Jubilee Year of Mercy a bust in Rome……. February 5, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, disaster, error, foolishness, Francis, General Catholic, scandals, secularism, self-serving, suicide, the struggle for the Church.
……..and, I would suspect, around the world. This is what comes from undermining sacred truths and loudly proclaiming that God is all mercy and makes no demands of us save for a vague commitment to progressive consciousness. If God is all mercy and no justice, why bother with getting an indulgence? I’m saved anyway, right? And Communion is something owed to everyone, so receiving it is not special at all.
Pope Francis Jubilee has been so far extremely disappointing, with incredibly few faithfuls showing up in Rome. Unbelievable! No one could forecast such a disappointing turnout of pilgrims. But it is the sad truth of the first two months of the Jubilee. It is time to draw a balance, and it’s a bitter one.
Things immediately started on the wrong foot on inauguration day, December 8, in the wake of the November 14 Paris shock. It was hoped that Christmas could go better, but so many people cancelled after the Paris terror attacks that nothing changed during the Winter holidays. January was even worse. The number of Catholics attending the Wednesday General Audiences plummeted below thinkable levels……..
……lines at security checks are short simply because so few people are coming to Rome. The mandatory reservations to cross the Holy Door was scrapped a couple of days after the start of the Jubilee as it was already clear that there was nearly noone around.
We’re not comparing this Jubilee’s figures with the last one in the year 2000. The current one was announced with a very short notice and it was conceived with very few key events and as a decentralised Jubilee, to be celebrated in each diocese. But the figures are so dismal that even a simple comparison with last year is puzzling: basically there is the same amount of people as last year. Major disappointment.
The Goddess of War Wants to Consume Our Daughters February 5, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, disaster, Domestic Church, error, family, General Catholic, horror, paganism, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society.
1 comment so far
Good commentary by Michael Matt on the recent support given by the politicians in uniform for opening registration for selective service to women. I’m a bit surprised this is happening, at least so soon, I thought there would be some uproar, but apparently, we’re too far gone for that. We can see how much 8 years of Obama have brought the military chiefs into line, with even the Commandant of the Marine Corps dutifully repeating the company line, even though his own service tests revealed the disastrous unsuitability of virtually all women for any kind of ground combat role. Long forgotten is even the faintest hint of the notion of women being the gentler sex, of being ordered for nurturing and bringing life into the world, not killing, and being protected from such evils as shedding blood for purposes of state policy:
“The top officers in the Army and Marine Corps testified on Tuesday that they believe it is time for women to register for future military drafts, following the Pentagon’s recent decision to open all jobs in combat units to female service members.
Gen. Mark A. Milley, chief of staff of the Army, and Gen. Robert B. Neller, the Marine Corps commandant, both said they were in favor of the change during an occasionally contentious Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on the full integration of women in the military. The generals, both infantry officers, offered their opinions in response to a question from Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), who said that she also is in favor of the change.
“Senator, I think that all eligible and qualified men and women should register for the draft,” said Milley, echoing the remarks of Neller. [Self-serving miscreants]
After the hearing, Neller added in a short interview that any young American as a rite of passage should have to register for Selective Service….
“Carter’s action allows women for the first time to apply for a variety of physically punishing positions, including Army and Marine Corps infantryman, as well as Special Operations jobs, including Navy SEAL and Green Beret. The Defense Department plans to begin implementing associated changes in training and evaluation by April 1.”
Before I get to Matt’s searing commentary, let me inform you how this will play out. Failure to have a certain number of women in “glamour slots” like the Green Berets, SEALs, or Marine Recon will be taken as evidence of sexism. Since zero women can qualify for those positions with their current standards, standards will be dramatically cut, if not obliterated. For a time, men will be held to the old, strict standard, and women to a new, much softer one. But eventually, if history is any guide, all standards will be dramatically lowered as men bring suits to bear. This has already happened across the military.
Even more, women can expect dramatically preferential treatment. In order to prove how un-sexist they are, careerist officers will insist that women show up on the top of proficiency tests like marksmanship, orienteering, and the like. This already happens with grim regularity today. But maybe a US military incapable of fighting is more of a feature, than a bug.
Some of Matt’s comments I found more choice:
I have five daughters, and the day that this increasingly demonic government attempts to drag them into combat is the day I take my family and leave this country. I don’t care what they do to me, but I fear the sick tortures of mind and body these globalist Christophobes have in store for my children and grandchildren……..
……..God help us, what a monster this evil Goddess Liberty has turned out to be. Mothers, sisters and daughters in combat—how liberating! Here’s where their precious ‘pill’ has taken them, to a world robbed of the civilizing leaven of femininity, with no maternal heart, no womanly gentleness, no queenly grace, no beauty, no life. [And the pill is one major reason why they have to draft women into combat in the first place, as we’re short millions of young men that should exist due to contraception and abortion.]
Just an ugly, sterile, globalist prison filled with testosterone, crime, drugs and brutal sex. Not only is chivalry dead but its point and purpose no longer exists. [Testosterone, but not masculinity, and certainly not manhood]
The Godless ones are clearly transforming our world into a place where the sting of death may soon seem a small price to pay to get out, and where the living may well come to envy the dead.
