jump to navigation

The Roman Pantheon and the American Pantheon August 21, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, awesomeness, Basics, Christendom, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, martyrdom, persecution, Roman Catechism, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society.
comments closed

Both built to honor false gods.  Both nations, large pluralistic socieites concerned far more with wealth, power, and order, than Truth, were consecrated to false gods which were nothing more than benign fronts for demons.  Thus says the priest below, who very ably encapsulates much of what I’ve been saying of late about the pagan, “enlightenment,” anti-Catholic foundation upon which this nation was built:


When our first president and “father of our country” George Washington laid the corner stone of the US Capitol in Washington, DC, he turned the event into a Masonic simulacrum of baptism.  Washington, like most of the founders of this nation and all the leading men of the endarkenment, was a mason. The Capitol was literally “consecrated” (to what?) in a perverse ceremony that both mocked Christian baptism and made plain that building, at least, was being given over to the care of spiritual forces other than God’s. From a small acorn doth the mighty oak grow.

A few select quotes:

“The popular will would trump the Divine Will……”  It took it a while to happen, but this country has long since rejected the Divine Will, even as misrepresented in erroneous protestant sects.

“While that pagan filth was removed from the Pantheon……”  But we, in this country, have been removing statues of Saints and Angels and letting the filth back in, at least in our hearts.

“A new Pantheon has built in this nation, where people can offer incense to whatever false “god” they wish, so long as peace is preserved……”  The endarkenment was founded on an exchange: order, for Truth.  Order, it was promised, would beget material prosperity, the likes of which the world had never seen, and it may have worked, for a while.  That material wealth was founded on the enlightenment claim that God did not care if we didn’t provide for our fellow man, or conducted our lives towards goals of avarice that would make the most opulent Eastern satrap of old blush.  God, the enlightenment claimed, did not care how we conducted our lives, especially with regard to sexual morality and almsgiving, and that was a very powerful allure to draw men away from God.  And many were ripe for the picking, because they either had a malformed, erroneous faith in one of the many sects, or were weakly catechized Catholics.

Pope Leo XIII: “Justice forbids the state to be godless, or to treat various religions with “equal rights………”  Why is this Pope not a Servant of God, let alone Saint?!?

Americanism: “best way for Church to thrive in this new order……a “free” Church, in a “free” state, competing in a “free market” of religions”……that’s Americanism, for sure.  Interesting contrast between a government which goes to great lengths to protect consumers from fraud and bad/dangerous products, but leaves the “religious marketplace” totally unpoliced, where all manner of dangerous, destructive sects are permitted, even encouraged, to flourish.  The scientologists have IRS “church” tax exempt status!  A “religion” whose own founder admitted to just making it up to get rich, and who was a long time associate of an avowed satanist!

“The Americanist bishops would encourage “dialogue,” not conversion.” Boy, that nails it.

Father then goes through the long, sad history of Americanism in the US Church hierarchy, going all the way back to the first primate of the US, John Carroll.  “Another Americanist bishop of the 19th century stated that he would never allow the Pope the smallest interference in the American voting process.” That has to have been Cardinal Gibbons.  Americanism is now the dominant trend in the Church today, meaning most of the Church is currently lost to the modernist/Americanist heresy.

The pagan superstate demands that we be at least somewhat indifferent towards the Truth.  That is its one unalterable demand.  Acquiesce, and riches, comfort, and friendship are yours.  Resist, and you will be reviled, despised, and crushed.

Given the timing of this sermon, I almost wonder if Father reads this blog.

Awesome sermon!  Spend 16 minutes and get some great catachesis!  I think we really need to be careful with the Baltimore Catechism. It has some strong Americanist overtones in sections.  The Penny Catechism or Roman Catechism is much better.

Michael Voris on the need for doctrinal clarity July 11, 2012

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, Dallas Diocese, disaster, episcopate, General Catholic, Papa, Roman Catechism, sadness, scandals, Tradition.
comments closed

One of the biggest concerns many devoted Catholics have regarding the last Council is not what it said, but what it did not say.  It did not define any dogmas.  It did not declare any anathemas.  It was, at times, extremely lacking in clarity.  That lack of clarity has been used and abused by modernists to drive many harmful agendas in the Church.  That lack of clarity has caused some to see in the Council an impossibility, a shift if the belief in the Church.  Even today, confusion reigns.  Some say that every small pronouncement of Vatican II must be adhered to with the greatest religious assent.  Others claim this is not so.  What many faithful Catholics have begged for – including luminaries like Msgr. Brunero Gherardini and Bishop Athanasius Schneider – is some kind of effort by the Church to clarify the many disparate statements of Vatican II.  The official response has constantly been that the Council is fully in line with Tradition (what the Church has always believed), and needs no clarification.  But Michael Voris makes the point below that clarity is an act of charity – that it is profoundly uncharitable to allow mass confusion to reign in the Church with regard to issues of doctrine.

