Faithful French bishop punished for being……..Catholic March 31, 2015Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, awesomeness, Basics, contraception, disaster, episcopate, error, General Catholic, paganism, persecution, sadness, scandals, secularism, Society, true leadership.
The Revolution is in an uproar in France, since Bishop Luc Ravel said somethings that are markedly Catholic. Can’t have that. Via Tancred at Eponymous Fowler:
His Excellency, Bishop Luc Ravel,a Catholic bishops in the French Military Ordinariate is to be “punished” by the French Ministry of Defense, for his writings. He has also been told to cease using any emblems identifying himself with the army. The bishop apparently in his words and actions, contradicts “republican values”. No doubt, as a good Catholic he does. But then, so did the thousands who were slaughtered by the Revolution…
The bishop wrote:
“...Christians feel shackled between two ideologies. On the one hand an ideology that is a caricature of God, which has contempt for man. [That would be islam] On the other hand, an ideology that manipulates man, despising God. [That would be leftism] On the one hand, we have those who are declared and known: the terrorists of the bomb, the Prophet’s avengers. On the other hand, we have terrorists of thought, the proponents of secularism, the admirers of the Republic. In what camp is a Christian to find himself”?
“We do not want to be held hostage by Islamists, but we also do not want to be slaves of correct thought. Islamic ideology has led to 17 victims in France, but the ideology of thinking correctly [political correctness] creates annually two hundred thousand victims in the womb of the mother. Abortion has become a fundamental right and a weapon of mass destruction “
I don’t know much about Bishop Ravel, but it sounds like he’s figured out the cultural predicament facing Catholics at the moment, squeezed more and more tightly between the vise of leftism and the immovable object in islam. He also rightly understands that abortion is absolutely vital, it is the keystone of the Republican war to return our culture to the days of pagan hedonism and barbarism. Without abortion as the backstop, the great left-wing trade (we give you sexual hedonism, we take everything else) falls apart. They know that only too well, which is why they will trade virtually anything and everything before giving up abortion. With abortion, they maintain control.
But I think leftism does reveal its grave weakness in that it cannot tolerate any competing or contradictory thought. So rather than argue the point on the merits (such as they are), they choose to shoot the messenger. That’s been a dominant characteristic of the revolution since it burst on the scene in 1789. Political opponents are not to be out-argued or even out-maneuvered, they are simply to be done away with.
But, remember, it’s we Catholics and other Christians who are the real extremists to worry about. Goebbels would be proud.
Walt must be spinning in his grave: Disney-ABC launches new program starring sicko Dan Savage March 31, 2015Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, Basics, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, paganism, persecution, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society.
Long long ago, way before any conversion I experienced, I used to occasionally read Dan Savage’s column in the local alternative weekly. Even though I was very much a libertine at that time, I was repulsed even then by much of what he wrote. I guess even worse were the scenarios his correspondents ostensibly presented (he wrote a “Dear Abby” for the profoundly sexually troubled, but I suspect many of the stories were invented by Savage himself), as he was beyond crude and depressingly sick even then. If anything, he has grown more deranged as the years have gone by. For twenty years he has made no bones of his hatred for all things good and pure. He hates religion, and especially Catholicism, with an intensity that is surely diabolical. He constantly attacks morals and decency as the affront they are to his own lifestyle, a lifestyle so beyond the pale of any standard of decent behavior it would likely have resulted in incarceration only a few short years ago.
But such is the environment in which we live, that the man who has said absolutely horrific things about all believing Christians and any politician he finds objectionable to his radical (even this word is far from sufficient) blend of perverse self-pleasing politics, is now going to be given a show on ABC, and to add insult to injury, the program is to be called “Family of the Year:”
Media Research Center (MRC) and Family Research Council (FRC) are launching a joint national campaign to educate the public about a Disney ABC sitcom pilot based on the life of bigoted activist Dan Savage. MRC and FRC contacted Ben Sherwood, president of Disney/ABC Television Group, more than two weeks ago urging him to put a stop to this atrocity but received no response. [Read the full letter]
A perusal of Dan Savage’s work reveals a career built on advocating violence — even murder — and spewing hatred against people of faith. Savage has spared no one with whom he disagrees from his vitriolic hate speech. Despite his extremism, vulgarity, and unabashed encouragement of dangerous sexual practices, Disney ABC is moving forward with this show, disgustingly titled “Family of the Year.”
The link goes on to list just a tiny sampling of Savage’s egregious statements against people he hates over the years, but I won’t include them on this blog. In fact, the statements chosen are some of his more innocuous, if that may be believed, but they really are. Savage tried for a long time to get like-minded folks to use the term “Santorum” to describe something so disgusting I can’t even describe it in general terms. And yet that disgusting product is the daily reality for all those who share Savage’s inclination, which tells us a very great deal about what kind of people we are dealing with. Sorry to be obtuse, I have to dance around this because it is so beyond the pale I can’t possibly even give any more hints than I have.
