Daily Archives: September 15, 2010

Third World? Not Really. Aggressively Atheist? You Bet!

One of the two men holding the Talmud is a Cardinal.

First casualty and first headlines ahead of the visit. Cardinal Kasper, a man well-known for not being very liked (ecumenism Taliban, no friend of the Ordinariates and in general: far too left) makes some very politically incorrect observations and as a result either gets gout, or “is advised” by the doctor not to travel (must be a capricious thing, gout) or is excluded from the visit to avoid worse trouble.

Let us see his affirmations to see what is there in them:

1) The UK is “marked by a new and aggressive atheism”.
Very true. Can’t see how anyone could deny this. I hope the Holy Father will say pretty much the same thing in the next days. Unfortunately, I ‘m afraid he’ll say that in a way that does not offend anyone, that is: that does not get at the heart of the matter. Kudos to the Cardinal for having said what must be said out loud.

2) “when you land at Heathrow you think at times you have landed in a Third World country”
I don’t know about that. This is one of the biggest and busiest airports of the planet. Logistics and security must be a nightmare. Still, on the many occasions I have been there I must say that I never felt in danger, nor has anything ever been stolen, nor have I had to endure any particular discomfort not due to the exaggerated security mania of our times. Yes, I have seen cleaner airports perhaps (and more beautiful, modern ones without the “perhaps”); but “third world” seems to me vastly exaggerated.
If he compares with Fiumicino in Rome, he knows Heathrow has nothing to be ashamed of and if he compares with Frankfurt in Germany, well you should never compare with Germany…

3) BA discriminates against you when you wear a cross.
Absolutely true. BA allow their Muslim employees to wear a head scarf, but suspend their  Christian ones if they wear a visible cross. Anti-Christian fanatics, period.

I am not a friend of the man. It seems to me that he incarnates if not the worst, certainly much of the bad come out of Vatican II. But I must say, this time I can’t avoid siding with him. To 66% at least.


Girl Sings In Latin: A Miracle?

She sings in Latin. Who'll explain it to Rev. Reese?

Creative Minority Report has an interesting contribution about the “America’s Got Talent” TV transmission. It would appear that a young (Catholic) girl called Jackie Evancho was allowed to sing unintelligible songs like Pie Jesu (the nation wondered, stunned, what this may mean) and Panis Angelicus (this was really too much, I suppose)

The last performance was also titled in the same impossibly dead language, called Latin, and the lady sung – incredibile dictu – not only the title (something incomprehensible, Ave Maria I think, who knows…), but the entire song in Latin.

This can, of course, not be true. Let us think about the reservations recently expressed by some progressive priests and bishops, like Rev. Reese about the great difficulties now facing English-speaking faithful having to cope with some modification of the Mass in English.

Having read the profound considerations of Mr. Reese, it is utterly impossible to us to believe that a little girl may have learned an…. an…… entire song not in English, but in a….. a….. foreign language!

It must be a miracle. Otherwise Mr. Reese would look entirely stupid and I am sure that he considers this absolutely inconceivable.

Completely different is then the question how the sender could authorise the singing of something as incomprehensible as that. It is clear that the audience will never, ever be able to grasp the beauty of the music or get to know what it means. You could give them subtitles of course, but this would be such a shock to them! Think of how much they’d have to get accustomed to! It can’t be.

I therefore must assume that:
1) it has been a miracle, or
2) Rev. Reese has been ridiculed by a girl.


The Pro-Life Adv Banned By The Irish Television

OneTimothyFour has a beautiful video of an irish Pro-life adv, banned by the Irish Government.

I fail to see what would make the video worthy of being banned. It is not crude or shocking. As a matter of fact, you only need to digit “abortion” on youtube and you’ll see photos that will make you – literally – cry.

At the end are the words “have you any conception what abortion is all about?”, but I doubt that these words might have been considered offensive. Perhaps the Irish government/regulation authority just bans advs with a religious content and this can be easily (albeit not necessarily) construed as religious content.

Still, it is good to do something in order for the irish (and all the others) to see the video anyway.


The Catholic University Of Seton Hall And Homo “Marriages”

PC caption: surprisingly, Ronald Reagan liked fags.

Seton Hall, a Catholic University, has scheduled a course on so-called “gay marriage” (let us repeat it once again: homosexuals are not gay, happy people are gay; and they cannot marry, because they are of the same sex).

The unusual event (as the times are) is that this time the local Archbishop has reacted promptly and has asked the University to change its mind. The affirmation of the Archbishop (that the course be “out of synch”with Catholic teaching) is a rather big understatement but it gives the idea of what is happening anyway.

It turns out that the (Catholic, or so they say) University of Seton Hall is not impressed. Not only have they not done anything to backpedal, but the University has openly mocked the Archbishop by stating that they never had a problem with the course, though “it’s been a problem for, it seems, some people outside of it.” It seems. Some people. Congratulations.

The person chosen for this work of enlightenment of Catholic young minds is a Mr. W. King Mott. Predictably, Mr. Mott is an openly practising sodomite. He states that the aim of his course is to help the students to “gain an appreciation and respect for disinterested analysis that can be used to formulate an informed opinion”. Leaving aside the attempt at being intellectual, the implication here is that to share the Catholic opinion about the matter is to be 1) not informed, 2) biased and 3) disrespectful.

The “disinterested analysis” should come, instead, from a person already demoted in the past for defining the Church “prima facie homophobic” and an aged member of “homosexualist” groups. He is most certainly the man for a disinterested analysis, isn’t he?

Seton Hall lets it be known that there is “nothing” the Archbishop can do to prevent the course from taking place. They are probably right. Still, it would be nice if the Archbishop would obtain that this university is deprived of the right to call itself “Catholic”. One can be secular and homosexualist and will not be burned at the stake for that (not the times anymore, they say). But we should at least be spared the hypocrisy of such institutions pretending to be Catholic.


%d bloggers like this: