jump to navigation

Is There a PR Campaign Against Traditionalists…….. May 25, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, Dallas Diocese, General Catholic, Grace, Interior Life, Latin Mass, mortification, scandals, Society, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
3 comments

…….or is there a resurgence in stereotypical “bad Trad” behavior in parishes that offer the TLM?

Dear reader SB, who I value so much in real life as a great sounding board to bounce ideas off, since SB has been around the TLM since ’91 (two decades more than me), sent me a link to this post at Unam Sanctam Catholicam some time ago.  I had been meaning to get to it, but then a few days ago another reader, MFG, sent me links to two other similar postings (here and here).  MFG wondered if this was perhaps part of some campaign to either give TLMers a bad name or to put them in a box, the suspicion being that perhaps this effort had something to do with the looming SSPX “reconciliation.”

Now, about these posts and the posters.  Of the three, I have total respect for Unam Sanctam Catholicam and know he’s a straight shooter duly reporting what he’s been told.  I also know there is no “agenda” there save perhaps for genuine concern about the health of TLM communities and the continued availability of the ancient Mass.  We all know Father Z and you can draw your own conclusions.  As for the final link above, it’s from the progressive-modernist Commonweal and I would treat any report by them with great skepticism.

Tying all this together for me personally was two sermons given by our pastor lately basically also imploring the faithful not to be “bad trads” by making others feel bad or engaging in much, if any, fraternal correction save in obvious or dire situations.

I won’t get into any of the particular posts but I’ll just share my own experience and my take on this sudden rash of posts seeming to say very much the same thing.  But before I do that I should share a bit about me.  Perhaps you’ve noticed but I really don’t give two shakes what anybody thinks about me.  That’s not entirely true – I’m extremely concerned what my wife, children, and other family and close friends think of me – but generally I’m not out to get people’s approval.  If they like me, fine, if they think I’m an asshole, bully for you and move on along.  I’ve also got a fairly thick skin and don’t mind sharing my opinion (obviously) nor hearing those of others, especially from those I have learned through experience to respect.  I’m generally reserved in real life but if people ask my opinion or I get drawn into a conversation then I don’t mind sharing it.  Having said that, save for close friends and family directly seeking counsel, I virtually never “correct” anyone in their behavior even if I have an issue with it.  However, I’m also perfectly willing to hear correction or exhortations to do better from others and I gladly received just such an exhortation as recently as last week.  Much depends on the source and how it is conveyed, of course.

That being said, the report I take the most seriously is the one from Unam Sanctam Catholicam (USC).  As I said, I trust the source implicitly but I’ve got to say I have rarely heard or seen any evidence of the type of behavior he’s describing – the typical trads complaining because the maniple is tied wrong or the Latin pronunciation is inexact.  I’ll take USCs word for it that he heard that from certain priests but I’m a bit skeptical that the priests were really receiving hyper-critical comments with any regularity.  There could also be a phenomenon at work where a priest going out on a limb expects a lot of praise and adulation from those he’s taking a risk for – and offering the TLM in most dioceses is hardly career enhancing and often career-threatening, so I certainly understand the expectation of praise from the faithful – which might cause even occasional negative comments to be blown out of proportion.  Now really I don’t know anything about the situation or the priests involved so I really shouldn’t comment but I’ll simply state this kind of hyper-critical behavior is, in my experience, quite rare.  It’s also so stereotypical of the “bad trad” behavior that was repeated uncritically in the conservativish Catholic press for a quarter century or more that it sort of sets off alarm bells in the back of my mind.  That’s all I’ll say about that.

Moving onto the subject of the local sermons, an exhortation to be very careful when applying fraternal correction, I thought the priest might have gone a bit far in some of his examples/verbiage but the overall point was certainly fine and well-taken.  I am certain this sermon was a reaction to reports/complaints the priest has received.  Now whether those episodes of correction that led to complaints were really malicious or simply misplaced zeal – or even people trying to assuage their own consciences that they are doing right, finding strength in number or whatever – I tend to imagine it is the latter far more than the former.

I also realize not everyone is like me.  Whereas I might hear someone extolling me to lead my family more in communal prayer as a well-meaning concern for my soul and the souls of my family, some people find this kind of talk threatening or as some kind of rebuke.  Perhaps it’s just my jerky nature but when someone goes to pieces because another person extolled the virtues of homeschooling to them (assuming decent tact and decorum) and they’re not homeschooling, well, toughen up buttercup.  That’s no reason to have a 30 minute crying jag in Father’s office.  Again, much would depend on the nature of the relationship between the people involved and what exactly was said, but I’m extremely skeptical that there is much in the way of malicious put-downs or hyper-critical correction going on – at least in the limited TLM communities I’ve been exposed to.

More often than not it’s probably just someone a little bit too on fire for a certain subject that comes on a bit strong.  I don’t see that as “bad Trad” behavior at all.  It’s probably just an error of judgment or a mild personality defect.

Really though outside relatively close personal relationships or directly-sought counsel we lay people probably don’t need to be doing a great deal of direct correcting of each other.  If you see something amiss repeatedly with someone who should no better, probably the best course of action is to quietly bring it to the attention of the competent priest and let them deal with it.  In my experience, they will generally follow through (and do a better job than we would), though it may not happen instantly as we would like.  (or am I being squishy here?  Is the crisis in the Faith so dire the times demand broad sweeping intervention into other’s business?)

At the same time I also think priests and laity should not be so delicate as to get upset about perceived correction (which may be simply a misinterpreted general exhortation).  The priests related by USC, especially, I think did not have the right reasons for offering the TLM.  Certainly there is a pastoral side to making the TLM available, but the real reason for offering ANY Mass is to render worthy honor and glory to God.  The Mass is the ONLY efficacious Sacrifice that is pleasing to God.  Since the TLM is so demonstrably superior in both form and effect every priest should be eager to offer the TLM at every possible alternative, and should not get discouraged if the faithful are not as appreciative and uncritical as he would like.  That’s probably expecting too much from frail human nature but nevertheless I think priests who stop offering the TLM because the laity are not docile enough or appreciative enough for his taste is, I think, pretty weak tea.

