jump to navigation

Leftism Is the Religion of Immoral People, Exhibit# 27,985,487 June 26, 2018

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, Basics, cultural marxism, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, Immigration, manhood, persecution, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, suicide, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

With a knowing nod to commenter Michele Kerby, who certainly knows that there is a world of difference between a liberal with whom I disagree on various points but with whom dialogue is still possible, a la Carl Benjamin aka Sargon of Akkad, and a leftist.

As a case in point – and I know this is painting with a broad brush, but there are so many brush strokes the object is plainly obvious – Steven Crowder held one of his “Change My Mind” public discussion forums in Austin recently on the subject of whether there are more than two genders (Crowder taking the stand that, biologically and on numerous other fronts, there are not, and cannot be).  He actually had a quite civil discussion with a self-described transsexual, but a hard left activist at my alma mater, the University of Texas, took such exception to the idea even being discussed that she sent out tweets calling for Crowder and his crew to be firebombed.  Just to be certain she was not misunderstood, she included photos of their equipment van and repeated the call more than once.

Of course, the craven, cowardly, and self-seeking administration at UT took no action against this assault on the social fabric.  But in a twist of fate, Steven Crowder was a few days later engaged in some mild mannered and humorous trolling, as he often does, at a meeting of the Texas State Democratic party convention, and guess who happened to be there, but the very woman who had incited violence.  Crowder very bravely but with great tact and charity sought this woman out and confronted her. The record of that experience is below:

What adjectives would you use to describe the reaction of not just the woman encouraging violence, but the rest of those who showed up to try to shout down and shame Steven Crowder, denying him even the ability to defend himself from violent attack?  Some that come to mind – childish, narcissistic, soulless, cult-like, cruel, self-serving, defensive, ignorant, ideologically possessed…….Can you think of a single virtue evidenced by this crowd?  On the other side, do you know how hard it is to face that kind of group action and remain not only one’s composure, but humorous?  I’ve done it a few times before, and did not remain as cool as Crowder did. He is a strong man in more ways than one.

These are not rank and file democrats.  These are leaders and activists – agents of agitprop – in the Texas democrat party.  They are among some of the most well connected people in the entire state party apparatus.  These are not some weirdo extremists in a basement somewhere.  These people have influence, and not a small amount of it.

The actions on display here speak volumes about the present state of the democrat party and the left in this country.  It is little wonder major commentators on both sides of the aisle are speaking more and more openly of civil war.

I have been trying over the past several months to see things from the other side’s perspective.  I read and listen to an increasing variety of sources, some of them very contrary to my established beliefs.  But there are simply virtually no arguments on the other side.  It is all invective, scare-mongering, grasping at straws and creation of a fantasy land in which it is the right that is pushing towards “violence” (by saying things they don’t like – note the hypocrisy, leftists act like actual incitements to violence are innocuous, while merely opposing leftist policy on logical grounds constitutes violence – only a child could formulate such a narcissistic justification) and about to bring down the nightmare of fascism on this nation.  The evidence for this always remains fabricated, grossly exaggerated, mired in “what about-ism,” or just around the corner.  What in reality has happened is that the Left has lost all sense and perspective and is deeply ensconced in an ideological bubble where only things that align with pre-existing notions are allowed to enter.  That is why, in the face of massive electoral losses, at every level, over the past 8 years, the democrats have only been able to double-down and press ever further leftwards.

For goodness’ sake, how on earth can you even have a discussion or debate when one side – and it is always the same side, the “right,” to the extent such even exists in this country (in a traditional sense, one not infused with the parasite of enlightenment liberal thinking) – behaves like the most utterly spoiled, ill-mannered, screaming, flailing, out of control children you’ve ever seen?  The utter insolence and solipsism is simply beyond the pale.  Look at the face of that woman and her associates when confronted – no shame, no willingness to concede even the slightest humanity to the hated “other,” just blank stares and a quick degeneration into formulaic chants and mind-numbing rage once the realization that they were caught out and could say nothing in their defense sank in.

At the root of all this is the growing sense, among these apparatchiks and their masters, that the Left’s ideals, political, cultural, economic, etc., have been decisively rejected by this country.  A poll out today showed that even after the incredible vitriol and rhetoric from the Democrats and their propaganda arm, the corporate media (or perhaps because of it), nearly 3/4 of Americans still firmly believe that illegal immigrants and their children should be deported.  Should the flood of illegal Hispanic immigration be stopped or even significantly reduced, the Democrats, having turned hard left and growing ever more so as the years have passed, know they are politically finished at the national level, forever.  The US public has, for all its flaws, retained enough sense to decisively reject the democrat program.  Without, essentially, electing a new population to replace the “failed” incumbent one, the democrat’s political fortunes at the national level are exceedingly bleak, looking to pick up a few House seats, mostly on procedural grounds through jerrymandered redistricting in Pennsylvania and the practical collapse of the Republican party in California.

Thus this entire immigration debate is really about who shall rule, and has been for decades.  But you knew that already.

Couple that sense of impotence and failure with a twisted religious fervor and levels of immorality that would make a late 18th century Parisian madame blush, and you have a recipe for true disaster.  Leftists are already planning to “punish” the country for voting the wrong way if the democrats, as looks increasingly likely, get creamed in the midterms, by staging massive temper tantrums “days of rage.”  Where things go from there is anybody’s guess, but my fear is that things will continue to go downhill at an ever-accelerating rate.

Where is the figure on the Left who has the sense, the presence, and the influence to call the raging, stampeding herd (30 million nutjobs can do a whale of a lot of damage) back from the brink?  From what I can tell, virtually all the thought leaders and media/entertainment personalities on the Left only seem primed to go increasingly insane in their rhetoric and action.  Twitter and other social media have helped create a perfect storm of ideological bubbles, instant gratification/denial, and extreme emotionalism.