This is the New World Order…and it will be no place to live. Everything true, good and beautiful is being systematically eradicated before our eyes, and now this modern Moloch wants to devour our little girls on the altar of Liberty.
They’ve taken God’s greatest gifts and urinated all over them all—from life, to love, to family, to innocence, to grace, to true liberty. I know I’m not the only one who’s grown supremely weary of the whole bloody reign of spiritual and moral terror. I cling to my faith, my rosary, my family—but I know the mob is coming to take them all away in due time.
Really well said. None of this is accidental. There has been a design at work for centuries, and all the things we see, from trying to make little girls play soldier to making little boys play Girl Scouts are not unintended consequences of the Revolution. It is the inevitable end-product of a godless, amoral society. And not to be a downer, but I don’t see it getting any better anytime soon, especially with the highest levels of the Church now seeming bent on caving.
Modern Problems: Male Girl Scout Has Trouble Selling Cookies in Drag February 5, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, disaster, disconcerting, General Catholic, horror, sadness, scandals, secularism, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, suicide.
I copied the lede from the link. Some might find it harsh, but it does have the benefit of actually describing reality. That’s where we are in these United States in the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand and Sixteen. 9 year olds pretending to be girls. Vast swaths of the populace insisting we go along with this epic mental divergence, and insisting still more that this manifest tragedy must be lauded and lionized by all as a brave embrace of someone’s true nature. No one is permitted to ask how a 9 year old boy could possibly come to feel this way, what terrible trauma he must have experienced to be so alienated from his own nature that he seeks to obliterate it. No, we are all just supposed to happily ignore reality more and more to please the soul-destroying progressives who dominate this culture. It’s either that, or just STFU and bear it in silence.
While I am loathe to see this child suffer still more, I am gratified to see there are still some people around sane enough, and honest enough, to say, no, I own’t buy cookies from a male “Girl Scout:”
A boy disguised as a girl scout tried to sell girl scout cookies to a man, who told him that he didn’t want to buy girl scout cookies from a boy disguised as a girl. This led to a major story in the Washington Post the size of an investigation into Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal. [Of course. Every single episode of resistance to the sexular pagan agenda, no matter how small, no matter how trivial, no matter how sensical and well-justified, must be excoriated, must be lambasted and shown to be totally unacceptable, pour les encouragement des les otres. The revolution has always been
“Nine-year-old Stormi set out last month to sell cookies just like every other Girl Scout — with a sales pitch and a goal.[Note the positive, humanizing coverage….]
But when Stormi, who is transgender, started knocking on neighbors’ doors near her home in Herrin, Ill., one man turned her away, saying: “Nobody wants to buy cookies from a boy in a dress.” [See what I mean? One man said no, and that merits national coverage?]
“It made me sad,” Stormi told BuzzFeed News. “Because I’m a girl.” [And I’m an armor plated, razor-toothed chipmunk. Don’t laugh! That’s coming, too. A Norwegian woman recently announced she’s actually a cat. Society’s insistence on the normalization of grave mental illness, all in furtherance of the sexular agenda, shows no sign of abating]
…..It turns out nine-year-old Stormi (probably not the child’s birth name) is a foster child, so that may contribute to his messed up background. But hey, he’s 9 years old, so he’s old enough to decide his gender identity, right?
Of course. And if old enough to decide one’s gender, then old enough to make “adult” decisions regarding sexual behavior, even with adults, right? That’s the ultimate goal. The making available of children, as guaranteed by law, for the service of adult desires.
Christ or chaos. Our world has chosen the latter, seemingly definitively. The nightmares will not end. And you will be made to bend to their will, or suffer the consequences.
What do you think of this list of the top twenty most dangerous Catholics? – UPDATED February 4, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, different religion, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, Francis, General Catholic, Papa, Revolution, scandals, secularism, the struggle for the Church.
So Church Militant TV has a new video up I both saw, and a reader sent to me, concerning a list of the top twenty most dangerous Catholics of the last 100 years.
Now, the list remains incomplete, only half has been released so far, but as I read it, I was quite surprised to find so few in the upper echelons of the hierarchy. The entire list is there if you take the survey. My mistake, I only read the article at Church Militant itself. So all the points made below stand. No popes listed, the names are heavily American, and almost no one in the curia or a major leader at Vatican II. For instance, Donald Wuerl is a politician, tends modernist (or is, whatever), and has given scandal on numerous occasions, but, really? Top 20 worst Catholics? Not even close. He’s nothing compared to some of the radicals in Europe, or some of those from the 60s-70s timeframe. To leave off Cardinal Martini is inexplicable to me. He’s the father of the current-day progressive wing in the Church. No de Chardin? No Congar? But bear in mind, some of those – de Chardin, Congar – received numerous plaudits from post-conciliar popes. Perhaps that played a role?
Here are some of the more prominent names:
Hans Urs von Balthasar
I’m struck by several things. For one, the list is overwhelmingly American. But many of the most destructive ideas have flowed out of Europe, and often, from high cardinals and others deeply entrenched at the highest levels of the Church. Most of the names listed here are priests, whose ideas, while certainly damnable, would not have had the impact they did had ecclesiastical authority not failed in its duty to discipline them or exclude them from the body of the faithful.
