jump to navigation

Francis at Fatima: “I am the bishop in white” May 23, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, Christendom, cultural marxism, different religion, error, Francis, General Catholic, pr stunts, Revolution, Saints, scandals, Society, the struggle for the Church, unbelievable BS.
3 comments

Well, I guess that’s settled now:

Lots of good stuff from Matt, including expressions of grave doubt against the growing drumbeat towards war with Syria – yet another Mideast country where the US apparently has a grave national interest in seeing the ancient Catholic communities wiped out.

I must also agree with Matt that the very watered-down canonization process that has been implemented in the past 35 years – because the most substantial changes happened well after the Council and were in fact put in place by Pope Saint John Paul II (who wound up, in a certain sense, being a beneficiary of the changes, at least as far as his public cultus goes) – has helped contribute to a “meh, whatever” sense regarding the many canonizations to which we are now exposed.  The dilution of the requirement for miracles from 3 to 1 (or none?), the deletion of the role of the devil’s advocate – these things have I think helped trivialize the process and decrease the general affection souls have towards the Church Triumphant in Heaven.

 

Francis also expresses what must be assumed to be disbelief of several recent – and Church-approved – Marian apparitions, accosting those who believe that Mary’s intercession stays her Son’s wrathful arm as basically an invention of the mind of  some of the faithful.  Mary referred to staying her Son’s arm not only at La Sallete but also Akita.  Apparently Francis takes a dim view of those revelations.  As for imposing one’s own beliefs on the Church – project much, Francis?

There is much more, it’s well worth watching.  The video does close with some good news that the school principal who insulted, cussed at, and threatened some home schooled evangelical kids who were witnessing against abortion outside the public school he serves at has been suspended.  Whether that is with or without pay is not stated.  If it were a Catholic cussing out and threatening some little pagans arguing in favor of abortion, does anyone doubt he would have been fired on the spot?  But that’s what the Left wants, the full measure of the law or social rules (rules they invent) for you, but special kid glove treatment for themselves.  Of course they deserve that, because every leftist knows, they are just better than everyone else.

If this double standard continues, it will be the end of this country.  People will not stand to be treated as second class citizens.  Or will they?  For now, I think, a majority answers no, as the election of Trump, I think, proves.  I think these kinds of social-interaction issues played a huge role in Trump’s election.

Dr. Jordan Peterson Destroys SJW Arguments on Sex/Gender in Canadian Senate Hearing…… May 23, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, catachesis, cultural marxism, error, fightback, General Catholic, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society.
add a comment

……..proving, in the process, the efficacy, even the desirability, of so-called “gay conversion” therapy, using the SJW’s own arguments to make his point.  The hearing is long but well worth listening to in its entirety.  The portion that is the subject of this post, however, begins at 54:38 and starts with a long-winded and patronizing question from a French-Canadian senator, which Peterson obliterates effortlessly (57:45).  If gender is changing and contextual and can be altered on a whim, then what on earth is wrong with the Christian-based psychological treatment of those with an inclination towards sodomy to avoid such behaviors – so-called gay conversion therapy – that leftists have been busy declaring illegal through legislation wherever they hold sway over the past few years?

In reality, Peterson should have dropped the mic and walked away right after just obliterating the left’s always so-self-satisfied claims.

He had several moments where he just shredded the “trap” questions the leftist pols tried to put to him.  They were reduced, towards the end (but before the clip above) to making insinuated threats against his tenured faculty position at University of Toronto.  So shameful was this the committee chair interrupted the questioner and they were partially expunged from the video, and the chair is a hardcore lib.

At any rate, Peterson is a religious modernist but he started out an atheist/agnostic and may be walking his way (back?) to God through the studies and argumentation he’s engaged in.  Nevertheless, on a great many pressing moral questions of the day, and especially the Left’s constant arrogation to itself of the moral high ground, there is no one going into these nests of academic and political vipers and just crushing them, over and over again, than this guy.  So hats off to him for that.

And this is some great work – what Peterson showed, in one of those brilliant 2 second questions that just eviscerate the other side, is that the Left has nothing in its bag but appeal to authority – we get the pseudo-academics in the humanities and the co-opted social sciences, the media, and then the pols of the “right” party to say that a thing is, no matter how ridiculous, and you will go along with it.  Showing that the emperor has no clothes, that the visions of gender/sexual identity being pushed by the Left today are as fantastical and unscientific as they are destructive of both individual souls and society at large, in such a direct and irrefutable way – this is very powerful.

Also extremely effective is pointing out the manifest contradictions between present leftist sexular pagan orthodoxy and reality- “gays” are born that way but gender is fleeting, ephemeral, and can change on a whim.  Women giving their sacred virtue away for a tawdry meaningless hook up is “empowering” but women are such victims lacking agency they can decide it’s “rape” 3 years later and ruin a guy’s life.  Getting an abortion is the ultimate fulfillment of a woman’s nature, rather than being a betrayal of everything a woman should be.  Carbon emissions are destroying the planet but the climate change zealots live as if they have no impact at all.  I could go on and on.

Very few people of note have had the will, the intestinal fortitude, the cajones, to stand up to the neo-Victorian shaming tactics of the sexular pagan left.  Peterson is one that has not only endured numerous such attacks, but he has taken the fight right into the enemy’s strongholds.  In doing so, he has garnered a huge following and has garnered sympathy from millions.  There is actually some danger here because too many people are unable to separate the good from the bad with him, and develop a sort of messianic attitude regarding not just Peterson but many other countercultural thought-leaders in the emerging anti-Left reaction, but that, I think, is not a significant problem for this particular audience.

Actually this brings up an important point, and that is the huge innate bias a huge proportion of people, especially young online-denizen types, have against religion and religious-based arguments.  This would actually be a good post on its own so I think I’ll just touch on it for now, but Peterson isn’t saying anything particularly new, but because he’s seen as a scientist and part of the “rational thinking community,” and not a weirdo Bible-thumping Christian with bad hair and a worse fake southern accent, he is automatically imbued with prestige, authority, and granted deference whereas a Catholic making the same statements would in many people be viewed with suspicion, doubt, and even outright hostility.  That’s actually an interesting sociological phenomenon and I think points up the Church’s utter failure of catechesis over the past 50 years, since many of these people turning to the likes of Peterson for direction in life (and people are literally doing this, using his “self-authoring program” to improve their lives) are probably former Catholics or even CINOs who assist at Mass perhaps once a year or so but never get anything out of it.

But yeah that would take a long time to flesh out so I’ll just leave it at that.

We Are in Opposition to the Person of the Pope Out of Loyalty to the Sublime Office of the Papacy May 9, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, different religion, episcopate, error, Francis, General Catholic, horror, persecution, reading, Revolution, scandals, secularism, Society, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

From Miter and Crook by Bryan Houghton, a mythical tale of an English bishop consecrated in 1965, just as the human element in control of the Church launched the revolution against her very nature, who “rebels” against authority and re-institutes the Traditional Latin Mass and many other traditional practices of the faith in 1977 after a decade of experience had shown him that the ethos of Vatican II was wholly destructive.  The book follows the repercussions of this most pastoral of decisions and the sufferings and persecutions the good, if fictional, bishop endures.

