I strongly suspected the reports from Kim Davis’ circle of her positive meeting and support from Pope Francis would not last long. The Vatican is now backing off claims that she had an “audience,” but instead says that she was just one of many people greeted that day:
In an official statement this morning, Fr. Federico Lombardi, head of the Vatican press office downplayed Pope Francis’ meeting with Kim Davis.
“Pope Francis met with several dozen persons who had been invited by the Nunciature to greet him as he prepared to leave Washington for New York City,” said Lombardi. “Such brief greetings occur on all papal visits and are due to the Pope’s characteristic kindness and availability.” [That does not mean he did not meet with Davis one on one. This is spin, it’s not a lie but it’s not the truth, either]
“The only real audience granted by the Pope at the Nunciature was with one of his former students and his family,” Fr. Lombardi added. [So now we’re down to parsing what a “real” audience is?]
The Vatican explained that the “brief” meeting between the Pope and Davis has “continued to provoke comments and discussion” and thus offered his explanation “in order to contribute to an objective understanding of what transpired.” [We’re trying desperately to placate harsh criticism in the US media and probably among the gay lobby in the Vatican. So now the media knows that a little pressure works in rolling this Pope, as if they didn’t know before. And don’t tell me this is the Vatican press office going off like a loose cannon. In this most authoritarian of pontificates, nothing “just happens.”]
Fr. Lombardi said, “The Pope did not enter into the details of the situation of Mrs. Davis and his meeting with her should not be considered a form of support of her position in all of its particular and complex aspects.” [Complex?!? She thinks sodomite marriage an offense against God and nature. She will have no part in it. Not hard to understand]
News that the pope had secretly met with Davis during his trip to the U.S. broke on Tuesday evening, after her lawyer made the meeting public. Davis said that Francis had told her to “stay strong,” giving both her and her husband a rosary. “Please pray for me,” he requested………
………In a new statement today, Davis’ lawyer, Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel, disputed reports circulating in light of the Vatican’s newest statement suggesting that Davis had simply met the pope as one in a line of people.
“There were no other people in the room,” he said. “This was a private meeting between Pope Francis and Kim and Joe Davis. This was not a meeting with other people in which Kim and Joe Davis were a part, but rather a private meeting with no other people in the room except Vatican security and personnel.”
Staver acknowledged that the pope “was not weighing in on particular facts of a legal case,” but added that “his statements about religious freedom and his encouragement to Kim Davis to ‘stray strong’ during a private meeting reaffirm the human right to conscientious objection. This is a right for everyone.”
Staver also said that the meeting was initiated by the Vatican, an apparent response to speculation that the meeting with the pope may have been arranged by a conservative bishop in the U.S., perhaps without the full knowledge of the Vatican or the pope about Davis’ case…….
…….[And now we get the spin of uber-weasel Fr. Tom Rosica]However, English-language spokesman for the Vatican, Fr. Thomas Rosica, placed the responsibility for the meeting in the hands of U.S. papal nuncio Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò.
“Who brought her in? The nuncio,” Father Rosica told the New York Times. “The Nunciature was able to bring in donors, benefactors.”
Fr. Rosica added: ““I would simply say: Her case is a very complex case. It’s got all kinds of intricacies. Was there an opportunity to brief the pope on this beforehand? I don’t think so. A list is given — these are the people you are going to meet.”
Rosica responded to a question about whether the Vatican press office had been unaware of the pope’s meeting with Davis, saying: “No, but I think we may not have been aware of the full impact of the meeting. It is very difficult sometimes when you are looking at things in America from here.” [How about let your yes be yes and your no be no, Fr. Tom?]
The force is strong in the sodomite mafia. Whether the pressure came from a US media gone over full bore into advocacy for perversion, or from the still extant sodomite lobby in the Vatican (or both), the Vatican has changed its tune. They are throwing Kim Davis under the bus. The Davis camp clearly refutes the Vatican allegations. I hope someone recorded the visit. This could get ugly before it’s over.
Oh what tangled webs we weave when first we practice to deceive! But whatever the reason for this meeting with Davis, the Synod will make all quite clear.
Bishop Olmstead releases 23 page exhortation to men October 2, 2015Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, Domestic Church, episcopate, General Catholic, manhood, mortification, sanctity, Society, true leadership, Virtue.
I found it a bit too redolent of the “New Evangelization” in parts, but Bishop Thomas Olmstead of Phoenix has released a fairly novel, for this day and age, exhortation/challenge to the men of his Diocese to step up and get engaged in the spiritual maelstrom raging all around us. Overall, I think this a welcome development, even if I wish the exhortation was more grounded in Tradition than it is (the great preponderance of the language is decidedly post-conciliar). It’s a rare thing in this day and age to see a bishop actually throw down a gauntlet, spiritually, rather than continue the production of vast quantities of happy gas. I say, good for him.
