Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Abortion, Basics, contraception, Dallas Diocese, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, persecution, sadness, scandals, secularism, sexual depravity, shocking, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
Well, well, well…….if it isn’t Robert Gates, continuing his disastrous leadership in yet another critically important American institutions. After essentially destroying the defense acquisition process in his turn as Secretary of Defense, he now apparently intends to insure the BSA (Boy Scouts of America) is well and truly leveled during his administration.
Not that their present position – admitting Scouts with perverse inclinations into their ranks, but not Scoutmasters with the same affliction – is in any way tenable. I wrote at the time they disastrously surrendered that it would’t be more than a year or two before just this happened, that they would have men given over to the most unnatural lusts, the vast majority of whom allow their faculties in that regard to run wild, serving in leadership positions. Well, I was just about spot-on, Gates has all but called to lift the ban on sodo-Scout leaders (thanks to MFG):
The Boy Scouts of America’s ban on gay leaders “cannot be sustained,” said president Robert Gates in remarks prepared for this week’s National Annual Meeting being held in Atlanta.
In his speech, which was posted to the Scouts’ website today and is available below, the former U.S. Defense Secretary and CIA director says he is not asking for a policy change — not yet, anyway. But, he says, “I must speak as plainly and bluntly to you as I spoke to presidents when I was director of the CIA and secretary of defense. We must deal with the world as it is, not as we wish it to be.”
The Irving-based Boy Scouts lifted its ban on openly gay youth members at its May 2013 meeting at the Gaylord Texan — much to the displeasure of then-Texas Gov. Rick Perry. But it continues to prohibit openly gay adults from serving as volunteers or paid BSA staffers.
In his speech, Gates points out that many councils are “openly” challenging the current policy — among them, for instance, the Boy Scouts’ Greater New York Councils, which recently hired an openly gay 18-year-old as a camp counselor. Said Gates, expect that trend to continue.
“While technically we have the authority to revoke their charters, such an action would deny the lifelong benefits of Scouting to hundreds of thousands of boys and young men today and vastly more in the future,” he says in the prepared remarks. “I will not take that path. [So, you’ve given up. Shocking. If you took a strong stand now, you could nip this trend in the bud, but by announcing you will take no action, you are not only insuring many more poor, morally lost souls will try to gain positions of influence in the Scouts, but, even more, you are positively encouraging them to do so. You’re basically announcing, on the QT, I’m in support of this, I will do nothing to stop it. Remember to check out the Troops of Saint George for a solidly Catholic alternative to the Boy-Rape Scouts]
Further prediction: it won’t be more than 10 years or so before two things happen: there are massive lawsuits against the Scouts due to sex abuse that occurs between scouts and “masters,” and the BSA will become a predominately left-wing sexular pagan advocacy organization a la the Girl Scouts. You are going to allow at least some men with powerful inclinations towards “twinks” unfettered access to them in remote, rural locations. Normal boys will flee in spades, within a few years virtually no normal boys will join up, and you’ll be left with a much smaller sodomite-advocacy group. Satan couldn’t be happier, and Baden-Powell must be spinning in his grave.
MFG also recommends this: interesting analysis that indicates that parishes that host Boy Scout troops but who refuse sodo-marriage could be held liable. The wheels, the wheels are coming off: http://www.adfmedia.org/files/BSALegalRamifications.pdf
Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Abortion, contraception, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, It's all about the $$$, Papa, persecution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, shocking, SOD, the return, the struggle for the Church.
Dear Lord, Life Site News posted yesterday an exchange between Archbishop Sanchez Sorondo, Chancellor of the Pontifical Academies of Science, and the large pro-family group C-FAM. C-FAM queried him, in very polite terms, about the scandal of having major pro-abort activists being given a platform to spread their diabolical errors at the recent Vatican conference on so-called climate change. His responses were incredibly hostile and dismissive. I mean, he doesn’t even try to hide his enormous bias or the fact that he’s very much on the progressive side of things, he simply chided and rebuked C-FAM for every mild criticism they raised. Get a load of this (questions from C-Fam in bold, I add comments):
Q. Were you aware before your collaboration with Sachs at the Vatican of his public position on abortion in the book “Commonwealth”, where he says abortion is a “low-cost” and “low-risk” intervention to reduce fertility in the event that contraceptives fail?
Sánchez Sorondo (S.S.) I’ve just come back from Argentina, where I attended a conference to combat new forms of slavery, like human trafficking, forced labor, prostitution, and organ trafficking, which I consider, together with Pope Francis and Pope Benedict, to be a crime against humanity. Unfortunately, there is not only the drama of abortion, but there are also all these other dramas, in which you should also be interested, because they are closely related. The climate crisis leads to poverty and poverty leads to new forms of slavery and forced migration, and drugs, and all this can also lead to abortion. [Note, he didn’t even remotely answer the question, he simply changed the subject. Certainly human trafficking is a huge concern and is most rampant in muslim nations (why don’t the Archbishop use his voice to chide muslims on that?!?) but it has no relation to “climate change.” But it gets worse…..]
Q. Several Catholic intellectuals and media sources criticized your decision to collaborate with Ban Ki-moon and Jeffrey Sachs on climate change, because of their positions on abortion and population control. Do you have any reply to these concerns?
S.S. The Tea Party and all those whose income derives from oil have criticized us, but not my superiors, who instead authorized me, and several of them participated. [Oh come on! My income doesn’t derive from oil, you petulant snot, and I’ve just been one of thousands, if not millions, scandalized by this biased watermelon festival. Give me a break!]
Q. Undoubtedly, you discussed Ban Ki-moon’s and Jeffrey Sachs’ position on abortion and population control in the lead up to the conference. How were any questions resolved?
