jump to navigation

Excellent Analysis – How the American Republic Came to This Point of Collapse September 28, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, catachesis, disaster, error, General Catholic, persecution, Revolution, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, suicide.
comments closed

I found a really good piece by Angelo M. Codevilla examining the background to the election in 2016 and the dire portents for the future of the American Republic.  Codevilla goes to significant lengths to prove the nightmarish, evil influence the self-anointed elites have had on this country, and how their self-serving beliefs portend only widening hatred of Christians, increasing persecution, and growing national malaise followed by ultimate collapse.

Codevilla quite rightly notes that the rise of Donald Trump is much more an expression of exasperation by a broad swath of the populace with the ruling elite who have all but destroyed this nation than it is an indication of a clearly defined set of policies.  Certainly, there are aspects of Trump’s popularity that have to do with policy – his claims to reduce or eliminate muslim immigration, build a wall to contain illegal immigration from south of the border, and his erstwhile support for some kind of return to an actual rule of law in this country – but most of all, he is supported for being perceived as an outsider, even an enemy, to the ruling class that has insulted and persecuted millions of Americans for decades, and which millions see as driving this nation off a cliff.

But Codevilla notes a danger here, on two fronts: one, even Trump, and many of his most fervent supporters, seem enamored of the same kind of rule by decree, punish your enemies philosophy that has been the primary tool of the leftist elite in this country for decades.  Secondly, Trump may well fail to “Make America Great Again,” leaving tens of millions even more aggrieved, more antagonized, more disenchanted with the political process in this country, and potentially open to revolution, or really, what might be a violent counter-revolution against the slow-moving revolution of the Left we have endured these past 50 years or so.

Thus, the prospects that Trump will return the US to some kind of pre-revolutionary Constitutional footing, the America That Was, seem slight, at best.  Having spoken with a number of ardent Trump supporters, however, many seem cognizant of this “long shot” aspect to Trump’s candidacy, but given the choices in 2016, many were willing to role the dice on a perceived outsider, hoping against hope that he might somehow find a formula to roll back the entrenched attitudes of the leftist elite, or even, even more miraculously, somehow displace that elite with a new elite, much more in line with traditional American values and support for the Constitution.

And there are glimmers of hope for this.  Trump has displayed an uncanny ability to both survive virtually unscathed the usual left-wing attacks that leave other politicians gravely wounded (or at least severely cowed), and to squash the fatal conceits and internal contradictions of cultural marxism.  Cultural marxism/political correctness has been the primary vehicle by which the ruling elite – which Codevilla repeatedly notes, includes both demonrats and Republicans, all sharing the same assumptions and hideous errors – has imposed its will on the American people.  It is one of the aspects of Trump’s rise I find most attractive.  But will Trump simply be a “reactionary” version of the same thing we have been enduring for decades, with rule by decree, executive action, secret handshakes, and all the other contra-Constitutional behaviors that have defined the ruling elite, only turned around and directed at those who have held sway for the best part of 56 years?

Codevilla’s work is long, but very much worth reading from beginning to end.  It’s also quite dense, and not easy to excerpt, so I’ll only provide his conclusion below.

His overall takeaway, however, is that whatever Trump is, and whatever good he might do, it is probably too late to preserve this Republic.  The toxic ideas of the marxist-inspired Left in this country have sunk in too deep, done too much damage, and influenced the thinking of far too many LIVs and other useful idiots to be checked by a single politician, even an exceptional one (which is far from certain, to my mind).  This is precisely my view, and has been for some time.  America has fallen beyond the realm of a political savior.  Politics is downstream of culture, the leftist pseudo-religion has definitively won the culture war (in terms of getting a large majority of people to accept their false precepts and diabolical doctrines), and only a religious renewal on a massive scale can possibly turn this country around.

I see little evidence of that, however.  What I fear will happen is just more of the same, but with limitless boundaries, as Codevilla notes, as this country transmogrifies into some kind of socialist pseudo-dictatorship of the oligarchy, with endless repression of Christians and traditional beliefs, generally.

Codevilla’s conclusion:

Trump’s slogan—“make America great again”—is the broadest, most unspecific, common denominator of non-ruling-class Americans’ diverse dissatisfaction with what has happened to the country. He talks about reasserting America’s identity, at least by controlling the borders; governing in America’s own interest rather than in pursuit of objectives of which the American people have not approved; stopping the export of jobs and removing barriers to business; and banishing political correctness’s insults and injuries. But all that together does not amount to making America great again. Nor does Trump begin to explain what it was that had made this country great to millions who have known only an America much diminished.

In fact, the United States of America was great because of a whole bunch of things that now are gone. Yes, the ruling class led the way in personal corruption, cheating on tests, lowering of professional standards, abandoning churches and synagogues for the Playboy Philosophy and lifestyle, disregarding law, basing economic life on gaming the administrative state, basing politics on conflicting identities, and much more. But much of the rest of the country followed. What would it take to make America great again—or indeed to make any of the changes that Trump’s voters demand? Replacing the current ruling class would be only the beginning.

Because it is difficult to imagine a Trump presidency even thinking about something so monumental as replacing an entire ruling elite, [how could such even be accomplished? Shut down all Ivy League and most other colleges, most public schools, where the indoctrination is so firmly entrenched rocing a change seems essentially impossible?] much less leading his constituency to accomplishing it, electing Trump is unlikely to result in a forceful turn away from the country’s current direction. Continuing pretty much on the current trajectory under the same class will further fuel revolutionary sentiments in the land all by itself. Inevitable disappointment with Trump is sure to add to them.