Now, the list is only half complete, so I’m hoping a whole slew of names – Martini, Frings, Alfrink, Bea, Congar, Suenens, Bugnini, etc., will make the list. Well, they didn’t. A list that does not include a number of the leading radicals from Vatican II – which includes those appointed by Paul VI to lead the Council – is woefully incomplete. And there are more top officials from today that I might include in my list – Koch, Schoenborn, Marx, Kasper…….basically the entire German episcopate.
But I’ll say something else. It is true that the crisis in the Church is a crisis of bishops. But who has appointed those bishops, and kept them in office, and even protected them, at times? If the list of “most dangerous Catholics” means those who have contributed the most to the crisis in the Church, can any list be complete that does not feature the names of Giovanni Montini and possibly Jose Bergoglio?
Look, I understand CMTVs editorial views. I know they are loathe to criticize any pontiff, especially the post-conciliar ones. I understand their viewpoint, even if I think it erroneous.
Having said that, from what limited study I’ve done of Vatican II, I am unable to conclude otherwise than that Pope Paul VI got the Council he wanted, more or less. John XXIII set the tone, but it was Paul VI who packed the all-important leadership/management with the Council almost entirely with thoroughgoing progressives. It was Paul VI who decided, at virtually every important logjam, in favor of the progressives, at least until the very end, when their excesses began to surprise and shock even him. And it was Paul VI who unleashed the Novus Ordo and deliberately put forth the notion that the TLM was abrogated, to the point of persecuting those priests who refused to go along. I could go on, HJA Sire and others have thoroughly criticized the pontificate of Paul VI in quite harsh terms.
Since the Council, with some exception for Benedict XVI, the dominant liberal interpretation of it has been allowed to stand, and even be promoted, by every pontiff of the intervening period, at least by silence and inaction if not by actual promotion (which, of course, has frequently occurred, as well). But you know all this already.
So I guess the question is…….can a list of the most “dangerous” Catholics of the last 100 years be complete without including any popes? Or is it tending too much towards scandal, with the wide audience CMTV has, to say so? (I tend to take more liberties, as I regard my readership as generally very well formed and steadfast, and able to stand “sterner stuff”).
And what of the many non-Americans/fathers of Vatican II who have contributed most to the collapse? And no Tielhard de Chardin? No Anibale Bugnini?
Nevertheless, while argument over who should be included could go on forever, I think the basic idea, to identify by name some of the most damaging Catholics of recent years is a pretty good one. While you or I might already be aware of most or all of these folks, many are not. It’s helpful to get those names out there. Who else would you have on your list?
“Saved by Race Alone:” Great riposte to Vatican’s Judaizing stand February 4, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, different religion, Ecumenism, episcopate, foolishness, General Catholic, Papa, rank stupidity, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, silliness.
This is really funny. Picked it up from Pertinacious Papist. An open letter from a Jewish Catholic convert to Francis, glad to know that, in true progressive biological determinative fashion, he is saved not by Grace, but by race, alone. He is rather non-plussed over the donations he was encouraged to make over the years, though (my emphasis and comments):
His Holiness, Pope FrancisVatican CityJanuary, 2016Dear Holy FatherI am a Jew. I have the assurance, as did Menachem Mendel Schneerson of Crown Heights, Brooklyn, of direct descent from King David on my father’s side (my mother, I was assured was descended of Hillel).I am 74-years-old. I converted to the Roman Catholic Church at the age of 17 in the last year of the pontificate of Pope Pius XII. I did so because I was under the conviction that I had to accept and have faith that Jesus Christ was my savior, and I believed it. And I believed that I had to be a baptized member of his Church to have a chance of salvation. So I converted and was baptized in the Catholic Church, and then I was confirmed. [I know baptism by desire and blood, but I also know, a heckuva lot of older Catholics, raised in the pre-conciliar Church, were taught to the point of total conviction that one had to be a visible member of the Church to be saved. My pious mother-in-law, God rest her soul, prayed constantly for my conversion based on that belief.]Over the years I have contributed tens of thousands of dollars to both Peters’ Pence (the pope’s own treasury about which you of course must be very familiar), and my local parish and diocese.During that time I attended thousands of Masses, hundreds of holy hours and novenas, said thousands of rosaries, and made hundreds of trips to the Confessional.Now in 2015 and 2016 I have read your words and those of your “Pontifical Commission.” You now teach that because I am a racial Jew, God’s covenant with me was never broken, and cannot be broken. You don’t qualify that teaching by specifying anything I might do that would threaten the Covenant, which you say God has with me because I am a Jew. You teach that it’s an unbreakable Covenant. You don’t even say that it depends on me being a good person. Logically speaking, if God’s Covenant with me is unbreakable, then a racial Jew such as I am can do anything he wants and God will still maintain a Covenant with me and I will go to heaven. [The public declarations are so general this “automatic salvation” can be inferred. Is it really extreme Zionist propaganda masquerading as new wisdom in the Church?]Your Pontifical Commission wrote last December, “The Catholic Church neither conducts nor supports any specific institutional mission