The Mercy of Akita

Our Lady of the Rosary Library is an amazing resource for Catholic tracts. Their pamphlets discuss things that have been severely neglected since the Second Vatican Council. With my pastor’s permission, I recently started distributing three of these at my parish. I did so hoping that the family rosary would be fervently taken up, and to encourage more people to set aside an hour for Eucharistic Adoration. One tract deals with Our Lady of Akita. At the parish picnic, a friend struck up a brief discussion with me about this one. He acknowledged that Akita has been approved, endorsed by Benedict XVI prior to his election. “But fire from heaven? That just doesn’t sound very God-like.”

Never adept at off-the-cuff debate, I was a bit relieved when the topic turned to the taboulleh my family had brought. I’ve mulled that statement over since then, however. It points to a disconcerting train of thought among even devout Catholics. One of my priest friends—tongue in cheek—put it best: in Old Testament times, God was very angry and prone to punish. With the New Testament, He apparently went through anger management therapy, and is doing much better.

As flippant as that statement sounds, a huge number of Christians seem to believe it. I could almost pay off my student loans in a single lump sum payment, if given a dollar for every variant of, “Oh, I don’t believe in an angry God. My God is a merciful God, who loves everyone.” True, God is love. He is merciful. We see His mercy in Ezekiel 33:11: “As I live, saith the Lord God, I desire not the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way, and live. Turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways: and why will you die, O house of Israel?”¹ (This from the God with an anger management problem.) His mercy is lauded in the Psalms. Our Lord’s intervention with the woman caught in adultery, or His kindness to the Samaritan woman at the well are other examples. Let’s also not forget the writings of St. Faustina! Experiential knowledge likewise proves God’s mercy. We have all sinned; we will all need the Sacrament of Confession many times while we live.

So yes, God is merciful. He has loved every human being since the Creation, enough to become one of us and die an excruciating death to pay the price of sin. Here we come to a fact about God that many today do not like to see: God is just. Justice and mercy are intertwined in a very intricate way. His justice gave us the Law in ancient days. In mercy, He also spelled out the consequences of disobedience (namely, damnation.) His justice and mercy are closely meshed in giving us Purgatory, in order to complete the reparation we do not or cannot complete in this life. Neither law nor consequences have gone away. Culturally, we just ignore them. The four crimes that cry to heaven for vengeance are all committed, more or less in full public view, and few are the voices raised against them (murder being the only exception.) They infest our entertainment, economy, education and politics. But sin has a price. Justice demands that payment be made.

God has fixed in His mind the length of time He will allow every person and culture on earth to turn from sin and follow Him.² In 1973, at a convent in Akita, Japan, God mercifully allowed Our Lady to tell us that our time is drawing near. (I won’t rehash the entire story here, but refer those who are not familiar with Our Lady of Akita to the link above.) She spelled out in detail the punishment we will incur, if mankind fails to repent:

“[I]f men do not repent and better themselves, the Father will inflict a terrible punishment on all humanity. It will be a punishment greater than the deluge, such as one will never have seen before. Fire will fall from the sky and will wipe out a great part of humanity, the good as well as the bad, sparing neither priests nor faithful. The survivors will find themselves so desolate that they will envy the dead.”

Remember, this was in 1973. I personally think it no coincidence. Akita occurred in the same year that abortion became formally legal in the United States. Since then, we have not collectively bettered ourselves. In some ways, we’ve become even worse. This raises unsettling questions.

Is it just, loving, and merciful to continue to permit evil to be done with apparent impunity? How loving is it that those who are less developed in holiness see the vilest sins brazenly committed in broad daylight, with no action taken by the Lawgiver? Are we to assume that He who rained fire upon Sodom and Gomorrah when their wickedness was ripe will not deal likewise with a world that openly celebrates its contempt for all Ten Commandments? Is He who smote Egypt for Israel’s sake no longer omnipotent? Has mercy made God an effeminate weakling? Is the Ancient of Days so old that He no longer dispenses the wages of sin?

