Forget Tolkien, the new controversy is whether Libertarianism is a heresy?

The Blaze

Just when you thought the Tolkien controversy was the greatest side stepping of real issues affecting the church today I give you this:

So on Saturday I came home from work and saw a story on the side bar of the blaze that made me laugh, then shake my head: Catholics Divided on Libertarianism as ‘Heresy’.  Ok so there is utter maddness about with the travels about of Cardinal Kasper, the generation from 18-23 year old actual Catholics being non existent, continued irreverence at least passively if not actively endorsed by Archbishop Gomez (at LA's education conference) or Pope Francis with Jesus Christ in plastic cups at world youth day.  There are so many things that are so much more important to this than trying to define libertarianism, which libertarians disagree with each other about to begin with, as heresy.

First if it is heresy then you have heretics not just identifying as progressives or consevatives, but actually quite a few traditionalists who are not prone to think only of post conciliar decrees as important would identify politically as libertarians.  People like Tom Woods (of How the catholic church built western civilization" book fame) and Judge Andrew Napolitano (who appears as a legal expert on many shows and makes it clear he is a pre-vatican II Catholic, which is confusing but he is not SSPX but probably more along the lines of FSSP).

If you read the Blaze article it brings up three articles written very recently by Michael Winters of NCReporter (aka fishwrap, aka that paper that John Allen wrote for knowing that the paper was heretical yet people treat him to this day like he is a good source, when he really knew he was feeding error, oh he even was endorsed by my Bishop to give a speech, oh Milwaukee you are useless).  The other is by Mark Shea (the ubber reactionary of neo-cons, Mark lets be real you are reading this) which is the article that outright condemns libertarianism as a heresy.  The final article I will post on this is one by Joe Hargrave entitled Mark Shea's Economic inquisiton (Which Mark Shea has been whining about ever since because hes being picked on... put on your big boy pants Mark. Consider asking Jimmy Akin to write a piece entitled "9 things to know and share about how writing posts that counter Mark Shea posts is dastardly")

I take no position on the matter of libertarianism probably because I'm a distributist and of the monarchial view on government.  By the way does anyone else find it odd that Mark Shea who writes for Heresy central (AKA Patheos, think about it, its pure indifferentism) is calling others out for being heretics.

Also I have put two videos below with differing view points on the matter for those interested in seeing the two views.

The first is by a seminarian in Canada who always puts about great YouTube videos.  His view is that libertarianism is not enough.

The second is by Tom Woods from his recent show where he tries to show how it is compatible with Christianity

I do think that we can agree that atheistic libertarianism espoused by the likes of Ayn Rand is devoid of compatibility.  There was an interesting article on how the satanist Anton LaVey was greatly encouraged by Rand's works and recommends her stuff for what its worth on the Acton blog.

Meanwhile we whistle dixie

WYD 2013

WYD 2013

+ Yep, were doomed... lol +

Yes Deacon Greg Kandra protestants prancing around in clerics is a scandal

edited: it was not nice to call patheos types goombas... not nice, should have defined it first... im sorry

BTW, the only thing good I will say about this picture and the others on Patheos is that at least they are not afraid to be seen wearing their 'clerics' in the public

Patheos 

So my facebook feed had this on it tonight with yes that headline.  Now before you call me a hypocryt dont blame me I dont follow Patheos goomba patrols, blame Matthew Olson for commenting on it and therefore it being on my feed.

Where to begin?

I gather the source of scandal is the notion of a woman wearing a clerical collar (rather than the  concept of her wearing a tasteful black dress to go with it.)
Well, this isn’t really anything new. A lot of Protestant ministers, some of them women, wear the classic “tab” collar. They’ve been doing it for years.

Just your average Joe Deacon

Ok so to begin with there is obvious scandal in that there are many groups apart from the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church (extra ecclesiam nulla salus) that like to call themselves Christian parading about in what seems to be clerical garb which has the distinction of holding some authority.  One cannot consciously say there is no scandal.  Are you blind?  Do you only see clerical garb as clothing.... oh wait we are talking about Deacon Average Joe, I'm just like you.  For crying out loud, you Deacon Kandra have been given orders by an apostle of the Church to represent the Church, to stand out in the world not just in how you act but how you look.  We are not gnostics that merely see ourselves spiritually but materially as well and the way you dress speaks to the person or the office you hold.  If Barry comes out of the White House one day sporting a "wife beater" and sweat pants he does a disservice to the office because he is not above the office that he holds.  This is true for all people, especially those consecrated or ordained, they are to live in the world (some) but not be of it.  And giving a witness with the way you dress shows people the seriousness you take in filling that office within Holy Mother Church.  That protestants are mimicking Catholics in what they wear is a scandal in that it puts confusion in the hearts of the already non-formed faithful that are already prone to indifferentism.  This minimalist attitude of 'I dont wear my clerics because it doesnt matter, plus those who focus on such are clericalists' has got to be one of the most blind personal decisions to take hold since the council (well maybe the continuance of versus populum mass and other things are just as bad or worse, but hey the minimalists dont care in the Church of Nice).  That we pretend its ok for these laymen to dress like they hold a real office is a sham, they are laymen clinging to error and for some reason we are content to see to it that nothing is said about them mimicking and or mocking Catholics by using clerical garb to their ultimately evil ends because they are content to keep peace with material heretics by not offending their sensibilities

It’s becoming so common, in fact, that most suppliers of clergy apparel now cater to both men and women.
This led me on a fascinating Google search I never thought I’d undertake: “Clergy shirts for women.”

