Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, different religion, Endless Corruption, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, It's all about the $$$, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, the struggle for the Church, unbelievable BS.
I saw the following excerpt of a lengthy interview Archbishop Lori gave to the Catholic Register recently on the subject of the new presidency and the prospects it brings to the Church, and in addition to being generally disappointed with the bishop’s general view of much of the Trump agenda he was queried about, I was very surprised by this particular excerpt:
What is your assessment of the president’s proposal to eliminate the Johnson Amendment?
That’s, of course, a very complex question. We would certainly want to see, more specifically, what the president might have in mind. As a general rule, it is not a good idea for churches to engage in partisan politics. I believe that, generally, that proves to be a great distraction from our central task and mission, which is to preach the Gospel. Furthermore, I think it would have a tendency to unnecessarily divide our congregations.
I would recognize that the Johnson Amendment is lived out fairly unevenly, across religious lines, but in general, I think we would eye the adjustment of this amendment warily. I think that’s the best adverb I can give you. We are looking at this carefully and warily.
The Johnson Amendment, for those who don’t know, was something created by the corrupt, racist Lyndon Johnson in 1954 and tacked onto a defense appropriations bill to punish the churches who had opposed his 1952 candidacy to the US Senate from Texas. Johnson only won by literally manufacturing votes in magical ballot boxes, but he had faced criticism from various churches for some of his stands and he did not want to have to deal with that again. So, he created an amendment that churches that endorse or oppose specific candidates would lose their precious tax-exempt status. The amendment was shockingly non-controversial at the time, but it has had enormous ramifications.
Now why would the bishops not favor being freed from this restriction on their ability to speak freely and endorse the most moral, most worthy candidates, and oppose those who are unworthy? There are two reasons, really – money, and ideology.
Regarding the money, the USCCB – and Lori was speaking in at least a semi-official capacity for the USCCB in this interview – is wholly dependent on federal funding for almost all of their activities, activities which have come to be thoroughly politicized by this very same funding. Something like 90% of Catholic Charities and 92% of Catholic Relief Services funding comes directly from US taxpayers. One could imagine that, if freed of the Johnson Amendment the bishops would be placed in a very difficult position, not wanting to anger either party by openly opposing some or many (or all) of their candidates. Such politicking could place their precious, precious billions at risk. Can’t have that.
In addition, one can easily forecast how divided and lukewarm the bishops would be in determining which candidates to endorse or oppose.
Think how many very difficult, uncomfortable stands out milquetoast bishops would have to take should the Johnson Amendment be repealed. The house divided they worry about is their own conference’s alienation from faithful souls. Either way they went, they’d be angering a large proportion of their sharply divided flock, but in most of these cases, there is a clear, Catholic moral imperative to support one candidate and oppose another. Right now, they have the perfect excuse not to speak out much more forcefully against pro-abort, pro-contraception, pro-perversion, etc., candidates. They simply can’t speak out for fear of losing that “holy” tax exempt status. It’s great cover.
But it’s also a huge shirking of duty and conduct unworthy of a shepherd of souls. In fact, much of the division among those in this country who apply the name Catholic to themselves stems precisely from the bishop’s unwillingness to take clear stands on moral issues, and, more importantly, impose ecclesiastical penalties against politicians and others of notoriety who advocate for positions contrary to the Doctrine of the Faith. How many pro-abort politicians have been denied Communion, for instance? How many have been condemned by name? How many morally worthless, mealy-mouthed “voting guides” have been trotted out over the years, always containing just enough morally ambiguous language to give a shade of cover for those who want to vote for politicians who advance morally reprehensible positions?
Overall, this commentary reveals the moral corruption at the heart of the USCCB and most national episcopal conferences. Not only do they try to enforce a rigid conformity, blocking individual ordinary’s ability to speak out by imposing penalties against those who do, they also reveal a bureaucratic contractor more concerned with getting paid than saving souls. Repealing the Johnson Amendment would allow the Church and the protestant sects and others to have a stronger impact on the electoral landscape than they’ve had in decades, and thus materially improve the moral condition of this nation. In point of fact, one can trace the steady decline in morals in this country almost in a direct line back to 1954 – that is to say, the silencing of the churches played a significant role in the subsequent moral collapse of this nation.