A key problem is that the Democrat party has been undergoing leftist ideological purity tests for the past 15 years or more, very quickly driving all but the most committed left-wing extremists from any participation in all but the most basic party activities (like voting).  Virtually all the old line conservative democrats and moderates have been driven from the party, and certainly from most all leadership positions.  Goodness, when Dianne Feinstein starts to sound like the voice of reason, you know things have gotten bad.

Where does this end up?  No one ever said the United States, as constituted since 1959 with the accession of Hawaii and Alaska to statehood, would last forever.  I increasingly agree with Ace, that an amicable divorce along state lines is the best possible solution at this point.  But even that could involve unbelievable violence, as those winding up on the wrong side of the line are “encouraged” to relocate a la the partition of the British Raj in 1948.  We shall see.  I see no solution to all this but prayer and penance, and more and more of both, but there are so few of us, and so many lost in the world and its false pleasures.  The number one leisure-time spend in this country is pornography. May God have mercy on our nation, and its people.

Advertisements

Please Pray for the Repose of the Soul of Jeff Dunnam February 7, 2018

Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, blogfoolery, firearms, Four Last Things, sadness, suicide.
comments closed

Jeff Dunnam was a coworker of mine for the past 2 years at Commscope.  The first 7-8 months I didn’t get to know him as he was on leave recovering from cancer.  Then he went out again for cancer treatment over the past 2 months or so.  But in between, I got to know Jeff quite well.  Jeff was not Catholic but was a believing Christian. He was in many respects a good guy.  We had many conversations when he drug me out to have a smoke in the afternoon heat.  He grew up in Collin County, like me, and we used to talk about the sounds and smells of summer – the Bois D’Arc trees and rotting horseapples, the smell of ragweed 10 feet tall, the katydids and locusts buzzing all day, the things we’d get up to as kids, before Collin County got built up and paved over.  I enjoyed the time I spent with him.

Even though he had been suffering from cancer, he died suddenly and unexpectedly this past Saturday Feb 3.  Amazingly, another coworker of mine ran into Jeff buying a handgun earlier that same day, and reported he looked agitated and distracted but physically well.

Obviously there is much cause for prayer.  The visitation/memorial is tonight, the funeral and burial tomorrow at 2pm.  Both are in Allen, near Jeff’s hometown of McKinney.  Location at the link.  Yes these are of course protestant services.

REQUIEM aeternam dona ei, Domine, et lux perpetua luceat ei. Requiescat in pace. Amen Fidelium animae, per misericordiam Dei, requiescant in pace. Amen.

Canadian Gov’t to Steal Children from Home if Parent’s Don’t “Accept” Their “Gender Identity” June 8, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, cultural marxism, disaster, error, family, General Catholic, horror, paganism, persecution, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, suicide, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

Whatever those loaded terms mean.

If you like your kids, you can keep your kids, provided you do and think and say everything the almighty state commands at every instant.  And no, this is not much of an exaggeration, with Ontario – whose laws almost always wind up being put into place at the national level in the People’s Republic of Canadia – now passing a law that says children may be removed from a home if parents do not “accept” – and who gets to decide the terms of that acceptance?!? – their child’s new “gender identity,” no matter how flighty, bizarre, peer-pressure-induced, or destructive it may be:

A Canadian province has passed a law that gives rights to the government to take away children from families that don’t accept their kid’s chosen “gender identity” or “gender expression”.

The Supporting Children, Youth and Families Act of 2017, also know as Bill 89, was passed in Ontario by a vote of 63 to 23, The Christian Times reported[Do note the Orwellian language.  Yes, they support families by ripping them apart, the better to allow the state to make permanent devotees of the religion of sexular paganism starting at age 3.]

The law, which replaces old laws governing child protection, foster care and adoption services, instructs all child services and judges, to take into consideration a child’s “race, ancestry, place of origin, color, ethnic origin, citizenship, family diversity, disability, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression.” [This is ugly in so many respects. This balkanization into post-modern eternally warring aggrieved groups is the work of satan.  Also note the overtones of anti-white racialism in all this.]

Minister of Child and Family Services Michael Coteau, who introduced the bill, said “I would consider that a form of abuse, when a child identifies one way and a caregiver is saying no, you need to do this differently.” [Once again the Orwellian language.  Not a parent, not a person whose very soul is intimately wrapped up in the fate of the child they helped create, but a “caregiver.”]

“If it’s abuse, and if it’s within the definition, a child can be removed from that environment and placed into protection where the abuse stops.” [And this will never be abused for political ends, or see children’s (and parent’s) lives permanently up-ended after they fall prey to some demonic online hellhole like Tumblr.]

The old law used to allow parents to “direct the child’s education and religious upbringing.” The new bill, however, amends such rights of the parents[Right.  But it also will never, ever be applied to muslims, only to Christians.  Also, shame on you Canada for your British-inspired and damnable conception of rights, believing it is up to the state to hand out to parents (and all other citizens) whatever the state deigns to give, rather than being the God-given right of every soul born on this earth to raise their children to the best of their ability and in line with their own conscience.  It is thus Canada has no equivalent to the US First or Second Amendments.]

It now emphasizes a child’s “identity and allows parents only to “direct the child or young person’s education and upbringing, in accordance with the child’s or young person’s creed, community identity and cultural identity.” [So if white parents adopt a black child they have to teach him ebonics?  If they adopt a child of muslim parents (however unlikely that may be) they have to raise him as a muzzie?]

Ontario children and youth advocate Irwin Elman celebrated the bill and said it signals a “paradigm shift” and creates a “child-centered system of service” with “the commitment to anti-racism and children’s rights.” [Let me rephrase: “Now we leftists get access to thousands of kids so young they’ll be ours forever.”]

Jack Fonseca, a political strategist for Campaign Life Coalition, meanwhile, criticized the new law.

I’d do more than criticize, I’d be profoundly freaked out and looking for somewhere to emigrate to, but it’s rapidly becoming clear there are few places left in the former West/Christendom that aren’t on an identical path. Colombia’s been fairly stable for a while now.  Cartageña’s supposed to be nice. How about Panama?  Every day is 12 hours long, no more, no less!