Our Lady’s message at Akita is a very sobering and resounding “No.” But because of the foul excesses of that bloodiest of centuries, the 20th, we have allowed ourselves to believe that God is no longer just. We’ve allowed ourselves to believe in mercy without prudence and that punishment is for the past and the Parousia. I suspect that’s why, in 1973, God allowed Our Lady to speak through her humble wooden likeness. She spoke to warn us that she will not be able to restrain the Father’s arm of justice for very much longer. She spoke to say that if we continue to offend God, there will be only one loving, merciful and just option for Him—to cleanse the earth with fire.

Would this break the oath He swore to the Patriarch Noah? If you’ve carefully read that part of Genesis, you know that God’s oath was to never again destroy all life with a flood. As the mark of original sin is removed once in a lifetime using holy water, so sin will be removed from the earth by water only once. God placed no such limits on fire, famine or pestilence.

At Quito, the Blessed Mother foretold our times. At La Salette and Fatima, she issued dire warnings and commanded penance. (Indeed, admonitions to pray and do penance have been central to the message of every Marian apparition for the past several centuries.) At Akita, she gave us her sternest warning. She spelled out the details of our collective sentence, and how it can be avoided. Akita is our final plea bargain offer. God has allowed Our Lady to give many warnings in the past 500 years. Can we really say that He is not being merciful when He finally visits just punishment upon us?

---

1 Douay-Rheims Translation. (2009, St. Benedict's Press)^↩

---

2 My readers should ask where I am getting this. My source is the chief exorcist for the Diocese of Tulsa, Fr. Chad Ripperger, via his website, Sensus Traditionis. He has made available many conferences, sermons and homilies which he gave when he was a parish priest with the FSSP. I think so highly of this site that I have provided a link in “My Watering Hole”. I cannot recommend it enough! ^↩

An Alarming Study

After my March 20, 2014 post, some of my readers might be under the impression that I no longer watch Church Militant TV. That impression would be erroneous. Despite my strong disapproval of Mr. Voris' puzzling attack on the ones who have been crying out a warning since the crisis began, I continue to tune in almost daily. I consider them one of the most important web-based apostolates out there. In fact, this post stems from what Mr. Voris has to say at about the 8:42 mark in the below-embedded Vortex.

In that episode, Mr. Voris focused on a very sobering new book, Young Catholic America: Emerging Adults In, Out Of, And Gone From The Church. I'll let him do the explaining, since I haven't read more than the Amazon.com preview of this yet. (Relax, dear reader: I fully intend to remedy that at the first available opportunity, and do a follow-up post as necessary. That would be the responsible thing to do.)



The first thing that struck me about this survey was its alarming 0% figure in the "Devout" category. It makes me wonder about the demographics. After all, every young Traditionalist that I have met is light years ahead of the average mainstream Catholic in their understanding of Church doctrine. It will be interesting to find out why they don't qualify as "Devout". My cynical side says the researchers don't consider the Traditionalist Movement Catholic. If so, they wouldn't be the first to make that mistake, and they won't be the last. But since logic demands that I not jump to conclusions, I look forward to a more in-depth reading of the study.

Submission Healed My Soul: One Catholic's Story

Once again, divorced and remarried Catholics are at the forefront of public consciousness, thanks to Cardinal Kaspar's recent absurd statement. I've decided to enter the fray (however briefly) and provide a different story. Since this is a personal account, it should be taken for what it is: one Catholic's personal perspective from lived experience. (In case you're tempted to call me an expert.)

I was divorced in February 2002. From my baptism at 18 years of age I'd been a nominal Catholic at best, living life on my own terms with very little concern for what the Vatican had to say. Although I identified as Catholic, my behavior and attitudes were decidedly pagan/secular. My wife and I had been married civilly, before a Justice of the Peace. As with most legal marriages in the U.S.A., things fell apart. We separated, and finally divorced, with a child between us.

I'll avoid reliving the bleak cyclone of the grieving process (which few people actually care about anyway.) It suffices to say that I survived the darkness that many men are forced to confront alone when their spouse abandons them. It was at that point in my life that God led me to the priest who would catalyze a profound change in my outlook, Fr. Erik J. Richtsteig.

