jump to navigation

Your Annual Reminder Not to Give a Dime to CCHD or CRS November 22, 2019

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, Dallas Diocese, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, It's all about the $$$, scandals, secularism, sickness, Society, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

A nice video from Taylor Marshall below, interviewing the long-laboring Michael Hitchborn of the Lepanto Institute, summarizing all the ongoing scandals with the US bishop’s so-called Catholic Campaign for Human Development (CCHD), which also ties in with Catholic Relief Services (CRS).  Of course, if you’ve been reading this blog for a few years, you know I’ve covered the scandals and moral atrocities of both organizations repeatedly, and have constantly advised readers not to give to either organization.  However, I go much further than that, and advise that faithful Catholics do all they can to “hide” their money from the bishops in every respect – meaning trying to be very careful about what you donate to your parish, because parishes are taxed (“assessed”) by the dioceses, and the dioceses are taxed by the USCCB, to the extent that the Archdiocese of Philadelphia was forced to kick up a quarter of a million dollars to the USCCB in one recent fiscal year alone.  All charitable organs of the USCCB and its affiliates are, at the very least, extremely dependent on government money, and as such, they drift ever leftwards in their cultural and moral outlook as time goes by, as the Left is seen at being more generous with the taxpayers dollars, and because the large majority of the bureaucrats who staff the various organs of the USCCB are leftists themselves (leaving aside the large and, under Francis, growing number of bishops who are also socially, morally, and religiously left-leaning).

In the 2nd video below, at about 18 minutes in, Michelle Malkin notes the connection between the US “episcopate’s” leftward drift (I put episcopate in quotes, because the vast majority of actions taken by the USCCB and its many subsidiary organizations are actually taken by lay staffers, with minimal if any actual episcopal oversight) and its growing dependence on government money.  Of course, the direction in which Francis is taking the Church is only accelerating this trend.

This is only part of the reason why (other reasons – rampant sodomy in their ranks that bishops refuse to police, the extremely dubious nature of national episcopal conferences with regard to the Tradition/Doctrine of the Faith, the deleterious effects of national conferences on right moral and doctrinal government by local bishops, mass-scale embezzlement and financial abuse, etc., etc.) I have long advised souls to do all they can to donate to their local Catholic parishes in ways that prevent their money from being assessed by the bishops and used for immoral purposes.  Once souls become aware of the constant, ongoing, and massive scale of the abuses of virtually all dioceses and the national episcopal conferences, it is arguable that they have a moral duty to do just what I am recommending.  That being said, diverting money to areas of parish finances that are not assessed is not easy, and bishops will react violently if lay Catholics do things like starting up lay-administered funds with which they pay for various parish needs.  The bishops really, really, REALLY do not like that, because  they know if the laity were to ever, en masse, start to make serious efforts to shield their money from assessment, the party would be over, and that right quick, in spite of the billions flowing into their coffers from the US taxpayer.

Fortunately, there do remain certain means to divert funds from sources that will be assessed by diocese.  Building funds are often a convenient location, that if assessed, are assessed at a much lower rate than the general parish income.  Saving money and making direct purchases for items such as objects of art, large capital equipment expenses, etc., are another means.  You might speak with your good, traditional pastor about other means of support.  If these steps are taken, they must be done individually, and not in an organized fashion.  Organization by lay people to fund their parish in ways that deny the dioceses ability to assess that money will bring down the wrath of iniquitous men upon you.  This has been tried, more than once, and the response by the bishops was always severe.

Cuck-Fil-A Chooses Mammon Over God November 19, 2019

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, It's all about the $$$, paganism, Revolution, sadness, scandals, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society.
comments closed

Not entirely surprising, but still disappointing.  The news has been all over, that popular but (stupidly) controversial restaurant chain Chick-Fil-A will stop supporting Christian charities, as it always has in the past, and now start supporting different, not explicitly Christian, if not avowedly leftist charitable organizations. They are doing this, of their own admission, in order to try to appeal to leftists generally, and specifically to get the rabid, deranged, amoral, but almost always successful sodomite lobby off their backs. I don’t think this will help Chick-Fil-A in its goal to expand into much more liberal areas of the US, and, especially, to Canada and overseas, unless they completely and totally become an active enemy of Christianity and avowedly take up a radical leftist agenda. Which, they may well do.  I, for one, am willing to bet that their policy of being closed on Sunday will be gone before the end of 2020.

Not many people may know that Chick-Fil-A attempted to expand into England over the summer, and had to shut down their restaurant there after only 5 weeks due to heavy protests and low sales.  Recent expansions into Toronto, Ontario have been met by very heavy protests, which I can’t show you, because they are unbelievably disgusting and immoral.

So, self-avowed Christian and Chick-Fil-A chairman Dan Cathy looked deep into his soul, as every good protestant does at one point or another, and realized he had a choice to make. He could choose God, or Mammon.  And, like the vast majority of protestants before him, he knew the decision was a no-brainer.  Mammon wins, every time. This ease of pretending Christianity while cuddling up to Mammon has always been one of the least appealing characteristics of protestantism, and this goes back to the first princes that backed Luther and the very convenient “more wealth means I’m saved” doctrines of Calvin and Zwinglii in Switzerland (yes, I’m bending things a bit, but not too much, in their essence). I guess we couldn’t expect much more from sects and entities built on foundations of sand, but it’s still disappointing to see.

Especially after the massive outpourings of love and support Christians gave to Chick-Fil-A in 2012, 2014, and ever since, this latest move does feel very much like a betrayal.  I can see why a number of folks are incensed.

Yes, it’s only a chicken shop, and one that always caused me some stomach upset when I ate there (I have no idea why), so my new boycott won’t cost me much.  I hadn’t eaten there for some time.  My wife and kids like it but I don’t know if they’ll be going there anymore.  Hopefully not. I’m curious what readers think.  Is it time to add Chick-Fil-A to your already extensive list of companies you won’t support?   Do you think this will cause Chick-Fil-A to experience a significant “get woke, go broke” backlash to their bottom line?  Are Christians and other conservatives right to feel outraged and betrayed?