Tragically, what happens in Canada, doesn’t stay in Canada.  It tends to show up here about 20-30 years later, or whenever the electorate gives the Leftist party the presidency.

The Destructiveness of Female Promiscuity – The Message is Finally Getting Out May 15, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, catachesis, cultural marxism, disaster, General Catholic, horror, paganism, scandals, secularism, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, suicide, Virtue.
comments closed

Great to see from a secular source, Lauren Southern’s video below strongly endorses what I have argued numerous times on this blog: that women, by their God-given nature, are uniquely (and deleteriously) affected by sexual promiscuity, and the wounds so received by this behavior are so severe as to render them virtually unsuitable for stable marriage.  There is extensive scientific data to support this claim, though it never breaks through to the mainstream propaganda press.  The video is very worth a watch, though, by its nature, it is not at all suitable for children or those with sensitive consciences/strong temptations against purity:

I really like how Southern notes the major impetus behind all this “tolerance” and virtue signalling – good feelings on the part of those involved.  It feels better to tell people pretty lies than to tell them the painful truth, no matter how destructive those lies may be (and in this case, they seem, collectively, to be poised to destroy the greatest civilization to ever grace the Earth).

On a deep psychological level, sexual intimacy affects women in ways far different from men.  The divorce rate for women with 3 lifetime sexual partners is about 30 times that of women with only one.

Women with ten or more lifetime sexual partners are, statistically speaking, practically certain to get divorced.  They have become unsuitable for marriage, absent a miracle of grace.

Women with numerous partners are far more prone to severe psychological problems and highly negative life outcomes like addiction, self-injury, serious mental problems, and even suicide.  This has naught to do with any “learned social roles” or some kind of hidden bias – it appears to be related to core elements of female personae and constant across societies.

This is why I’ve said in the past that the modern amoral sexual pagan culture is literally driving women, especially young women leading a tortured existence on the present-day hookup-culture college campus, insane.  The young men are also being driven insane, but in different ways, ways that may or may not be easier to recover from.

At any rate, it is very refreshing to see another young woman acknowledge this fact, and implore others not to fall into the cultural trap of selling their most cherished possession, God’s gift of innocence/purity, at fire sale prices.

Put another way, perhaps all those stringent standards that have existed in so many successful/moral cultures across time and location going back millennia were not accidental, not the result of a cruel patriarchy, but are in fact a manifestation of God’s Law.  In fact there is no perhaps about it, that is exactly the case but we humans love to have to learn things the hardest, most painful way possible.

Freedom is the Hijab April 6, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, Christendom, disaster, Ecumenism, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, pr stunts, rank stupidity, scandals, secularism, sickness, Society, suicide.
comments closed

As a believing Catholic, I am all for modesty in dress on the part of everyone.  Not just women, but everyone.  I am so convinced of the necessity of modesty, that I am even in favor of certain societal norms and social pressures that would encourage people to dress (and behave) modestly, casting out of polite society egregious offenders against this norm, as was the case throughout Christendom for, oh, about 17-1900 years (I hedge a bit, not knowing what standards of dress were like in the period of the early Church).

But I stop short at people being physically coerced to dress with decorum and modesty.  I do not think women should be beaten if they show 2″ too much leg, or don’t wear a full, stinking burqa.  I do not think there should be religious police wandering around able to dish out corporal punishment on the spot, with no trial, no appeal.

Practice of virtue is a great source of salvific Grace.  But virtue that is coerced is not such a source.  We can argue at length about where to draw the line, or whether societal pressures would constitute coercion, but I think it not unreasonable to conclude that threatening severe corporal punishment or death for a violation against modesty is not only a bad thing in general, but something that is prone to abuse and capricious application (as we see from the video below).

But we have come to the point in this country, where the muslim infiltration/invasion has been allowed to go unchecked for two decades or more, that the nation’s “newspaper of record” is running op-eds from muslim women opining that the essence of freedom is found in being forced to cover themselves head to foot under threat of force from the men around them:

A great point I wish I had more time to flesh out today, but will hopefully get to tomorrow: why are the Left and islam such easy bedfellows, in spite of holding radically contrary beliefs on almost every subject imaginable?  Well, aside from islam being the perfect tool to crush the Left’s highest priority target for destruction – Christianity – neither recognizes any authority but its own.  They don’t recognize the value of (true) liberal democracy, they don’t recognize the value of Christianity, they don’t recognize the value of peaceful coexistence, all they recognize is power and the urgent command to obey their ideological dictates.  Islam, through the practice of deliberate deceit known as taqqiyah, will make allies wherever it finds them, no matter how noxious they find their beliefs, so long as it serves the interests of the unholy “ummah.”  The Left uses islam as almost their armed wing to attack the instituttions of Western Civilization and to serve as a battering ram against Christianity (in which they are far too often – almost always – aided by the Quislings within the Christian community).

Thus it actually makes a great deal of sense that they collaborate so much, so that the wholly vulgar vagina-fest known as the “Women’s March on Washington” was principally led and organized by a hijab-wearing muslim woman, a woman literally sporting a symbol of her submission to men.  And yet that woman was portrayed as a feminist icon.

 

Pure Politics: Cardinal-Elect Farrell Continues Singing Whatever Tune Francis Calls November 17, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, Dallas Diocese, different religion, disaster, episcopate, error, General Catholic, horror, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, suicide, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

An interview with CNS of former Dallas Bishop and now Cardinal-elect Farrell raised quite a bit of well-earned ire with quotes like  “perhaps we have emphasized rules and regulations to excess” and “focus on Jesus, not rules.”  First of all, the Church isn’t obsessed with “rules and regulations,” but with teaching the Truth that is required of souls in order to be saved. If you want rules and regulations for their own sake, go work for a Roman dicastery, they have tons of them. When prelates like Farrell reduce the Sacred Truth Jesus Christ has revealed through His Church to “rules and regulations,” they are revealing that they are fundamentally disconnected with the Church and Her role as the vehicle of salvation for all men, and are subordinated the Sacred Deposit of Faith for the preferences of fallen men and a sick, dying culture.