At first, I didn't like him. He was a rigid, tradition-bound, stick in the mud. I mainly attended his parish because I needed a place to call home and I'd been invited by an acquaintance who was a parishioner there. Usually, what he had to say went in one ear and out the other. After all, I was an adult. I knew best how to live my life in relation to my subjective circumstances, and this quaint anachronism of a priest was just sorely misinformed about the world. Sooner or later he would be transferred, hopefully replaced with a priest who was more in touch with the modern world. In the mean time, I could try to open his mind.

Such was my mindset one fine spring weekend around 2005 when Fr. Richtsteig went on retreat. He left his parish in the capable hands of his friend, Fr. Pius of Mount Angel Seminary. That weekend happened to be particularly bleak and trying for me. When I went in "just to talk" to this unfamiliar Benedictine, I didn't have an inkling that my true conversion would begin that day. That talk turned into a good, honest confession. I don't recall what he said, but I do remember its deep impression. I began to question all that I thought I knew--about life, about the Church, and about the world. One day while praying the Peace Prayer attributed to St. Francis of Assisi, I was powerfully struck by the words "Oh Divine Master, grant that I may never seek so much...to be understood as to understand..." I realized that I didn't have any understanding of Father's point of view. With that in mind, I began to listen. I began to read. I began to understand--and what I understood, shocked me.

Fr. Richtsteig was teaching the authentic doctrine of the Catholic Faith.

Almost everything I thought I knew about Catholicism post-Vatican II was wrong! It was I who was in error. My ideas and behavior that needed to be realigned. If I was to continue to be Catholic, my submission to the teaching authority of Holy Mother Church was mandated. Steadily, I began to bring myself into conformity with the Church.

That was almost ten years ago, and I have no cause to regret my decision. I can honestly say that my life has improved. The existential angst that compelled me to go to Mass-as-group-therapy when I was stumbling about in the darkness has been truly resolved, through the simple act of submission. It started with an increase of faith (the virtue by which we intellectually submit to a revealed truth, which we may not understand fully) and cultivating honest humility. In my case, this meant becoming familiar with the words "I don't know." It meant overcoming the erroneous idea that "knowing something in my heart" made it true, even where what I "knew" contradicted a revealed truth of the Faith.

Here we come to the crux of the matter. The German bishops seem to think almost unanimously that the Church should conform to the world, particularly regarding Catholics who have been civilly divorced and civilly remarried without obtaining an annulment from the Church. That was once my view, and it was wrong. It remains wrong, even if those who hold such a view are bishops. It might seem unfair to deny those Catholics full participation in the Sacraments. It might seem more loving and compassionate to simply change. But I can honestly attest to you, Excellencies, that you would be doing all of those people a grave disservice in the long run. They would know that you simply caved in to circumstance; how then could they trust anything you say? Where might I be if Fr. Pius had simply patted me on the head and given me a cookie? (Metaphorically speaking.) I was on the road to Hell, Excellencies. I thank God that Fr. Pius cared enough about my soul to point that out to me and call me to repentance, in such a way that I heard what he was saying. I pray that you will all do the same; only good could come of it.

The Remnant Presents Its Case

This is compelling, and worthy of consideration. I hope that Mr. Matt will not mind my re-blog.

My Opinion of the Storm

I like ChurchMilitant.TV.

I decided I should state that up front, because what I have to say here is not going to be very nice--not that Mr. Voris will have a problem with that. (After all, he's based his entire apostolate on strident opposition to what he terms "The Church of Nice" and openly declaring that the emperor has no clothes.)

For those who aren't aware, Mr. Voris and ChurchMilitant.TV recently fell into the same trap as Catholic Answers did a few months back: he's mistaken faithful, respectful public questioning of the Pope for Neo-Protestant revolt. And he's gone on the offensive in a big way, publically excoriating Michael Matt, Christopher Ferarra and John Vennari for...doing essentially the same thing Mr. Voris is doing, with one notable exception: Mr. Voris will not criticize the Pope in public. Period. (Never mind the consequences of recent highly public papal gaffes.)