The reactions online from conservatives were quick, vociferous, and essentially unanimous.  I think Chick-Fil-A screwed up badly and seriously misjudged the situation.  We’ll see how committed they are to serving moloch and his leftist minions over the coming months.  I imagine they expected a backlash, but possibly not this severe.

Eat more beef.  It tastes infinitely better, anyway. “My” farmer raises anywhere from 400 to 1200 head of Herefords at a time, so I’m covered.

How Much Responsibility do the NeverTrump Rinos of the 2016-18 Congress Bear for this Impeachment Farce We are Enduring? November 14, 2019

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, disaster, error, General Catholic, horror, Immigration, It's all about the $$$, Revolution, scandals, secularism, sickness, Society, unbelievable BS.
comments closed

I’d say, a very, very great deal.

Remember, this is the party that could not, would not, support Trump on virtually any of his major policy initiatives (the border wall, principally, but there were others) and in fact tried to stone wall and impede every move he made.  Their actions, and an inept organization by the Republican Congressional Campaign Committee (were they trying to fail), chilled enthusiasm among Republicans and pretty much insured – along with a press consisting almost entirely of leftist operatives with bylines – that the demonrat party would gain control of the House in 2018.  Which, they did, after promising for two years that if they DID gain the House, they would use that as their leverage of power to impeach Trump and/or derail his re-election.  I increasingly believe that the House Republican leadership quite knew what it was doing in blocking Trump and helping to set this @#$&! show up, and that creatures like Paul Ryan (who, you will remember, conveniently retired from Congress to a lucrative lobbying career after his work in blocking Trump was done) did this deliberately with an intent to achieve just what we are seeing now.  Heck, the demonrats were very clear in their intent from even before Trump was sworn in – he must be blocked, stopped, and resisted by all means, fair or (preferably, for them) foul, up to an including use of naked violence.  They were talking impeachment from January 20, 2017 and haven’t stopped since.

Of course, this is what they have done to every single Republican elected President since Eisenhower, save for hapless, helpless, and hardly conservative Jerry Ford.

The democrats have been sending very strong signals to the American people for half a century now.  They mean to gain power, and once gained, never let it go.  I truly believe they felt they had practically attained their end in 2016, when, after 8 years of Obama and decades of flooding the country with democrat-voting immigrants, they were certain that 8 more years of demonrat rule under Hillary would mean perpetual democrat power.  That’s what this impeachment is about, it’s about overturning the elective will of the American people, and insuring that perpetual one-party rule under the democrats.

And leading Republicans went along with it, all too eagerly.  They are all too happy playing the always losing saps to the democrats one party rule (of course, as many have noted, there are so few differences between the Republican and Democrat elites that govern us that we are already essentially ruled by an incompetent, self-aggrandizing uniparty).  One grows exhausted at their constant malfeasance and cowardice. There aren’t 60 rock solid conservatives between the entire Congressional Republican bunch, House and Senate combined.  I guess at some point, we only have ourselves to blame.

So, I get very much what the “groypers” are doing.  I agree with much of it.  I just think their attacks are a bit broad and some parts of their focus may prove counterproductive. Or, at least, premature.

I liked this from reader T:

Our Endlessly Self-Aggrandizing Elites: Statistics on the Collapse of Manufacturing in the US October 3, 2019

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, cultural marxism, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, It's all about the $$$, sadness, scandals, self-serving, sickness, Society.
comments closed

Aside from insanity directly related to the steadily increasing moral insanity of our creature, two ideas – factoids, declarations, I don’t know what you call them – have bothered more than almost any other throughout my life. I remember these things since I was a teenager and they’ve always bothered me.  The first is, it is inevitable that manufacturing be lost in the US to foreign competition.  The second one is a corollary to the first- because of this, we must of necessity become a service economy (an unspoken part of this second bit was, because of this, we must of necessity become a much poorer nation, because flipping burgers doesn’t pay like a CNC operator or ASME-code pressure vessel welder).

These twin declarations – shibboleths, is what they really are, shibboleths held as unyielding dogmas by the self-anointed elites in our society from industry to academia to media to government, who then try to convince us thattheir self-serving policies were actually forces of nature – always really bothered me because I always knew they were a form of lie.  They were lies because what was really being said was, “we elites choose, in large measure, to  send manufacturing overseas, to enact policies that make that transfer practically inevitable, and we thus impose this service economy whether you like it or not.”  Now, of course, there are many reasons of varying degrees of validity to explain why the US manufacturing base has been unbelievably gutted in the last 40 years, but especially in the last 20.  US wages are comparatively high, environmental and safety regulations (among others) impose onerous costs, taxes are sometimes high in some ways, etc.  But Ross Perot was right, NAFTA did lead to a giant sucking sound, and it was followed by an even larger sound going not south but east, to China and other locales starting after President Bush inexplicably gave preferential trade advantages to the murderous communist regime in China (oh, I know, if we just enrich the Chicom party bosses, and make them infinitely more powerful than they were in, say, 1980, they’ll be sure to become oh-so-amenable to our will!).

The point being, manufacturing has been lost due to some organic factors, certainly. Some loss was probably inevitable. But a very great deal of that loss has been a result of deliberate policies enacted at the highest levels of our political and economic system, policies that have enriched a very few at the expense of the very many.  Perhaps manufacturing was always going to decrease in the US as wages increased, but this much, this fast?  90+% of some industries eliminated in less than 40 years?

The list below represents some 10 million families wiped out in the space of a generation.  No wonder people are so enraged, and a revolutionary spirit seems to grow more and more insistent.

Note, while many industries outlined below are “old style” heavy industries like metal forming and steel production, some are not.  Aerospace, defense, and computer/microchip manufacturing make the list of industries founded in the US or once incredibly robust here that have been all but eliminated, and these last certainly in the last 25 years or so, not 40.

