jump to navigation

Vatican Issues Stamp Hailing Luther – Will Anything Shake Papologists From Their Slumber? January 20, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, Francis, General Catholic, horror, Revolution, scandals, secularism, Society, the struggle for the Church.
8 comments

The Vatican post office plans to issue a stamp this year featuring the likeness of the arch-heretic Martin Luther, the man single most responsible for the seeming-permanent rending of the unity of Christendom and, almost certainly, the man responsible for consigning literal billions to eternal damnation.  Given the aid and comfort the Bishop of Rome has given protestants since his installation, this is hardly surprising, but only marks an intensification of an effort that dates back to Francis’ days in Argentina:

The Vatican office charged with issuing stamps, known as the Philatelic and Numismatic Office, confirmed Tuesday to LifeSiteNews that Luther, who broke away from the Catholic Church in a schism 500 years ago, will be celebrated with a postage stamp in 2017. The office is in charge of the annual commission of stamps, coins, and other commemorative medals.

The Vatican regularly issues such memorabilia for special events, including papal trips and holy years. Honoring Luther and the Protestant Reformation is an unlikely choice, trumping other significant events in the Catholic Church such as the 100-year anniversary of the apparition of Our Lady of Fatima and the 300-year anniversary of our Lady of Aparecida, Brazil.

Got that?  Luther trumps Fatima.  Will that be the tenor for the entire, momentous year 2017?  I fear so.

Michael Matt posted a video last night that directly relates both the stamp issue and the broader crisis afflicting the Church of which the administration of Francis is simply the culmination so far.  It features a debate he had with an ostensible Church liberal and conservative (Dale Alquist), wherin both his opponents more or less ganged up on Matt and attacked him with ad hominems throughout.  According to Matt (the entire debate was not included) neither of his opponents were able to provide cogent arguments in defence of their position that, regarding violating 2000 years of sacred belief and practice and a direct command of Jesus Christ, it just doesn’t matter that much, times have changed, and the Church needs to get with the 21st century program and go all mercy all the time, even to the point of allowing constant sacrilegious reception of the Blessed Sacrament by those openly persisting in grave sin.  The video is great and I recommend you watch the whole thing:

But the broader point is this, and cuts to the quick of that 50+ year argument that has been ongoing between those who accept radical changes in the Church (whether quickly a la “liberals” or more slowly a la “conservatives”), and those who find those changes a total abandonment of the Church as she lived and breathed for 1900+ years. The results of the exchange were not encouraging – there is apparently no action authority figures in Rome can take that will not be accepted by those Matt labels as “neo-Catholics.”  As Matt notes, where the revolutionary program is headed is all the more obvious everyday – protestantism, and protestantism of the most ineffectual, libertine bent.  We know from 150 years of history where that liberal, worldly protestantism leads: decay, destruction, and collapse, both of individual souls and church structures as a whole.

But the vast majority in the Church still refuse to see this.  At some deep level, they appear psychologically unable to see it.  Their conception of the Church simply does not allow that bad men might deeply infiltrate it and possibly even corrupt her teachings to the extent men can – which is not insubstantial.  But the evidence that there has been a deliberate effort to alter, undermine, and destroy twenty centuries of sacred Doctrine is there for any who care to examine it, and it is overwhelmingly compelling.  Nevertheless, it appears the “neo-Cats” will never be moved by it.  They were not moved by the radical destruction of the Liturgy.  They were not moved by the implosion of the priesthood and religious life.  They were not moved by all manner of heresy and abuse being taught as solemn Catholic Doctrine.  They were not moved by Assisi.  A stamp won’t even elicit a tired sigh from them.

Even more, the manifest problems afflicting the Church since the 60s have had their center in the Petrine office.  Francis may be the most openly radical of the post-conciliar pontiffs, but he is hardly the only one to promote massive novelty.  All of his immediate predecessors have, including Benedict.

It appears the Church is to cleave into two halves, a tiny, faithful remnant, and an initially huge but constantly, rapidly shrinking majority who go along with whatever they are told this week constitutes Catholic belief and practice.  I used to hold high hopes that by sharing careful, detailed analysis of the crisis in the Church – by getting the message out – that souls would naturally react similarly to me, come to see the crisis for what it is, and do what they could to impose the different religion we see being built around us.  I found out very early to my dismay, however, that while there was a fraction who would come to comprehend the crisis in the Church and the inadmissibility of many of the revolutionary changes made since Vatican II (that including the vast majority of those who will read this), the vast majority would not.  That, in fact, that there was nothing that would move them to do so.  They were literally unable to do so.

I understand that, to a degree.  We all have lines we are unwilling, even unable to cross.  I am disheartened to see how many struggle to accept that the Church could be afflicted with a pope who tries to promote error (it’s happened before, after all), but it’s a reality I – we all – have to face.  The question is what we do about that reality.  It seems we are fated to be a very small remnant, with malice towards none and charity for all, hopefully, but a very small one, nonetheless.  We must work to preserve as much as we possibly can, which starts with saving ourselves and our families.  We must do as much prayer and penance as possible, far, far more than most of us are doing today.