work directed towards Jews…it does not in any way follow that the Jews are excluded from God’s salvation because they do not believe in Jesus Christ as the Messiah of Israel and the Son of God.” [This statement still hurts. Goodness what a repudiation of Jesus Christ. Lord, I pray they know not what they do.]You are the Pontiff. I believe what your Commission teaches under your banner and in your name, and what you declared during your visit to the synagogue in January. As a result, I no longer see any point in getting up every Sunday morning to go to Mass, say rosaries, or attend the Rite of Reconciliation on Saturday afternoon. All of those acts are superfluous for me. Predicated on your teaching, I now know that due to my special racial superiority in God’s eyes, I don’t need any of it. [It’s not just Jews, is it? Many people are concluding they no longer need Mass, or don’t need to take Church Doctrine seriously, because “who am I to judge” and all the rest. I personally two folks who have fallen away entirely in the last year, quoting Francis as they exited]I don’t see any reason now as to why I was baptized in 1958. There was no need for me to be baptized. I no longer see why there was a need for Jesus to come to earth either, or preach to the Jewish children of Abraham of his day. As you state, they were already saved as a result of their racial descent from the Biblical patriarchs. What would they need him for? [Let’s just chuck the entire Gospel of John while we’re at it, right?]In light of what you and your Pontifical Commission have taught me, it appears that the New Testament is a fraud, at least as it applies to Jews. All of those preachings and disputations to the Jews were for no purpose. Jesus had to know this, yet he persisted in causing a lot of trouble for the Jews by insisting they had to be born again, they had to believe he was their Messiah, they had to stop following their traditions of men, and that they couldn’t get to heaven unless they believed that he was the Son of God. [Can any of this be disputed? Can you imagine how this new line makes Jewish converts feel, how much torment and scandal it must cause?]Your holiness, you and your Commission have instructed me in the true path to my salvation: my race. It’s all I need and all I have ever needed.God has a covenant with my genes. It’s my genes that save me. My eyes are open now. [Isn’t that more or less what the Jewish “dialoguers” with the Church have demanded, though? A pretension that some are saved by race alone? And how much is liberal katholyc acceptance of this driven by latent guilt for the Holocaust and whatever else? Really, the pro-Jewish stance demanded of the Church devolves, like so many other progressive shibboleths, to “shut up,” Catholics]Consequently, you will be hearing from my lawyer. I am filing suit against the papacy and the Roman Catholic Church. I want my money back, with interest, and I am seeking compensatory and punitive damages for the psychological harm your Church caused me, by making me think I needed something besides my own exalted racial identity, in order to go to heaven after I die.I am litigating as well over the time that I wasted that I could have spent working in my business, instead of squandering it worshipping a Jesus that your Church now says I don’t need to believe in for my salvation. Your prelates and clerics told me something very different in 1958. I’ve been robbed!
This blog has long had a great love for Fr. Michael Rodriguez. I was very gratified when reader skeinster sent me a link to this interview Father gave to Louie Verrecchio. Father gives some updates on his situation viz a viz El Paso Bishop Mark Seitz in this interview. Since it’s out there in the wide open internet, I guess I can cover it, and comment on it.
Below, the entire excerpt involving the impasse between Fr. Rodriguez and Bishop Seitz (emphasis in original, I add comments). I need to make very clear all commentary below is mine alone and is not based on any input from Fr. Rodriguez whatsoever:
Fr. Rodriguez: At present, January 2016, I am a priest in good standing of the Diocese of El Paso, TX, with no pastoral assignment.
My Bishop, Most Rev. Mark J. Seitz, had appointed me as the Administrator of Sacred Heart Mission in Shafter, Texas (a small mission in one of the most remote parts of the diocese), effective July 11, 2014, for a term of three years. However, as a sine qua non condition of the assignment, he insisted that I offer the Novus Ordo Missæ. At the time, I had already been offering the Traditional Latin Mass exclusively for almost three years!
On July 24, 2014, my Bishop issued a Personal Precept which included the order, “I enjoin you to celebrate the Mass and Sacraments according to the Novus Ordo in the Mission of Shafter. The Mass and the Sacraments must be celebrated in the vernacular of the people (English or Spanish) and not Ad Orientem.” [I know of no possible justification in the Canon Law or rubrics by which a priest could be forced to offer Mass facing the people. Versus populum has NEVER been codified as a default or required position for the priest in any authoritative Church document above national council level. And the decisions of national councils are NOT authoritative.]
Throughout my nineteen years as a priest, I have always done my best to practice the virtue of obedience, but now I was put in an impossible situation. St. John of the Cross teaches, “Obedience is a penance of the intellect and therefore a more acceptable sacrifice than all corporal penances. Hence God loves your tiniest act of obedience more than all other homages you might think of offering Him.” What was I to do? Never before had the opening words of the prayer from the Divine Office struck a deeper chord in my soul, “Deus in adiutórium meum inténde. Dómine, ad adiuvándum me festína.” “O God, come to my assistance. O Lord, make haste to help me.” The decision I had to make was my most difficult one yet as a priest. Holy Mary, Virgin Mother of God, intercede for me, a poor sinner.
