FSSP Priest Interview Reveals Divisions within Fraternity April 25, 2017Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, Basics, foolishness, General Catholic, huh?, Latin Mass, priests, Restoration, Revolution, sadness, Society, SSPX, the struggle for the Church, Tradition.
I got sent a link to the following post this morning by reader TT. It’s an interview of the rather small German province of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter, the organization of priests dedicated to the traditional Mass that was founded by some who “broke away” from the SSPX at the time of the illicit consecrations of 4 bishops in 1988.
This interview is already being picked up as fodder for the endless (and tiresome) SSPX/FSSP debates that have been raging for almost 30 years. For those who already feel the FSSP is hopelessly compromised, the interview is being taken as proof of the correctness of that view. For those with internal knowledge of the Fraternity, as it is typically called, however, this interview only reiterates the divisions already well known within this society of priests.
I’ll add comments to the post I copy below, because I think there are some important things to clarify/note, but I’d like to make one point clear at the outset: every grouping of more than a few individuals is going to have disparity of belief. Once you get into the hundreds, like the FSSP, there is going to be a whole range of belief. Given that, generally speaking, both acceptance of a more stridently traditional outlook (or a certain, sometimes severe, hostility to Vatican II) and friendliness/sympathy for the SSPX varies inversely with the age of the priest and their closeness to the original point of division in 1988. That is to say, older priests in the Fraternity, especially those who were present in 1988 and made the decision to leave the SSPX, generally tend to be more accommodating towards the post-conciliar ethos and hostile towards the SSPX. Younger priests are generally more hardcore “traditional” and more friendly towards the Society.
This is not a universal rule and there is infinite nuance, even within individual priests!, but that’s probably the broad norm. I would also add that there is, as I understand it, a certain division of belief between priests of the Fraternity in the Americas, and those in Europe, with those again in Europe tending towards being the less ardently traditional, or the more accommodating. Having said that, I concur with a commenter at 1Peter5 that this is far from an inspiring interview. While I think the interview is being presented in a fairly negative light by Maike Hickson at 1Peter5, I think I can also say these are some of the most unhelpful comments I’ve seen from an FSSP priest in print, perhaps less for what they say (esp. on reflection) but for the sense they seem to convey of accommodation, of being (to quote some commentary I’ve seen) “modernist lap dogs who will do anything so long as they can continue to offer the ‘old Mass'”. Then again, I find myself defending the priest quite consistently below – I think that while he exhibits an attitude far different from what I’d like to see expressed, it’s not entirely surprising given his past.
So keep that in mind as you read the below, which many of you perhaps already have:
The usually cautious and reserved Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP) has now given its current opinion concerning the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) and on its possible formal re-integration into the structures of the Catholic Church. Father Bernhard Gerstle – the head of the German district of the FSSP – just gave a 24 April interview to the German Bishops’ official website Katholisch.dein which he explains many of the positions and opinions of his priestly fraternity. (Father Gerstle is the same priest who, in 2016, made a politely critical statement about the papal document Amoris Laetitia.) [An important note of clarification. Fr. Gerstle may be the head of the German district of the Fraternity, but I think it a great leap to derive from that that he is speaking for the mind of the entire Fraternity. Words of Fr. John Berg, former Superior of the entire order, in Latin Mass Magazine from 2015 (which I haven’t to hand) were far different and conveyed a far more traditionally Catholic understanding.]
Father Gerstle explains, first of all, that he himself split off from the SSPX because of the “illicit episcopal consecrations” in 1988 which, in his eyes, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger tried to forestall. (Interestingly, and just in the recent past, there have been voices saying that Cardinal Ratzinger, as pope, later removed the excommunications of the four SSPX bishops because he realized that he had contributed to the intensification of that earlier conflict. Worth noting is that, Bishop Athanasius Schneider, who has served as an official Vatican liaison to the SSPX, recently called this act of excommunication an “injustice.”) [This little aside causes me to wonder whether the author is not trying to inculcate a bit of doubt, even resentment, towards Fr. Gerstle. Sure “some voices” may say that, but lots of others say that the excommunications were wholly right and just. Obviously Fr. Gerstle is going to have a bias since he left the SSPX over this matter. I am curious as to why Hickson chose to introduce this seeming rebuttal right here.] In Gerstle’s eyes, the 1988 breach happened due to a “lack of trust toward Rome.” He also claims that many more priests within the SSPX had disapproved of the episcopal consecrations, “but did not make the final step.” Thus, there were “only a few priests and seminarians who left the Society of St. Pius X at the time [in 1988].” Gerstle explicitly says that the foundation of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter happened “essentially due to Cardinal Ratzinger, [who was] then head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.” [For those of us who weren’t involved, I don’t think it is easy to comprehend the depth of feeling on both sides involved in the 1988 consecrations. This was an event so trying and so radicalizing I don’t think many today fully realize the effect these events had on the participants. As one who was directly involved and experienced that heart-rending time, I don’t find Fr. Gerstle’s comments out of place. There are many involved who share his views, and of course, many who don’t, but it’s not like he’s breaching some radical new concept no one’s ever said before, even those who are very attached to the traditional practice of the Faith.]