We must pray for one thing in particular, to sum up which I will turn to Ann Barnhardt.  We must pray to have the traditional Sacraments available to us as the cultural and ecclesiastical noose tightens around our necks, figuratively or literally:

What you should do is move heaven and earth to attend a Traditional Mass or Divine Liturgy, and then go every single day humanly possible, and spend as much time as possible before the Blessed Sacrament, and go to confession frequently.  Do whatever it takes, right now, to find a good parish or chapel. If you wait until The Remnant Church is forced completely underground, you will have a much harder time.  This is precisely what the parable of the wise and foolish virgins is about, folks.  At some point, the door will close, and if you are one of the foolish virgins who got caught without any oil in your lamp, and had to scramble to find any, it will, at some point, be too late, and the Bridegroom will close the door.  You have been warned.  It is obvious what is happening.  No one will have any excuse.

Go to Our Lord, kneel before Him and BEG HIM to provide for you and your family to always be able to go to Mass. Beg Him to show you the way and illumine the path for you, as He illumined the path of the Magi. Beg Him to fill your lamp with oil Himself, and to keep it always full.  Beg Mary, Mother of The Church, to intercede for you.  Beg St. Joseph, Patron of The Universal Church, to lead you to safety as he led Our Lord and Our Lady on the flight to Egypt.

I hoped to flesh this post out some more, but I’ve run out of time, at least for the moment. I think Barnhardt’s exhortation is as good an ending as I could put to a post, anyway.

“Putin’s Russia has moved considerably to the right of the Pope’s Vatican.” January 20, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, Ecumenism, General Catholic, Restoration, sanctity, secularism, Society, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, Victory.
10 comments

If by “right,” one means in the direction of promoting traditional Christian values and beliefs, I’d say that’s correct, and what a damning indictment that is, given how many errors the Russian Orthodox hold, in spite of the ancient nature of that Church and its many beautiful elements.

Reader TE sent a link to an article examining the role of the Russian Orthodox Church in Putin’s Russia.  As in the days of the tsars of old, the relationship between Putin’s government and the Russian Orthodox Church is one of complex interdependence, each supporting and strengthening the other.  Post-Christian libertine Westerners are aghast at this relationship, but it’s very similar to how Church-state relations were conducted in western Christendom for centuries.  It would be fascinating – and one hopes instructive – to see if Putin’s close integration of the Church into Russian society/government leads to an increasingly stable, united, morally upright Russia.  That would serve as a powerful counter-example to the direction of the decadent West.

Some highlights from the piece, which is not exactly what I would call a ringing endorsement of these close Church/state relations:

Putin may not be religious in the traditional sense, but he certainly realizes that Christianity- specifically the Russian Orthodox Church- is the common glue that holds the Russian people together. It has deep historical roots that were dampened, but never extinguished by 75 years of communist rule. And it extends beyond the borders of Russia itself into neighboring lands, especially the Ukraine.

Putin has carefully nurtured his relationship with the Church. He has demanded that the oligarchs fund the rebuilding of almost 25,000 Orthodox churches in Russia. A recent law passed forbids the practice of religion outside of an established church- a law that targets Western religions like Jehovah’s Witnesses that practice in their home……..The Church is consulted on legislation of any nature that may touch upon religion.

Putin, like the Church, view themselves as a bulwark against Western decadence. [In spite of the many problems in Russia’s government, the endemic corruption and continued rot and decay, this is not an unfair assessment, and Russia’s re-embrace of religion (along with that ongoing in much of the former Soviet satellite states) is a damning indictment on the Western belief that the irreversible trajectory of history is towards more secularization, more libertinism, more hedonism, and less and less influence on religion.  We simply have not yet learned the lessons learned in the former communist states, which is that a society that explicitly rejects God is a dystopian nightmare where all manner of evils are prevalent in appalling abundance]  He has criticized Western values and “tolerance” as “genderless and infertile.” To Putin, the new Cold War is one of Western values versus Russian conservatism.

As a result, Russia has rising birth rates. [But still far from adequate] It is perhaps the only developed country where religion is taking on a greater role rather than a diminished one. His stance has been intolerant of divorce. He has banned the advertisement of abortion services. Pornography is banned as is “homosexual propaganda.” Putin’s Russia has moved considerably to the right of the Pope’s Vatican….. [Which is equally a commentary on the radicalism emanating from Rome as it is on Russia’s nascent return to its Christian roots]

……..There is nothing new here as concerns the Putin regime and the Church. Since the time of the czars, the Patriarchate and the Kremlin were allies- each doing the other’s bidding. The Church saw the czar as God’s chosen leader. But underlying the alliance was the belief in a shared and almost sacred vision of Russian exceptionalism and a unique national identity- neither Western nor Eastern.

Perhaps this explains why some have called upon Putin- not the EU, not the UN, not the Pope and not the US despite who occupies the Oval Office- to save Christianity. In fact, the Orthodox Church has specifically asked Putin to do just that and he enthusiastically responded, “Consider it done.”

Such a contrast to our decadent Western elites, who, even among those who do not outwardly mock and scorn Christianity, rarely do more than pay lip service to orthodox Christian belief.  Religion for the vast, vast majority in the West, especially among the elites, is at best a quaint relic from a benighted past, and at worst the most dangerous, corrosive, hateful element of society – something to be fought and crushed at all costs.