So, this is the cultural elites telling all Christians to go you know what themselves. We’ve had this growing for a while, and Disney, through ABC, has been in the vanguard of this kind of cultural persecution. This is about the 27th program (I made that up, but there have been many) from ABC that extols the perverse and degraded state of the “family” today and constantly bashes the faithful, non-perverse, undivorced, Christian family. We’ve had shows like “Modern Family” and “Desperate Hosewives” and “Good Christian B#$%^s” – all with input from the same nucleus of Christ-hating sodomites – that not only attack the traditional family, they are the prime vehicle of indoctrination in the new, anti-Christian cultural “standards,” such as they are. Look, Marshall Kirk wrote back in 1989 that sodomites, through their great influence in the media, would use that media to basically propagandize Americans, over the course of decades, into not just accepting, but lionizing sodomy and those who practice it. And so you have it.
Things have reached such a state of collapse that a bill in Indiana to defend religious rights from sodomite persecution is now the greatest controversy in the land, even though similar bills have been signed at the federal level and in a number of other states. But that was before the perverse agenda gained clear ascendancy last year. Now, all bets are off. What used to be perfectly acceptable and reasonable is the greatest affront to “freedom” (of the perverse) imaginable.
Christianity cannot stand side by side in a culture with this official approbation of acts and lifestyles diametrically opposed to the Faith. As one advances, the other must retreat. For the time being, we know which that will be.
Tradition-supporting Italian Bishop stripped of power? March 30, 2015Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Dallas Diocese, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Papa, persecution, pr stunts, sadness, scandals, secularism, Society, the return, the struggle for the Church.
Rorate has a post regarding Bishop Oliveri of Albenga-Imperia in Italy, a bishop known for his strong support for the Traditional Latin Mass and the traditional practice of the Faith. There have been some (relatively speaking) minor allegations regarding problems handling abuse and some other matters in the Diocese, so last year a coadjutor bishop was appointed. At the time, it was not clear what role the coadjutor would have. Rorate is reporting, based on recent revelations in the Italian press, that Bishop Oliveri will be replaced in all but name as the functional head of the Diocese, with Coadjutor Borghetti taking over all administrative and disciplinary functions:
What was predicted by Italian media in October last year, as reported by Rorate at the time, has taken place exactly as foretold: Msgr. Mario Oliveri, 71, the exceptionally Traditionalist-friendly Bishop of Albenga-Imperia, has been stripped of all powers and is now Ordinary of the diocese in name only.
The appointment of his Coadjutor Bishop, Guglielmo Borghetti, was announced on January 10, but the full extent of the powers given to him was not reported at that time. This has now been publicized thanks to a series of articles in the Italian media and blogosphere in the last few days. The full text of the bull appointing Msgr. Borghetti was read out to the Consultors of the Diocese on March 25, and published on the diocesan website (h/t Messa in Latino). The bull specifies that he is nominated Coadjutor Bishop “with special faculties” consisting of no less than the same jurisdiction that a diocesan bishop has according to Canon 381 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law.
The new Coadjutor Bishop himself confirmed to the Italian news agency ANSA that he now has full powers. ANSA also mentions that “the priests who attended his first celebration in the seminary have expressly said that for the Diocese of Albenga ‘begins a Copernican revolution.'”
It must be kept in mind that even when a Bishop receives a Coadjutor, the former does not necessarily lose his normal powers as ruling bishop until he steps down. The current situation in Albenga-Imperia is therefore exceptional, and can only be the result of the express will of Pope Francis.
As our readers will certainly realize, this humiliation of yet another Traditional-friendly Bishop stands in dramatic contrast to the Pope’s inaction over the crisis enveloping his scandalous appointment of Juan Barros as Bishop of Osorno in Chile, despite credible and multiple allegations linking him to the sexual abuse of minors.
All the supporting links are in Italian, so it is difficult to understand, specifically, how this assigning of roles to the coadjutor is more expansive and different qualitatively than such appointments normally are.
This matter may bring back unhappy memories for Dallas Catholics, who recall that in 2000, Joseph Galante was appointed Coadjutor Bishop of Dallas in the wake of Bishop Grahman’s disastrous handling of several priest boy-rape cases, especially that of Rudy Kos, which at the time resulted in a historic civil judgment against the Diocese. Scandalously, in spite of the fact that his credibility had been shattered, Bishop Grahman refused to step down and turn over significant areas of diocesan administration to Bishop Galante. There followed a very public row that divided the clergy and laity and led to Bishop Galante’s eventual stormy departure in 2003.