The book is a bit odd in format, being a compendium of correspondence this sadly unreal bishop (would that we had far more like him!) engaged in from the time he launched his program of restoration until the inevitable conclusion (which I will not spoil).  The excerpt I quote below is between the good bishop and a hostile confrere, one who judged the good bishop rebellious to authority and disloyal to the Holy See for committing the horrific crime of Catholicism.  I copy and paste from various sections, but draw from pages 31-35.  I thought some of the fictional bishop’s commentary highly insightful, and also quite apropos of our present time, when Rome has once again descended into soul-destroying selfishness.  I indulge myself with comments along the way:

I have my own private view of history.  I accept that it is a struggle – even a constant state of revolution.  It started straight away in the Garden of Eden.  I also admit that the revolution always succeeds.  But what is so puzzling is that the moment the revolution succeeds it is obliged to start all over again from scratch.  It always triumphs but never conquers.  The USSR today is a living example of what I mean. [Thank God not so living today, at least not in a physical form, though its spirit lives and has colonized much of the former Christendom]   After sixty years of straining away at the most ruthless and continuous revolution in history it is no further advanced than in October 1917.  It has massacred untold millions of people, all of whom appear to have resurrected again.  In fact it has taken 60 years for it to beget its most astonishing and least desired product, Alexander Solzhenitsyn. Strange, isn’t it? [Quite insightful. Indeed, the revolution never ends.  Not only does it devour its own, but in the end it devours itself.  The revolution against the Church is of a part with the revolution of October 1917, and that of May 1968, but more fundamentally it is an inescapable part of the original rebellion of Adam and Eve, as noted above. The Church is the only enduring construct of the counter-revolution]

This seems to me to be the process [by which revolution is carried out].  Neat, logical little men, often lawyers, are forever attempting to reduce God’s magnificent, incomprehensible, chaotic creation to the neatness and logic of their own beastly little minds. [This is a tremendously meaningful sentence.  Think about it.  Not only have all revolutions stemmed from such little minds, and every heresy, but the entire modern conception of science (as a pseudoreligion) has as well.  Evolution, global warming, and Big Bang are what comes from men who try to reduce God’s greatness down to their own level of understanding.] Of course they succeed in a way, rationalizing everything around them until it stops working altogether.  They can rationalize the egg industry so as to guarantee equality of egglessness for all but they cannot pass a law requiring all hens to lay an extra egg a day.  If they do – and it happens – the hens are unlikely to play ball, or, in the present case, eggs……Hence the endless and heroic fight of the revolutionary.  I suppose that Robespierre will forever remain the ideal type; such a nice little lawyer, as neat and tidy in his mind as in his pale blue frock-coat, and so full of “virtue” and so “incorruptible” that only he could organize the Terror.

Anyway, my point is that the revolutionary process is the eternal attempt of man to impose his order, his law on God’s creation. And this is exactly what is happening in the Church. Until this post-conciliar period, God’s Church appeared almost as magnificent, incomprehensible, and chaotic as His creation. It was cluttered up indiscriminately with tiaras, cardinal’s hats, miters, birettas, rosaries, prie-dieus, saints and sinners, Friday fish, indulgences……and all the rest.  yes, cluttered up it was, as is the universe.  But it all worked incredibly smoothly………

……After Vatican II the neat, logical little fellows were given their head.  Obviously, the first thing to do was to clear the decks.  A clean sweep has been made of absolutely everything.  Not only was the tiara flogged but even the Pieta got chipped.  Then they must produce a neat, logical little liturgy: unpretentious, comprehensible, as dull as themselves.  The laity promptly participated by walking out.  That is the process all along the line.

Now, am I acting as you say “clean against the trend of history?” [You’ve surely heard this argument, haven’t you?  That Catholics – “traditional” Catholics – are contrary to the times?  That the Church “isn’t going in that direction anymore?”  That Latin is “not where the Church is headed?”]  Yes, if you regard the revolutionary process as the constitutive element of history.  No, if you think of me as the dull, elemental matter of God’s creation popping up inevitably from the very nature of things.  That I personally shall be ground to dust [by the Church hierarchy lashing out against this most unspeakable of rebellions, non-acceptance of the revolution they have imposed] is not unlikely; but the reality I stand for will still pop up when the neat, logical little men find themselves holding a handful of dust.

Quite logically, you accuse me of fighting for a lost cause……[This] is among the greatest compliments you can pay me. Perhaps my only inveterate sin is my contempt for those who jump on bandwagons.  Surely lost causes are the only ones worth fighting for?  Why don battle dress for a victory parade?  And surely you do not believe what is lost by men is lost to God? [I appreciate this hopeful segment]

……Colomba was a Dominican nun who lived in Perugia.  She suffered from almost every type of mystical phenomenon – ecstasy, levitation, and the rest.  The Master of the Dominicans felt uncertain about whether her spirit was from God or from the devil.  This was about 1490, when people still believed in both.  In consequence he would have the girl examined by the Holy Father himself who was on a visit……This was duly arranged.  In the great hall of Perugia…..there sat enthroned the Sovereign Pontiff, Alexander VI…..and the Papal Court around.  Colomba was introduced. Upon sight of the Vicar of Christ, she immediately went into ecstasy, as should all good nuns……….She levitated and railed at the pope from somewhere near the ceiling. “You who are the Vicar of Christ and act as the Vicar of Satan! You who hold the Keys of the Kingdom but only unlock the doors of brothels!  You who are captain of the Ark of Salvation and have a girl in every port!  You who…….”  After twenty minutes of this, the Papal Court felt rather anxious for poor Colomba’s safety.  How do you get girls out of ecstasy?  However, Alexander Borgia turned to the Master of the Dominicans: “Have no fear, my son: her spirit is certainly from God since everything she says is true.”

I sometimes wish that I were an ecstatic Dominican nun.  I could keep going for well over twenty minutes.  What i doubt is whether the sixth Paul has the humility of the sixth Alexander.  Admittedly, it is far more difficult to be humble if one sins between the ears than if one sins between the sheets.  Anyway, the point is perfectly clear: Colomba was in opposition to the person of the Pope precisely out of loyalty to the institution of the Papacy[Yes!  That’s it!  And the same is the case today, and dare I say, has been the case with most critics of the leadership of the Church, including the Pope, since the human element of the Church rebelled against the Church’s very nature and being.]