I think we shall see over the coming decades which vision produces the best effects.  Russia still faces enormous problems, and while the religious revival may be a mile wide, it is yet only an inch deep.  Massive problems including rampant alcoholism and the lackadaisical work ethic resulting from a lifetime of communist rule remain. But the post-Christian West very apparently has a suicidal death wish, forlornly refusing to learn the lessons of history and embracing the exact same ideologies that have led to endless misery and societal collapse around the world.  Should Russia’s religious revival intensify and work more deeply into the day to day lived experience of Russians, I have no doubt which society, which culture will be the more robust, the more vibrant 50 years from now.

Surgical Abortion Rate Falls to Lowest Level in Over 40 Years, But Is This Good News? January 18, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, contraception, disaster, episcopate, error, General Catholic, horror, paganism, priests, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, the struggle for the Church, unadulterated evil.
6 comments

So the pro-abort Guttmacher Institute has put out its annual compendium of abortion statistics and reported that fewer than 1 million surgical abortions were performed in the US in 2014, for the first time since 1975.  This would normally be a cause for rejoicing (while lamenting the fact that there are still mountains of dead babies every year even still), but there are certain caveats that make this report less than heartening.  First, at least part of the reduction in surgical abortion can be explained away by the continuing implosion of the conception rate, especially among native born American women.  Another factor is the rise of chemical/pharmaceutical abortion, the “morning after pill” and such like, which are not “counted” as abortions in the statistics.  Many deeply involved in the pro-life movement report that these chemical abortions are increasing at an alarming rate, so that the total abortion rate may indeed by higher than it was a few years ago.  Chemical abortion is often preferred as it can be done at home and doesn’t involve much of the trauma and medical risk of surgical abortion.

The final negative factor on the abortion rate is an increase in the use of long term contraception, which is very nearly self-sterilization in the form of IUDs.  Use of long-term contraceptives exploded over the past several  years and is probably also driving the abortion rate down.

At any rate, here’s the report from a non pro-abort source:

Great news, if not surprising news. As contraceptive technology has improved, as the taboo against using it has shrunk, and as new restrictions on abortion have passed in various red states, it’d be odd if the rate weren’t declining.

The pro-choice Guttmacher Institute, which conducted the survey, says there were fewer than a million abortions performed last year for the first time since 1975. Which is also good news, once you get past the whole “a million children aborted every year for 40 years” thing.

ab

Some really bad news:

By the way, according to two polls taken last year, approval of birth control as either morally justified or not a moral issue is virtually unanimous among Americans. Gallup found 89 percent willing to call contraception “morally acceptable.” When Pew asked a similar question, just four percent overall (and eight percent of Catholics) deemed it morally wrong.

Thanks, bishops and priests of Amchurch!  Mission accomplished.

Know this, and without the slightest doubt – the progressive/modernist faction in the Church intends to do the same with divorce and sodomy as they have done with contraception, turn them into moral non-issues for the vast, vast majority of Catholics.  That includes, naturally, making the Blessed Sacrament available to those who have been civilly remarried with no annulment of their first marriage – as what’s the point of being Catholic if you can’t line up to get your “reward” every week like everyone else?

Think how many priests should have at least strongly suspected that the vast majority of their married couples with two or one or zero kids never once challenged them on the exceedingly strong likelihood that they were receiving the Blessed Sacrament while actively practicing contraception.  That’s a massive failure of moral duty and a very large part of the reason why the Church continues to implode in a self-inflicted crisis.

Even writing this feels like whistling past the graveyard.  Outside a handful of isolated traditional communities and even rarer Novus Ordo parishes with solid priests, no one in the Church cares in the slightest. Everyone continues to believe their happy fantasies that God is just a good guy in the sky that never holds anyone even slightly accountable for the moral evils they commit.  He’s the cosmic Pez dispenser handing out eternal life to all who come calling.  That this is utterly contrary to both Scripture and Tradition is, of course, conveniently forgotten.

Enjoy your newchurch while it lasts, boys.  It won’t be around for very long.  People can get their empty, meaningless, happy-clappy emotional/spiritual kumbayah experience just as well at home as they can in your parish.  It won’t be long before the vast majority of the few remaining active Catholics start to figure that out.

More and More (Curial) Priests Apparently Can’t Stand Francis January 13, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, disaster, episcopate, error, Francis, General Catholic, horror, priests, Revolution, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, the return, the struggle for the Church.
12 comments

That’s what Damian Thompson says, anyway. Some interesting observations below – some revelations as to Francis’ character.  It might even be considered a bit psycho-analytical. I was not aware of Francis’ scandal in reinstating a scandalous progressive boy-raping priest that Benedict had previously defrocked.  That’s a damning indictment that Francis’ mercy extends only to perceived ideological allies, and not those whom he is most charged to shepherd and defend:

On 2 January, the Vatican published a letter from Pope Francis to the world’s bishops in which he reminded them that they must show ‘zero tolerance’ towards child abuse. The next day, the American Week magazine published an article that told the story of ‘Don Mercedes’ — Fr Mauro Inzoli, an Italian priest with a passion for expensive cars and underage boys.

In 2012, Pope Benedict stripped Inzoli of his priestly faculties, effectively defrocking him. In 2014, however, they were restored to him — by Pope Francis, who warned him to stay away from minors.