S.S. Yes. We had these discussions, and as you can see, the draft SDGs (Sustainable Development Goals) don’t even mention abortion or population control. They speak of access to family planning and sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights. The interpretation and application of these depends on governments. Some may even interpret it as Paul VI, in terms of responsible paternity and maternity. Instead of attacking us, why not enter into dialogue with these “demons” to maybe make the formulation better, like we did on the issues of social inclusion and new forms of slavery? [Now just wait a minute. This is diabolical. In every Western country including all of Latin America, “family planning and sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights” are synonymous with contraception and abortion. This is diabolical in the use of code language to communicate to what I have to assume was the intended audience – the radical sexular pagan enviro-left – that the Vatican, or at least this conference, is on board with their agenda, while leaving some wiggle room to say “oh, we didn’t endorse abortion,” even while they had huge pro-aborts speaking for this conference all over the place. Don’t you like how they’re trying to drag Humanae Vitae back into this, as well? “Responsible parenthood” means, according to Pope Francis, “3 kids is about right,” and contraception is back on the table. I also like how he tries to chide C-Fam for being critical, asking why they didn’t join in the process? The reason they didn’t is because they couldn’t, they weren’t invited, and even more, any noted pro-life pro-family “conservative” groups were blocked from entering the conference!]
Q. Critics of this collaboration lament how Catholics and non-Catholics alike may be confused about participating, even remotely, in the grave moral errors that Ban Ki-moon and Jeffrey Sachs promote. At the same time, Ban Ki-moon and Jeffrey Sachs have derived great benefit from their participation, confirmed in the enthusiastic media coverage of the conference, which may in turn also raise a lot of interest for Pope Francis’ new encyclical on the environment.
S.S. We are happy that Ban Ki-moon and Jeffrey Sachs have accepted the theory on climate that the Academy has maintained for thirty years, namely, that human activity based on fossil fuels determines climate. [Based on what?!? Global temperatures have not increased in 20 years even as carbon emissions have greatly increased! This is a conclusion looking for evidence, and a perversion of science.] The members of the Academy have defined this “anthropic climate” or “anthropocene,” chief among them being Nobel Prize winners Paul Crutzen and Mario Molina. You should also be happy, because the consequences of climate change fall especially on the poor, and this also puts them in situations where they then accept abortion. [He is here directly reiterating Sachs’ claim at the conference, and simply espousing left wing talking points with essentially no basis. If you make fossil fuels vastly more expensive, that’s going to put great pressure on the poorest to abort, not “climate change.”] Moreover, we are happy that Ban Ki-moon and Jeffrey Sachs have accepted to modify the proposals on social inclusion by adding new forms of slavery such as human trafficking, forced labor, prostitution, and organ trafficking, which were not even present in the last drafts. You should be happy about this too, because if there is anything that threatens the family, of which you call your self a supporter, it is prostitution, which Pope Benedict called an absolute evil precisely because it destroys the cell of social order. [His words drip with venomous derision. This man is a snake]
Q. The Declaration on climate change that was released after the conference unequivocally assigns responsibility for climate change to human activity. Is this a position that is shared by pope Francis?
S.S. This I do not know. But I suppose yes, because he would not write an encyclical just to say that man is responsible for the Earth but that everything is fine! Perhaps, you believe, like those who live off oil, that everything is fine? [This is how a Vatican prelate speaks? With the baiting emotion-laden language of the left? “You’re not one of those evil oil profiteers, are you?” I’ve never read or heard anything about this guy before, but he comes across as a thug in cassock.] The Academy says otherwise, as do all the rest of scientific academies in the world. Only a few scientists paid by lobby groups opine differently. [This is a wicked and unsubstantiated calumny. This is utterly beneath the dignity of an archbishop. Note his entire argument is this: climate change is happening, because we say it is, and how dare you say anything different! Now just shut up!]
There is a bit more at Life Site News. I’m sorry for abusing fair use, but this is so incredibly revealing I felt it had to be shared.
This guy was promoted to his position 17 years ago by Pope JPII. He has written very extensively. It seems he started out perhaps a bit progressive with occasional orthodox positions thrown in. But he seems to have tacked hard left since……surprise!………March 2013. Gee……I wonder what happened then that could have precipitated a sudden shift?
Geez……..if this is any confirmation of the kinds of attitudes percolating at the Vatican over the past 2 years, things are going to get out of hand very quickly. Then again, many would argue they already have.
Here’s a question……how much money has the Vatican/Church been promised for their climate change advocacy? I don’t think that’s an unfair question, things like this don’t just “happen,” there is almost always money involved.
UPDATE: Sheesh, how blind do you have to be to leave a comment like this (I paraphrase):
I think I see the hand of the Holy Ghost here. These bad bishops have always been in the Church, but Pope Francis is really encouraging them to come into the open. I’m sure he’s just giving them enough rope to hang themselves, and that Pope Francis will squash them soon.
My mouth hangs agape. And yet such willful blindness is everywhere. This is not just withholding judgment. This is self-delusion.
Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Holy suffering, manhood, paganism, persecution, scandals, secularism, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
And there was a particularly awesome picture that accompanied the article, too:
If one were to judge from the overall media coverage, one would think Archbishop Cordileone is veritably besieged in the chancery building, holding off crazed masses of whooping, dancing Catholics with a flintlock rifle and a bag of powder. Or, alternatively, using his iron hand of repression to destroy the lives of innocent teachers who just happen to oppose virtually the entire moral edifice of the Faith.
Obviously, the situation is not so one-sided. While it is difficult to discern from this distance just how “divided” actual believing Catholics are over Cordileone’s insistence on a bare minimum of doctrinal integrity from the teachers in the Catholic schools in that afflicted city, hundreds of Catholics rallied to his support recently, and I would wager that’s just the tip of the iceberg. It is well past time for Catholics, and especially the leadership, to start making public distinctions between those who call themselves Catholic, but who reject all manner of belief and practice, and those who truly do accept the Faith whole and entire. The latter should receive the praise and thanks of Church leadership, while the former should – must – be told in no uncertain terms that their lack of faith is not only disturbing, but places them outside the Church and on a path towards eternal suffering.
Yeah, I won’t hold my breath, either, but a man can dream. The report:
San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone smiled for photos, blessed the faithful and accepted thanks from many among the hundreds of Bay Area Catholics who showed up for a picnic Saturday in San Francisco in support of the religious leader.
For months, the archbishop has been the target of demonstrations by teachers, students, parents and others who disagreed with changes he has proposed for the staff handbook and high school employee contracts atRiordan and Sacred Heart Cathedral high schools in San Francisco, Marin Catholic in Kentfield and Junipero Serra in San Mateo that defined adultery, masturbation, homosexual relations and the viewing of pornography as “gravely evil.”