I am not certain if Bishop Galante was given similar “special faculties” to more or less forcibly take over administration of the Diocese of Dallas, as apparently this Bishop Borghetti has. Certainly, it was expected that Bishop Grahman would retire within 18 months of Galante’s appointment, something Bishop Grahman steadfastly refused to do (which brings up rather significant questions regarding obedience, since Pope Saint John Paul II had very clearly conveyed his express desire that Bishop Grahman retire early and give up the reins to Galante- apparently, arch-liberals like Grahman are allowed to obey if they want and disobey when they feel like it – pretty rich coming from a man who demanded absolute unquestioning obedience from all this priests). So could Oliveri “pull a Grahman” and simply refuse to leave, refuse to give up an administrative role, and work with those priests loyal to him to maintain a power base? Unlikely, as it seems only modernists/progressives are allowed to get away with such disobedience. Those friendly to to Tradition generally have qualms of conscience that would prevent them from acting in a way so contrary to the express will of the Sovereign Pontiff. But double standards in treatment can tend to erode that tendency towards obedience, a trend that could have unfortunate consequences for the future of the Church.
As a final footnote, after the ambitious Bishop Galante finally got his diocese (Camden, NJ), he turned out to be at least as dogmatically liberal as Grahman. His administration of the Diocese of Camden was filled with church closures and unhappy laity. Galante revealed himself to be very strongly on the side of the hermeneutic of rupture, you could say. He was no fan of Tradition, and sought to sack priests who were too tradition-friendly. There was also a financial scandal. At least one good local priest indicated “we dodged a bullet” in not getting Galante as our bishop.
So perhaps all’s well that end’s well. But not for Bishop Oliveri.
I agree with a commenter’s idea that on the specific matter of helping end division among faithful Catholics, coordination with like-minded individuals is one of the first steps to take. Consider it done.
But on the broader matter of opposing the ongoing decline in the culture, boycotting corporations and especially charities that support egregiously amoral activities like anything related to Planned Barrenhood, sodo-marriage, and the like, is another relatively easy step to take. No, you don’t have to send a letter, and you certainly don’t have to avoid every company and charity on the list (available here, from Life Decisions International), but you could choose to stop shopping at this place or that to make a statement. For instance, even though I find Home Depot generally has superior product selection, because of their ardent support for sodo-marriage, I no longer shop there, but at Lowe’s. The point is not to make your life a nightmare of narrow choices and constant moral conundrums, the point is to to what you can.
As a way of helping, find below some of the major corporations and charities that are tied to grave immorality. First, the corporations:
Bank of America
Johnson and Johnson
Levis (one of the worst. I used to love Levi jeans but won’t have anything to do with them anymore)
Nike (another bad one)
Polo Ralph Lauren
Southwest Airlines (gives lots to Komen and Planned Barrenhood)
American Automobile Association
American Association of University Women (particularly egregious)
American Cancer Society
Boys and Girls Clubs
Council of Churches
Glaucoma Research Foundation
Human Rights Watch
Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation
League of Women Voters
March of Dimes
Muscular Dystrophy Association
National Childhood Cancer Foundation
National Multiple Sclerosis Society
National Osteoporosis Foundation
National Parkinson’s Disease Foundation
Ronald McDonald House
Save the Children
Susan G. Komen
YWCA (neither are remotely Christian anymore)
More and more, as we also see in the Church, corporations and charities form a densely tangled web in which charities donate to each other, and corporations cross-pollinate their “charity” as well, and the whole thing becomes an impenetrable fog. It’s gotten to the point that the vast majority of charities wind up giving some money to Planned Barrenhood, either directly or through another agency like Komen. Other evil charities like the Human Rights Campaign similarly receive funds from a wide variety of other charities.
The above is not meant to beat you down. Take it for what you will. If it’s helpful to you, please, by all means, use the info above. There are many more less well known companies and charities also on the banned list at FightPlannedParenthood, but bear in mind, that’s only a partial list, because it only addresses those entities that fund PP. Others not on the list above fund many other evils (which is why I added Home Depot, they do not fund Planned Parenthood, directly, but they are big fans of sodomy, especially in San Fran and their Atlanta HQ). To me, it’s important to try to limit my business with the especially bad actors as much as possible, but I’m probably not going to change banks over the matter. But I won’t drink Starbucks, for about 200 reasons. As I said, whatever works best for you.
Hope the above helps!
So many people who come into the Church, or even those who have been raised in it but develop a particular fire of devotion, often feel that there is something missing. Something big, but undefinable. They often find that the Church whose beliefs they read about in a good catechism or that they see in old pictures is not the Church they experience on a daily basis. Something very significant has changed.
I think that sense of absence, of loss, is conveyed very well in a recent post at the Ignatius Press website, as relayed by Pertinacious Papist. It’s a lament for a Church that no longer seems to quite exist, and for a past, we are told over and over again, we can never return to. I found it quite moving. Perhaps you will, as well:
Eamon Duffy’s The Stripping of the Altars forced professional historians and casual readers alike to revise assessments of the Catholic religion in England in the years immediately preceding the Reformation:
If medieval religion was decadent, unpopular, or exhausted, the success of the Reformation hardly requires explanation. If, on the contrary, it was vigorous, adaptable, widely understood, and popular, then we have much yet to discover about the processes and the pace of reform.