There’s a lot in here to unpack, I’ll only pick a few gems:

Right from the get-go, Farrell announces that “My training for this job was pastoral work.  Forget all the administrative part, that’s the least important.”  Really, Bishop Farrell? When was that?  You only ever served in a parish for about 18 months. You’ve held administrative positions for the last 30 years solid.  Yes, a bishop should certainly have a major pastoral role, but you were known throughout this diocese as an unreachable man who was rarely in town and who viewed duties like visiting parishes a hassle to be endured.  You were generally escorted in and out of parish events as quickly as possible.  But apparently you said all the right things in your interview, you’re now “a man of the people.”

In using the parable of the prodigal son to make his point about the Church embracing sinners without question or call to conversion – one must assume, because that’s what we’ve heard from Francis since Day 1 – Farrell completely misconstrues the parable, which conversion and embrace by the Father was based on the son’s contrition and conversion. But that is not what Francis wants to do in handing out the Sacred Species of Our Blessed Lord in the Flesh without any visible sign of avoiding mortal sin, repentance, and conversion.

Doctrinal indifference has never attracted souls to the Church.  The last 50 years is hideous testimony to that fact.  The Church has grown and been most vibrant when Doctrine has been preached with clearly and with fervor, and when the corruption and laxity in the priesthood and other areas of the Church has been at a minimum. That’s exactly what the Counter-Reformation was about.  And, no, Francis is not drawing crowds larger or more fervent than his predecessors.  In fact, in many cases, they are far smaller than they have been in the past.

“We need a more loving, a more caring Church.”  Consigning souls to hell because of doctrinal laxity and even the promotion of heresy is the complete, total inversion of love.  It is a diabolical inversion of that, to be frank.

“We keep pushing rules and regulations all the time.  Well, none of us are good at following rules.  And perhaps we have emphasized rules and regulations to excess.”  I think the Cardinal-elect may have revealed a great deal more than he intended.

I’m out of time, but I covered most of what Farrell said.  He certainly knows exactly what to say to achieve his career objectives.  I grow less and less convinced, however, that those objectives have much at all to do with the good of souls.  Being charitable, perhaps he thinks he is willing the good of the Church as a material, worldly construct, but it’s not an approach to ecclesiology I think any of the Apostles would have recognized, or shared.  What comes through to me throughout – and this is a view shared by most prelates, that large majority heavily influenced by neo-modernism – is that the eternal destiny of souls is hardly considered, or, to the extent it is, Farrell believes virtually all souls are saved, and thus Doctrine really shouldn’t matter much.  Unfortunately, 2000 years of belief and practice, not to mention the clear guidance of Sacred Scripture, say he, and those many, many like him, are not just wrong, but damnably so.

I’m out of time, or I’d say more.  I don’t know who will replace Farrell in Dallas, I think we’ll be waiting for quite some time to come, but he’d have to be quite liberal indeed to surpass where Farrell is at right now.

h/t reader Richard Malcolm.  Thanks.

 

Francis Had Himself a Busy Week November 14, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, disaster, episcopate, error, Francis, General Catholic, horror, Latin Mass, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, suicide, the struggle for the Church, unbelievable BS.
comments closed

Goodness, it just never stops. And almost always towards the end of the week.

In a presser for the release of a new Vatican-sponsored book containing many of Jorge Bergoglio’s homilies as Archbishop of Buenos Aires, the subject of the Sacred Liturgy came up, and Francis opined very negatively on those younger folks who have an attachment for the TLM:

Asked about the liturgy, Pope Francis insisted the Mass reformed after the Second Vatican Council is here to stay and “to speak of a ‘reform of the reform’ is an error.”

In authorizing regular use of the older Mass, now referred to as the “extraordinary form,” now-retired Pope Benedict XVI was “magnanimous” toward those attached to the old liturgy, he said. “But it is an exception.”

Pope Francis told Father Spadaro he wonders why some young people, who were not raised with the old Latin Mass, nevertheless prefer it.

“And I ask myself: Why so much rigidity? Dig, dig, this rigidity always hides something, insecurity or even something else. Rigidity is defensive. True love is not rigid.”

There is so much to unpack here, so  many errors, both of logic and with regard to the Sacred Deposit of Faith.  One must ask, was the entire pre-conciliar Church similarly rigid and defective, in the Bishop of Rome’s mind?  I think the answer to that is clear, Francis has always, always reserved his most feverish invective towards those in the Church who hold to a different, more traditional practice of the Faith than him.

But that wasn’t all.  In another strange, one might even say scandalously disastrous interview with the noted Italian communist Eugenio Scalfari, Francis let go this whopper:

You told me some time ago that the precept, “Love your neighbour as thyself” had to change, given the dark times that we are going through, and become “more than thyself.” So you yearn for a society where equality dominates. This, as you know, is the programme of Marxist socialism and then of communism. Are you therefore thinking of a Marxist type of society?

It it has been said many times and my response has always been that, if anything, it is the communists who think like Christians. Christ spoke of a society where the poor, the weak and the marginalized have the right to decide. Not demagogues, not Barabbas, but the people, the poor, whether they have faith in a transcendent God or not. It is they who must help to achieve equality and freedom”. [emphasis added]

Apparently, being a Christian is now about being a control freak totalitarian mass-murderer.  How many tens of millions have died as a direct result of communism around the world, and continue to do so to this day?  At least one hundred million, and that is quite frankly a conservative estimate.  If one takes communism as simply leftism taken to its logical, inevitable conclusion, and notes that leftism has been the driving force behind the legalization of abortion worldwide and the mass use of contraception, the total number of deaths attributable to communism must run way into the billions.  Leftism cannot exist anywhere as a ruling force/ideology without inflicting mass suffering on the populations under its rule.  This has been the case from the French Revolution straight through to today, where thousands are starving in Venezuela and North Korea and are mired in abject poverty in Cuba -among other places.