“He’s like a rock star,” said Eva Muntean of San Francisco, who organized Saturday’s “family picnic day” at Sue Bierman Park near the Ferry Building in support of the archbishop, as she watched Cordileone try to inch his way through the throng of well-wishers. [OK, the ‘rock star’ comparison may be a bit disordered. Move on]
Muntean, who started the website sfcatholics.org, said she organized the event because she believes many Bay Area Catholics feel their support of the archbishop isn’t being heard. [And I’m quite certain that’s true. Did that effort to run an ad supporting Archbishop Cordileone in the San Fran newspaper ever succeed?]
The archbishop appeared to have felt that support Saturday. “I’m just here to thank my supporters,” Cordileone said to a reporter, declining to comment further. He did not speak before the crowd at the picnic.
Cordileone became the center of controversy in one of the country’s most gay-friendly cities for requiring that staff at archdiocese high schools “affirm and believe” what many Catholics say is simply the tenets of their beliefs: that marriage is between a man and a woman, that sexual relations outside of marriage are wrong and that certain types of reproductive technology and surrogacy are against the teaching of the church. [See how the media tries to twist this into a “he said, she said” kind of situation. The Church, even today, even with all the confusion and demonic chaos, does not hide the Doctrine of the Faith. Few prelates and priests convey it whole and entire, and fewer laity accept it, but it still stands, in spite of decades of heresy run amok, in spite, even, of destructively opaque papal statements]
Adele Lindberg of Danville said she wanted to support the archbishop because she feels he’s being “demonized” for being faithful to the church’s doctrine.
“Nobody’s saying you have to be Catholic or that you have to send your children to school,” said Lindberg, 59. “But don’t change something that has stood for more than 2,000 years just to meet your agenda.”
Many in the crowd said the controversy was not about hate or disapproval of gay people or others but rather about loving others despite differences and following the teachings of the church……
…..A small group of protesters stood on the edge of the picnic waving a rainbow flag and holding signs. [It was about 3 or 4 rather pathetic older gentlemen. They held signs saying “Why aren’t gay families welcome here?” which were pregnant with error and demonic oppression. Of course everyone is welcome, but your sin remains a sin, and until you give it up, you continue to place your eternal soul in grave jeopardy. This life is short, eternity is forever, and your existence does not have to revolve around your loins]
It appears Cordileone, in a rare display of episcopal backbone, plans to stick to his guns, which makes Bishop Vasa’s collapse in nearby Santa Rosa Diocese all the more pathetic. I certainly pray he continues to do so. Who knows what heavy pressure he is experiencing behind the scenes, not just from well-heeled San Fran Katholycs who have grown very accustomed to having things their way for decades, but also from his fellow bishops in the USCCB, many of whom are as aggrieved as the San Fran sicko community over +Cordileone’s stand. Which, go figure, right, I’m sure not a one of them has a personal stake in this matter, right?
Stay strong, Archbishop Cordileone. No one can make you do anything. It’s all up to you. Serve God, and not man. And let this not be a single step, may this be the first of many in restoring sanity to the Church and world. One man can make an enormous difference. One man can literally change the world. Keep being a man, brother!
Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, paganism, Papa, persecution, religious, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, Society, SOD, the struggle for the Church.
I posted yesterday some content on just a few of the problematic statements of Fr. Timothy Radcliffe, OP, just this past weekend (this Pope seems to have learned quite a bit from Obama – or Juan Peron – on how to manipulate the news cycle to one’s advantage) appointed to role of Consultor to the Pontifical Council for Peace and Justice, a long-time hot bed of dissent, abuse, and even open heresy. Radcliffe’s role of Consultor will get him a voting position at the upcoming Ordinary Synod on the family. Burke out, Radcliffe in. Means nothing, move along, nothing to see here, move along.
Via Vox Cantoris, some additional writings from Fr. Radcliffe, including his belief that sodomy is equivalent in “fertility” to natural relations between husband and wife (emphasis in original, I add comments):
Fr Radcliffe OP expands the meaning of fertility to include gay sex
But not every marriage is fertile in this way. We must avoid having a mechanistic or simplistic understanding of fertility. Jesus speaks a fertile word: This is my body, given for you. He is God’s fertile word. And surely it is in the kind and healing words that we offer each other that we all share in fertility of that most intimate moment. When Jesus met Peter on the shore after Easter, he offers him a word that renews their relationship. Three times he asks him; ‘Do you love me more than these others?’ He allows him to undo his threefold denial. Sexual fertility cannot be separated from the exchange of words that heal, that recreate and set free. [Just to be clear, Fr. Radcliffe is comparing Christ’s forgiveness of St. Peter with the words exchanged in the foul embrace of sodomites. I don’t think I have to comment on just how perverse that is]
How does all of this bear on the question of gay sexuality? We cannot begin with the question of whether it is permitted or forbidden! We must ask what it means, and how far it is Eucharistic. [Not even slightly, and no amount of modernist double-talk will make it so] Certainly it can be generous, vulnerable, tender, mutual and non-violent. [I point you again to this link, which discusses the sky-high rates of violence between same-sex partners. Sodomy, by its very nature, is an act of violence. It abuses the human body in ways that are unnatural and destructive. If you want to be grossed out, read about the incredibly disgusting after-products of sodomy – lube, blood, fecal matter, semen. Oh, yes, it’s so “vulnerable and tender.” That language, BTW, strikes me as being redolent of pederasty] So in many ways, I would think that it can be expressive of Christ’s self-gift. [The abomination of desolation, indeed. And this man was head of the Dominican order for 9 years.]
We can also see how it can be expressive of mutual fidelity, a covenantal relationship in which two people bind themselves to each other for ever. But the proposed legislation for ‘gay marriage’ imply that it is not understood to be inherently unitive, a becoming one flesh. […] [I’ll just repeat, even among so-called “married” individuals fallen into these perverted lusts, the idea of monogamy – especially for men – is almost completely foreign. Trysts with others are very common. This fact is kept as undercover as possible, because it (along with a thousand other things) obliterates the call for recognition of their “unions” as marriage.]
And what about fertility? I have suggested that one should not stick to a crude, mechanistic understanding of fertility. Biological fertility is inseparable from the fertility of our mutual tenderness and compassion. And so that might seem to remove one objection to gay marriage. I am not entirely convinced, since it seems to me that our tradition is incarnational, the word becoming bodily flesh. And some heterosexual relationships may be accidentally infertile in this sense, but homosexual ones are intrinsically so.