We have stepped over the threshold of a revolution. It is difficult to imagine how we might step back, and futile to speculate where it will end. Our ruling class’s malfeasance, combined with insult, brought it about. Donald Trump did not cause it and is by no means its ultimate manifestation. Regardless of who wins in 2016, this revolution’s sentiments will grow in volume and intensity, and are sure to empower politicians likely to make Americans nostalgic for Donald Trump’s moderation.

Two last things: first, I don’t take this piece as anti-Trump.  I think it realist.  I have become increasingly anyone-but-Hillary in the past 2-3 months, but I am highly skeptical that Trump will really turn things around in this country.  I am skeptical that any man, especially a politician, could do so.  We’re in the hands of God at this point.

Secondly, I am increasingly doubtful there will be some kind of revolutionary or counter-revolutionary reaction against the entrenched elites.  I mean, given the insults, persecutions, and unjust treatments we’ve already swallowed, what will we not swallow?  The elites are absolutely banking that we’re far too spoiled, comfortable, and afraid of losing what we have to do anything radical.  I see little evidence they are not right.

But should they begin to truly impoverish Americans en masse via things like carbon taxes, banning of fossil fuel production/use, implementation of hard-socialist policies a la Venezuela or Bolivia, then………maybe.  Note, however, that even in Venezuela, strident protest and violent reaction against the country-destroying socialist regime has been really quite limited, and the government is not experiencing an existential crisis just yet.

The Real Goal of H-1B Visas is Driving Down STEM Field Salaries August 11, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, Domestic Church, foolishness, General Catholic, It's all about the $$$, sadness, scandals, Society, suicide.
comments closed

Many readers will recall that I was laid off from my job of 8 years (12, actually, but in two different stints) earlier this year.  I have described my not only finding a new job, but one that actually allowed me to get a little uptick in pay, as miraculous.  Not only did I find that job in record time (5 weeks), but the fact that I didn’t have to take a pay cut after leaving an unusually high paying employer (Fujitsu) was beyond amazing.  Your prayers, I am convinced, made all the difference. I shall forever pray for you – I pray.

One thing I was frustrated by during my job search – and I’ve kept looking around just a tiny bit since – is how little salaries in my profession had gone up since the last time I was on the market in 2006.  They had remained totally flat, if not decreased a bit.  I found many companies unwilling to pay a senior, highly skilled mechanical engineer, with very strong CAD and analysis skills, more than the same amount a year they were offering 10 or 15 years ago.  I had a lot of contacts with HR people or hiring managers that got positively peeved when I told them my salary requirements, and I fired back more than once that they were basically paying under $50k a year in 2006 dollars for that $75k salary they were so proud of (when you factor in inflation).

So I was fairly interested to see this news report, and especially the attached graph, that shows how salaries among computer programmers and IT types have actually FALLEN since 2002 in constant dollars, and I can say that software engineers and IT folks have it better than more “old school” engineers like mechanicals.

Meanwhile, barely 2/3 of those with STEM degrees are actually using their degree in their present employment, and the unemployment rate of STEM types has nudged upwards over the years.

All of which proves that the much vaunted STEM shortage is really a fabrication.  Or, they never quite finish the sentence…….many corporations, including ones headed by astonishing wealthy individuals (Microsoft, Facebook, Google, etc), do have a shortage of STEM workers…..at the very low salaries they want to pay.

That is why, as the article below notes, H-1B visas tend to go to very young, inexperienced workers, making them cheaper still.

Leaching off last week’s DNC Convention, tech industry-behemoths Facebook, Microsoft, and Amazon hosted a mini-conference amidst the gathering elite aimed at building awareness of the supposed lack of tech-education among America’s youth. The policy-push comes off Microsoft’s ‘National Talent Strategy’ hatched a few years back; an initiative which the company’s own general counsel apparently admitted was nothing but a ‘manufactured crisis’ really geared to serve the industry’s H-1B immigration agenda. Indeed, if America really did have an ‘education crisis’ in the STEM-fields, why do so many of the hundreds of thousands of H-1B professionals imported here every year come from places that do far worse educationally than we do?

The H-1B program was created in 1990 following claims from the then-brand new tech lobby that American professionals with sufficient tech-skills were in short supply. Twenty-five years on, that labor market-shortage has apparently still not been corrected with the industry spending hundreds of millions of dollars a year lobbying Congress to import more and more tech-professionals from abroad. …….

……..Recently, the Immigration Reform Law Institute obtained government records showing that between FY2013 and May of this year, almost one million H-1B petitions for imported white collar-workers were approved by DHS officials. And of all those successful petitions, a whopping 70 percent went to white collar-workers from India. This isn’t exactly surprising. BigTech loves Indian workers; not only because English is India’s national language, but because the workforce there is young (and therefore cheap). Unsurprisingly then, according to DHS-data almost three-quarters of petitions awarded to professionals in 2011 went to those aged between 25 and 34—Gender discrimination’s also likely. Although DHS says it doesn’t track gender-data, one labor association’s estimated that at least 80 percent of H-1B petitions go to men.

For a very long time, I shied away from believing that corporate titans and captains of industry were really as greedy as they are often portrayed as being.  But that reticence is becoming harder and harder to maintain.