In the almost six hundred pages following this observation, Duffy develops support for this thesis: that the Reformation in England was more of a revolution against a popular, widely-revered institution than an effort to reform something rife with problems and corruption. He can only build his case by reference to contemporary written accounts and a study of Church artistic works that somehow managed to survive state-sponsored efforts to obliterate the past. [And many of us feel that what happened in the mid-20th century was another revolution against the Church, from within]
The Tudor and Puritan road he guides his readers down is littered with burnt books, defaced statues, destroyed altar screens, and melted down church vessels. Destroy the artistic creations and traditions of an age, and when the last person who remembers it dies, a world dies also. This is where the road ends.
In our own time, those of us old enough to remember the Catholic Church as it was prior to Vatican II are also living with an obliterated past on a road marked ‘Dead End’. Inevitably, as the days move along, we are a vanishing breed on an all but forgotten journey. [Not forgotten. Some of us who were not even alive then are striving to remember and keep that Church alive]
These days much is made of the Catholicity of celebrated writers Chesterton, Tolkien, and Waugh. The latter two lived long enough to experience firsthand changes wrought by Vatican II, and both railed against them. (Details are at hand in the Ignatius Press edition of A Bitter Trial.) Tolkien and Waugh would never again feel at home in the Church. G. K.’s childhood memory of successful businessmen, bankers, and shop clerks falling to their knees as Cardinal Manning passed by along Kensington High Street seems to come from a world other than this one. G. K.’s old nemesis, George Bernard Shaw, might think the Church has become a bit more palatable, but what would G. K. himself think? Given his sense of humor, he might have somehow managed whereas Belloc—had he lived to see the day—would have blown a fuse.
Tolkien is said to have been dismayed by the exiling of Latin to what would become in our time a liturgical antique shop. Pope Francis the other day spoke approvingly of the vernacular replacing it. Pope Francis knows more languages than I do, but Tolkien, who understood Old English well enough to translate Beowulf, was irate. At times I myself am not even sure what to make of the English version, let alone the German or the Polish, which I do not grasp at all. From the current Psalm translations, O Lord, deliver us!
Complaints in this vein are now seen as coming from the make-believe world of annoying and tiresome fuddy-duddies. It has not taken long to obliterate a world where liturgical Latin could flourish. And there is no going back, except in memory. Eamon Duffy understands this. The last sentence of The Stripping of the Altars sounds a mournful note. [See my final comments below. I am not quite as hopeless as this, but I do fear the Church cannot go home again, and even a “restored” Faith of the future will be in many significant ways different from that of the past.]
I would argue that much the same was true of the farmer, the butcher, the baker, and the candlestick-maker of my time. You did not have to be a Jesuit to know what was going on in an age when—by the way—not everyone at Sunday Mass trooped forward to receive communion. (Barely a majority did.) Share that fact with someone today, and mention fasting from midnight; the smell of tuna fish sandwiches for breakfast in your classroom after ‘First Friday’ Masses, etc.
With respect to the past, we are all ‘cafeteria Catholics’. [Interesting, and disturbing point. I fear he is right. Even as Catholics striving to be faithful, it is very difficult to reformulate the Catholic existence of the past into our own lives in this present time, so cut off, even if only by 50 years!, from a Church that no longer exists]]
Tell someone you fondly remember Pope Pius XII from an age when pontiffs were not expected to smile like beauty queens. Attempt to explain why he is your favorite pope. Mention the Marian Year while you are at it. Describe his serious, ascetic demeanor. As likely as not, your listener will bring up the Nazis.
To adapt a line from the novelist L. P. Hartley, “The past is a foreign country: they do things differently there.”
The one thing I will add, the one bit of disagreement I have with the notion of irreparable loss, is the fact that that past is still available in little pockets, here and there. I feel the author must not have access to the TLM, or even more, a traditional community. But I do recognize that even these pockets are unable to recreate in full that glorious past. People try, we hopefully all try, but we have to recognize that we are isolated geographically, historically, and culturally from the full vibrancy of the Church that was. Experiences vary from location to location and community to community, but being as isolated as we are, there are surely gaps. For one thing, we are at best islands in a hostile culture and, even more, a frequently hostile Church. We no longer have the whole Catholic culture surrounding us, as it used to be, though never very fully in this country. Unable to draw on past experience, what we are able to create is necessarily limited, though I pray not stunted and deformed. That is the greatest tragedy of the collapse of Christendom and the Church’s voluntary retreat from her historic role……something that was centuries in the making can be lost literally overnight, and it will take literally centuries to build it back up again……..if it can be. I fear you cannot go home again, and even if the Church does regain some semblance of her historic and God-given role, it will be necessarily be quite different from the Church that was. That may not necessarily be a bad thing, but, then again, it could. It all depends on who ultimately wins the struggle for the Church, and how complete their victory is.