Sexual ethics is about what our acts say. And I have the impression that we are not very sure of what gay sexual acts signify. Maybe we need to ask gay Christians who have been living in committed relationships for years. I suspect that sex will turn out to be rather unimportant.’ [Which is why an overwhelming majority of those fallen into sodomy have over 100 lifetime partners, and only 4.5% report fidelity to their current partner?]
Fr Radcliffe on Holy Communion for Catholics who are divorced and re-married:
I would conclude with two profound hopes. That a way will be found to welcome divorced and remarried people back to communion. And, most important, that women will be given real authority and voice in the church. The pope expresses his desire that this may happen, but what concrete form can it take? He believes that the ordination of women to the ministerial priesthood is not possible, [Note the phrasing: “he believes……”…….but wait till we get a really radical Pope!] but decision-making in the church has become ever more closely linked to ordination in recent years. Can that bond be loosened? Let us hope that women may be ordained to the diaconate and so have a place in preaching at the Eucharist. What other ways can authority be shared?’ [Note also that the idea that women must be “given real authority in the Church” is just an assumed good, something “desirable.” On what basis? The entire college of disciples was male, this is something Christ Himself instituted, but, heck, if we can admit adulterers and attempted bigamists to Communion in spite of Christ’s command, why not just scrap all His other inconvenient (to leftists) commands?]
So, as time goes by, the reality of this pontificate and its nature becomes more and more clear.
Regarding this Radcliffe character, it’s been said that modernism was an attempt by liberal “Christians” to incorporate evolutionary theory (Darwinism) into their faith – but with the evolution always predominate. The real (main) religion of the modernists was scientific socialism and Darwinism. The neo-modernists of today are simply leftists who hold positions in the Church requiring a patina of Catholicism of them due to the nature of their position. Their primary religion is leftism.
I think if you will look at matters through that lens you will find that virtually all these “inexplicable” acts suddenly make a great deal of sense.
Dismas and others have been quite right: different religion.
Posted by Tantumblogo in General Catholic, Society, foolishness, asshatery, sadness, persecution, error, secularism, self-serving, Christendom, paganism, rank stupidity.
UPDATE: Just a quick thought. Mr. Weinstein is demanding court martial under criminal charges. That means penalties up to and including jail time for Gen. Olson. Tell me again how he doesn’t hate Christians and isn’t persecuting them?
This sicko Mikey Weinstein has got to be called out for what he certainly appears to be –an anti-Christian bigot. As I’ve blogged before, Weinstein says that as a cadet at a service academy in the 70s, he was so traumatized by exposure to Christians that he, as an admittedly atheistic Jew, felt compelled to send his sons to the Air Force Academy in the 90s. Surely a strange reaction to such terrible trauma. For the past 20 years, he has waged an unrelenting war specifically against the Air Force, once strongly populated with convicted Christians, seeking to re-make that military branch in his self-loathing sexular pagan image.
His “Military Religious Freedom Foundation” – not much more than him and a fax machine – is now attempting to destroy the career of Maj. Gen. Craig Olson for having the temerity to give a speech that touched on his faith in God to a pro-family group. That speech was broadcast and can be viewed on the internet. This was apparently such an egregious violation of the false doctrine of “separation of church and state” that Mr. Weinstein very nearly blew a gasket, and, in the process, revealed just a bit too much what really motivates him. See if you can figure it out:
An Air Force general who recently spoke about how God has guided his career should be court-martialed, a civil liberties group is saying.
In a speech at a National Day of Prayer Task Force event on May 7, Maj. Gen. Craig Olson credits God for his accomplishments in the military, and refers to himself as a “redeemed believer in Christ.”
The Air Force Times reports that the Military Religious Freedom Foundation has taken issue with Olson’s remarks, is calling for the two-star general to be court-martialed and “aggressively and very visibly brought to justice for his unforgivable crimes and transgressions.” [Speaking publicly in uniform about his Christian faith constitutes “unforgivable crimes and transgressions?” How unhinged do you have to be to say that?]
The group authored a letter to Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Walsh, arguing that Olson’s speech violates rules within the Air Force, which prohibits airmen from endorsing a particular faith or belief. [Rules that Weinstein, with his threat of lawsuit after hassling lawsuit, more or less foisted on the Air Force, but they are not quite so clear as he pretends]
The letter, posted on the group’swebsite, begins, “This demand letter is sent to you on behalf of countless members of the United States Air Force[“countless” to keep you from knowing how few they are. I bet Weinstein couldn’t find 1/10 of 1% of Air Force members who would be bothered by this] who are utterly disgusted and shocked by the brazenly illicit and wholly unconstitutional, fundamentalist Christian proselytizing recently perpetrated, on international television(“GOD TV”), and streaming all over the Internet and in full military uniform, by USAF Major General Craig S. Olson on Thursday, May 7, 2015 during a VERY public speech for a private Christian organization……[As I said, unhinged. “Shocked,” “utterly disgusted?” In reality Weinstein is terrified that this bit of pushback by Gen. Olson might unravel what his decades of lawsuits have achieved, a military where even the slightest outward expression of the Christian Faith is totally forbidden.]
………During Olson’s 23-minute talk, the Air Force Times reports, Olson spoke of “flying complex aircraft; doing complex nuclear missions — I have no ability to do that. God enabled me to do that.”
Heck yes, and that’ a beautiful thing to relate to others.
Mikey Weinstein, a house divided against itself cannot stand, but you are pitting the legislative branch against the executive branch in your bid to hassle Christians out of the military. Gen. Olson was invited to speak at that prayer event by Rep. Aderholt of Alabama. Not everyone shares your understanding of the separation of Church and state or Department of Defense policy – policy your close relationship with Gen Welch has certainly helped advance tremendously in recent years.
You can see Gen. Olson’s speech below. As I’ve commented many times, to some degree I counsel young Catholic men to totally avoid military service, but a sizable part of me doesn’t want to give little bullies like this Weinstein character the satisfaction of having driven us out.
To be honest I watched only a bit of it, and while he comes across on the protestant evangelical side and thus you can sense the creeping errors in his understanding of the Faith, it’s hardly something to have go into a fist pounding spittle flinging profanity laced rage as Weinstein is known to do.