I don’t mean to sound like a grousing populist man of the people, but I have recent and direct experience of seeing how wages in my profession, the one I was promised by parents, teachers, professors, and counselors alike would always be in high demand and was a “sure bet,” have stagnated if not retreated in constant dollars.  I have seen how many long time professionals of eminent capabilities have not been as blessed as I have been, and are still desperately searching for engineering employement 6, 12, 18, even 24+ months after being laid off.  Or if they do find employment, it is most often contract-based with no benefits and at a significant cut in pay.  And I have seen far too many companies gut their R&D investment, placing short term profits over long-term viability.

Once again, it is little wonder Trump is as popular as he is.  It’s not only the blue collar types that are being crushed, it’s a great many white collar professional types, too.

Trump Brings Out Shocking Classism of Republican “Elite” August 11, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, Basics, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, rank stupidity, sadness, scandals, Society, suicide.
comments closed

Via Rorate, a really interesting post by Dalrock, examining how conservative elites (well, two prominent ones, anyway) now chastise blue-collar whites for falling into the moral morass the self-anointed elites of both parties themselves created.  From serial divorce and concubinage to casual drug use (leading to addiction) to contrabortion and now redefining marriage, wealthy elites have by and large been able to escape the painful economic and social effects of the immoral culture they have created.  Meanwhile, they castigate blue collar folks “failure” to uphold the very standards the elites themselves have successfully destroyed.  Trump’s success is a sign of the peons revolting against those who view themselves as masters:

Love him or hate him, Trump has managed to bring the Republican elite’s seething contempt for the working class to the surface.  Back in March, Kevin D. Williamson at National Review wrote that white working class communities deserve to die:

If you spend time in hardscrabble, white upstate New York, or eastern Kentucky, or my own native West Texas, and you take an honest look at the welfare dependency, the drug and alcohol addiction, the family anarchy—which is to say, the whelping of human children with all the respect and wisdom of a stray dog—you will come to an awful realization. It wasn’t Beijing. It wasn’t even Washington, as bad as Washington can be. It wasn’t immigrants from Mexico, excessive and problematic as our current immigration levels are. It wasn’t any of that…

The truth about these dysfunctional, downscale communities is that they deserve to die. Economically, they are negative assets. Morally, they are indefensible…[I have liked a great deal of what Williamson writes, but never saw this before.  As someone who visits these kinds of locales regularly, several times a year, and has family scattered throughout them, I find this gravely offensive and about as backwards as one can get.  What is the greatest predictor of economic disadvantage, tendency towards crime, and drug addiction?  Growing up in a single parent (mom only) household.  But it wasn’t the working class whites of Muleshoe or Watertown or Harlan County that clamored for divorce on demand, it was the white upper and upper middle classes.  The working class have embraced the false freedoms imposed by the sexular pagan elite, to their shame and great self-injury, but they didn’t create this mess, in fact, in many cases they were some of the most stalwart opponents of the agenda the elites insisted on imposing, and yet now they are being blamed for it as is it were their own.  Surely there is enormous blame to go around, I’m not giving those folks a pass, but I will say that, even to this day in the small towns I visit regularly, there is far less divorce, concubinage, and drug addiction than there is in the “sainted” big city.]

Trump’s focus has been on the elite’s policy of driving down the wages of the working class through lopsided trade deals and flooding our economy with cheap foreign labor.  Williamson ironically disregards the economic crisis faced by the working class by accurately noting that our elites have done even more damage by creating a new family model that only works for the upper middle class. [It doesn’t even work for them, the children are devastated and eventually enough will be brought low by this that whole families will sink from “upper-whatever” to “lower-whatever” class. But the upper classes generally have the financial wherewithal, the reserves, to weather the devastation of frivorce and other ails better than the lower classes]

The callousness on display here is breathtaking, yet it is commonplace amongst Republican elites. [Is it?  My gut says yes, certainly, Republican elites have always been disdainful of social conservatives and our concerns, preferring to please the donor class. Not sure how much more evidence there is, however, of a bias specifically against icky lower middle class blue collar types]  Much of the contempt for Trump stems from the contempt the elite have for the segment of society that he is reaching out to, a segment the Republican elites have done their best to ignore for decades.  This shines through even when members of the elite try to learn from Trump’s example…….

[Now another damning quote from another conservative writer]………They will have to go to the Fishtowns of America, to the forgotten and shuttered places, and by word and deed show the people there, however backward they might be, that they can rebuild their lives and their communities, and that they aren’t alone anymore…..[Wow]

………This attempt by the Republican elites to minimize the plight of the white working class is not only foolish politically, but is also built on moral quicksand.  It is true that the dysfunction we observe typically involves poor choices by all involved.  But it is also true that these same elites have reworked marriage to a model that only works for the elite.

That is, one not built around the father-provider and mother-nurturer, but basically eliminating the father from the family and replacing him with Uncle Sugar, the surrogate provider of the state.  That method denies an increasing number of children, tens of millions of them, a father, almost insuring future poverty, joblessness, poor education, and a profound tendency towards crime.  It gravely wounds society from a moral standpoint, of course, but also produces young people of weak moral fiber and with little work-ethic, helping insure the economic malaise Williamson, et. al., claim to find so damning.

I’m still not terribly down with Trump, but I have zero problem understanding why so many are.  I’m far from certain he’s the right answer to the problems crises so many face, but I can understand why folks would be willing to take a shot on the perceived outsider, no matter how dubious that perception may be.

It’s amazing how far we’ve fallen.  Can you imagine Ronald Reagan, or William Safire, arguing to just write off all the small towns and rural districts of America?  THEY ARE YOUR NUMBER ONE BASE!!!!!! No group votes more consistently “(R) than rural whites. What kind of idiot would think something like that, let alone write it?!  What an amazingly tribalistic, classist notion.

