Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, General Catholic, Holy suffering, martyrdom, paganism, persecution, priests, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, Virtue.
This is a very good response to yesterday’s query: is it a sin for a Catholic baker to make a cake for a sodo-marriage, or for one involving already married Catholics (with no annulment)? The answer below is along the lines Noah proposed, dealing with formal and material cooperation with sin. This is one very good priest’s opinion. I am not saying it is the final answer, but I tend to agree with everything he says (I add emphasis and comments):
There is formal and material co-operation in another person’s sinful act. Formal co-operation is always sinful, and this occurs when A helps B in an external sinful act and A intends the sinfulness of it. In the case of the Catholic baker or florist, it is safe to assume there is no formal co-operation. [Catholic……..as opposed to katholyc. In the latter case, the assumption may not be entirely safe]
Material co-operation occurs when A helps B to accomplish an external act by an act that is not sinful, and without approving of what B does. Perhaps some might argue that the baker/florist is not helping the sodomites to sin (i.e. engage in a fake wedding), but I would not accept such an argument. Material co-operation in the sin of another is in general sinful. Material co-operation can be immediate or mediate and the mediate can be proximate or remote. In this case, I think it’s true that the material co-operation of the baker/florist is the “least possible,” i.e. mediate and remote. It is certainly possible that mediate and remote material co-operation not be sinful, but I find no way to make such an argument in the particular case we are addressing. Why?
(1) For material co-operation in the sin of another to not be sinful, there must be sufficient cause for permitting the sin of another. Unless the baker/florist is starving and has to make a sale in order to live, one cannot even begin to put forth an argument that there is sufficient cause for permitting such a grave sin, i.e. desecration of marriage and public acceptance of sodomy. I will admit, however, the matter can get quite complex, because what if the baker/florist loses his job or gets a hefty government fine if he refuses to service the marriage desecration? Is this sufficient cause?
(2) The most serious reason for the sinfulness of material co-operation in this particular case is that the sinful act (the fake wedding) is causing great harm to the Church and society (not to mention scandal), and is about the gravest possible offense against God Himself! In this particular case of a “gay wedding,” the stakes are so high (for example, desecration of marriage, public approval of sins against nature and sins that cry to heaven for vengeance, the total corruption of public morality), that in my priestly opinion, there is no possible “sufficient cause” to justify any form of co-operation, even if one were to lose one’s life for not co-operating. [This is the crux of the argument, and what caused me to feel that cooperation would be sinful. The priest expresses the argument much more accurately and formally, but basically he’s saying what I was saying: in the present context, this matter is so heated, and cooperation in the sin, even against one’s will, is so loaded with meaning, as to be cooperating in an act that has import enormously larger than just providing a cake, or some flowers, or whatever. And that is why a few souls have chosen to suffer enormously rather than cooperate in the act, even if most of those so “outed” for doing so have not been Catholic, but evangelicals. Another commentary on the state of the Church today, is it not?]
One final point: I think we need to beware of isolating this question from the larger context. Yes, if the baker/florist is being threatened with prison if he/she does not perform the service, this does affect his/her personal culpability regarding his/her material co-operation, but what are we doing as Catholics on a daily and constant basis to oppose and fight against the subversion of society, i.e. the diabolic corruption of a society to the point where said society now penalizes bakers and florists who refuse to service sins that cry to heaven for vengeance? If we Catholics are not “hitting it hard” on a daily and constant basis to fight against the diabolical “gay agenda,” how sinful is our dereliction of duty?
Dang right. I agree totally with that. Maybe we should be praying outside “gay” bars, rather than outside strip clubs. But that’s for a later day. If there is cause for concern over a violent reaction outside a strip club, it must be orders of magnitude higher for praying outside places occupied by the perverse. We’re just not there yet. Maybe eventually……
Thanks very much to Father for providing this opinion. It is both edifying and clarifying. Know that this is one priest who has suffered greatly for his strong stand for the Doctrine of the Faith and opposition to to sins that are, as he so aptly says, totally corrupting the morals of our society. May God have mercy on him and all of us in this time of darkness and evil run amok.
Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, paganism, persecution, pr stunts, rank stupidity, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society.
The 6 years of the Obama administration, so far, have seen the most disastrous undermining of morale through misuse of the military as a test tube for every radical sexular pagan social experiment possible. Fine officers and senior NCOs are cashiered for falling afoul some social justice warrior in uniform who makes a complaint, typically completely unsubstantiated and often singularly vicious in motive. But no matter, the career officer who falls into the sights of such a creature is doomed from the start.