I wrote many letters to my Bishop. The following is a sample of this correspondence; it is an excerpt from a letter which I wrote to him on September 8, 2014, the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary:
I am 100% committed to my priestly promise of obedience. You are my bishop, and thus, I have promised obedience to you. It is my firm and sincere intention to be obedient to you. Unfortunately for me (and my conscience), your July 24, 2014, Precept contains an order which is “problematic,” to say the least.
[This is really very important……] The order you are giving contradicts Pope St. Pius V’s Apostolic Constitution Quo Primum, Canon IX (a dogmatic canon) of Session XXII of the Holy Council of Trent, Pope Pius VI’s ConstitutionAuctorem Fidei (see the 33rd of 85 propositions which are condemned, Denzinger 1533), Pope Pius XII’s Encyclical LetterMediator Dei 59, and the Second Vatican Council’s Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium 36 and 54. Moreover, your order appears to be irreconcilable with the Decree of the Council of Nicea II regarding ecclesiastical tradition (Denzinger 308), and Canon XIII (a dogmatic canon) of Session VII of the Holy Council of Trent.
In addition, the order contained in your Precept appears to (a) deny the Catholic priest’s legitimate right to offer the Extraordinary Formof the Roman Rite (presumably, exclusively) as expressed in Summorum Pontificum Art. 1, and (b) dismiss Summorum PontificumArt. 1, “the Roman Missal promulgated by St. Pius V . . . must be given due honor for its venerable and ancient usage.” Finally, from the pastoral perspective, your order appears to disregard the expressed needs and good of the faithful of Presidio/Shafter, who are specifically requesting parish life based on the Traditional Latin Mass.
As I wrote to you in my July 1, 2014, letter, as a priest of the Diocese of El Paso, I am committed to do my very best to spiritually nourish, teach, and serve the souls placed under my care. However, I cannot do this apart from what has always been the lex orandi, lex credendiof Holy Mother Church. Thus, with respect to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and the celebration of the Sacraments, it is not a matter of “preference” or my “unwillingness” to obey; rather, there are all-important ecclesial, theological, liturgical, spiritual, ascetical, and pastoral reasons which compel me, in conscience, to offer the Traditional Latin Mass exclusively.
[Unfortunately, Pope Benedict XVI never addressed this situation, of a former NO priest exclusively offering the TLM, directly in Summorum Pontificum and Universae Ecclesiae. As such, many bishops continue to pretend that the TLM was abrogated in 1970 by Paul VI and requires special permission, or conditions, to be offered. This is plainly against the spirit of Benedict XVI’s documents, and against his clear statement that the TLM was not, nor ever could be, abrogated. As a valid Rite, the priest should have the option, based on his pastoral reality, to offer the TLM exclusively, even if not a member of an Ecclesia Dei community. But because that point was never specifically addressed, it is viewed as a matter of opinion, at this time, since virtually the entire hierarchy has chosen to jettison the entirety of the pre-conciliar Magisterium as a practical reality in the day to day operation of the Church. Thus, Father’s very well supported arguments from pre-conciliar sources are simply rejected out of hand.]
In the end, I had to follow what Holy Mother Church has always taught. Out of fidelity to God and to the Church’s immemorial lex orandi, lex credendi, and for the good of the souls entrusted to my care, I could not, in conscience, follow the specific liturgical directive given by my Bishop. [I have very strong sympathy for the conclusion Father has reached. He feels in conscience he cannot offer the Novus Ordo any more. Some may feel that he is failing in obedience. That’s not my take, but I understand it. I see in this action by Bishop Seitz, especially with regard to the demand not to offer Mass Ad Orientem, as unjust and an abuse of power. The situation regarding the TLM is perhaps arguable (though I strongly side with Father on this), but insisting that a priest MUST face the people at Mass is totally unjustifiable, to my knowledge.]
Effective November 10, 2014, my Bishop revoked my appointment as Administrator of Sacred Heart Mission. I was unable to hold back my tears during the final Holy Sacrifice of the Mass which I offered in Shafter, TX, on Sunday, November 9, 2014. With a sorrowful heart and plenteous tears, I prayed the words of blessed Job, “The Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken away, as it hath pleased the Lord so it is done. Blessed be the name of the Lord.” (Job 1:21)
I begged my Bishop for a minimum one-year sabbatical, in order to have ample time to pray, study, reflect, go on an extended retreat, and discern God’s will for my future. He refused, and instead gave me only six months, and restricted the use of my priestly faculties. Eventually, he extended my sabbatical to August 31, 2015.
At the beginning of October 2015, my Bishop initiated a canonical process to determine whether or not I have committed a Delict against Ecclesiastical Authority (i.e. disobedience). Currently, I await whatever decision he may make. If necessary, I am prepared to appeal to Rome. I am under no illusion that Rome will intervene to do what is right and just, but at least by appealing, I will know, in conscience, that I went to heroic lengths in the practice of obedience by following the juridical process instituted by the Church for recourse against the abuse of power.
At present, I continue to discern God’s will for the future of my priesthood. What is Thy will, O Lord? What wilt Thou have me to do? (Acts 9:6) In spite of some very difficult trials over the past four years, I am in awe of God’s goodness, mercy, and mysterious ways.
Father then goes on to address how he’s like this situation resolved. The answers are obvious, but Father is very realistic about where he stands.