Father Gerstle further distances himself from those smaller groups within the SSPX – whom he calls “hardliners” – who “reject the Second Vatican Council to a large extent, for example with regard to religious freedom or as to the decree on ecumenism.” Some of them, he says, also doubt the validity of the new liturgy. Gerstle makes it clear, moreover, where the Fraternity of St. Peter stands with regard to the Second Vatican Council: [No, he gives his own opinion. Unless he directly stated he was speaking as the voice of the entire Fraternity as a matter of policy – which if he did, we can be certain Hickson would be trumpeting this from the rooftops – then he’s giving his opinion, which Hickson is taking to mean it is the policy of the Fraternity because of his position, but I can say from direct experience there are many Fraternity priests who do not conform to the views expressed in this para or the one below. As to the divisions within the SSPX, these are well known and I find pointing them out wholly unremarkable.]
The Fraternity of St. Peter, however, has accepted to study without prejudice the conciliar texts and has come to the conclusion that there is no breach with any previous magisterial statements.However, some texts are formulated in such a way that they can give way to misinterpretations. But, in the meantime, Rome has already made here concordant clarifications which the Society of St. Pius X should now also recognize. [Emphasis added] [I would say the situation now remains as it has been, vague, uncertain, and unclear. Some tradition-friendly individuals in the Curia have made clarifications, they have expressed their opinions, but that is far from saying there has been a wholesale clarification of the problematic aspects of Vatican II. Rome appears willing to say almost anything to get the SSPX regularized. But whether these stands hold after that occurs is anyone’s guess, but there remains a huge monolith of progressive-modernist opinion in the clergy and hierarchy that VII is perfect, the best expression of the Faith ever conceived, and that the Church was literally re-born in 1965. That remains an extremely dangerous ideology that has not been washed away by a few conciliatory comments from folks at the Ecclesia Dei commission.]
Additionally, Father Gerstle insists that for the FSSP, the new 1983 Code of Canon Law is the standard. In his eyes, the SSPX has here some more reservations. For the FSSP, explains Gerstle “there is not a pre- and a post-conciliar Church.” “There is only the one Church which goes back to Christ,” he adds. Gerstle also insists that the FSSP does not “wish to polarize or even to promote splits,” but that they wish to instill in their own parishes “an ecclesial attitude.” Certain (unnamed, unspecified) abuses in the Church should only be criticized in a “differentiated and moderate way.” [We are only getting very partial and bifurcated comments. I don’t read German so I can’t go to the original and Google translate is too unreliable in such fine points. Having said that, I find these comments disappointing and far too conciliatory towards the post-conciliar construct. Then again, we do not know what pressures the Fraternity is under right now, but I understand they are considerable and the dangers great from those who would like to do to the ED communities what has been done to the FI’s.]
Father Gerstle also distances himself from the concept “traditionalist” when he says: “This notion I do not like at all to hear. We are not traditionalists, but simply Catholic.” As Catholics, he says, “we appreciate tradition,” but without “completely blocking organic adaptations and changes.” [This one I have no problem with. Some of the most informed readers of this blog eschew the term traditional, and say that what we practice is simply the Catholic Faith as it has always been believed, understood, and lived. There is nothing remarkable about “organic changes” either. VII was wholly inorganic.]
The worthy celebration of the traditional liturgy, together with a loyal teaching of the Catholic Faith, is at the center of the work of the FSSP, according to Gerstle. “Salvation of souls” and “eternal life” are their Fraternity’s own concern. Unfortunately, adds the German priest, “the Four Last Things have been widely neglected in the Church, with the effect of a belittling and attenuation of sin and of a loss of the practice of sacramental confession.” [I would hope this is uncontroversial. In fact, one could take from this a tacit rebuke of the post-conciliar construct, where the Mass is typically deplorable and the “teaching” counterfeit.]
Father Gerstle sees that “one cannot simply introduce everywhere again the old liturgy and, so to speak, impose it upon people.” “Both rites thus [with the help of the “reform of the reform”] should enrich each other,” explains the priest. Certain elements of the new liturgy could be “enriching for the extraordinary form of the Roman Rite.” [He’s just parroting PBXVI here, but I am personally extremely leery of any “enrichment” flowing from the NO to the TLM. I think there is virtually nothing in the NO that would “improve” the TLM.]