Then, finally, the Italian civil authorities caught up with this serial groper of teenagers in the confessional. Last summer Inzoli was sentenced to four years and nine months in jail for paedophile offences. The Vatican, under ‘zero-tolerance’ Francis, refused to supply evidence that prosecutors wanted…….. [I doubt he was guilty only of “groping,” and I hate how the media continues to soft-pedal these men’s crimes.  They, painfully and cruelly, rape young boys, destroying their irreplaceable innocence and scarring them for life. Those who suffer childhood sex abuse are never quite right again.  Reducing that to “groping” is yet another example of why so many of us have no respect for the media.  As for Francis, his “zero-tolerance” depends entirely on whether one is seen as an ally or not.  Leftism is always about power – those perceived as aiding that pursuit of power can never do any wrong, those who oppose it can never do any right.]

……A man who, when he took office, seemed endearingly informal — paying his own bill at his hotel, refusing to live in the Apostolic Palace, making surprise phone calls to members of the public — now cuts a less sympathetic figure.

He has broken with a far more significant papal tradition than living in the papal apartments or travelling in limousines. He has defied the convention that a pope, once elected, ceases to play nasty curial politics. [I’m shocked, shocked that a convicted Peronist would behave like a…..convicted Peronist]

Pope Benedict respected this convention. [Probably too much. It undermined his ability to effect any change – if he even wanted to.] Liberals who were worried that the ‘Rottweiler’ would harbour ancient grudges watched in amazement — and relief — as he turned into a virtual hermit. This created the factional chaos that led to his resignation — but right up until the end, Benedict was always ‘the Holy Father’.

That title has almost dropped out of use inside the Vatican under Francis, at least in everyday conversation. And, when you hear it, there is an edge of sarcasm. For example: ‘As the Holy Father so wisely says, we all have a natural tendency to eat shit.’

The priest in question is no fan of Francis. But the fact is that the Pope did say it — in public. Last month, he told the media to stop spreading fake stories because ‘people have a tendency towards the sickness of coprophagia’. Which means eating excrement.

Why did he say it? The traditionalist blog Rorate Caeli suggested that ‘ageing or an underlying medical issue’ was responsible for his ‘persistent anger, rancour, vituperation, use of uncouth words (which is known to be increasingly frequent in private)’. [Nah.  It’s just who he is. It’s who he’s always  been.  This is a severely intemperate man.  This is a man who is not in control of his appetites. Humility is what gives us the moral strength (and grace) to practice penance and limit our appetites.  Francis may or may not limit his physical, material appetite, but his appetite for more ethereal things like obeisance and the gathering of power appears voracious.]

Again, this is an opponent speaking. There is no evidence that the Pope is mentally ill. However, plenty of Vatican employees will testify to his outbursts of temper, rudeness towards subordinates and vulgar language. [Again, intemperance.  Intemperance also speaks to a lack of solid interior life driven by humility and devotion to prayer.]

He can also be genial, funny and compassionate. But this side of his personality is increasingly reserved for his inner circle and his allies.

All popes have inner circles, it goes without saying. What distinguishes Francis from his recent predecessors is the nature of the alliances he forms. He is far more brutal in the exercise of his power than, say, Pope John Paul II, who certainly had an authoritarian streak in him. [Indeed.  Some say Francis is even more authoritarian than Pius XII, the supposed epitome of the “bad old Church.”]

‘Bergoglio divides the church into those who are with him and those who are against him — and if he thinks you’re in the latter camp then he’ll come after you,’ says a priest who works in the curia. [Think that had much impact on the Franciscans of the Immaculate?]

‘Bergoglio’, note: he doesn’t even call him ‘Francis’. Tellingly, this priest used to be a fervent supporter of some of the Pope’s administrative reforms and he doesn’t look back nostalgically at the reign of Benedict, whom he blames for neglecting his papal duties.

But, like so many Vatican employees, he’s sick of Francis’s habit of telling the entire Roman curia that they are modern-day Pharisees — an analogy that casts the Argentinian pontiff in the role of Jesus. [Convenient, that.]

Clearly Francis believes that relaxing the rules on communion for Catholics in irregular marriages is an act of Christlike compassion. [Could there be more to it than that?  As a point of attack against the entire moral edifice of the Church, a more insidious one could hardly have been chosen.  I don’t think that’s accidental in the slightest.] This is also the view of the venerable liberal cardinals who campaigned to elect him. It is often said that he is enacting their agenda — and it’s true that Francis is well disposed to liberal demands for women deacons and married priests. [Thus the upcoming terror of Synod 2018.  Lord, please prevent this from taking place.]

He is not, however, their instrument. In the words of a Vatican observer who held an important position in Rome for many years, ‘He hasn’t taken on the old progressive mantle so much as created his own personality cult.’ Theological niceties bore him. Personal loyalty obsesses him — ‘and if the cardinal electors had done due diligence they would have discovered that he was an extraordinarily divisive figure among the Argentinian Jesuits’.

It’s not hard to detect a Latin American flavour to the deal-making and settling of scores that has become blatant over the past year. Most Catholic bishops had thought Francis was a plain-spoken and perhaps touchingly naive reformer. Instead, they are confronted by a pope who is simultaneously combative, charming, bad-tempered, idealistic and vengeful……..