There are some who believe that Vatican II was intentionally made nebulous so that modernists in the Church could take advantage of the confusion to spread their errors.  Whether that was the intent or not, in practical terms, that is precisely what has occurred.  Of course, the Holy Father has repeatedly declared that Vatican II must be understood in light of Tradition, but there remains the fact that there are pronouncements within the many Vatican II documents that are, for many, extremely difficult to reconcile with what the Church has always believed.  In fact, I am unaware of any comprehensive source that has taken the, ah……..contentious ………..statements of Vatican II and so reconciled them.  Thus, the ongoing conflict.  Vatican II is the only Council since before the dark ages which has promulgated more error and more confusion than was present prior to its taking place.

In the early history of the Church, there was great division over what constituted orthodox belief. Councils were held to define that belief, but due to both the prototypical state of theology at that time, and due to the severe divisions and acrimony within the Church itself, these definitions were often incomplete and open to other interpretations.  So, another Council would be held to further define orthodoxy.  I do not advocate for another council – at least not for another 50 years or so!  But what I do say is that a sort of “system” regarding the output of Councils was developed as  a result.  This system used precise terms and exacting definitions in order to eliminate virtually any likelihood of confusion in conciliar pronouncements.  That was a very successful system, that served the Church well for centuries.  I, with Mr. Voris, pray we get back to such clarity, and soon.

But, I know that there are many in the Church who thrive on ambiguity.  We must pray for them.

Canon Ripley on sin July 10, 2012

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, General Catholic, Glory, Interior Life, priests, Roman Catechism, Tradition, Virtue.
comments closed

Canon Francis Ripley, Canon of Westminster Cathedral, the primatial see of England and Wales, wrote a book for foundational catechesis in 1951 called  This Is The Faith.  It’s a gem.  I’ve been reading it and think it’s the best, compact, one volume source of “Catholicism for Dummies” I’ve read.  I had read a little of it before, but this is my first time going through it, page by page.  Here is an excerpt from pp. 56-57, on sin, and the false formation of conscience:

Sin is a crime, not against the law of any land, but against the law of God; hence, the sinner is a criminal in the sight of God, his Maker, his infinitely good and loving Father, his Judge.

Sometimes sinners try to justify themselves by explaining that in doing wrong they “did not go against their conscience.”  But it is the duty of everyone to make sure that his conscience is reliable and in conformity with the true Law of God. He has to have a “correct conscience,” which could obviously deceive him.  One’s conscience must be “correct.” A watch is not use to anyone unless it is regulated according to the true time. The conscience is like a watch’ it must be regulated according to the true norm of morality, the Law of God. Conscience is the interior judgment we make as to the rightness or wrongness of our actions, and such judgment can only be reliable in so far as it does not contradict the only real norm of right and wrong. [Which, we get through the Church, especially such incredible moral theologians as St. Alphonsus Ligouri] People sometimes warp their consciences, or stretch them.

Conscience is only “correct” when its verdict is in harmony with the Ten Commandments of God, the Six Commandments of the Church, and the demands of all the Christian virtues.

—————————————–End Quote—————————————

As I said above, we obtain our understanding of the Truth through the twins pillars of Catholic belief, Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.  Novelties, new beliefs which contradict previously held beliefs, or just outright errors, must be rejected.  If we “form” our conscience to arrive at a belief antithetical to what the Church believes and has traditionally believed, we have placed ourselves outside the Church.  We can call ourselves whatever we want, but if we reject core Catholic beliefs like the Incarnation, Resurrection, Real Presence, worship of God alone, necessity of Baptism, the need for Sacramental Confession, etc., then we are no longer Catholic.  God knew human nature better than we ever will, and so He gave us an Authority in the See of Peter to decide doctrinal issues and, either ex cathedra, through traditional, universal belief,  or in concert with many bishops in a Council, authoritatively declare what the Church believes.  Until the last Council, such declarations were extremely clear, but since Vatican II radically changed the form of a Catholic Council, things are much more muddy.  But it is still extremely possible to deduce what the Church believes, especially if we refer to older texts.

More, hopefully, tomorrow.

Remember to thank God when you pray! June 26, 2012

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, Four Last Things, General Catholic, Holy suffering, Interior Life, Roman Catechism, Tradition, Virtue.
comments closed

It’s easy to get into the habit of just making a list of demands to God when we pray.  I have been in that mode personally in the past.  The Roman Catechism makes the following salutary recommendations regarding prayer:

It is His Will that, before we pray to be delivered from evil, we ask that the name of God be sanctified, that His Kingdom come, and that we give thanks for all the salutary benefits which He has so lovingly bestowed on us.  Yet there are those who, if there head or foot ache, or if they suffer loss of property, or if menaces or dangers threaten them……they omit all thought of thanks or glorifying God and ask only to be delivered from these evils. This practis is at variance with the command of Christ the Lord: Seek first the Kingdom of God (Matt 6:33).   To pray, therefore, as we ought, we should have in view the greater glory of God, even when we ask deliverance from calamities, trials, and dangers.