Moreover, Father Gerstle also explains that, in the German district, there are growing numbers of faithful who are interested in the traditional Tridentine Mass. Some of the FSSP Masses have “100 to 180 faithful” in attendance. He admits, however, that the FSSP has not too many vocations. “All in all we have a good number of incomers [16 new priests in 2016 and currently some 100 seminarians altogether], but it is not so that we are under pressure due to high numbers of vocations.” [The Fraternity is generally doing better in North America, where there is a certain pressure to grow the seminary. As for Mass attendance, the local FSSP parish is now attracting 1200+ on a typical Sunday. That is unusual, but the growth is consistent throughout, and I pray all the other tradition-oriented groups are experiencing the same or better.]
At the end of this interview, Gerstle explains that the SSPX faces a dilemma: either Bishop Fellay chooses unity with Rome and will have a split within his own organization, or he will choose unity within the SSPX and will not have unity with Rome. The German priest explains, as follows:
I think that the current Superior General, Bishop Bernard Fellay, will have to decide between unity with Rome and unity within the Society of St. Piux X. The realists within the leadership will then hopefully realize that there is no alternative to a reconciliation with Rome.
I find the first part of this analysis to be insightful, but I think anyone who has followed the situation even as casually as I have has reached about the same conclusion. I also think the second part is right, though I continue to have doubts as to whether now, with Francis in charge, is the right time. The man has a demonstrated track record of deliberately targeting tradition-embracing groups for destruction. But may God’s will be done.
As for the interview, this is absolutely not what I would prefer to see from a leading Fraternity priest. But I’m not sure it confirms the fatal weakness of the Fraternity, either. Does having a regular canonical status involve some compromise? Absolutely*. And folks in the SSPX had better be FULLY cognizant of that fact when they sign their “deal” with Rome.
Well I don’t post for a week then you get a novella. Lucky you. Sorry folks, posting is going to be infrequent for the foreseeable future. I had a very unusual situation for first 76 months of this blog’s history but that period is definitively order. I probably would not have posted today if this matter hadn’t hit so close to home. We’ve had a nightmare bronchitis/pneumonia go through our family that takes weeks to get over. I’m still fighting it but am back at work but also playing lots of catchup. Hope to get another post out tomorrow but who knows.
*-but so far, only of a limited and generally unobtrusive (or undamaging) sort. The “gravitational pull” of an unreconciled SSPX probably plays a role in the limited nature of the compromises forced on the FSSP – which is why I fear regularization for the entire restoration of the Faith. But ultimately God is in charge and we have to want what is best for the salvation of souls, which everyone (not really, but lots) tells me is regularization. So it must be it.
In Horrible Decision, Anthony Kennedy Allows Trial Verdicts to be Nullified if Jurors Are Found Insufficiently Politically Correct March 15, 2017Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, huh?, Immigration, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, unbelievable BS.
This story did not get much coverage, but has the potential to be huge. It will almost invariably lead to endless appeals and an end to the anonymous jury system, with jurors being investigated after the fact for any beliefs that might exonerate those found guilty of crimes. It also fits in perfectly with the general left-wing assault on civil liberties ranging from practice of Christianity to freedom of speech to freedom of association. Now jurors can be publicly excoriated if they are found to have uttered something politically incorrect at any point prior to or during a trial involving some “minority.”
Naturally, “Catholic” Anthony Kennedy sided with the Supreme Court’s left-wing minority to decide the issue. He is the most powerful man in America by a long shot, and was never elected to so much as dog catcher:
A recent Supreme Court ruling turns criminal justice on its head, putting the jury on trial for political incorrectness and letting the criminals run free. Pena-Rodriguez v. Colorado is utter lunacy:
After a Colorado jury convicted a Mexican man of sexual harassment, two jurors signed affidavits that a retired police officer on the jury had expressed racial animus during deliberations. The juror was reported to have stated that “nine times out of 10 Mexican men were guilty of being aggressive toward women and young girls,” among other slurs. The defendant’s counsel sought to overturn the conviction based on racial animus but was denied by the trial judge.[Who declares that statement to be a slur? It might be wrong, it might be a slur, but it could also be a mere statement of fact. Who gets to decide what constitutes a slur? Yet another power acceded to an unelected, unaccountable jurist?]
Civilization has been protected from verdicts being retroactively nullified due to alleged flaws of the jurors for centuries, thanks to the no-impeachment rule rooted in English common law.
As Justice Anthony Kennedy explained in the 5-3 majority opinion this week in Pena-Rodriguez v. Colorado, the rule “promotes full and vigorous discussion by jurors by providing considerable assurance that after being discharged they will not be summoned to recount their deliberations” or otherwise harassed. It also “gives stability and finality to verdicts.”
Yet Justice Kennedy joined the Court’s four liberals in Pena-Rodriguez to overturn that standard for accusations of racial bias. [Remember, Anthony Kennedy was the man possessed of the god-like power to peer into the souls of tens of millions of Americans opposed to so-called same-sex marriage, and find nothing but bigotry and blind animus. This is the creature that decides the fate of hundreds of millions of people.]