But that’s where we’re at.  I really fear this country is way beyond any political savior at this point, the moral rot is too deep, the evil too widespread.  The center cannot hold, the best lack all conviction, and all that.  Perhaps I’ll be surprised, however.  We’ll see.

Best Analysis I’ve Read on the “Deaconess Commission” August 9, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, episcopate, foolishness, Francis, General Catholic, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, suicide, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

I finally took the time to stop down by Unam Sanctam Catholicam, and was rewarded as usual.  Some have argued strenuously that merely creating a committee to study the issue of “female deacons” doesn’t imply an endorsement of such or any kind of move towards making deaconesses a reality, and could even be an ingenious method to bury the issue!  Of course, there have been preceding commissions, preceding studies, and they failed to do so.

Anyone who knows how politics work, however, knows that nothing is more important to a fringe issue than keeping it alive.  Nothing is more vital than getting the seeming acceptance of the powers that be by having them create some committee to study your nutty fringe issue.  Suddenly, it’s not so fringe, it’s become mainstream, it’s part of the process!  It has momentum. And allowing highly contentious politicized issues to gain momentum in the official sphere can often have enormous unintended consequences, even those quite contrary to those who may have intended to kill a matter by consigning it to committee in the first place.

So opines Boniface at USC, and I am strongly inclined to agree (my emphasis and comments):

……But the thing to realize is the mere fact of opening a subject to discussion makes it appear that its open for discussion. Even if there’s no money for the project and it literally cannot happen, the fact it is being discussed makes people think it can[Absolutely]

[The most important part…..] And the impossibility of the project coming to fruition does not stop its partisans. They use the commission as a means of propagating their ideas and refining their arguments – of networking with the right people and putting the right mechanisms in place to further their agenda. Of putting out whatever message to the public they wish. Of building public support and leveraging pressure on those in charge to bend to their wishes.

In other words, they might know they are not going to get what they want, but they create a momentum towards it.[!!!]

Why create momentum when they know it literally can’t happen? Well, in politics nothing is ever ultimately impossible. But in the Church, literally women can never be ordained to the diaconate. It simply cannot happen any more than a woman could be ordained to the priesthood. But that does not mean its proponents – who think it is possible – will not try to create the momentum. And the momentum is what is so dangerous,  because even if we never have women deacons, the momentum is like a huge net that will drag all sorts of souls into error on this point, create dissension, false expectations, schisms, scandal, confusion and chaos. And the chaos itself is detrimental, whether or not we ever get women deacons. [And so, Francis committees, and the ones that have come before, rehashing an issue already settled centuries ago, are, at best, huge prudential mistakes, if not at times worse than that]

People who think this is “no biggie” just because it “won’t happen” don’t understand the way people hijack parliamentary procedure and the commission-committee system to foment chaos to create momentum towards their goals. It is all destabilizing, and ultimately destabilization of the traditional Church structure is what the progressives are after. [And you have to keep in mind, though you or I may know deaconesses in the modern sense to be impossible, the supporters of women’s ordination do not know that.  They think it not only possible, but inevitable.  They’re on the “right side of history,” and all that.  Even more, many of their allies in the hierarchy also think it quite possible.  From that, all kinds of dire outcomes are possible]

The pope ought to have said, “There is no point in a commission to study. This can never happen, and if so, there’s no point in studying it. I don’t want to give Catholics the impression something could change when it can’t.” But by allowing a commission to “study” the question, Pope Francis is opening the door for partisans of women deacons [no, women “priests,” that’s always been the goal] to start building that momentum towards a female diaconate; whether they get it or not it irrelevant. The fact is, the traditional exclusion of women from Holy Orders is now open for discussion, and that fact alone – regardless of what conclusion they come to – is dangerous. 

I agree.

With the Left, whether secular or ecclesiastical, it’s always about moving the ball forward.  Once moved, it’s like a new point of departure,; there is no going back.  Anything that serves to move their agenda forward, they will take with great cheer.  Even synods that don’t go nearly as far as some might have liked.  And they can be very patient in pursuit of their agenda.

I’ll admit – there are times when committees are used to kill certain issues.  But rarely do they succeed with regard to sacred shibboleths of the Left that involve cultural hot-button issues.

Boniface has been in politics.  It shows.

Bergoglio establishes commission to study diaconate of women August 2, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in different religion, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, paganism, priests, Revolution, scandals, secularism, Society, suicide, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

If this study goes anything like the Synods, we can safely assume not only has the matter already been decided, but the papers announcing the change in policy after the close of the study are already written, or at least well underway:

On May 12, 2016, the Holy Father, in the course of the meeting — in the format of dialogue in the Paul VI Hall — with the participants at the Plenary Assembly of Superiors-General, expressed his intention of “establishing an official commission that can study the question” of the Diaconate of women, “especially regarding the first years of the Church”.
After intense prayer and mature reflection, His Holiness has decided to institute the Commission for the Study of the Diaconate of Women……..
There follows the list of individuals making up the study group, including 6 women and 6 men, plus a president from the CDF.  I know only a few names on the list – the ones I know lean heavily liberal, including Phyllis Zagano, who has written for the Apostate Reporter for  years.

There were deaconesses in the early Church.  Their role, however, was strictly limited, and nothing like the modern role of the deacon, especially in the Novus Ordo realm.  Since baptism in the early Church involved full immersion and little clothing, women assistants were needed to perform them to prevent the risk of scandal and sin.