Mr. Voris is certainly entitled to his opinion. He raised an excellent point in his March 18, 2014 episode of The Vortex. However, I think that he is falling victim to a dangerous form of papolatry which can lead to a cult mentality that is inimical to Catholicism. In fact, such a mentality has led some into the error of sedevacantism. Thinking that the Pope--or any leader at all--is above criticism is not Catholicism, Mr. Voris. It is fascism. It is totalitarianism. It is not the Faith I follow, and never will be. Only One is above criticism, and He is God Made Man. If you want to goosestep in line with the rest, all the while bellowing "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!" that is certainly your perogative. But it isn't helping anyone who loves the Faith.

For how can we reconcile the Assisi debacle of 1986 and beyond with the dogmatic statement Extra ecclesiam, nulla salus? This is just one example of where the public behavior of a Pope easily served to undermine the mission of the Church.

I agree that any criticism of His Holiness must be done with respectful tone, in deference to his holy office. (As I'm fond of saying, respect the office if not the man.) But it must be done, on occasion! Particularly by those who are in a position to know better. (Even Pope Francis himself acknowledged this recently.)

John Vennari gave an excellent refutation; I'll let him finish up this post in his own words.

New Liturgical Music, Deo Gratias!

Those familiar with The Latin Mass magazine already know Mr. Kwasniewski. His thoughtful, insightful articles are almost a staple there. For some reason, I am unsurprised to discover that he also writes liturgical music. He's just published a collection of work spanning 20 years, and if the clip included in the press release from Corpus Christi Watershed is any indication, those two decades were inspired and fruitful indeed! This link leads to more information. What an efficacious vaccine for the influenza of sentimental drivel we've been assaulted with since 1970!

Comments tightened.

Due to a heretical comment by a Protestant troll, denying outright a truth of the One Holy Roman Catholic Church--outside of which there is no salvation, which has endured from the beginning, and will endure until the end of time (see St. Matthew 16:18)--I have tightened my comment controls. Comments are now only open to members of this blog, persuant to my review.

Urgent re-post: Bishop attempts unlawful suppression.

I'll let this article from Rorate Caeli speak for itself. Pray during this Lent for this bishop.

The Mighty Still Falter: RIP, Ars Orandi.

With heavy heart, I learned that one of my favorite places in the blogosphere, Ars Orandi, is no more. Apparently the blogger thought it was having a detrimental effect on him as a person. Having been at that point myself, I won't throw blame. I'll miss the well-informed posts and hard links to information I might never have seen otherwise. A crying shame.

A New Direction.

Bloggers sometimes post for the sake of posting, just to increase traffic. You might have noticed that I haven't posted since Pope Francis was elected.

There's been a lot of chatter about our latest Pope. (If it please you, Your Holiness, I won't be referring to you as "The Bishop of Rome." I don't question your intentions in thus branding yourself, but it's too uncomfortably close to the Protestant/Eastern Orthodox mind for my Catholic soul.) I'm uncertain what effect his pontificate will have on Holy Mother Church, but the abdication of Benedict XVI and election of Francis has given me many things to mull over.

Here are a few: What is Tradition? What role does the Traditionalist Movement play in the Church? What does the term "Traditionalist" mean? Overall, how should I conduct myself as a layman who calls himself a Traditionalist?

In theory, the answers to these questions are simple and easy to grasp. A Traditionalist is a Catholic who cannot in good conscience participate in the novel experiments of the past several decades. A Traditionalist cleaves to the Church that was, in spite of the Church that is, in the hope of the Church to come. All one need to do is accept all that the Church has taught through the ages, and act accordingly. Simple, in theory.

In practice, however, it becomes a different matter. I've been on several Traditionalist chat groups and Facebook sites where the participants display a sometimes shocking lack of respect--for clergy, for bishops, and even the Pope. Other people are often subjected to derision. I can no longer reconcile this pernicious attitude with being Catholic.