What exactly constitutes “racial bias” that should result in the verdict being overturned? The Supremes don’t say, guaranteeing endless appeals on grounds of alleged juror political incorrectness.
Presumably it will still be possible to incarcerate white male heterosexual Christian criminals. All other guilty verdicts are likely to be held up indefinitely while the jurors are retroactively investigated for any indication of ideological impropriety.
The ruling is a step toward corrupting juries with political standards based on the progressive obsessions with race, gender and class.
Beyond that, it is a step toward reducing our legal system to a dysfunctional farce.
Indeed. If there is an extreme imbalance in the failing US constitutional system of checks and balances, it is in the judiciary. Every single leftist advance in the culture, going back decades, has come from the judiciary, not the people themselves. Even constitutional amendments have been found “unconstitutional.” Basically anything a left-leaning judge does not like can be found to be unconstitutional, and rationalized on the most ephemeral of precepts: emanations from the penumbras, and all that. Amazing.
As far as turning the legal system into a dysfunctional farce, to those who want to see the United States, as it has been, destroyed, this is a feature, not a bug. Anything that undermines people’s support for the USA That Was is good to them, as they think it will bring forth their much longed for revolution.
Of course, the vast majority of the people longing for revolution today will be among the first lined up and shot should it occur. Along with millions of other relative innocents.
So now you have another reason to strive to get out of jury duty.
So……..Today’s a “Day Without a Woman”……… March 8, 2017Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, Basics, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, huh?, scandals, secularism, silliness, Society, unbelievable BS.
……….or, what my son and I call, daddy and BZRs super fun time party day.
Just more self-indulgent virtue signalling bullshnit.
The virtue signalling was turned up to level 11 in the city of Alexandria, VA, which even 20 years ago was a sane, somewhat conservative suburb, but which has been transmogrified into hyper-liberal enclave through the invasion of thousands of Washington apparatchiks. They closed all schools today in solidarity or because of a huge jones for a J or something I don’t know. The actual reason is so many left-wing teachers are taking the day off to…….demonstrate how a woman’s place is truly in the home, I guess:
Alexandria City Public Schools will be closed Wednesday after more than 300 staff members requested the day off.
The “unusually high number” of call-outs may be connected with the “Day Without a Woman” nationwide protest and social media campaign, school superintendent Alvin Crawley said in a statement.
Wednesday also marks International Women’s Day.
March 8 will be a teacher workday, Crawley said. March 10 was already a regularly scheduled workday.
“This is not a decision that was made lightly,” Crawley said, adding it was “based solely on our ability to provide sufficient staff to cover all our classrooms.”
The decision to close school “is not based on a political stance or position,” Crawley said.
Bonus content for this post. You know the democrats use violent SJW protesters as a breeding ground for their next generation of national leaders, right? This is really a training ground for their next generation of political leadership. Some very high profile names have been taking part. George Soros’ grandson helped organize and fund the riot in Berkeley. “Catholic” Tim Kaine’s son was arrested for rioting in Minnesota:
The son of former vice presidential candidate Tim Kaine reportedly was arrested during a clash between protesters at a pro-Trump rally.
Linwood Michael Kaine, 24, was busted for second-degree riot after the melee that took place in St. Paul, Minnesota, on Saturday during a rally in support of President Trump, according to Minnesota’s Pioneer Press.
Kaine, whose father was on the 2016 Democratic presidential ticket with Hillary Clinton, was released from jail Tuesday and the city attorney is considering whether to file misdemeanor charges, the paper said.
The chaos unfolded when anti-Trump protesters descended on St. Paul’s capitol rotunda Saturday during a March 4 Trump rally.
Demonstrators blew whistles and airhorns while one allegedly threw a smoke bomb into the crowd — striking a 61-year-old woman in the head, the Pioneer Press reported.
A total of five people were arrested for rioting and another busted for disorderly conduct.
Now, Tim Kaine’s son does not live in Minnesota. He is part of that core group of paid agitators who fly around to take part in riots whenever a pro-Trump event is planned. Many of today’s leaders of the demonrat party were extremists of the 60s and 70s. This is their next generation.
Finally, some good news, ESPN is dying, and not soon enough. Maybe more college games will wind up on broadcast TV if they go away. Keep up the leftist diatribes, ESPN! Keep losing audience!
As sports cable network ESPN continues to bleed cash, another round of layoffs is about to hit that will reportedly take out some well-known reporters and on-air faces.
Reports say that ESPN management is being tasked with cutting “tens of millions” of dollars of staff salary from its payroll, meaning that on-air personalities are on the chopping block, according to Sports Illustrated…….