Oh, I think the naivete is an act.  I think he – as the scion of those who elected him – knows exactly what he is doing and the impact it will have.  This is a man bent on remaking the Church in his own ideological image.  Niceties mean nothing to him, all that matters is the end result.

He’s a leftist Borgia, minus the appetites against the 6th and 9th Commandments.

TLM under threat from Francis? January 13, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, Basics, disaster, Francis, General Catholic, horror, Latin Mass, persecution, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, the struggle for the Church.
36 comments

I have long suspected – and I think I have opined to this effect here on the blog in the past – that with the direction of Francis’ tenure as Bishop of Rome so apparent, Summorum Pontificum could not long be left standing.  The architects of the revolution in the Church did not accidentally make a full-on assault on the Mass their first priority.  They knew that was the key to changing people’s beliefs and ultimately to changing the Church into the worldly, secularized construct they so ardently desire.  The Mass has always been the key to the life of the Church.  It is the living embodiment of absolutely core elements of Catholic belief.  Change it, and anything is possible.

The last 50 years have been a clear witness to this.  The Church has been changed in ways that Catholics of prior generations could neither imagine nor believe – the vast majority would in fact be utterly aghast at what passes for liturgy, doctrine, morals, ecclesiology, etc. in vast swaths of the Church today.  Forcing changes on the Mass – whether to “modernize” it as was claimed, or to make it less “offensive” to protestants, or to simply wreak a revolution – was a master stroke by those who knew the Church well enough to know where to wound her most grievously.

Summorum Pontificum is a deadly threat to the entire post-conciliar construct.  I know there are readers who haven’t jumped on the TLM train, and I understand some of their particular reasons, but overall, allowing the TLM to exist outside a few isolated, persecuted ghettos, to allow it to spread, even with all the roadblocks and obstacles constructed by most dioceses against it, to allow it to be perceived as “normal” and “equal” to the Novus Ordo is to allow a counter-revolutionary element to exist in the Church of the highest effectiveness and the gravest import.  Over time, the revolutionaries know that even slightly free existence of the TLM will eventually cause the complete destruction of their Great Facade, the modernist-progressive construct successfully imposed on the Church in the 60s and 70s.

It simply cannot be allowed to exist, to be seen as an equally normative expression of the Sacred Liturgy (even though, in reality, it is the new Mass that is the oddball).  At some point the permissions granted under Summorum Pontificum and Universae Ecclesiae – as unfairly implemented and unreasonably blocked as they have been – MUST be repealed.  Already opposition is building to the Franciscan attempt to replay the revolution.  Even secular sites are noting this (OK, it is Damien Thompson, but what about this observation from the “manosphere?”).  The hope that Francis would mark a new period of progressive pontifical ascendancy may be misplaced.  Thus, the time to act is now, no matter how politically explosive this act may be, no matter how much of a repudiation of the signature achievement of the still-living former pontiff it would mark.

Thus, I was not surprised at all to read this post from Rorate:

This from the latest blog post by Italian vaticanist Sandro Magister (along with Marco Tosatti, the top vaticanist in the current pontificate):
There are those who fear that after the demolition of “Liturgiam Authenticam,” the next objective, of this or another commission, will be the correction of “Summorum Pontificum,” the document with which Benedict XVI liberalized the celebration of the Mass in the ancient rite.
The time to agitate is now: Traditionalists around the world must make clear the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum (which was not an act of “mercy,” but a mere recognition of justice and logic) cannot be touched.

I agree.  While overall I fear the difficulty of moving the committed ideologue, especially one with as many Machiavellian instincts as this one, I do think sufficient noise might scare them off.  I’m not certain what the best approach to achieve that is.  I’m open to suggestions.  Flood the Vatican with letters?  Go crazy on social media?  Enlist the aid of sympathetic alternative media with a large following? Deck the USS Missouri out in thousands of fiddlebacks and float it up the Tiber?  All of the above…….

Prayer and penance must be at the root of all such efforts, as in all things.  I don’t know how many times I have doubled down on my prayers for Francis and the prevention of any havoc in the Church, but it looks like it’s time again.

Cardinal Burke Offering Mass of Reparation in Dallas 01/22 January 12, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, awesomeness, contraception, Dallas Diocese, different religion, Eucharist, General Catholic, priests, Sacraments, Society, Spiritual Warfare, the struggle for the Church, Virtue.
10 comments

It would be awesome if it were at a TLM Mass – which would of course mean Mater Dei – but then again, I wasn’t one of those who put in what I am quite certain was most significant effort in inviting Burke and making arrangements for his travel, etc.  So good for the folks in the “Catholic Action for Faith and Family” who pulled this off.  The Mass is at 10:30am at Mary Immaculate Parish in Farmers Branch.  This is a Mass of Reparation for the sin of abortion, marking of course yet another sad anniversary of this nation’s genocide against it’s own young.

I don’t plan on assisting at this Mass, as grateful as I am for Cardinal Burke’s relative orthodoxy and his stand against the increasingly unhinged and egregious errors and abuses emanating from the pontificate of Francis.  I will note in passing that Mary Immaculate is one of a number of parishes in this diocese with only one hour of Confession a week.  I do pray that Cardinal Burke’s presence and example encourage a much more generous attitude on the part of Fr. Michael Forge and Daniel Rendon to this most vital of Sacraments.  It is a metaphysical certitude that there are numerous souls receiving Communion weekly and even daily at Mary Immaculate in a state of mortal sin, and who have not availed themselves of Confession in years if not decades.  And why should they, when it is evidently of such low priority to those with the solemn duty to pastor their souls to Heaven?

