The Unhinged Father Reese Tips His Progressive And Tyrannical Hand

The above title is an apt summary for the latest rantings by Father Thomas Reese.  He is a Jesuit purveyor of dissidence and general hatred of the One True Faith.  I suppose that last statement contains some redundancies but it still bears saying.

We find his latest piece of manure at Religion News Service, entitled "The Future Of Catholic Liturgical Reform".  In truth, he is simply engaging in a death throe of the glory days of hippie priests and pant-suit nuns.  It is a hodge-podge collection of anti-Catholic and anti-God slogans, all disjointed from each other.  There is so much error in it, one scarcely knows where to begin to unpack the mess.

You'll notice that he has an axe to grind with Pope Benedict XVI.  No doubt this grudge is a result of Pope Benedict's removal of Reese from his editor position at America rag-mag.  One of the more outlandish statements he made was that "children and young people should not be allowed to attend such Masses (meaning the Traditional Latin Mass)."  One of the commenters in the article rightly pointed out that any such prohibition is a usurpation of parental authority.  Please do read the comments for that article; by and large, the readers see through the farce that pours forth from Reese.  

He no doubt notices that the abandonment of tradition is itself passing away with each aging hippy that goes to his or her eternal reward.  The young people who stay with the Church understand, even if only instinctively, that progressive wreckovators like Reese have done nothing but mock our Lord and leave many of their contemporaries rudderless and without knowledge of eternal matters.  They understand that tradition is the guardian of timeless truth and are flocking to it.  Some of us older folks get it, too.  I go to Traditional Latin Masses on Sundays these days.  A goodly percentage of those attending these Masses are young couples with their children - and often quite a few children at that.  Now we see why Reese wants them banned from the Mass.  Reese seems to have jettisoned his faith and replaced it with both ignorance and arrogance.

At least he understands, from a perverse perspective, the principle of "lex orandi, lex credendi, lex vivandi".  This is why he states quite plainly that he wants the Latin Mass to disappear.  That Mass is the most sublime prayer of the Church.  He and his buddies understand that if the Latin Mass is jettisoned, then both faith and morals will likewise be lost.  We've seen it happen on a large scale now for at least 50 years.  Reese wants it to continue unchallenged.

Below I post an analysis of Reese's screed by Taylor Marshall.  Please take the time to listen to this.  I echo his suggestion that all attend the Traditional Latin Mass. 

Possible Motives Behind Papal Malfeasances

Through Canon 212, I came across two posts.  One is by George Neumayr entitled "The Roots Of Pope Francis' Anti-Americanism".  The other is from a blog called The Deus Ex Machina and it's entitled "More Fog Lifting - FrancisPlan Becoming Clearer And Clearer".  They might seem unrelated but I think there is a common theme running through both.  Most progressives harbor deep hatred for western culture - that is, culture that largely originated in Europe from its Catholic roots and that spread throughout its various colonies.  The United States of America is one of those offshoots.  Owing to our constitutional republican form of government, we have certain safeguards that have helped retard the disintegration of our cultural roots as compared to Europe - but we aren't that far behind them.  The progressives are literally hell-bent on expunging from society any vestige of belief and obedience to God and His Roman Catholic Church.

Sadly, they see in Pope Francis an ally in the pursuit of their goals.  The US, again, remains as an obstacle to their plans.  Had Hillary Clinton won the White House last November, their juggernaut could have processed with lightning speed.  By God's grace, she lost and now the rate of decline has slowed somewhat.  Hence the pot-shots that the pope has been lobbing in President Trump's direction - and towards us who abhor the progressive agenda.

Other recipients of papal pot-shots are faithful Catholics, particularly those of us who sound the alarm about malfeasances coming from the Vatican.  In a development that is coming straight from the "niggers of the new age" department, we have been advised of a hit piece that appeared in Civilta Cattolica, a semi-official publication coming from the Vatican.  One of the two authors is Father Antonio Spadaro (a subject of many posts)   In that piece you can see the visceral hatred that Spadaro (and quite possibly the pope) harbor for those of us who shine the light on their shenanigans; Church Militant TV has particularly earned their scorn.  Rorate Caeli has the full text.  I think I'm not alone in opining that we faithful Catholic bloggers can take hit pieces like this as badges of honor.

I'd like to return to the "more fog lifting" piece for a moment.  Towards the bottom of the article we read that Pope Francis is "trying to engineer a schism in the Catholic Church...to drive the Catholics out of the post-conciliar church, thereby leaving all the physical assets and cash for the FrancisChurch".  This thought has occurred to me before.  One must admit that his "gaffes" are becoming too numerous, too blatant for any reasonable and honest person to believe that they are merely innocent blunders.  Of course Neumayr cannot say for certain just what is motivating the pope, but no one can honestly gainsay that there is some sort of ulterior motive behind Amoralis Lamentia, the way that faithful prelates are being treated, etc.

Do we have the honesty and intestinal fortitude to accept the truth that is literally slapping us in the face?

Priestly Formation Document - Its Sinister Context

With this post I'd like to delve more into the problematic guidelines for priestly formation that were recently released; see yesterday's post.  Some good people don't see the harm in what was said in the guidelines per se about concern for the environment.  As I said yesterday, I think it's necessary to look at them in the context of other proceedings from this papacy to date.  Together they paint a very ominous picture.

In addition to Laudato Si, many questionable statements were issued and deeds committed by the Vatican, many with the cooperation of anti-life forces.  Recall that last month the pope addressed the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, calling for the creation of "a regulatory system that included inviolable limits and ensure the protection of ecosystems".  Will seminarians be brainwashed taught to shill for these "regulatory systems"?  Also recall how the pope waxed lyrical about the UN summit on climate change last year.  He, the Vicar of Christ, stated that the summit was "humanity's last chance to thwart climate disaster" and that the world is at "the limits of suicide".  Will seminarians be forced to parrot that crap?  Will they be forced to teach that "global warming is a sin" that must be "atoned" by recycling and carpooling?

Will they be forced to promote the Catholic Climate Covenant?  That was a bit of a fad a little while ago and may well make a comeback.  Let's look at the Catholic Climate Covenant in light of some very troubling facts unearthed and exposed by Michael Hichborn of Lepanto Institute.  Sarah Spengeman, Program Director of CCC, is a member of Emily's List.  That organization exists for the sole purpose of helping elect pro-abortion women to political offices.  The Lepanto page shows the online evidence.  Additionally, Spengeman's social sites show her to be sympathetic to women's ordination and homosexual perversity.

I bring up the matter of Sarah Spengeman for she is only one of the anti-God activists that new priests, thanks to that ill-considered "gift of the priestly vocation" thing, will be forced to promote (even if only indirectly).  They will also be forced to portray "climate change" as sin, thus obfuscating the true serious nature of sin.  In fact, the very acceptance of the notion of "climate change" as fact may be its own sin against honesty, for by no means is "climate change" settled science and it is outside the competency of Church hierarchy to pronounce it settled.  So it seems that our seminarians will be coerced into preaching a progressive agenda that has nothing to do with scientific truth, let alone the salvation of souls.