What I find astonishing in our days is that the situation is exactly reversed.  People can attack the Papacy to their heart’s content provided they do not breathe a word against the person of the Pope [the particular pope then reigning]. Our own ecumenists see the Pope as a Constitutional Monarch with plenty of whiskers but no teeth.  Hans Kung is even against the whiskers.  Dom Bernard Bresnet thinks that the papacy should be a committe with, get this, a lady chairman.  Professor Delumeau would prefer the pope to be the quinquennially elected President of the World Council of Churches.  All these – and I could name many others – are in keeping with the present regime, and Delumeau can even expect a gift in his stocking at Christmas from the pope himself.  On the other hand, that benign old gentleman, Archbishop Lefebvre, gets into endless trouble for maintaining that the personal administration of the present Pontiff is an unmitigated disaster[Because he refused to take part in the mutual suicide pact that is the post-conciliar Church]

…...What I am getting at is perfectly clear.  You should think twice before you start talking about loyalty.  It is certainly you who are disloyal downwards. [meaning, to the laity under his charge, by leaving them to the ravening wolves of error and heresy while blithely declaring his “loyalty” by introducing the endlessly destructive conciliar revolution] It is also possible that you are disloyal upwards to the divine institution of the Papacy precisely by toadying to its temporary administrator.

———–End Quote———–

Indeed.  Excellent, excellent summation.

I haven’t got much to add to that, except that it is amazing how little has changed in the past 40 years.  If anything, it’s gotten worse, even acknowledging young priests of relative orthodoxy (few of whom have any idea how much they do not know, nor the volume of what has been lost, some hopeful religious orders, Summorum Pontificum, and other positive developments.

Many hoped that JPII and then Benedict indicated that the tide had been turned, or a nadir reached from which we could hope for steady improvement.  Others, perhaps wiser, believed that the conservativish pontificates following Paul VI were simply a period of entrenchment and solidification. Either way, Francis has shattered many illusions that the Church was on the cusp of renewal.

I do believe there is great truth in the above, wherein the bishop states that no matter how hard they try to kill Catholicism, it will keep popping back up, both because at least a tiny fraction of people recognize its unalterable truthfulness and want it, and also because God is ultimately in charge of all.  God has a penchant for working phenomenal turnarounds, as this series of sermons indicates.

I could say more, but must cut this off now.  I did not want to go an entire week with no posts.  Hopefully you think this post makes some kind of sense. In lieu of reading here, watch one of those five videos on God’s turnarounds a day until I get back.

Thank you for your prayers and well-wishes.  The power of prayer – or at least yours –  is unbelievable. Every day with my boy is a testament to that.  I am in debt to you all.  Thank you again. I pray for you.

 

 

Has the “Church of Darkness” Eclipsed the True Church? May 5, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, catachesis, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, religious, Revolution, scandals, secularism, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, Virtue.
comments closed

Interesting commentary from Father Albert of the traditional Dominican community of the Holy Rosary in Belgium.  I do not think he quite answers the question posed to him definitively, which posited that the Church in Rome, that is to say, the curia and the institutional hierarchy, are becoming so estranged from the Catholic Faith as to become “the seat of antichrist” (boy, won’t prots have a field day with that), but he notes that while the Church has not quite reached the point that the antichrist is literally reigning in it, much of the institutional hierarchy is preparing the way for that terrible eventuality.

Most troubling, the Church has, since Vatican II, and to a greater and greater extent as the years pass, lost those four distinguishing marks that reveal her to be the True Church and Bride of Jesus Christ, those being: holiness, unity, catholicity, and apostolicity.  Such is Father Albert’s surmise, at any rate:

Do you agree with his assessment, and in what way?  Is the compromised, even fallen Church forewarned by Our Lady at La Sallete, Fatima, and Akita coming to pass, or is it already in full bloom?  Has the true Church been “eclipsed?”  These are very difficult questions.

You can catch Father’s brief Q&A sessions most days on The Fatima Center channel on Youtube.

Awesome to see the tonsure, btw.  Much appreciated.

Supreme Court Rules California Law Banning “Gay Conversion Therapy” Constitutional May 3, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, cultural marxism, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, persecution, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

So you have freedom of speech and worship, comrade, unless it offends against one of the most favored groups of the glorious people’s coalition.  In that case, take your Christofascism and shove it, bible-humper.

h/t to reader Camper for the link.  This is a really big decision that’s gotten precious little coverage.  From this priests and others could easily be sued for giving sermons against the evils of sodomy, if some aggrieved sodomite took that to be a call to conversion from their lifestyle.  This ruling could easily pave the way for Canadian-style intrusion into what priests and preachers can and cannot say (which, of course, has entirely to do with whether leftists find it objectionable or not.  Big surprise):

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday left intact California’s ban on “gay conversion” therapy aimed at turning youths under age 18 away from homosexuality, rejecting a Christian minister’s challenge to the law asserting it violates religious rights. [This essentially says to parents: you have no right to seek treatment for the moral and mental disorders of your minor child if such treatment offends against the sexular pagan zeitgeist.  The arrogance is breathtaking.]

The justices, turning away a challenge to the 2012 law for the second time in three years, let stand a lower court’s ruling that it was constitutional and neither impinged upon free exercise of religion nor impacted the activities of clergy members. [Even though clergy may well be involved in the process.  We are in “emanations from the penumbras” territory again.  And once again having a majority of Republican-nominated justices mean nothing.  We are a nation ruled by an unelected, tyrannical and impious oligarchy]

The law prohibits state-licensed mental health counselors, including psychologists and social workers, from offering therapy to change sexual orientation in minors. The Supreme Court in 2014 refused to review the law after an appeals court rejected claims that the ban infringed on free speech rights under U.S. Constitution’s the First Amendment.

California outlawed gay conversion therapy in 2012, calling it ineffective and harmful. New Jersey, Illinois, Oregon, Vermont, New Mexico and the District of Columbia have similar laws on the books, according to the Human Rights Campaign, an advocacy group for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people. The Supreme Court turned away a challenge to New Jersey’s law in 2015.

Gay conversion therapy methods range from counseling, hypnosis and dating-skill training to aversive techniques that induce pain or electric shocks in response to same-sex erotic images, according to California officials. Such treatments stem from a belief that homosexuality is a mental illness, a view that has been discredited for decades, the state said in court papers. [“Discredited” through an entirely political coup at the APA session in 1973, which sodomites themselves gleefully describe hijacking and turning to their ends after a campaign of serious intimidation. As for so-called electroshock therapy, has there ever been a single documented instance of its being used for this purpose?  Or is it simply the product of the fevered imagination of dedicated (and paid) advocates for the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah, presenting a scary if highly implausible “threat” to drum up sympathy for their cause?]

Lead plaintiff Donald Welch, an ordained minister and licensed family therapist, oversees counseling at Skyline Wesleyan Church, an evangelical Christian church in the San Diego area that believes sexuality belongs only in a marriage between a man and a woman. [You know, like GOD COMMANDS.]

Welch, along with a Catholic psychiatrist and a man who underwent conversion therapy and now aspires to perform it on others, sued the state claiming the law is unconstitutional. [A Catholic on the front lines defending the moral order?  Must be a layperson.  I kid, but not much.]

After their free speech challenge failed, the plaintiffs’ pressed their claim that the ban violates their right to freely exercise their religion. Last October, the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected their arguments.