But perhaps many of our shepherds today consider that much more of a feature, than a bug. Whatever keeps the gravy train rolling……is that their primary concern? And how many of them favor the Church to be a mute, subservient, loyal and dutiful NGO-type contractor to the government, rather than the radically countercultural Body of Christ and vehicle of salvation she is intended by our Lord to be?
Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Immigration, It's all about the $$$, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society.
……..policy over which they have never expressed much concern. Cynical, much? The Mexican government constantly and quite roughly deports any and all illegal immigrants they catch coming over their southern border – that is, if those immigrants don’t have sufficient inducements with which to bribe Mexican officials, not all of which involve money, if you know what I mean. The Mexican Church has had very little to say about that.
But in a sense, this very much makes sense, as bishops for a given country should have as their primary concern the well-being of their own citizens. Of course, Mexicans in the US have in a very real way repudiated their citizenship and as often as not rejected the Church (either there or here, huge numbers are walking away from the Faith). I can understand some degree of loyalty, but for the most part, this just seems like ugly politicking of a most base kind.
See what you think:
The Catholic Church in Mexico has accused the government of adopting an attitude of fear and “submission” over US President Donald Trump’s immigration measures, which it labeled “terrorism.”
Mexican authorities “only make declarations and promises, their reactions are lukewarm and they also show fear and even worse, submission,” read an editorial in the Church’s From the Faith weekly.
The editorial, entitled “Migrant Terrorism,” criticized Trump’s immigration measures, which aim to expel millions of undocumented migrants from the United States.
The Trump administration issued tough new orders Tuesday for a sweeping crackdown on illegal immigrants……..[Umm, the only ones really under threat of deportation are those who have criminal records]
“What Mr Trump does is not only apply inhuman legalism, but a real act of terror,” the editorial said. [But the Mexican government does any different? And why aren’t you castigating your government for its corruption and horrific policy which has driven so many Mexicans to flee in the first place. Most importantly – how much income does the Church in Mexico derive from remittances from Mexican expatriates living in the US? I bet it is not insubstantial]
The new rules make it easier for US Border Patrol and immigration officers to quickly deport any illegal immigrants they find, with only a few exceptions, principally children.
But on Thursday, US Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson met with Mexican ministers promising no “mass deportations” or use of military force to expel immigrants.
Trump has infuriated Mexico by insisting the country pay for a border wall to keep undocumented immigrants out. Mexico’s foreign minister has warned that his country will impose tariffs on US products if the United States taxes Mexican imports to finance a the wall. [Good luck keeping your collapsing oil industry alive if you do that]
Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, asshatery, contraception, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, It's all about the $$$, rank stupidity, Revolution, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society.
Barbara Bush is headlining a fundraiser for Planned Butcherhood here in Texas. Franklin Graham is not amused:
Franklin Graham is calling out former President George W. Bush’s daughter, Barbara Pierce Bush, for speaking at a Planned Parenthood fundraiser on Thursday, saying that raising funds for the abortion business is like raising money for Nazi death camps.
“Planned Parenthood is the #1 abortion provider in the United States,” Graham wrote in a Facebook post yesterday. “Raising funds for this organization is like raising money to fund a Nazi death camp — like Auschwitz, except for innocent babies in their mother’s wombs!”
The Christian evangelist and son of Billy Graham continued: “Reports say they [Planned Parenthood] perform over 300,000 abortions per year. And this is the organization whose employees were caught on video trying to sell baby body parts over wine. Disgusting.”
Bush will be the keynote speaker at the fundraiser for Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas. Individual tickets to the event cost $150, and sponsorship levels go up to $20,000.
As LifeSiteNews reported, Bush’s company, Global Health Corps, which promotes “health equity,” works closely with Planned Parenthood, which Bush labeled an “exceptional organization.” A senior staffer for GHC is a former board member of Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest and the Hawaiian Islands, and the Pacific Northwest Abortion Fund.
Bush and Planned Parenthood CEO Cecile Richards “are enthusiastic supporters of each other’s work,” The New York Times reported in an article celebrating their alliance.
When it comes to social issues, Bush seems to have imbibed the liberal worldview of former First Lady Laura Bush, who is pro-abortion-on-demand and pro-“gay marriage.”
………Barbara Bush also supported Hillary Clinton’s run for president.