Please pray for him. He’s a very good priest who found himself in a nigh impossible situation. It is such a tragedy that this has occurred. I don’t want to pontificate too much on his situation, he just really needs prayers at this point. The future will take care of itself.
How can ecumenism be reconciled with St. Paul and the entire pre-conciliar Magisterium? February 3, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, catachesis, different religion, disaster, Ecumenism, episcopate, error, General Catholic, horror, Papa, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, suicide, the struggle for the Church.
Older Catholics will tell you, they remember a day when it was clearly taught that to even step foot in a protestant church was a mortal sin. Participating in the kind of “joint ecumenical service” that Francis – and he is not the first post-conciliar pope to do so – would have been utterly unthinkable. The mind of the Church was guided by St. Paul’s 2nd Letter to the Corinthians:
Bear not the yoke together with unbelievers. For what participation hath justice with injustice? Or what fellowship hath light with darkness?
And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath the faithful with the unbeliever?
And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? *For you are the temple of the living God: as God saith: **I will dwell in them, and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
Wherefore, go out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing:
Pope Pius XI taught that Catholics were forbidden to engage in liturgical celebrations with protestants, and in doing so he was only reiterating what the Church had clearly taught for some 350 years. The post-conciliar Church has most frequently tried to pretend that protestants and Catholics both belong to some “invisible church” consisting of “believers” (usually reduced to a shared baptism), but this kind of thinking was rejected by numerous pre-conciliar popes. Thus very clear statements such as those by St. Paul, which served as justification for “fundamentalists” like Saint Athanasius to have no contact with, and to give no recognition to, even the heretical Arian “Catholics” of his day. St. Basil stated that the faithful should even go into the desert to offer Mass, rather than participate in the liturgies of the heretics of those days.
And yet here we are, 2000 years later, after a completely novel council, the first ever in the history of the Church to proclaim no dogma and declare no anathemas, with a radically changed mindset, a mindset that much more plays to worldly thinking and approval than to the constant belief and practice of the faith.
50 years ago, in the immediate wake of Vatican II, there was a great outburst of ecumenical efforts. Thank God, those efforts largely subsided under the previous two pontificates (obviously, there were some scandalous exceptions, like Assisi), but they have come roaring back under Francis and especially in this run up to the 500th anniversary of the outbreak of the protestant heresy cum revolution. It must be remembered that many leading lights at Vatican II were scandalous in their acceptance of protestant belief, from Congar to Bugnini, who felt that in many cases the protestants had got in more right than the early Church Fathers directly informed by the Apostles. Congar reverenced Luther greatly, and Bugnini desired to create a Mass so bowdlerized of Catholic content that it would never be offensive to protestants.
Michael Matt and Christopher Ferrara have a valuable video on this subject below. I found it providential that I read a biblical verse with a note that pointed me to II Cor vi:14-17 just hours before I saw this video show up in my Youtube feed. I especially like the early reference Matt makes to St. Thomas More and his excoriation of protestants for loathing order and seeking to create a society based on disorder and the triumph of the will (which, perhaps, makes subsequent German history rather less than surprising).
Some more important points regarding the below. I have already reported on the disturbingly pro-protestant nature of elements of this joint “liturgy” composed by uber-liberal Catholics in the Congregation for Christian Unity and the Lutheran World Federation. As Matt notes below, this Federation is exceedingly modernist/liberal in and of itself, and is rejected by more conservative Lutheran bodies like the Missouri Synod. So what this amounts to is a self-congratulatory confab of progressives in the two bodies patting themselves on the back for their progressive beliefs. But such has been the practical nature of the ecumenical movement since its inception, it’s far more about confirming progressives in their beliefs than it is concern for souls, arriving at the truth, or, most especially, conversion:
Is it too much saying that Francis is trying to destroy the Church, or complete its destruction? As I said, these kinds of things have gone on for years, though not always with such fanfare, with such high-level participants, or with as much significance as the quincentenary portends.
Having said all that, I plan, for a time, to start ignoring the many problematic statements emanating from the Vatican, and limit myself to discussion/analysis of actions. At this point, I think we, who pray we adhere to what the Church has always believed, know who and what this man is. We know his penchant for highly destructive rhetoric. To some degree, reporting on that is feeling like repetitive non-news (water is wet), and I also need to do so to preserve my own faith and sanity. This planned confab with Lutheran heretics, and modernist ones at that, is a concrete act of such monumental significance that it does merit a good deal of coverage. I pray somehow, by some miracle, there may be an end to all this, but I won’t hold my breath.
I think it important to stress that the ecumenical/interreligious dialogue movements are radically counter to the Church’s pre-conciliar approach, and serve as one of the prime indicators that the Council, no matter what was intended (those arguments are endless, and quite possibly were intended to be), ushered in an era where practice, and belief, was irreconcilable with the Catholic ethos before 1962. That’s the take-home point.
IOC to allow “transgender” men to compete in women’s events February 2, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, paganism, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, suicide, unbelievable BS.
Well, I suspect we’ll start seeing a whole lot of records being broken. Now any man who is quite athletic but not quite gold medal material can go on female hormones for a while and, voila, gold city.