I think we can rest assured this study will ignore the true historical realities, and instead try to invent out of whole cloth a sweeping mandate for an expansive list of female diaconal duties.  I have to believe, in spite of Bergoglio’s statements to the contrary, that this is ultimately about paving the way for false women priestesses.  That is what this “movement” (of a very small number of disaffected women and some ignorant, worldly hangers on) has been driving at all along, since the scourge of feminism first burst into reality in the Church in the late 60s.  Thankfully most of the women clamoring for this are quite elderly and they are not being replaced by younger followers.   But a female diaconate could breathe new life into an increasingly moribund effort.

Will something like this only continue to expand the growing divide between the traditional practice of the Faith, centered on the TLM, and the Novus Ordo practice?  It is impossible that it would not, unless it is planned to unleash all the recent novelties of the NO on the TLM at some point (or just do away with “permission” for the TLM outright).

Either way, it’s disconcerting.  Some may say “you’re over-reacting,” but all I can say is, look how the Synods went, and what is planned for future ones.  The Left telegraphs its objectives well in advance.  I don’t think I’m over-reacting at all, I think I’m making a sober assessment of the situation.

Which may soon look like this:

Oh, bring it on……and while you’re at it, do tell me all about your absent father and bullying at school.  Quite the rich tapestry, I’m sure.

So how do you reconcile this with a sudden breakthrough with the Society?  How could the Society accept?

Remaking a Culture through Ignorance of History July 27, 2016

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

Two small datapoints indicative of a huge force shaping the remaking of our culture below.  Why are  young people so willing to accept leftist revisionist history regarding the United States/Western Civilization as the must uniquely evil influences in the history of the world?  Largely because they are so ignorant of history they have no basis for comparison and are thus unable to make any kind of comparison or distinction.  The goal is malleability – young minds clueless of history are a field ripe for leftist manipulation.

Thus we get the before:

The overwhelming majority of America’s most prestigious institutions do not require even the students who major in history to take a single course on United States history or government. Disregard for the importance of United States history in the undergraduate history major is matched by the overall disappearance of United States history requirements from general education, the core curriculum that should be part of every student’s education… [A] survey of seniors at the “Top 50” colleges and universities, those holding the most prestigious positions in the U.S. News & World Report rankings, found that only 22% could match the phrase “government of the people, by the people, for the people” with the Gettysburg Address.  [well thoughts like that can tend to be inconvenient for the “progressive” camp, so they are better left unlearned]

And the after:

I started giving quizzes to my juniors and seniors. I gave them a ten-question American history test… just to see where they are. The vast majority of my students – I’m talking nine out of ten, in every single class, for seven consecutive years – they have no idea that slavery existed anywhere in the world before the United States. Moses, Pharaoh, they know none of it. They’re 100% convinced that slavery is a uniquely American invention… How do you give an adequate view of history and culture to kids when that’s what they think of their own country – that America invented slavery? That’s all they know.

In fact, almost the entirety of rapid growth of the racial supremacist movement known as “Black Lives Matters” (the supremacy being proved by their unremitting hostility towards those who counter “all lives matter”) can be attributed to young people’s massive ignorance of history. For them, with a narrow, solipsistic world view and abject ignorance not only of history but current affairs in the world, the United States is the most uniquely evil country in history.  That this is laughable to anyone with even a light knowledge of history is, in their warped, ideological worldview, only proof of rampant racism.  Thus, they are perfectly formed to be invincibly convinced activists bent only on destruction of the current “system” as they perceive it, no matter how outrageous and pathetic their rhetoric appears to those with a bit more knowledge.

For instance, how many of these black lives matters radicals know that black muslims took probably a million or more white European slaves during the Medieval and Baroque periods?  How many know or would admit that slavery is still practiced in muslim Africa today?  What the heck do they think Boko Haram is all about, kidnapping hundreds (or thousands) of African Christians and keeping them under forced bondage?  To me, you have to be almost unbelievably uninformed to buy into the rhetoric, but study after study shows that Americans, and especially young Americans, are in fact that ignorant.

Also note that the culture of “no losers,” “everyone gets a trophy” has convinced millions of middling minds that they are, in fact, irreducibly brilliant, so brilliant, in fact, that they have absolutely nothing left to learn.

It’s a recipe for revolution. Of course, it was intended to be, all along.  Too bad the student cadres are almost always the first to be strung up and shot once the revolution ends.  See the Bolshevik and Cultural Revolutions, and the Khmer Rouge rule of Cambodia.

The term is useful idiots, and Lenin did not coin it accidentally or ironically.

The Solution Liberal “Catholics” Refuse to Countenance: Conversion July 21, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in catachesis, different religion, error, foolishness, Francis, General Catholic, paganism, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, suicide, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

Matthew Schmitz, who apparently writes at First Things (which is a severe condemnation of that publication) has a piece at the Catholic Herald wherein he wrings his hands over the future of liberal “Catholicism.”  Apparently, liberals are feeling a great deal of angst over Francis’ failure to implement as radical a policy as they would like.  Goodness, his documents and statements all but obliterate the moral Doctrine of the Faith – what more could they want?!  That, in itself, tells us a very great deal about what liberal Catholics really believe.  They want a Church that is so permeated by the sense of the world, that it is indistinguishable from it, and bends to every shift in liberal opinion.