One delicious irony in the data below is that the industry that probably did a great deal to egg on, give cover for, and otherwise encourage political and cultural elites to gut manufacturing in this country – the media – have been hoisted on their own petard.  Newpaper printing and circulation is one of the 20 industries that have most collapsed over the past 40 years.

  1. Newspaper publishing and printing

475,800 people were employed in 1980, falling to 207,700 in 2017 (a 56% drop).

  1. Metalworking machinery manufacturing

370,300 people were employed in 1980, falling to 156,600 in 2017 (a 58% drop).

  1. Iron and steel foundries

208,500 people were employed in 1980, falling to 88,100 in 2017 (a 58% drop).

  1. Metal forging and stamping

183,300 people were employed in 1980, falling to 73,700 in 2017 (a 60% drop).

  1. Blast furnaces, steelworks, and rolling and finishing mills

682,200 people were employed in 1980, falling to 270,000 in 2017 (a 60% drop).

  1. Construction and material handling machines manufacturing

389,400 people were employed in 1980, falling to 152,400 in 2017 (a 61% drop).

  1. Water transportation

189,600 people were employed in 1980, falling to 74,000 in 2017 (a 61% drop).

  1. Household appliances manufacturing

185,800 people were employed in 1980, falling to 71,400 in 2017 (a 62% drop).

  1. Primary aluminum production

171,600 people were employed in 1980, falling to 64,100 in 2017 (a 63% drop).

  1. Metal mining

122,000 people were employed in 1980, falling to 45,200 in 2017 (a 63% drop).

  1. Computer and related equipment manufacturing

419,400 people were employed in 1980, falling to 146,600 in 2017 (a 65% drop).

  1. Guided missiles, space vehicles, and parts manufacturing

198,100 people were employed in 1980, falling to 66,900 in 2017 (a 66% drop).

  1. Cutlery, hand tools, and general hardware manufacturing

143,900 people were employed in 1980, falling to 46,500 in 2017 (a 68% drop).

  1. Coal mining

263,100 people were employed in 1980, falling to 62,500 in 2017 (a 76% drop).

  1. Radio, TV, and communication equipment manufacturing

588,900 people were employed in 1980, falling to 136,000 in 2017 (a 77% drop).

  1. Primary metal industries, other than iron, steel, and aluminum

251,200 people were employed in 1980, falling to 54,000 in 2017 (a 78% drop).

  1. Footwear manufacturing

160,600 people were employed in 1980, falling to 32,500 in 2017 (an 80% drop).

  1. Yarn, thread, and fabric mills

568,300 people were employed in 1980, falling to 107,600 in 2017 (an 81% drop).

  1. Apparel and accessories manufacturing

1,149,300 people were employed in 1980, falling to 206,900 in 2017 (an 82% drop).

  1. Knitting mills

178,100 people were employed in 1980, falling to 17,700 in 2017 (a 90% drop)

It ain’t just manufacturing any more.  Engineering and other white collar fields are being increasingly hit – through straight up job loss or wage stagnation – due to foreign competition or a flood of cheap immigrant labor.  Very few people have what it takes to be an entrepreneur.  Very few are able to satisfy the demands of extremely intellectually challenging and creative fields.  What the “other 80%” are going to do, 50 years from now, is quite terrifying.

Something tells me we won’t get to that point, however.  I think the wheels are going to come off this society before then, the singularity will never, could never, happen, and instead we’re going to go through a brief period of intense decay followed by widespread collapse.

Meh, this is me just mostly spit-balling, but those numbers represent a tragedy of almost limitless proportions.  So sad.

If only there were an alternative.

This Is the Luxury Home Former Bishop Farrell Occupied During His Time in Dallas September 18, 2019

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, Dallas Diocese, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, It's all about the $$$, rank stupidity, scandals, sexual depravity, sickness.
comments closed

This actually came out in 2014, but I missed it until just recently.  An “anonymous donor” (perhaps a certain former cardinal, or an ally of his?) mysteriously gifted this luxury home to now Cardinal Farrell just immediately as he arrived in Dallas, and the home was sold instantly upon his departure.  No other occupant of the episcopal see of Dallas has ever lived in such lavish circumstances, to my knowledge.  Ostensibly, this home was to allow Farrell to entertain the great and the rich, to pull donations from them.  Somehow both his predecessor and successor managed to entertain potential donors without recourse to such luxurious surroundings.  There is absolutely no concrete evidence that this home was associated with any particular donations. There were occasional, frankly unbelievable, statements from Farrell that he really just wanted to have a poor little apartment, but was just forced, forced, you see, by the hard life of being a bishop to live in such ostentatious circumstances, and this in a diocese that was then, and remains – or so we are told – essentially existing in penury.

I frankly find it preposterous, and even insulting, this claim that soliciting donations made such a home absolutely necessary.  As if donors would not donate if not entertained in extremely comfortable surroundings?  Please.  This was for Farrell, who has made personal comfot a focal point in his episcopal career, from his days in the corrupt and decadent Legionaires of Christ to his cardinalate in Rome, where he was the recipient of nearly $30,000 from the corrupt and fallen Bishop Bransfield of West Virginia to to help pay for his living expenses in Rome. Apparently, the extravagance Farrell lavished on himself in terms of living arrangements was not limited to Dallas.  After the scandal broke about this sodomite, drug-addicted Bishop Bransfield (another creature of the Washington, DC circle of graft, immorality, and self-pleasing surrounding McCarrick, Wuerl, and, yes, Kevin J. Farrell), Farrell ostensibly returned the money, but why would bishops be in the habit of personally gifting each other tens of thousands of dollars? One of Farrell’s defenses in this case was that this kind of thing goes on all the time, and is no big deal.

Below, Farrell’s 6100 square foot home in a very expensive section of North Dallas.  Bought for $1.2 million in 2007, today it is worth north of $2 million.  Taxes alone on this property would be in the vicinity of $30,000 a year.  It had over 1000 square feet of garage and occupied nearly half an acre of extremely expensive land.

You can decide why a supposedly celibate priest would need to live in such circumstances.  If those walls could talk, eh?