A review from Fr. Richard Heilmann:
In a powerfully worded apostolic exhortation addressed to the men of his diocese, Bishop Thomas Olmsted of Phoenix, Arizona, has urged them to “not hesitate to engage in the battle that is raging around you.”
In a 23-page exhortation, entitled “Into the Breach,” Bishop Olmsted challenges men to join in a “primarily spiritual” battle against forces that are “progressively killing the remaining Christian ethos in our society and culture, and even in our homes.”
Bishop Olmsted writes that the cultural crisis has arisen primarily because “Catholic men have not been willing to ‘step into the breach,’ and his purpose in the document, released on September 29, is to rally good men to the cause. [Yes, men’s failings have been a significant part of the problem, but how are sheep to rally without a shepherd to guide them? I very much appreciate Bishop Olmstead’s exhortation in that regard, but let’s be real: the crisis in the Church is a crisis of a mass failure of leadership by the clergy. THAT IS NOT TO EXCUSE MEN OF THEIR DUTY! Not at all, but it is a a recognition of reality, though should fathers/men return en masse to their duty, one would hope and pray that within a few generations the crisis would be resolved through a huge influx of very good priests]
Bishop Olmsted explains that Catholic men are needed to conduct the “New Evangelization,” to re-introduce Christian principles in a society that has come to neglect them. He also cites the image offered by Pope Francis, of the Church as a “field hospital,” providing urgent care for those wounded by societal problems. [The only problem with the “old evangelization” is that it was dropped for no good reason. I am very dubious of this “new evangelization,” because it is grounded in the modernist concept that the world and humanity have somehow undergone a change so fundamental that the old means and methods – so effective for centuries – no longer work. They only no longer work, because they are no longer tried. It is one of the signal achievements of the modernist camp, in getting the Church to embrace this mentality, by and large]
Reflecting on the complementarity of the sexes, the bishop calls for active resistance against “gender ideology” and a dedication to living out male virtues, particularly the virtues of fortitude and chastity.
Addressing the question of what it means to be a man, Bishop Olmsted reminds his readers of how Pontius Pilate referred to Jesus: Ecce homo– “Here is the man!” The bishop observes: “Only in Jesus Christ can we find the highest display of masculine virtue and strength that we need in our personal lives and in society itself.” [Good]
The bishop urges men to undertake a campaign of spiritual growth, advising regular prayer and use of the sacraments, reading of Scripture, and unselfish service to wives and children. He recommends imitation of the great males saints. [Ooh Ooh! I pick Saint Jerome!] He cites the words of one of these models, Blessed Pier Giorgio Frassati: “To live without faith, without a patrimony to defend, without a steady struggle for truth – that is not living, but existing.”
In closing his apostolic exhortation, Bishop Olmsted calls readers’ attention to the scandal of Planned Parenthood’s involvement in the sale of fetal tissues. “We need to get off the sidelines and stand up for life on the front lines,” he writes, adding:
“We need faith like that of our fathers who defended the children of previous generations and who gave up their own lives rather than abandon their faith in Christ. My sons and brothers, men of the Diocese of Phoenix, we need you to step into the breach!”
Men of the Dallas Diocese (and nearby environs), you have two opportunities in the next week to step up and take on some additional effort to for the good of souls, the restoration of the moral order, and in opposition to grave evil. The first is next Wednesday, October 7 in the prayer vigil outside ‘The Men’s Club,’ and the other is on Saturday, October 10, in the Rosary Rally outside Planned Butcherhood. There is also a Life Chain being held this Sunday Oct. 4 at Mater Dei Parish from 2-3:30 pm. So you can’t say: “Well, what can I do?” You can go to any or all of those!!!
I pray I see you there!
National Right to Life: 2016 more important than stopping murder and sale of baby parts October 2, 2015Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Abortion, asshatery, contraception, disaster, General Catholic, horror, It's all about the $$$, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, Society, unbelievable BS.
Congress just passed “temporary” funding bills that will continue to keep federal dollars rolling into Planned Barrenhood for some time. Many widely expect Republicans to continue to do so, to prevent their members from having to vote for or against a measure funding Planned Barrenhood. These temporary measures also keep RINO names from being attached to disastrously large, debt-inducing appropriations bills. It’s the new way of running government for the benefit of the elite, not passing proper bills and laws but just hacking together temporary measures to better aid their political fortunes.