Pope Francis named Juan Barros as Bishop of the Diocese of Osorno in Chile earlier this year. Just this past weekend was the consecration Mass. There has been scandal attached to this man for years, with repeated and well-documented claims he covered up years of sexual abuse of three men, one of whom currently resides in the United States. At the consecration Mass, it is reported that hundreds of protesters disrupted the proceedings:
Despite protests that ended with three people arrested, as well as a campaign asking the Vatican to revisit the decision, a Chilean bishop mentored by the country’s most notorious sex abuser priest took possession of his new diocese on Saturday.
The appointment by Pope Francis has led many observers to question the pontiff’s commitment to tackling the scandals of clerical sex abuse and hold those who stood by accountable for their inaction.
An estimated 4,000 people dressed in black as a sign of mourning gathered in front of the cathedral of the diocese of Osorno, Chile, to demand that Bishop Juan Barros Madrid, former military chaplain, not take possession.
A video of the event posted online shows the crowd throwing objects at the prelate, pushing him, and trying to stop him from entering St. Mathew’s Cathedral, despite strong security measures……
…….Requesting to remain unnamed because he has ties with the diocese, the person said that while Barros was celebrating the Mass, many kept screaming “Pedophile!” and “Get out!” The situation escalated to the point that the celebration had to be cut short, skipping the homily, Communion, and other parts of the liturgy.[Wow. So was it valid? That’s so totally unfortunate]
[The root of the protests]……Since Barros’s appointment was announced last January, it has been criticized by elements of the local community because of ties Barros had with the Rev. Fernando Karadima, a priest the Vatican condemned in 2011 to a life of “solitude and prayer” after being found guilty of sexually abusing several devoted followers during the 1980s and the 1990s.
Three of Karadima’s victims, Juan Carlos Cruz, James Hamilton, and José Andrés Murillo, have accused four Chilean prelates, including Barros, of covering up for Karadima and of being present while he abused them.
I am far from clear that the protesters are necessarily faithful Catholics. They may be, in part, but they may also be secular opponents of the Church seeking to stir up mess.
Having said that, Vox Cantoris has followed the reports more than I have and he is clear that this episcopal appointment is disgraceful, and quite contrary to the rhetoric we hear about being close to the sheep and all that:
Only days after stripping the disgraced pervert Cardinal, Keith O’Brien of his title and power and sending him to retire quietly in a £200,000 cottage, Pope Francis; amidst the outrage of the people of the Diocese of Osorno in Chile has permitted another bishop to take his Cathedra – a man implicated in the scandal of sodomy and perversion and the abuse of three men from the time they were boys. Is this to be considered another “who am I to judge” episode as with Msgr. Ricca appointed to a high position within the Vatican Bank? If so, then the definition of scandal has been forgotten along with a real understanding of mercy for those victimized by the evil and perverted pederasts who performed abominable acts upon young boys of teenaged years…….
…….Since this appointment was announced in January, Chileans have been outraged. Crux further reports that “The Archbishop of Concepción, Fernando Chomalí, met with the Pope a few weeks ago and warned him that the Barros appointment was causing consternation in Chile, not only in the community of Osorno, but throughout the country. Pope Francis admitted to knowing the suffering of the victims of Karadima and the damage to the Chilean church. However — despite everything — the Pope, through the Nuncio in Chile, Ivo Scapolo, reconfirmed Barros without considering the facts and warnings of so many people, including priests and bishops. With pain we see that the faithful will have to accept and deal with Pope Francis’ decision. A pain and fear we know too well.”
Yet, Pope Francis still proceeded in spite of the warning. This is a scandal to the people of Osorno; it is a scandal and an insult to the three victims assaulted by a homosexual pederast priest whilst the then Fr. Juan Barros, watched. [And, it is claimed, did nothing to stop it]
……The Pope must be accountable for this; not just to Almighty God, but to the smelly sheep in the periphery.
As I stated in an interview with “From Rome” – Let us not, as Catholics, give an exaggerated status to any pope along the lines of what our protestant friends think – an infallibility without respect for the Gospel, which he does not possess. The First Vatican Council defined it very clearly.
All the talk of mercy, thumbs up photographs and the washing of feet and the daily media spin from the manipulators in the Vatican Press Office won’t fix this. The Pope himself is responsible for this and there is no spinning out of it.
It is a disgrace to Our Lord Jesus Christ and His Church.
In their dictatorship of mercy and condemnation of the Law and those who try to live by it some appear to have forgotten who is in charge.
Sheesh, truly a mess. At the very least, the pronouncement sounds quite tone deaf. Surely there were other candidates for the position? Reading between the lines a bit, it seems the papal nuncio to Chile made this a hill he was willing to die on. He really insisted upon this appointment. I really have no idea why.
This Diocese, by the way, is tiny. It has 35 priests! Shoot, Clear Creek may have that many in a few years. I have seen some contradictory reports that the bishop was either opposed by over half the priests in the Diocese, or supported by them, but it seems clear there is division among the priests there, too.
I guess the broader question is……given the scandals that have so afflicted the Church with regard to perverse, abusive priests, and given that we know there are still many of these priests (perverse, possibly not abusers of children) in circulation……..should not the Vatican err decisively on the side of caution and insure that no priest with even a hint of this kind of scandal is ever promoted to the episcopate?
