1 comment so far
I was interested to learn that the Harris County prosecutor who filed charges against David Daleiden of the Center for Medical Progress (CMP) for, get this, using a fake ID (and pushed for the maximum felony charge carrying a 20 year sentence) has been very eager to try to get Daleiden to take a plea deal. The intent from the start on the prosecutor/Planned Barrenhood side seems to have been intimidation, the sending of a clear message that if you embarrass Planned Butcherhood you’ll have to contend with the full force of the law.
But the prosecution and Planned Parenthood seem to have missed a salient point. That may be exactly what Daleiden/CMP want. By going to trial, they can subpoena Planned Barrenhood’s internal records, and they can put PB officials on record, in a court of law, testifying as to their baby-butchering and parts-selling practices:
Harris County prosecutors offered David Daleiden a plea deal. He didn’t take it. Bravo.
You see, now that felony charges were brought against Daleiden for altering government records*, and a misdemeanor involving the purchase of human body parts, the death merchants have realized that it’s not a good idea to put the Center for Medical Progress investigator in front of a jury.
So they threw him a plea deal for a misdemeanor after Daleiden posted bail today. For his part, Daleiden stuck to his guns, asking prosecutors for an apology instead of a deal.
“I think we all know that every day that goes by that the Texas authorities do not prosecute Planned Parenthood for their illegal trade in baby parts, they are sending a message to the entire country,” Daleiden told supporters outside the courthouse. “The state of Texas right now is open for business in baby body parts.”
If Daleiden were to go to trial, the videos he made along with Sandra Merritt and the Center for Medical Progress exposing Planned Parenthood’s baby body parts operation would certainly enter into evidence. And they’d be found to be truthful. And Planned Parenthood officials would be subpoenaed to testify at the trial. And they’d be found to be lying.
And oh, BTW, about that prosecutor:
With her top campaign contributor representing a prominent abortion practitioner and a Planned Parenthood board member working in her office, the attorney for pro-lifer investigator Susan Merritt said it’s no wonder that Devon Anderson indicted the pro-life investigators as opposed to Planned Parenthood.
I’m shocked, shocked to find evidence of collusion – or at least strong bias – involving a supposedly Republican DA and a radical promoter of abortion. That’s never, ever happened before.
The response from the prosecutor and PB will likely now be to draw out the pre-trial proceedings for as long as possible, in the hope of exhausting CMP’s financial resources. It will be interesting to see how this develops. This case has several aspects. Planned Barrenhood and their allies in the Harris County prosecutor’s office obviously intended to persecute CMP for embarrassing them. Even if CMP escapes these charges, the left-wing media will forever paint them as “accused felons” in future. The goal is to destroy their credibility, and all it required was an accomplice to their baby-killing agenda in a prosecutor’s office. This kind of thing is happening more and more, and has caused many to fear that conservatives are now more or less defenseless before the progressive minions abusing their positions of power at all levels of government.
There’s another interesting point raised below: how long are we going to silently, meekly allow the powers that be to exercise that power in such a biased and plainly unjust manner:
I should also note that David Daleiden is apparently prepared to go to jail over this. If that bothers you – if you don’t like the fact that a jury could put a man in jail for twenty years because he used a fake ID in one of the few ways that society finds acceptable and even moral* – then, well, that’s why people do civil disobedience. REAL civil disobedience, not the petulant, look-at-me garbage that the Activist Left revels in.
Anyone know if there have been any protests outside the Harris County courthouse or DA’s office? I guess there were a a number of people there when he turned himself in. But how about some old school civil disobedience like the pro-life movement used in its early days? I am told that was found to be counterproductive? Or was it just uncomfortable?
A thought regarding Fr. Rodriguez….. February 9, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, disaster, episcopate, error, Eucharist, foolishness, General Catholic, Liturgy, persecution, priests, Revolution, scandals, self-serving.
…..concerning a possible Dallas connection regarding the demand he apparently faces to not only offer the Novus Ordo, but, lacking any justification in the rubrics of the Mass or canon law, to offer it strictly versus poplum, facing the people. I remind readers of an excerpt from a directive of El Paso Bishop Mark Seitz to Fr. Rodriguez, as related by Father in his recent public update on his situation:
I enjoin you to celebrate the Mass and Sacraments according to the Novus Ordo in the Mission of Shafter. The Mass and the Sacraments must be celebrated in the vernacular of the people (English or Spanish) and not Ad Orientem.
I was reminded that this demand was similar to a situation that played out here in the Diocese of Dallas a few years ago. Then, a priest announced that he would start offering Mass Ad Orientem at his Sunday Masses, and that folks had better get used to the idea because he wasn’t changing his mind. At that time, we were not yet assisting at TLMs, but we did assist at the very reverent Latin Novus Ordo Masses this particular priest offered. We, and a number of other souls under who attended this parish, were elated at this development.