So I looked up a bit on Mr. Weinstein, and you can see him below describe his worldview and tactics to a group of secularists masquerading as Christians below (I mean, c’mon, they’re unitarians, the very descendants of the Puritans, now not so puritanical). I say that, because Weinstein ID’s his crowd as “good Christians,” meaning those who are totally indifferent to doctrine and utterly ambivalent about winning converts. I mean, that’s literally his argument: “good” Christians are those who leave others just about totally alone, never seeking to even begin to approach them with the faith, because of the 1st and 2nd Commandments something something, which Jesus obviously intended to mean ‘thou shalt never hassle anyone ever with things that put them out, even slightly.” He compares the indifferent leftists to the “bad Christians” who accept the Great Commission, which he more or less dismisses out of hand with some rhetoric about the Great Commission being a “violation” of the American social contract. It’s all just talk, will-to-power, I don’t like what you have to say so shut up. It’s couched in language to make it seem “reasonable” but that’s the main point. I don’t like what you have to say so I am going to manipulate the power of the state to shut you up [warning, there is profanity in this video. In a church, even a Unitarian one. Stay classy, Mikey]:
There is a broader point here that I hope I can address quickly since this post is already getting long. The point is this: I do encourage you to watch the first few minutes of the Weinstein video above, because it illustrates the degree to which the enemies of Christendom take advantage of the noxious heresies introduced by the protestant revolutionaries to advance their libertine endarkenment agenda. See how he takes Scripture out of context to pretend that Christ would prefer we not evangelize and just “all get along.” See how secular he is as to equate the very Word of God, spoken by the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, with, of all things, the juvenile Prime Directive from Star Trek (which basically argues that it is better to leave people in ignorance, poverty, misery, and darkness, than to share all your wonderful life-saving technology with them, denying them, in a sense, salvation). General Olson’s speech wasn’t proselytizing in the slightest, it was one man sharing his faith experience in uniform. But Weinstein can easily find thousands of self-described Christians, and even Katholycs, who express horror at such gauche, because these bad “Christians” are in actuality sexular pagan religionists who keep a patina of Christianity for reasons of convenience, family, comfort, etc.
Think on it this way. Mikey Weinstein is literally a persecutor of Christians. He persecutes them on exactly the same basis that Romans persecuted us 1800 years ago – not for believing in Christianity, but for propagandizing for the Faith and refusing to accept the false shibboleths of the dominant society as the highest, and essentially religious, doctrine to be observed by all. His religion, and the religion of those “Christians” supportive of his aims, is actually secular liberalism. Weinstein is as fervently religious as they come, he simply belongs to a religion intractably hostile to Christianity. He’s a particular devotee, since he has taken his secularism to full-on God-hatred in his self-professed atheism and his obsessive knowledge of Scripture (it is always revealing to see just how much atheists and satanists study Scripture, they claim, to find its “weaknesses,” but I think they doth protest too much).
In addition, he uses errors introduced by protestants as weapons against believing Christians, which is ironic, because most of those he persecutes are protestant themselves. There’s actually a bit of delicious irony there that probably goes unnoticed by those protestants on the receiving end, they are simply experiencing the destructive effects of their own rejection of the Dogmas of the Faith revealed through the Church Christ founded in Saint Peter, and their own penchant for taking isolated bits of Scripture dramatically out of context. In Wine-stain’s case, he pits the 1st Commandment against the Great Commission, which is asinine on its face (Christ told us that our evangelizing would make the Weinsteins of the world hate and persecute us), but he’s simply taking protestantism’s own abuse of Scripture to its logical conclusion. They are being hoisted on their own petard, and it doesn’t feel very good. He is also a walking demonstration of secular libertinism’s fundamental incompatibility with Catholicism – only one can survive, and all those in the Church who attempt a compromise are only serving to advance the liberal cause – which is in reality probably quite intentional for many who do so.
The tragedy is that there are certainly good Catholics in the military getting caught up in this persecution, as well. I pray for their strength of faith, and I thank Mr. Weinstein for showing us the two faces of our persecutors, who on one side try to appear so “fair” and “reasonable,” and on the other, in their crazed tirades, reveal their true motivation – unyielding hatred for Christ and His Church.
It’s only going to get worse.
PS – Why hasn’t Mikey Weinstein sued the Commander-in-Chief of the US armed forces, President Hussein Obama for his numerous religiously-tinged speeches and his taking the oath of office which ends with “so help me God.” Olson is hardly the first military man ever to reference God and His necessity in the life of any nation. Witness the terrible religious extremist and raving fundy Dwight D. Eisenhower below:
Without God, there could be no American form of Government, nor an American way of life. Recognition of the Supreme Being is the first — the most basic — expression of Americanism. Thus the Founding Fathers saw it, and thus, with God’s help, it will continue to be.
Well, Ike, this nation turned its back on God and brought down His justly deserved wrath on itself when it started killing its own young, and allowing creatures like this Weinstein to have any influence at all. You were very right, but this nation, or at least its self-anointed elites, decided they didn’t need God anymore.
Posted by Tantumblogo in Dallas Diocese, General Catholic, Society, scandals, sadness, disaster, horror, persecution, unadulterated evil, sexual depravity, secularism, self-serving, paganism, huh?.
9 bikers reported dead, and 18 injured, after a biker gang meeting went seriously wrong yesterday in Waco. This is not my usual fare (I’ll class it as non sequitur), but it’s so violent and random – and potentially indicative of societal breakdown a la the late 60s – that I thought I’d post it.
Apparently, two heated rivals among the “1%er” outlaw motorcycle gangs – the Bandidos and the Cossacks – had been experiencing increasing tensions and violence over the past few months. The Bandidos, based in Texas and apparently Texas’ largest outlaw motorcycle gang, felt the Cossacks were invading their turf and refusing to pay dues to the older, established Bandidos. Whatever that means. So what is apparently a regular bi-monthly meeting of motorcycle gangs to…….discuss whatever it is they discuss…….turned into a free-for-all brawl with over 170 arrested and potentially facing murder charges. Over 170 have been charged with involvement in organized crime (seems difficult to prove?), while some will apparently face capital murder charges:
About 170 suspects arrested after a shootout between rival biker gangs and police Sunday at Waco’s Twin Peaks restaurant that left nine dead and 18 injured were ordered held in lieu of $1 million bonds Monday while investigators continued the painstaking process of gathering evidence at the crime scene.