But that’s only a small part of the ongoing emasculation of the military. PC and radical left-wing shibboleths are being imposed on service members in a propaganda campaign of Stalinist proportions. This campaign includes attacking the very documents these servicemembers are sworn to protect, including the Constitution.
According to a Defense Department-approved “sexism course,” the Bible, the U.S. Constitution and the Declaration of Independence all contribute to modern sexism.
Those three cherished texts all count as “historical influences that allow sexism to continue,” according to a presentation prepared by the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute, whose mission is
to give a ”world-class human relations education.”
According to the course, the Bible has “quotes” which can be interpreted as sexist by readers.
The Declaration of Independence is also an historical cause of sexism, as the document refers only to ”all men” — not “men and women.”
And the Constitution, the Pentagon argues, is an historical source of sexism because “slaves and women were not included until later in history.”
Of course, members of the Armed Forces take an oath to defend the Constitution — which is, according to the DEOMI course, an “historical influence that allows sexism to continue.”…….
……But following TheDC’s request for comment, the sexism course — as well as two other courses listed on DEOMI’s website, entitled “Prejudice & Discrimination” and “Racism” — were taken offline. [Of course they were]
It’s a sexular pagan free-for-all, with leftist consultants getting rich off of destroying the military. Which, maybe with the government and people of the US revealing themselves to be so perverse (50.1%, or more), the military should be broken, so it won’t be used for immoral purposes as I’m sure some would argue it has in the past.
What I take away from all this is just the immense loathing these people have for the Bible……and those who believe it contains the Divine Revelation. We’re just inbred cracker hicks to be stamped out if we won’t get with the times. A friend and reader at lunch today said we need a law to give faithful Christians at least some rights back from the advancing sexular pagan agenda, but I countered that that was exactly what the Indiana RFRA was about, and that got crushed. There won’t be any laws favoring Christians and our rights outside a few conservative states for a looong time, I’m afraid, and those will likely be struck down by federal court decisions.
So we better keep our powder dry and get prayed up.
Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, paganism, persecution, pr stunts, scandals, secularism, sexual depravity, sickness, Society.
Commenters have asked an interesting question that I haven’t seen discussed elsewhere, but which could become an increasingly common moral conundrum for Catholics to deal with in the near future. The question is this: if a Catholic baker is asked by a sodo-couple to bake a cake for their pretend-wedding, is it a sin if he decides to do so? As a corollary equally valid, what if it is a M-F couple he knows to be divorced and without annulment from their previous marriage(s)? Does anyone know if there has been any official guidance from a reliable Catholic source on these matters?
I think I can answer a little bit. First, I think it would be a sin if the baker makes the cake (or the florist the flowers, or the caterer the meal) because that baker/whoever thinks sodo-marriage is fine and is happy to participate. Second, even if the baker is opposed to either of these assaults on the sanctity of marriage, and really doesn’t want to participate, but does, there is great risk of scandal in that other Catholics would see what they believed to be a fine, upstanding Catholic participating in this action that, publicly, implies support for this evil. I think the case involving fake sodo-marriage is worse, because it has become so politicized merely baking a cake now becomes, in the eyes of the radical lobby and many others, a tacit admission of support for their entire agenda. Which is why they are coming down so hard on those who refuse, because if people are allowed to abstain from participation in this evil, it will form a basis to undermine their entire agenda.
I am no moral theologian, but my surmise is that baking the cake (or whatever) would be disordered at best, and likely sinful. Certainly sinful if the cake is baked out of support. But what if one only does so because you know for a fact you will be persecuted and possibly lose your business and have your family threatened as a result? I think then it would be incumbent to somehow let people know you are doing so under duress, maybe by really botching the job or something. Even saying “I am doing this against my will” would probably bring about a hardcore persecution. But if we all give in under threat of persecution, haven’t we surrendered?
Let me know what you think. This is a pretty interesting point for discussion. I am no moral theologian, my opinion has no weight. Personally, under the present context, I would not give in under any circumstances. Others may arrive at a different conclusion.
Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Dallas Diocese, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, Immigration, scandals, secularism, Society.
So what happens if some hideous terrorist attack occurs that can be confirmed to originate in Mexico? What will that do to the immigration bandwagon (if, that is, the truth of the matter were allowed to come out)? What if it involved a WMD? How would the US bishops look if an attack based out of Mexico killed 50,000 Americans?
That’s been one of my prime concerns with an essentially undefended southern border for years. The likelihood that a serious attack originating in Mexico only grows as the years pass by and the situation on the border deteriorates. I don’t think it’s a question of if, but when, such an attack or a whole series of them occur:
ISIS is operating a camp just a few miles from El Paso, Texas, according to Judicial Watch sources that include a Mexican Army field grade officer and a Mexican Federal Police Inspector.
