Tuesday, September 23, 2014

"Oklahoma City: Reparation, adoration of Christ VICTOR after sacrilege, blasphemy, evil"

[Disclaimer: Rules 7-9]

Fr. John Zuhlsdorf, "OKLAHOMA CITY: Reparation, adoration of Christ VICTOR after sacrilege, blasphemy, evil" (Fr. Z's Blog, September 23, 2014), writes:
The other day some nitwits did something like a satanic “black mass” in city government facility of Oklahoma City. You know the controversy, so I won’t go over it here.

I hope that the local Archbishop, Most Reverend Paul Coakley, will break out his copy of the older, traditional Roman Ritual and use the chapter in the section on exorcisms to ask God to cleanse the place, indeed the region.

Good people in Oklahoma City also showed their concern. Some 3000 people showed up for a Eucharistic Holy Hour invited by Archbp. Coakley. HERE and HERE

Archbp. Coakley said, among other things, that the city was “targeted by dark forces”.

I concur.

OK City is not alone. Right now I have a sense of growing evil that has me both a little shaken and increasingly combative. I am taking some steps in my own life in the face of what I see on the horizon. I suggest that you do to. As part of that preparation… GO TO CONFESSION. But I digress.

Another group which showed solidarity against the evil of that event was the SSPX. A friend sent this video, which was, “a response effort organized by the priestly Society of St. Pius X here in the United States. After a Black Mass was publicly marketed in Oklahoma City to desecrate our Savior in the Blessed Sacrament, an outcry from Catholics resounded. In an effort to make reparation for this public offense, the SSPX displayed a spontaneous 900 faithful from multiple states.”


26 comments:








Anonymous

said...

Then, we have this all-so-intelligent input: http://fatherpaulnicholson.blogspot.com/2014/09/there-is-something-worse-than-black-mass.html

/sarc





Elizabeth

said...

Beautiful video of the SSPX response. God bless them!





BenYachov

said...

>http://fatherpaulnicholson.blogspot.com/2014/09/there-is-something-worse-than-black-mass.html

That one has the virtue of being plausibly true and plausibly false.

First the false.

The SSPX showing up to protest the so called black "mass" is like a bunch of Baptists showing up invoking the Name of Jesus to protest a Black "mass".

Separated Christian brethren calling out the blasphemous worship of the dark powers is a good thing. All things being equal as separated brethren SSPX has more valid sacraments and less heretical beliefs then the Baptist or other Protestants so qualitatively they have more truth and more access to grace to fight evil spiritually.

Thus how can they be worst then Satanists who by definition have virtually no truth or good in their "religion"?


OTOH....

The true.....

The priests of the SSPX have as of yet no faculties from the lawful Church authority. They have no authoritative permission to publicly consecrate or display the Eucharist. Their group is synonymous with Schism and disobedience. Also the less said about some of the wackos who have belonged to them the better.

They are plausibly a false Catholicism that misleads the faithful and are thus wolves in sheep's clothing.

The Satanists at least we know what they are......

It's like life we have a mixed bag.

Even thought my opinion for the SSPX has always been low I would say what they did here is good.

Now if only they would get off their butts and return to full communion?

No good comes from their being not reconciled.





Charles

said...

It may be a rare day that I find myself in agreement with Ben, but this is one. The SSPX is a mixed bag.

On the one hand, there are clear grounds for arguing that they represent approximation of "schism" by dint of their history of disobedience, that they have no licit faculties in any ordinary sense, and that they are not "in communion" with Rome.

On the other hand, Vatican representatives (including Cardinal Ratzinger and Cardinal Castrillón, president emeritus of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei) have often enough denied that the SSPX is in "schism" (in the latest meeting between the CDF and SSPX, the Vatican seems to be dropping any reference to their need to "return to full communion," implying that they're already in full communion, but merely canonically irregular), and have, on occasion, even stated that Catholics could assist at SSPX Masses and contribute financially to the maintenance of SSPX chapels if their personal intent was not "schismatic." On one occasion, Rome even approved a Novus Ordo nun's transfer to an SSPX convent [source].