By early afternoon about a third of the suspects had been booked into the McLennan County Jail.
All 170 will be processed into the jail, Sheriff Parnell McNamara said Monday, although some may later be transferred to other facilities.
Affidavits and arrest warrants totaled more than 500 pages, an official said.
At least some and technically all of those in custody could be charged with capital murder because of the number of victims, Waco police Sgt. W. Patrick Swanton said.
All of those killed and injured were bikers, police say
No officers or bystanders were hurt.
I saw a news clip that said there were dozens of bikers – along with regular patrons – in the restaurant when the fight broke out. It quickly degenerated from fists to knives and then guns, and subsequently spilled outside. Non-biker patrons and employees fled to the freezer to escape the gun fire. Once the fight spilled outside, Waco police, pre-positioned due to past problems and intelligence that this meeting could go bad, began to approach the brawl. The bikers then allegedly opened fire on police, leaving several vehicles bullet-ridden but striking no officers. The police then opened fire and apparently re-established order quickly. No idea how many of the killed and injured died as a result of biker violence, and how many were due to the police.
Twin Peaks is a seedy, Hooter-esque place In fact, though I’ve never been, the female staff at these restaurants apparently wear even less than the Hooter’s girls. Thus it is quite possible the derangement of faculties driven by exposure to scantily clad young women could have helped precipitate this brawl. I’m sure alcohol and meth played their role, too. Because nothing honors the Lord on the Sabbath like burning some crank and then setting out for an R-rated skin joint with violence in mind. So wrong, on so many levels.
Silly me, I knew there were real, criminal type motorcycle clubs still around, but I had no idea their membership numbered in the thousands in this state alone. And here I thought all the rather rotund dudes with silver ponytails I see driving around on Harley’s were just mid-life crisis types trying to re-live their glory years.
Such a sad scene. By some miracle, all the victims were apparently members of the gangs themselves. No police and no passersby were even injured, let alone killed. That speaks to at least some level of fire discipline, and it seems a high percentage of the members of these gangs are former military. The woman in the video below makes clear, however, that patrons had experienced intimidation from the Bandidos at this restaurant before (0:45 – 1:00):
The Twin Peaks chain has pulled the franchise for the restaurant that had been hosting regular biker days and other events for bikers in spite of increasing concerns from law enforcement. I would imagine the franchise holder is in for a mass of legal problems.
I pray for the souls of the deceased Eternal rest grant to them O’ Lord. May those who remain be converted. May this kind of madness cease. It seems a good number of those present were from the DFW area.
And, yes, Waco is a strange place. It’s been the center of a disproportionate number of bizarre acts of violence. I could tell a story or two of interaction with some Wacoites from my bad old days but I’ll skip for now.
Posted by Tantumblogo in General Catholic, Society, foolishness, sickness, disaster, persecution, error, unadulterated evil, secularism, catachesis, self-serving, paganism.
Another excerpt from Diane Moczar’s book The Church Under Attack that examines the thought of both Charles Darwin and Karl Marx, the two men probably most singly responsible for the disastrous state of the world today in terms of moral collapse, creeping totalitarian statism, and the steady erosion of the influence of the Faith. Much below may already be known to you, but I think by tying the two together you may come to a greater appreciation of their continuing evil influence, AND the influences that worked upon them to arrive at their deliberately anti-Christian philosophies (from pp. 135-139, I add emphasis and comments and do condense a little bit of text):
Darwinism and Marxism are both continuations of the Enlightenment craze for science as well as of that current of Enlightenment thought known as determinism. This is the approach to reality that denies free will and assumes some underlying, non-rational mechanism to account for what happens in the world. For Darwin it was evolution, for Marx the class struggle, for Freud….subconscious drives within the psyche. [Where did this denial of free will come from? From protestantism, of course, in particular Luther’s and especially Calvin’s deterministic, unrelenting God]
To start with Darwin, then, the myth about him is that, through his scientific observations, particularly on his famous expedition to the Galapagos Islands, he acquired data that led him to think that one species could “evolve” into another………Like Luther with his new religious principles largely worked out long before he posted those theses [on the door of Wittenberg Cathedral in 1517] Darwin had thought up his evolutionary theories before he ever set foot on the Beagle to being the famous voyage, on which he “discovered” the evidence to support the theory, as ideologues are fond of doing. He himself was also the first Social Darwinist, categorizing the various human races he encountered on his travels as more evolved or less evolved, using various criteria………for Darwin and his well-heeled followers, the summit of evolution was the Victorian English gentleman. [Amazing that! So convenient. First I do away with God, then I appoint myself and my friends in His place. Nice trick! Moczar does not mention above that not only did Darwin first create his theory, then selectively find evidence to support it, but he formed his theory deliberately as a means to attack Christianity at its very core, Sacred Scripture. He knew if he could convince people he had “disproved” Scripture, especially the Creation account of Genesis, he could gravely wound the Christian Faith and peel many, many followers away. Mission accomplished!]
….Darwin’s thought is not free from contradiction and incoherence……[Darwin realized early on…] if all biological change comes about by chance, there is no room for God. If there is no creator guiding the development of life, then life just emerged on its own. Something, in short, came from nothing. A modern analyst of Darwin’s works has remarked on how often Darwin insists that “God would not have done it this way,” in order to argue his case for blind chance against God’s Providence. He seems to have been haunted by God, insisting, for example, that the excessive production by plants of seeds hat will never germinate is too wasteful and disorderly to be part of a divine plan. Certainly, a tidy, thrifty, Victorian God would “not have done it this way.” [It is from the prim Victorians that we get the theologically ridiculous phrase “cleanliness is next to Godliness.”]……..
We need not go into a refutation of Darwin’s theory, which has been amply accomplished from many angles by many competent writers, with new ones turning up all the time……..[explains Marx’s admiration for Darwin]…….Darwin had postulated not only the “struggle for survival” and the “survival of the fittest,” but their inevitability – and implicit denial both of Providence and of human free will.