I’m sure they’d tell a tale of superior virtue and rigid self-denial, right?  I kid.  But just on a purely human level, this is an exceedingly poor look for a Catholic bishop, and practically invites scandal.  Especially in a diocese that was supposedly flat busted, monetarily, from the Rudy Kos payout.  Yes, yes, anonymous donor, yes, supposedly Farrell raised money at this house (impossible to prove, of course), but our bishops are supposed to be our guides in all aspects of the Faith, and set a personal example for all us.  Saintly bishops produce saintly laity.  And vice versa.

Francis Is Wholly Owned by the “Homosexual” Mafia in the Clergy August 29, 2018

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, cultural marxism, disaster, Endless Corruption, episcopate, Francis, General Catholic, horror, It's all about the $$$, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, the struggle for the Church, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

Just a couple of quick examples of how this is true, both from Life Site News.  Why was Cardinal Muller fired as head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith?  Because he actually tried to implement the Church’s canon law and procedures governing priests addicted to sodomy and abusing their favorite target, young barely pubescent boys (“twinks”).  That caused many of Francis’ closest friends and supporters in the Curia and global episcopal hierarchy to demand his ouster, and Francis was only too happy to oblige.

Secondly, Francis gave a very nice (and very much desired) Vatican apartment to a priest already known to be lost in the sins of sodomy and drug addiction, among others (a very, very prevalent phenomenon among those men who give themselves over to the sins of Sodom), even though Francis had been warned that this man was wholly unsuited for being a priest, let alone such a perk.  That man, Msgr Luigi Capozzi, was subsequently caught hosting a drug fueled sodomite orgy in that very same apartment – within the Vatican!  Absolutely nothing is sacred to men such as these.  And yet it is upon their support that Francis depends – and indeed, he seems quite happy to do as many favors for his friends as possible.

This priest was a creature of the unrepentant sodomite Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio, who has a high ranking role at the Vatican and has spoken glowingly about the “benefits” of men sodomizing other men.  In fact, Capozzi was the Cardinal’s secretary.  Of course, this kind of behavior is almost universally learned.  I don’t think we need to guess from whom Msgr. Capozzi learned this kind of behavior.

Of course, those who have been following this pontificate have known all along that Francis his support primarily from among the lavender mafia in the Church, and that he both buried the detailed report on sodomotical activities of Italian clergy delivered to Pope Benedict in late 2012 (shortly before his resignation), and immediately rehabilitated and elevated to high positions several men long known to be addicted to these perverse acts, and the accompanying crimes that so often go hand in hand with the sodomy (as in, diabolical narcissism).  Of course, the story of Francis elevating the corrupt Msgr. Battista Ricca shortly after he became Pope is also very well known.  The Vatican Bank has been accused for years of being a source of money-laundering on a vast scale, and the ongoing inability to reform this slush fund for sodomites and their hangers on probably played a substantial role in Benedict’s tragic abdication.  It is also no accident that Francis made his infamous “who am I to judge?” comment, after being directly questioned about Ricca.  Nice way to get the media to forget an abusive and larcenous priest, by declaring yourself to be on their side in the great leftist struggle to destroy Christianity, and especially Christian morality.

Yes, many have known for quite some time just what Francis is, and who he is beholden to.  I think the best we can hope for is that these ongoing revelations – and their escape out of the faithful Catholic ghetto and into the broader world – will kneecap the rest of Francis’ efforts to destroy the Church utterly undo the moral edifice of the Faith.  He won’t resign.  Unless the faithful can bring unprecedented pressure to bear, and even then, it’s very much a long shot.  But if the monetary well dries up, these men who have entered the priesthood for their own prurient reasons will decamp for easier pickings in short order.

 

Response to Francis Church – “Not One Cent” August 28, 2018

Posted by Tantumblogo in disaster, Endless Corruption, episcopate, Francis, General Catholic, It's all about the $$$, Restoration, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

My people,” saith the Lord, “have been a lost flock; their shepherds have caused them to go astray” (Jer i:6).

Many faithful souls are casting about right now, trying to discern what, beyond the always needed and vital prayer and penance, they can do to help effect change in the Church, to bring this voraciously destructive regime in charge of the Church to an end, or at least lay the groundwork for change to occur.  Many necessary and probably helpful ideas are proposed – call the chancery!  Send a letter to the bishop.  Tweet, post, make a video, denounce Francis and the flock of diabolical narcissists that surround him!

These are all good ideas.  But they ignore the one REAL power the laity has in the Church, given by God as one of our primary roles – the laity is the source of financial, material support to the Church.  There is no other way in which the laity play such a direct role in the daily life of the Church.  I have proposed the idea of withholding donations before – or at least directing them to reliable sources that are not subject to taxation (assessments) from ecclesiastical higher-ups who then often use that money for purposes contrary to the Doctrine of the Faith – as the most vital means the laity have to effect change in the Church.

Many souls seem hesitant to do this, however.  They worry they will be guilty of sin, or violating some precept of the Church.  The precept declares that one must contribute to the material support of the Church – but that does not say right now, or to which organization.  I propose that souls withhold donations for the time being, and instead include a little note in the collection basket that says they will make no further donations until real reform against the sodomitical cabal currently in charge in the Church is implemented (you might use more politic language).  Each soul would have to determine what constitutes that reform, but a stop to the undermining of the Faith from Rome and the institutional hierarchy , and the end of the promotion of heretical, immoral men to high office might be a start. A statement to the diocese might also be in order, but I would suggest doing so anonymously.  There have been ugly reactions to such efforts to de-fund the Church, or parts of it, in the past.

I suggest creating a dedicated account for the receipt of funds which would normally go to the Church.  They would be held there, to be donated at such a time – or to such a Church entity (like a traditional religious order) – that they would no longer go to the furtherance of the activities of immoral men and activities counter to the good of souls.