I’ll excerpt quite a bit from the below, adding my own emphasis and comments, but the thought that overwhelmed me throughout reading it was how un-Catholic it was.  Not in the details, not in the diminution of Tradition or the advocacy of error, but in its overall sense.  There is no sense of conversion.  No sense that perhaps the liberal who desires to be Catholic should shift his belief to conform to that of the Church, instead of always insisting that the Church should change to conform to his belief, and militating to that end by devious means (which the author openly advocates – “hollowing out” the Doctrine of the Faith is desirable for Francis right now, because outright repudiation of it is not possible!).  This is a path of pure destruction, as any review of history and the ongoing collapse of the mainline sects would reveal to anyone with even a remotely open mind.

This desire for the Church to conform to  me, wonderful me, is utterly alien to me.  I am a convert. I have, by an act of Grace and of the will, changed by belief on a huge number of subjects to conform with Catholic thought.  That process continues to this day, as I learn the Faith better (I pray).  I became a Catholic by choice.  I think Dom Prosper Gueranger would, among other Catholic greats, agree with me, that it would be far better for these liberal “Catholics” to leave the Church whose beliefs they so manifestly reject, rather than continue to heap coals of fire on their heads in their useless attempts to create a Church in their own fallen image.  In fact, if I put my mind to it, I am certain I could quote Gueranger to precisely that end.

Nevertheless, the angst of the unsatisfied radical:

…….The first problem is demographic. There are not enough highly committed young liberal Catholics to replace the older generation. Last September, the posh Town and Country Club in St Paul, Minnesota, hosted to a conference with the title “Can Francis change the Church’s approach to sexuality?” Barbara Frey, a human rights lawyer, and Massimo Faggioli, an advocate for the theological education of newspaper columnists, addressed a crowd of 125 attendees. Notwithstanding the spicy topic, the National Catholic Reporter noted that crowd members were “mostly in their 60s, 70s and 80s”.

Though many self-identified Catholics count as liberals, broad trends [trends perpetuated by…….liberalism!] away from religious attachment and observance have left fewer than ever willing to spend time and energy trying to change the Church. Phyllis Zagano, a professor at Hofstra University and advocate for women deacons, worries that “older Church professionals who adjusted to vernacular liturgies and who incorporate mercy into their understandings of justice are retiring daily” only to be replaced by young conservatives. [I pray that is the case.  If it is, it isn’t happening fast enough.  I would posit to those who incline liberal, that they actually belong to a different and inveterately hostile religion.  Liberalism is itself a religion. It has dogmas, certainly, but also signs and symbols, and even diabolical sacraments (abortion, contraception, etc). Liberals seek to force the Church to correspond to their true religion, left/liberalism.  Thus the Church must be forced to yield to their worldly religion at all times, and since the revolution is never over, even Francis’ mighty novelties are judged insufficient, and cannot be, until there is literally nothing left. Then there will be a crocodile tear or two, while the liberal rests smug in his act of destruction]

Though liberals control various[virtually all] media outlets and theology faculties, they have not been as successful as traditional Catholics in drawing people into the sacramental life of the Church. Liberals who have accepted calls to the priesthood or religious life, who attend Mass daily, who volunteer on parish councils are getting older [and fewer] every year…..[Why is that?  It’s because liberalism is a false religion inefficacious of Grace and unable to work true conversion on men’s hearts!  Why? It is a religion of men, for men, and by men!  Liberalism has always sought to dethrone God and replace Him with a false god acceptable to the world, as I quoted just earlier today!  And the ONLY reason liberalism ever had any more than a bare handful of Catholics who assisted at daily Mass or, incredibly, took a religious vocation, is because THEY WERE ORIGINALLY FORMED IN THE TRUE FAITH AND THEN REBELLED AGAINST IT! That’s why liberalism cannot replace itself, the original cadre of aging leftist “Catholics” were formed before the revolution occurred, and still carry elements of that formation, that attachment to the Faith, even though it is twisted and perverted.  But for younger people, that formation has been denied them as liberalism swept over and subsumed all but a few small pockets of the Church!  They never had have, and never will have, the well of true Faith upon which to draw in order to become good, faithful Catholics – Catholics who assist at Mass daily, who deeply care and are involved in the life of their parish, who might even become a priest!  Thus, a liberal church’s collapse is a self-fulfilling prophecy – the more liberal the Church or a sect becomes, the smaller and less effectual it will become, BECAUSE IT HAS DEVIATED FROM THE TRUTH OF JESUS CHRIST AND IS NOT EFFICACIOUS OF GRACE! See all the mainline sects for examples of this]

This spring I attended the ordination and first Mass of a young priest. As the infant children of our friends cried in the pews, I watched him kneel before the altar and elevate the Host. [Oh, the horror!  How gauche!  Didn’t he know there were liberals in the audience who would look aghast at such cornball displays?] After the liturgy ended, we gathered in the parish hall for a reception with sandwiches and soda. The newly minted Father entered the room dressed in a soutane. [Good for him] He is neither a traditionalist nor a controversialist, [Too bad, I pray he becomes both] but his long garment would have struck a previous generation or priests as grossly retrograde. [Which tells us a great deal about them, doesn’t it?] I asked if any of the older priests he knew would be offended by it. He said yes, but that they had by now resigned themselves to seeing such things among their younger colleagues.

Not everyone is willing to concede so quietly. A few years ago I attended a Mass at which the priest began to rage against Benedict XVI’s investigation of American nuns: “This is evil, evil, wicked and evil! It is a sin, and Benedict should beg for forgiveness!” [What a stupid, vapid argument. Imagine, the Pope investigating serious, repeated, and incredibly well-documented deviations from the Doctrine of the Faith, and the 40-year promotion of a hostile and alien set of beliefs, within the Church!]