Of course it did.  Enforcing immigration laws on the books for decades, and non-controversially endorsed by Bill Clinton in 1996, is unconstitutional to the 9th circus, but denying millions of people their right to worship, parent, and speak on an increasing array of matters IS totally constitutional.  Gotcha.  In other words, whatever leftists want, the 9th Circuit will provide, no matter how much they have to disfigure the Constitution to oblige.

As Camper said, this is a case with potentially huge implications. No wonder it’s been buried by the fake news media.

I’m sure the USCCB will be taking a true leadership position on this offense against God and the rights of the Church any second now.  Right after I sell that beachfront property in Kansas I own…….

“The Growing Epidemic of Religious Hostility in Our (the US) Military” April 26, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, paganism, persecution, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society.
comments closed

Two bits of data on the Left’s continued, and almost entirely successful, even unopposed, long march through the institutions.  The Air Force of men like Jack Broughton, Ed Rasimus, Bill Lloyd, Dick Jonas, Robin Olds, and Chappie James is long, long gone.  Even 20 years ago, most leadership in USAF were outwardly conservative and Christian, most often devout evangelicals.  After a deliberate program of de-Christianization and secularization, which reached new heights during the Obama administration, the Air Force today, like all the services, is simply one more vehicle for the advance of the godless amoral secular leftist agenda.  Unless one feels called to (and able to meet the stringent standards of) a top-tier special forces type career field, joining the US military today is a fool’s errand where anti-Chrisitan and amoral indoctrination reigns, where one is often judged less on the basis of merit but most often on whether you fall into one of the many favored categories (categories which happen to align, magically!, with the core elements of the leftist political coalition).

In other words, what we are seeing is a revolution in slow motion, where a previous ruling elite is replaced by another, hostile elite, all for the benefit of a particular political agenda.

First story up, a 26 year bird colonel flight surgeon at Lackland in San Antonio suddenly, in June 2016, got slapped with a career-ending reprimand not from his CO, but from someone very high up in his chain of command (the vice commander of Air Education and Training Command), over an incident that ostensibly occurred more than two y ears earlier.  Sound fishy?  It is:

First Liberty Institute has sent a letter to the Air Force demanding the reversal of punitive actions taken against Col Michael Madrid for expressing his religious beliefs about sexuality.

In 2014, one of then-LtCol Madrid’s subordinates — who was in the middle of being court-martialed — accused Col Madrid of

“engaging in demeaning and derogatory behavior toward [the subordinate] based on [the subordinate’s] sexual orientation” thus “creat[ing] a hostile work environment.” [the court martial concerned an enlisted member  in Madrid’s section who developed an addiction to prescription pain killers.  When caught and court martialed for being high on duty, he started making wild accusations, including this one, to try to get out of the court martial]

Besides the troubled circumstances of the initial complaint, it is also notable that it was a blanket complaint (and apparently a first complaint) covering the prior 15 months, not any specific incident.

As a result of the complaint, Col Madrid’s Group Commander at FE Warren AFB, Wyoming, Col Hans Ritschard, initiated a Commander Directed Investigation.

In March 2014, the two-week CDI determined the allegations were “unsubstantiated,” and Col Madrid’s commander agreed.

That should have been the end of the story.

More than a year later (June 2015), Col Madrid had been promoted to full Colonel and had moved to San Antonio to serve in Air Education and Training Command Headquarters. Somewhere in that time, MajGen John McCoy became an acting Vice Commander of AETC.

On 29 June 2016 — more than a year after moving to San Antonio and more than two years after the CDI was closed — MajGen McCoy issued Col Madrid a Letter of Admonishment for a statement he made during the CDI conducted at FE Warren. He reportedly also intended to establish a further punitive Unfavorable Information File (UIF) but never did so……..

……….how did MajGen McCoy even know about the CDI? By their very nature, CDIs are not supposed to be millstones around the necks of their subjects for the rest of their careers — particularly when the allegations are “unsubstantiated.” (In fact, it requires a very specific approval process — and a legal “need to know” — to even see a CDI.) And once he did know about it, for what reason was he motivated to review it? Col Madrid had already served at AETC HQ for more than a year, and two years had passed since the CDI had ended. Why now?

First Liberty has an idea:

Attorneys at First Liberty are concerned that the reason the case was dredged up once closed is because the Air Force is unduly focused on political correctness and targeting people with beliefs who don’t fit the progressive mold.

“We are concerned that Major General McCoy judged and punished Madrid – a decorated Air Force officer – because he became aware of Colonel Madrid’s traditional religious views,” Berry added. “If so, that not only harms the military, but it is illegal.”

So this is probably the 20th or 25th such case I’ve read concerning individuals in the Air Force being targeted for holding Christian beliefs in the past 2-3 years.  I have done at least 10 posts on the subject in that period, all involving different cases, and I know there were 2-3 cases I stumbled on for everyone I posted.

This has all the appearance of being a newly exaltant political movement searching out and persecuting as many ideological adversaries as it can find.  Again, such persecution was highly institutionalized during the Obamanation.

Second case, Obama apparatchiks still populating DoD have nominated  the first open lesbian to be commandant of the Air Force Academy.  This lesbian woman presently commands the 2nd BW at Barksdale (in spite having no previous experience with B-52s) after holding a very cushy position in the Pentagon where she got to hobnob with numerous Obama appointees.  AFA provides the core of the Air Force’s officers and was, for a very long time, a hub of evangelical Christianity.  That had its pluses and minuses, but it is being plainly remade into a secular pagan institution:

An open lesbian has been chosen to be the next commandant of the U.S. Air Force Academy, according to a USAF Academy report and other media.

Col. Kristin Goodwin has a “wife” and two children. She will take charge of the USAF Academy pending approval by the U.S. Senate. If approved, she likely will assume her new position in May. That is usually a formality, but conservative opposition to her appointment might make it less so.

Air Force Academy alumnus and former Navy Chaplain Gordon James (“Chaps”) Klingenschmitt, a conservative activist, is urging concerned citizens to call their U.S. senators to oppose Goodwin’s nomination to lead the USAF cadets.

Klingenschmitt, who heads the Pray in Jesus Name Project, told LifeSiteNews that Goodwin’s appointment under a Trump presidency is part of a “deep state problem of Obama’s appointments remaining in office while the Senate drags its feet to confirm Donald Trump’s appointments to replace them.”

“Obama’s bureaucrats in the Pentagon are still running the show,” Klingenschmitt said. “Obama is gone. Why does he still have this power?”…….

………According to the article, “Goodwin served in several high-level leadership positions, including vice commander of the 59th Bomb Wing at Whiteman Air Force Base, Missouri; commander of the 2nd Bomb Wing at Barksdale AFB, Louisiana; and senior military adviser to the secretary of the Air Force at the Pentagon. … She’s also a veteran pilot who has flown B-2 Spirit, the EC-130h compass Call, the C-130 Hercules, and other aircraft.” [That is what one calls being picked and groomed.  From C-130s to vice commander of the premiere bomb wing in the Air Force (flying B-2s, necessitating a type conversion), to about THE most politically advantageous role an officer can get (adviser to the civilian SECAF) – this is a wholly political move.  People like her don’t happen, they are made. She may even wind up CoSUSAF at some point.  I wouldn’t doubt it.]

