies in order to build bridges and maybe one day, 80 years hence, win a single convert]
So Western men now feel they need to ape muslim behaviors in order to demonstrate leadership and masculinity. Gotcha.
Not unrelated, a German woman has taken to Youtube imploring the men of her country to stand up for libertine ideals and protect their women. The men yawned, turned up the TV, and took another chug of beer:
One time in summer, the Muslims said we were sluts for walking outside in a t-shirt. Yes, we were wearing t-shirts. It’s summer!
Another day, I was wearing this. My friend and I purchased it while shopping hehe. If we feel like wearing it, we will wear it! And you Muslims have no right to physically assault or rape us for it! God willing, never in my life. You have no right to attack us because we are wearing t-shirts. You also have no right to rape.
The life of Germany has changed because these people cannot integrate. We give them so much help. We support them financially and they do not have to work. But they only want more babies and more welfare and more money. Men of Germany, please, patrol the streets and protect us. Do this for your women and your children.
This begging of men to defend native women from muslim rapine does raise an interesting question: why haven’t many, or any, done so? There actually was a protest against the islamification of Europe a few weeks ago, one that featured 3000 marchers and 1500 police and which descended into violence under what some participants believed was the influence of agents provacatuer planted by the police, who seem far more concerned about protecting the left-wing political “consensus” than protecting women from being raped and harassed.
But a protest is different from taking to the streets to prevent attacks on women, and it is not the same thing as responding to muslim depredations when they are seen occurring. Now it’s possible such responses have been buried by the media – though I have no idea why, they would love to trumpet some ugly “reactionary,” “anti-muslim” behavior – but I tend to imagine it’s more because they simply are not happening. Why? Do many Western men secretly long to see women subjugated, islam-style? I doubt it. Is it because they simply weren’t present? Perhaps, but that raises another question……why are women going out in areas with few native but bunches of muslim men?
I imagine the real answer, however, has something to do with the decades long feminist-leftist campaign to emasculate men and render them essentially neuter. Feminism has degenerated from a campaign to ostensibly elevate women into one that now nakedly seeks to lower men, especially outwardly masculine men. That campaign has taken a huge toll. Not that many men have fought it. Far too many have simply rolled over and submitted.
That’s not to say there is no positive defense being mounted by European men. See the rallies in Poland. It’s just that there hasn’t been nearly enough of this (we must keep in mind, however, that immigrants are protected by numerous laws, and can even deliberately provoke police and expect almost no reaction, so many “rights” have been accorded them by the governing elites who seem hell bent on destroying the nations they govern).
Ultimately, that’s what islam demands of all…..submission. Indeed, that is what the term “islam” means – submission. It seems the immigrants flooding Europe are making quite a bit of headway getting Europe to submit. Church of England ministers are visibly submitting to islamic dictates (and if they make even a single convert, I will be totally shocked). While left-liberalism is a pseudo-religion, when confronted with a very strong true religion, it will always fold. The reaction of European liberals to the ongoing muslim invasion have only confirmed my belief that there will be no great “war” between the libertine left and the muslim invaders……..the left will happily submit (it will take some time, but it’s already happening).
That’s because leftism is a specifically anti-Christian religion/ethos. So long as the “strong horse” religion they submit to, or even convert to, is not Christianity, the vast majority will be content to do so. Thus the diabolical origin of leftism is confirmed. Certainly, there are other factors at play and other explanations can be offered, but man is inseparable from the religious nature God gave him, and religious behavior – even when such is specifically denied – tends to predominate in the lives of many. Europe lost its soul when it rejected Christianity, en masse, and opened itself up to a diabolical replacement.
God allows our sins to be our undoing. Europe’s rejection of Christianity is proving the maxim.