……..Marx capitalized on the ongoing craze for all things “scientific” by calling his new system “scientific socialism” and studding his explanations of it with supposedly scientific examples……His other inspiration was the work of Hegel, the German idealist philosopher whom Marx so admired that he joined the Young Hegelians at his university when he was a student. Hegel had a theory of Idea as the prime force in history, with one idea (the thesis) being challenged by an opposite idea (the antithesis) and the conflict eventually resulting in a synthesis that would become a new thesis, and so on. [It must be stated that Hegelian dialectics are the driving force behind the poison, anti-Christian philosophy of modernism. Look at Kasper’s attempts to alter (in reality, destroy) the moral edifice of the Faith through his proposals on marriage. There is a “thesis” – the Church’s existing Dogma. The “antithesis” comes from the radical sexular pagans in the world today. He seeks a “synthesis,” a sort of middle ground between the two, with the Church, naturally, being the one to give.]
[Follows an explanation of Marx’s theory. I’ll assume your familiar enough with that, and simply note Mozcar’s great rhetorical question – if history is nothing but the class struggle in action, and the process has gone on from the beginning of time, why should the process of class struggle stop simply with the forced imposition of the “dictatorship of the proletariat?” He never even attempted to explain that. Communist systems are some of the most rigidly classist, hierarchical societies the world has ever seen, with the “nomenklatura” enjoying great privileges, and varying levels of privilege being dolled out according to caste all the way down]
The whole system is rife with contradictions. Man hos no free will, according to Marx the determinist, but somehow he will respond to the Communist Manifesto’s call to the workers to throw off their chains. How can he, if he lacks the freedom to decide on an action in the first place? Never mind, it sounds good. Religion, of course, is “the opium of the people,” merely one of the tools the exploiting class uses to keep the proletariat in their place…..
Marx’s philosophy was profoundly atheistic, but long before he wrote Das Kapital, his compendium of communist ideas, he expressed a very different view in the horrific poems he wrote to satan – apparently a very real person to Marx – breathing a fanatical hatred of God and mankind. “I want to avenge myself,” he wrote, “on Him Who reigns above us.” God must have been real to him, at least as the object of his hatred. Other poems reveal a demonic rage and desire to destroy the whole world if he could. Taking the role of God, he screams, “I shall howl gigantic curses at mankind.” Once he had thought up communism, he remarked “What do I care if three-quarters of the world perish, provided the fourth that is left is communist?” This creepy versifier was no humanitarian; he had no care for the individual suffering worker and objected when a socialist organization to which he belonged was to be called a “brotherhood.” “There are many men,” sniffed Marx, “whose brother I do not choose to be.” A thoroughly nasty man, he also bullied his wife, had an affair with her servant, and seems to have had unhappy daughters, both of whom later committed suicide. [This hatred of God and desire to wreak vengeance on mankind was a trait quite common to many of the endarkenment philosphes and leaders of the French Revolution. Voltaire, Robespierre, Fouqier-Tinville, Hobbes, all had twisted and dark views of humanity, which informed the perverse philosophy they developed. The world has suffered ever since for their embrace of the satanic. I did not know Marx was so warm towards satan until reading the above, but it is hardly surprising – his system is probably the most evil ever invented, being the perfection of the libertine, anti-God and anti-Church ideas developed in the 18th century. Note that many of these men, especially Marx, were epic failures in life, thoroughly nasty men in both habit and outlook, who sought to avenge their failures on the world. Lenin was much the same way until the Germans, in a damnable act, shuttled him on a sealed train to St. Petersburg in order to drive Russia from WWI. But what does it say of human society that their perverse ideas have been allowed to be so influential?]
I once heard a good priest give a sermon to a wedding party. Unfortunately, it was not recorded and has never been posted online, so I cannot share it with you. The souls to be married were then traditional Catholics – now apparently both fallen away, please pray for them – but their families were made up of soft protestants and sexular pagans. The sermon traced the sad development of these libertine ideas so destructive of souls and the entire society from Luther’s screeds to the present day. It’s a very easily discernible line of thought if one shakes off the blinders we’ve all had carefully installed over our eyes by the schools and constant propaganda we are exposed to. It goes from protestant denial of free will and so many allied matters, which informed rationalism, which informed endarkenment liberalism/libertinism, which informed Hegel, Heidigger, and Nietzche, which informed communism, Nazism, and other evils, along with modernism, which inevitably to the resurgence of un-Christian sexular paganism today. All of these ideas or philosophies, whatever you want to call them, had at their heart an attack on Scholastic reason but even more the Church and Her Doctrine. They have each been the natural, virtually inevitable outcome of its predecessor, and they have each advanced the culture further and further away from its Christian center. We are now out on the periphery of the spinning wheel as I noted earlier, more and more souls are being thrown off into the darkness, and it seems inevitable that the entire culture will be joining them shortly.
After that, nothing but bedlam, barbarism, naked power, and enormous suffering. We should be doing all we can in terms of prayer and penance to steel ourselves, and our children, for the time ahead.
Posted by Tantumblogo in General Catholic, Society, scandals, foolishness, sickness, disaster, persecution, error, sexual depravity, secularism, self-serving, abdication of duty, paganism, It's all about the $$$.
Do you sense the same acceleration I do, the whirling twirling growing faster and faster the further we, culturally, get from our Christian center, the hub of Western and even worldwide civilization where virtue and reason reign? It seems as we approach the peripheries of heretofore unimaginable immorality and unspeakable evil, the process simply accelerates towards even greater barbarity and amoral evil? How many souls already have been flung off the spinning wheel? How many more must before we can plot a course back to the center?
I thought the above might have some value for readers. As for the quotes below, big surprise, the same organization that makes abortion into a hallmark of “womanhood” and teaches girls how to become sexualized objects for the porno-state will now admit boys who think they are girls. A crafty, highly sexed, unscrupulous boy could probably already come up with some ways to take advantage of this policy. The thing is, a good number of male “transgenders” are not attracted to men, they still like women.
Yeah, this is going to end well:
A new Girl Scouts of America (GSA) policy states it will extend membership to boys who identify as girls.
