Read here the Notification Concerning men’s Dress Worn by Women, from Giuseppe Cardinal Siri.
Cardinal Siri was the Archbishop of Genua for more than 40 years. He was a staunchly conservative prelate, one you could have well imagined in the same room with Ottaviani and Lefebvre. He wasn’t the one to say it half. I wonder how many we have nowadays who would have the sheer guts to talk that way.
Some flowers carefully picked for you:
The wearing of men’s dress by women affects firstly the woman herself, by changing the feminine psychology proper to women; secondly it affects the woman as wife of her husband, by tending to vitiate relationships between the sexes; thirdly it affects the woman as mother of her children by harming her dignity in her children’s eyes.
The motive impelling women to wear men’s dress is always that of imitating, nay, of competing with, the man who is considered stronger, less tied down, more independent. This motivation shows clearly that male dress is the visible aid to bringing about a mental attitude of being “like a man.”5 Secondly, ever since men have been men, the clothing a person wears, demands, imposes and modifies that person’s gestures, attitudes and behavior, such that from merely being worn outside, clothing comes to impose a particular frame of mind inside.
Then let us add that woman wearing man’s dress always more or less indicates her reacting to her femininity as though it is inferiority when in fact it is only diversity. The perversion of her psychology is clear to be seen.
This man is so politically incorrect, you would want to make him a monument. He is so on target, you are at a loss to understand how can a prelate dare to talk in such a plain, strong language. And he is so different from most Archbishops of today, you wonder whether the latter haven’t come out from a convent for schoolgirls.
You also wonder what a man like this would think of knowing that colleagues of him approve of “civil partnerships”….. truly, what an insensitive and non inclusive chap….
What do our archbishops dish the faithful today? When they are not openly heretical like our wannabe Christian, parody-Archbishop, walking joke Vincent “Quisling” Nichols (just type his name in the “search” bar of this blog, or click under “bad shepherds”; and I have spared you the last exploit…..), they are suavely whispering wimps who spend their time telling us how “green” Pope Benedict is, how oh so connected the Church is with modern issues, and how so very worldly the Church has become. Yes, there will be some very slight warning about that chap, Jesus. But only if it really, really can’t be avoided, and always in a way meant not to excite or upset anyone. When was it last time you heard your Bishop mention Jesus – unless it was to link him to some popular cause, which doesn’t count – ? If you exclude a handful of brave men, when was last time you heard an Archbishop expressing himself with one fifth of the guts of the late Cardinal Siri?
Alas, this generation will not experience many of Siri’s courage and energy, but possibly many of Nichols’ cowardice and utter betrayal of Catholic – nay, Christian – values. Still, we are called to love the Church and be faithful to her irrespective of how many Nichols come our way. Be assured, they will have their reward.
In the meantime, I suggest you read the linked piece in its entirety. And cry.
Fifty years of V II and of relentless quest for popularity have made the Church a ghost of her old self. No doubt, sanity will unavoidably prevail one day, and we already see signs of improvement here and there. But make no mistake, decay and stench of modernism are everywhere not only at the peripheral level, but in the Curia, where still too many see the SSPX as if it were the work of the Devil – or should I say, of the angels – and have no problem at all when an archbishop says he is fine with “civil partnerships”.
Siri was made Cardinal by Pope Pius XII.
I do not doubt Nichols will be made Cardinal by Pope Benedict XVI.
We must pray.
CNA has a beautiful Papal intervention, aimed at stressing the necessity of good evangelisation work.
One must say, this Pope is good at talking. Take for example these two phrases:
“It is important to make them understand that being Christian is not a type of outfit that one wears in private or on special occasions, but something living and totalizing, capable of taking all that is good in modernity.”
“proclaiming Jesus Christ, the sole Savior of the world, is more complex today than in the past, but our task continues to be the same as at the beginning of our history. The mission hasn’t changed, just as the enthusiasm and courage that motivated the apostles and first disciples should not change.”
I see a slight problem, though. To talk the talk is all good and fine, but from a Pope able to talk the talk with such clarity, one would expect the ability to walk the walk with far more energy and determination than this is the case now. It seems to me more and more that Pope Benedict sees himself not as an enforcer of orthodoxy, but as one whose task is to prepare the way for future orthodoxy. He often gives to me the impression that he is working so that his successors may act, but without acting directly with anywhere near the energy that would be required.
Summorum Pontificum was obviously huge, and Universae Ecclesiae provides the priests and faithful (after, if I may say so, too many years of inaction) with valid instruments to improve its implementation. What I miss, though, is the concrete action on the ground, the factual providing for robust evangelisation rather than the talking about it; in short, the walk.
We still are afflicted with bishops like Nourrichard (Benedict’s appointment to his present position) and Fonlupt (whose very recent appointment even sparked a reaction in form of a letter from French priests); we have an Archbishop of Westminster (also a Benedict’s appointment to his present position) openly boasting that he is nuanced about homosexual relationships and doesn’t know whether he will celebrate their “marriages”. If you read around this blog, you’ll find many more examples, but you get my drift: evangelisation is best made by first putting one’s house in order.
The Church is not in order. The number of bishops with either heterodox views or without the guts to defend orthodoxy is staggering. The situation is so bad, that when a bishop dares to do his job properly this makes huge waves, so unexpected it is. Many of these liberal, heterodox or cowardly bishops have been appointed, and continue to be appointed, by Pope Benedict and I am sorry to say so, but as long as this continues every beautiful talk about the need of a new evangelisation will sound little more than verbal decoration.
Make no mistake, I am a big fan of Pope Benedict’s reforms and I think that, as a Pope, he is a huge improvement on his saintly but catastrophic predecessor. Still, I think that he will be remembered rather as a Pope who prepared the ground for concrete action, than as one who acted decisively himself.
Summorum Pontificum is no concrete action if after four years we still have very few Latin Masses, and nice talks about the needs of evangelisation are no concrete action if the evangelisation is then left to the devices of the Nourrichards of this world, whom the Pontiff himself appoints. Concrete action is to take care that the sheep are provided with good shepherds, and that the shepherds take care that the priests are sound.
Evangelisation via television doesn’t work, much less evangelisation via “encouragement speech” to people whose theology and praxis is almost beyond repair. Evangelisation is done from the pulpit; with a reverent celebration at the altar; with a strong defiance of unChristian politicians; with an insisted, frontal assault on secular thinking.
Most of all, evangelisation is done by forcing the Nourrichards of the world to march allineati e coperti like as many soldiers, or by getting rid of them without delay.
Michael Voris has an interesting “vortex” (*) about the recent Papal visit.
The elements I’d like to emphasise are as follows:
1) He stresses the fact that whilst the Pope was kind in his word, he was hard as steel in the message he delivered. Truth soaked in charity, not falseness soaked in false compassion.
2) He very aptly points out to the fact that the Pope has centered his message on the salvation of souls instead of the social instances so often espoused by those who have stopped believing and want to undermine or downplay the Teaching of the Church.
You may want to listen to this video attentively and keep in mind both points above, because the videois a good introduction to the next entry. The next entry will deal with the utter betrayal of Catholic values from a disgraceful individual fully bent on confusing Catholics, spreading scandal, undermining Catholic teaching and pandering to the political correctness of our times: Archbishop Vincent Nichols.
(*) you might have to register, which is free and easy.