Some folks are raving about this appointment, saying that (now) General Goodwin is a committed warrior and a stand-up leader who doesn’t inculcate her ideology on those under her command. That would make her different from some of her colleagues of similar proclivity – including a former commander at Lackland AFB who conducted witch hunts against hardcore Christians.  There was another at Patrick AFB who was apparently similar, banning Bibles from public spaces.

I think it’s very sad.  In secular coverage of this proposed change of command, support for Goodwin is overwhelming from those in and out of uniform (the comments at Air Force Times were especially disheartening).  Trump or no Trump, more and more souls are, consciously or not, surrendering to the leftist sexular pagan zeitgeist that unnatural vices are fine, that it’s just a small accident of someone’s personality (after we were sold for decades that we MUST grant them rights for this CORE element of their being), that so long as they do a good and fair job what does it matter?

It matters because character matters.  Because honor matters.  Because this woman, who has chosen a totally sterile form of sexual expression, insisted on using artificial means to create two new lives she could pretend rounded our her pretended marriage.  Those children are denied the father they have a right to experience and learn from.  Because our principal enemies, the islamists, see from things like this a totally decadent and depraved society that deserves to die, and they are further emboldened in their efforts.  And because this role is fundamentally different from other commands, it involves education as its principal mission, and more than education, the installation of virtues suitable for those who will command others in combat.  This woman is wholly unsuited to be a role model because of the lifestyle she has chosen.

But mostly I oppose it because it is wrong. It will remain wrong even if I am the last person alive who knows it is so.  It will remain wrong forever because Our Lord created us to be fruitful and not to cast our seed on barren ground or engage in filthy acts.  You cannot support sodomy (or abortion, or many other things) without making a mockery of Christianity and God Himself.

FSSP Priest Interview Reveals Divisions within Fraternity April 25, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, Basics, foolishness, General Catholic, huh?, Latin Mass, priests, Restoration, Revolution, sadness, Society, SSPX, the struggle for the Church, Tradition.
comments closed

I got sent a link to the following post this morning by reader TT.  It’s an interview of the rather small German province of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter, the organization of priests dedicated to the traditional Mass that was founded by some who “broke away” from the SSPX at the time of the illicit consecrations of 4 bishops in 1988.

This interview is already being picked up as fodder for the endless (and tiresome) SSPX/FSSP debates that have been raging for almost 30 years.  For those who already feel the FSSP is hopelessly compromised, the interview is being taken as proof of the correctness of that view.  For those with internal knowledge of the Fraternity, as it is typically called, however, this interview only reiterates the divisions already well known within this society of priests.

I’ll add comments to the post I copy below, because I think there are some important things to clarify/note, but I’d like to make one point clear at the outset: every grouping of more than a few individuals is going to have disparity of belief.  Once you get into the hundreds, like the FSSP, there is going to be a whole range of belief.  Given that, generally speaking, both acceptance of a more stridently traditional outlook (or a certain, sometimes severe, hostility to Vatican II) and friendliness/sympathy for the SSPX varies inversely with the age of the priest and their closeness to the original point of division in 1988.  That is to say, older priests in the Fraternity, especially those who were present in 1988 and made the decision to leave the SSPX, generally tend to be more accommodating towards the post-conciliar ethos and hostile towards the SSPX.  Younger priests are generally more hardcore “traditional” and more friendly towards the Society.

This is not a universal rule and there is infinite nuance, even within individual priests!, but that’s probably the broad norm.  I would also add that there is, as I understand it, a certain division of belief between priests of the Fraternity in the Americas, and those in Europe, with those again in Europe tending towards being the less ardently traditional, or the more accommodating.  Having said that, I concur with a commenter at 1Peter5 that this is far from an inspiring interview.  While I think the interview is being presented in a fairly negative light by Maike Hickson at 1Peter5, I think I can also say these are some of the most unhelpful comments I’ve seen from an FSSP priest in print, perhaps less for what they say (esp. on reflection) but for the sense they seem to convey of accommodation, of being (to quote some commentary I’ve seen) “modernist lap dogs who will do anything so long as they can continue to offer the ‘old Mass'”.  Then again, I find myself defending the priest quite consistently below – I think that while he exhibits an attitude far different from what I’d like to see expressed, it’s not entirely surprising given his past.

So keep that in mind as you read the below, which many of you perhaps already have:

The usually cautious and reserved Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP) has now given its current opinion concerning the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) and on its possible formal re-integration into the structures of the Catholic Church. Father Bernhard Gerstle – the head of the German district of the FSSP – just gave a 24 April interview to the German Bishops’ official website Katholisch.dein which he explains many of the positions and opinions of his priestly fraternity. (Father Gerstle is the same priest who, in 2016, made a politely critical statement about the papal document Amoris Laetitia.) [An important note of clarification.  Fr. Gerstle may be the head of the German district of the Fraternity, but I think it a great leap to derive from that that he is speaking for the mind of the entire Fraternity.  Words of Fr. John Berg, former Superior of the entire order, in Latin Mass Magazine from 2015 (which I haven’t to hand) were far different and conveyed a far more traditionally Catholic understanding.]

Father Gerstle explains, first of all, that he himself split off from the SSPX because of the “illicit episcopal consecrations” in 1988 which, in his eyes, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger tried to forestall. (Interestingly, and just in the recent past, there have been voices saying that Cardinal Ratzinger, as pope, later removed the excommunications of the four SSPX bishops because he realized that he had contributed to the intensification of that earlier conflict. Worth noting is that, Bishop Athanasius Schneider, who has served as an official Vatican liaison to the SSPX, recently called this act of excommunication an “injustice.”) [This little aside causes me to wonder whether the author is not trying to inculcate a bit of doubt, even resentment, towards Fr. Gerstle.  Sure “some voices” may say that, but lots of others say that the excommunications were wholly right and just. Obviously Fr. Gerstle is going to have a bias since he left the SSPX over this matter.  I am curious as to why Hickson chose to introduce this seeming rebuttal right here.] In Gerstle’s eyes, the 1988 breach happened due to a “lack of trust toward Rome.” He also claims that many more priests within the SSPX had disapproved of the episcopal consecrations, “but did not make the final step.” Thus, there were “only a few priests and seminarians who left the Society of St. Pius X at the time [in 1988].” Gerstle explicitly says that the foundation of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter happened “essentially due to Cardinal Ratzinger, [who was] then head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.”  [For those of us who weren’t involved, I don’t think it is easy to comprehend the depth of feeling on both sides involved in the 1988 consecrations.  This was an event so trying and so radicalizing I don’t think many today fully realize the effect these events had on the participants.  As one who was directly involved and experienced that heart-rending time, I don’t find Fr. Gerstle’s comments out of place.  There are many involved who share his views, and of course, many who don’t, but it’s not like he’s breaching some radical new concept no one’s ever said before, even those who are very attached to the traditional practice of the Faith.]