Is there ever any end to the sickness? We haven’t even begun to adjust to the new, state-enforced “reality” of pseudo-sodo-marriage, and they’re already trying to force this mental illness of transgenderism down our throats. And what kind of a society lets men pretending to be women beat the living daylights out of a woman, and for prize money?!?
“I’ve never felt so overpowered in my life,” said female mixed martial arts fighterTamikka Brents. “I’ve fought a lot of women and have never felt the strength that I felt in a fight as I did that night. I can’t answer whether it’s because she was born a man or not, because I’m not a doctor. I can only say I’ve never felt so overpowered ever in my life, and I am an abnormally strong female.” [Go figure. The vast majority of men are stronger, an usually vastly so, than the vast majority of women. God designed us for different things.]
The woman Brents was referring to isn’t a woman at all, but transgender MMA fighter Fallon Fox, who fights as a woman against women. Brent felt the full weight of what it was like to fight a man, and even with all her training and strength, she quickly fell to Fox.
Transgenderism has invaded the public consciousness, raising awareness of gender dysphoria; but not as the disorder linked to depression and suicides at an alarmingly high rate, but a celebrated identity everyone must respect—or else. [Absolutely. Just as with the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah, the truth has to be buried and a lie carefully constructed to conceal the truth and advance the sexular pagan agenda] The concept of transgenderism has become so pervasive that a man can step into the ring with a woman and pummel her for money, and the media will cheer for him.
What Brents reportedly experienced at Fox’s hands was a concussion and a broken orbital bone that required staples. In other words, this woman was savaged by an opponent that was genetically advantaged with a thicker bone structure, longer reach, and denser musculature—or, put more simply, was a man. Fox was able to do this despite hormone treatments that made him more feminine in certain aspects. [Which treatments dramatically raise the risk of cancer and also cause a greatly increased reach of psychosis, or dramatically unstable behavior]
………it should be common sense to not pit men against women in any serious sporting event, regardless of any hormone treatment or any genital surgery. [It might make even more sense to bar men from beating up women, and those with severe mental problems from high-profile public events]
This has not been the opinion of the International Olympic Committee (IOC), however, which has been allowing transgender athletes to compete against athletes not of their sex since 2004. They had formerly allowed transgender athletes to compete if they had fully transitioned with cross-sex hormones and surgery. As Fox demonstrates, this transition makes very little difference to a fully trained athlete.
But now the IOC has recommended ending the surgery requirement. In the “IOC Consensus Meeting on Sex Reassignment and Hyperandrogenism” report, the committee recommends that a male-to-female transgender “must demonstrate that her total testosterone level in serum has been below 10 nmol/L for at least 12 months prior to her first competition.” Female-to-male transgendered athletes may register to compete with male athletes without restriction. [What a freaking disaster]
Insanity. The Western world has completely lost its mind. I know better than to ask whether there is any end. Christ or chaos. By rejecting God, there is no end to the depth of depravity to which individuals, and an entire culture, can sink.
But one would think, we have to be nearing some kind of tipping point, where things really begin to break down due to rampant insanity and unreality. So many people have constructed a view of the world so dramatically counter to reality that it is amazing they are able to function, but not only do they function, they have dictated to the rest of us how things will be as they have served as totems to advance the revolution against Christendom.
Bah. I could go on forever. I’ve said all this before. It’s just sick. And, BTW, the NCAA is considering adopting the IOC’s position.
Wow. Via Eponymous Flower, one of the most disturbing statements emanating from Francis I’ve read to date. Speaking before the Italian Committee on Bioethics recently, Pope Francis had this to say, according to Vatican Insider:
Francis said: “Everyone is aware of how sensitive the Church is to ethical issues but perhaps it is not clear to everyone that the Church does not lay claim to a privileged voice in this field; [Whaaa?!?!] in fact it is a source of great satisfaction for the Church when civic responsibility at different levels is able to reflect, discern and act according to a free and open way of thinking and inspired by integral human and social values. This mature civic responsibility is a sign that the seed of the Gospel – which has been revealed and entrusted to the Church – has produced fruits, successfully fostering the search for truth and good in complex human and ethical questions” [This last statement might seem to ameliorate the first a bit, but what is he saying? He seems to be saying that “integral human and social values” are Gospel values, and they are, but that is such a reductive view of the Gospel, which is first and foremost about SALVATION. The first statement – that the Church does not lay claim to a privileged voice in ethical – or moral – matters is incredible, inexplicable, and indefensible. Like “who am I to judge,” this can be used by enemies of the constant belief and practice of the Faith within the Church for many years to come. How dare you speak out against abortion, or usury, or anything else? The Church doesn’t have a privileged voice, after all.]
…….Pope Francis said in a meeting with the Italian Committee for Bioethics today, highlighting the risk of utility and profit being the only reference points for developments in science and biological and medical technologies. He urged this advisory body of the Italian government, headed by Francesco Paolo Casavola, a Catholic, to look further into environmental degradation, “disability and the marginalisation of vulnerable individuals”. [Purely humanistic concerns. But what about the state’s role in fostering good morals and even an environment conducive to the salvation of souls, something so many previous Pope’s have highlighted?] He asked them in other words to tackle the challenge of countering today’s “throwaway culture” which “takes on many forms, including treating human embryos as disposable material, as well as sick and elderly people approaching the end”. The Pope also asked them to harmonise standards and norms in the biological and medical fields.