But to Jorge Bergoglio cum Francis the Ideologue, who as a young man waited expectantly for the arrival of communist broadsheets in 50s Argentina and has always been a fervent Peronist, communists think like Christians. This is very close to saying that communism is the apotheosis of Christianity.  Can anyone imagine both a more perverse, and a more materalist, conception of the Faith?

I know these catalogs I make from time to time of Francis’ derangement from the Faith, and his, it must be said, incessant attacks upon both Faith and faithful, are disturbing to some.  But this stuff is incredibly important, and deserves at least a cursory review and rebuttal.  Burying our heads in the sand will not make Francis go away, as much as we might like that (and as much, at times, as it may even feel necessary to maintain our own faith, which I completely understand).

Inadvertently, however, Francis himself has identified the source that drives so many to seek out the TLM, at least in major part.  Just as the extremes of the Left in the United States played a huge role in Trump’s election as a reaction against and rejection of those extremes, it is the extreme errors of the left wing of the Church -of which Francis is most certainly a part – and the extreme destruction they have wrought both on souls and on the Church at large that is a driving factor in leading people to search out and find often not terribly convenient TLMs.  And once they do, these souls find, almost always (though a few do not), that not only is the TLM and the entire traditional liturgical/sacramental practice of the Faith infinitely more efficacious for them in helping them grow in the Faith, it is almost always associated with far more rigorous and traditional (orthodox/faithful/just plain Catholic) catechesis that is equally of enormous benefit to souls.  THAT, and not some secret psychological deficiency, are some of the major reasons why young people like me and my children adore the TLM and find so much fruit therein, both because of its innate goodness, and as an escape from the “communists make the best Christians” garbage (among many, many other errors) the permeates so much of the Novus Ordo establishment Church.

I know for my family, fleeing error was at least as big an attraction in seeking out the ONE parish that makes the TLM available in this Diocese as was our desire for sound catechesis and beautiful, God-given Liturgy (God-given because of the inspiration so many Saints acted under in guiding the organic development of the Mass over centuries).  What Franky George Bergoglio really means by “rigidity or something else” is he finds these people – us – antagonistic ideologically.  Much the same as the Left in this country is now calling everyone – even blacks, hispanics, and women – who voted for Trump racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. – every dirty name they can think of – what they are really saying is “enemy.”

Bearing in mind that projection is an inseparable part of being left-wing, Francis is saying much more about himself than he is those “young” people who “inexplicably” find great solace and sustenance in the TLM.  He is such a child of the 60s and so provincial he is incapable -again, the parallels to the behavior of factions in this country are amazing – of imagining anyone with true humanity (and not some sad, pathetic holdover from the time of the Council who simply never got on board) that could believe differently.

There are a thousand ways to pic these two latest egregious statements apart.  I have only chosen to focus on a couple of criticisms for brevity’s sake.  I’m sure you can come up with many more.

A final note: Francis’ attitude towards the TLM being simply a magnanimous gesture to those old enough to have been around prior to VII to still have an attachment to the TLM implies an expiration date for Summorum Pontificum, does it not, since eventually those folks will die off?

 

The Blessing of 2016?: Revealing the Wolves in the Conservative Flock November 3, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, Basics, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, persecution, rank stupidity, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, suicide.
comments closed

This is a post on American politics, not the status of the Church, just to be clear from the start.  I really appreciated a post at Ace of Spades yesterday, that harped on a subject he’s been paying a great deal of attention to for many months: the revelations of just who is and who ain’t a real, believing conservative as this most bloody election season has run its course.

I want to make some things clear up front, and my time is very short so I’ll have to rush through it.  I am not taking the line that a failure to support Trump is a betrayal of the conservative cause. I am not criticizing those who, out of conviction and adherence to conservative principle, refuse to vote for Trump. That is their right, and I shall never condemn that.  What I am talking about is the many in the “conservative” media who have, due to Trump’s rise, shown themselves to be either far more liberal or far more attached to this ethereal “elite” we are confronted with to hold to their purported conservative beliefs in this time of stress.  Even more, many of these folks are now endorsing the devil herself, Hillary Clinton, in order to demonstrate their opposition to Trump, or, if they are not going to that extreme, are vehemently attacking the populist wave that drove Trump to victory in the primary (that is, attacking the beliefs of those who drove Trump, such as opposition to open borders, or to disastrous free trade policies), and are sucking up to the liberal state media with a disconcerting enthusiasm.  In doing so many are dumping ostensibly long-held conservative bona-fides in their transition into an open political hack.

Ace’s case in point is a good one – Glenn Beck.  I’ve never been a fan of Beck. Back in 2011/12, when I was on a local radio show with Vicki (RIP) and Jim Middleton, Vicki was a huge fan, but I was alway somewhat suspicious of his mormonism (I’ll admit it) and, even more, his sudden embrace of a whole array of very strong conservative criticisms not only of Obama but of the entire social justice/leftist academia/infotainment media complex.  It just seemed like he was glomming on to a popular movement that was rising in reaction to Obama’s election (the TEA party, etc).  Well, here we are in 2016, and it seems Beck has “evolved:”

Struggling radio, video and internet entrepreneur Glenn Beck, who has styled himself as a conservative firebrand and sworn enemy of the liberal media, seems to have done an about-face and is now ardently courting the journalistic outlets he previously had little use for.

“I think a lot of people are going to be turning to him after the election to ask what role he can play in the reconciliation within the Republican party and between the parties,” said one of Beck’s business associates, explaining why the right-wing radio jock and former Fox News rabble-rouser has been plying his trade in hostile territory, cooperating with profiles for Rolling Stone and Vice News.

Beck has also started showing up on MSNBC and at The New York Times, where he recently contributed an Op-Ed essay urging }empathy” for Black Lives Matter protesters, whom he described as “decent, hardworking, patriotic Americans.”