So, I’m an ardent pro-lifer. I know many others who are. I can’t say I know many of those ardent pro-life fathers and mothers whose kids wound up becoming pro-abort. I’m far from sure I know any couples where the husband and wife ostensibly disagree stridently on matters such as abortion and pseudo-sodo-marriage. The point being, this is further evidence whatever slight pro-life stands Bush ’43 took were probably simply for political expedience and not related to some deeply held belief.
It’s more than passing odd that this formerly leading family of the Republican party has so many close and happy associations with ardent leftists. That’s what I mean by self-serving elitist uniparty. They all attend the same institutions, go to the same parties, marry within the group, seek to please the same corporate masters, and wind up believing pretty much the same things.
More on the Bush family’s long-time love affair with contraception and abortion. Yes it’s Mother Jones but there are many other articles from less left-wing sites confirming the same thing, but this one gave the most detail.
Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, disaster, Ecumenism, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, Immigration, It's all about the $$$, persecution, rank stupidity, scandals, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
As you can guess, the reaction to the proclamation of these particular abhorrent beliefs has been just a little bit different from what was directed at Milo, because a prof is a member of the great left-wing machine and leftists always take care of their own. h/t to reader skeinster who sent this along (I know reports of this have been around for a while but they were fairly scattered so it’s likely many have not seen this):
Two weeks ago today, a professor from Georgetown University publicly rose to the defense of slavery and rape, and not a single major media outlet—with the exception of a blogger on the Washington Post website and a brief posting on foxnews.com—has said a word about it. The absence of outrage is not hard to figure out: Jonathan Brown’s defense was limited to Islam. [yet another sign that islam is the de facto state religion of this country]
Brown, a convert to Islam, holds an endowed chair in Islamic studies at Georgetown. The Jesuit-run institution has a wealthy benefactor in Saudi Arabia, a nation which bans Christianity. How sweet.
What did Georgetown get from this arrangement? Money, and a lot of it. Twelve years ago, Saudi Arabia wrote a check to the Jesuit-run institution for $20 million; it went to support the school’s Center for Muslim Christian Understanding, run by Brown. And what did Saudi Arabia get from this peculiar “understanding”? Legitimacy. [And much more than that. They got the silence of a Catholic university on the evils of islam. They got influence at a body that in turns greatly influence mainstream Catholic thought. They got influence on American and Catholic thought leaders for years to come. They got more and more acceptance of the idea that islam is deserving of special rights and privileges]
The fruit from this decayed tree is now apparent. Georgetown now employs a tenured professor who defends slavery and rape, provided the slavemasters and rapists are Muslims. This is apparently Georgetown’s idea of diversity. It also shows how phony the school is. Why all the handwringing about Georgetown’s ownership of American slaves in the 19th century when it employs defenders of slavery today?
Brown’s position was not made in the heat of debate. If anything, his comments were well prepared: they were delivered at the Islamic Institute for Islamic Thought. After being criticized by some, he tried to walk it back, offering a lame Tweet that meant nothing.
“As a category, as a conceptual category that exists throughout states and trans-historically,” Brown said clumsily, “there’s no such thing as slavery.” It gets better. “I don’t think you can talk about slavery in Islam until you realize that there is no such thing as slavery.” [Naturally. If you can’t defend your religion’s behavior on a subject, pretend the subject doesn’t exist. Also, taqqiyah.]
It is not certain what Brown would say to slaves in Mauritania and Somalia today—they are owned by their Muslim masters. Would he tell them to stop promoting fake news?……..
Brown is also incompetent. If slavery doesn’t exist in Muslim-run nations, why the need to justify it? “Slavery cannot just be treated as a moral evil in and of itself,” he opined. He really means it. “I don’t think it’s morally evil to own somebody because we own lots of people all around us.” [This guy is really screwed up. Go figure for a western convert to islam]
(Who he owns he did not say, but perhaps the Southern Poverty Law Center will look into it. Maybe I’ll convert to Islam and see if I can buy him. I’ll use my credit card—Mastercard for the Master.)