Do you think this appointment represents a backing away from Pope Benedict’s very strong, unyielding stand against priest sex abusers? It’s hard for me to discern at this point, it could be a one off anomaly, or I suppose this Barros could be innocent, but is not discretion the better part of valor? Was this really a necessary appointment to make, given the wound and scandal it is causing? Should we see more mass action of this kind by faithful Catholics to scandal in the Church?
I pray this is not a return to the really bad old days of episcopal appointments.
Michael Voris reacts to Cardinal Dolan parade imbroglio March 20, 2015Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, SOD, the struggle for the Church, Voris.
I like the little bit at the beginning of the video. Voris reacts to his manhandling at the New York St. Patrick’s Day parade below:
Hmmm……pretty convincing that Cardinal Dolan probably directed his handlers to toss Voris? I’d say.
Of course, the great scandal regarding the parade is that, while Cardinal O’Connor made clear he would never give any public support to a parade that included any anti-Church elements, from abortionists to sodomites, Cardinal Dolan quite happily agreed to be “grand marshal” of the first St. Patrick’s Day parade that featured a formal pro-sodomite group in attendance. He even said it was great and swell that they were in the parade he was leading.
As for the continuing matter of whether it is right and proper to lambaste prelates, while maintaining that the Pope is sacrosanct from such criticism…..discuss. I am too late to do that matter any justice today.
Irving City Council supports anti-Sharia law March 20, 2015Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, Dallas Diocese, disaster, Ecumenism, error, foolishness, General Catholic, persecution, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society.
Thanks to MFG for the link.
An atrocious Dallas Morning News article below (but that’s no surprise) reports on a recent Irving City Council decision to back a proposed state law to never allow decisions from “foreign” or sharia law courts to influence or form any basis in jurisprudence in the State of Texas. This occurred as a result of the standing up of the first “optional” (until it’s not) sharia court in Irving recently. Irving, reportedly, is nearly 1/5 muslim (though, not where I live – it’s more like 70% Hispanic where I live). I add many comments below, and will try to address MFG’s question as to whether this kind of law could have any effect on canon law courts (the short answer is……unlikely for a very long time):
The intense national spotlight on Islam has shifted to Irving, where Mayor Beth Van Duyne has accused mosque leaders of creating separate laws for Muslims and the City Council voted Thursday to endorse a state bill that Muslims say targets their faith. [Are canon law courts similar to sharia, and thus under similar “threat?” I would say, no. While the culture is becoming increasingly anti-Christian and there will be many forms of persecution, canon law is very different from sharia. Sharia is a holistic system of legalisms that apply from the islamic state down to the individual, insisting that ALL law be dictated by its statutes. Church canon law is very different and never really competed with the secular state in its proper sphere. That is not the case with sharia, the goal in sharia always and everywhere is to become the SOLE means of jurisprudence in all spheres. In the islamic world, there is no distinction between the secular and the religious. Everything is subsumed into islam and sharia. That is how most radical muslim states operate today. And the danger is that certain courts in Canada and even a few in the US have started to incorporate legal findings from sharia courts into secular court decisions. That is what the state law here in Texas, in Oklahoma, and other localities seeks to block, that islamic influence on American courts. So, sharia is really a very different entity that Church canon law courts, it is a different system, it has different aims, and I think, even today, even given the rising persecution, that is still generally quite understood. Plus, Catholics don’t often kill others to advance their religion, or use babies to slaughter Jews, or whatever. But……should the persecution continue to advance, it is not impossible that even Church canon law courts could come under fire, but that is probably some distance in the future (if ever), and this law won’t have any immediate or even medium term effect on the Church.]
The dispute has made Van Duyne a hero among a fringe movement that believes Muslims — a tiny fraction of the U.S. population — are plotting to take over American culture and courts. [All we must do is look to France, the Netherlands, the UK, and many other European countries to see what happens when muslims dominate a given area. Sharia is imposed, secular authority breaks down, whole regions become effective “no-go zones” for the state authority, and you have little sharia-muslim enclaves within western nations, where outsiders are ruthlessly attacked if they do not conform to sharia, especially women. So give me a break that this is only the concern of a “fringe movement,” Dallas Morning News, and thank you for reminding me why I ended my subscription years ago]
“It fuels anti-Islamic hysteria,” said Zia Sheikh, imam at the Islamic Center of Irving. “Her whole point was to rile up her supporters. … The problem is we become the whipping boys.” [In which Western countries is public flogging still practiced? In how many islamic countries is it currently practiced? Why, Riyadh has an infamous public square where such floggings occur. Tickets are sold! So maybe not the best metaphor. Or maybe a Freudian slip.]
The mayor stands by her statements, including an interview with former Fox News host Glenn Beck last month, when she said Sheikh and other imams were “bypassing American courts” by offering to mediate disputes among their worshippers according to an Islamic code called Shariah.