So, yes, I agree with Ben that the situation is a mixed bag.

What I don't understand, in view of this, is Fr. Nicholson's attitude toward the SSPX. It seems either misinformed or animated by a spirit of hostility that fails to conform to the magnanimous spirit of Pope Benedict XVI, the CDF, and the leadership of the Ecclesia Dei commission.

Further, while I agree with Ben that having Baptists show up in Oklahoma to protest that Black Mass wouldbe a great thing and be recognized as such certainly by the ecumenically-minded mainstream of today's clerical establishment, I beg to differ on the small but important point that the SSPX is in any sense of the word materially heretical. In fact, you will find much clearer exposition of Catholic teaching in any SSPX chapel or conference than you will in 90% of Novus Ordo parishes today, which are closer to being aligned with the seditious views of the National Fishwrap Reporter than with anything resembling Church teaching.

It would be more accurate to say that 90% of Novus Ordo parishioners should "get off their butts and return to full communion" with Rome.





BenYachov

said...

Some random thought in semi response to Charles & my regards to him and good will.

>It would be more accurate to say that 90% of Novus Ordo parishioners should "get off their butts and return to full communion" with Rome.

You will be happy to know I have always agreed with what I believe was the option of Hitchcock (or maybe Von Hiderbrand my memory is fuzzy) that the case can be made that the American Catholic Church is in a state of del facto schism because of the rampant heresy & descent. Of course I learned my faith from conservative Catholic apologists, Charismatic Catholics and orthodox teachers.


Trads I saw as a species of conservatives with an affection for the old Mass. The lunatic fringe of Traditionalism, schismatics, Williamson and his anti-Semitic ilk put me off & Sungenis.* OTOH later in life Traditionalist Catholic Philosophers like Edward Feser and my friend Pete Vere gave me a more positive image. Kevin Tiereney a young spit fire trad I use to butt heads with has become another I admire. There are more. The father of the guy who runs the AGAINST THE GRAIN blog seems a good sort(what was his name again I forget? But I am sure it will come to me;-) ). Others who I have neglected to mention but I can't list everybody.

But AmChurch is not formally in schism nor have any of her bishops illicitly consecrated or ordained clergy but I can’t credit my knowledge of my faith by any formal religious instruction I received formally from the Church or my parish. Aquinas was my patron saint at my confirmation & Thomas is my confirmation name after him.

Finally Pope Francis has his problems but all the Popes have had them even the ones who became Saints. I can look for good in the SSPX and I suggest that Traditionalists can with Francis. I love the Pope but I think it is a mistake to wait for the coming of a future Pius XIII or Benedict XVII or even a John Paul III to “save” the Church. We should get out their and do it ourselves. It’s not like even the most liberal AmChurch bishop can stop us from sharing Jesus.

Just some thoughts which are solely my own and don’t reflect the opinions of anyone but moi.

Cheers.


Of course E Michel Jones is hardly a trad and ironically he used to do exposes on the fringe anti-Semitic factions and colorful priests in the SSPX or SSPV till he started pushing his own Jewish conspiracy theories. My innocence was shattered.





Mighty Joe Young

said...

Mike Jones sources every controversial statement he drafts. His sources range from authoritative Jewish and official Catholic sources - from Saint Doctors of the Church, to Popes,to Encyclicals to the great Jesuit editorials in Catholic Civilisation.

While he may be prolix, he is, neverthleless, profound and on point re the consequences of the Jews rejecting Logos.

Mike Jones has the intellectual cojones to write the truth about the Messias-deniers and their baleful influence on once formerly Christian nations whereas legion are the epicene ecclesiastics, the gate-keeper catholic commentariat and the gang of Grundy's anxious to label as a blackguard any man like Mike Jones.

Owing to their own craven constitution (fear of the Jews is one biblical principle still operative) many missed the opportunity to learn the facts about our ancient and permanent enemy (Rabbinical Judaism) butt they could simply buy his book on The Revolutionary Jew and make their own evaluation and they now have the opportunity to also intellectually disengage from the many Acton Institute Heresies (Fr Z's favorite economic source) by reading "Barren Metal."