I recognize this is a huge step.  It might seem drastic.  Yes, parts of the Church you know and love, which may not be as lost in the maelstrom of modernism currently afflicting the Church, would necessarily be hurt by this action, if they are subject to diocesan assessment (as all Ecclesia Dei communities are).  Or, groups of laity might get together to consider ways to support their local parish/community without giving through the normal channels.  If such is done, it must be done extremely quietly, and with as little as possible shared with the priests/religious of those communities (none at all would really be ideal).  Nothing enrages the Church machinery more than the faithful trying to find ways to escape their assessments, so just keeping your own counsel, and acting individually, may be the best course.   If you act collectively, I would suggest keeping it as quiet as possible.

In short, divest, or divert.  If you know, with certainty, of some Church group or entity that does good work and supports priests (like the St. Vincent Ferrer Foundation), then divert your normal giving to such groups.  If not, as I said, make your regular contributions but hold them until such a time as you can, in good conscience, support the institutional Church again.  This is not about being cheap, or greedy.  It’s about using the best lever God gives the laity to see that their voices are not ignored in the Church.

This is my proposal.  It is one the laity can take on their own initiative, and which does not require the compliance of a corrupt ecclesiastical hierarchy (as so many other proposals assume – if we just let the laity get a vote on bishops!  Or if the bishops will only be moved by our thousandth tweet!).  Believe me, if even 10% of the most devout laity did this, you would start to see real changes in the Church. Why was McCarrick never laicized and driven from the Church?  He was a consummate fundraiser, and contributed millions directly to the papacy.  We have the same power, if we are willing to use it.  Perhaps, something, at least, to pray about?

There are Fewer and Fewer Reasons for the Repubnikan Party to Exist March 27, 2018

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, asshatery, contraception, disaster, Endless Corruption, General Catholic, horror, It's all about the $$$, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society.
comments closed

Many conservatives were outraged, and badly shaken, but the 1.3 trillion dollar, 6 month omnibus continuing resolution that was passed last week to forestall the most meaningless event in history, the dreaded and loathed government shutdown, was just another confirmation that even though the party possesses the presidency, a large majority in the House, and a shaky but still existent majority in the Senate, the Republican Party cares absolutely nothing for the views and priorities of its voting base.  This was a giant upturned middle finger to the Trump movement and the conservatives that have given the Republicans their most sustained majority in Congress since the Robert Taft era.

Many even stalwart conservatives and longtime supporters of the Republican party are asking what purpose this party serves if the frankly amoral Chuck Schumer can claim that the democrats are getting more of  what they want from a Republican Congress and president than when the democrats themselves held power.  There wasn’t even a slight attempt to defund Planned Murderhood, secure real funding for the border wall (yes, there are some claims that there might be some funding there, but it is wholly inadequate), or curb the growth of the democrat’s bread and butter, unaccountable social welfare spending.  In fact, the leftist social program spending exploded under this 6 month continuing resolution.

The politics of it are disastrous, too.  Instead of taking the demonrats to the wall, now, nearly 8 months from the upcoming midterm elections, the Repubniks folded like a cheap green tent and funded the government for another 6 months, meaning the next continuing resolution (they’ve already told us there won’t be a proper budget for 2019, either, just as there hasn’t been a proper budget passed by Congress since 2009!!!!!) fight will take place in late September, only weeks before the election. With enough boneheads in this country still allowing themselves to be influenced by the democrat party’s propaganda arm (the so-called mainstream media), democrats will almost surely force an even more pathetic collapse from the Republicans then.

Trump also really disappointed in this process.  He tried to assert himself late, once the bill was already passed, but made no public full court press starting weeks ago to gin up opposition to the backdoor deals the Republican leadership was working on with the hard Left.  The exact thing Trump was elected to do – to kill the swamp monster by denying it the money it feeds on – was not even attempted, publicly, at least.  It was a major disappointment.

At some point, if voting for Republicans just gets us demonrat policies and we continue to witness the fiscal, moral, social, and cultural dissolution of this nation, there is no reason to vote for them.  They no longer serve any useful purpose.  And note, the biggest outrage here is not that they failed to enact the conservative policies tens of millions of Americans demanded of them, but that they failed to even try.

I went from living in a district so red that voting hardly mattered, to one that is so gerrymandered blue that it really really doesn’t matter, and I am wondering what all my time, money, and effort has gone to.  I am not quite as downtrodden as some conservatives are in the wake of this fiasco, like Stefan Molyneaux forecasting the eminent and permanent demise of this nation below, but I am quite disgusted and wondering when someone is either going to hijack the Republican party back from the statists, or a truly viable alternative to the corrupt uniparty is going to emerge.

Maybe we are stuck with a two party system, but no one said it had to be these two parties forever.

I think this was a pretty big deal, and Trump’s first really major disappointment. As for Congress, they all suck and should all go.

 

Texas, US Bishops See Threat to Tax Exempt Status in Wake of Texas Right to Life Gaffe March 8, 2018

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, asshatery, contraception, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Immigration, It's all about the $$$, Revolution, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, Society, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

There are several players in the articles below from Church Militant, all increasingly isolated and bereft of public support from their colleagues and peers.  There’s Bishop Michael Olson of Fort Worth, the man who decided against all good reason to attack the state’s largest and most effective pro-life group (Texas Right to Life – TRL), demanding even that a statement from him to all the Catholics of his diocese refusing them “permission” – on a matter of prudential judgment, as if it were even within his purview – to support TRL and desiring souls from each parish report to him as to whether or not his unnecessary and inflammatory statement was read.  As a matter of record, so far as I know – and I know regarding at least 7 other dioceses in this state – Fort Worth is the only diocese where such a statement, issued on Texas Catholic Conference (TCC – the bishop’s conference for the state) letterhead, was created and forcibly read. In fact, other bishops have run for cover, either trying to ignore the firestorm entirely, or outright repudiating the move against TRL.