The mediation is advertised as voluntary, nonbinding and in harmony with the law. [Until such a time as a given area’s muslims become numerous enough, and radical enough, to insist on sharia being applied as the dominant form of government. Sharia is not just about adjudicating failed muslim marriages, it is, as I said, the legal system of the muslim ummah, which dominates and informs everything from civil codes to criminal law. Which gets us back to the public floggings and stonings, all called for by sharia.]
But it has led Van Duyne to back a bill by state Rep. Jeff Leach, R-Plano, that would forbid judges from using foreign law in their rulings……
…….Muslims in hijabs, burqas and business suits packed City Hall on Thursday, voicing protests before the council endorsed the bill in a 5-4 vote……. [probably not the best display to reassure concerned citizens. Now, I have no problem with modest dress, of course, but the fact of the matter is, there are whole swaths of Europe, Canada, and even these United States today where women – whether muslim or not – have to wear at least the hijab if not the burqa if they are not to be assaulted or even attacked. And that is how it starts! Not how it finishes.]
……“You will find there is starting to be an encroachment and a movement to chip away at the ability of judges to say no to certain foreign laws.”…… [As I said, aspects of sharia have already been incorporated into legal decisions in Western countries, especially in Canada and the UK, where adherence to sharia has been used as a mitigating factor to let perpetrators of heinous crimes (spousal abuse, child rape, etc) off the hook because such was viewed as acceptable under sharia]
…..“Shariah law … it’s the whole way of life to a certain religion,” Berman warned a House committee as he pitched his bill that year. “It’s starting in Europe because of a large population of Middle Easterners … and it could spread through the United States.” [It already has. Sections of Detroit]
I’m out of time, but never forget the muslim practice of taqqiyah, or “holy lying,” which is deliberate falsehoods made “moral” if they are made to fool the infidel and serve to advance islam. The koran or haddith, I don’t remember, also guides muslims to use every means possible to advance islam, to gain every right possible while a minority, to gradually chip away, until they gain an ascendancy in a given area and then they are commanded to impose sharia, which they almost invariably do.
So this is not the fevered imaginations of some anti-muslim bigots, this is how islam operates and has operated for 1400 years.
Adult pre-school – the 5th horse of the Apocalypse March 20, 2015Posted by Tantumblogo in General Catholic, Society, scandals, foolishness, asshatery, silliness, sadness, error, secularism, abdication of duty, disconcerting, huh?.
Remember when growing up and being a responsible, self-reliant individual was the general cultural ambition?
Not so much anymore, I guess. We know already about the omnipresent cult of youth in our culture, the “60 is the new 30″ crowd, and the general immaturity in the refusal of parenthood, but I think the cultural desire never to grow up and be a responsible individual has reached a new low.
In Brooklyn, an “adult preschool” has opened, charging many hundreds of dollars, to give full-grown adults the ability to behave like 4 year olds again:
The Brooklyn-based Preschool Mastermind, as it’s called, is a preschool-type experience for adults. No, really. And according to its founder, there’s show-and-tell, arts-and-crafts such as finger paint, games (think musical chairs) and even naps.
“I realized all the implications of what we learn in preschool,” said founder Michelle Joni, who said she went to school for childhood education and always wanted to be a preschool teacher. “People come here and get in touch with their inner child. It’s magical.”
The class runs through March and meets weekly. Joni was getting ready for tonight’s class when we spoke. She facilitates the class with two assistants. There are six students in the class, each hoping to get something different out of the experience…….
…..Adult preschool — not unlike New York City’s preschool’s for children, doesn’t come cheap. Payment for the class is on a sliding scale ranging from $333 to $999. Joni said that “preschool is all about choice. I want them [the students] to feel good about the choice they’re making.”
The pictures are worth more than the text:
If you look through the photos, you realize the “pre-school” is about 15 x 15 room. The photos show everyone jammed together because there is literally no room. As for the individuals who plunk down hundreds of dollars to relive their childhood…….you know, I’m beginning to think maybe New York is not a healthy place to live!
What was it Chesterton said about people who reject God – it’s not that they don’t believe in anything, it’s that they’ll believe everything? Yeah, that seems to have more than a slight role to play here.
I guess some might say “oh, it’s just fun, what’s the harm?” And I would say, strictly speaking, as an isolated event, this is probably fairly harmless, aside from the obvious bad taste of the uber-hipsters on display. But as part of a much broader trend towards rejection of adult responsibility and roles, the delaying of being “grown-up” until later and later in life, and the constant glorification of youth (the impact of which is to make things like this much more attractive), it contributes to something increasingly noxious and corrosive.
I guess I’m odd, but I like being all grown up. I like being a man. Responsibility can be heavy at times, but it comes with the territory and is God’s will for me. I don’t seek to escape from who and what I am, I try to excel in it. I certainly have no desire to be 18 again, and for goodness’ sake definitely not 4!, even for a few hours. If anything, I wouldn’t mind if I had a little more of that kind of gravitas and self-possession a man in his 40s should project. I certainly don’t want to chase the latest trends and be a hipster dufus.