As to whether this is an anti-TLM PR campaign I think probably not, it’s probably just coincidence, but you know the old Hardy Boy’s formula: once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, thrice is CONSPIRACY!!  I think in this internet age, however, where people are hard up for content and want to attract attention, that formula probably needs some modification.

What do you think, or what is your experience?  Is there still a problem of mean ‘ol judgy trads wagging their fingers in innocent faces and driving people away from the TLM?  The way our local parish is growing, I’d have to say their failing if their intent is to keep people away.  Is there a problem with maybe a bit too zealous, perhaps a bit brittle and damaged trads getting too much into other’s business?  I still think my answer would be generally no (SB says she used to see this as a big problem, but not so much anymore).

Or perhaps are Trads and Trad priests maybe so set in their ways and so sure of being right they can’t take correction even when it’s well placed and deserved?

Francis at Fatima: “I am the bishop in white” May 23, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, Christendom, cultural marxism, different religion, error, Francis, General Catholic, pr stunts, Revolution, Saints, scandals, Society, the struggle for the Church, unbelievable BS.
11 comments

Well, I guess that’s settled now:

Lots of good stuff from Matt, including expressions of grave doubt against the growing drumbeat towards war with Syria – yet another Mideast country where the US apparently has a grave national interest in seeing the ancient Catholic communities wiped out.

I must also agree with Matt that the very watered-down canonization process that has been implemented in the past 35 years – because the most substantial changes happened well after the Council and were in fact put in place by Pope Saint John Paul II (who wound up, in a certain sense, being a beneficiary of the changes, at least as far as his public cultus goes) – has helped contribute to a “meh, whatever” sense regarding the many canonizations to which we are now exposed.  The dilution of the requirement for miracles from 3 to 1 (or none?), the deletion of the role of the devil’s advocate – these things have I think helped trivialize the process and decrease the general affection souls have towards the Church Triumphant in Heaven.

 

Francis also expresses what must be assumed to be disbelief of several recent – and Church-approved – Marian apparitions, accosting those who believe that Mary’s intercession stays her Son’s wrathful arm as basically an invention of the mind of  some of the faithful.  Mary referred to staying her Son’s arm not only at La Sallete but also Akita.  Apparently Francis takes a dim view of those revelations.  As for imposing one’s own beliefs on the Church – project much, Francis?

There is much more, it’s well worth watching.  The video does close with some good news that the school principal who insulted, cussed at, and threatened some home schooled evangelical kids who were witnessing against abortion outside the public school he serves at has been suspended.  Whether that is with or without pay is not stated.  If it were a Catholic cussing out and threatening some little pagans arguing in favor of abortion, does anyone doubt he would have been fired on the spot?  But that’s what the Left wants, the full measure of the law or social rules (rules they invent) for you, but special kid glove treatment for themselves.  Of course they deserve that, because every leftist knows, they are just better than everyone else.

If this double standard continues, it will be the end of this country.  People will not stand to be treated as second class citizens.  Or will they?  For now, I think, a majority answers no, as the election of Trump, I think, proves.  I think these kinds of social-interaction issues played a huge role in Trump’s election.

Francis is the Antifa Pope May 23, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, cultural marxism, disaster, error, Francis, General Catholic, horror, rank stupidity, secularism, self-serving, the struggle for the Church, unbelievable BS.
4 comments

I had not had time to check out Catholic blogs or even most secular news sites for weeks, but I took some time late Friday night to do so to try and catch up.  I came across several articles or posts on Francis, and in reading them I was struck with the sense that, to a very large degree, he could be described as the Antifa (supposedly anti-fascist hardcore communists) Pope.  Just a few ways in which he mirrors this hopelessly silly and pointless but still manifestly destructive group (and I’m not saying the analogy holds in every respect, but I think there is enough overlap for the descriptor to apply):

  • Completely beholden to a wholly disproved and outmoded ideology (constantly living in 1968)
  • Refusal to accept the historic and contemporary crimes of communism/socialism (as in Venezuela) while constantly attacking “evil” capitalism, liberalism, (authentic) Catholicism, etc.
  • Tilting at windmills that probably never existed, or at any rate certainly haven’t in decades (“rigorism in the Church,” severe confessors, hyper-judgmental parishes where people with common moral failings are literally chased away)
  • Using unjust, even fascistic practices in the name of fighting ostensible fascism or revanchism in the Church – which are the labels constantly applied, by default, to any perceived ideological opponent

It would be laughable if so much damage were not being done.

At any rate, a few excerpts of some articles from just one week of Francis’ folly:

Francis condemns Catholic “fanatics” about doctrinal clarity:

But there were always those people who, without any commission, go about disturbing the Christian community with speeches that upset souls: “Eh, no, someone who says that is a heretic, you can’t say this, or that; this is the doctrine of the Church.’ And they are fanatics about things that are not clear, such as these fanatics who go about there, sowing discord in order to divide the Christian community. And this is the problem: when the doctrine of the Church, that which comes from the Gospel, that which the Holy Spirit inspires – because Jesus said, ‘He will teach us and remind you of all that I have taught’ –  that doctrine becomes an ideology. And this is the great error of these people.” [Said perhaps the most doctrinaire pope in Church history]
“We must not be frightened when we hear of the opinions of the ideologues of doctrine. The Church has its own Magisterium, the Magisterium of the Pope, of the Bishops, of the Councils, and we must go along the path that comes from the preaching of Jesus, and from the teaching and assistance of the Holy Spirit, it is always open, always free… this is the freedom of the Spirit, but in doctrine… doctrine unites, the councils always unite the Christian community… ideology divides… for them ideology is more important than doctrine: they leave aside the Holy Spirit.”
“Today it falls to me to call for the grace of mature obedience to the Magisterium of the Church, that obedience to what the Church has always taught and continues to teach us…….[Even as I go about, practically daily, dismantling the Magisterium, or, at the very least, proposing contradictions against it as a counter-Magisterium I pretend is the real one.  He is truly a conciliar Jesuit.  It will be well when this order dies a natural death, if it is not suppressed along the way]

Note that Franci’s speech was surely a rebuttal of the speeches given the same day of two of the most ardent defenders of the Faith in these times of horrible trial, Cardinals Burke and Caffara.  As always, Francis snipes from the side, making snide comments (not always on point) and insinuations without the decency, the moral fortitude to address those who call out his heretical “propositions” straight on.