I am a bit reticent to introduce this rant into a post on what is really a different subject and should be a happy occasion, but I must wonder how many souls who may assist at what will surely be a glorious event in the life of this parish (and a significant statement on the part of the clergy in hosting Burke) do not have unconfessed involvement in the deliberately willed termination of perfectly innocent life on their conscience, and who will receive the Blessed Sacrament, in an act of terrible sacrilege, without a second thought?  I’d be willing to bet it’s more than a handful.

Please God that I am wrong, but I strongly suspect I am not.

Lazy Video Post, Hong Kong Flu Edition January 10, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, awesomeness, catachesis, Domestic Church, family, General Catholic, Interior Life, Latin Mass, priests, Restoration, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
comments closed

I started with a little sore throat Friday, which transitioned to a cough yesterday, and today is full blown Hong Kong Phooey Flu. All you get today is two vids, but they’re both really good, one on the Jezebel spirit and wives rebellion from their husbands……….:

…….and the other from that priest many of us had missed so much these past 2-odd years, on Epiphany, the Holy Family, and the Errors of Russia.  I believe this is new content, from 2016:

There are so often really good book recommendations embedded in this priest’s sermons.

That will be all for today, barring a miraculous recovery, not sure about tomorrow, either.  When I get a high fever, I’m a wimpy as they come.

Any recommendations for home remedies? Pretty sure it is actual influenza, maybe with bronchitis on top.

Your prayers are most appreciated. God bless you!

Fr. James Martin, LBGTSJ, Continues to Cover Himself in Dung January 9, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, cultural marxism, disaster, General Catholic, horror, religious, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, the struggle for the Church, unbelievable BS.
comments closed

A brief final post of the day: many readers will be aware that Fr. James Martin, SJ, is typical for men of the sadly fallen order he represents so fittingly, in being solidly on the progressive, worldly side, frequently (if not constantly) making what should be clear Doctrine into a dog’s breakfast of confusion and uncertainty.  He displayed that to excess, recently, in trying to claim that the Holy Family was filled with argument and disunity at times, contrary to the constant belief of the Church dating from Apostolic times, which is that the Holy Family featured three souls for whom sin was totally foreign*, and for whom self-interest was a non-existent commodity, thus making argument an impossibility, even if Mary and Joseph were sometimes confused by aspects of the Savior’s mission on earth:

c1v9i9mxaaaig2x
Perhaps I’m overstating things in claiming that Martin is asserting arguments within the Holy Family, but I think that implication can be plainly drawn.  His intent to “humanize” or “de-mythologize” the Holy Family may have good or sinister intent, but it is wholly consistent with the kind of insidious attacks on long-held belief that Jesuits have been infamous for these past several decades.

Our Lady was miraculously preserved from sin from her Immaculate Conception.  She was incapable of disagreeing with her Son, of not seeing “eye to eye.”  If there were times when she did not understand, fully, the Christ’s actions, she instantly conformed her will to them once their meaning became plain, such as when we read in the Gospel from the Feast of the Holy Family this past Sunday, when Jesus stayed behind in the Temple in obedience to his true Father instead of his earthly one – the completely right priority. Joseph and Mary were naturally worried about their son, but did not chastise Him or argue with Him in any way once He made his reply.  The Wedding at Cana is another instance where what may to secular eyes appear as “conflict” is actually the perfect alignment of wills.  Our Lady asked Jesus, perhaps prematurely, to address the exhaustion of the wine.  She asked this KNOWING that He would accede to her……it wasn’t really even a request, it was more a bald statement of fact, but Jesus, in His perfect generosity, knew what His mother willed……..and that is of course what happened.  Any other purported instances of disagreement are simply the natural result of what happens when limited human understanding confronts omnipotence and omniscience – there are bound to be misunderstandings on the human part, but in every case, Our Lady conformed her will to that of her Son as perfectly as a human being can.

This kind of tweet and post are just click-bait, to me.  Say something controversial in the hope of attracting hits.  It’s as banal as it is predictable – especially for a creature such as Martin.  There is no concern over causing scandal or offending the sensibilities of numerous devout souls, the only concern is for the clicks.

But that’s not all, Martin LBGTSJ also feels compelled to jump on the cultural bandwagon whenever something pleasing to progressives comes along, such as Meryl Streep’s breathless hyperventilating at the Golden Globes:

c1vv08lwiaa9c9z

Wow, so deep.  You can see how social media so elevates the cultural discourse.

Streep’s comments were offensive, because they equate voting for Trump with holding a foundational disrespect for certain others (whoever the Left wants from one moment to the next).  Sure, Trump has said some  unfortunate things, but they are off-hand comments made in passing, not points of deliberate policy.  Streep, Martin, and their co-religionists of the Left think very little about the “disrespect” shown to the unborn by the outgoing president they so idolize.  No, they are fixated on 15 year old off-color comments, not because they really care, but because it serves their political interests to do so.  That’s what all this screaming and crying and literal public lunacy on display over the past 2 months has been about, an attempt to de-legitimize the man elected president and prevent his administration from being able to roll back any of Obama’s disastrous policies, policies that have pushed this nation to the brink of destruction.