It seems National Right to Life is fully supportive of this. They continue to maintain the delusion that 2016 might be a banner year of Republicans (it won’t) and that 2016 represents the best chance to end Roe v. Wade in a generation. As if. I don’t know where they get their delusions, in reality, these are hard-bitten political veterans who know better than anyone Roe won’t be going away anytime in the foreseeable future, these excuses are simply for public consumption, to explain away their all-too-cozy relationship with a Republican party too concerned about its electoral future to stop the mass slaughter of children and sale of murdered baby parts. LSN reports:
For weeks, leading pro-life groups have urged Congress to defund Planned Parenthood. This week, however, both chambers passed government funding bills that funded the government — including its funding of Planned Parenthood — until December.
Shortly before the vote, LifeSiteNews spoke with the leader of one of the few pro-life groups urging Congress to avoid a full-tilt defunding fight until 2017 — after a pro-life president can be elected.
“There was a government shutdown in 2013 because people wanted to see Obamacare repealed,” said National Right to Life’s Carol Tobias. “The repeal didn’t happen, and Republican numbers were in the tank until the disastrous rollout of Obamacare, which became a national joke. I don’t know that we can count on something like that next year to happen.”…….
……NRLC has not been shy about going against the pro-life grain. In 2013, it targeted two no-exceptions representatives from Georgia who opposed the “Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act” because the bill allowed for the abortion of children conceived through rape.
Last year, the national pro-life organization dropped its affiliation with Georgia Right to Life because of the latter’s opposition to exceptions in pro-life legislation. A new, untested group — Georgia Life Alliance — became the new state partner. [Well that is DANGED interesting, and mirrors the division between Texas Right to Life – a no exceptions type group – and Texas Alliance for Life, which this writer has observed to be willing to make a lot of exceptions]
………”I hate to say this, but in 2012, pro-lifers lost. And babies are paying the price. We have to do everything we can to make sure that doesn’t happen in 2016, because we don’t want another four years, or eight years, of a pro-abortion president who is going to defend Planned Parenthood and defend abortion,” explains Tobias. The next president will “appoint justices to the Supreme Court who will, maybe five years, 10 years, 15 years down the road, be able to overturn Roe v. Wade.” [Uh huh. How many Republican-nominated justices do their have to be to overturn Roe v. Wade? Because in 1992 there were 6!! (O’Connor, Kennedy, Scalia, Thomas, Rehnquist, Souter with a very conservative Byron White), and yet how did Casey v. Planned Barrenhood turn out? Instead we got a lecture from O’Connor about how abortion is the vital backstop to America’s contraceptive mentality? Just what exactly does NRLC do to oppose contraception? How many votes are enough in the Senate? The R’s will never, ever have 60+, and how many Republican presidents have taken real, hard steps to end abortion in this country? In the final analysis, the Republican party at the national level has repeatedly shown itself willing to only nibble around the edges of abortion but never, ever put it at serious risk of being outlawed. Even if the R’s by some miracle had 65 seats in the Senate and a president in the White House they STILL would manage to screw it up)
“When you weigh everything on the scale, I don’t know how, when you’ve got the current Senate make-up, and you’ve got Obama in the White House, I don’t know how you can win [inaudible],” she stated.
So what can pro-lifers do in 2016? Tobias says they can vote. “Part of the problem in 2012 was that some people [said], ‘Oh, I don’t really like Mitt Romney, I don’t like his religion,'” said Tobias. “A lot of people didn’t vote. We have to make sure that doesn’t happen next time. It’s up to pro-lifers to make sure that every pro-life voter in the country knows what is at stake.”
……… But if pro-lifers decide that, for whatever reason, they’re upset and they’re just gonna stay home, babies continue to die.”
I’m sorry, and excuse my language, but bullshit. Sure the Republicans are marginally better on pro-life at the national level, but only marginally so. Does anyone really think that if Romney – a total abortion squish, who has changed his position to whatever is convenient – had been elected, abortion would be under any more threat in this Year of our Lord 2015? No. We’d be hearing the same crap about how they’re aren’t enough votes in the Senate, the democrats will filibuster, we must wait till next election and see how we come out, but in the meantime, all you pro-lifers be good little obedient soldiers and keep donating to our cause and always keep voting Republican, and maybe one distant day in the future (but no promises!) we’ll put in a minor limitation on abortion.
I think a lot of pro-lifers have been hearing this same line for decades and we’re sick of it. The Republican party leadership takes pro-life votes for granted and isn’t even slightly interested in seeing our vital concerns realized. And NRLC and many other groups are so institutionalized that they are basically inseparable from the Republican party apparatus.
Here’s the reality – in spite of the billions donated to national pro-life groups, in spite of decades of pro-lifers dutifully voting for the Republican party, the United States today remains one of the most free-wheeling abortion landscapes in the world. We are one of only six nations to allow abortion to six months gestation, nominally, but let’s be real, we all know there are thousands of doctors all too happy to declare a “threat” to the mother’s health for specious reasons, so that abortion is in reality legal to 42 weeks and beyond. We see in the Planned Barrenhood videos that partial birth abortion still goes on on a wide scale, and does anyone think a single soul at Planned Barrenhood will be indicted under the federal ban?