Cardinal Kasper “explains” Pope Francis March 19, 2015Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, disconcerting, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, paganism, Papa, sadness, scandals, secularism, SOD, the struggle for the Church.
Uff da. I worked nearly an hour on this post and WordPress ate it totally and completely. So here is a feeble reconstruction of the glorious original.
Obviously, Cardinal Kasper is not some disinterested party. He has many reasons to portray Pope Francis in a light favorable to himself. But, at the same time, it is hard not to the descriptions below pretty compelling. Just because he’s a modernist doesn’t mean he’s wrong in everything he does.
Walter Kasper, “How Pope Francis Sees the Church” (Commonweal, March 13, 2015).
Either way, it’s interesting: Kasper does state, however, that the Pope’s “pastoral” style is more than “good-natured folksiness” or “cheap populism.” Behind it stands an “entire theology,” he says. It’s deliberate.
What are its elements? The Church, as the people of God, “transcends every institutional expression.” It is rooted in God’s mercy. It eschews every form of clericalism (“Laypeople are … the vast majority of the people of God”). It recognizes the indispensable contribution of women. It recognizes the importance of young people and recognizes their difficulties. It puts a premium on the sensus fidei. It seeks “a magisterium that listens.” In terms of the Sacraments, the Church is viewed as “a merciful mother with an open heart for all,” seeking to reconcile those in irregular relationships. It regards as wrong an attitude that stays fixated on “hot potatoes.” It seeks to grow, not by proselytism but by attracting. “God is a God of the journey …” It wants to “touch Christ … in the poor.” Its “paradigm shift” takes as its model the Good Samaritan. The “guiding star of evangelization and of this kind of pastoral care is Mary, Jesus mother — and our mother.” It’s magna carta is Evangelii gaudium, in which Pope Francis writes:
… I would like to remind you that “pastoral care” is nothing other than the exercise of the church’s motherhood. She gives birth, breastfeeds, lets grow, corrects, nourishes, leads by the hand…. There is need therefore for a church that is capable of rediscovering the womb of mercy. Without mercy it is scarcely possible today to penetrate into a world of the “injured,” who need understanding, forgiveness, and love.
I would argue that the Church has been more clericalist, of a most brutal kind, over the past 2 years, than it was prior. Certainly, the Franciscans of the Immaculate and a good number of bishops have experienced a certain form of clericalism. And we have seen high Church prelates of a progressive bent basically tell the laity to shut up and take what’s good for them.
Nevertheless, in Pope Francis’ defense, Kasper is such a thoroughgoing modernist he is likely to interpret any behavior he views favorably in that light. So almost anything Pope Francis does, Kasper will try to spin as serving his purpose.
But once again, the shoe seems to fit more often than not, above.
My biggest problem is with the whole feminized vision for the Church presented above. Many orthodox Catholic commentators have noted that the Church, perhaps biased towards the masculine for most of her history, has swerved suddenly and decisively towards the feminine in the past several decades. Michael Voris and others have identified in that phenomenon a major reason for the collapse in so many Church statistics – since men are turned off by the feminized Church, and since children almost invariably follow the father’s religious example rather than the mother’s, the Church has seen an unprecedented exodus in the past 50 years.
I would also say the little quote above about a heavily feminized Church explains the whole ethos presented. The feminine involves many virtues and many vices. The feminine seeks compromise and inclusion, and dislikes division and clarity. The feminine wants everyone to feel welcome and comfortable, and fears excluding anyone. That is all quite well illustrated above, with a Church that “attracts” instead of propagandizing, a Church that doesn’t keep anyone out with some hard, unbending rules. Mothers give unconditional acceptance and a heavy dose of mercy, whereas fathers tend to be the disciplinarians and the maintainers of standards. I note in passing that Pope Francis, like so many current day priests, speaks often of his mother, rarely of his father.
In many respects, a heavily feminized Church oriented towards the Blessed Mother would be a beautiful, attractive thing. Some souls might well be drawn to such a merciful, non-judging Church (but I think many more would fall away). But such an unremittingly merciful Church, centered, at least rhetorically, on the Blessed Mother, could be a great thing, except for one uncomfortable fact: we are judged by God the Father, the stern Judge of Sacred Scripture, and not the always merciful Blessed Mother.
Which brings up another point – more and more I see universal salvation as being THE error at the root of all modernist/leftist/progressive Katholycs. Understanding universal salvation suddenly makes things like Communion for adulterers or the whole indifferent ecumenical movement make sense. If All Dogs Go To Heaven anyway, what does it matter? We should just let anyone come and enjoy Christ now as a prelude to their automatic assumption into Heaven at death (except for those mean ‘ol nasty trads and conservatives – they can rot in hell forever). It also puts the “proselytism is solemn nonsense” into quite a clear context, don’t you think?”
So……will the sole universal women’s religious order of the futurechurch be the Most Merciful Mothers of Universal Salvation?