………..The news of the massive cuts comes on the heels of reports that ESPN is losing millions per year.
Once a sports powerhouse, ESPN has gone from must-see-TV for millions of sports fans to a financial boondoggle for owner Disney with the network losing up to 10,000 subscribers a day, reports said last month.
“A floundering ESPN, with rising costs and declining viewership, continued to sink Disney’s DIS, +0.24% financial results during its fiscal first quarter,” MarketWatch.com reported.
With ESPN dragging on the company, Disney’s revenue fell 3 percent, and its profits sank 14 percent, the financial site reported.
As to ESPN itself, the network lost subscribers, found its average viewership crater, and experienced falling advertising rates even as its programming costs climbed. And this fall from grace continued even after Disney insisted that ESPN had reached its bottom after the previous quarter came to an end.
ESPN’s crashing revenue coincides with its increasingly leftward political content, a drift so blatant that the network’s ombudsman felt pressured to address the network’s political content.
A Highly Illuminating Blast from the Past February 28, 2017Posted by Tantumblogo in fun, General Catholic, history, huh?, Revolution, secularism, sickness, Society, the enemy.
Wow. You might find the video below as intriguing as I did. It covers the early part of George Wallace’s 1968 election campaign as a third party candidate. Later he chose the often unfairly maligned Curtis E. LeMay for his running mate.
It’s interesting what is and isn’t discussed in the video, which I believe was produced by a friendly Alabama TV station. Segregation is never directly addressed – which of course had been a huge part of Wallace’s political past (though leftists might hear a “dog whistle” in repeated appeals to law and order) – but then neither is Vietnam. What is discussed may sound eerily familiar to you, as it did to me. Many of the same concerns that resulted in Trump’s election were being voiced by millions of Americans (Wallace got 14% of the vote and won several southern states) fifty years ago: horror at liberal overreach, grave concern over an increasingly totalitarian judiciary pushing an always leftist agenda, an increasing sense that individual liberties were being steadily curtailed. Hey, 60s people, wait till you get a load of cultural marxism/political correctness! Are any of you Wallace supporters still around?!
May dad had an AuH20 (Goldwater in that very atomic time) sticker on his car in ’64, but voted for Nixon in ’68. West Texas used to be covered in billboards demanding the impeachment of both Johnson and Earl Warren. Those early efforts were sadly unsuccessful, and now we’re much further down the line of leftist totalitarianism, being perhaps one presidential administration away from the final demise of the “American experiment.” Fortunately, that did not come to pass, at least, in 2016. But it might in 2020, if Trump cannot roll much of this leftist agenda back.
Wallace, of course, did not earn much Catholic support. Jim Crow segregationists -and he had definitely been one – had little more love for Catholics than they did for blacks. Catholics returned the sentiment, in general. It is surprising that Wallace did attract quite a bit of support outside the South, as the video makes clear. Numerous Americans were disgusted by Johnson and exceedingly concerned over what was then the still quite nascent advance of cultural marxism and leftism in our country. Whatever Wallace was, and I’m certainly no big student of him, he seemed to appeal to developing and broad-ranging concern that America had gotten badly off-track and was in danger of becoming lost. Reagan would tap into this same sentiment to great success in 1980, finally gaining wide crossover support from Catholics for a Republican nominee.
No I am not endorsing Wallace or some of his more unfortunate views in posting this. It is to me a highly revealing time capsule of an America that was, which ain’t nearly so different as we might have thought it would be from today. If you’ve got 30 or 60 minutes to invest, I think it’s worth your time. Wallace certainly did recognize some of the gravest threats this republic faced then and now, and articulated them quite well. Of course, a few years later, after being shot in 1972, he would reverse many of these opinions and become much more liberal. Nevertheless I think this has some value from both the historical perspective and from a sociological point of view, in terms of comprehending just how long and deep the same concerns that led to Trump’s media-aided emergence in 2016 have existed. I tell you what, it is almost mind-blowing to see George Wallace packing halls in, of all places, San Francisco!! – California used to be a fairly conservative state until the invasion of illegal immigrants and burned out hippy summer of love leftovers totally remade that state’s demographics.
If you want to save time I think you can get a good feel for the whole by just watching the first 10 or 15 minutes. After that it does become a bit more repetitive.
UPDATE: Wallace took some stands that most people today find appalling. His “segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever” seems unfathomable. Of course, he was always more a populist than a true segregationist – that portion of the Alabama white populace that elected him in ’64 wanted segregation to persist, so Wallace became that group’s champion. As desegregation became inevitable Wallace jettisoned that rhetoric quickly, and as I noted, in later life wholly repudiated those policy positions.