The group says on its website, “If the child is recognized by the family and school/community as a girl and lives culturally as a girl, then Girl Scouts is an organization that can serve her in a setting that is both emotionally and physically safe.” [You can never guarantee perfect safety. This is a situation that will be prone to grave abuse. So the Girl Scouts are sacrificing the safety and well being of young ladies on the altar of sexular paganism, as they have done for decades. Film at 11]
This means girls in the organization will be forced to recognize and accept transgenderism as a normal lifestyle. Boys in skirts, boys in make-up and boys in tents will become a part of the program. This change will put young innocent girls at risk. [That’s putting it mildly. It’s yet another way to normalize the perverse and dangerous]
Adults are willing to experiment on our kids – both the boys who are confused and the girls who will wonder why a boy in a dress is in the bathroom with them. [Or, they may not wonder at all……to their horror]
“Turning and turning in the widening gyre” indeed. The Girl Scouts are one of dozens of formerly politically and morally more or less mainstream, fairly virtuous institutions that have gone over to hardcore leftist activism. Buckley’s dictum that every organization not explicitly founded on conservative principles will eventually go hard left seems about right. But even many orgs like the Boy Scouts that were indeed founded on those principles have fallen under the latest onslaught. It shows how weak they had become, and how easily bullied by the culture, because they weren’t enduring even a fraction of what Christians have endured -and are indeed enduring today! – in defense of their faith and virtue.
We are very much a soft, spoiled society. That is why the Girl Scouts and so many others have fallen – they were too weak and too soft to immediately remove the first leftists planted in their organization, to squash the first, seemingly innocuous but still worrying and precedent-setting attempts to turn the Girl Scouts towards the left. The Boy Scouts fought for decades but finally just literally gave up, even with a Supreme Court decision in their pocket. What they feared was loss of corporate sponsorship – heaven forbid, I’m certain the Christians of old would have burned all the incense in the world had the Emperor only threatened their funding!!!! Fortunately, there is a good alternative to the Boy Scouts, but the leaders of that alternative will have to remain forever vigilant, a tiring and thankless, but utterly necessary, task.
Should a culture this soft fall on even somewhat hard times (say, 1930s hard), it’s could get real ugly, real quick.
Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, disaster, error, General Catholic, Holy suffering, horror, persecution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society.
Texas is known around the country as the most powerfully conservative state in the union. At the present time, marriage and the rights of the Church are under attack in this country as never before. One would think, then that we would be seeing really strong leadership from Governor Abbot and in the Legislature to pass many measures to establish as many legal protections for marriage and the rights of convicted Christians as possible. But as the article below notes, Abbot has been MIA and the House remains under the business-owned, socially liberal country-club Republican Joe Strauss, so very little has happened, even with overwhelming majorities and a large number of true conservatives in both houses. Strauss is allowing bill after bill to die, while Abbot is using none of his substantial political capital to fight for those who elected him.
Many good points below. Discuss. Thanks to MFG for the link. BTW, it must also be stated that our bishops, through the TCC, are doing precious little to defend marriage and the Church’s rightful liberty, either. Hardly surprising, but eventually the leftists will come for something the bishops do hold dear, so they may regret their relative inaction:
As I have written here many times, there is a war waging against people of faith and the values we hold. Nowhere is that more evident than the war on marriage that soon likely will culminate in another Supreme Court decree, this time declaring that marriage is something that it plainly is not.
But much more troubling than even the destruction of the nuclear family and the institution of marriage is the all-out assault on religious liberty underway by the anti-faith left and their corporate crony allies. It’s apparently not enough to re-define marriage. No – those who resist must be silenced and made to care and to conform.
It is at this moment that we would expect states to lead the fight for religious liberty and the constitution. Thankfully and not surprisingly, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal has stepped up to defend people of faith from the attacks, and has articulated the important principles clearly and with passion. But with all due respect, where is Texas leadership? Sadly, they are MIA.
Our first liberty is under assault. If you dare to express your religious conviction about marriage, you will be told you are a bigot by someone not remotely grasping the irony of his own discrimination against you. Pastor or Rabbi? You must marry two men! Private religious school? Don’t teach the hatred of traditional marriage! Cakebaker, photographer or wedding planner? Perform or shut down!
This is the new world order. If you don’t believe me, you need look no further than the Solicitor General of the United States. Arguing before the U.S. Supreme Court in the marriage case a few weeks ago, he actually asserted (openly and without hesitation) that “it’s certainly going to be an issue” whether religious schools can keep 501(c)(3) tax exempt status if they teach the traditional definition of marriage.
Yet, in the face of this assault, the great state of Texas – supposed beacon for liberty in the nation – is sitting on its hands. Why? Hardly a soul in the entire Capitol Building is leading, and especially not Governor Greg Abbott. Unfortunately, he has been essentially silent on the issue other than some half-hearted plugs for religious liberty generally once the issue heated up and a few comments in support of Pastor protection. But no boots-on-the-ground, back room arm-twisting, big-speech giving leadership that we had become accustomed to from Gov. Rick Perry.
And in the vacuum, there has been a hodge-podge of bills, tweets, press releases, and other half-measures while Texas “leadership” shrugs and avoids fighting the massive Texas Business machine. The result has been chaos.
Last night, a bill that was introduced by State Rep. Cecil Bell that would have forbidden public funds from being used to issue marriage licenses died a painful death at midnight (a deadline in the Texas Legislature). While well intentioned, it never had a chance because 1) there has been no leadership on the issue generally, and 2) this bill was the wrong approach. It would certainly be struck down if the Supreme Court decides (wrongly) that there is an equal protection right to non-traditional marriage, and it misses the actual fight – religious liberty.
On that front, the strongest leadership has come from 2nd term Texas State Rep. Scott Sanford for introducing a bill (HB 2567) to increase protections for Pastors, Priests, Rabbis and all members of the clergy to conduct marriages according to their beliefs. After a great deal of work – and working with Texas Values to rally Pastors to engage – that bill was also picked up in the State Senate by Sen. Craig Estes (SB 2065).
With the support of Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (kudos to him), the Senate bill was passed out with a vote of 21-9. It sits in the Texas House right now awaiting a second chance after Sanford’s bill died in the Joe Straus-led House of Representatives.
The bill is far from passage given the total lack of leadership in Texas. And the worst part is – it’s kind of a yawner anyway! Of COURSE we should protect the clergy. Isn’t that the babyist of baby steps? New Hampshire took that step in 1992. How is this difficult? Yet it’s not even clear Texas will get that through – it may.