When someone in the audience challenged Brown, he became indignant, as well as inconsistent. “The fact that there was slavery is wrong [thus did he contradict his remark that there was no such thing in Islam]. Okay. If you’re a Muslim, the prophet of God…had slaves. He had slaves. There’s no denying that. Are you more morally mature than the prophet of God? No, you are not.” [HE’S DEMANDING STUDENTS ACCEPT THE DICTATES OF ISLAM, A FALSE SATANIC RELIGION, ON A CATHOLIC CAMPUS!!! This is an appeal to authority based on his view that Mohammad – if he existed – is supposedly “god’s” prophet. Does Brown know that, unlike Christ, Mohammad worked no miracles, did no great good deeds witnessed by tens of thousands, in short gave absolutely zero evidence of any supernatural connection or powers short of a book he wrote, alone, under supposed guidance from Gabriel? Does Brown admit of the satanic verses where the Koran (at least, a version where these bits are not expunged) admits that satan fooled Mohammad? Did satan ever trick Christ into teaching error?]
One would hope that all of us are more morally mature than Muhammad. After all, he was not only a slavemaster and an advocate of violence, he consummated his marriage with his bride Aisha when she was nine years old. That’s what we call rape.
Speaking of which, Brown went on to say that non-consensual sex—it’s called rape—is okay with him, at least if the offenders are adherents to Islam. He took aim at the Western notion of “consent,” maintaining that “It’s very hard to have this discussion because we think of, let’s say in the modern United States, the sine qua non of morally correct sex is consent.”
Continuing his defense of rape, Brown criticized Americans for making a big deal about individual rights. “We fetishize the idea of autonomy to the extent that we forget, again who’s really free? Are we really autonomous people?” In other words, since none of us is really autonomous, the difference between us and a rape victim is more contrived than real. [And you can tell from this exactly how far into islam this guy has gone, and it’s pretty damned deep. This is exactly why islamic societies are so backwards, hidebound, superstitious, and casually disdainful of human life. They place no value on the self as a unique soul created in the image and likeness of God – or to the extent they do, they have horribly perverted this understanding precisely in order to justify Mohammad’s abhorrent, amoral behavior.]
Brown and Georgetown would be on the front page of every newspaper in the nation if he had justified Christians enslaving and raping Muslims.
Dang straight. Good piece by Deal Hudson.
This is what the Left has in store for you folks. Get rid of Christianity, create a failed totalitarian leftist state, then submit to the almighty allah.
Brown does a fine job of revealing the demonic immorality at the heart of islam, as well as islam’s inability to logically, rationally defend itself. The appeals to authority start within moments. And I would say Christianity’s long struggle to extirpate slavery from Western civilization sufficiently establishes its inherent moral superiority.
Only a muslim extremist would claim differently. Good to know just what $20 million in dirty Saudi oil money will buy.
Posted by Tantumblogo in cultural marxism, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, Immigration, It's all about the $$$, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, the enemy.
Just some data to confirm what you already knew: the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), which probably did some good and helpful work decades ago in helping to undermine and eliminate the legacy of the Jim Crow South, long ago became just another corrupt agent of leftist agitprop. More specifically, they’re simply another attack wing of the demonrat party, trading on the good name and legacy they built up decades ago to engage in nakedly biased, partisan political attacks.
And typical for politically favored institutional attack dogs, their attacks are typically based on outright falsehoods and incredibly manipulated “data.” As a for instance, in the wake of Trump’s election – and frankly mere days after the event – the SPLC claimed that “attacks” against muslims had skyrocketed, as had the number of anti-muslim “hate” groups.
How did this horrible outbreak of persecution occur? By broadcasting doubtful, or even inventing, incidents (many of which have been very publicly debunked) and listing things like billboards and individuals who hold beliefs the very far left SPLC finds wrong as being purveyors of “hate,” even if these beliefs are held by a large majority of Americans. FrontPageMag has catalogued a partial list of some of their recent inventions and false condemnations of largely innocent people, who simply happen to think differently than they do, and it’s an amazing compilation:
“Huge Growth in Anti-Muslim Hate Groups During 2016: SPLC Report,” wails NBC News. “Watchdog: Number of anti-Muslim hate groups tripled since 2015,” FOX News bleats. ABC News vomits up this word salad. “Trump cited in report finding increase in US hate groups for 2nd year in a row.”
The SPLC stands for the Southern Poverty Law Center: an organization with slightly less credibility than Ringling Bros and Barnum & Bailey Clown College, and without the academic degree in greasepaint.
And you won’t believe the shameless way the SPLC faked its latest Islamophobia crisis.
The Southern Poverty Law Center’s latest “hate group” sightings claims that the “number of anti-Muslim hate groups increased almost three-fold in 2016.”