Then there’s Jennifer Carr-Allmon –  former PR staffer for TCC and now its executive director – who has had a habit of lining TCC up on the wrong side of many sanctity-of-life related issues.  In 2014 TCC waged war against TRL and many individual pro-lifers over a disastrous bill on end-of-life care that would have substantially worsened the already bad laws in effect.  TCC  played a major role in supporting that bill and the RINO stealth liberals in the legislature that were pushing it.  Only heroic efforts by TRL, attorney Kassi Marks, individual committed pro-lifers, and a few good priests, bishops, and especially Bishop Emeritus Rene Gracida finally managed to raise enough fuss to have the proposed bill changed and improved to the point that it did, in fact, wind up making a positive difference on end of life issues facing Texans.

In all of this, like the USCCB, the bishops are most often led by their lay staff bureaucrats within the respective conferences.  That is to say, the bishops are in many cases relying on the lay staff to “stay informed” and give them guidance on many of the various issues, being too busy with golf, exotic travel, and other activities to do so themselves.  Thus what often happens is that the Catholic bishops are advocating for the viewpoint of lay staffers of  unknown provenance, and certainly without any grace of office, to set Catholic public policy at the state, national, and even local level.

So just bear all that in mind as you read through the highlights of the two reports below, the first reporting that Bishop Olson and TCC may have violated the Johnson Amendment provisions of their tax exempt status in this fight with TRL.  Now, I don’t believe there is even a slight genuine threat to their status, but the fact that a complaint has been publicized is a bit unusual.  Now, if someone actually files a lawsuit against TCC and Olson with the IRS, then that would be serious. But mere complaints tend to go in the dustbin.  This article also ties the support of Olson and TCC to the RINOs to their love – and positive need – for continued unconstrained mass, illegal Hispanic immigration.

The second article adds a bit more detail to the coverage.  I’ll start with the tax exemption article via the good Bishop Gracida:

Here in Texas, the RINO Establishment has held power for a long time, and this establishment has been largely backed by the Catholic bishops of the state, casting their votes in ways generally approved of by the bishops and their agenda, particularly in regards to illegal immigration issues. Texas is of course greatly impacted by the question of illegals since it shares the longest border of any state with Mexico where most illegals come from………

……….Last week, in what many are viewing as an attempt to directly influence the outcome of tomorrow’s midterm elections, the bishops issued an unheard-of, unprecedented rebuke of Texas Right to Life, essentially claiming teaching authority over the group in matters political. The statement consisted of three major points, but the most troublesome point is the third point where they publicly decry the Texas Right To Life Voter Guide, which supports the young and upcoming anti-Establishment Republican candidates primed to upset the old-time GOP Establishment politicians favored by the bishops. [Not all of these anti-establishment candidates were so young. And in the case of Senate District 8, I think pro-lifers can be practically equally satisfied with either Ray Huffines or Angela Paxton.  Paxton won the primary, and it was a nasty, expensive race, but which candidate was actually the more pro-life actually figured quite substantially into that race.  At any rate, many voters in Collin County were turned off by Huffines extremely negative campaign and perceived carpetbagger relo to Richardson just to run for this seat]

And here is where the bishops may have actually have run afoul of IRS regulations forbidding Church involvement in politics, a rule known as the Johnson Rule, which actually originated under the administration of Texan President Lyndon B. Johnson back in the 1960s. To have injected themselves into statewide political races just a week before the elections and essentially condemned a political activist group by name, a group that publicly backs certain candidates over others, crosses the line and puts the bishops’ conference in a position where it could thereby lose its tax-exempt status.

Church Militant has learned exclusively that plans are being drawn up and formulated to file a petition with the IRS to have the tax-exempt status of the Church in Texas completely stripped. It that were to happen, the dollar cost to the dioceses of Texas would run into the hundreds of millions of dollars and bankrupt many dioceses. Additionally, experts observe that since the head of the Texas Catholic Conference, Galveston-Houston Cdl. Daniel DiNardo, is also president of the U.S. bishops’ national conference, this could actually extend beyond Texas and impact the tax-exempt status of the entire Church across the country.

If that scenario were to play out which observers tell Church Militant is certainly a possibility, the Church across America would become financially insolvent as the 194 dioceses across the country would have to scramble to sell tens of billions of dollars of assets to pay the exorbitant tax bill that would surely come their way in the absence of their tax-exempt status — billions and billions of dollars presently and moving forward that the federal government would dearly love to get its hands on. [As I said, it is extremely unlikely that any serious threat to the Church’s tax exempt status will come from this. But what may well happen is that Olson will get some hard questions behind the scenes at the next USCCB meeting of bishops.  Or maybe not.  They may all be in perfect agreement. Hard to say with this crew raised in the post-conciliar Church]

How did this happen? How is it that the bishops of Texas would collectively sign on to an agreement that could potentially bankrupt the Church in the United States? The answer, insiders say, lies with one woman, Jennifer Carr Allmon, the executive director of the Texas Bishops’ Conference, the first woman to ever hold that position.

A little background is in order here. The most vocal bishop in support of the attacks against Texas Right to Life has been Fort Worth Bp. Michael Olson who launched a blistering accusatory social media campaign on his Twitter feed, actually telling parishioners to let him know if his orders to his diocesan priests to read the statement of condemnation out loud at Masses from the pulpit were being followed. Olson is the same bishop who ordered Catholic pro-life groups in his diocese not to protest in front of abortion chambers with banners of Our Lady of Guadalupe because the image of Our Lady was offensive to Protestants who might also be protesting.

The behind the scenes of this is that very wealthy supporters of the Church in Fort Worth, who also support the status-quo RINOs, became very concerned that the young Republicans backed by Texas Right to Life were close to capturing the state legislature, according to internal polls. So they reached out to Olson and Jennifer Carr Allmon and said something needed to be done and done quickly before the elections.

One such establishment figure in the Texas legislature the rich want to protect because he is seen as “their man” is Charlie Geren, who barely hung on to his seat in the last election, almost losing to a Texas Right to Life challenger Bo French. That same race is again coming down to the wire and a loss in that race for the GOP-RINO establishment would signal a massive defeat for the status quo, including the bishops who are wedded to that same status quo.