I really appreciate Ace’s commentary, which was directed not only at Beck, but also Washington Free Beacon turncoat writer Matthew Continetti:

There are very few conservative commentators, it turns out, who actually believed the things they’ve been saying for 15 years……..

……….Yes, the “New Right” — actually the Garbage People Base of the GOP — provided the dollars and manpower to give the elite class the power to do things the base never asked them to do, and, in fact, were often explicitly promised they would not do.

Like attempting to pass amnesty three or four times………

Now that people have gotten hip to that particular shuck and jive ace, and won’t have their anger stoked over specific issues only to see the GOP drop those issues like a dead rat the day after the election, populism has revealed itself as a racist, repulsive cancer that must be excised………

……….Anyway, a lot of people just seem to be admitting they flat-out never believed the bullshit they’ve been saying for most of their lives.

I guess I’m one of the saps.

Meanwhile, two Roman Dynasties seem to have formed an alliance — George P. Bush reveals, unsurprisingly, that his Connecticut-born-and-bred uncle George W. Bush may in fact be voting for dear family friend Hillary Clinton.

Let this be our last Bush in high elected office — ever. At least elected on the “conservative” side.

There’s an Obamaesque plaintiveness to all this whining. One can hear the very pronounced theme, These noisome, repulsive ingrates just aren’t educated enough to understand all the Wonders we have accomplished for them (and our corporate patrons).

As I’ve asked, rhetorically, a hundred times: How many times did you expect run-on-border-security-propose-amnesty-three-months-after-the-election play would work? Even the stupidest people on earth eventually get wise to the same con the fifth election cycle in a row it’s run on them.

I guess the GOP base disappoints the party “intellectuals” as the American public disappoints Obama. They’re not quite smart enough to believe these people’s apparent failures are actually Beautiful Victories in Disguise, but have gotten a little too smart to keep believing the same con every two to four years.

Such is the unhappy, middle-to-low-brow lot of a GOP commoner: Too stupid to truly understand like the elites do, but not quite stupid enough to happily go along with the ruse any longer.

Good times. Honestly. The truth is always a good thing, and we seem to be getting the truth is very large doses this year.

It goes down bitter, but like medicine, it’ll do you good.

There are two likely explanations on the harsh side (putting aside any arguments that these people really are conservative, they’re just being misinterpreted or judged unfairly or whatever) of this: either these folks were always libs all along, and were just singing a conservative song to earn $$$ while secretly remaining liberal, or these are maybe folks who don’t believe in anything, really, other than their own aggrandizement, and since they see no real future for themselves in a conservative movement dominated by Trump-types and their supporters, they are suddenly appearing much more liberal in order to find future sinecures for themselves.  Some of the swings have been so extreme and nasty that it’s difficult to swallow a more charitable explanation.

Again, I am not criticizing those who simply cannot support Trump for any of his many, many failings, both personally and policy-wise, so long as that inability does not translate into supporting Hillary.  If you feel compelled to vote third party, that’s your right.  I’ve come to conclude that such a protest is both ineffectual and quite likely counterproductive, but you may reason differently.  But I don’t think this post even remotely relates to any regular readers of this blog.  This has to do with the media complex, and the fact that conservatives have been afflicted with sham conservative-in-name-only media figures, writers, and thinkers, at least as much if not more than we have been with CINO politicians.  That growing realization, that we have been played for saps for decades by an inbred, self-serving elite, is probably the single factor most driving Trump’s securing the nomination and his (at present?) competitive stand in the polls.  Now, Trump may be playing his own con, I know some fervently believe he is, but many ardent Trump supporters I’ve interacted with are willing to take a flyer on a relative unknown/outsider than continue to support an elite that has betrayed them over, and over, and over again.

That, and at this point, the “anybody but Hillary” motivation also looms quite large.  Castle, Mullins, and the rest simply have no chance to stop her, thus the logic behind voting for Trump, even with all his deplorable personal morality and his track record of radically changing his beliefs.

Thirty+ Years of Leftist Domination of “Education” Is Really Paying Off October 18, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, paganism, rank stupidity, Revolution, sadness, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, suicide.
comments closed

I’ll preface my broad, sweeping attacks again by noting that there are so-called millenials (folks 16-35, roughly) who are not idiots, not whiners, and who are in fact very good, hard-working, creditable people.  Having said that, this Madison Ave. defined “generation” continues to cover itself in ignominy.  So thoroughly indoctrinated by leftist propaganda in the school systems (public and private)they are utterly unable to think for themselves, left with a totally distorted view of themselves as the greatest, bestest, smarterest generation ever by the disastrous self-esteem participation trophy movement, these kids are ripe for any demagogue or slick-sounding hustler to come along and sell them on some sexular pagan paradise, which these kids will learn to their great cost will be nothing of the sort.

I am amazed at how well the leftist indoctrination in the schools has played out.  These kids are completely ignorant of the evils of leftism/socialism/communism and are so pumped full of media lies they actually believe George W. Bush was responsible for more deaths than Josef Stalin.  Of course, the kids have to admit they have no idea who Josef Stalin was. Oh, and communism is totes great, get on board the free stuff gravy train!:

More than one in five U.S. millennials would be open to backing a communist candidate, and a third believe George W. Bush killed more people than Joseph Stalin, according to a new poll released Monday. [In their defense, what do these kids know?  Virtually nothing outside what idiot box sites like Twitter, Vox, Slate, and Buzzfeed have told them.  They grew up seeing Bush ’43 described as the devil himself, compared constantly to Hitler, but have probably only the foggiest notion of Josef Stalin, and have heard none of his mass murdering crimes.  It is obvious kids are being intentionally dumbed down by federally funded schools far more concerned with political indoctrination than they are with giving young people a broad based education which will teach them how to think.  After all, the powers that be want good, docile worker bees, not independent thinkers.  The pathetic part is, these kids think they have arrived at their leftist leanings on their own, when all they are doing is parroting what they have been very carefully propagandized to say]

The poll, commissioned by the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation and carried out by YouGov, surveyed Americans of all ages about their attitudes towards communism, socialism, and the American economic system in general.