That’s a lot of folds.
And there is both bad news and good news from its “Year in Hate and Extremism.”
First the good news.
Casa D’Ice Signs, the sign outside a bar in K-Mart Plaza in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, is no longer listed as a hate group. The sign outside the bar had been listed as a hate group by the SPLC for years. The owner of Casa D’Ice had been known for putting politically incorrect signs outside his bar. So the SPLC listed the “signs” as a hate group. (Even though there was only one sign.) Not the bar. That would have made too much sense.
Since then Casa D’Ice was sold and the SPLC has celebrated the defeat of another hate group. Even if the hate group was just a plastic sign outside a bar.
But the bad news, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, is that anti-Muslim hate groups shot up from only 34 in 2015 to 101 in 2016.
What could possibly account for that growth? Statistical fakery so fake that a Vegas bookie would weep…….
…….The SPLC decided to count 45 chapters of Act for America as separate groups.
How do you get a sudden rise from 34 to 101 hate groups? It helps to suddenly add 45 chapters of one group. Act for America isn’t a hate group. It’s also just as obviously not 45 groups.
Act for America was only listed as one group in the 2015 list. It shot up to 45 now.
Furthermore Act for America boasts not 45, but 1,000 chapters across the country. Why list just 45 of them? Look at it from the SPLC’s perspective. Next year, it can add 200 chapters and claim that anti-Muslim hate groups once again tripled. And then it can do the same thing again the year after that……..
……..[T]he SPLC makes a point of highlighting the locations of likely terrorist targets. [People who oppose radical islam, for instance, or who uphold traditional morality] And the Southern Poverty Law Center’s map of hate has been used by terrorists before.
Floyd Lee Corkins opened fire at the headquarters of the Family Research Council. The conservative Christian organization had been targeted by Corkins because of its appearance on the SPLC’s list.
“Southern Poverty Law lists anti-gay groups. I found them online,” Corkins later confessed to the FBI.
When Leo Johnson, the building’s African-American manager, attempted to stop Corkins, the SPLC shooter told Johnson that he didn’t like his politics and opened fire. The SPLC gunman had planned to kill everyone in the office, but Johnson’s heroic actions saved their lives. The African-American building manager was forced to undergo painful surgeries because of the Southern Poverty Law Center’s hate list.
Despite its role in the terror attack, the SPLC continues to target the Family Research Council.
None of the so-called “Anti-Muslim hate groups” listed by the SPLC have shot anyone. The SPLC has……
……..But there is one barrier to being listed as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center.
No amount of overt anti-Semitism from CAIR’s Nihad Awad would ever get the Islamist hate group listed as a hate group. Even CAIR’s flirtation with Neo-Nazis and Holocaust deniers can’t get it on the hate map. The SPLC collaborated with the Muslim Public Affairs Council despite its anti-Semitism.
Instead the SPLC lists counterterrorism organizations such as the Investigative Project on Terrorism, the Clarion Project and the David Horowitz Freedom Center which point out their terror ties as hate groups.
The Southern Poverty Law Center is greedy, cynical and dishonest.
Shorter post – the SPLC are thoroughgoing leftists who trade on the name and sufferings of those who truly fought discrimination and unjust persecution in order to advance leftism. If a person or group leans left, or is perceived as being part of the leftist coalition, as muslims are (even though muslims would destroy them, and take away so much of the sexual license leftists purport to love), they can literally do no wrong. If a person or group (or sign) is perceived as standing in opposition to leftism, they can do no right, and the SPLC will be quite happy to unjustly tar that individual as some kind of hate-mongerer, if they hold beliefs counter to the religion of sexualized secular paganism. It’s a travesty what they are allowed to do, but it’s part and parcel of the Left here and throughout the West.
Indeed, the SPLC has long listed traditional Catholic groups like the SSPX as “extremist” and supposedly guilty of one bad “-ism” or another. That’s because traditional Catholics uphold morals and decency, and those things are bad, because large parts of the leftist coalition would get bad feelz if someone “judged” their sodomizing or adulterating. They also have listed anti-abortion groups as “hate groups.” Soooo………they’re bad. Finis.
I pray to have the time tomorrow to post something much more substantive than these endless catalogs of the left’s moral failings and frank evil. They’re important, but I will try to focus tomorrow and next week on much more Catholic-focused posts.
Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, disaster, error, family, foolishness, General Catholic, It's all about the $$$, paganism, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
Aside from a bit of football, mostly college, we never watch TV. Even watching football on a Saturday afternoon is problematic, at least, because of the commercials. We generally turn the channel or turn it off.
So the likelihood that we would stumble on this atrocious new program from Fox called “The Mick” is low, but I’ve got to say I think I saw ads for it during a bowl game. It looked terrible, and it seems it is. It inspires me to want to get rid of the TV someone gave us a couple of years ago. Here are the problems with this new program, to air during the “family hours” of prime time:
And what exactly is “The Mick”?
It’s a “comedy” series featuring “Micky”, an irresponsible, foul-mouthed, cigarette-smoking alcoholic, pill popping woman who assumes guardianship of her spoiled niece and nephews.
It features unprotected teen sex, a child consuming quantities of birth control pills. Strong language (“b*tch,” “a$$,”) and crude sexual references are frequent, with kicking, screaming, and slapping.
And it’s airing right now in the “family hour”, when programming is supposed to be appropriate for any age.
But is this program “appropriate”? Just listen to this:
- Kids get slapped in the face repeatedly.
- There is underage drinking, foul language, and drug use.”
- Along with an incredible array of inappropriate sexual banter, and nasty talk.
And it gets even worse. Mick lets her teenage niece have boys in her room, and smiles with approval when she hears banging coming from upstairs.
So is Mick a “cool aunt?”
Or is this twisted and warped entertainment – using kids to promote contraception, homosexuality, and transgenderism?
More from this site where you can sign a petition opposing the airing of this program:
Lindsay Kornick with the Media Research Center’s NewsBusters writes: “There is nothing decent about The Mick. Not the topic, not the characters, and most definitely not the humor.”
Little Boy in Dress Says It ‘Breezes on My V*****’ in Twisted Trailer for ‘The Mick’
Fox Comedy Features 6YO ‘Trans’ Boy Wearing Bondage Gag
I don’t know how effective this kind of opposition is. You’re probably better off telling Fox that, thanks to them, you’ve decided to cancel your cable/satellite/broadband subscription and won’t be viewing ANY programming, least of all theirs.
We always hear what a fallacy the slippery slope argument is, and, logically speaking, it can be, but this all started with short skirts and innuendo in the 60s, fell into more bawdy and controversial humor in the 70s, then descended into outright nudity, profanity, and immorality in the 80s and 90s. Television programming is enormously powerful and has probably played THE key role in the advance of the sodomite and other perverse agendas – indeed, as the orchestrators of those agendas deliberately planned that to be. The infamous book laying out the “gay agenda” in the late 80s – After the Ball – spoke of using TV and the movies to first normalize sodomy, and then so glorify it as to be in many senses viewed as superior to morally upright use of the marital faculties. And so here we are today, with transgender 6 year olds wearing ball gags, for pity’s sake. What a travesty. All along, people have been pooh-poohed who warned that the steady decline in morality in broadcast media would lead to exactly what we see today, and we were all lectured by our cultural betters what fools such nattering nabobs of negativity were.
Couple this post with the previous one for a course of appropriate action, perhaps.
Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Abortion, asshatery, Basics, contraception, cultural marxism, disaster, episcopate, Francis, General Catholic, It's all about the $$$, persecution, scandals, secularism, sexual depravity, Society, the struggle for the Church.
A bit more data on the attempts to reduce Cardinal Burke’s formal role and thus influence in the Church, the notorious Albrecht von Boeselager, the man at the center of the controversy within the Knights of Malta for his involvement in the distribution of condoms, has claimed that Cardinal Burke is “de facto” suspended. Well, it’s certainly clear that at this point, with his dismissal by Francis from his former post as Cardinal Patron of the order, Cardinal Burke lacks any clear apostolate or formal role in the Church. He’s also, of course, been shuttled off to Guam. Francis intervened decisively in Boeselager’s favor, not only reinstating a man who had taken gravely immoral actions entirely contrary to the Doctrine of the Faith, but deposing the former leadership of the Knights and instituting direct Vatican control over what had been, throughout its 500 year history, always a lay-led and run organization.