The bishops are interested in maintaining the current political environment because the up and comer Republicans backed by Texas Right to Life are not friendly to the cause of illegal immigration which is the cause fueling the engine of the bishops’ political agenda in Texas. If the state of Texas suddenly turns anti-illegal immigration, the Texas bishops stand to lose a great deal, so they are willing to settle for weak pro-life support from RINOs in order to hold on to large sums of money going to what they see as the most important issue — illegal immigration……. [Well I would say Texas already is majority anti-illegal immigration, as many Texans see quite rightly that if mass illegal immigration is allowed to continue much longer, Texas will go purple if not blue, and this entire nation will be finished, if it isn’t already.  But there is not much Texas can do to secure the border, unless the governor wants to activate the Guard and start patrolling the border en masse, which may not be a bad idea but would instantly result in a flood of lawsuits and probable instant court injunctions by activist leftist judges to desist.]

………Reports are that some of the Texas bishops are now backpedaling from the statement, some even privately denying any advance knowledge of it. Some of this backpedaling appeared to be the case in a Friday afternoon interview on EWTN where San Angelo Bp. Michael Sis downplayed the statement and offered that everyone just needs to find common ground and work together — a radical departure from the aggressive tone of the earlier condemnation.

That the entire tax-exempt status of the Church, certainly in Texas and possibly in the entire country, owing to the connection between both Cdl. Daniel DiNardo, could come down to a hastily compiled statement by one woman, Carr Allmon, in charge of the Texas Bishops’ Conference and backed by one hot-tempered bishop wanting to do the bidding of some rich donors with political interests, it’s simply mind-boggling. But given the current temperature of the culture with regard to Catholic matters, a financial tsunami could certainly be in the cards for the nation’s bishops. [He does seem to be hot-tempered. It’s also funny how times change. When Farrell was here, Olson was definitely the more orthodox of the two DFW bishops.  Now with Bishop Burns, the situation seems to have reversed.  Bishop Burns is generally keeping a low profile and doing the hard work of trying to reconstitute both the badly depleted priesthood (which Bishop Farrell did revive from practical total death of vocations) and the aging and far too progressive lay administration of the Diocese.  He doesn’t seek after publicity as Farrell very obviously did.  But those cardinal hats don’t fall from trees!  You gotta get out there and make a name for yourself!]

This post is getting really long but here’s a bit more on Olson:

Bishop Michael Olson of Fort Worth is currently steeped in controversy over his attack on Texas Right to Life, a pro-life group focused on electing authentic pro-life leaders in the Texas legislature. Yet in August 2016, Bp. Olson allowed a pro-abortion Democrat to speak on parish property. This is despite recent tweets to the Catholic faithful about his “apostolic duty” to “guard authentic doctrine in the parishes.”

In August 2016, Congressman Marc Veasey (D-Texas) was allowed to speak on the property of All Saints Catholic Church in Fort Worth. Veasey voted against the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act when it came in front of the House for a vote. He supports abortion through all nine months, and has attended Planned Parenthood rallies. [I sadly live in Veasey’s district, one so gerrymandered that there is virtually no chance he will ever face a serious challenge, let alone lose his seat.  You should see how ridiculously the boundary lines are drawn in Irving, literally looping around apartment complexes and avoiding single-family homes.  Good job legislature!  Veasey is a true extremist who supports all the most extreme fashions of the Left – transgenderism for youth, taxpayer funded abortion on demand and any time, restrictions on homeschooling, etc]

Church Militant reached out to the diocese of Fort Worth for comment. A spokesman claimed the reason Veasey was allowed to speak on diocesan property was that the event in question was a town hall and not a stump speech.

When Church Militant asked whether the town hall included a speech from Veasey, the official angrily interrupted, reasserting that the event at the town hall wasn’t a speech. He said he was present at the event and that attendees did ask Veasey about his position on abortion, which Veasey answered by restating his support for abortion.

The diocese claimed that Veasey listened carefully to the pro-lifers in attendance at the event. An article in the North Texas Catholic quoted Bp. Olson on the subject: “My point is, we’ve gotten to the point of our civil discourse — to our understanding of our responsibility as citizens — that the only way we are able to participate in our society politically and to contribute to the common good is in a partisan way.”

In the wake of the Texas bishops’ parish advisory on Texas Right to Life, which Congressman Matt Rinaldi (R-Irving) has called “factually inaccurate,” Bp. Olson tweeted out an order for Catholics attending Mass to spy on priests and report to his office if the Texas bishops’ advisory was not read from the pulpit.

Bishop Olson went so far as to imply that those who don’t read the advisory at Mass are not “true Catholics” and that the advisory is an act of his “authentic teaching office.”

I am told that most parishes did read the statement.  Whether it is really an act of his authentic teaching office is another question, there is no question Texas Right to Life supports the entirety of the Church’s Doctrine on the sanctity of life -in fact, it seems to support it better than the bishops often do. Whether one can be commanded to not support an organization that commits no sin and endorses no error – and is in fact totally wedded to the truth – seems dubious, at best.  I would argue in fact that it is TRL that is upholding Catholic Doctrine in its truest, fullest sense, and that, prudentially, the more accommodationist position of the TCC and Olson may be accepted for particular matters but is morally inferior to the more hardline stand.

Once again, as we see so often in the post-conciliar institutional edifice, the bishops make dogma of prudential matters and treat dogmatic ones as matters of judgment.

I would add in closing that TRL is the only pro-life group in the state, and one of the few in the country, that correctly ties together the issue of contraception with that of abortion.  Texas Alliance for Life, the group Olson and TCC apparently prefer, and which is widely seen as being much, much less reliable on these weighty matters, won’t touch contraception with a 10 ft pole.

Sorry, apparently this is book length post week.