The exact location where the terrorist group has established its base is around eight miles from the U.S. border in an area known as “Anapra” situated just west of Ciudad Juárez in the Mexican state of Chihuahua. Another ISIS cell to the west of Ciudad Juárez, in Puerto Palomas, targets the New Mexico towns of Columbus and Deming for easy access to the United States, the same knowledgeable sources confirm……// //
…….According to these same sources, “coyotes” engaged in human smuggling – and working for Juárez Cartel – help move ISIS terrorists through the desert and across the border between Santa Teresa and Sunland Park, New Mexico. To the east of El Paso and Ciudad Juárez, cartel-backed “coyotes” are also smuggling ISIS terrorists through the porous border between Acala and Fort Hancock, Texas. These specific areas were targeted for exploitation by ISIS because of their understaffed municipal and county police forces, and the relative safe-havens the areas provide for the unchecked large-scale drug smuggling that was already ongoing.
Mexican intelligence sources report that ISIS intends to exploit the railways and airport facilities in the vicinity of Santa Teresa, NM (a US port-of-entry). The sources also say that ISIS has “spotters” located in the East Potrillo Mountains of New Mexico (largely managed by the Bureau of Land Management) to assist with terrorist border crossing operations. ISIS is conducting reconnaissance of regional universities; the White Sands Missile Range; government facilities in Alamogordo, NM; Ft. Bliss; and the electrical power facilities near Anapra and Chaparral, NM.
Disconcerting. This is an unusually detailed report, but I would not say it is confirmed. There could be many motivations for exaggerating ISIS’ presence near the US-Mexico border, including increased funding, mistaken interpretation of intelligence data, desire to make a big “scoop” and impress superiors……you could likely think of more. So while I wouldn’t lose sleep over this particular report, the broader situation along the absolutely porous US-Mexico border remains a huge scandal and an equally huge security threat. I would hazard it’s a virtual certitude that islamic terrorists have already entered this country through the southern border.
Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, Bible, catachesis, General Catholic, Grace, paganism, persecution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, Society, Spiritual Warfare, the struggle for the Church.
The progressive enemies of the Church tipped their hand a bit last week when a writer in the NYT informed observant Christians they must be converted to the new sexular pagan orthodoxy or face dire consequences. The progressives probably feel so confident at this point they can just broadcast plans that would have been shocking and elicited a vigorous response 20 years ago without fear of much response. And that indeed seems to have been the case.
So, it’s going to get much rougher. I don’t think I even need to elaborate on how the culture will increasingly pressure faithful Catholics to reject Church Doctrine and accept the prevailing sexular heresies. But we will also – and this is as certain as the need for oxygen – have large numbers of Catholics, including many in leadership positions, who will encourage accommodation with the culture on various matters, especially the new shibboleths surrounding sodomy. That’s the popular sin, now. But also on marriage, divorce, receipt of Communion…….it will be a full-court press. And there will be many Charles Currans and Hans Kungs and Karl Rahners and Walter Kaspers in the Church to tell us how wrong, how uncharitable, how unmerciful we are to continue to cling to the Truth the Church has always believed.
Fortunately, as in all things, Our Blessed Lord knew this would happen. He knew there would be many times in the life of His Church when there would be enormous temptation to abjure sacred revealed Truth and embrace the lies and false dogmas of the world and its master. And so, Our Lord, through the Third Person of the Blessed Trinity, showed us how to respond and stand fast in the Truth we have received even in the face of enormous pressure coming from within the Church to reject that truth. This revelation has come both in the form of Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.
The Epistle from last Sunday, Low Sunday and the Octave Day of Easter, from I John, seemed particularly suited to our times. In light of the progressive program to try to force the Church and faithful Catholics to abjure the Truth of Jesus Christ, this seemed particularly apropos:
Dearly beloved, whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory, which overcometh the world, our faith. Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God? This is He that came by water and blood, Jesus Christ: not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit which testifieth that Christ is the truth.
And there are three who give testimony in Heaven: the Father, the Word and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that give testimony on earth: the Spirit and the water and the blood; and these three are one. If we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater: for this is the testimony of God, which is greater, because He hath testified of His Son. He that believeth in the Son of God hath testimony of God in himself.