But politics is what it’s always about with the Left, whether it’s Streep or Martin or Winters or Chittister.  They are fervent adherents of an implacably hostile, alien religion, a demonic mishmash of bad science, diabolical philosophy, hatred for sound Doctrine, and unbounded pride – the religion of sexular Leftism.

I’m quite certain you already knew well enough to ignore anything Martin, SJLBGT and his ilk have to say, because you guys is S-M-R-T smart.

The only question I have is, can the Jesuits be reconstituted along something like the lines of their holy founder again through great suffering, reduction in numbers, and eventual replacement by solidly orthodox membership, or will extreme measures like suppression for a century or so be required to snuff out their particularly vile and pernicious set of errors?

*- St. Joseph is regarded – I don’t think it is a doctrine, but it is a strong tradition – to have been sinless from the moment of his betrothal to Mary.  For the time Jesus was Incarnate until his death, then, St. Joseph did not sin, even venially.

Neo-Catholics, Water Carriers of the Revolution January 9, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, Basics, disaster, error, family, General Catholic, horror, Latin Mass, rank stupidity, Sacraments, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

Quite a stinging, but very much timely and on point video from Michael Matt.  A couple of people sent this to me over the weekend, but I’d already seen it – you have to get up pretty early to get the  jump on ol’ Tantumblogo.  Hopefully that doesn’t mean everyone’s already seen it – I hate to be redundant.  But if it’s good enough to watch once, it’s good enough to watch again, amiright?

I have to say, I’ve never seen a “gathering rite” as Matt relates.  I have, however, seen much abominable behavior prior to, during, and after Mass, including loud, rude conversation, total lack of prayer and devotion, wholly inappropriate attire, and various forms of roughhousing and grabass playing.  Sometimes that latter involves kids, sometimes not.  This complete lack of reverence, devotion, and seeming understanding of what is about to take place during the Mass is one of the major factors that drove me to seek out more orthodox, pious alternatives; first, a Novus Ordo Latin Mass, and finally, the TLM.

Speaking of, I assisted at a nuptial Mass in the Novus Ordo world over the holidays.  The parish was abominable, liturgically.  Tabernacle shunted into a literal closet (it sat 8 in cramped fashion!).  The church itself was a huge circle with the altar offset far to one side and a large stage for the priest and other “liturgical actors” to prance around on.  Felt banners abounded. There was naturally a huge hot tub baptismal font.  For a little while, I thought I was in San Antonio, but, no, it was just the Diocese of Fort Worth.

I will never comprehend what weird – one might even be tempted to say diabolical – psychology is at play in weddings (and not just Catholic ones), where it seems like a contest among the young women invited to attend to be the most scantily, inappropriately dressed woman there.  It almost seems like a passive-aggressive attempt by young, single women (and some not so young, or single) to upstage the bride by drawing attention to themselves through revealing clothing.  The laughable part was, it was quite cold that night by Texas standards, about 33 degrees with a brisk north wind.  My wife, always seeking the charitable explanation, opined that these fit-for-Tinder dresses might be the only ones they own.  I’m tempted to call BS on that, but, then again, I’ve seen similar at more than a few funerals, so maybe there’s something to it.

Folks at the wedding Mass at least tried to keep the conversation down to a dull roar, but far louder than one might see in, say, a movie theater.  That’s the worst part, these people have been deliberately and carefully formed to regard assisting at Mass, being in the Eucharistic Presence of the Second Person of the Holy Trinity, to be of LESS significance, and deserving of less decorum, than one might find in a theater or upscale restaurant.  It’s not just St. Paul – prior to an ordination Mass here in the Diocese of Dallas, when the Cathedral was jam packed, I got congratulated by a media photographer for being the only one of the thousand odd people there on their knees, praying prior to the Mass.  He was Eastern Orthodox and blown away by the lack of reverence for the Blessed Sacrament and the unbelievably powerful transformation about to take place in men given a supernatural Grace beyond human comprehension, and by the boorishness of those in attendance.

I’m sure we all have similar stories.  Too many to share.  When we wonder how Francis could be doing what he’s doing, and all the long years of abuse, error, and even outright heresy committed by so many in the Church, including every one of his predecessors dating back to Paul VI, at least, all we have to realize is, they radically, cruelly, heartlessly changed the Mass. Heck, they upended it, turned it inside out, turned the sublime into the banal and showed a billion odd Catholics and the entire world that literally nothing at all was sacred in the brave new post-conciliar world.

Given that, nothing should really surprise us.  The way from the Church as it was prior to the Council to where it is today, near schism and potential doctrinal collapse, was paved very carefully and deliberately.  I think we have to recognize that even some of Francis “conservative” predecessors played a substantial role in that construction project.  I am far from certain how we get back to the way things were, or some new reality based on the Church as it must be, but I do know the restoration of the Mass of Ages is absolutely central to that project, and, indeed, it cannot occur without the return of the TLM as the regular, everyday, normative Mass for the entire Church.

 

+Schneider Likens Church to Soviet Regime December 7, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, episcopate, Francis, General Catholic, persecution, Restoration, scandals, secularism, the struggle for the Church, true leadership, Virtue.
comments closed

Well, one leftist cohort tends to resemble another.  They are all predicated on the exaltation of man above God and the state (or institution) above all, to the extent that humans are crushed for the “greater good,” which really means the good of the tiny cabal that actually holds the reigns of power.