But a very strange and unfortunate thing happened. Just a couple of weeks after this announcement, the priest went back to Mass facing the people. He didn’t explain why, in fact, to my knowledge, he still has never given a justification for this volte face. I wound up finding out through another source, months later, that someone at the parish had complained to the Diocese, and a very firm decree had some down that the practice of Ad Orientem was barred for this priest and this parish. Even more, no priest was to offer Novus Ordo Mass facing the Lord in the tabernacle in any parish at any time.
At the time this all came down, Bishop Seitz was still Father Seitz, pastor of All Saints with the gay pornish processional crucifix (which, in fairness, I guess, did predate his time there). But it seems highly likely that whatever directive was issued in this diocese, however unjustifiable, it continues to inform Bishop Seitz’ thinking regarding how the Mass not just should, but must be offered. That is, in the closed off circle of self-worship, in Pope Emeritus’ Benedict’s words, of the versus poplum orientation.
I guess given his history, it’s not entirely surprising that Bishop Seitz would hold this view, unsupportable as it appears to be. That doesn’t make it any more right, of course.
I thought this small historical tie would be of interest to readers. Like Communion in the hand and the abandonment of chapel veils, this massive novelty rests on nothing at all other than progressive whim and the will of a large number of bishops. There is nothing in any formal Church document that demands Mass facing the people. A sort of vague permission to offer Mass facing the people sneaked into the post-conciliar documents produced by the revolutionaries of the liturgical “renewal” led by Anibale Bugnini, but there was even in these never a clear demand to change the orientation of the priest at Mass. At most, it implies the possibility of such.
I remind, as well, that declarations from national conferences are non-dogmatic and have questionable binding authority, at best. We were told for a long time that lay people were to be refused Communion received kneeling and on the tongue, until that turned out to no longer be the case. We’ve also been told that the TLM was abrogated, until that, too, turned out to be totally false.
In sum, this demand for versus poplum rests on the flimsiest of premises, and raises grave questions regarding those who insist upon it.
This blog has long had a great love for Fr. Michael Rodriguez. I was very gratified when reader skeinster sent me a link to this interview Father gave to Louie Verrecchio. Father gives some updates on his situation viz a viz El Paso Bishop Mark Seitz in this interview. Since it’s out there in the wide open internet, I guess I can cover it, and comment on it.
Below, the entire excerpt involving the impasse between Fr. Rodriguez and Bishop Seitz (emphasis in original, I add comments). I need to make very clear all commentary below is mine alone and is not based on any input from Fr. Rodriguez whatsoever:
Fr. Rodriguez: At present, January 2016, I am a priest in good standing of the Diocese of El Paso, TX, with no pastoral assignment.
My Bishop, Most Rev. Mark J. Seitz, had appointed me as the Administrator of Sacred Heart Mission in Shafter, Texas (a small mission in one of the most remote parts of the diocese), effective July 11, 2014, for a term of three years. However, as a sine qua non condition of the assignment, he insisted that I offer the Novus Ordo Missæ. At the time, I had already been offering the Traditional Latin Mass exclusively for almost three years!
On July 24, 2014, my Bishop issued a Personal Precept which included the order, “I enjoin you to celebrate the Mass and Sacraments according to the Novus Ordo in the Mission of Shafter. The Mass and the Sacraments must be celebrated in the vernacular of the people (English or Spanish) and not Ad Orientem.” [I know of no possible justification in the Canon Law or rubrics by which a priest could be forced to offer Mass facing the people. Versus populum has NEVER been codified as a default or required position for the priest in any authoritative Church document above national council level. And the decisions of national councils are NOT authoritative.]
Throughout my nineteen years as a priest, I have always done my best to practice the virtue of obedience, but now I was put in an impossible situation. St. John of the Cross teaches, “Obedience is a penance of the intellect and therefore a more acceptable sacrifice than all corporal penances. Hence God loves your tiniest act of obedience more than all other homages you might think of offering Him.” What was I to do? Never before had the opening words of the prayer from the Divine Office struck a deeper chord in my soul, “Deus in adiutórium meum inténde. Dómine, ad adiuvándum me festína.” “O God, come to my assistance. O Lord, make haste to help me.” The decision I had to make was my most difficult one yet as a priest. Holy Mary, Virgin Mother of God, intercede for me, a poor sinner.
I wrote many letters to my Bishop. The following is a sample of this correspondence; it is an excerpt from a letter which I wrote to him on September 8, 2014, the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary:
I am 100% committed to my priestly promise of obedience. You are my bishop, and thus, I have promised obedience to you. It is my firm and sincere intention to be obedient to you. Unfortunately for me (and my conscience), your July 24, 2014, Precept contains an order which is “problematic,” to say the least.