……..Yet such anecdotes tend to overstate liberal Catholicism’s weakness. It may not be able to propel people toward the centre of Church life, but it appeals to many who are falling away, or at least lingering near the exits. Newman once wrote, “there are but two alternatives, the way to Rome, and the way to Atheism: Anglicanism is the halfway house on the one side, and Liberalism is the halfway house on the other.” Liberal Catholicism may be a temporary home for many who are headed to unbelief, but some who stop there take the opportunity to turn back. [Setting aside the fact that this is circular reasoning, what the heck is he saying?  That liberalism is a deviation from the Faith that some return from?  Is that it’s only use, then?  To stop a few wayward souls from completely departing?  But what damage do they do in the interim?  This is really a weak and rather pathetic bit of argumentation – he is completely misinterpreting Blessed John Newman.  Newman wasn’t positing Liberalism as a good thing, but as a very, very bad thing, simply one other way to leave the Church and enter another religion, like Anglicanism.]

Liberal Catholicism is based on the admirable and eminently Catholic aspiration for a Church and society that work in concert. What distinguishes the liberal from your run-of-the-mill integralist is the liberal’s belief that the society must not only be brought around to the views of the Church, but that the Church must also, to some extent, and perhaps to a very large one, be brought around to the views of the society. [Thank you for making my argument for me.  Did not our Blessed Lord specifically warn us to reject the false wisdom of the world? And yet you would drag this into the heart of the Church?  No thanks.]

……..Revolution may have seemed possible in the 1960s, but it no longer does today. The New Mass may have given our grandparents a delicious frisson, but it is comfortingly or depressingly familiar to younger Catholics. As it no longer has the power of revolution, liberal Catholicism has lost its last taste of transcendence. Those who want some share of excitement must look elsewhere.

I’ll conclude on that note, leaving aside the author’s statements – which he plainly makes – that Francis’ attacks on the Doctrine of the Faith are made in a deliberately underhanded way, as that is the only way to attack the Doctrine without opening up an obvious breach (I’d say the breach is obvious any, but….).  He also notes with great candor that Francis has advanced beliefs that contradict the solemn Doctrine  of the Faith.

But I’ll leave that aside, and simply note in conclusion the possibly inadvertent “tell” the author gave us there in the last paragraph.  What is intoxicating about liberalism?  The excitement of revolution? What does revolution always involve – the destruction of the preceding order, and its replacement by a new one, most often involving violence, always with great distress to the maintenance of peace and civil order.

If revolution was the only thing that ever gave liberalism transcendence, then the author would, I think, be forced to admit that it is a false ideology and one that is not pleasing to God.  Catholicism is transcendent to its core, in all of its manifestations.  It is transcendent in the public sphere, and in the interior forum.  It is transcendent in its Sacraments and in its Doctrines.

But liberalism is not.  It is only “transcendent” – and in a manifestly false way – when it stirs the emotions to a violent peak, tearing down what existed before and promising to build a better tomorrow, which somehow never comes.  Catholicism posits an interior revolution, a quiet, peaceful revolution in the soul, as one exchanges the errors one holds for the Truth of Jesus Christ, just as St. Paul did.  Liberalism, on the other hand, posits an exterior revolution, a revolution of emotional excess and invariable suffering – just as millions of souls were anguished by the changes unleashed on the Church in the 60s and 70s.

In brief, Catholicism demands the soul convert to Jesus Christ and the Church He gave us.  Liberalism demands everyone and everything – including the Church, including Jesus Christ Himself – submit to the individual liberal will.  Thus, liberalism advances a revolution that never ends,  until the last human being has breathed his last. It is the ultimate realization of the notion of non serviam.  It is, as Pope St. Pius X alluded when speaking of liberalism’s ecclesiastical offspring, modernism, the synthesis of all errors.

May God have mercy on all those who fall into this false, nightmarish ideology.

“I had an abortion, on Good Friday” she screamed. And the feminists cheered. July 20, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, asshatery, contraception, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, suicide, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

Shorter Ann Barnhardt below.  Diabolical narcissism defined in 12 seconds:


Also see: feminist solipsism.

Pro tip: that baby is not in Heaven, tragically.  Abortion is not a Sacrament.  Telling women their aborted babies go to Heaven only encourages them to go through with it.  They actually convince themselves they’re doing a good thing.  The constant belief of the Church, whether it be a solemn Dogma or not, has been that babies innocent of actual sin who die unbaptized cannot enter Heaven.  That’s not to say they endure eternal suffering, but they do not receive the blessedness of the Beatific Vision for having been ripped limb from limb at their mother’s command.

In reality, this soul is in enormous pain and needs a lot of prayers.  She’s desperately trying to convince herself that what she did was morally acceptable, even though on some level, she knows it is not, hence the desperate need to appear brave and transgressive.

Gender-confused Soul Bradley Manning Attempts Suicide July 6, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in disaster, error, General Catholic, horror, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, suicide.
comments closed

Just a small bit of tragic evidence that the sick euphemism “transgenderism” is not a lifestyle, it’s not a gender, it is a severe mental illness that almost always ends tragically.  The bad ends surrounding transgenderism have nothing to do with any perceived persecution or lack of acceptance – which is a laugh today, what with the infotainment industrial complex solidly at their backs – they have to do with the deep-seeded mental problems of which so-called gender dysphoria is simply a particularly egregious manifestation.