Which argument above absolutely obliterates the self-serving claims of the NYT columnist who advanced, completely from a materialist, will to power perspective, that because belief in the evil of sodomy or the indissolubility of marriage are unpopular today, they not only can, but must be disregarded. He tried to dismiss the truth revealed by Scripture as just the ramblings of some “ancient text,” ignoring the fact that the veracity of that Scripture and its wholesomeness in the lives of men has been attested to and verified by thousands of years of Tradition and experience. What was proposed in the Times was simply the old temptation of satan, “I will give you all these kingdoms if you will but fall down and worship me.”
This is the key point in the above: all Frank Bruni at the Times and other leftists can point to in support of their cherished sexular pagan shibboleths is the testimony of men. Catholics can point to an infinitely higher testimony, that of God, and not just one Person of God, but the Three Persons of the Blessed Trinity. The triune nature of God is critical, because Scripture further reveals that upon the testimony of three men the truth of a matter shall be established. In Sacred Scripture, then, we have such a verifiable, irrefutable source of Truth. Even more, we have the immovable testimony of Tradition, which in some respects is even greater than that of Scripture, as the Tradition predated it.
Not that I expect souls lost in sexular pagan apostasy to recognize any of the above. They are lost and possessed of a reprobate sense. Reaching any of them, let alone converting them, would require a moral miracle. But for the faithful, I pray the above is useful and consoling. I certainly found it to be just that.
Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Papa, persecution, scandals, secularism, Society, SOD, the struggle for the Church.
To borrow a phrase from our leftist friends, to be a Pharisee, one must have both an unyielding adherence to man-made tradition, and the power to enforce that adherence. As 1 Peter 5 notes below, after demonstrating the falsity of many of the all-too-convenient claims of faithful Catholics being Pharisaical, it’s not the faithful Catholics, by and large, wielding the power. It’s not the faithful Catholic pastors who get banished to the far peripheries of the diocese because they add a little Latin to their Novus Ordo Masses, or focus a bit “too much” on Confession. I’m out of time for the day, but some good thoughts along those lines below. Do read the whole thing:
Although it is common in today’s antinomian world to condemn anyone who supports a tradition or rule as “Pharisaical,” this clearly was not the point of Christ’s warning. Instead, he condemned only those who support traditions that lead people away from a relationship with God, i.e., those who “make void the word of God.”
So who today is advocating man-made traditions that deny people access to God’s grace? Who teaches as doctrine the precepts of men? Imagine the following scenarios, and see if any of them seem all-too-familiar:
- A parish offers the Sacrament of Confession for only a half-hour each Saturday, at an inconvenient time, and makes no announcements promoting Reconciliation. The defense is that “no one goes anymore” and the priests are too busy.
- Requests for more traditional hymns to be sung during Mass are turned down with the response that “the songs we sing now are the songs our parishioners have always enjoyed the most.”
- Communion is advocated for the divorced and remarried, with the argument that to withhold it would be to violate the Church’s great tradition of “welcoming.”
- When an effort is made to institute a new marriage preparation program that includes substantial Church teaching, the existing volunteers resist on the grounds that the current program is “how we have always done it.” [Or……not. When Armand Ochoa, former Bishop of El Paso, took over the Diocese of Fresno, one of his earliest acts was to obliterate the very strong marriage prep classes that had been developed in that diocese, insisting that they be reduced to a pale 4 hour shadow of their former depth. It’s all about will to power, and claims of “tradition” are just a convenient excuse to dismiss legitimate desires of the faithful by an ideologically entrenched bureaucracy]
- A priest who decides to withhold the Eucharist from a publicly same-sex couple is quickly removed and told that his actions show a “lack of pastoral sensitivity” and make the Church appear judgmental.
- A parishioner suggests to the pastor a door-to-door campaign to try to bring people into the Church, but is turned down on the grounds that “Catholics don’t do that.” Additionally he is told that “proselytization” isn’t in keeping with ecumenism.
In each case, people are being directed away from the truth found in Christ and His Church, away from healing and reconciliation, away from a lasting relationship with Christ – and the reasons given amount to no more than “that’s how we do it now.” In other words, these are our “traditions.” The New Pharisees of today downplay Catholic doctrine, minimize the importance of the Sacraments, ridicule traditional Catholic devotions, scoff at Catholic moral teachings, and diminish the uniqueness of the Catholic Church. The man-made traditions they’ve instituted over the last 40 years have become encrusted in the life of the average Catholic parish, even though, as I wrote recently, there is no evidence that any of these programs or practices actually draw people into Christ’s Church. The evidence, in fact, is overwhelming that it draws people away from Christ and his Church. In other words, “For the sake of their tradition, they have made void the word of God!”