[This is really very important……] The order you are giving contradicts Pope St. Pius V’s Apostolic Constitution Quo Primum, Canon IX (a dogmatic canon) of Session XXII of the Holy Council of Trent, Pope Pius VI’s ConstitutionAuctorem Fidei (see the 33rd of 85 propositions which are condemned, Denzinger 1533), Pope Pius XII’s Encyclical LetterMediator Dei 59, and the Second Vatican Council’s Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium 36 and 54. Moreover, your order appears to be irreconcilable with the Decree of the Council of Nicea II regarding ecclesiastical tradition (Denzinger 308), and Canon XIII (a dogmatic canon) of Session VII of the Holy Council of Trent.
In addition, the order contained in your Precept appears to (a) deny the Catholic priest’s legitimate right to offer the Extraordinary Formof the Roman Rite (presumably, exclusively) as expressed in Summorum Pontificum Art. 1, and (b) dismiss Summorum PontificumArt. 1, “the Roman Missal promulgated by St. Pius V . . . must be given due honor for its venerable and ancient usage.” Finally, from the pastoral perspective, your order appears to disregard the expressed needs and good of the faithful of Presidio/Shafter, who are specifically requesting parish life based on the Traditional Latin Mass.
As I wrote to you in my July 1, 2014, letter, as a priest of the Diocese of El Paso, I am committed to do my very best to spiritually nourish, teach, and serve the souls placed under my care. However, I cannot do this apart from what has always been the lex orandi, lex credendiof Holy Mother Church. Thus, with respect to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and the celebration of the Sacraments, it is not a matter of “preference” or my “unwillingness” to obey; rather, there are all-important ecclesial, theological, liturgical, spiritual, ascetical, and pastoral reasons which compel me, in conscience, to offer the Traditional Latin Mass exclusively.
[Unfortunately, Pope Benedict XVI never addressed this situation, of a former NO priest exclusively offering the TLM, directly in Summorum Pontificum and Universae Ecclesiae. As such, many bishops continue to pretend that the TLM was abrogated in 1970 by Paul VI and requires special permission, or conditions, to be offered. This is plainly against the spirit of Benedict XVI’s documents, and against his clear statement that the TLM was not, nor ever could be, abrogated. As a valid Rite, the priest should have the option, based on his pastoral reality, to offer the TLM exclusively, even if not a member of an Ecclesia Dei community. But because that point was never specifically addressed, it is viewed as a matter of opinion, at this time, since virtually the entire hierarchy has chosen to jettison the entirety of the pre-conciliar Magisterium as a practical reality in the day to day operation of the Church. Thus, Father’s very well supported arguments from pre-conciliar sources are simply rejected out of hand.]
In the end, I had to follow what Holy Mother Church has always taught. Out of fidelity to God and to the Church’s immemorial lex orandi, lex credendi, and for the good of the souls entrusted to my care, I could not, in conscience, follow the specific liturgical directive given by my Bishop. [I have very strong sympathy for the conclusion Father has reached. He feels in conscience he cannot offer the Novus Ordo any more. Some may feel that he is failing in obedience. That’s not my take, but I understand it. I see in this action by Bishop Seitz, especially with regard to the demand not to offer Mass Ad Orientem, as unjust and an abuse of power. The situation regarding the TLM is perhaps arguable (though I strongly side with Father on this), but insisting that a priest MUST face the people at Mass is totally unjustifiable, to my knowledge.]
Effective November 10, 2014, my Bishop revoked my appointment as Administrator of Sacred Heart Mission. I was unable to hold back my tears during the final Holy Sacrifice of the Mass which I offered in Shafter, TX, on Sunday, November 9, 2014. With a sorrowful heart and plenteous tears, I prayed the words of blessed Job, “The Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken away, as it hath pleased the Lord so it is done. Blessed be the name of the Lord.” (Job 1:21)
I begged my Bishop for a minimum one-year sabbatical, in order to have ample time to pray, study, reflect, go on an extended retreat, and discern God’s will for my future. He refused, and instead gave me only six months, and restricted the use of my priestly faculties. Eventually, he extended my sabbatical to August 31, 2015.
At the beginning of October 2015, my Bishop initiated a canonical process to determine whether or not I have committed a Delict against Ecclesiastical Authority (i.e. disobedience). Currently, I await whatever decision he may make. If necessary, I am prepared to appeal to Rome. I am under no illusion that Rome will intervene to do what is right and just, but at least by appealing, I will know, in conscience, that I went to heroic lengths in the practice of obedience by following the juridical process instituted by the Church for recourse against the abuse of power.
At present, I continue to discern God’s will for the future of my priesthood. What is Thy will, O Lord? What wilt Thou have me to do? (Acts 9:6) In spite of some very difficult trials over the past four years, I am in awe of God’s goodness, mercy, and mysterious ways.