I’ll just sum up again, bluntly: if the Republican party had all 9 Supreme Court justices, a “pro-life” President, 65 seats in the Senate and 280 in the House, does anyone think Roe v. Wade would be overturned/outlawed? Would abortion be made illegal? I don’t. I don’t believe that because I don’t believe the Republican party leadership wants abortion to go away, too many of even the “pro-life” ones aren’t, and, even more, the Republicans NEED abortion to remain as a vital motivator for much of their base. Even a 20 week limit would only be a probability under those circumstances, not assured. If you think I go too far, look at the historical track record, people.
Bah, maybe I’ve gotten too cynical, but having followed these matters closely for years my view of the Republican party on abortion has grown exceedingly pessimistic.
add a comment
This almost reads like a joke. So German Cancellor Angela Merkel was in New York to attend some UN function. She wound up at a table with Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg. She lamented to him the hostility expressed on social media to her immigration policy, especially given that Germany has taken in over 800,000 “refugees” this year alone. She was not happy with this wrong kind of self-expression, and demanded action. The CEO was only too happy to oblige:
On the sidelines of a United Nations luncheon on Saturday, Merkel was caught on a hot mic pressing Zuckerberg about social media posts about the wave of Syrian refugees entering Germany, the publication reported.
The Facebook CEO was overheard responding that “we need to do some work” on curtailing anti-immigrant posts about the refugee crisis. “Are you working on this?” Merkel asked in English, to which Zuckerberg replied in the affirmative before the transmission was disrupted.
There’s two standards folks: one for those who hold the “right” opinions, those who hold great leverage in society, and one for the rest of us. The internet, while also being a serious source of disinformation, has also been a thorn in the side of the powers that be. As the global consensus towards authoritarianism grows, don’t be surprised to see quite concrete moves to start blocking free speech on the internet. We can expect comments on various fora not to show, we can expect being banned from various sites, we can even expect being outed as various forms of hate monger. All in the service of “equality” and “non-discrimination.” It’s amazing how many other rights, even ones heretofore so sacrosanct (when they were an effective tool of the Revolution), are willingly sacrificed on the altar of expediency once their usefulness is at an end.
OR……it could just be a corrupt politician with a really bad policy seeking aid and cover from the media. But notice they rarely go to such lengths over things as prosaic as tax policy…..it’s only on the cultural issues that they seek to silence dissent, because culture trumps all.
So a liberal NYT writer (I repeat) has authored a piece on what it is to be a “modern man.” The result is about what you would expect, a whimpering metrosexual ninny who knows more about nail files than he does about gaping spark plugs.
I agree with Ace. This is pure click-bait, a deliberately obtuse effort designed to spark outrage and attract the maximum number of hits. But I imagine their are elements of truth in it, like the author’s obsession with footwear or his inadvertant revelations of his ladylike attention to other people’s feelings. It also reveals a man who probably spends very little time outside his precious city.
Since I strongly suspect this is at least a somewhat disingenuous effort only put forth to attract hits, I won’t link to it. You can find it through Ace’s post if you want. Ace took a lot of it anyway, which I’ll copy and comment on:
1. When the modern man buys shoes for his spouse, he doesn’t have to ask her sister for the size. And he knows which brands run big or small. [My wife would probably want to go meet with the priest if I started buying shoes for her]
4. The modern man doesn’t cut the fatty or charred bits off his fillet. Every bite of steak is a privilege, and it all goes down the hatch. [Fillet’s are not known for their fat. You mean strip or sirloin?]
6. Before the modern man heads off to bed, he makes sure his spouse’s phone and his kids’ electronic devices are charging for the night. [Rock on, superdad!]
7. The modern man buys only regular colas, like Coke or Dr Pepper. If you walk into his house looking for a Mountain Dew, he’ll show you the door. [WTF?!?? Who is obsessive enough to care? I’m sure they’re Coke Zero, anyway]
8. The modern man uses the proper names for things. For example, he’ll say “helicopter,” not “chopper” like some gauche simpleton. [Well, aren’t we a dandy? Can you see all us little people from up there, perched on your lofty heights?]
9. Having a daughter makes the modern man more of a complete person. He learns new stuff every day. [Yeah, well, I try to teach my kids something every day, too. I gave my second oldest daughter (try having 6) a lecture on the GULAG system yesterday.]
10. The modern man makes sure the dishes on the rack have dried completely before putting them away. [You show ’em, tiger. I pray you never have a son]
11. The modern man has never “pinned” a tweet, and he never will. [Well we agree on one thing]
12. The modern man checks the status of his Irish Spring bar before jumping in for a wash. Too small, it gets swapped out. [I’m sitting here, mouth agape. Did I just read that, as a DEFINITION OF MANHOOD?!?!?]