We must keep in mind that there are some things which we commonly pray God to alleviate, but which are actually to our spiritual or even temporal advantage.  Such was the sting of the flesh to which the Apostle Paul was subjected in order that, by the aid of Divine Grace, power might be perfected in infirmity (2 Cor 12:17).  When the pious man learns the salutary influences of such things, far from praying for their removal, he rejoices in them exceedingly. We pray, therefore, against those evils only, which do not conduce to our spiritual interests; not against such as are profitable for our salvation.  [This is a hard one, and requires good spiritual guidance to discern.  There may be times when we have some temptation or problem that seems to us most onerous, but suffering through it is to our immense spiritual advantage.  As such, we should pray for the removal of all true imperfections, attachments, and definitely sins or tendencies towards sin, but for many other burdensome things we can pray that God remove them, but if He does not, we should accept them as His Will and suffer through them as joyfully as we can, rendering thanks to God for the opportunity to grow in virtue and Grace.  This is an easy thing to say, but can be quite difficult in practice.]

One of our primary prayers should be that God would remove all occasions of sin and iniquity.  We do not, however, pray to be delivered from these things which all look upon as evils, but also from those things which almost all consider to be good, such as riches, honors, health, strength, and even life itself; that is, we ask that these things not be detrimental or ruinous to the soul’s welfare.

We also beg God that we be not cut off by sudden death; that we provoke not His anger against us; that we be not condemned to suffer the punishments reserved for the wicked; that we be not sentenced to endure the fire of Purgatory, from which we piously and devoutly implore that others may be liberated.

The Blessed who reign with God in Heaven have been delivered by the Divine Assistance from all evil; but, as for us, although the Almighty delivers us from some evils, it is not His Will that, while journeying in this, our mortal pilgrimage, we should be entirely exempt from all.  [For, we must suffer in this life, we pray, as opposed to the next.]

[A final note……….] According to the interpretation of St. Basil the Great, St. Chrysostom, and St. Augustine, the devil is specially called the evil one, because he was the author of man’s transgression, that is, of his sin and iniquity, and also because God makes use of him as an instrument to chastise sinful and impious men.  For the evils which mankind endures in punishment of sin are appointed by God; and this is the meaning of these words of Holy Writ: Shall there be evil in a city which the Lord hath not done? (Amos 3:6), and I am the Lord and there is none else; I form the light and create darkness; I make peace and create evil (Is 45:7).

—————————————End Quote—————————————-

Just some thoughts on prayer, and deliverance from various “evils,” from Catholic thought of, say, a century ago.  All still applies today, although some may not like to think that, especially the final bit.

The essence of the Faith….. June 14, 2012

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, General Catholic, Glory, Interior Life, Roman Catechism, Tradition, Virtue.
comments closed

…..to me, I think is pretty well encapsulated from this brief excerpt from the Roman Catechism, or the Catechism of the Council of Trent:

….let us then earnestly implore the Spirit of God that He may command us to do all things in accordance with His Holy Will; that He may so overthrow the empire of satan that it shall have no power over us on the great accounting day; that Christ may be victorious and triumphant; that the divine influence of His Law may be spread throughout the world; that his ordinances may be observed; that there be found no traitor , no deserter; and that all may so conduct themselves, as to come with joy into the presence of God their King, and may reach the possession of the celestial kingdom, prepared for them from all eternity, in the fruition of endless bliss with Christ Jesus.

Whoever desires to enter the Kingdom of Heaven should ask of God that His Will may be done.  For Christ the Lord has said: Not every one that says to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the Kingdom of Heaven; but he that doth the will of My Father Who is in Heaven, he shall enter into the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 7:21).

————————————–End Quote————————————–

What is the Will of the Father?  That we love Him with all of our heart, mind and strength, and our neighbor – every person we encounter – with that same kind of love.  We must obey all the commandments Christ has given us through His Church – from opposing abortion as the gravest of evils to providing for the material welfare for those in need through the giving of alms – personally, not through the force of a government gun.  We must also pray for those who do us evil.  Love is not an emotion, it’s a series of acts, a taking up our cross throughout each day to suffer for Christ willingly through self-denial and service towards others.  It’s not a notion that we are saved once and for all by some declaration, nor is it the “primacy of our conscience” that leads us to reject what the Church believes in a way that, magically!, aligns perfectly with our preconceived notions and preferences.  It’s about self-denial, and it’s hard work, taken up every day for love of God and neighbor.

It’s very easy to get wrong.  It’s very easy for subtle pride to come into lead us astray, or to develop attachments to things we don’t even recognize that steal away our love for God.  That is why we have the Church and confessors, to help us stay on the right path.  It’s really very simple, but it’s also very hard.  It’s the work of a lifetime, and requires nothing more than death to self and submission to God’s Grace. 

That is the best we can ever do – to cooperate with God’s Grace.  Unfortunately, horribly, there are many that fail.