Father then goes on to address how he’s like this situation resolved. The answers are obvious, but Father is very realistic about where he stands.
Please pray for him. He’s a very good priest who found himself in a nigh impossible situation. It is such a tragedy that this has occurred. I don’t want to pontificate too much on his situation, he just really needs prayers at this point. The future will take care of itself.
A couple of quick items. I posted a while back about the mysterious death of a prominent Chinese priest and the fear many Chinese Catholics – including Cardinal Zen – fear of being sold out in the Vatican-Chinese negotiations, and now there are further reports of Chinese persecution of Christians. Is China unusual (yes), or is it simply in the vanguard of how progressive regimes, given the chance, would treat Christians generally?
…….The Chinese government has just arrested the pastor of China’s largest official Protestant church, as Time reports:
Pastor Gu Yuese, also known as Joseph Gu, was placed under “residential surveillance in a designated location” — the official term for facilities known more commonly as “black jails” — in the city of Hangzhou last Thursday, according to U.S.-based Christian rights group China Aid.
Gu, who headed Hangzhou’s prominent Chongyi Church, was reportedly removed from his post by China’s Three-Self Patriotic Movement (TSPM), the Chinese Communist Party–sanctioned authority that regulates churches, 10 days prior to his detention. He had been vocal in his opposition to the government’s destruction of crosses atop church buildings in China’s Christian-dominated eastern province of Zhejiang, a campaign that began in 2014.
“His arrest marks a major escalation in the crackdown against those who oppose the forced demolition of crosses,” Bob Fu, president and founder of China Aid, said in a statement. “He will be the highest-ranking national church leader arrested since the Cultural Revolution.”
Pastor Gu’s detention represents the latest development in a dispute between China’s central government and the burgeoning Christian community in Zhejiang Province. In 2013, local authorities began a wide-ranging demolition campaign that was ostensibly aimed at “illegal structures,” most of which turned out to be Christian churches and prominent crosses atop them. An internal government document obtained by the New York Times put the lie to the government’s proclamations of neutrality, as it spells out the provincial government’s intention to “remove crosses at religious activity sites on both sides of expressways, national highways, and provincial highways…Over time and in batches, bring down the crosses from the rooftops to the facade of the buildings.”
So, big shock. But perhaps a needful reminder of how leftist persecution of Christians can progress from attempts to dominate the hierarchy and doctrine, to erasing any public sign of the Christian faith.
Next, kind of dumb, but I found a whimsical site on tumblr that is finally actually worth something. Tumblr is widely known for being a haven of many kooky things – like radical feminists – but here’s a site I can get behind: Polish priests blessing things:
Lots of cassocks.
They bless pretty much anything, including supercomputers:
Another insightful Rorate interview with Bishop Schneider; gives strong support to SSPX February 1, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, episcopate, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Papa, persecution, sanctity, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
You might also recall a separate interview +Schneider gave in which he spoke positively of the SSPX. This was in the wake of his apostolic visitation, conducted at the request of Francis. That interview contained very positive comments towards the SSPX, comments that developed into a bit of a furball involving CMTV trying to get Schneider to retract or explain his comments away, which he never did, to my mind. at least not to change their meaning.
I excerpt a bit of this most recent interview below. Bishop Schneider, while drawing necessary distinctions, appears to reveal an even more positive attitude towards the SSPX than he did last summer (among a few other matters addressed – my comments as usual):
The very crisis of the Church in our days consists in the ever growing phenomenon that those who don’t fully believe and profess the integrity of the Catholic faithfrequently occupy strategic positions in the life of the Church, such as professors of theology, educators in seminaries, religious superiors, parish priests and even bishops and cardinals. And these people with their defective faith profess themselves as being submitted to the Pope.
The height of confusion and absurdity manifests itself when such semi-heretical clerics accuse those who defend the purity and integrity of the Catholic faith as being against the Pope – as being according to their opinion in some way schismatics. [It’s a train wreck. To add to the tragedy, I have now had two different people tell me just in the past couple of weeks that protestants on the cusp on converting have backed off due to scandal and confusion caused by Francis. I imagine my two examples are hardly the last] For simple Catholics in the pews, such a situation of confusion is a real challenge of their faith, in the indestructibility of the Church. They have to keep strong the integrity of their faith according to the immutable Catholic truths, which were handed over by our fore-fathers, and which we find in in the Traditional catechisms and in the works of the Fathers and of the Doctors of the Church. [Bishop Schneider is saying in times like these, we cannot always look to the institutional Church for orthodox catechesis, but must turn to the unchanging “Magisterium of the Dead” – Tradition]
………When someone or something is unimportant and weak, nobody has fear of it. Those who have fear of the Priestly Society of St. Pius X ultimately have fear of the perennial Catholic truths and of its demands in the moral and the liturgical domain.