Meanwhile, as Venezuela burns, more and more Latin Americans are asking, “¿Donde esta Jorge?”:

One institution which has remained free of the regime’s control is the Catholic Church. For years, Venezuela’s Catholic bishops have bravely underscored the abuses of the government first led by the man whose personality and socialist policies lit the fuse for the current conflagration—the late Hugo Chávez—and now by his successor Nicolás Maduro.

Venezuela’s left-populist regime has always recognized the Church as a major support for anyone—Catholic, non-Catholic, believer, non-believer—who opposes what Venezuela’s Catholic bishops called in a remarkably clear and tough-minded January 2017 pastoral exhortation a “totalitarian political system” that seeks to impose its “21stCentury Socialism” upon the country. This is despite the “utter failure,” the bishops added, of “socialism in every country in which this regime has been installed.”

Chávez’s response to similar criticism was to publicly insult Catholic bishops while proclaiming, in near-blasphemous terms, that “Jesus was the first socialist.” Maduro has upped the ante. Chávista thugs regularly attack Catholic priests in churches and Catholic university students in the streets. In April this year, they interrupted the Chrism Mass of the Archbishop of Caracas, Cardinal Jorge Urosa, during Holy Week—which included roughing up the cardinal.

There is, however, one question being consistently asked—with greater frequency and visibly growing impatience—throughout Latin America whenever Venezuela comes up in conversation. And that is: “Where is Pope Francis?”

In fact, as the article goes on to reveal, Francis continues to provide aid and comfort to the murderous Maduro regime by running interference for them and placing onerous demands on the regime’s critics.

Like antifa, he has to pretend Venezuela does not exist, or practically so, as it is too fatal a rebuke to the ideological shibboleths held by both.

And finally, in what amounts to yet another howler of such stupendous proportions one kind of wonders whether or not Francis is all there mentally – or perhaps caught in a reverie of ’65 he can’t get out of? – Francis spoke of an invasion of libertarianism, of all things, into the academy, where daily proof of total Marxist dominance grows more and more insurmountable.

I forget which book I was, but it was a very sad tale of marxist revolutionaries in later life.  These were primarily ex-Soviet revolutionaries, the few alums of 1917 that managed to survive the Stalinist purges that killed the original revolutionary cadres almost to a man.  It was an immensely depressing tale.  All these revolutionaries, even after being betrayed by Stalin (and, some of them, Lenin), actually beat their own breasts for their failure to accord to the Marxist ideal (this is a subject upon which Solzhenitsyn expounds at length, the idiot commies betrayed by the commie system who continue to love and remain loyal to it, so brainwashed are they).  All they could do was relive their youth when they felt they were in the revolutionary vanguard, just at Bergoglio continues to seem to continually be stuck in his 50s heyday of leftist Peronists desperately seeking to return to power, constantly surrounded by “neoliberal” and traditionalist enemies – enemies to be crushed.
Meh, may be going a bit far there at the end, but the evidence that this guy somehow persists in some late-50s to early 70s fantasyland is, I think, beyond dispute.
And the man most imbued in casuistry imaginable constantly finds it in others.  But there you go.
Perhaps less the Antifa pope, he’s Don Jorge de la Mancha.

Hundreds of Thousands of Pilgrims Fill Fatima to Overflowing…… May 18, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, Christendom, episcopate, fightback, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Our Lady, sanctity, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
3 comments

……..but the ongoing wreckovation that has affected even this most sacred of locales caused many thousands to be forced to stand outside the large outdoor sanctuary which was built to attract the great number of souls who have a powerful devotion to Our Lady and the apparitions at Fatima.  About 1/3 of the former area for pilgrims to worship has been dedicated to a modernist monstrosity designed in typically post-conciliar brutalist style:

All the above from The Fatima Center.

Finally a very interesting video from Bishop Fulton Sheen’s show Life is Worth Living.  He ties together the Russian Revolution with Fatima and and the consecration of Eugenio Pacelli, the future Ven. Pope Pius XII, who was nothing if not an ardent anti-communist (who saw much of his work done by perhaps the least anti-communist, or pro-hard left, pope to ever reign – at least till now – Paul VI).  I wish I could say more but time prohibits, but trust me, it’s a powerful tale and well told.  Did you know a communist tried to assassinate then Archbishop Pacelli? Enjoy!

 

We Are in Opposition to the Person of the Pope Out of Loyalty to the Sublime Office of the Papacy May 9, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, different religion, episcopate, error, Francis, General Catholic, horror, persecution, reading, Revolution, scandals, secularism, Society, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

From Miter and Crook by Bryan Houghton, a mythical tale of an English bishop consecrated in 1965, just as the human element in control of the Church launched the revolution against her very nature, who “rebels” against authority and re-institutes the Traditional Latin Mass and many other traditional practices of the faith in 1977 after a decade of experience had shown him that the ethos of Vatican II was wholly destructive.  The book follows the repercussions of this most pastoral of decisions and the sufferings and persecutions the good, if fictional, bishop endures.