Yet another aspect of the scandal is that the faithful, who again are not taught the faith of Our Fathers to any meaningful extent now see women prancing about in clerics fostering more indifferntism.  Yes women wearing clerical garb is a scandal because it is not proper to them be they lay or "ordained" by heretics who have no authority themselves(which they are because calling them ministers is only a feel good, non confrontational way of perpetuating insanity).  Just because it is the thing for Protestants to do now in ordaining women doesn't mean we are silent on the issue.  JPII, when the episcopalians "ordained" the active same sex attracted guy cut off all talks with the Anglicans (one of the few things I applaud him for btw).  But to some there would be no scandal there because, hey, their protestants thats what they do, so lets let bi-gones be bi-gones.  Cowards, they mock Christ and call themselves Christians, and you are content giving them that title.  And another thing why is a deacon of the Church wasting his time searchig for such things.... what about the so called new evangelization?

People who are upset about that image at the top of this post are falling prey to a manufactured outrage that isn’t really all that outrageous—and the issue is older than some realize. The simple fact is: it’s not uncommon for non-Catholic ministers to dress like Catholic clergy. It’s just that now, a growing number of those ministers are women.
Lest we forget: nearly 70 years ago, David Niven was depicted as an Episcopal bishop with both the tab collar and—spoiler alert— a wife.

So in other-words the Deacon has fallen, himself, prey to complacency.  And complacency breeds contempt, especially for those that dont just take a ho-hum approach to those that have chosen to separate themselves from Christ.  That this issue is not brought up today is outrageous because their is no zeal to call out confusers of truth.  When they dress as they do they cause scandal because their is no distinction between those with true authority and those that are self-appointed buffoons of error.

It’s also worth noting that the clerical collar itself is a relatively modern invention. In fact, its roots aren’t even Catholic. Wikipedia points out:

Which makes me wonder more why Catholic clerics give their assent to such things.  The Roman Cassock is the clerical garb of the Church from time immemorial yet you will hardly ever see it worn by a cleric in the confines of the Church or in public because they worry that they will be perceived as being clerical and not friendly.  Take for instance my own archdiocese.  One priest wished to wear a cassock and was called into the Bishops office for having had the gull to do so, when the USCCB made specific allowances (theres double speak for you) so priests that chose to do so would not be persecuted as being clericalists.  When in reality most priests in this diocese will not be caught dead in public wearing their clerics and even sneer at those that do.  Give witness to the faith not just in the actions and thoughts but in the way you look because then the world will know you stick out like a sore thumb to them calling them to something greater than yourselves, the office you hold

Also, why are so many Fathers in the faith removing their Fr. status from their Facebook pages?  Is this tryng to prevent clericalism or more liberal pandering to a world devoid of fathers to begin with?

Dear Average Joe Deacon Kandra dont be complacent with this but give testimony to the true scandal that it is!!

Look at that lace! What a Clericialist!!!!

G.K. Chesterton on Motherhood

"Supposing it to be conceded that humanity has acted at least not unnaturally in dividing itself into two halves, respectively typifying the ideals of special talent and of general sanity (since they are genuinely difficult to combine completely in one mind), it is not difficult to see why the line of cleavage has followed the line of sex, or why the female became the emblem of the universal and the male of the special and superior.

 Two gigantic facts of nature fixed it thus: first, that the woman who frequently fulfilled her functions literally could not be specially prominent in experiment and adventure; and second, that the same natural operation surrounded her with very young children, who require to be taught not so much anything as everything. Babies need not to be taught a trade, but to be introduced to a world. To put the matter shortly, woman is generally shut up in a house with a human being at the time when he asks all the questions that there are, and some that there aren’t. It would be odd if she retained any of the narrowness of a specialist.

 Now if anyone says that this duty of general enlightenment (even when freed from modern rules and hours, and exercised more spontaneously by a more protected person) is in itself too exacting and oppressive, I can understand the view. I can only answer that our race has thought it worth while to cast this burden on women in order to keep common-sense in the world.

 But when people begin to talk about this domestic duty as not merely difficult but trivial and dreary, I simply give up the question. For I cannot with the utmost energy of imagination conceive what they mean. When domesticity, for instance, is called drudgery, all the difficulty arises from a double meaning in the word. If drudgery only means dreadfully hard work, I admit the woman drudges in the home, as a man might drudge at the Cathedral of Amiens or drudge behind a gun at Trafalgar. But if it means that the hard work is more heavy because it is trifling, colorless and of small import to the soul, then as I say, I give it up; I do not know what the words mean.