Having said that, LBJ, often lauded as a civil rights pioneer, is widely reported to have said, regarding the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and the creation of the welfare state – “we’ll have the niggars voting for us (the democrats) for 200 years.” This was part and parcel with a racism inherent within much of the democrat party that I think, in much more subtle but possibly more destructive ways, persists to this day. Of course, virtually everyone has forgotten that all of those measures required strong Republican support to pass Congress, as the democrat party was badly split on those issues. Interesting how that works out, the democrats have always reaped the electoral rewards of these stands taken in the 60s today, to the extent that the entire Republican party, or merely to vote Republican, is considered irretrievably racist by the Black Lives Matters movement and others dedicated to the furtherance of Democrat political interests. The current Republican president is being presented as history’s biggest monster simply because he exists, not because of anything he’s actually done, which isn’t much, yet. This is the new normal for Republicans going forward. The media-government complex (those Wallace lambasted as “pseudo-intellectuals”) cannot be destroyed soon enough.
Meanwhile, democrats continue to cultivate a virtual plantation where they keep minorities voting reliably for them even as those same minorities cultural, moral, and even economic situation continues to horribly deteriorate as a deliberate result of democrat-leftist policies. Someone will write a great comic tragedy someday, some great masterpiece of literature, if such things still exist 100 years from now, covering exactly this comedy of errors. It would be unbelievably if it were not true.
Two Short Videos Exposing the Danger and Ignorance of the Left February 22, 2017Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, awesomeness, cultural marxism, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, huh?, rank stupidity, Revolution, secularism, silliness, Society.
These are both great, and just what I need to kick out a post in 5 minutes! First, Nigel Farage, key man in the drive towards Brexit in the UK, discusses the destructive influence leftist domination of the schools, where propaganda replaces traditional curricula, and the effect this has had on the “millennial” generation:
“This young generation, who scream words like ‘fascist,’ have actually themselves become the fascists.”
This was from an hour long speech he gave at Hillsdale College.
Next, and even more fun, the increasingly awesome Tucker Carlson utterly eviscerates a clueless and very confused young man who can’t provide a single, verifiable reason for his (and many other’s) unhinged opposition to Trump:
Stupidity like that actually makes me cringe. It’s like fingernails on a chalkboard to me, seeing someone so completely unable to form a rational argument or justify his very strident beliefs. He is so propagandized he a) can’t think, and b) is only able to repeat the dumb, dense talking points he’s been spoon fed. The terrifying thing about this is that there are millions, possibly tens of millions just like him, and many of them do not have the excuse of being young or formed in a corrupt, politicized educational establishment.
But that’s precisely the point of gaining control of the schools and indoctrinating children in cultural marxism. Yuri Bezmenov, one of the architects of cultural marxism in the West and a former KGB agent, says the system is so pernicious those who become captured by it are never – barring some great act of Grace, I suppose – able to escape. They are literally unable to think independently or critically. This cultural marxist hold on the education system started in the 50s and 60s, gained firm hold by the late 80s, and has had total dominance since the 90s. At least parts of three generations have been affected by it, with the latest generation seemingly dominated by this kind of thinking (there are, of course, exceptions).
Carlson has folks like this on about every night, it seems, and similarly crushes and embarrasses them. Yet they keep coming. What could motivate someone to do that? What would cause a young leftist to think they’re the one who will finally give Carlson his comeuppance? Diabolical narcissism.
Did an American Hermit Predict Donald Trump Would Lead a Great Spiritual Revival in the US? February 22, 2017Posted by Tantumblogo in fun, General Catholic, huh?, priests, Restoration, Society, the struggle for the Church.
I haven’t much time, but was sent this yesterday by reader D. I’ve never heard of the priest before. He claims, through rather providential circumstances, to have met at American hermit living in Loreto many years ago, a man who predicted decades before last year’s election that Donald J. Trump would lead a great spiritual or religious revival in this nation. Take it for what you will, it’s certainly interesting, to say the least:
Look, I am grateful to have Trump. Anybody but Hillary. And he’s done some pretty good things so far, along with a few not so good ones, like letting the “Dream Act” illegals remain, apparently. His undermining of the self-serving elitist uniparty of indifference and self-enrichment is a great achievement in itself. But I do think people sometimes have exaggerated expectations for the man. He’s never been particularly devout or Christian. His personal morality is uninspiring, to say the least. So, I’m a bit doubtful about the great 21st century American Catholic Restoration being inspired by this man, but there is certainly nothing wrong in maintaining a pious hope that such may occur. Lord knows, we need it.
I’m out for the day. It always happens like this, I have a proverbial ton of great material for the blog and no time to share it! Perhaps God may will that I may have more time tomorrow. I tried to get a few things out today.
I had found most of these on my own, but commenters also shared all the the videos below. Sorry if they’re repeats for many of you, but these videos are good enough to share again on the off chance some haven’t seen them.