Father Gerstle further distances himself from those smaller groups within the SSPX – whom he calls “hardliners” – who “reject the Second Vatican Council to a large extent, for example with regard to religious freedom or as to the decree on ecumenism.” Some of them, he says, also doubt the validity of the new liturgy. Gerstle makes it clear, moreover, where the Fraternity of St. Peter stands with regard to the Second Vatican Council: [No, he gives his own opinion.  Unless he directly stated he was speaking as the voice of the entire Fraternity as a matter of policy – which if he did, we can be certain Hickson would be trumpeting this from the rooftops – then he’s giving his opinion, which Hickson is taking to mean it is the policy of the Fraternity because of his position, but I can say from direct experience there are many Fraternity priests who do not conform to the views expressed in this para or the one below. As to the divisions within the SSPX, these are well known and I find pointing them out wholly unremarkable.]

The Fraternity of St. Peter, however, has accepted to study without prejudice the conciliar texts and has come to the conclusion that there is no breach with any previous magisterial statements.However, some texts are formulated in such a way that they can give way to misinterpretations. But, in the meantime, Rome has already made here concordant clarifications which the Society of St. Pius X should now also recognize. [Emphasis added] [I would say the situation now remains as it has been, vague, uncertain, and unclear.  Some tradition-friendly individuals in the Curia have made clarifications, they have expressed their opinions, but that is far from saying there has been a wholesale clarification of the problematic aspects of Vatican II. Rome appears willing to say almost anything to get the SSPX regularized.  But whether these stands hold after that occurs is anyone’s guess, but there remains a huge monolith of progressive-modernist opinion in the clergy and hierarchy that VII is perfect, the best expression of the Faith ever conceived, and that the Church was literally re-born in 1965.  That remains an extremely dangerous ideology that has not been washed away by a few conciliatory comments from folks at the Ecclesia Dei commission.]

Additionally, Father Gerstle insists that for the FSSP, the new 1983 Code of Canon Law is the standard. In his eyes, the SSPX has here some more reservations. For the FSSP, explains Gerstle “there is not a pre- and a post-conciliar Church.” “There is only the one Church which goes back to Christ,” he adds. Gerstle also insists that the FSSP does not “wish to polarize or even to promote splits,” but that they wish to instill in their own parishes “an ecclesial attitude.” Certain (unnamed, unspecified) abuses in the Church should only be criticized in a “differentiated and moderate way.” [We are only getting very partial and bifurcated comments.  I don’t read German so I can’t go to the original and Google translate is too unreliable in such fine points.  Having said that, I find these comments disappointing and far too conciliatory towards the post-conciliar construct.  Then again, we do not know what pressures the Fraternity is under right now, but I understand they are considerable and the dangers great from those who would like to do to the ED communities what has been done to the FI’s.]

Father Gerstle also distances himself from the concept “traditionalist” when he says: “This notion I do not like at all to hear. We are not traditionalists, but simply Catholic.” As Catholics, he says, “we appreciate tradition,” but without “completely blocking organic adaptations and changes.” [This one I have no problem with.  Some of the most informed readers of this blog eschew the term traditional, and say that what we practice is simply the Catholic Faith as it has always been believed, understood, and lived.  There is nothing remarkable about “organic changes” either.  VII was wholly inorganic.]

The worthy celebration of the traditional liturgy, together with a loyal teaching of the Catholic Faith, is at the center of the work of the FSSP, according to Gerstle. “Salvation of souls” and “eternal life” are their Fraternity’s own concern. Unfortunately, adds the German priest, “the Four Last Things have been widely neglected in the Church, with the effect of a belittling and attenuation of sin and of a loss of the practice of sacramental confession.” [I would hope this is uncontroversial.  In fact, one could take from this a tacit rebuke of the post-conciliar construct, where the Mass is typically deplorable and the “teaching” counterfeit.]

Father Gerstle sees that “one cannot simply introduce everywhere again the old liturgy and, so to speak, impose it upon people.” “Both rites thus [with the help of the “reform of the reform”] should enrich each other,” explains the priest. Certain elements of the new liturgy could be “enriching for the extraordinary form of the Roman Rite.” [He’s just parroting PBXVI here, but I am personally extremely leery of any “enrichment” flowing from the NO to the TLM.  I think there is virtually nothing in the NO that would “improve” the TLM.]

Moreover, Father Gerstle also explains that, in the German district, there are growing numbers of faithful who are interested in the traditional Tridentine Mass. Some of the FSSP Masses have “100 to 180 faithful” in attendance. He admits, however, that the FSSP has not too many vocations. “All in all we have a good number of incomers [16 new priests in 2016 and currently some 100 seminarians altogether], but it is not so that we are under pressure due to high numbers of vocations.” [The Fraternity is generally doing better in North America, where there is a certain pressure to grow the seminary.  As for Mass attendance, the local FSSP parish is now attracting 1200+ on a typical Sunday.  That is unusual, but the growth is consistent throughout, and I pray all the other tradition-oriented groups are experiencing the same or better.]

At the end of this interview, Gerstle explains that the SSPX faces a dilemma: either Bishop Fellay chooses unity with Rome and will have a split within his own organization, or he will choose unity within the SSPX and will not have unity with Rome.  The German priest explains, as follows:

I think that the current Superior General, Bishop Bernard Fellay, will have to decide between unity with Rome and unity within the Society of St. Piux X. The realists within the leadership will then hopefully realize that there is no alternative to a reconciliation with Rome.

I find the first part of this analysis to be insightful, but I think anyone who has followed the situation even as casually as I have has reached about the same conclusion.  I also think the second part is right, though I continue to have doubts as to whether now, with Francis in charge, is the right time.  The man has a demonstrated track record of deliberately targeting tradition-embracing groups for destruction.  But may God’s will be done.

As for the interview, this is absolutely not what I would prefer to see from a leading Fraternity priest.  But I’m not sure it confirms the fatal weakness of the Fraternity, either.  Does having a regular canonical status involve some compromise?  Absolutely*.  And folks in the SSPX had better be FULLY cognizant of that fact when they sign their “deal” with Rome.

Well I don’t post for a week then you get a novella.  Lucky you.  Sorry folks, posting is going to be infrequent for the foreseeable future.  I had a very  unusual situation for first 76 months of this blog’s history but that period is definitively order.  I probably would not have posted today if this matter hadn’t hit so close to home.  We’ve had a nightmare bronchitis/pneumonia go through our family that takes weeks to get over.  I’m still fighting it but am back at work but also playing lots of catchup.  Hope to get another post out tomorrow but who knows.