The book is a bit odd in format, being a compendium of correspondence this sadly unreal bishop (would that we had far more like him!) engaged in from the time he launched his program of restoration until the inevitable conclusion (which I will not spoil).  The excerpt I quote below is between the good bishop and a hostile confrere, one who judged the good bishop rebellious to authority and disloyal to the Holy See for committing the horrific crime of Catholicism.  I copy and paste from various sections, but draw from pages 31-35.  I thought some of the fictional bishop’s commentary highly insightful, and also quite apropos of our present time, when Rome has once again descended into soul-destroying selfishness.  I indulge myself with comments along the way:

I have my own private view of history.  I accept that it is a struggle – even a constant state of revolution.  It started straight away in the Garden of Eden.  I also admit that the revolution always succeeds.  But what is so puzzling is that the moment the revolution succeeds it is obliged to start all over again from scratch.  It always triumphs but never conquers.  The USSR today is a living example of what I mean. [Thank God not so living today, at least not in a physical form, though its spirit lives and has colonized much of the former Christendom]   After sixty years of straining away at the most ruthless and continuous revolution in history it is no further advanced than in October 1917.  It has massacred untold millions of people, all of whom appear to have resurrected again.  In fact it has taken 60 years for it to beget its most astonishing and least desired product, Alexander Solzhenitsyn. Strange, isn’t it? [Quite insightful. Indeed, the revolution never ends.  Not only does it devour its own, but in the end it devours itself.  The revolution against the Church is of a part with the revolution of October 1917, and that of May 1968, but more fundamentally it is an inescapable part of the original rebellion of Adam and Eve, as noted above. The Church is the only enduring construct of the counter-revolution]

This seems to me to be the process [by which revolution is carried out].  Neat, logical little men, often lawyers, are forever attempting to reduce God’s magnificent, incomprehensible, chaotic creation to the neatness and logic of their own beastly little minds. [This is a tremendously meaningful sentence.  Think about it.  Not only have all revolutions stemmed from such little minds, and every heresy, but the entire modern conception of science (as a pseudoreligion) has as well.  Evolution, global warming, and Big Bang are what comes from men who try to reduce God’s greatness down to their own level of understanding.] Of course they succeed in a way, rationalizing everything around them until it stops working altogether.  They can rationalize the egg industry so as to guarantee equality of egglessness for all but they cannot pass a law requiring all hens to lay an extra egg a day.  If they do – and it happens – the hens are unlikely to play ball, or, in the present case, eggs……Hence the endless and heroic fight of the revolutionary.  I suppose that Robespierre will forever remain the ideal type; such a nice little lawyer, as neat and tidy in his mind as in his pale blue frock-coat, and so full of “virtue” and so “incorruptible” that only he could organize the Terror.

Anyway, my point is that the revolutionary process is the eternal attempt of man to impose his order, his law on God’s creation. And this is exactly what is happening in the Church. Until this post-conciliar period, God’s Church appeared almost as magnificent, incomprehensible, and chaotic as His creation. It was cluttered up indiscriminately with tiaras, cardinal’s hats, miters, birettas, rosaries, prie-dieus, saints and sinners, Friday fish, indulgences……and all the rest.  yes, cluttered up it was, as is the universe.  But it all worked incredibly smoothly………

……After Vatican II the neat, logical little fellows were given their head.  Obviously, the first thing to do was to clear the decks.  A clean sweep has been made of absolutely everything.  Not only was the tiara flogged but even the Pieta got chipped.  Then they must produce a neat, logical little liturgy: unpretentious, comprehensible, as dull as themselves.  The laity promptly participated by walking out.  That is the process all along the line.

Now, am I acting as you say “clean against the trend of history?” [You’ve surely heard this argument, haven’t you?  That Catholics – “traditional” Catholics – are contrary to the times?  That the Church “isn’t going in that direction anymore?”  That Latin is “not where the Church is headed?”]  Yes, if you regard the revolutionary process as the constitutive element of history.  No, if you think of me as the dull, elemental matter of God’s creation popping up inevitably from the very nature of things.  That I personally shall be ground to dust [by the Church hierarchy lashing out against this most unspeakable of rebellions, non-acceptance of the revolution they have imposed] is not unlikely; but the reality I stand for will still pop up when the neat, logical little men find themselves holding a handful of dust.

Quite logically, you accuse me of fighting for a lost cause……[This] is among the greatest compliments you can pay me. Perhaps my only inveterate sin is my contempt for those who jump on bandwagons.  Surely lost causes are the only ones worth fighting for?  Why don battle dress for a victory parade?  And surely you do not believe what is lost by men is lost to God? [I appreciate this hopeful segment]

……Colomba was a Dominican nun who lived in Perugia.  She suffered from almost every type of mystical phenomenon – ecstasy, levitation, and the rest.  The Master of the Dominicans felt uncertain about whether her spirit was from God or from the devil.  This was about 1490, when people still believed in both.  In consequence he would have the girl examined by the Holy Father himself who was on a visit……This was duly arranged.  In the great hall of Perugia…..there sat enthroned the Sovereign Pontiff, Alexander VI…..and the Papal Court around.  Colomba was introduced. Upon sight of the Vicar of Christ, she immediately went into ecstasy, as should all good nuns……….She levitated and railed at the pope from somewhere near the ceiling. “You who are the Vicar of Christ and act as the Vicar of Satan! You who hold the Keys of the Kingdom but only unlock the doors of brothels!  You who are captain of the Ark of Salvation and have a girl in every port!  You who…….”  After twenty minutes of this, the Papal Court felt rather anxious for poor Colomba’s safety.  How do you get girls out of ecstasy?  However, Alexander Borgia turned to the Master of the Dominicans: “Have no fear, my son: her spirit is certainly from God since everything she says is true.”