When the SSPX tries to believe, to worship and to live morally the way our fore-fathers and the best-known Saints did during a millennial period, then one has to consider the life and the work of these Catholic priests and faithful of the SSPX as a gift for the Church in our days– even as one of the several instruments which the Divine Providence uses to remedy the enormity of the current general crisis of the faith, of the morals and of the liturgy inside the Church.
In some sectors of the SSPX there are, however, as it is the case in every human society some eccentric personalities. They have a method and a mindset which lack justice and charity and consequently the true “sentire cum ecclesia,” and there is the danger of an ecclesial autocephaly and to be the last judicial instance in the Church. [I think he is pointing at the SSPX-SO here] However, to my knowledge, the healthier part corresponds to the major part of the SSPX and I consider their General Superior, His Excellency Monsignor Bernard Fellay, as an exemplary and true Catholic bishop. There is some hope for a canonical recognition of the SSPX. [That’s a pretty clear and bold statement. Fellay is an exemplary bishop. Quite an endorsement. And not one that seems prone to walking back.]
………We have to believe firmly: The Church is not ours, nor the Pope’s. The Church is Christ’s and He alone holds and leads her indefectibly even through the darkest periods of crisis, as our current situation indeed is. [Something very important to remember. We MUST keep the Faith, in spite of all the temptations to the contrary. We cannot run away like the twelve Apostles. But there is a world of discussion surrounding just what “keeping the Faith” means, and how that faith can be best exercised. I try to be as liberal in understanding as possible in that regard, within the bounds of my mediocre conscience, working out my salvation with fear and trembling]
This is a demonstration of the Divine character of the Church. The Church is essentially a mystery, a supernatural mystery, and we cannot approach her as we approach a political party or a pure human society. At the same time, the Church is human and on her human level she is nowadays enduring a sorrowful passion, participating in the Passion of Christ.
One can think that the Church in our days is being flagellated as our Lord, is being denuded as was Our Lord, on the tenth Cross station. The Church, our mother, is being bound in cords not only by the enemies of Christ but also by some of their collaborators in the rank of the clergy, even sometimes of the high clergy………[Or very often the high clergy. The crisis in the Church is a crisis of leadership, of bad bishops]
………We have to pray that the Pope may soon consecrate explicitly Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, then She will win, as the Church prayed since the old times: “Rejoice O Virgin Mary, for thou alone have destroyed all heresies in the whole world” (Gaude, Maria Virgo, cunctas haereses sola interemisti in universo mundo). [So there it is. It seems Bishop Schneider believes Russia has not been explicitly consecrated, which, judging from Russia’s lack of conversion and the worsening crisis in the Church, would certainly appear to be the case.]
……..Expressions like “development of doctrine” and “pastoral compassion” are in fact usually a pretext to change the teaching of Christ, and against its perennial sense and integrity, as the Apostles had transmitted it to the whole Church, and it was faithfully preserved through the Fathers of the Church, the dogmatic teachings of the Ecumenical Councils and of the Popes.
Ultimately, those clerics want another Church, and even another religion: A naturalistic religion, which is adapted to the spirit of the time. Such clerics are really wolves in sheep’s clothing, often flirting with the world. Not courageous shepherds – but rather cowardly rabbits.
There is a great deal more at the link. Bishop Schneider generally does not mince words and tells it like it is. He goes beyond what some of the other relatively orthodox bishops are willing to say, especially with regard to the Society. He seems to really feel they are part of the Church, even in their current situation. Which is not a point I have ever been inclined to argue, while noting that there are problems and limitations attached to that situation.
+Schneider does seem open to the possibility of confrontation with this pontificate over matters of Doctrine, which is hardly surprising. Saying so publicly, I imagine, means he has been much more strident behind the scenes, as that tends to be how such things go. He is careful in his words – which some might find disappointing – but I always try to be reasonable in my expectations of bishops who have to walk a fine line. Yes we’d love to see fire-breathing excoriations and razor-sharp clarity, but that might mean that bishop is removed from office and loses whatever influence he has. It’s not easy for lay people to understand the risks relatively good bishops like Schneider take in going even as far as they do, and the enormous pressure and threats they face.
With that in mind, I’d say it’s a very good and helpful interview, overall. I’m glad we have Bishop Schneider in the Church.
Is the barbaric behavior of muslim “immigrants” a sign of ignorance, or is it a sign of domination? January 29, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Immigration, persecution, sadness, scandals, secularism, Society, suicide, the enemy.
A little of column A, and a little of column B, perhaps?
Bookworm notes that many of Europe’s governments from the local to the national level seem to be operating on the belief that the incredibly offensive, timorous behavior of many recent immigrants stems from the ignorance and barbarism of the immigrants themselves. Thus, there are mass campaigns underway to try to educate these immigrants in Western-ways, to, in effect, de-islamify and de-barbarize them.