Texas Catholic Conference Conducts Ugly, Unprecedented Attack on Texas Right to Life February 23, 2018

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, asshatery, Basics, contraception, disaster, episcopate, error, General Catholic, It's all about the $$$, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, Society, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

I’ve written on this subject before, though it’s been some time – basically, there has long existed a marked division among the Texas pro-life movement, the uncompromising, total ban on abortion and other forms of murder position represented by Texas Right to Life, and the much more accommodating stand taken by Texas Alliance for Life.  There are many reasons to view Texas Alliance as weak on key issues, and indeed, most of the most dedicated, most successful pro-life advocates tend to support Texas Right to Life.  During the 2014 legislative session, some acrimonious division developed between Texas Right to Life and the Texas Catholic Conference (TCC), which is the bureaucratic arm of the state’s bishops (like a mini-USCCB).  Dominated by its lay staff and their preferences, including their relations with several prominent Texas lawmakers, TCC at various points supported end-of-life legislation that a number of pro-life advocates believed – I should say proved –  actually worsened the status quo in Texas, and put elderly, the sick, and their families even more at the mercy of doctors and hospitals in making end of life decisions.

So why has Texas Catholic Conference taken the very  unusual step of disavowing, or telling all Catholics in the state to disavow, this most effective pro-life group now?  In a word, politics.  Texas Right to Life, along with a number of other hardcore grass-roots conservatives groups like the Eagle Forum, Concerned Women for America, Texas homeschoolers, and others, have managed to fund a number of “insurgent” campaigns by true, hardcore conservatives against establishment candidates like Angela Paxton.  Early voting is underway for the party primaries, so feeling their establishment buddies under threat, major Texas politicians like Joe Straus – the Speaker of the House, who has done more than anyone to block effective pro-life legislation in this state and who saw Texas’ pro-life ranking drop from #4 to #12 in his 10 year tenure as speaker – are pulling out the stops to try to break the backs of the conservative groups supporting the insurgent candidacies.

We’ve seen this before in this state, where the establishment always favors its own, but not to this degree, and not with a public disavowal of a group whose only “sin”, even by Texas Catholic Conference’s own admission, is to be “too pro-life.”  In point of fact, the very minor pro-life “gains” we have seen in Texas are out of all proportion to the citizenry’s general abhorrence of abortion.  In one of the most conservative states of the union, Texas’ pro-life legislation falls further and further behind, because of the super slow boil establishment approach.

Many Texas Catholics are incensed by what they see as a betrayal of THE most effective, most dedicated pro-life group in the state (which also happens to have the support of the best bishop this state has seen in 50+ years, Bishop Emeritus Rene Gracida of Corpus Christi, who now offers the TLM more or less exclusively).

If you want more on the inside baseball of Texas politics and how this very sad abandonment of a great pro-life group9 came to pass, read the below from Church Militant, which……..yeah, I know, but just roll with it:

The bishops’ denouncement of Texas Right to Life comes in the wake of a split looming inside the Texas Republican Party — a winnowing of the conservative wheat from the Establishment chaff. Internal polling indicates Lone Star State RINOs are facing extinction in the upcoming elections, and political insiders believe the bishops’ “advisory” is a ploy to save their political hides. By demonizing Texas Right to Life, they suggest, the bishops hope to preserve their political allies in office.

According to their “advisory,” the bishops are spurning Texas Right to Life for three reasons:

  1. Conflicts on pro-life reform. The bishops complained the group “often opposes the Texas Catholic Conference of Bishops and has implied that the bishops do not faithfully represent Church teaching.” Texas Right to Life rejects the bishops’ “incrementalism” as a halting, soft approach.
  2. Conflicts on end-of-life reform. The bishops slammed Texas Right to Life’s messaging on end-of-life care and advance directives as “misstatements.”
  3. Texas Right to Life’s voter guide. The group publishes an annual voter guide scoring Texas lawmakers according to their pro-life record. The bishops have denounced the guide as built on unfair analysis, and they maintain “a number of legislators who have consistently voted for pro-life and end of life legislation have been opposed by Texas Right to Life.”

This isn’t the first time Texas Right to Life has run afoul of the Church Establishment. In 2013, Jeffrey Patterson, executive director of the Texas Catholic Conference, wrote to state Representative Dan Huberty on behalf of the bishops, blasting Texas Right to Life’s voter guide as “unconventional,” “subjective” and producing “perplexing results.” He complained that the voter guide assigned low scores to “pro-life lawmakers who have worked long and hard to protect and preserve life.”

But Republican lawmakers like Byron Cook and Joseph Straus, key leaders of the Texas GOP Establishment, have been criticized by Texas Right to Life for obstructing pro-life laws.

As Church Militant reported in October 2017, “Cook, as the chairman of the Texas House State Affairs Committee, has worked overtime to block pro-life legislation from being passed in the Texas legislature despite claiming to be pro-life.” For example, he killed HB1113, the Pro-Life Health Insurance Reform, which would prohibit insurance companies from paying for elective abortions.

The pro-life bills Cook did support were considered “weak” and “fake” by Texas Right to Life — “ineffective or non-priority” measures that were actually “detrimental to the pro-life movement.”

Straus, meanwhile, as Speaker of the House, “put a sudden end to a special legislative session” that Gov. Greg Abbott had called in order to address important bills Establishment Republicans ignored during the 2016–17 regular session.

Just because, fearing losing a primary election, Straus and Cook are no longer seeking another term, does not mean that the establishment is broken or disorganized. As we see, they are still plenty powerful.

I do wonder the degree to which the 13 bishops who ostensibly make up TCC are involved in this, and the degree to which it comes from the lay bureaucrats who run TCC on a day to day basis?

If you want to read the TCC declaration, here it is—>>>02-2018_TRTL_parish_advisory

Some folks are planning to walk out if the announcement is read in their parish during Mass this Sunday. I don’t think I’m going to have to worry about that.

I am saddened and shocked at this turn of events.  There was no need for such an absolutist position from TCC against TRL – the two have worked together at many points in the past.  Why now, of all times, this matter had to be brought to the fore is incomprehensible for reasons of doctrine or importance to souls.  It very much appears to be doing what their political allies in Austin want the TCC to do, which is to try to remove a troublesome thorn from the establishcrats side.  To Bishop Olson – dude, I’ve defended you in the past, but you got to get a hold of your temper.   There are fights that are optional, and fights that are mandatory, and fights that one should never get in, and this is one of those.