Leftists that treat supposedly sacrosanct “dialogue” as an arcane relic once they’ve gained power?  Color me shocked:

Before a packed room in Rome’s Centro Lepanto on Monday, Bishop Athanasius Schneider of Kazakhstan urged the faithful to ardently hold on to the Church’s Magisterium on the indissolubility of marriage within the current state of ongoing ambiguities.

“When Christ preached 2,000 years ago, the culture and reigning spirit were radically opposed to Him. Concretely religious syncretism ruled, also Gnosticism among the intelligent leaders, as well as permissibilism among the masses — especially regarding the institution of matrimony. […] The sole purpose of the Son of God was to reveal the truth to the world.”……

……..“The formulation of dubia, as the Cardinals here have expressed in their own terms, has been a common practice in the Church,” he explained. “We need to be able to ask questions openly without being afraid of repressions.” [Progressives are all about “dialogue” and “debate” when they perceive themselves out of power, but when they believe they have power, such quaint notions go out the window.  It’s all about whatever serves their perceived interests, that’s all.]

Bishop Schneider referred to the numerous attacks that the four Princes of the Church have suffered after their dubia was published. The questions still remain unanswered by Pope Francis.

“The reaction to the dubia is a proof of the climate in which we actually live in the Church right now,” Bishop Schneider said. “We live in a climate of threats and of denial of dialogue towards a specific group.”

Schneider went to say that “dialogue seems to be accepted only if you think like everyone else – that is practically like a regime.” [Leftists be leftists, wherever they are. Power is the only end they care about, and will use any means to gain it. Once they have it, they have few scruples in using it in cruel and unjust ways]

Schneider brought up his experience in Russia, where he was born in the time of the Soviet Union. His parents were sent by Stalin to work camps, or “Gulags,” after the Second World War. “If you didn’t follow the line of the party, or you questioned it, you couldn’t even ask. That is for me a very clear parallel to what is happening now in the reactions to the dubia — questions — of the Cardinals.”

“This is a very sad experience especially since everybody is speaking about a ‘culture of dialogue’ after the Second Vatican Council. While bishops openly teach heresies and nothing happens to them, that is truly a grave injustice and very sad,” Bishop Schneider added. [Sure. “Dialogue” for the progressives, which really means promotion of the worst errors, and persecution for everyone else]

“If the Pope does not answer, the next step will be recourse to prayer, to supernatural means,” Schneider said, “to pray for the enlightenment of the Pope and that he will gain courage.” [Prayer is the basis of everything.  It’s a foregone conclusion.  But I hope Burke and his allies are prepared to do more in the material realm, if need be.  As in starting formal proceedings of inquiry into the orthodoxy of Francis’ beliefs.]

Schneider speculated about what might happen in the near future. “In Church history, we say that in an extreme case in which the bonum commune of the faith is threatened, then the bishops as members of the college of bishops, and in a truly collegial relation to the Pope with a brotherly obedience to him, must ask him publicly to renounce the misdeed of giving Communion to remarried divorced Catholics, as it is already being done in many dioceses.” [That’s very specific. But in a general council, Burke and those like him would be in the distinct minority, would they not?  What then?]

Rebutting the attacks of various persons against the Cardinals, he defended the four. “This situation has already had precedences in saints — not in schismatics or heretics. Hilary of Poitiers, St. Catherine of Siena, and I think this should be possible in the Church without the person being called a schismatic.” [Absolutely.  As I say, leftists always project. When they call someone schismatic, it’s because they themselves have schismatic intent.  Thus the recent article in L’Osservatore Romano by the Patriarch of Constantinople, certainly the most liberal patriarch of the Orthodox Church.]

Cardinal Burke has said a “formal correction” might be in order to resolve the situation of uncertainty. “In the language of moral theology, fraternal correction is an act of love — if it is given in obedience and with reason,” Schneider commented. “We have to return to this familiar way of dealing with it.”

Absolutely true.  I pray that not only does Cardinal Burke have the wherewithal to continue pursuing this matter – he is increasingly becoming the obvious leader of the opposition to Francis’ Reign of Error – but that he can be sufficiently persuasive to get at least 30% or so of prelates on his side.  He may not ever be able to convince a majority of spineless, careerist prelates to join him in condemning Francis’ promotion of error, but even a good 25-30% would be an enormous rebuke and a sign of pending schism. It would gravely undermine Francis’ ability to govern the Church, and, more importantly, pursue his agenda.

Schneider is correct, however, in assessing that prayer is the basis for whatever strength Burke and his allies will have.  Please devote Novenas, Rosaries, and many other prayers to him and all like him who are willing to oppose this most egregiously destructive of popes.

As an addendum, Cardinal Turkson has been, for the most part, firmly in the Franciscan camp (which is how he got a plum new assignment), but one wonders if he is wavering, given his recent statements seemingly supportive of the pointed questioning of the dubia?  Turkson is a wholly political animal, a man who plastered Rome with images of himself during the conclave of 2013, so if he is shifting, even a bit, it might be revealing of general trends within the episcopate.  Or he could simply be playing both sides of the fence.