Certainly, sarcasm has its place; sometimes it's the best response to something completely ridiculous. When a bishop, priest or civil official says something in a public manner that directly contradicts a doctrine of the Faith we can't participate in their sin by saying nothing. But there's a fine line being walked here, and more and more I see my comrades in spiritual warfare crossing over it to become instruments of the Enemy.

In the Winter/Spring 2013 issue of The Latin Mass, there was an interview with Fr. John Berg, FSSP. He was asked about the Fraternity's silence regarding Vatican II and the New Mass. His response was very profound and should be read in its entirety if you have the chance. He said that "[W]hen one tries to extend beyond his duty and office it can have disastrous consequences for souls. It is our duty to address these difficult passages, but in the proper manner with the Holy See or individual bishop." He also stressed that "...it is not a matter of being silent in order to have a legal status; it is a question of when and where (and to whom) one ought to speak in order to aid souls, in order to best serve the Church. I repeat, there are souls at stake. If every bishop in the Church is not 'on the same page' as us, what would it avail to shake our fists and shout 'debacle' as you suggest? It may satisfy the prejudices of a few who are outraged for a time, but at the risk of endangering the liturgical practice of unnumbered souls. And for what; what change would be brought about?"

This combines with several things I have heard Fr. Chad Ripperger say over at Sensus Traditionis about fulfilling the duties of our station in life, the vice of curiosity (yes, it can be a vice--have a listen!) and others. It's given me a new perspective on the entire situation, which henceforth I intend to reflect in my posts.

The perspective is this: I am a simple layman, with no more education on these matters than any other. I'm not a priest or a bishop. God has given me the simple grace of recognizing the nobility and magnificence of the Traditional Latin Mass. He has given me this for my sanctification and that of my family; not so that I can develop the attitude that Fr. Fryar mentioned in his farewell sermon at Christ the King parish. (The link includes the entire High Mass; the relevant part of his sermon begins at approximately 33:00.) That attitude is one that I have seen far too often on chat sites--traditionalist and otherwise--and in the comment section of blogs; an overweening arrogance that allows one to overstep the duties of station and indiscriminately hold forth on matters of which he/she has scant knowledge but plentiful opinion.

What good can come of expressing my opinion? Am I stepping beyond my "duty and office"? Am I writing for the good of souls, or for my own ego? I can't guarantee that I will never again post controversial topics; but from this day, you can expect me to answer those questions before I post.

Habemus Papam!

Thanks be to God, we have a Pope! As my pastor quipped, the only thing of which I'm certain is that the Jesuits will now be really insufferable. More later...

Sede Vacante.

The blogosphere has been all a-twitter (n.p.i.) since 2/11. Until now, I have kept my thoughts close. How could I adequately express how the abdication of the Pope--my Pope, Benedict XVI--knocked the wind from my lungs? What could this mean? Why now?

Ironically, I was asking those same questions on April 19, 2005.

Back then, I was only just rediscovering what it means to be Catholic. I was a left-of-center Cafeteria Catholic who couldn't understand why God had chosen the dreaded "Rottweiller" to be His vicar. Wasn't the Church evolving? Becoming more inclusive? Surely this was a mistake--perhaps a recount was in order...? Little did I know how much this papacy would change the face of Holy Mother Church, and my own life.

I became a Catholic in 1991. My conversion was largely aesthetic: I was in love with the institution I saw on T.V. and in the movies. All that arcane ritual, incense, Latin and chant in majestic stone cathedrals lit by massive stained glass windows. Mozart's Requiem. Vestiges of a noble medieval past. I didn't care much for the doctrine; but that distasteful stuff was changing, right?

I was acutely disappointed to discover that those changes had also eliminated everything I loved. The new way of doing things didn't really move me the way "Cathollywood" did. I still chose to be baptized, but it wasn't long before I lost interest and wandered off. (I wasn't really that fond of hippie music.)

For six long years, I tried different things on for size, then lost belief in everything. I grew severely angry, depressed, nihilistic and bitter.