I sometimes wish that I were an ecstatic Dominican nun.  I could keep going for well over twenty minutes.  What i doubt is whether the sixth Paul has the humility of the sixth Alexander.  Admittedly, it is far more difficult to be humble if one sins between the ears than if one sins between the sheets.  Anyway, the point is perfectly clear: Colomba was in opposition to the person of the Pope precisely out of loyalty to the institution of the Papacy[Yes!  That’s it!  And the same is the case today, and dare I say, has been the case with most critics of the leadership of the Church, including the Pope, since the human element of the Church rebelled against the Church’s very nature and being.]

What I find astonishing in our days is that the situation is exactly reversed.  People can attack the Papacy to their heart’s content provided they do not breathe a word against the person of the Pope [the particular pope then reigning]. Our own ecumenists see the Pope as a Constitutional Monarch with plenty of whiskers but no teeth.  Hans Kung is even against the whiskers.  Dom Bernard Bresnet thinks that the papacy should be a committe with, get this, a lady chairman.  Professor Delumeau would prefer the pope to be the quinquennially elected President of the World Council of Churches.  All these – and I could name many others – are in keeping with the present regime, and Delumeau can even expect a gift in his stocking at Christmas from the pope himself.  On the other hand, that benign old gentleman, Archbishop Lefebvre, gets into endless trouble for maintaining that the personal administration of the present Pontiff is an unmitigated disaster[Because he refused to take part in the mutual suicide pact that is the post-conciliar Church]

…...What I am getting at is perfectly clear.  You should think twice before you start talking about loyalty.  It is certainly you who are disloyal downwards. [meaning, to the laity under his charge, by leaving them to the ravening wolves of error and heresy while blithely declaring his “loyalty” by introducing the endlessly destructive conciliar revolution] It is also possible that you are disloyal upwards to the divine institution of the Papacy precisely by toadying to its temporary administrator.

———–End Quote———–

Indeed.  Excellent, excellent summation.

I haven’t got much to add to that, except that it is amazing how little has changed in the past 40 years.  If anything, it’s gotten worse, even acknowledging young priests of relative orthodoxy (few of whom have any idea how much they do not know, nor the volume of what has been lost, some hopeful religious orders, Summorum Pontificum, and other positive developments.

Many hoped that JPII and then Benedict indicated that the tide had been turned, or a nadir reached from which we could hope for steady improvement.  Others, perhaps wiser, believed that the conservativish pontificates following Paul VI were simply a period of entrenchment and solidification. Either way, Francis has shattered many illusions that the Church was on the cusp of renewal.

I do believe there is great truth in the above, wherein the bishop states that no matter how hard they try to kill Catholicism, it will keep popping back up, both because at least a tiny fraction of people recognize its unalterable truthfulness and want it, and also because God is ultimately in charge of all.  God has a penchant for working phenomenal turnarounds, as this series of sermons indicates.

I could say more, but must cut this off now.  I did not want to go an entire week with no posts.  Hopefully you think this post makes some kind of sense. In lieu of reading here, watch one of those five videos on God’s turnarounds a day until I get back.

Thank you for your prayers and well-wishes.  The power of prayer – or at least yours –  is unbelievable. Every day with my boy is a testament to that.  I am in debt to you all.  Thank you again. I pray for you.

 

 

Has the “Church of Darkness” Eclipsed the True Church? May 5, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, catachesis, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, religious, Revolution, scandals, secularism, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, Virtue.
comments closed

Interesting commentary from Father Albert of the traditional Dominican community of the Holy Rosary in Belgium.  I do not think he quite answers the question posed to him definitively, which posited that the Church in Rome, that is to say, the curia and the institutional hierarchy, are becoming so estranged from the Catholic Faith as to become “the seat of antichrist” (boy, won’t prots have a field day with that), but he notes that while the Church has not quite reached the point that the antichrist is literally reigning in it, much of the institutional hierarchy is preparing the way for that terrible eventuality.

Most troubling, the Church has, since Vatican II, and to a greater and greater extent as the years pass, lost those four distinguishing marks that reveal her to be the True Church and Bride of Jesus Christ, those being: holiness, unity, catholicity, and apostolicity.  Such is Father Albert’s surmise, at any rate:

Do you agree with his assessment, and in what way?  Is the compromised, even fallen Church forewarned by Our Lady at La Sallete, Fatima, and Akita coming to pass, or is it already in full bloom?  Has the true Church been “eclipsed?”  These are very difficult questions.

You can catch Father’s brief Q&A sessions most days on The Fatima Center channel on Youtube.

Awesome to see the tonsure, btw.  Much appreciated.

Blessed Miguel Pro, the Cristiada, and the Synagogue of Satan May 1, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, history, Holy suffering, Latin Mass, manhood, martyrdom, mortification, priests, Saints, sanctity, secularism, Spiritual Warfare, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
comments closed

Great sermon from Padre Not Tony Romo, on the life and suffering of Blessed Miguel Pro.  He then ties in his own apostolate trying to re-establish the authentic practice of the Faith in Latin America generally and once so devout Mexico in particular.

As is widely known, Blessed Miguel Pro, SJ, was one of many Catholic priest-martyrs of the Cristiada in Mexico, which developed after a masonic-inspired cabal of Christ-hating pseudo-revolutionaries gained control of that tortured nation’s governance.  I did not know, as Father relates, that Blessed Miguel Pro levitated during his final Mass before his capture and martyrdom, nor that his face was transfigured as on Mount Tabor.  Very interesting.

I like how Father notes the false Catholics of our time (and all times), those who, when confronted with a contradiction between the Truth of Jesus Christ and the ways of the world, choose the world over Jesus Christ.  Father does not say this, but the greatest reason for the crisis in the human element of the Church is that the vast majority of priests and prelates today are of just that type of Catholic, those who choose the world over Jesus Christ in the constant belief and practice of the Faith.  In fact, there was an entire ecumenical council that was captured, or hijacked, by this same spirit.  Or, at least, many think, and so it seems.