Francis seems increasingly to exist in a world I might call fantastic, or something like a fantasy-land. At a time when the Christian influence on the culture, especially in the post-Christian West, is falling away more rapidly than at anytime in recorded history, he points at integral human and social values in bioethics – a highly morally troubled field, to be kind – as evidence of Gospel influence? Yes, tilting one’s head sideways and ignoring a great deal of contrary evidence, there is a bit of truth to that, but implying that modern-day progressive humanist values as strongly Gospel-inspired is simply incredible.
I guess more concerning – more obviously substantial – is his correlation of humanism with the Gospel. Again, that is true, to a point, but there are no distinctions made, no rebuke against the grave errors that inhabit the mind of many “ethicists” (this is the same profession, after all, that has told us that post-birth abortion “aka murder” of children up to five is perfectly acceptable), no demarcating a clear line of distinction between the positive humanism of Jesus Christ and the profoundly negative, materialist, soul-destroying humanism of the modern-day progressive outlook.
And on top of it all, the statement that the Church has no privileged voice when it comes to public ethics! No wonder he looks down upon those praying outside abortion mills as interloping busy bodies! No wonder he opposed the effort of tens of thousands of Italian Catholics to stop their nation from accepting the lie of pseudo-sodo-marriage! Little wonder he lists “environmental degradation” as one of the most grave evils to combat!
This is well beyond even anything that Pope Paul VI was willing to advocate, heretofore far and away the most secular-minded, progressive pope in history. It is the veritable opposite of what virtually every single other predecessor of his in his vital office has ever decreed, such as Pope Leo XIII stating: “The Church of Christ is the true and sole teacher of virtue and guardian of morals.” However, this kind of declaration is in line with how a secular left-leaning individual views the Church. In fact, it is entirely in context with what we have seen of this entire agenda to remake the Church into what Francis somehow claims to loathe – just another worldly, money-funneling, occasionally-do-some-good NGO.
I’m quite surprised this comment hasn’t received far more attention than it has, because it’s really shocking. Have we already become inured to such declarations? That’s a potential follow-on effect of this pontificate, that it reshape the views of even those doubtful, or openly opposed, to its course in ways they themselves don’t quite realize. Thus the revolution embodied -and, according to many of his collaborators, intended – by this pontificate can become deeply ingrained in the Catholic psyche, affecting the sensus fidei of millions for years or decades to come And as I said, this can even trickle down to those who have grave concerns.
Feature or bug?
Mass failure: Brooklyn parish holds “Star Wars” Mass February 1, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, Basics, different religion, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, Liturgy, sadness, scandals, secularism, Society, the struggle for the Church.
St. Bernard Parish in Brooklyn scheduled, and apparently yesterday held, a “fun” Star Wars themed Mass. Kids were invited to dress as their favorite characters – many adherents to a Buddhist-Shintoist religion, some of whom are guilty of genocide and other acts of depravity on an unimaginable scale – and further denigrate the sanctity and vitality of the Mass:
The theme in the Church these past few decades really seems to be: when you totally run out of ideas, ape pop culture! Pop culture is popular! Maybe some of that popularity will rub off on us!
We wish this was just a joke. It is not. It is pure sacrilege taking place in a parish in Brooklyn, New York. Not only does the Diocese of Brooklyn know about this abomination … it actually helped advertise it on facebook!…….
……..According to the advertisement, the Mass itself was to be “Star Wars” themed.
First, this Mass did take place. Parishioners have confirmed it did.
Some of those tried to downplay the event, saying the Mass was not Star Wars-themed, itself, except for the kids dressed up like little Sith and Jedi. They say there was a Star Wars party concurrent and after the Mass, instead. But the flyer clearly spoke of a Star Wars themed Mass, so……..
As I said, when the Mass undergoes a transformation from the re-presentation of the Sacrifice of Calvary, the confecting of the Real Presence of Our Lord Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity, into a closed circle celebration of us, awesome, awesome US, this kind of thing is bound to happen. Indeed, it is almost inevitable, and there is even room to argue it is surprising it doesn’t happen more often than it does (instead, we tend to see a proliferation of not-so-obvious abuses). Such a fundamental dereliction of the ends of the Mass, from Adoration, Contrition, Thanksgiving, and Supplication, to “let’s cheer for the choir,” Eucharistic Prayer II, and “active participation means everyone scurry around” reveals a profoundly humanistic, even attention-seeking ethos. Instead of reaching children by sharing with them the unspeakable glory of the Gift God makes available to us every time we assist at Mass, we get Star Wars, clown, and balloon Masses.
And the vast majority of those kids fall away. 50 years of abject failure have proven that to an irrefutable degree. Instead, those in the vast majority of the Church, be they lay, priest, or bishop, continue to try absolutely anything, no matter how disordered, no matter how irreverent, except that which worked – demonstrably, provably – so very well for 1950 years, give or take a few.
It’s very difficult to see in that steadfast refusal to return to what worked so well, for so long, something other than a revolutionary intent revealing the mindset of an incompatible religion. It was through the Liturgy that I first came to recognize the crisis in the Church, and that continues through to this day.