That’s what you call a decisive intervention. There are many prurient reasons for this intervention, not the least of which being the Boeselager’s wealth and their involvement in the often corrupt Vatican bank, but don’t think the issue of contraception did not play a significant role. I’m quite certain it did. In fact, this entire issue may have been orchestrated in order to further isolate and ostracize Cardinal Burke, the most effective leader to date of opposition to Francis, at least publically among the episcopate. The report, via LifeSiteNews:
The Knights of Malta official at the center of controversy over the Order’s Catholic identity and sovereignty says its patron, Cardinal Raymond Burke, has been “de facto” suspended.
Albrecht von Boeselager, a German aristocrat, was removed from his post as Grand Chancellor on the grounds that he violated his promise of obedience. He hadn’t submitted to his superiors’ request that he resign after it was revealed he had overseen the distribution of contraception in the developing world. The Catholic Church teaches that contraception is intrinsically evil.
After Boeslager’s removal caused a kerfuffle, Pope Francis personally stepped in, reinstating Boeselager to his former position. The pope also asked Grand Master Matthew Festing, the order’s highest-ranking official who had removed Boeselager, to resign. This was unusual because the order of Malta is a sovereign state. [It’s also the first time such a demand – and it was a demand, done under great pressure, not a request – has ever been made in the 500 year history of the order.]
The pontiff then appointed a “papal delegate” to run the order.
In comments translated by The Tablet, Von Boeselager told the Archdiocese of Cologne’s website, domradio.de, that delegate Archbishop Angelo Becciu is now fulfilling Cardinal Burke’s role.
Becciu “has the full confidence of the Pope and is his spokesman,” von Boeselager said. [Gee, you figure?] “That means that Cardinal Burke as Cardinal Patron of the Order is now de facto suspended.” [Is that, suspended as Cardinal Patron, or suspended in a more general sense?]
Von Boeselager said it’s a “completely unfounded accusation” that Pope Francis undermined the Order’s sovereignty by demanding Festing’s resignation. [This is BS. All other reports have indicated Francis went on one of his epic tirades when Festing was summoned to the Doma Sancta Marthae and insisted on a most groveling “resignation” on the spot, directing Festing to blame Burke for the entire affair. But spinners gonna spin]
“The Pope acted at the Order’s wish and he took great care that the Order’s sovereignty was in no way violated or impaired,” [as he unprecedentedly violated a sovereign order’s sovereignty] he said. “He asked the Grand Master to step down, his resignation was carried out according to the Order’s regulations and was accepted. The appointment of the Holy Father’s delegate is expressly limited to the spiritual side of the Order and has nothing to do with its activities as a sovereign power.”
We shall see what further action is taken against Cardinal Burke. With this most vindictive and ideological of Bishops of Rome, there is no chance he’s done trying to humiliate him and break his influence.
Something tells me these efforts will backfire, however.
Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, It's all about the $$$, persecution, secularism, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, true leadership, Virtue.
Many people, even Texans, are not be aware that by far the most influential/powerful office in Texas state government is that of Lieutenant Governor. The Lieutenant Governor sets the legislative agenda and has a powerful rule-making position in the state senate. The office of governor is much more of a figurehead position that holds only limited powers, the ability to veto legislation being probably the foremost of these.
With that in mind, it is significant that legislation was proposed last month for the upcoming legislative session that would allow private enterprises to set their own policies with regard to this insane “let’s let deranged grown men use the same bathroom as little girls” issue that came to the fore last year under heavy pressure from the Obama administration. Schools and some other public entities would be required to maintain single-sex restrooms.
Shortly after the most recent Super Bowl, which took place in Texas, the NFL decided to huff and puff over this grievous offense to their increasingly radical left-wing sensibilities. An NFL official threatened that should the bill pass, the NFL would block awarding future Super Bowls to the state. Many noted the irony of the timing – they only spoke out after the Super Bowl occurred.
Was Lt. Governor, a stalwart pro-lifer, going to be swayed by this attempted influence? No, no he was not:
Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick told the National Football League to “get out of politics” and “not tell states what their public policy is” Wednesday after the NFL warned the state about moving forward with a transgender bathroom bill.
Just one week after the NFL held the Super Bowl in Houston, league spokesman Brian McCarthy issued a statement advising the state of Texas to carefully consider whether or not to pass Senate Bill 6, also known as the Texas Privacy Act. The bill, which was proposed in January, allows businesses to choose their own bathroom policies while prohibiting schools from allowing students to use bathrooms or locker rooms whose specified gender does not match their biological sex.