But Bookworm posits another theory. These muslims are not so backwards that they do not know that doing despicable things – like defecating in public swimming pools and gang raping women – is not acceptable behavior. They are doing these things deliberately, and to a specific end:
Open any website dealing with the Muslim refugees in Europe, and you’re sure to find two different kinds of stories. The first kind of story tells about Muslims engaged in all sorts of inappropriate behavior, such as assaulting women,urinating or defecating in swimming pools, raping little boys, or just plain old killing people. The second kind of story tells aboutthe ways in which Europe intends to address these decidedly anti-social behaviors: They’re educating the refugees. The sophisticated Europeans have concluded that the refugees are so stupid and simplistic that they need to be taught good manners. Otherwise, how will they know not to rape, poop, or kill?
It strikes me that the really stupid, naive, unsophisticated people here are the Europeans who actually believe that this anti-social Muslim behavior comes about because Muslims are primitive people who are, for the first time, confronting an advanced society. To hold this position, Europeans must be willfully blind. Didn’t any of them notice the number of migrants who showed up with smart phones intact?…….
……….Here’s what I think is going on: The refugees are acting as they are, not because they see themselves as charity cases, but because they see themselves as conquerors. They know perfectly well that one doesn’t defecate in a pool in which people (especially children) are swimming. They’re doing it because they are performing the literal equivalent of the expression “I don’t give a —- about you.” They know you’re not supposed to rape women . . . that is, unless those women are the products of conquest, in which case raping them is one of Mohamed’s commandments.
I think Bookworm is onto something here. These millions of migrants see themselves changing Europe forever. I’m certain more than a few – probably those who engage in such disgusting behavior – see themselves as conquerors. That doesn’t mean they are, yet, anyway. But they could become so if policies are not reversed or if there is not some kind of reaction, much more than government signs and pamphlets begging immigrants not to behave in atrocious ways.
Is it too much to see in this developing crisis similarities to the fall of Rome? Note that the barbarian invaders did not have to outnumber the native, Romanized population when they started pouring through the no longer defended frontier in the 5th century. There had been barbarians in the Empire for years, for a number of reasons, but that rapidly accelerated in the 400s and led, within a lifetime, to the total collapse of the Western Empire. By the time they reached 10% of the population, the Western Empire was finished.
There have been barbarians/immigrants in Europe for years in this modern context, but now, suddenly, something has happened and the floodgates have opened. I don’t mean to say that Europe is finished at this point, but I am saying that each day this invasion in permitted to continue increases the likelihood of at least a nightmare internecine conflict as incompatible peoples sort themselves out, if not the actual implosion of Europe as bastion of Western civilization (such as remains, anyway).
At this point, I’m really not certain which is more likely to play out – a nativist awakening and struggle to eject (or at least contain) the invaders, or the gradual slipping away of all that has made Europe, Europe. It’s really up to the Europeans. Not that we are in substantially better shape. Our country, too, has been largely remade through immigration over the past 50 years, but it has been immigration of a much different, and less problematic, type. Having said that, there is no way Ronald Reagan could be elected governor of California today. That California is gone.
Calgary bishop wages war against the sexular pagan state January 28, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, episcopate, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, manhood, persecution, Revolution, secularism, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
I don’t know much about Calgary Bishop Frederick Henry. I think I heard some rumbles a while back that he wasn’t terribly friendly to the TLM, but that was a long time ago and I could be misremembering. Whatever his general level of orthodoxy and promotion of Tradition, he has done a great thing in opposing the totalitarian imposition on all public and private schools in Alberta of the radical sexular pagan pro-sodomy agenda of the left wing government inexplicably elected to power in Canada’s most conservative province (which, being Canada…….isn’t saying much).
Bishop Henry has released two documents excoriating the totalitarian agenda at work and its promotion of the rankest immorality. After his first missive, he received some heavy criticism from sexular pagan quarters but has not backed down and had released a second tome solidifying his stand. As such, Bishop Henry is giving an all too rare episcopal witness to the Truth of Jesus Christ and taking a stand against the dominant, if perverse, secular power.
Some coverage below from the Edmonton rag, then some excerpts from Bishop Henry’s first letter:
“If you are reading this piece in the hopes of discovering an apology and/or a retraction, you might as well stop reading right now. That’s simply not going to happen,” Henry wrote on the Calgary Catholic Diocese website.