Overall, the poll found, Americans remain broadly hostile to socialism and communism, even though 67 percent of the populace believes rich people don’t pay “their fair share” and 52 percent believe America’s economic system works against them. [And they may be right.  After all, the vast preponderance of the most wealthy in this country hold leftist opinions, and I don’t see any of them volunteering to overpay their taxes by several hundred percent. But the cultural assumption is that the rich is made up of right-wingers.  That hasn’t been the case for 20 years or more as the same cultural forces that are producing a whole generation well disposed towards leftism first moved through the elite levels of society, who all attend the same prep schools, Ivy league colleges, and have developed into a terrifyingly monolithic block of opinion totally disdainful of traditional values and especially Christianity]

But American millennials are more sympathetic towards communism, the survey found. While 57 percent of respondents overall had a “very unfavorable” view of communism, only 38 percent of millennials felt the same way. Close to 20 percent said they were likely to vote for a self-described communist, while barely 50 percent said they were likely to vote for a self-described capitalist.

Millennials were also more likely to take a favorable view of communist leaders. Twenty-five percent view Soviet revolutionary leader Vladimir Lenin positively. Eighteen percent were favorable towards Chinese dictator Mao Zedong, despite a body count in the tens of millions. Thirty-four percent were favorable to Karl Marx, and 37 percent were favorable to revolutionary and T-shirt fixture Che Guevara. [Didja know Che was the scion of a guilt-ridden wealthy heretical leftist Spanish Catholic family that fled Spain when Franco quite rightly won the Spanish Civil War?  Another person who never learned to think beyond his programming. He wanted to help the poor by……..miring them in even more grinding communist poverty!  Or maybe he just wanted power for himself and all his high-minded rhetoric was just a means to that end]  

A full third of millennials believe U.S. president George W. Bush is is responsible for more deaths than Soviet leader Joseph Stalin…….[This has to be the most offensively stupid thing I’ve read this year that didn’t come from Francis or one of his flunkies]

……..Notably, despite his infamous purges, Stalin enjoys a 12 percent approval rating with millennials.

Useful idiots.  That’s all they are.

And oh gee giant surprise the whole BLM movement and the violence outside Trump rallies is just political theater organized and carried out by a tiny group of paid demonrat revolutionaries.  But you knew that already.

Explosive Question: Should Women’s Suffrage Be Abolished? October 17, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, Domestic Church, error, family, foolishness, General Catholic, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, suicide, Tradition, Virtue.
comments closed

Reader TT sent me a recommendation to a short book that contains two lectures given by the Catholic Bishop of Denver, CO, J.P. Machebeuf, in 1877.  In those lectures, basing his reasoning almost entirely on the Epistles of Saint Paul – that is, inspired and inerrant Scripture – Bishop Machebeuf argues passionately against women’s suffrage – then a growing cause celebre among the nascent progressive faction in this country.  I read this book months ago, and have been meaning to blog on it for some time, but never took the time to sit down and try to frame the matter in a way I thought would provide a reasonable discussion, as opposed to instant recourse to emotion.

Machebeuf relies principally on the following quotes from Scripture in his argument:

I would have you know that the head of every man is Christ and the head of every woman is the man and the head of Christ is God; the woman is the glory of the man, for the man was not created for the woman but the woman for the man (I Cor xi:13).

Let women be subject to their husbands, as to the Lord, because the husband is the head of the woman as Christ is the head of the Church.  Therefore as the Church is subject to Christ, so also let the women be to their husbands in all things. (Eph v:22).

I will therefore, that men pray in every place……..In like manner the women also, in decent apparel, adorning themselves with modesty and sobriety…..as it becometh a woman professing Godliness with good works. Let the women learn in silence, with all subjection, but I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to use authority over man, but to be in silence, for Adam was first formed, then Eve.  And Adam was not seduced, but the woman being seduced was in the transgression; yet she shall be saved through child bearing, if she continue in faith andlove and sanctification in sobriety (I Tim ii: 6- 8)

To the woman also he said: I will multiply thy sorrows, and thy conceptions: in sorrow shalt thou bring forth children, and thou shalt be under thy husband’ s power, and he shall have dominion over thee. (Gen iii:16)

From these scriptural quotes – which are not being relayed outside modifying context, I would judge – and a few others, Bishop Machebeuf argues against allowing women the vote.  He also uses his assessments of the peculiarities of female nature as arguments against women’s suffrage, finding women perhaps more inclined to emotionalism, less inclined to the broader, long-range common good (as opposed to their own perceived, individual good), and perhaps less well disposed for making such decisions. He also feels women’s involvement in politics, even simply as an involved voter, would detract time from women’s primary duty in providing for the household and rearing the (hopefully many) children.  Primarily, however, the bishop finds women’s suffrage an affront to what he understands as God’s divinely revealed order, an order which places women, in such matters as the public trust, if not subordinate to men, at least in no position to dictate to men, through their vote, how public affairs should be conducted.

Bishop Machebeuf also presciently notes that the matter of women’s suffrage was simply the tip of the spear for a much broader move towards “women’s rights,” or the general trend towards feminism we have seen wreak such havoc on the family and culture over the past several decades. He had the foresight to see that the then very small women’s movement would metamorphose into a mass movement dedicated to the destruction of the moral order ordained by God.  A couple of quotes on this matter suffice to reveal the whole:

[The woman] cannot perform the duties of both man and woman at the same time, which makes it impossible for a woman to be a faithful wife and mother, attend to her household duties, and hold a public office – which seems to be the main object of the friends of women’s rights [Demonstrating that the Bishop foresaw, quite rightly, that the women’s suffrage movement was not just about giving women “equality” with men in terms of voting, but even putting them in positions of authority over men in the temporal realm by seeing women elected to public office.  Now we stand on the precipice of seeing perhaps the most amoral character in American political history elected to the highest office of the land.  And that character is a woman]

…….