Jones masculine approach to controversies is bracing and one would learn more about real matters of consequence were he to read just his books rather than to submit to the indoctrination of the modern academy.

Mike Jones is a hero of mine





BenYachov

said...

@MJY

Anti-Semite conspiracy wonks are nothing more then plagiarizers of Jack Chick who replace the words "Roman Catholic" or "Jesuit" with the word "Jew".

They are also about half as smart & selective in their citations of Jewish source material.

Sort of like if you wanted to paint a picture of the Catholic Church via exclusive quotes from malleus maleficarum.

They are Morons. Nothing more there is nothing admiral about them.





BenYachov

said...

I really have to update my spell-check software. the logical spelling errors are killing me.

Admirable.





Mighty Joe Young

said...

Ben. You begin your ignorant slander of Mike Jones by launching an undefined slur and you do so having been taught the leathality of that blanket accusation while forgetting basic Christian morality; that is, you lack basic common decency in criticising what (who) you do not understand.

Go ahead, define anti-semite.

Once you do define that word you will realise it does not apply to Mike Jones and then you will realise you have the duty to publicly apologise.

It is clear to me you have, at best, a cursory idea of what Mike Jones has written.

Your hatred of Mike Jones is in proportion to your ignorance about him. M.J. will not write what he really thinks about you but he doesn't know if he cab resist the temptation to surrender to the schadenfreude concerning you beiing judged as you judge others.





BenYachov

said...

@MJY


I am not going to re-invent the wheel. I've heard of the Radtrad weirdo definition of anti-Semitism more than a decade and a half ago. "Which is hatred of Jews because of their race."

It's a stupid rationalization for bigotry.

This allows the Radtrad or any other extremist nut job to spread lies about the Jewish people, Jewish Religion, sanders of the Talmud, slanderous claims of secret cabals and conspiracies, holocaust denial, mistrust of Jewish converts to Catholicism..etc...but this is all Ok & you may hate and mistrust the Jews but as long as it's not "race based".

Give me a freakin break! Catholics are not a race but I think I know what anti-Catholicsm is I just have to do a word swap to get to anti-Semitism.

>Once you do define that word you will realise it does not apply to Mike Jones and then you will realise you have the duty to publicly apologise.

You might as well demand an apology from our Blog Master's Son. It's not going to happen.

http://christopherblosser.blogspot.com/2012/05/michael-voris-interview-with-e-michael.html

QuOTE"Jones takes a stand against anti-semitism: "Antisemitism is very clear; every Catholic has to take a stand against antisemitism. Antisemitism says that the Jew cannot be trusted, is an evil person because of his RACIAL inheritance, because he's got bad DNA."

Well, yes. I would say that's one kind of anti-semitism, narrowly construed. But thus defined, it leaves the field wide open for Jew-hatred and animosity of a non-racial variety."END QUOTE

>It is clear to me you have, at best, a cursory idea of what Mike Jones has written.

I was a fan of his at one point. His expose on medjugorje was brilliant. His taking Feeneyites to woodshed was also brilliant. His take down of Fr Grunner. BELLA DOES CHIRO was one of my favorite articles. Not too mention his criticisms of neo-fascist sympathies from some in the SSPX and SSPV. Some guy named Fr. Scott(no relation thank G_d) was notorious in that regard.


I have heard this nonsense all before MJY.

You have nothing original to say to me.

That's life.

Shalom Alkem MJY.

B'Shem H' Av, v HaBeb v. Ha Ruach HaKodesh.

Elohim Echad.

Yeshua be with you.





BenYachov

said...

One last point MJY then I have little to say to you.

>Your hatred of Mike Jones is in proportion to your ignorance about him.

Interesting how my criticisms of Jones are "hatred" of him yet Jones' "criticisms" of Jews are not hatred?

Well that's consistent.....not.





Anonymous

said...

Ben, I think MJY's point is that the now ubiquitous charge of "anti-semitism" is hurled at Jones before it's even defined. So how about defining it, instead of throwing out red herrings?





BenYachov

said...