I’m sure you could come up with your own list. Requests are made to mix in just a little more Latin in Sunday (or weekday) Masses, but you are told “the Church is moving in a different direction.” Or you are told in the Confessional that having 4 children “is enough,” and you can safely contracept. Or ask for a sermon on porn……that would make too many people uncomfortable. At all costs, the status quo must not be challenged, entrenched sin must not be confronted. And this, we are told, is “mercy.”
It’s been said many times by many other people, but the only unforgivable sin in so many quarters of the Church today seems to be to have an open attachment and preference for the Catholic Faith, the way it was always practiced and believed. It’s incredible, but far too true. And that is because orthodox Catholicism has almost always been inherently countercultural, and there is nothing most leaders in the Church today desire more than to be accepted by the prevailing cultural “elite.” Thus orthodox Catholics become not, as Dietrich von Hildebrand wrote nearly 50 years ago, a bishop’s or priest’s pride and boast, but thorns in the side to be dismissed as cranks unable to get with the new program.
That is also, of course, what occurs after an institution undergoes a revolution – adherents to the old paradigm represent the largest threat to the new order of things. That is why revolutions tend to deal so savagely with those die-hards of the ancien regime. When viewed through the lens of post-revolutionary consolidation, the actions of the large majority of Church leaders suddenly seem much more sensical- from their point of view. The only surprising aspect of this whole drama acted out over the past 50 years is the willful blindness of many, many otherwise quite faithful Catholics, who refuse to contemplate even the possibility that a revolution has occurred.
And if you want to endure calls of Pharisaism, of being a mean ol’ judgmental nasty “trad,” then challenge them on that point. Make sure you have your foxhole dug good and deep, however, for the return fire will be intense.
Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, disaster, Ecumenism, episcopate, General Catholic, horror, martyrdom, Papa, persecution, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, unadulterated evil.
Whatever one may think of ecumenism/interreligious dialogue in general, probably my greatest problem with the way it has been conducted over the past 50 years is that it has been built on a web of distortions and even outright misrepresentations. We see this in many of the ongoing dialogues with the various sects and other religions, but it has been most marked of late with respect to islam. We are told how peaceful and wonderful islam is, the great spiritual fruit it provides to its followers, in spite of their explicit rejection of Jesus Christ as 2nd Person of the Trinity, the claim is even made that by some that muslims need not convert! Atrocities are glossed over as the Church constantly apologizes for the mote in its own eye, while ignoring the beam in its neighbor islam.
Well, Pope Francis interjected some badly needed honesty in this dialogue with islam when he accurately termed the Turkish mass pogroms against Armenian Christians, many Catholics, that took place a century ago a genocide, which it certainly was. Turkey, as a result, has recalled its ambassador to the Holy See. Boo-hoo:
Speaking at a Sunday Mass in St. Peter’s Basilica in the Vatican to mark 100 years since the Armenian killings, the pope spoke of the massacres in the context of the contemporary persecution of Christians in the Muslim world—a subject that has become an increasingly prominent and urgent theme in Pope Francis’ public statements.
Armenians say that as many as 1.5 million Armenians were systematically killed during World War I in today’s eastern Turkey, which was then part of the Ottoman Empire.
Many countries officially recognize the killings as genocide. But Turkey contests Armenian claims about the scale of losses; it argues that hundreds of thousands actually died in warfare and famine, and that many Turks were also killed by Armenians. Turkey argues that the question of genocide should be left to historians rather than politicians. [The historians have answered the question. It was a genocide, aided and abetted by Imperial German staff officers serving with the Ottoman Empire during WWI]
Pope Francis said Sunday that “it is necessary, and indeed a duty” to “recall the centenary of that tragic event, that immense and senseless slaughter whose cruelty your forbears had to endure…Concealing or denying evil is like allowing a wound to keep bleeding without bandaging it.”
A little more background:
The evidence is overwhelming that the Ottoman Turks systematically organized the deliberate deaths of up to 1.5 million Armenians. Government documents, photos, testimony from survivors prove that Turkey wished to rid itself of its Christian minorities, largely because they believed that the Armenians and others were siding with Russia against Turkey in World War I. They also needed a convenient scapegoat for the losses suffered on the battlefield.
The greatest number of killings occurred on horrific death marches of hundreds of miles where the Turks drove women, children, and old people (most of the young men had already been massacred) into the Syrian desert. There was no food or water given to the victims along the way — again, by design.
Few recognized historians take Turkey’s side — that the deaths were regrettable but not part of an organized effort to kill all Armenians. And Turkey is fanatical about the subject. After Pope Francis identified the Armenian massacres as genocide, Turkey angrily recalled its ambassador to the Vatican.