 To be Queen Elizabeth within a definite area, deciding sales, banquets, labors and holidays; to be Whiteley within a certain area, providing toys, boots, sheets, cakes and books, to be Aristotle within a certain area, teaching morals, manners, theology, and hygiene; I can understand how this might exhaust the mind, but I cannot imagine how it could narrow it. How can it be a large career to tell other people’s children about the Rule of Three, and a small career to tell one’s own children about the universe? How can it be broad to be the same thing to everyone, and narrow to be everything to someone? No; a woman’s function is laborious, but because it is gigantic, not because it is minute. I will pity Mrs. Jones for the hugeness of her task; I will never pity her for its smallness."

 -What’s Wrong with the World by G.K. Chesterton

The Importance of a Good Priest for ones Interior Life

Taken from the book:  The Soul of the Apostolate

 by Jean-Baptiste Chautard, O.C.S.O

Source

If the priest is a saint (the saying goes), the people will be fervent; if the priest is fervent, the people will be pious; if the priest is pious, the people will at least be decent. But if the priest is only decent, the people will be godless. The spiritual generation is always one degree less intense in its life than those who beget it in Christ.


 “The good morals and the salvation of the people depend on good pastors. If there is a good priest in charge of the parish, you will soon see devotion flourishing, people frequenting the Sacraments, and honoring the practice of mental prayer. Hence the proverb: like pastor, like Parish. According to this word of Ecclesiasticus (10:2) ‘Those who dwell in the state, take after their ruler (St. Alphonsus, Homo Apost., 7:16)

Fr. Hardon rebukes Von Balthasar

I came across this audio the otherday, and since this remains a hot topic I have put it on YouTube to be shared.  He also mentions Fr. Fessio S.J. seeking his (Fr. Hardon's) approval for publishing Von Balthasar's works for Ignatius Press (you will find his answer to Fr. Fessio surprising):



I have also included some more videos on Topics Fr. Hardon Covered below

URGENT!!! Harvard Club to Host Black Mass With Consecrated Host

Christ is being Crucified Again!!!!

http://www.womenofgrace.com/blog/?p=29977

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/theanchoress/2014/05/07/no-comment-from-venue-re-harvard-black-mass/

UPDATE: I just spoke to Priya Dua, PR director for The Satanic Temple and she has confirmed that yes, they have obtained and will use a Consecrated Host during this “re-enactment”. She is hopefully putting me in touch with someone who will answer my questions about how the Host was obtained, what they think they’re doing by using a Consecrated, as opposed to unconsecrated Host, and more.

http://wp.patheos.com.s3.amazonaws.com/blogs/theanchoress/files/2014/05/Black-Mass-Poster-Harvard.jpg

CARDINAL O'MALLEY WHERE ARE YOU?!!!!!!!!!!

A story you might not have heard about Thomas Aquinas

A while back I heard a story about St. Thomas Aquinas that I have found few people know about and would like to share it with you today.

Most people know that Thomas Aquinas was on his way to meet with the Pope for the upcoming Ecumenical Council at Lyons i
n France which was intended to find a way to bring the Orthodox back into communion. While headed there he hit his head on a tree branch and fell off his donkey.  (Isn't it odd that he was riding his donkey at this point, when at other times he refused to put such a burden on the donkey.  But he was old so give him a pass)

He was taken to the Cistercian monastery of Fossanova near Terracina in the Papal States (modern day Italy). He died there on March 7th in the Year of Our Lord 1274 and his body remained with the Cistercians at the monastery until the Dominicans called on them to return the amazingly in-corrupt body to their possession so he may be justly venerated by those he was closest to.  The Cistercians were not all too happy with this call from the Dominicans because they wished to keep the Saint in their possession.  Under pressure they relented and agreed to send him back, but here is the interesting part.

Relic of St. Thomas Aquinas

They decided it would be better to return him, not in the in-corrupt state he was in, but in a more efficient way.  The Cistercians boiled Thomas's in-corrupt body in wine leaving behind only the bones of the formally in-corrupt saint. Even more weird is the fact that when they boiled the saint in wine this left a pink hue entrenched in all of his relics to this day.  Another interesting thing is that, out of perhaps shall we call it pastoral concern, the Cistercians lopped off one of Thomas's in-corrupt hands and sent this to his living sister as a personal remembrance of her now deceased Saintly-Brother.  The hand, gloriously, remained in-corrupt for what its worth. 

Ok so thats the story... its an oddity, I will grant you. But it shows just how strange and in a morbid way beautiful the churches history is.

I recently finished an art piece of St. Thomas meeting with St. Louis IX.  I have posted the picures below because I am proud of the piece and give thanks to God for all his help