15. The modern man has hardwood flooring. His children can detect his mood from the stamp of his Kenneth Cole oxfords. [Get you a pair of Red Wings and maybe you’ll put a little peach fuzz on]
16. The modern man lies on the side of the bed closer to the door. If an intruder gets in, he will try to fight him off, so that his wife has a chance to get away. [Yeah, well, I lie closer to the door but I also have two guns within arm’s length. I win.]
17. Does the modern man have a melon baller? What do you think? How else would the cantaloupe, watermelon and honeydew he serves be so uniformly shaped? [These are not the balls you’re looking for]
18. The modern man has thought seriously about buying a shoehorn.
19. The modern man buys fresh flowers more to surprise his wife than to say he is sorry. [How about the decent man?]
20. On occasion, the modern man is the little spoon. Some nights, when he is feeling down or vulnerable, he needs an emotional and physical shield. [Well, we now know who the “man” in the family is]
23. The modern man has all of Michael Mann’s films on Blu-ray (or whatever the highest quality thing is at the time). [I prefer John Wayne. Just watched The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance again. What a film! Talk about men! Lee Marvin was a MAN]
24. The modern man doesn’t get hung up on his phone’s battery percentage. If it needs to run flat, so be it. [I am astonished at this man’s bravery. How he shames the men who fought and won WWII]
25. The modern man has no use for a gun. He doesn’t own one, and he never will. [Better pray he never runs across an un-modern criminal who carries one. Me, I think a man ought to own 5 or 10]
26. The modern man cries. He cries often.
Oh I give up. Definitely click bait, but sheesh, how pathetic can you be?
If this is a man, Bruce Jenner didn’t lose much by pretending to be a woman, does he?
US undertaking unprecedented influx of immigration October 1, 2015Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, demographics, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Immigration, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society.
It’s always a bit of a fallacy to extend present trends far into the future, because there are many reasons why things could change, but given that the United States continues to ride an unprecedented 45 year wave of extraordinary levels of illegal immigration, there is not much reason to conclude that the trend will suddenly reverse, unless there the mass public dissatisfaction with this ongoing trend should finally move the political, cultural, and economic leadership of this country to act. Nevertheless, if trends hold, the United States will, in 7-8 years, surpass the highest percentage of immigrants in the country in its entire (by then) 250 year history:
The United States is taking in more immigrants than at any time in our history, while at the same time making little or no effort to assimilate them. No one can know what the consequences of this experiment will be. This chart, created by the Center for Immigration Studies from Census Bureau data, plots the number of immigrants living in the U.S. and their share of the population, from 1900 to 2014 and projected through 2060. As of last year, the U.S. was home to a record 42.4 million immigrants, legal and illegal, representing 13.3% of the nation’s population.
* In addition to immigrants, there were 16.2 million U.S.-born minor (<18) children with at least one immigrant parent in 2014, for a total of 58.6 million immigrants and their children. Immigrants and their minor children now account for more than one in six U.S. residents.
* Mexico had by far the largest immigrant population in the country, with 11.7 million legal and illegal Mexican immigrants living in the United States in 2014.
Indeed, at present, 1 in 8 Mexican nationals now resides in the United States. Talk about unprecedented.
This nation is being radically changed. If trends do hold, any idea of the Republicans or any other conservative party holding power (Presidency + at least one House of Congress) come 2030 or so is literal insanity. Hispanics and all other immigrants vote democrat/left wing about 4:1. Their children do the same, the pattern does not begin to change until the 3rd or 4th generation, and even that is somewhat doubtful. Add another 10-15 million voters of that bent and you have the makings of a permanent democrat majority.
In a sense, there is a delicious irony playing out, if you have some knowledge of the history of the United States treatment of Mexico and much of Latin America. We had things totally our way for about 200 years, but no longer. This can be traced directly back to the collapse in US birth rates, which has created at least some justification for the influx of illegal worker bees to replace those never born here. The US quite frankly has royally screwed over Mexico on numerous occasions, from the invasion of 1848-9 that took away almost half of Mexico’s former land area, to the deliberate, purposeful infiltration of the Mexican political and cultural system by US interests, planting masonry and liberalism in a deeply traditional country and instigating most of the dire persecutions the Church has experienced there. In a sense, we’ve sown the wind, and are in the process of reaping the whirlwind. If these Hispanics would somehow remain devout Catholics and work to instill a Catholic culture in this country, I’d be much more supportive of this literal human flood, but most fall away, or are already extremely weak, worldly Catholics formed by the disastrously bad Church in Latin America, when they come here.