In the service of geopolitical interests, the Obama administration in 2010 blocked an effort by the House of Representatives to label the Armenian pogroms a genocide. Turkey threatened dramatic sanctions against the US if the effort were approved.
The genocides (for there was more than one) conducted against Christians in what is now Turkey were remarkably successful. In 1914 about 15% of the population of Turkey was Christian, today that number is 0.1%. Many describe the campaigns against the highly educated and successful Greek Orthodox of the far western regions of Turkey of the early 1920s as something akin to a genocide, as the Greek Christian was driven from the land and many died. This despite the fact that there had been Christians in Turkey since the 1st century. Today, one of Christianity’s most ancient ancestral homes, places where St. Paul evangelized to great success, are now totally denuded of any Christian presence.
Post-conciliar ecumenism/inter-religious dialogue is primarily a worldly effort designed to achieve worldly aims. It is not about saving souls, or arriving at the “truth,” which has been revealed through the Church, anyways. It is about satisfying the demands of secular shibboleths and advancing a certain kumbayah notion of the world. As such, it has been surrounded by a bodyguard of lies since its inception. Lies about things like the Armenian genocide, but that’s just one example out of far too many to list. It’s not that I am demanding that past atrocities all be listed in detail, but what I am saying is that “dialogue” that fails to take into account the true nature of various sects and religions as well as their recent history (up to an including today) is a dialogue based on a fantasy and is really advocacy for a certain indifferentist end, and not a true spirit working in the Church and people of faith to arrive at some happy common ground. Could any work be blessed by God that finds lies and the ignoring of uncomfortable truths such an essential part of its modus operandi?
Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Holy suffering, martyrdom, paganism, persecution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, Society, unadulterated evil.
Reader skeinster tipped me to this important piece at One Peter Five regarding the coming persecution. But I have to disagree with the notion that it is coming. It’s here. It’s actually been here for a while, furtive and tentative, but here. But now it is here in all its terrible ferocity. I will remind readers of the prophetic words of Fr. Michael Rodriguez from several years back, when he appeared on my radio show. I am paraphrasing, but Fr. Rodriguez had confronted the sexular pagan sodomite lobby as fully as a pastor of souls can and has been made to suffer the consequences for doing so. What he said was that this rainbow-absconding radical sodomite movement would be THE vehicle of the persecution, and he has turned out to be as right as rain. I knew he was right 3 years ago, but I didn’t want to think it would happen this fast. Even then, he was predicting that we would have redefined perverse marriage within 3 or 4 years – he was spot on – and that a persecution even to blood would follow not within years, but within months or even days of that. What rough beast, it’s hour come round at last, slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?
Most of the words below are from Steve Skojec, but I do also excerpt a bit of his quoting of Ann Barnhardt, as well, because it encapsulates my own struggles over the past several months:
But something I’ve become suddenly and alarmingly convinced of is this: this is the way the new persecution of the faithful will come to pass in the Western world. You’re looking at it, in its nascent stages. When I say “suddenly and alarmingly convinced,” I mean this is not just the fruit of reason. Our beliefs have been under attack for a very long time, in many ways, and the homosexual agenda is nothing new. I was fighting my health teacher about her promotion of homosexual experimentation among my peers back in the eighth grade.
But this is something different. Visceral. It’s a gut feeling that sends little waves of panic through me. [I know just how he feels] People are definitely going to lose their livelihoods over this. But I suspect many will also lose their freedom, and some may even lose their lives over it. Soon. And as with all the seductive, slowly-advancing evils of the world, most people won’t wake up until it’s at least a week too late. What powers they might have mustered to stop the growling, guttural advance of the demonic hordes foisting sins that cry out for vengeance upon the world, they will not invoke. Because there’s stuff to watch on the tee-vee. And did you see that one weird trick to lose stubborn belly fat? BTdubs, these cat videos are hilarious.
…….It’s coming, friends. Sooner than you think. Do you honestly believe this will stay contained to the realm of bakers and florists and pizza shops and weddings? The scent of blood is in the air, and they’re coming for more victories. [I have had a premonition that I will lose my job over my writings here. I do work for a private company, but that won’t provide much protection in the near future]
What I’m writing here, right now, will very soon be considered hate speech. Laws will be passed. Rights will be trampled. This pestilence has been given a wide berth for too long, and it has grown to epidemic proportions.
And now the words from Ann Barnhardt that struck me:
Writing about current events has become almost impossible. I sit down at my computer, and nothing happens. Oh, I have plenty to say, but you can only say stuff so many times over and over before you just start to feel like a hack, luxuriating in the act of screaming. And that’s no good.