As I said, they’re very good, BUT – as they feature today’s Left, they have to be filled with foul language, immodest displays, and rank idiocy. The first is the best, and demonstrates something I’ve been hypothesizing for years: the Left will not fight islam, but will eagerly be subsumed into it as simply another militant anti-Christian muslim entity. Christianity is the Left’s most ancient and hated foe – all other considerations must pale before that. And, honestly, even though they have used hedonism to attack and undermine Western society, most leftists would be perfectly happy under a strict moral code imposed by a tyrannical religion – so long as that religion is not Christianity.
I don’t know what else could prove Leftism as a creation of satan better (again, language and content warning, do not watch near children):
That chick shouting the islamic call to prayer has done that many times before. Her intonations were spot on. Scary.
On a brighter side, a Trump supporter called “Big Joe” carpet bombs participants in the “Women’s March” with 2000 lb truth bombs. I think there’s a little bad language here but generally it’s just annoying leftism, ad hominems, and a complete inability to respond to real, hard, factual argument:
I really cannot stand to see/hear people just shouting over each other. It’s like fingernails on a chalkboard to me.
So here is another, someone put together a spoof mashup of Star Trek (TOS) and Ashley Judd’s totally unhinged, absolutely freaked out rant at the feminist march in DC. It’s pretty funny, but again, I’ve got to provide a warning, another Leftist with a potty mouth. Frankly, you can get the same effect from this video by watching the first 30 and last 60 seconds, and skip most of the rant, which I would only watch if you enjoy displays of people very much all aboard on the kray-kray-train. I mean, this chick is just straight up nuts:
Did you ever see that movie “Bug” she was in. She plays a lady who meets a guy, and together they descend into madness. I don’t recommend it. But after watching this, I have to conclude, she didn’t have to act much for that part.
Finally, another bit from Steven Crowder, this time, presenting Planned Murderhood in an all too realistic light. This is pretty ribald, but no bad words, thankfully:
There has been an explosion of really good conservative commentary on Youtube in the past year. Crowder, Watson, Kennedy, McIIIIInnes, Yiannopoulos, Dr. Joel Peterson……..lots of excellent resources. These folks are also much more combative and relatively immune to the Left’s usual tactics – crying racist, sexist, homophobic, etc., to all their opponents. IOW, the politics of personal destruction, and all that.
Anyhoo…….maybe you’ll find something worthwhile in these vids.
Circumcising the Root of All Evil January 18, 2017Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, Christendom, Domestic Church, family, General Catholic, huh?, manhood, sadness, silliness, Society, Tradition.
The post title is a bit tongue in cheek, Sensus Fidelium on Youtube posted the video below yesterday, an upload from a recent episode of the Crusade program of the St. Benedict Center in New Hampshire. The topic is voluntary male circumcision, which is done to the large majority of males (Jewish or otherwise) in infancy, generally at the hospital within a day or so of birth. I’ve always thought circumcision was mostly a question of taste with perhaps some overtones of cleanliness and moderation, but it appears at least one Catholic philosopher/ethicist has determined circumcision to be a barbaric practice that causes a huge gamut of (potential) deleterious health effects. None of which any of the males on either side of my family has ever experienced going back at least 4 generations, and all of which were circumcised.
I’m posting this not because I really care either way, this is a very personal decision. There are pros and cons on both sides and you can decide where you line up. It’s quite possible the medical benefits of circumcision have been overstated, but I think the dire claims made in the program of negative effects are also being dramatically overblown. Love, and do what you will, and all that.
The reason I’m posting this is the fascination I had with the responses on Youtube. People who had almost certainly never heard such a detailed (and one might even say, extremely opinionated) presentation on this subject before were suddenly lining up declaring circumcision to be a barbaric practice that must be stopped NOW. Which is odd, because, this is just one presentation, which may or may not be accurate. Why are folks getting so exercised over something they may have never heard a cogent argument on before? Are those expressing instant shock and outrage really in a position to judge whether or not this guy is really telling the truth, or maybe has gone a bit around the bend?
There was another aspect to that drew my attention – some pretty hardcore comments regarding Judaism. Certainly circumcision and Judaism have a long connection, but some of the direct commentary – leaving alone snide implications – regarding filthy Jews, et. al., was a bit extreme. I found that unfortunate.
As I said there are arguments on both sides, some people say circumcision negatively effects a man’s ability to feel certain pleasures, some say being uncircumcised can lead to accumulation of dirt and disease. I’ve never known anything different, so I have no way of knowing if these claims are right or not. I do think maybe we should tone down the instant outrage generation on every single little issue that comes along. If one wants to argue that circumcision is a bad practice that has outlived its usefulness, fine. He’s probably right. But for folks to turn it into a giant conspiracy and start to allude that you’re somehow less Catholic if you’ve been involved in this very optional, tangential practice, I think that’s where the circular firing squad and the shrinking of the membership of the True Remnant Church (TM) down to one (me!) starts to get a little extreme.