So, traitor Bradley Manning, who leaked countless classified documents onto the internet, and who now pretends he is a woman, attempted to commit suicide at Fort Leavenworth in Kansas.  This attempt occurred in spite of the fact that the Obama administration just forced the Pentagon to accept “transgender” troops, and after a couple of years in which political and cultural support for forcing everyone to go along with these people have advanced immeasurably. That is to say, in spite of being imprisoned, Manning should have a great deal to be happy about.  Yet, he attempted suicide, as nearly half of all these poor afflicted souls do (warning, the article, from ostensibly conservative Fox News, fully adopts Manning’s derangement. I edit the article to correct the errors):

Bradley “Chelsea” Manning, who has been serving a 35-year prison sentence for her his role in leaking U.S. government secrets, was treated and released from a prison hospital Wednesday after she he tried to hang herself himself, according to media reports.

The “transgender” soldier, formerly known as Bradley Manning, was convicted in 2013 of espionage and other offenses for sending WikiLeaks more than 700,000 digital files including battlefield logs, diplomatic cables and video clips.

Both CNN and TMZ reported that the incident occurred at Fort Leavenworth, an all-male facility in Kansas. Few other details about the incident were immediately known. TMZ, citing prison officials, reported that she he has been released from the hospital and is being monitored.

It is very sad, but altogether unsurprising, to see Fox News adopt the culture of make believe the sexular pagans are trying to foist on all of us.  The language of the sexular pagan left, and especially the even more radical transgender fringe, is completely Orwellian in nature.  A lie becomes the truth, and then becomes a lie again, whatever suits the needs of the ruling nomenklatura.

And it is poor souls like Manning that pay the highest price for this madness. The more the culture pretends such a fundamental characteristic as the sex in which God made us is fungible and changeable, the more people will fall into this incredibly destructive lifestyle.

It’s all of a piece: contraception, self-abuse, fornication, porn use, and the other elements of the sexular pagan culture of diabolical narcissism they foster precipitate mass divorce, child sex abuse, and other trauma which leave many young people fatherless and almost irredeemably damaged (humanly speaking).  This damage further propagates from one generation to the next, so that each succeeding generation is, generally speaking (and barring some kind of miracle), worse than the one before.  More and more extreme forms of behavior thus propagate through the culture, and become accepted as the norm.*  The damage these behaviors do, paid for in shattered lives and literal rivers of blood, are always conveniently ignored as some kind of unavoidable by-product of “progress.”  It’s almost as if someone had a plan to destroy a culture, and were executing it to the last detail.

On a more prurient level, you and I not only get to pay for Manning’s continued incarceration under very special conditions and hormone treatments, a huge bill for psychological treatment will now be added to the mix.  So, we have that going for us.

*- Note, I am not trying to say that the individuals who fall into grievous sin are not culpable for their actions, or are somehow, according to Marxist thought, the mere victims of societal forces beyond their control.  Everyone has a choice towards good and evil, it is only that the forces unleashed and directed by the sexular pagans tend to bias many more souls towards choosing evil rather than good.

Francis declares Clear Doctrinal Definitions Heretical June 10, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Abortion, different religion, error, Francis, General Catholic, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, suicide, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

How can one respond to this very bold declaration from the Bishop of Rome, Francis, in declaring clear doctrinal definitions to be the stuff of heresy?  My first reaction is that this is a rhetorical excommunication of the entire pre-Franciscan Magisterium.  And not for the first time, mind you!

As Rorate notes, this declaration stands in irreformable contrast to the declarations of even the post-conciliar popes (let alone their predecessors).  That is to say, only one or the other can be right – either Francis is right, and the Church must jettison doctrinal definitions for the sake of the leftist cause “good” of souls, or the entire pre-conciliar Magisterium is right.

I know where my money will lay:

Francis……by qualifying as “heretical” a rejection of the “Doctrine of the Ideal” as well as any affirmation of the absoluteness of moral prohibitions (‘or this or nothing’).

“This (is the) healthy realism of the Catholic Church: the Church never teaches us ‘or this or that.’ That is not Catholic. The Church says to us: ‘this and that.’ [Fornication AND Sodomy!  Marriage AND Adultery!] ‘Strive for perfectionism: reconcile with your brother. Do not insult him. Love him. And if there is a problem, at the very least settle your differences so that war doesn’t break out.’ This (is) the healthy realism of Catholicism. It is not Catholic (to say) ‘or this or nothing:’  This is not Catholic, this is heretical. Jesus always knows how to accompany us, he gives us the ideal, he accompanies us towards the ideal, He frees us from the chains of the laws’ rigidity and tells us: ‘But do that up to the point that you are capable.’ And he understands us very well. He is our Lord and this is what he teaches us.”

Homily at Santa MartaJune 9, 2016

Not Cathoilc, eh?  But what of those on the left hand and right hand, or “If you do not eat My Flesh and drink My Blood you do not have life within you?”  What about “go and sin no more,” and “let them be as a heathen and publican.”

It’s not some man-made law of the Church that Francis is contradicting; it is Jesus Christ Himself.

The only way I can comprehend that he can mentally justify his stance, is if he is a modernist who believes basically all of Scripture is just an ex post facto creation of men with little or no relation to the supernatural.  Thus, it’s pick and choose (which correlates with his love for protestants) and will to power.

Rorate has the countervailing quotes from John Paul II, which I recommend reading for completeness.