“The NFL needs to get out of politics. They need to stick to their business,” Patrick said Wednesday on “The Laura Ingraham Show.” “Does [NFL Commissioner] Roger Goodell, who didn’t care about people not respecting the national anthem, who took a while to come down on domestic violence — does he support boys and girls showering together in the 10th grade? Is that what the NFL is for?”
Although the bill was proposed in January, the NFL conveniently waited until the Super Bowl occurred in Texas a month later before issuing its political statement……..
……….But because the NFL is not a school, the Texas Privacy Act would allow the league to institute its own bathroom policies as it sees fit……
……”We’re a free enterprise state. If a business wants to be as stupid as Target and run off their business and see their stock drop 25 percent, let them do it,” Patrick said, referencing Target’s decision last year to announce that its patrons could use whichever restroom they wished. [Nice. Thank you.]
“We say that no school can have a policy that boys and girls share showers, locker rooms, and bathrooms. So the NFL thinks that’s discriminatory?” Patrick said. “If Roger Goodell is worried about our bill, then why doesn’t he announce that next season every stadium in the NFL is going to allow men in the ladies’ room? I don’t think that would fly with any of the NFL owners. The NFL needs to just stand on the sideline and not tell states what their public policy is.”
Well, should the legislature follow through and pass this bill as is generally expected, Texas can descend, along with North Carolina, even further into that basket of irredeemable deplorables that are so hated.
Here’s an idea – if we’re so rotten and evil, why not just let us leave and go our own way?
Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, Basics, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, It's all about the $$$, rank stupidity, Revolution, sickness, Society, unbelievable BS.
No, no more pressing health problems, for the moment, thank God, but I am stuck in all day meetings three days this week with a hard rule on no laptops or phones. You can thank the VP of Quality for that. Her rule, not mine. So, I won’t have really any time to post until Friday, at best, and I’m sure I’ll be playing a lot of catchup then.
A little quickie to tide you over, some data that is as satisfying to your snarky side as it is revealing. A German study has found that 90% of the most hardcore leftist “protestors” in that country still live at home, and a huge percentage are unemployed. I doubt the situation is much different in this country, most of the so-called “antifa” (anti-fascist) radicals here are associated with various universities, either as part-time students, professional students, drop-outs, staff, and/or hangers on. It has been revealed that a number of the most violent rioters in Berkeley were faculty or staff of that benighted institution (I heard somewhere – I think from Milo – that only 37% of recent Berkeley graduates are employed?):
A new study shows that over 90 percent of the anti-fascist protestors in Europe are still living in their mother’s basement.
Heat Streetreports that the study found that 92 percent of the protesters at these anti-fascist rallies that are believed to have committed violence still live with their parents. Heat Street also notes the following findings from the study:
- 84% are male
- 72% are aged 18-29
- 90% are single
- 34% are unemployed
These “Antifa” protesters have been behind the violent protests that occurred on the day of President Donald Trump’s inauguration and the riots that occurred in U.C. Berkeley when Breitbart editor Milo Yiannopolous was scheduled to speak. In fact, it seems that the violence didn’t start until the “Antifa” thugs appeared, according to International Business Times.
In reality, most of these “spontaneous protests” are nothing of the kind, they are carefully planned and organized, while most of the hardcore of this group are basically paid activists/protestors/activists. They are paid by the demonrat party and many allied George Soros funded groups. Many people have found ads on Craig’s List and other sites that attest to this fact, where advertisements appear regularly offering pay for taking part in protest-riots. It’s all astroturf, fake grass roots uprisings conducting politics by other means, attempting to achieve on the streets through violence what the failed and rejected leftist agenda failed to win at the ballot box. It’s exceedingly dangerous to fund and support groups like this, not only with money but with increasingly extremist and unhinged rhetoric – thinks like this can easily spin out of control.
Which may be the point of it all. As I said, politics by other means. When their political program utterly fails to attract the support of the majority, the historical tendency of the Left is to resort to violence. More and more people are noting that a kind of civil war, whether fought with armed combat or not, is in the offing.
At any rate, I’m off for a 1st birthday party for my youngest, have a blessed few days and I’ll try to catch up with you on Friday.
h/t reader TT for the link to Rush