Completely, totally related – the average full-time male employee in the United States makes less today than he did in 1970:
he typical man with a full-time job–the one at the statistical middle of the middle–earned $50,383 last year, the Census Bureau reported this week.
The typical man with a full-time job in 1973 earned $53,294, measured in 2014 dollars to adjust for inflation.
You read that right: The median male worker who was employed year-round and full time earned less in 2014 than a similarly situated worker earned four decades ago. And those are the ones who had jobs.
Would you like fries with that?
Two videos – everything wrong with modern art, Abby Johnson destroys Cecile Richards October 1, 2015Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, Art and Architecture, Basics, contraception, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, sadness, scandals, sickness, Society.
I like this video on all the problems with modern (and post-modern) art. The abandonment of artistic standards has led to the near total collapse of the production of quality, timeless art. I think it also emblematic of the decadence and moral corruption of the West, that tacky, cheap, boring, unskillful, offensive, and just plain crap that my 3rd grader could better is now promoted as “fine art.” Give me a break:
A couple of things – do you remember the movie “Dead Poet’s Society?” There is a pivotal scene that repeats itself, having to do with a textbook that teaches a means of “rating” the relative merits of different poems. The new liberal teacher, played by Robin Williams, is horribly offended at this notion, believing that poetry is so sublime it is beyond any kind of ratings or metrics. He teaches his students to rip that section of the textbook out. Later on, this becomes sort of his triumph.
But is that really right? Are there not means by which various poets and poems could be rated against each other? Is writing in a very technical meter, and pulling it off with rhyme, rhythm, and deep meaning, a greater achievement than a few lines scrawled in a haiku? Is the Illiad greater than some of EE Cummings later trash? Does Shakespeare not trump the contemporary schlock called poetry we are dished up? Or Blake or Wordsworth or Coleridge, for that matter?
The same applies to the visual arts. It is perhaps true that the governing academies of the late 19th century had become a bit too rigid and stale, but throwing off ALL restraint and ANY founding principles has led art down the garbage drain of boring, thoughtless, derivative trash. And I think it right to cast a bit of blame at the Impressionists on this, because they started the revolution, even though their own works were great achievements in their own right.
Second video, kind of boring but a for-the-record type entry, Abby Johnson obliterates Cecile Richards. I’m quite certain my sophomore daughter could do so even more thoroughly, but she’ll never have the cache of having worked at Planned Butcherhood:
Meh: Cecile Richards, head of an organization responsible for tens of millions of murders (for profit), lies. Shocking, I know.
A couple of what the heck videos. There is so little footage of the incredibly charismatic Gram Parsons. Here is one of the better bits. Groovy man. Somebody please pin Chris Hillman to the ground and shave his head, sheesh.
From the same shoot in support of the first Flying Burrito Brother album. Such a shame Gram couldn’t put together more than about 6 consecutive clean months the last 10 years of his life. When he did wow was he prodigiously talented. [FAIR WARNING – GRAM TOOK THE IDEA OF A “NUDIE SUIT” A BIT TOO FAR]:
REMINDER: Next Men’s Prayer Vigil outside ‘The Men’s Club’ Wednesday October 7, 2015 @ 8 pm October 1, 2015Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, awesomeness, Dallas Diocese, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Interior Life, manhood, mortification, sanctity, Society, Spiritual Warfare, Tradition, Virtue.
1 comment so far
I got a really awesome sign of Our Lady of Fatima. I shall try to bring it. It’s huge.
Thank you, gentlemen, for your suggestions and recommendations. The sign is one thing that was recommended, to better communicate to passersby what it is we are doing. As for the rest, standing pat for now, but there will likely more changes in future.
I will be praying outside The Men’s Club, 2340 W. Northwest Hwy, Dallas, on WEDNESDAY OCT. 7 @ 8p. I will actually be across the street in the parking lot of the US Post Office. This is directly across from the entrance to the inappropriately named “gentleman’s club.”
We’ve had some good turnout. I pray all of you are able to come back out this time.
The post office parking lot is well lit and set back some distance from the very busy roadway. It is public land so we cannot be harassed for being there. It’s really an ideal situation, we are basically impossible to miss by patrons leaving this sexually oriented business (SOB). Men over 18 only. All men are welcome. You don’t have to be a member of a particular parish. I will stay for at least an hour, maybe an hour and a half, depending on how many show up.
Just to be clear we have had no occasions of sin stemming from being adjacent to a strip club. We are out in public and have experienced no scandal at all to this point.
No protesting, just prayer. If we are approached by anyone associated with the SOB let one man interact with them while the rest provide prayer support.
I pray I see you there! We love to see new faces!
Is the report that the world financial system force PBXVI’s abdication real, or hyperbole? October 1, 2015Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, different religion, disaster, episcopate, error, General Catholic, It's all about the $$$, Papa, persecution, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, the return, the struggle for the Church.