Yep, that’s exactly the case. I struggle with that, myself. I do feel a bit like my writing has become hackneyed, because I do find myself saying the same things over and over again. But I haven’t felt it quite as strongly as Barnhardt, apparently, because I still feel the motivation to write. I don’t just stare, mouth agape, at the coming terror. I want to fight! But I do carry a fear that covering all this advancing tragedy does take a toll on one’s spiritual life. It is easy to become cynical and hardened in this process. Pray for me.
There is a lot more at the link, including more copious excerpts from the NYT op-ed I quoted from 2 days ago. These additional quotations only fill me with more dread and terror, because I believe what is written is actually a program to further subvert the human element of the Church that has already proved far too susceptible to such efforts over the past several decades. To wit:
And it elevates unthinking obeisance above intelligent observance, above the evidence in front of you, because to look honestly at gay, lesbian and bisexual people is to see that we’re the same magnificent riddles as everyone else: no more or less flawed, no more or less dignified.
Most parents of gay children realize this. So do most children of gay parents. It’s a truth less ambiguous than any Scripture, less complicated than any creed.
So our debate about religious freedom should include a conversation about freeing religions and religious people from prejudices that they needn’t cling to and can indeed jettison, much as they’ve jettisoned other aspects of their faith’s history, rightly bowing to the enlightenments of modernity.
Please. This same man wrote that adhering to 2000 years of belief and practice is a choice. And if he means by that, an act of the will, it is. But so is the decision to reject that 2000 years of belief and practice. And he has absolutely nothing he can hold up that could possibly represent a stronger argument than the fact that these aren’t just obscure, made up ancient texts, as he calls them, but the revealed Word of God. This is absolute Truth, not the constantly changing, will to power, materialist truthiness of the world and its master. What he is saying is that observant Christians should just put the sexular pagan blinders on along with everyone else, and enjoy the swift ride into both an earthly and the literal hell. Can’t we see it would just be so much easier that way, at least in the short term? Sure, the sexular pagan ethos demands rivers of blood and mountains of broken lives to sustain it, but the left has shown us it is so very, very easy to just keep the blinders on and ignore all that, and “enjoy” the utterly empty, banal, rationalistic ride over the 1000 foot waterfall of societal collapse.
That’s exactly what this prince of darkness is calling for. I fear – I know – far too many Christians, and even important personages in the Church, will be more than willing to heed his advice, and are doing so already.
Eloi, eloi lama sabacthani? Because we forsook You first.
Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, episcopate, error, fun, General Catholic, Papa, scandals, silliness, the struggle for the Church.
Or as I think it might otherwise be called, Vatican II, beyotch!
I think I’ve made clear my affinity for the blog Unam Sanctam Catholicam clear many times in the past. Boniface, Noah, and the rest write awesome stuff. But my appreciation has zoomed to new heights with this song performed by Boniface, putting Vatican II in its rightful place:
Oh the picture and lyrics @~0:28 are just perfect. Hi, I’m Novus Ordo!
Does this song not just nail it? Who cares if the voice is a bit flat? Gram Parsons wasn’t much of a singer, either, but he wrote some awesome songs. Great pics at the end.
“modernist hypocrisy” indeed. Thanks for such a fun video, Boniface, no, it doesn’t make me depressed. Franky makes me depressed, not the song. Who knew you were so multi-talented? A real Renaissance man. We need to smile and laugh sometimes. This song does that for me.
If I have one regret in life, is that I laid down the guitar way too early. I can scratch out a couple of chords, and knowing my tendency to take things to the Nth degree maybe getting better playing would have been a dangerous thing, but I could have a lot of fun if I could play better. Kind of too late, now.
I think Boniface should write and record more music. What do you think?
Hey, at least I’m putting him in pretty good company:
Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, Basics, disaster, error, family, foolishness, General Catholic, persecution, scandals, secularism, sexual depravity, Society.
Fellow Texas Ex Kevin Williamson, as part of a much broader article examining how the left has consistently used false moral panics in the culture to advance their sexular pagan agenda, formed a very interesting argument on the strange panic surrounding day care centers and alleged satanism and child abuse that occurred in the early 1980s. I quote him below framing the argument, noting how preposterous those claims were even at the time, and, most importantly, his understanding of the reasons why so many people were willing to accept such outlandish claims:
In retrospect, the social psychology at work is embarrassingly obvious: The divorce tsunami that peaked in the late 1970s left a great many American parents partly or entirely estranged from their children. The resulting guilt and anxiety sent an entire generation of parents — and the professional scolds and political opportunists whose livelihood greatly benefits from national moral panics — searching for a villain…….