Many of those who choose the world over Christ lambaste those who still cling to Christ and His Truth as extremists, fanatics. Amazingly, guns are no longer needed to persecute the Faith out of Catholics, Catholics have largely voluntarily lost their faith under the bad example of so many priests and prelates, the errors taught since 1965, and the practice of all manner of immodesty, unchastity, and personal filthiness.  That is to say, the reason men like Plutarco Calles used violence was to force Catholics of the time to lose their faith through exposure to evils like pronographic sexual education in the state schools that replaced parochial schools.  Today, people happily partake of far worse of their own volition.

Good sermon:

I have had the privilege of meeting this priest and I follow his apostolate with some closeness.  I continue to be impressed with his devotion to the many souls in his care and efforts to restore the Catholic Faith in Mexico, which never really

Sorry if this is too many sermons for one day!

Two Complimentary Views of the Crisis in the Church May 1, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, Christendom, cultural marxism, episcopate, General Catholic, Good St. Joseph, Grace, history, Latin Mass, paganism, priests, scandals, secularism, sickness, Society, Spiritual Warfare, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, true leadership, Victory, Virtue.
comments closed

I originally thought to frame this post as two contrasting views, but that wouldnt’ be right.  Yes the Church is in dire straits, possibly enduring the worst crisis in her long history, as Michael Matt notes in the first video, but that might only make the likelihood of God working a miraculous turnaround even greater, as the priest notes in the second video.

Both are very much worth your time and consideration, especially, in the first, for the heartfelt eulogy Mr. Matt delivers for his departed friend and co-worker in the devastated vineyard, John Vennari.  I think there is worth in fleshing out something Matt alludes to, as well: he repeatedly defends Vennari, and himself, for their “strident” beliefs in noting they were simply elucidating the Doctrine of the Faith as it has always been believed and practiced.  The other side, the progressive-modernist side, does not get this; because they elevate, heck, exalt, their own opinion above that of the solemnly defined Doctrine of the Faith to such a marked extent, they assume everyone else must do this as well.  Thus they smear Catholics with “extemism” in defending what has always been the de fide mind of the Church, but which so many, including probably most bishops, now dismiss as mere opinion.

It’s a good video:

Also worth watching is this video on on the great corollary notion, the historical fact of God working improbable, even impossible turnarounds, snatching victory from the jaws of defeat time and time again.  Now most of the examples below are examples of personal conversion or healing, rather than the societal/ecclesiastical restoration, which we desperately need today, but there are certainly plenty of the latter I can think of.  The Counter-Reformation, what might better be called the Great Catholic Counter-revolution, is probably the most obvious.  There were a dozen different periods between 1520 and 1660 when the entire Catholic Faith faced seeming extinction in the face of the protestant onslaught.

And, of course, it was Athanasius contra mundum in 320 or so.  Then there was Joan of Arc saving France from English domination and, through that and the folly of Henry VIII, the ascendance of false protestantism over Christianity in the 16th century.  The very foundation of our Faith is based in a miraculous recovery from the darkest of events, when it seemed the Savior of the world had been put to death and crushed beneath a tyrannical people’s hatred.

But there is some really interesting catechesis from ~13:00 – 17:30 when the priest discusses the role of the occult on both the Allied and Axis side in WWII and the ascendance of the post-Christian ultra-rationalist cult of scientific materialism since.  We are plainly as a culture and Church experiencing God’s wrath for our lack of faith and deviance from not only devotion to Him but to the very truth itself.

The sermon also includes an illuminating study of the horrid pantheistic neo-pagan cult ceremony that marked the opening of the Gotthard base tunnel in Switzerland.  That was a literal flipping of the bird towards God.  And yes there was a Catholic priest, in addition to a protestant pseudo-cleric, a rabbi, and an imam there to bless it all.  But Father sees much greater meaning in a performance that many just saw as strange, offensive, and gross.  It was a veritable recapping in ghoulish song and perverse dance of the descent of Christendom from its former glory through communistic materialism to the sexual revolution and now into neo-pagan violence, decadence, and self-degradation.  I forgot they had a huge picture of Bahomet on the screen and ultimately ended in Gaia-worship.  How sick.  That part of the sermon from roughly 18:30 – 27:00.  “The highway for hell has been opened for easy travel.”  Indeed.

Father, however, prophecies that we are poised for a great reversal from God.  Historically, however, we have to comprehend that several of these historical reversals entailed destruction on a national or even societal scale in order to clear away all the evil and set a path for restoration.  The fallen pagan order must cease to exist in order for the Reign of Christ to return.

I don’t want to steal all of Father’s thunder but it’s very well worth listening to.

FSSP Priest Interview Reveals Divisions within Fraternity April 25, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, Basics, foolishness, General Catholic, huh?, Latin Mass, priests, Restoration, Revolution, sadness, Society, SSPX, the struggle for the Church, Tradition.
comments closed

I got sent a link to the following post this morning by reader TT.  It’s an interview of the rather small German province of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter, the organization of priests dedicated to the traditional Mass that was founded by some who “broke away” from the SSPX at the time of the illicit consecrations of 4 bishops in 1988.

This interview is already being picked up as fodder for the endless (and tiresome) SSPX/FSSP debates that have been raging for almost 30 years.  For those who already feel the FSSP is hopelessly compromised, the interview is being taken as proof of the correctness of that view.  For those with internal knowledge of the Fraternity, as it is typically called, however, this interview only reiterates the divisions already well known within this society of priests.

I’ll add comments to the post I copy below, because I think there are some important things to clarify/note, but I’d like to make one point clear at the outset: every grouping of more than a few individuals is going to have disparity of belief.  Once you get into the hundreds, like the FSSP, there is going to be a whole range of belief.  Given that, generally speaking, both acceptance of a more stridently traditional outlook (or a certain, sometimes severe, hostility to Vatican II) and friendliness/sympathy for the SSPX varies inversely with the age of the priest and their closeness to the original point of division in 1988.  That is to say, older priests in the Fraternity, especially those who were present in 1988 and made the decision to leave the SSPX, generally tend to be more accommodating towards the post-conciliar ethos and hostile towards the SSPX.  Younger priests are generally more hardcore “traditional” and more friendly towards the Society.