I instantly saw the report come out on Tuesday from a French source alleging that the evil American globalist financial power had somehow forced Pope Benedict XVI’s abdication by freezing assets at the Vatican bank. Here is the report below, translated by Google:
“Few know what SWIFT (the acronym stands for Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication) is: in theory, is a global “clearing house”, uniting 10,500 banks in 215 countries. In fact, is the most occult and sole center of American-globalist financial power, a bastion of blackmail on which the hegemony of the dollar, the most powerful means of political and economic espionage (to the detriment especially for us Europeans) and the means by which the most feared global finance breaks the legs of states that do not obey. …
“‘When a bank or territory is excluded from the system, as it did in the case of the Vatican in the days before the resignation of Benedict XVI in February 2013, all transactions are blocked. Without waiting for the election of Pope Bergoglio, the Swift system has been unlocked the announcement of the resignation of Benedict XVI.
“‘There was a blackmail come from who knows where, through SWIFT, exercised on Benedict XVI. The underlying reasons for this story have not been clarified, but it is clear that SWIFT has intervened directly in the management of affairs of the Church.’
“This explains and justifies the unprecedented resignation of Ratzinger, that many of us have been able to exchange for an act of cowardice; the Church was treated as a state ‘terrorist’, but worse — because note that the dozen banks falling into the hands of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria ‘are not excluded from SWIFT’ and continue to be able to make international transactions — and the Vatican finances could no longer pay the nunciature, to convey transport missions — in fact, the same ATM of Vatican City had been blocked.
The Church of Benedict could not ‘neither sell nor buy’; its own economic life was counted in hours.”
So my initial inclination was to think this was all a bit histrionic, especially the typically European hyperbole over (often European-dominated) international institutions like SWIFT and of course the cruel hand of the American Dollar.
HOWEVER, I started looking through some dates on these matters, and things lined up shockingly well. The Vatican Bank lost access to all electronic monetary transfers on Jan. 1, 2013, ostensibly due to failure to implement Euro-mandated reforms regarding protections against money laundering. For years, PBXVI had been trying to reform the Vatican Bank, or “IOR,” without total success. As 2012 melted into 2013, his reform process came to a standstill with the forcing out of IOR head Gotto Tedeschi, the man hand-picked by Benedict to reform the bank. Tedeschi seems to have been nothing but a fall guy, facing a number of false allegations after his dismissal and beating them all in court (even Italian court, which is really saying something). It appears his force out was part of the broader struggle to undermine and foil every attempt PBXVI made at reform at every level. Tedeschi was simply an early casualty in the war against Pope Benedict and Cardinal Bertone.
SO, the day after Pope Benedict announces his abdication, voila!, the ban on electronic monetary transfers/credit card transactions is suddenly lifted! That seems an enormous coincidence, but who am I to judge?
Anyway, I see Louie Verrecchio has written a long piece on this subject with far more detail than I can give, so if you really want to dig deep into it, you can read his post. I really tend to think the Vatileaks scandal, the 300 page dossier on sodomite clergy in the Diocese of Rome/Vatican (how quickly that has been forgotten), and the constant machinations of the modernist cardinals like Daneels, Kasper, McCarrick, et. al., were probably more significant factors, but this may have been the icing on the cake to convince Pope Benedict to realize that his pontificate was being ground to a halt, with ongoing damage to the Church (though not so much damage as since!). I still think there is a missing link, which Rorate Caeli has referred to, regarding a certain turncoat cardinal, ostensibly an ally/protege of Benedict, who convinced him that abdication was a safe course as a friendly, like-minded successor was assured.
I do think the many revelations we’ve seen in the past 12-18 months do make clear (to this writer, anyway) that Pope Benedict abdicated under duress. That is to say, the stated reason (health) was perhaps only one part of a very complex picture, featuring attacks on his pontificate from every possible angle.
EXPLOSIVE REVELATIONS! SYNOD A SHAM! SECRET CABAL MEETING DRAFTING RADICAL LIBERTINE NEW “DOCTRINE.” POPE BEHIND ALL. October 1, 2015Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, different religion, disaster, episcopate, error, General Catholic, horror, Papa, persecution, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, SOD, the struggle for the Church.
Well folks, it seems the dread day has finally arrived. It is being widely reported that a secret parallel synod comprising Jesuits and Argentines has been stood up to draft the post-synodal documents that will implement whatever Pope Francis and his sponsors, like the immoral Cardinal Daneels and the radical episcopalian Cardinal Kasper, want. Marco Tossati reports, along with more info from Edward Pentin. All below from Rorate Caeli:
Italian journalist Marco Tosatti reveals that A SECRET PARALLEL SYNOD has been established in Rome, a cabal composed almost exclusively by Jesuits, with the occasional Argentinian presence (easy to guess who), to draft the necessary post-synodal documents to implement whatever the Pope wants to implement. And they will implement it, no matter what, as the secret committee to draft the Annulment reforms has shown; what everyone supposed was true in fact is true: the Synodal process is a sham.