……Anxiety about wayward adolescents is eternal. But widespread anxiety about toddlers was, at the time, a relatively new phenomenon, the tykes of Generation X having been the first generation of Americans to have been entrusted to professional daycare services in such large numbers……
……The criminal cases brought against those accused of carrying out theatrical episodes of ritualized sexual abuse within the walls of American daycares look absolutely unbelievable in retrospect. The phenomenon of “recovered memories” that drove many of these cases is pseudoscientific poppycock, and the details of the abuse suffered by the children in these cases is obviously the result of adult anxiety filtered through the juvenile mind: Little girls insisted, for example, that they had been sexually violated with butchers’ knives, while others told of being buried alive, being flushed down toilets, etc. There was no physical evidence that any of this happened, of course — and even in the happy era before toilet capacity became a federal obsession, flushing an entire child down the commode was a physical impossibility — but that did not seem to matter very much. The nation was convinced — not in its mind, but in its always-unreliable heart — that there were monsters afoot, that somebody, somewhere, was doing terrible things to our teenagers and children. The parents of that paranoid time were, of course, absolutely right: Somebody was doing something terrible to the children.
It was them.
The place that a child is most likely to experience physical abuse, and particularly sexual abuse, is not in a daycare run by Satanists, or in a church youth group overseen by a pedophilic priest, or even in a classroom run by one of those hot-to-trot teachers who periodically dot the news. It is at home, when that home includes a male to whom the child is not biologically related.
This is not news, and it wasn’t really news 20 years ago, either. There was not an epidemic of musically propelled Satanism in the United States in the 1980s. And there was no shadowy network of occultists infiltrating the nation’s daycare centers, either. There was an epidemic of divorce and a great deal of stress as Americans attempted to manage the emergence of what we now euphemistically call “blended families” in unprecedented numbers. The actual face of villainy — absent fathers and neglectful mothers — was too terrible to contemplate. [Boy that is what I saw in the 80s and early 90s, in spades]
I think that is a fascinating and astute analysis. For those too young to remember, there was a brief flurry of absolutely outlandish claims of serial sex abuse in day care centers, particularly those along the West Coast. There were several lurid trials, and amazing claims of ritualistic abuse of hundreds if not thousands of children. It was all, 100%,. completely made up by overeager prosecutors, quack psychologists, and easily impressionable children.
And yet, as Williamson notes, every single adult charged with these crimes was convicted. Many spent years in jail before their convictions were overturned, with great prejudice (meaning the appellate judges were hopping mad at the convictions), on appeal.
I think Williamson has diagnosed the mass psychology exactly: millions of parents with latent guilt over either their shattering their children’s lives through participation in divorce, or mom desiring to work and the kids going to daycare, or both, found themselves with much less than optimal relations with their own children. Their children were frequently acting out in destructive ways. Someone had to be to blame, and it sure couldn’t be mom and stepdad and their terrible choices. No, it had to be the daycare center. And so it went.
Williamson then segues to the moral panic receiving the most publicity today, the completely made up campus rape epidemic. His purpose was not to analyze the psychology of this latest mass movement, but I will, and to me, its as obvious as the 80s day care satanist panic. The psychology to me is equally obvious. I mean, really………the generation of young women who have made giving away their virtue at fire sale prices to any random dude they meet after five minutes of conversation is going to suddenly develop a moral panic about rape, and especially on college campuses, where this sterile rutting is focused? Isn’t it rather obvious what’s going on here? This is classic transference. Young women feel empty and used by these pointless couplings, and harbor resentment towards the men who use them and lose them. Duh. From there the feelings of being used and abandoned snowball into a veritable mass consciousness (since millions of young women have experienced this) of being so used and abused it mentally transmogrifies, weeks, months, or years after the fact, into rape. Thus the equal perpetrators of this amoral rutting (at least 50% responsible) get to take on the noble halo of victimhood, reclaiming their “purity” and casting men as the sole responsible party. Quite a nice trick, really.
Goodness, I know how hard it is, but if ever there were a time for young women and men to remain celibate until marriage, this is it. And this is yet another reason not to send your son or daughter off to a distant college to live full time. Maybe local colleges and living at home would be a much better option. It is absolute Russian roulette for young men on these college campuses today, and all it takes is one slip up, one moment of weakness, with the wrong girl, and your life is irrevocably ruined. Never has strongly inculcating the absolute necessity of the virtue of chastity in your children been as important as it is now.
I know, like we needed another reason. Unfortunately, I’ve been surprised how many even faithful/traditional Catholic parents seem to have problems in this regard.