*-but so far, only of a limited and generally unobtrusive (or undamaging) sort.  The “gravitational pull” of an unreconciled SSPX probably plays a role in the limited nature of the compromises forced on the FSSP – which is why I fear regularization for the entire restoration of the Faith.  But ultimately God is in charge and we have to want what is best for the salvation of souls, which everyone (not really, but lots) tells me is regularization.  So it must be it.

What to Make of the Francis’ SSPX Marriage Imbroglio? April 6, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, cultural marxism, different religion, disaster, error, foolishness, Francis, General Catholic, horror, persecution, Revolution, scandals, Society, SSPX, the struggle for the Church, Tradition.
comments closed

I chose the word imbroglio, because gambit felt a bit critical, and indult seemed off the mark, too.

For those who do not know, Francis, Bishop of Rome, extended another “indulgence,” or a faculty with no formal juridical structure, to the SSPX, this time concerning marriage.  Readers will know that since Advent 2015 the SSPX has had faculties to hear Confession granted from Francis himself.  Originally intended for the Year of Mercy, those faculties have been extended indefinitely.  A few days ago, Francis, through the CDF and Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, granted permission to local ordinaries to grant faculties for the Sacrament of Marriage, as well, under some rather odd circumstances.  The “normal” means of doing this would be to have a Novus Ordo priest perform the actual marriage sacrament, or to oversee it somehow?, with the nuptial Mass following according to the ancient Rite and conducted by a Society priest.  But in addition – since this would surely be a huge burden to already overtaxed (or so we are told) diocesan priests – there is also a caveat allowing faculties to simply be granted without the involvement of local clergy.

That’s admittedly a rough summation of a fairly complex initiative but you can read all the details at the Rorate link.  The point of this post is not to haggle over details of this initiative, or whatever it is, and to talk aboutits implications.

I have seen two general reactions to this, and they have followed in line with sentiments folks hold towards SSPX regularization overall.  Some, like Rorate, are convinced that both this latest indulgence by Francis, and the overall process of regularization that now seems coming close to fruition, are unalloyed goods and something every faithful soul should be really excited about.  I would like to present some text confirming this optimistic view, but Rorate seems to have shifted much of their focus to Twitter and while I’ve seen tweets confirming their excitement at this development, such as this: “This is clearly a final step towards full regularization that will go away when the papers are signed. It’s a good thing.”

Others, like Michael Matt below, are far more skeptical.  In fact, in my very narrow experience, it seems a lot of folks who have had a long time association with the Society of St. Pius X are among the most skeptical of both this latest grant of faculties and the overall process of regularization.  The Remnant video:

“They are wrecking the Church, they are enabling heretics everywhere……They are raping our kids, physically and spiritually, and then they have the audacity, to demand obedience.  Oh so pious.  To demand OBEDIENCE, and to hold the threat of schism over the heads of little old ladies to prevent them from in any way standing in opposition to their diabolical agenda.”  Great rant.

Former Catholics are now the second largest “denomination” in the country. 70% of those baptized in Catholics in the US have fallen away. 80% of even those remaining American Catholics never go to Mass (and I bet it’s at least slightly higher than that).  Even the vast majority of “practicing Catholics” are heretics of one form or another.  Almost all of them support the use of contraception, and a large majority do not believe in the Real Presence, the very core, the essence, of our Faith.  And these statistics from the US are much better than one would find in Europe and other locales, the Church’s ancient home.

Matt brings up a key point and one that I have gradually, over the years, come to accept, not as a metaphysical certitude but as being supported by the preponderance of the evidence: that “full communion” is a term much bandied about by those who have wrought the destruction of the Church in this world while demanding obedience from all to go along with a project they can easily see is causing nothing but devastation for souls.   I am not sure what meaning that term means when bishops “in full communion” can declare, with the full backing of the pope, that adulterers can freely receive the Blessed Sacrament, re-crucifying our Blessed Lord over and over and over again in a horrid sacrilege. Given what is going on in the Church and world, as evidence by those statistics above and what we see and read every day, the arguments over the canonical regularity of the SSPX seem like a tempest in a teacup.  Even worse, these same Church leaders who constantly appeal to obedience while snarling at and denigrating all those who strive to practice the Faith as it has always been practiced are the very ones who have placed the Church in the direst straits of her 2000 year history!

Not that the canonical status of the SSPX is a hill I’m prepared to die on, nor something I’m overly concerned about.  I know there are fervent partisans on both sides, and I’ve always struggled to stay out of those endless squabbles where partisans stack up enormous piles of books and quotes from Fathers, Doctors, and Saints to support their favored side.  It just seems to me, practically speaking, all this concern over and focus on the canonical status of the SSPX is just not a huge issue, compared to all else that is going on.  The Church has fallen into the worst crisis of her history and the ostensible imperfect canonical status of the 0.05% of the Church (nominally speaking) associated with the SSPX just doesn’t concern me that much.

I do continue to be very ambivalent regarding this apparently unstoppable ongoing process of regularization.  I’ve been catechized to believe that this must and has to be a very good thing, but something – my own lack of faith, the temptations of satan, worldly experience, natural cynicism, something – keeps shouting in my interior spaces that this is a grave, grave danger, not just to the SSPX but to all the Ecclesia Dei communities and the entire human aspect of the Church.  It is also an opportunity, yes, but given how easily communities like the Franciscans of the Immaculate have been completely crushed by the modernist powers, it seems like the opportunity is far outweighed by the dangers.

If regularization comes to pass part of me will be happy and I’ll pray like mad – as I already have been – that everything will turn out for the best.  In the grand, grand scheme of things I know it will, that the Church will be restored and Christ’s reign recognized by all, but I cannot get over my concern for the millions of souls who will continue to fall into hell so long as the Church persists in this disastrous crisis.  Whether SSPX regularization will ultimately be a massive turning point in the restoration of the Faith, or simply another grim milestone in the chronicle of the Church’s long demise prior to the parousia, I do not know. None of us does.  So I’ll just keep hoping and praying that God will have mercy on His Church and raise up the leadership and laity we so desperately need, and not that which we and the world deserve.

If you want an even more detailed critical take on this initiative, sent in by reader D, read this.  I am concerned that it seems like the leadership of the SSPX is giving evidence of an attitude of appeasement towards the overwhelmingly modernist hierarchy in the Church and not rocking the boat, which bodes ill, I think, for their role in the Church after regularization, but we shall see.

Goodbye America, It’s Been Nice Knowing You: Millennials Gayest Generation Ever April 5, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, Basics, cultural marxism, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, paganism, rank stupidity, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

Now, I’ve got to preface this post somewhat.  The survey that reports a huge spike in millennials reporting they are somewhere on the perverse spectrum was commissioned by the lead sodomy-advocacy group “GLAAD.”  So, it is likely the results are skewed anywhere from slightly to severely.  Having said that, however, even if the survey is over-reporting reality by 300%, that would still mean that over twice as many millennials are self-identifying as inclined to the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah (if not active, ongoing participants in same) than any previous population survey.