Because since, as Edward Pentin revealed in detail, the 2014 Synod was rigged, [and yet still did not quite achieve the desired result]the 2015 will be rigged beyond all measure, as Pentin himself reported on September 29 at the National Catholic Register, on procedural changes to be announced tomorrow (Friday) that will make any control over the outcome impossible by Synod Fathers who realize they are being cheated (as happened last year – the manipulators learned their lesson):At last year’s meeting, the interim document, properly called a relatio post-disceptationem, caused controversy after it was sent out to the media before the synod fathers had read it. Critics said the document lacked references to Scripture and tradition, and most controversially, appeared to imply the Church was considering giving tacit acceptance of same-sex relationships — an issue that was hardly discussed during the meeting’s first week. [The 2014 Synod was greatly manipulated by papal-appointees assigned to lead and govern the Synod, all in order to promote a modernist-progressive message as morally acceptable]The probable decision not to have an interim report may be an effort to avoid last year’s controversy from recurring. But some fear it will lead to less transparency, and worry the timing could be intentional in order to facilitate the advancement of controversial proposals as time runs out for discussion.…Another rumored change is that the rule on propositions having to pass by a two-thirds majority might be eliminated and a simple majority take its place.This would favor a controversial proposal, such as Cardinal Kasper’s, because his thesis only received a simple majority at the last synod……..Tosatti adds his own exclusive information, which is quite explosive, considering that the last time a secret papal commission met, what we got was the most authoritarian canon law reforms in the history of the Church, in violation of all understanding of the proper boundaries of papal power and establishing de facto Catholic divorce under the guise of easy acccess to “annulments”: [Because left-liberal paeans to “fairness” and “equality” and “democracy” are really just a pile of manure, nothing but cover for “I will.” I will that sodomites should be “regularized” in the Church, I will that adulterers receive the Blessed Sacrament, I will that Catholic divorce be permitted, etc. It’s the most authoritarian papacy of the past 200 years, if not a lot longer than that. We now see very clearly, as if we did not before, that “collegiality” and “dialogue” and all the other things are just means to their ends, when convenient, and instantly chucked overboard when they are not. A more faithful/traditional pope in future would do well to remember that.]
In this context [that is, of the procedural changes mentioned by Edward Pentin], news has arrived to us for about twelve days that around thirty people, almost all of them Jesuits, with the occasional Argentinian, are working on the themes on the Synod, in a very reserved way, under the coordinatin of Father Antonio Spadaro, the director of Civiltà Cattolica [the official journal of the Holy See], who spends a long time in Santa Marta, in consultation with the Pope.The discretion in the works extends also to the Jesuits of the same House, the villa of Civiltà Cattolica, Villa Malta, on the Pincio [Hill], where part of the work is done. One possibility is that the “task force” works to provide the Pope the instruments for an eventual post-synodal document on the theme of the Eucharist to the remarried divorced, on cohabiting [couples], and same-sex couples.
Patrick Archbold feels this revelation irrevocably nails the intent behind the Synod, which is not to canvass the opinions of a small subset of the world’s bishops, but to arrive at predetermined ideological conclusions, the very conclusions we’ve seen referenced by Cardinal Daneels, Cardinal McCarrick, and many others: a “modernized” church, “finishing the work of Vatican II,” and firmly and irrevocably instituting the modernist program into formal Church legislation:
They will get their way NO. MATTER. WHAT.
Because of their PR setbacks last year when their nefarious deeds became public, they are changing the rules. Just like the Pope circumvented all traditional process to implement his annulment reforms, they are changing all the rules of the synod this time around to keep that from happening again. The persistent rumors will likely become fact tomorrow after a press conference on the subject.
But that is just the beginning. Like the first time around when the tragic, horrible, and disgusting interim relatio was written before a single conversation, the fix is in…….
They will get their way and they are depending on the Pope to make it happen.
This is where we are now. Time to face it.
And there is nary a handful of Bishops standing up to this thuggery in any meaningful way.
There is NO resistance but us. None. Time we start acting like it.
I think a lot of us are trying. I’m not entirely certain what we do at this point.
I will say this: these guys are messing with primal supernatural forces. They may unleash something well beyond their expectation, and it may have shocking results. The only thing I know is, God will not be mocked. This will not stand. Even if it takes the black flag of Jihad flying over St. Peter’s, this will not stand.
May God have mercy on His Church. What terrible days we live in.