So, While I Was Away, Dallas Got a New Bishop January 4, 2017Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, Dallas Diocese, episcopate, General Catholic, history, huh?, priests, secularism, Society.
Edward Burns from, of all places, Juneau, AK, was named to replace departed <giggle> Cardinal <snort> Farrell about three weeks ago, while I was in beautiful but cold North Carolina. This is a real under-the-radar kind of appointment. Burns is not as young as I feared (59, meaning Dallas won’t be saddled with one man, great or disastrous, for thirty years, like Albany and Rochester have been), and he’s led a fairly low profile heretofore. I’m not entirely certain, but there’s a good possibility that his former Diocese, Juneau, is the smallest in the nation. Heck, it’s 6000 Catholics are smaller than probably 2/3 of the parishes in this diocese.
I’ll admit this appointment happened a great deal sooner than I thought. Bishop Cardinal Farrell had said, before departing, that a replacement would be named within 2-3 months. I scoffed at that, since other dioceses have waited 18-24 months to get replacements, but he was obviously better informed than I: the replacement was named just over 3 months after Farrell departed for his new sinecure in Rome.
New Bishop Burns hails originally from Pittsburgh, and got some love from Pope JPII (via Ratzinger) in being appointed one of the co-chairman of the apostolic investigation into the (deliberately engineered) vocations crisis in the US, and later was appointed to the Vatican review of US seminaries. After that, however, he was sent back to Pittsburgh to the post he had held before he had been elevated to the USCCB in 1999, as rector of the diocesan seminary in Pittsburgh. After an additional year in that role was apparently sufficient purgatory and he was then consecrated Bishop of Juneau by Benedict XVI in early 2009. I don’t know if these moves signify a rising or falling star or are simply the vagaries of Church assignments for a man being groomed for the episcopate. Beats me.
The Diocese of Pittsburgh under Bishop David Zubik is generally seen to be somewhat on the conservative side, I think, at least relatively speaking by 201X American standards. What that means for our new Bishop Burns in Dallas is uncertain. This guy does not have much of a paper trail, though he has been fairly reliably pro-life, at least in a few public pronouncements. He doesn’t seem to be a screaming liberal, but I could be fooled.
I’m also uncertain what Burn’s appointment means for the Diocese. It does seem something of a step down, from receiving the consummate insider (and clearly a man on the rise) in Farrell, who had been a protege of the notorious but highly influential Cardinal McCarrick, a big player in the politically important Archdiocese of Washington, DC, and a deeply committed USCCB apparatchik, to this guy, wonderful though he may be (or may not be) from the Diocese of North Pole. Does that say something about how Dallas is perceived within the Church? Under Farrell, Dallas went from being something of a backwater with a scandalous recent past (the boy-rape scandals and decadent seminary situation being Farrell’s two biggest repair priorities in office) to being a destination, from being a place that received bishops from elsewhere to one that exported many into leadership positions in nearby dioceses. Or is it a situation where a diocese in crisis merited an admittedly sharp administrator (if hardly an inspiring, doctrinally strong shepherd), and now that the crisis is supposedly past (though things continue to be buried), someone of a lower profile could be named as replacement? I do not say any of this as a criticism of Burns, it’s simply comparing the very disparate past histories of two different men.
Some local pro-life folks have apparently met with Bishop-elect Burns and came away heartened. So maybe he’ll be awesome. My guess is that very little will change, practically speaking. There isn’t anything in his background, that I have found, that indicates he might have a innate hostility towards Tradition, over and above what most men formed in his time and place have. Of course, it’s difficult to say, most of this is just speculation off of a few thread of evidence. If you have found documentation that indicates reasons for concern or elation, please share them. My research has been limited to an afternoon and an evening during the break. I admit I am mostly just spitballing in this post.
One thing that has changed, and I imagine this was planned under Farrell, is that the local pro-life Mass and march will be split into two days, and the march will be little more than a short stroll from the convention center to an empty parking lot on deserted, weekend downtown streets (the last bit being per usual, unfortunately). This isn’t a major change, formerly held on one day with a Mass and a mile or so long march through downtown Dallas, the local pro-life March has, over the years, degenerated into a self-congratulatory spectacle garnering precious little media coverage and accomplishing mostly mutual back-patting. I don’t criticize those who participate, it’s certainly fine to get some reinforcement for one’s pro-life beliefs, but the March reaches basically no one who is not already converted and I don’t think it accomplishes a great deal in the defense of life in any concrete sense. As such, we’re going to just pray/counsel outside a mill, instead of participating in the March. Unfortunately, in the wake of the court’s overturning of Texas HB2, mills that had closed down due to the bill are re-opening, like the notorious Northpark mill which is nearly complete.