You know, beloved brethren, what some of those discontented women want; they want to shake off the authority of men, they want to turn upside down the order established by a just God, they want to rule over man.

What are we to make of this? Is this just some uncomfortable relic from a bygone, far less enlightened age, or could the bishop perhaps be onto something?  Obviously, his thinking is entirely absent from the public mind of the Church today, at least outside maybe a few isolated individuals (who are treated as crackpots), but we also know the “public mind” of the Church, as expressed by the large majority of bishops, priests, cardinals, and lay people, is at divergence with the perennial belief and practice of the Faith on a vast panoply of subjects.  That is to say, simply because his belief seems very much at odds with the beliefs posited by the vast majority of those who claim the name Catholic today, that does not mean they are necessarily wrong because of it.

One way to look at this subject, perhaps, is to look at the course of history in the many nations that have adopted practically universal suffrage, including women, over the past century or so.  Has that trend not been overwhelmingly towards the left, towards self-seeking, and towards the undermining of the moral and religious order and its replacement with an entirely new and hostile order oriented towards paganism, immorality, totalitarian government, and selfishness?  Polls in this and most every Western country reveal that women are far more likely to vote for the left-wing candidate than men.  They have played a vital part of the left-wing coalition in this and many other countries.  The rise of the Left has been a disaster for the Church and for the moral order, generally.

Interestingly, Bishop Machebeuf predicted that this would happen, that as women diverted attention from the home and rearing of children, towards what they were told would be the greener pastures of political and economic “empowerment,” that the rearing of children would necessarily suffer, and that neglect and the relaxation of familial and societal moral discipline would soon lead to a general, and grave, moral decay.

Bishop Machebeuf does not say in so many words, but what he is arguing in favor of, and what he reveals to be divinely ordained by God through Scripture, is that virtual curse-word today, a patriarchal society.  It is very clear today, and has been for some decades, that the radical feminist movement, which was given birth (apropos turn of phrase, no?) by the women’s suffrage movement (and has continued to use many of the same methods), has developed into a movement oriented towards the destruction of the traditional patriarchal society and its replacement with something different and far more destructive.  Since patriarchy is so clearly endorsed by Scripture, feminists have both waged war, and sought to co-opt, Christian leaders into their movement, even though in so doing, those leaders have helped hasten the destruction of their religion and the entire moral order.  It is little wonder that it was only ten years from the institution of women’s suffrage in the United States, and the approval of contraceptive use by a major non-Catholic ecclesial body (Lambeth Conference, 1930).  The decline  of the moral order has unalterably advanced since then.

Am I calling for the abolishing of women’s suffrage?  Perhaps in theory, though not very strongly even there.  I think the bishop basically right in his assessment, but I do wonder why there are not more texts of this type that have come down to us.  Was Bishop Machebeuf an outlier, even 140 years ago?  Or is his rare “hardness” or orthodoxy in this matter simply an early indication of the grave problems inherent in the American episcopate all along, but which would not reveal themselves en masse until about a century later?

Either way, we are about 500 billion miles from this being even a remotely viable issue or something to push for, publicly.  The vast majority of people, even – or, especially – those who call themselves Christian and/or Catholic, are so totally convinced that women voting is such a natural good, such an inviolable right, that even broaching the subject (outside a specialty audience like those who tend to read this blog) would be, at present, simply to instantly discredit oneself, or have oneself labeled as a member of the lunatic fringe.  Then again, Catholics – true Catholics – have always been perceived as such by the society at large.

Having said that, another thing TT sent me, a link to a post by Mundabor, contains relevant argumentation that is probably better than I could make.  It’s said a bit more strongly than I would phrase things (as you know, I am always so milquetoast and diplomatic), and overlooks one reality – that the female readers of my blog and probably his, too, are far better informed and make far better choices than the vast majority of men out there in the general populace – but he does provide a helpful condensation of the arguments it would take me many hours to frame.  So take this for what you will, and I look forward to the discussion that will follow (emphasis in original):

It fills me with rage at this stupid age to know that, in the most crucial US election in the last decades, there is such a discrepancy between female and male voter orientation. It seems that this wave of Reprobation (make no mistake: voting for Clinton can only be a mortal sin) is mainly fueled by the female sex, who is more prone to swallow hook, line and sinker all the rubbish about the “first female President”, the “objectifying of women” and all that insignificant noise meant to cover the real issues: the fact that Christian heritage and fundamental liberties (besides the Country’s security) may well be at stake.

Women of past ages knew very well that it was better for them that only men could vote, or be a judge. It helped a lot to keep the emotions out, and preserve an ordered society. It prevented the brutal emotional manipulation of serious issues we see today.

In a society in which only males can vote you can’t get very far with the emotional appeal to the “poor pregnant girl”. In a society in which only males can vote you could never attack the Second Amendment. In a society in which only male can vote not only Trump would clean up, but you would probably have a better Democrat opponent in the first place……..[I don’t think this goes nearly far enough.  If there had never been women’s suffrage, I don’t think there would have ever been a Trump, or a nation fallen far enough to give us two such unworthy candidates.]

…….Women suffrage has done great damage to women. It has allowed them to hurt themselves in so many ways: with abortion, with divorce, with a stupid push for an “emancipation” that has become a double burden, with the attempt to dismantle a patriarchal society that served them so much better than making of them the toys of many men…….

………It would be better for everyone, and particularly for women, if they were not allowed to vote. In time, this would cause a reversion to what every Catholic (that is: sensible) woman must wish: a solidly patriarchal society honoring women for their real qualities and helping them to give the best of their feminine nature, whilst stifling the self-destructive tendencies unavoidably generated by their (otherwise so beautifully) emotional nature.

Two thousand words is very long for a blog post, so I’ll end here, but I’ve really only scratched the surface of a very complex, and important, topic. I may err above where I say debating this will confine one to a lunatic fringe; not that I’m wrong about how people would receive such an argument, but as to whether that matters or not.  That is to say, the truth must be revealed no matter how it is received.

So, perhaps we’ll have more on this topic in the future.