And as the pro-sodomy lobby gains more and more power and influence, as the perverse sexular pagan Left sinks its tentacles more and more into the mind, heart, and soul of our yutes, each generation is worse than the one before.  My generation was somewhere between tolerant/ambivalent and moderately supportive of this sinful lifestyle.  The millennials seem given to full-throated support.  Some say the generation after them is somehow more conservative, but I doubt that, it would run counter to the prevailing trend of the past century or more, where each succeeding generation is more tolerant/supportive of immorality than the preceding one.

The report:

Twenty percent of millennials say they’re LGBTQ, and 12 percent are either transgender or gender-nonconforming, according to a new Harris Poll survey conducted for the activist group GLAAD.

Of all generations, millennials are the least likely to say they’re straight, the poll found.

And millennials also reported numerous gender identities: Three percent said they were agender; 3 percent, gender fluid; 2 percent, transgender; 2 percent, unsure or questioning; 1 percent bigender; and 1 percent genderqueer.

“This could be attribute to increasingly accepting environments, wherein for many people, family rejection is less frequent, job security is less at risk, and overall safety is less of a concern when coming out,” said their study, explaining the unprecedented findings.

Though pollsters agree that more Americans—and more millennials, especially– are identifying as LGBT, they disagree about the numbers. When it came to the percent of LGBTQ adults under 35, the Harris Poll’s findings were nearly three times higher than a Gallup survey released in January.

Yeah I didn’t even mention that 12% say they are somehow unsure of their gender.  That’s such an enormous explosion from the teeny, tiny percentage of previous population groups it staggers the imagination.  These kids are being propagandized to the extent they are embracing self-loathing and flirting with permanent self-mutilation.  That’s a direct effect in being exposed to porn and self-abuse from a very young age.  In addition to these kids being so fully indoctrinated in the victimhood hierarchy and the immense benefits, advantages, and immunities that flow from being a perceived member of a supposed victim group, but really an incredibly privileged group, that young people are embracing perverse, alien identities in order to garner some of those wonderful perks.

Even the secular conservative New Yorker Ace notes that a trend like this will quickly be the end of us should this persist much longer:

while some of that could just be virtue signaling — straights claiming to be gay in solidarity with gays, …… — and some could be GLAAD using the broadest possible definition of “gay” to plump the numbers, I wouldn’t completely discount it.

I’ve heard some horrifying stories from parents who say their kids are growing up in an environment where there is positive social and institutional pressure to be gay or experiment with being gay, as if being straight means there’s something defective in you. To not have any interest in sex with the same sex means that you’re a hater, so many kids are in fact trying a little bit of sexual and gender experimentation. [Very true.  As is the reverse of the coin, being able to identify as supposedly gay or especially transgender puts one in the vanguard of a vital social justice movement both conveying purpose to an otherwise empty existence, and providing greatly coveted (if wholly unearned) moral authority and all manner of privileges, such as being able to never be questioned on a wide array of topics because of supposed “victim status.”  It’s a moral authority card many kids find too irresistible to avoid]

Based on anecdotal data: Kids today are being coached and even “groomed” to be gay by cultural forces and intentional institutional programming.

This will all work out well, I’m sure. I’m sure that none of the psychological strains of forcing yourself to conform to a sexual preference you actually don’t share that gays often report will definitely not be evident in a generation of 97% straight kids taught that they’re probably gay and should at least experiment with gay relationships for a while to make sure.

Or else they’re perverts in revolt against the laws of nature and morality.

No bad consequences at all, I’m sure.

Indeed.

Dudes, I would never say my generation has covered itself in glory.  It’s been shameful.  But this……holy cow this is so beyond wheels off I don’t even know how to describe it.

 

Oppose Fanatical Devotees of the Religion of Sexular Paganism at Every Turn April 4, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, cultural marxism, different religion, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, paganism, persecution, rank stupidity, Revolution, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, Society, unbelievable BS.
comments closed

When I read the article below, I was struck with the sense that what was being demanded, what these special snowflake university students were seeking, was essentially the imposition of their ludicrous false demonic religious creed upon everyone else.  Without any supporting evidence, they decried the presence of a presumably Christian preacher on their campus who, they claim, “promoted hate speech against marginalized students,” demanding that the ability to speak such heresy be banned from campus.

This is essentially religious speech, if from a pathetically weak, unreasonable (and unreasoning), and false religion.  Fortunately the administrator they were trying to bully – the university president – would have none of it.  At least so far.  We’ll see if the president yields as almost every one of their peers at other colleges and universities has.

But the key point, the takeaway is, if ever confronted by social justice warriors attempting to foist their demonic religion on you, CALL THEM ON IT.  Call them on the essentially religious nature of their beliefs, and the totalitarian nature of their methods.  Tell them you will not be made a proselyte for their (provably) sick and destructive faith.  Call on them to convert:

The president of a US university is facing calls to resign because she refuses to endorse safe spaces on her institution’s campus.

Rita Cheng, who leads Northern Arizona University, sparked protests and a campus walkout by telling students they had to confront ideas they don’t like rather than hide from them.

The university’s Student Action Coalition attacked Dr Cheng’s leadership and demanded that she quit after a tense confrontation at a Q&A session………

……….According to Arizona’s 12News channel, the incident came to a head with a question from a sophomore, who asked:

How can you promote safe spaces if you don’t take action in situations of injustice such as last week when we had the preacher on campus and he was promoting hate speech against marginalized students? As well as, not speaking out against racist incidents like blackface two months ago by student workers followed by no reform and no repercussions? [I would bet dollars to donuts this later event never happened, at least not anything like described.  And these kids demonstrate the validity of my claim, demanding the quashing of one religion in favor of their own.]

Dr Cheng responded by attacking the safe space ideology wholesale, saying essentially that they only serve to coddle students and stunt their development…….

A photo of the “mass protest:”

Now, NAU has over 30,000 students, but barely over a dozen bothered to attend.  This is also typical, however, a tiny but very loud minority comes to dominate not only the political scene on college campuses but the culture and even the material taught.  Over 50 years, the Left has managed to bend almost every of academia outside of the hard sciences and engineering to their lunacy.

Now, I realize there are many ways to verbally/mentally oppose these little leftist ideologues. They can very truthfully be called fascists, totalitarians, bullies, liars, and many other things besides.  But I think the religious angle will really throw them off, because these people almost invariably pride themselves on being wholly fact and reason-based, even if they do nothing but shout back slogans they’ve been indoctrinated to accept uncritically their entire life.  Calling them out in this manner is probably more effective than simply shouting wholly descriptive but more obviously pejorative epithets at them.

Or not. Do what you will.  Notice the makeup of the crowd, over 80% female.  Exit question: what role has the increasing dominance of women on campus played in the steady shift towards leftism and hostility to reasoned argument on the college campus, if any?  Can it not be fairly said that in the general society, granting women the vote played a substantial role in setting virtually all Western countries on an inevitably leftward arc over the past century?