Henry said he has received much support: “Only God can judge the state of the human soul, but it is pure nonsense to suggest we cannot and should not judge human behaviour.” [Dang right. Which is what makes “who am I to judge” – whether taken radically out of context or not (and the evidence says not) – such a poisonous doctrine. We’ll never be rid of the attempts to exploit that dreadful statement for nefarious, anti-Catholic purposes]
Henry set off a societal debate and firestorm when he issued a letter Jan. 13, calling ministerial guidelines to help schools create policies to protect the rights and safety of transgender and other LGBTQ students and teachers “totalitarian.” [You’re forcing radical change in behavior on 98% of the population for the sake of 2%. You’re not just encouraging mentally ill people to embrace their illness (and if you knew some transgenders, you would know exactly what I mean), you are extolling them as the most special, most deserving among us, to whom everyone else should yield without question or rebuttal. Yes, I call that totalitarian]
The guidelines suggest [BS – require] schools allow transgender students to choose which bathroom they want to use, which sports teams to play on and what pronouns to which they should be referred.
“God created beings as male and female. … In his plan, men and women should respect and accept their sexual identity,” Henry wrote in his first letter. Both letters said: “This approach and directive smack of the madness of relativism and the forceful imposition of a particular narrow-minded anti-Catholic ideology.”…….. [Spot on]
…….“I think the spirit of collaboration and looking after children, especially our children who are most vulnerable, I think will steer the day,” Eggen said.
He said the private Edmonton Islamic Academy has been co-operative about drafting its transgender policies and wants to comply with human rights laws. [That’s because islam has internal rules, viciously enforced, that prevent people from ever “coming out” as inclined to perversion or so self-loathing they desire to be the opposite sex from which they were born. This is a non-issue for them, by and by]
Now a few quotes from the first letter:
……..The Alberta Government “Guidelines” issued on January 13th show no evidence of consultation with or sensitivity to the Catholic community. They breathe pure secularism……..
……..All persons – married, single, religious and ordained – need to acquire the virtue of chastity……..
……..Chastity unites our sexuality with our entire human nature. It approaches sexuality as related to our spiritual natures so that sex is seen as more than a physical act. Sexuality affects the whole person because of the unity of body and soul. Jesus is the model of chastity.
“Chastity includes an apprenticeship in self-mastery which is a training in human freedom“(CCC, no.2339). The acquisition of chastity depends on self-discipline and leads to internal freedom, which enables human beings to temper sexual desires according to God’s plan for the appropriate expression of love in the marital relationship of a man and a woman. [And to overcome the slavery of sin, the greatest weakness of which the Fall left us with was an inclination towards abuse of the faculties suited for the procreation of children]
GSAs and QSAs are highly politicized ideological clubs which seek to cure society of “homophobia” and “heterosexism,” and which accept the idea that all forms of consensual sexual expression are legitimate. [And even some which are non-consensual, in their less guarded moments. Never forget that the perverse lobby has children as their ultimate target. The Alberta government is trying to force these clubs into every school, including Catholic, which would be absurdly against the US Constitution – if that matters anymore – but Canada is a much more authoritarian government/society than the US] The view of sexuality that they espouse is not Catholic.
The Supreme Court held that “to tell a Catholic school how to explain its faith undermines the liberty of the members of its community who have chosen to give effect to the collective dimension of their religious beliefs by participating in a denominational school”(para.62), “ìt amounts to requiring a Catholic institution to speak about Catholicism in terms defined by the state rather than by its own understanding of Catholicism” (par.63), and “ìt also interferes with the rights of parents to transmit the Catholic faith to their children” and the “rights of parents to guide their children’s religious upbringing”(para. 64 & 65). [So it seems this regulation by unelected officials is also contrary to Canadian jurisprudence. Does that matter anymore, or are we in a nakedly lawless, will to power situation north and south of the 49th parallel?]
And the second letter:
……Only God can judge the state of the human soul but it is pure nonsense to suggest we cannot and should not judge human behaviour. Reluctance to judge moral behaviour is the inevitable consequence of moral relativism and moral subjectivism that has eroded confidence in the ability to determine objective moral truth on which sound judgment is based…… [And moral relativism is a communist concept and technique deliberately contrived to destroy the moral fiber of the non-communist West and eventually topple the society of Christendom. Mission dang near accomplished, I am horrified to admit.]
……Having a clear Faith, based on the Creed of the Church, is often labelled today as a fundamentalism. Whereas, relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and ‘swept along by every wind of teaching,’ looks like the only attitude acceptable to today’s standards. We are moving towards a dictatorship of relativism which does not recognize anything as certain and which has as its highest goal one’s own ego and one’s own desires. [And which has most frequently left children abandoned and broken in the wake of these desires. I repeat, ultimately the immoral left will make “normalized” sexual access to children their openly avowed goal.] However, we have a different goal: the Son of God, true man. He is the measure of true humanism. Being an ‘Adult’ means having a faith which does not follow the waves of today’s fashions or the latest novelties.
A faith which is deeply rooted in friendship with Christ is adult and mature. It is this friendship which opens us up to all that is good and gives us the knowledge to judge true from false, and deceit from truth”……
Very true. Bishop Henry’s (and how rare is it today, to see a bishop who refers to himself by not his first, but his last, name) response could have been stronger, but it was far better than the mealy-mouthed response of the Bishop of Edmonton.