This is not a universal rule and there is infinite nuance, even within individual priests!, but that’s probably the broad norm.  I would also add that there is, as I understand it, a certain division of belief between priests of the Fraternity in the Americas, and those in Europe, with those again in Europe tending towards being the less ardently traditional, or the more accommodating.  Having said that, I concur with a commenter at 1Peter5 that this is far from an inspiring interview.  While I think the interview is being presented in a fairly negative light by Maike Hickson at 1Peter5, I think I can also say these are some of the most unhelpful comments I’ve seen from an FSSP priest in print, perhaps less for what they say (esp. on reflection) but for the sense they seem to convey of accommodation, of being (to quote some commentary I’ve seen) “modernist lap dogs who will do anything so long as they can continue to offer the ‘old Mass'”.  Then again, I find myself defending the priest quite consistently below – I think that while he exhibits an attitude far different from what I’d like to see expressed, it’s not entirely surprising given his past.

So keep that in mind as you read the below, which many of you perhaps already have:

The usually cautious and reserved Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP) has now given its current opinion concerning the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) and on its possible formal re-integration into the structures of the Catholic Church. Father Bernhard Gerstle – the head of the German district of the FSSP – just gave a 24 April interview to the German Bishops’ official website Katholisch.dein which he explains many of the positions and opinions of his priestly fraternity. (Father Gerstle is the same priest who, in 2016, made a politely critical statement about the papal document Amoris Laetitia.) [An important note of clarification.  Fr. Gerstle may be the head of the German district of the Fraternity, but I think it a great leap to derive from that that he is speaking for the mind of the entire Fraternity.  Words of Fr. John Berg, former Superior of the entire order, in Latin Mass Magazine from 2015 (which I haven’t to hand) were far different and conveyed a far more traditionally Catholic understanding.]

Father Gerstle explains, first of all, that he himself split off from the SSPX because of the “illicit episcopal consecrations” in 1988 which, in his eyes, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger tried to forestall. (Interestingly, and just in the recent past, there have been voices saying that Cardinal Ratzinger, as pope, later removed the excommunications of the four SSPX bishops because he realized that he had contributed to the intensification of that earlier conflict. Worth noting is that, Bishop Athanasius Schneider, who has served as an official Vatican liaison to the SSPX, recently called this act of excommunication an “injustice.”) [This little aside causes me to wonder whether the author is not trying to inculcate a bit of doubt, even resentment, towards Fr. Gerstle.  Sure “some voices” may say that, but lots of others say that the excommunications were wholly right and just. Obviously Fr. Gerstle is going to have a bias since he left the SSPX over this matter.  I am curious as to why Hickson chose to introduce this seeming rebuttal right here.] In Gerstle’s eyes, the 1988 breach happened due to a “lack of trust toward Rome.” He also claims that many more priests within the SSPX had disapproved of the episcopal consecrations, “but did not make the final step.” Thus, there were “only a few priests and seminarians who left the Society of St. Pius X at the time [in 1988].” Gerstle explicitly says that the foundation of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter happened “essentially due to Cardinal Ratzinger, [who was] then head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.”  [For those of us who weren’t involved, I don’t think it is easy to comprehend the depth of feeling on both sides involved in the 1988 consecrations.  This was an event so trying and so radicalizing I don’t think many today fully realize the effect these events had on the participants.  As one who was directly involved and experienced that heart-rending time, I don’t find Fr. Gerstle’s comments out of place.  There are many involved who share his views, and of course, many who don’t, but it’s not like he’s breaching some radical new concept no one’s ever said before, even those who are very attached to the traditional practice of the Faith.]

Father Gerstle further distances himself from those smaller groups within the SSPX – whom he calls “hardliners” – who “reject the Second Vatican Council to a large extent, for example with regard to religious freedom or as to the decree on ecumenism.” Some of them, he says, also doubt the validity of the new liturgy. Gerstle makes it clear, moreover, where the Fraternity of St. Peter stands with regard to the Second Vatican Council: [No, he gives his own opinion.  Unless he directly stated he was speaking as the voice of the entire Fraternity as a matter of policy – which if he did, we can be certain Hickson would be trumpeting this from the rooftops – then he’s giving his opinion, which Hickson is taking to mean it is the policy of the Fraternity because of his position, but I can say from direct experience there are many Fraternity priests who do not conform to the views expressed in this para or the one below. As to the divisions within the SSPX, these are well known and I find pointing them out wholly unremarkable.]

The Fraternity of St. Peter, however, has accepted to study without prejudice the conciliar texts and has come to the conclusion that there is no breach with any previous magisterial statements.However, some texts are formulated in such a way that they can give way to misinterpretations. But, in the meantime, Rome has already made here concordant clarifications which the Society of St. Pius X should now also recognize. [Emphasis added] [I would say the situation now remains as it has been, vague, uncertain, and unclear.  Some tradition-friendly individuals in the Curia have made clarifications, they have expressed their opinions, but that is far from saying there has been a wholesale clarification of the problematic aspects of Vatican II. Rome appears willing to say almost anything to get the SSPX regularized.  But whether these stands hold after that occurs is anyone’s guess, but there remains a huge monolith of progressive-modernist opinion in the clergy and hierarchy that VII is perfect, the best expression of the Faith ever conceived, and that the Church was literally re-born in 1965.  That remains an extremely dangerous ideology that has not been washed away by a few conciliatory comments from folks at the Ecclesia Dei commission.]

