Daily Archives: May 28, 2012
Reblog of the day
Archbishop Gomez has accused Americans of being angry and “judgmental”, unloading on his poor listeners such a load of commonplaces and fashionable words that they must have thought themselves back in the early Seventies.
“Everywhere in our culture, people seem so quick to condemn. It is very hard to find words of mercy or understanding for someone who has done something wrong,” says the oh so understanding bishop; “many good people out there saying things they know they shouldn’t be saying”, he went on in a rather, well, judgmental way.
“People make mistakes. They sin. Some people do evil that causes scandal and grave harm. We can condemn the offense and work for justice — without trying to destroy the person who committed the sin,” says the bishop again and seems to have found some solid ground, but then forgets what he has just said by stating that “We…
View original post 872 more words
If you thought you knew how bitchy a fag can be, wait until you read this. In short, some homo-activists running the place (the place is, clearly, in San Francisco; I bet he/she/it votes Pelosi) has decided that “any celebration of straight marriage” is banned. Basically, perverts are supposed to be the only one who have right to “celebrate” what they (being pervs) call marriage.
This is not even the stupid – and to be refused, erm, straight – idea that marriage as God intended and that abominable parody attempted by perverts be “equal”. We are already beyond that. This is the idea that there is only one marriage worthy of celebration, and it is the non-existent one.
I am tempted to tell you where I think these people have their brains.
Of course, I must also disagree with the idea of the author of the article, who has no problem with what the wannabe girls are doing.
I have. I can’t imagine a Christian society “ok with perversion” and if it must be that we Catholics have to live with such abominations until the time comes when sanity prevails and sodomy laws are reintroduced (astonishingly, this appears to be now a very naughty things to say; two thousand years of Christianity look at us and cry), this does not mean we are ok with it. Freedom can only exist within the boundaries God has given us, and freedom of this kind has simply no right to exist.
I thought I was an unapologetic man, but this is truly good…
1) Log in your Facebook account
2) Find the Starbucks account (extremely easy).
3) Send a very short message: like “forget me as a client as long as you continue to encourage sexual perversion and to attack Christianity”. No gentle words. The brutal truth.
How long will it take? One minute? Ninety seconds?
Hardly ninety seconds, really…
P.s. Thanks RM, text corrected; hopefully right this time…
I never understood the argument that if the SSPX is reconciled, it will stop acting as they always did. This thinking seems in my eyes to consider that the SSPX never was in what the Vatican calls “full communion”, or that once it wasn’t anymore this constituted a sort of improvement.
If you ask me, the SSPX just does not work that way: they are now what they were forty years ago, and when this reconciliation comes they will be reconciled exactly as they were forty years ago, and will not be a iota “softer” because of it.
If you want another confirmation, please read the excellent excerpt of Bishop Fellay’s Pentecost speech on the usual Rorate Caeli.
A casual observer, who had just been informed the SSPX and the Vatican are very near reconciliation, would be nothing less than astounded at the tones chosen by Bishop Fellay. Please consider this is a man of some diplomatic talent, not an emotional steamroller flattening everything on his path. The words he uses, he has chosen carefully.
You can read in every word a very clear intention of showing – to his own troops of course, and by reflex to the entire Catholic world – that the SSPX is not going to change anything in the way they operate. This is what they have always made clear, by the way, so that if anyone in the Vatican has nurtured some illusions of making the SSPX “house trained” by the means of the reconciliation, he must blame himself for the mistake.
This man is made, if you ask me, of the stuff great Popes are made of: prudent but firm; patient but clear; never closing any door, but never allowing anyone to let him in from the servants’ entrance.
I can’t imagine a better shepherd for the SSPX.
A sadly interesting article on the Catholic News Service. The article deals with something I have not lived, but some of the older and wiser of my readers might recollect; the “adoption” of a “pagan baby” encouraged in past decades.
I can’t see anything wrong, anything at all, with converting to Christianity pagan (as in: pagan) babies; but this is obviously not really good nowadays, in the era of the 12-lanes way to heaven only closed to Dr Goebbels and (many would have told you in the past; not for long, I think….) Archbishop Lefebvre.
Father Small, national director of the Pontifical Mission Societies in the United States, does “not apologise” (how brave is that, uh?) for the past campaigns, but he clearly takes the distance from the tones and the spirit of the initiative:
“We can smile at it now at perhaps how silly it was,” says the good father, feeling so superior to those generations of good Christian children sincerely depriving themselves of what was at the time much more scarce than today to help a pagan (as in: pagan) baby to grow up as a Christian. You can, in fact, clearly taste in him the same airs of smug superiority he (clearly, if implicitly) accuses past generations of having. Father also talks of “apparent condescending tones at times”, which might appear an unbiased comment if it had not come from the one who has just reflected on “how perhaps silly” the entire exercise was.
In fact, what the good priest does is to stress the good that was meant by those poor insensitive Catholics obsessed with a white (or westerner) sense of moral superiority but in the end desirous to do some good. We, the post-hell generation, look at them with a mixture of self-satisfied sadness and condescending sympathy.
To give you an idea of how bad the situation is, and how secular ideas have now infiltrated every small expression of Catholicism, please note the following passage (emphasis mine):
“Through their action the proclamation of the Gospel also becomes an intervention on behalf one’s neighbor, justice for the poorest, possibility of education in the most remote villages, medical aid in isolated places, emancipation from poverty and rehabilitation for the marginalized, overcoming ethnic divisions and respect for life in all its stages,” Archbishop Vigano said.
The good archbishop knows evangelisation isn’t really cool nowadays. In order to validate what the Church does you must always, always mix it with the deities of modern times: social justice, education, health, wealth, and the likes. You see here the “proclamation of the gospel” is clearly reduced to a side effect, and its salutary effect is not even explained: what is put in the centre is the worldly result of the activity.
This is something which never ceases to anger me of the modern “work” of Catholic hierarchies:
1) the continuous need to let you feel everything they do is linked to V II (cue the JP II Catechism, made unwieldy and impractical from the endless notes, all meant to show you NuChurch is behind everything they say) and (particularly evident here)
2) the uninterrupted need to show you the Church is “engaged” in pretty much everything but what should be her primary practical task: the salvation of souls.
The words of the Archbishop are a short explanation of everything that is wrong with the Church of today: the desire to be friends with the world by substituting the church’s world for the world’s. Hey, look at how “social” Jesus was! And he loved the environment so000 much!
Even the expression “pagan babies” is now a no-no and Father Small does not seem to care to explain to us why this should be so: where I grew up a baby without Christ was a pagan baby, and the fact was as hard as it was incontrovertible (and yes: this nowadays includes a number of our relatives, friends and neighbours; Pagans all of them, babies included: may God have mercy of us all…). Not so in the post- V II, “the Holy Ghost does all the job”-Church, where the phrase “an appellation that would never be used today” is used to describe a factual truth so self-evident that it does not even need an explanation.
Mala tempora currunt. Decidedly, the reconciliation of the SSPX – and with it, hopefully, the possibility to act more effectively against the errors of neo-Modernism – cannot happen a day too soon.