Note that this new regulation was issued in early January, and school districts and religious groups were given less than 3 months to draft their plans to implement this regulation. The left never moves slow, while the restoration, to the degree any moves in that direction occur at all, is achingly so.
Well, while I’m fairly certain Bishop Henry has his flaws and is probably not the shining beacon of orthodoxy and defense of the Faith in all the situations we might like, still, good for him for taking this stand. I’ve always thought such things, rare as they are, should be recognized and extolled. Hopefully he will remain as steadfast when in conference with his brother bishops and when negotiating with our sexular overlords. I pray the Lord may give him strength.
Just an FYI – while the comparison is not entirely apt, relatively speaking, Alberta electing the “New Democrat Party” is about like seeing Texas elect an overwhelming slate of hard socialists. The election in 2015 was the first time ever Alberta, as I said Canada’s most conservative province, had elected this party to power. And they did so in dramatic fashion, giving this left wing party a nearly 2/3 supermajority. It was a thoroughly shocking result. And now Albertans are going to get to “enjoy” the fruit of having elected a left-wing government, including the now de rigueur attacks on the Church and Christianity generally.
Voters having temper tantrums can be bad things.
(Further) exploding the glaring ignorance of Bishop Farrell and other liberal gun control advocates January 28, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, manhood, persecution, Revolution, secularism, self-serving, Society.
Great video below. As I wrote in response to Bishop Farrell’s poorly formed argument against the Texas open carry law and firearms ownership, generally, there is NO GUN SHOW LOOPHOLE. Those who are in the business of buying and selling guns MUST conduct background checks whether they sell in a store, on the internet, or at a gun show. Failure to do so means committing a felony with forfeiture of assets, closure of business, and likely prison time.
I have bought guns every way possible and I have never, ever not had to fill out Form 4473 and had a background check run. When buying on the internet, the firearms must almost always ship to a Federal Firearms License holder who will run the background check. The ONLY exception is people who rarely – maybe 2 or 3 times a year – sell a firearm to a friend, acquaintance, or family member. Selling more frequently than that would constitute being in the “business” and require an FFL, background checks, and all the rest.
In addition, it is very difficult, time consuming, and expensive to buy a fully automatic weapon, in spite of what the drones on the left say. Owning an automatic requires a class 3 license AND an expensive stamp for each weapon owned. It also requires major hurdles, like getting the OK of the chief of police in your locality and going through a rigorous series of checks by the ATF. Bishop Farrell didn’t argue that particular point, but as the video shows, many other left-wingers have.
For our bishop, I suggest he stop getting his information on gun control legislation and current firearms purchasing requirements from the left-wing media and politicians.
I am exhausted with the lectures from people who have never tried to buy a gun in their life about how easy it is, about how terrorists and mentally incompetent and wife beaters all just stroll into gun stores every day and walk out with a full auto Uzi without so much as signing a receipt. They can only say that because they are completely, utterly ignorant of the process. That’s not how it works. If ever a known terrorist does get a gun in a gun store, it’s because the ATF/FBI completely failed when running the background check. And how often does that happen? I really don’t know, but if the ATF isn’t doing it’s job with the current laws on the books, why would more laws make it do its job better?
In point of fact, there are already hundreds of firearms laws and regulations on the books, and they are almost never enforced against criminals. They are enforced most often on otherwise law-abiding citizens. Those who use illegal guns in the commission of a felony are rarely charged with such. I believe that fact alone strongly indicates that the left-liberal push for even more draconian legislation is not about purported concern for crime victims, but an attempt to deliberately disarm a nominally free people.
A local Lenten mission you may want to consider January 27, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, catachesis, Dallas Diocese, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Interior Life, Latin Mass, Lent, manhood, persecution, priests, religious, sanctity, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
He will be offering a mission at Mater Dei parish in Irving from Feb. 15-19 at 7pm each night, followed by a Holy Hour:
Fr. Joseph Tuscan, OFM Cap. will be offering a Parish Mission for Mater Dei Latin Mass Parish during Lent. The mission will be held every evening from February 15th through the 19th at 7:00 PM; each talk will be followed by a Holy Hour.
There is no cost to this mission. Donations will be accepted.
ST. FRANCIS AND THE HOLY WOUNDS; TRUE SOURCE OF THE MERCY OF GOD
Monday: The side; The Heart of Christ, the Church; Why be Catholic?
Tuesday: The right hand: The Holy Mass, Prayer and Devotion
Wednesday: The left hand: Sin, Repentance and Mercy
Thursday: The feet; Evangelization and Mission
Friday: The Crown of Thorns; The Glory of Jesus and Mary