Additionally, Father Gerstle insists that for the FSSP, the new 1983 Code of Canon Law is the standard. In his eyes, the SSPX has here some more reservations. For the FSSP, explains Gerstle “there is not a pre- and a post-conciliar Church.” “There is only the one Church which goes back to Christ,” he adds. Gerstle also insists that the FSSP does not “wish to polarize or even to promote splits,” but that they wish to instill in their own parishes “an ecclesial attitude.” Certain (unnamed, unspecified) abuses in the Church should only be criticized in a “differentiated and moderate way.” [We are only getting very partial and bifurcated comments.  I don’t read German so I can’t go to the original and Google translate is too unreliable in such fine points.  Having said that, I find these comments disappointing and far too conciliatory towards the post-conciliar construct.  Then again, we do not know what pressures the Fraternity is under right now, but I understand they are considerable and the dangers great from those who would like to do to the ED communities what has been done to the FI’s.]

Father Gerstle also distances himself from the concept “traditionalist” when he says: “This notion I do not like at all to hear. We are not traditionalists, but simply Catholic.” As Catholics, he says, “we appreciate tradition,” but without “completely blocking organic adaptations and changes.” [This one I have no problem with.  Some of the most informed readers of this blog eschew the term traditional, and say that what we practice is simply the Catholic Faith as it has always been believed, understood, and lived.  There is nothing remarkable about “organic changes” either.  VII was wholly inorganic.]

The worthy celebration of the traditional liturgy, together with a loyal teaching of the Catholic Faith, is at the center of the work of the FSSP, according to Gerstle. “Salvation of souls” and “eternal life” are their Fraternity’s own concern. Unfortunately, adds the German priest, “the Four Last Things have been widely neglected in the Church, with the effect of a belittling and attenuation of sin and of a loss of the practice of sacramental confession.” [I would hope this is uncontroversial.  In fact, one could take from this a tacit rebuke of the post-conciliar construct, where the Mass is typically deplorable and the “teaching” counterfeit.]

Father Gerstle sees that “one cannot simply introduce everywhere again the old liturgy and, so to speak, impose it upon people.” “Both rites thus [with the help of the “reform of the reform”] should enrich each other,” explains the priest. Certain elements of the new liturgy could be “enriching for the extraordinary form of the Roman Rite.” [He’s just parroting PBXVI here, but I am personally extremely leery of any “enrichment” flowing from the NO to the TLM.  I think there is virtually nothing in the NO that would “improve” the TLM.]

Moreover, Father Gerstle also explains that, in the German district, there are growing numbers of faithful who are interested in the traditional Tridentine Mass. Some of the FSSP Masses have “100 to 180 faithful” in attendance. He admits, however, that the FSSP has not too many vocations. “All in all we have a good number of incomers [16 new priests in 2016 and currently some 100 seminarians altogether], but it is not so that we are under pressure due to high numbers of vocations.” [The Fraternity is generally doing better in North America, where there is a certain pressure to grow the seminary.  As for Mass attendance, the local FSSP parish is now attracting 1200+ on a typical Sunday.  That is unusual, but the growth is consistent throughout, and I pray all the other tradition-oriented groups are experiencing the same or better.]

At the end of this interview, Gerstle explains that the SSPX faces a dilemma: either Bishop Fellay chooses unity with Rome and will have a split within his own organization, or he will choose unity within the SSPX and will not have unity with Rome.  The German priest explains, as follows:

I think that the current Superior General, Bishop Bernard Fellay, will have to decide between unity with Rome and unity within the Society of St. Piux X. The realists within the leadership will then hopefully realize that there is no alternative to a reconciliation with Rome.

I find the first part of this analysis to be insightful, but I think anyone who has followed the situation even as casually as I have has reached about the same conclusion.  I also think the second part is right, though I continue to have doubts as to whether now, with Francis in charge, is the right time.  The man has a demonstrated track record of deliberately targeting tradition-embracing groups for destruction.  But may God’s will be done.

As for the interview, this is absolutely not what I would prefer to see from a leading Fraternity priest.  But I’m not sure it confirms the fatal weakness of the Fraternity, either.  Does having a regular canonical status involve some compromise?  Absolutely*.  And folks in the SSPX had better be FULLY cognizant of that fact when they sign their “deal” with Rome.

Well I don’t post for a week then you get a novella.  Lucky you.  Sorry folks, posting is going to be infrequent for the foreseeable future.  I had a very  unusual situation for first 76 months of this blog’s history but that period is definitively order.  I probably would not have posted today if this matter hadn’t hit so close to home.  We’ve had a nightmare bronchitis/pneumonia go through our family that takes weeks to get over.  I’m still fighting it but am back at work but also playing lots of catchup.  Hope to get another post out tomorrow but who knows.

*-but so far, only of a limited and generally unobtrusive (or undamaging) sort.  The “gravitational pull” of an unreconciled SSPX probably plays a role in the limited nature of the compromises forced on the FSSP – which is why I fear regularization for the entire restoration of the Faith.  But ultimately God is in charge and we have to want what is best for the salvation of souls, which everyone (not really, but lots) tells me is regularization.  So it must be it.

Gentle Reminder: Switch from the Angelus to the Regina Caeli April 17, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, awesomeness, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Interior Life, Latin Mass, Liturgical Year, Our Lady, priests, religious, Restoration, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, Victory, Virtue.
comments closed

I remembered this year, to start praying the Regina Caeli, as opposed to the Angelus, on Easter day.  Sometimes in the past, it’s taken me a day or three to remember.  I’m sure most of you have not had this problem, but if any have, here is your reminder.

To beef out the post a bit, a few pictures from Good Friday:

It was nice having a religious priest present during Holy Week

I pray you are enjoying this glorious Octave.  I think next year I will take off less time before Easter and more time after.  I’ve taken off most of Holy Week for years, but I feel ready for a change.  I’d like to enjoy the great feast more, and not just go back to work the day after Easter. I’ve always enjoyed that aspect of Christmas.  I wish I had the time to take off the entire week of Easter, but that’s not going to happen.  Oh for the days when working men had every great feast day off work, a true holy day holiday!