Flash forward to 1996. A few events had happened that shook my worldview significantly (I won't bore you with the personal details.) Nostalgic and a bit lost, I wandered into the chapel of the local Newman Center. I sat there for a good long while, staring at the altar and wishing I could come home. I'm not sure what moved me to talk with the pastor, but I did. He radiated peace, joy and wisdom. He was also a dreadful Neo-Modernist; but at that time I was ignorant. I didn't even know that term existed (truth be known, I wouldn't have cared if I had.) One talk led to another and I was soon singing with the choir every Saturday.

Then I rather abruptly met and married a Wiccan, outside the Church. I quit going again. Four years and one kid later, we were in divorce court. Broken, I moved back home to reassemble the pieces. For the sake of my kid, I went back to church. An acquaintance went to St. James the Just, so I started attending there, despite the infamous Father Erik J. Richsteig. (Had I heard the bells of fate ringing, I probably would have run in the opposite direction.) By then, I was used to the Novus Ordo. I even had my favorite hippie songs. I was singing in the choir again. My attitude hadn't really changed much, but it was changing. Slowly. The biggest catalyst for change were two dreadful words thundering out on April 19, 2005:

"Habemus papam."

The man I dreaded more than Jesse Helms was now the Holy Father. What to do? I chose to let it rest in God's hands. Over the course of a year, I discovered that everything I "knew" was wrong. My daughter made her first Communion. My ex-wife became a Catholic.

Then came Summorum Pontificum. Right about that time, I discovered that my ex-wife had fled to the SSPX in desperation, thanks to recurring issues in our lukewarm diocese. Like any good father, I began looking closely at this disturbing new influence in my daughter's life. In the process, I discovered the FSSP and an entire trove of Traddies in full communion with Rome. I was elated. I bought a 1962 Roman Catholic Daily Missal from Catholic Caravans when they came to visit our parish. Immediately afterwards I half-jokingly approached Fr. Richsteig to have it blessed, holding it aloft:

"Hey, Father! Are you going to give us a chance to use these?"

He gave me a look, made the Sign of the Cross over my new purchase, and slowly replied "HmmMay-be."

About a year later, he did (despite passive-aggressive resistance.) Every Wednesday and the first Sunday of every month. I became a regular attendee; soon I was learning to serve. The graces that come with service at the altar have changed my soul and my outlook forever. I joined the Confraternity of St. Peter, embraced the rich patrimony of the Extraordinary Form.

I had grown to love "our German Shepherd." My dismay was now joy. The Church I had wanted to join was here again (albeit diminished, in absolute ruins on our local level.) Pope Benedict XVI was to thank for it.

I also rejoiced when the Pope introduced changes to the English translation of the Novus Ordo Missae. By that time my doctrinal understanding had evolved into something unrecognizable from the shallow aestheticism that led to my baptism, the sappy & sentimental need to belong that had formed my "reversion" (both times.) Still a far cry from the depth and splendor of the Usus Antiquior which has become my preferred mode of worship, I see a glimmer of hope for the future of the Ordinary Form which was not there when His Holiness Benedict XVI became Pope. His papacy has formed my future, and that of my family.

On February 11, 2013 His Holiness knocked the wind out of me again.

I got a text from my fiancee. Our beloved Holy Father was resigning. I was stunned. Had the circling wolves at last devoured my dear shepherd? Anxiously I watched the news, hoping to make some sense of this jarring development.

Thanks to this insightful post by Dr. John C. Rao, I have some perspective and equilibrium again. I will pray for the coming Conclave. May God send us the Pope we need at this crucial time.

Veni, Creator Spiritus.

Two Articles.

I found both of these on patheos.com via Facebook. Since I don't know enough about patheos.com yet to gauge its worthiness from a Traditionalist perspective, I haven't added it to "My Watering Hole" yet. (But it's definitely under consideration, pending investigation.)

Be that as it may, these two articles are quite worth reading:

The Aurora Murders and Demonic Possession

“Coventry Carol”: A Bit of History

Merry Christmas to all 'til Candlemas, and may God's blessing be upon you in the year to come!

Discussion Forums

A very devoted Traditionalist once advised me to steer clear of online discussion forums. I'm beginning to see the wisdom in that advice. Does it profit a soul to visit a place that is little more than laity--with no assurance of qualifications--spouting off? I look at these places and see nothing but opinion. Sometimes opinion is backed up by links to a reputable source, sometimes not. I won't claim innocence in that respect; many are the times that I have trumpeted my own opinion as if it were the latest Papal Encyclical. (I'm working on correcting this.)

Unfettered opinion can be a dangerous thing. It is the plague that has caused a great deal of damage in the Church in the past 50 years. Opinion often becomes an occasion for the deadly sin of pride. Not infrequently these sites bring to mind St. Paul's words in his letter to the Romans:

Now I beseech you, brethren, to mark them who make dissensions and offences contrary to the doctrine which you have learned, and avoid them. For they that are such, serve not Christ our Lord, but their own belly; and by pleasing speeches and good words, seduce the hearts of the innocent.

Romans 16:17-18, Douay-Rheims Translation

Out of aversion to detraction, I won't mention any sites by name. However, on one very popular mainstream Catholic site, Traditionalists are routinely verbally flogged, tarred, feathered and treated with an extreme lack of respect (particularly by the moderators.) Half-truths and outright lies about the SSPX in particular and Traditionalists generally are permitted with impunity. With dread and shivers I recall the Protestant persecutions of Elizabethan England whenever I visit that site. On another--ostensibly a Traditionalist Catholic forum--the moderators are slow to punish any infraction of their own rules. Free reign is given to open blasphemy on one recent thread, genuine anti-Semitic hostility on another. (One is uneasily reminded of the lax disciplinary measures frequently attributed to post-Vatican II bishops and popes.)

Overall, do these discussion forums strengthen the faith of those who frequent them? Ultimately, I don't know. But for Advent, I have decided to avoid these places. Who knows? I might find it so beneficial that I eschew them permanently.

And they say the FSSP has no teeth. HAH!

When I read this story on Fr. Z's blog, I knew I had to share it. (Just in case none of my 3 readers have heard about it.) Some fans of the SSPX like to accuse the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter of having no teeth or backbone. Incidents like these leave egg on their faces. I would like to publicly applaud Fr. Hearty's audacity! Certainly their commitment to union with the Holy See tends to make them mute on certain issues on which the Society is highly vocal. But on other fronts they are definitely leaders in orthodoxy.

Clear as...mud...

Because I was so quick to take umbrage at the original article, I think I owe it to His Excellency to at least post his recent response in The Remnant. I am nothing if not committed to being fair. The matter gains some perspective...but not clarity.

Fantastic Treatise on Suffering.

Courtesy of one of my Facebook friends, I was privileged to read this article on redemptive suffering. It is very well-written and worth reading (it is also very long. Hence, the link to it.) Suffering and its purpose have been on my mind a great deal lately, after watching two members of my family being slowly devoured by cancer recently. (Not to mention being out of work since March.) Between Fr. Chad Ripperger's class on Spiritual Theology (which I highly recommend! You can listen to it over at Sensus Traditionis) and this article, it becomes much clearer to my mind.

Bragging Rights.

When I read this article, I felt my spirits lift. Not because I have a son at this academy (I don't), nor because I attend an SSPX parish (again, I don't. Utah has no Traditionalist parish of any stripe.) It was because of the fact that against all odds, there are young men today who are being taught to behave like Christians at all times, in all circumstances. And the fact that some in the secular world are taking notice. Kudos to La Salette!

Nice.

In the age of electronic books (of which I am not a fan, except perhaps for college textbooks) I find it incredibly refreshing that there is still a publishing company out there producing quality hard copies of Catholic classics. Check them out!

http://www.baroniuspress.com/

Why Traddies mistrust the Novus Ordo

This article from The Remnant demonstrates it perfectly. Small wonder why the SSPX is hesitant to place themselves under the jurisdiction of such petty little despots. (Sorry, Your Excellency, but a spade is a spade. As a loyal Catholic I continue to respect your office, but your actions are contemptible.)