>Ben, I think MJY's point is that the now ubiquitous charge of "anti-semitism" is hurled at Jones before it's even defined. So how about defining it, instead of throwing out red herrings?

Enough BS from you too. I am not interested in games.

If you don't know what anti-Semitism is or what anti-Catholicsm is then you are too dull to tie your own shoes.





Mighty Joe Young

said...

Ben. Your response was predictable. You refused to define anti-semitism.





Mighty Joe Young

said...


One last point MJY then I have little to say to you.

Try to imagine how my heart sank upon reading this..

Your hatred of Mike Jones is in proportion to your ignorance about him.

Interesting how my criticisms of Jones are "hatred" of him yet Jones' "criticisms" of Jews are not hatred?

Well that's consistent.....not.

Agreed. That was a poor choice of words. M.J. ought to have written dislike, not hatred.

O, and if you ever do get around to defying the worse you use to libel Mike Jones, let M.J. know,,,





Mighty Joe Young

said...

M.J. does want to note that the Catholic Church has been cajoled into considering holocaus-denial as worse than Messias-denial when it clearly is not.

Engaging in "Holocaust denial" means one loses "respect" of "civilised society" whereas Messias-Denial means the eternal loss of Ones's soul

O, and as far as Holocaust goes, that word means the Suffering, Crucifixion,and death of Jesus; it is an abomination that word has been allowed to be highjacked and used for any other purpose.

The Crucifixion and Murder of Jesus is THE worst Crime ever to have happened and it is not possible to even imagine a crime that could come within a galactic distance of that crime.

Even if every single person on earth was murdered by a Martian Death Ray, that would not even begin to appear as a crime at all when compared to The Holocaust.

Now, of course, such beliefs about Holocaust are isolated and kept alive in Catholic Tradition which is why the movement is so crucial and so hated by the permanent enemies of the Church - both inside and out of the Church.





Mighty Joe Young

said...


>Once you do define that word you will realise it does not apply to Mike Jones and then you will realise you have the duty to publicly apologise.

You might as well demand an apology from our Blog Master's Son. It's not going to happen.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Where did Christopher Blosser charge that Mike Jones is an anti-semite - like you did with your spiritual libel?





BenYachov

said...

I love the sophistry, rank dishonesty, selective reading of my words, misdirection, sheer stupidity & Chuzpah of the average reactionary.

(Reminds me of the fights I had with a fellow called "J" over at Envoy back in the day. He kept insisting I had to "prove" Bishop Williamson was a holocaust denier or I was libeling him. Some things never change.)

But I can play too. I have had a lot of practice talking to radtrad extremists.

>Where did Christopher Blosser charge that Mike Jones is an anti-semite - like you did with your spiritual libel?

But by your own standards where did I make that charge(re-read what I wrote)?

I complained about "Anti-Semite conspiracy wonks"* & how they deserve no respect but I never literally said "Jones is an anti-Semite". Now did I?

(*That is persons who are enthusiastic for anti-Jewish conspiracy theories regardless of wither or not they have race based hatred of Jews by their own novel definition of anti-Semitism.)

If you want to charge I implied it well then the same charge can be leveled against Christopher Blosser by your own apparent standards.

Thus by the wacko standards of those who make excuses for holocaust denial those who accuse me of calling Jones an "anti-Semite" are guilty of "spiritual libel".

Of course the head of the Catholic League minced no words.

http://www.catholicleague.org/playing-fast-and-loose-with-theology/

Good luck getting an apology out of him.

>M.J. does want to note that the Catholic Church has been cajoled into considering holocaus-denial as worse than Messias-denial when it clearly is not.

A strange equivocation? Many non-believers(including Jews) could be classified as per the teachings of Pius IX as "non-believers by negation". That is persons who threw no fault of their own fail to believe. So their non-belief is mere material heresy of which they incur no moral fault(granted we can't tell who among the non-believers is of this category. We are also forbidden to find out as a pretense not to preach the Gospel).
So that is not comparable.

Holocaust denial OTOH is promoted by White Supremacists, neo-Nazis and other persons who ideologies are at the root anti-Catholic. Also denial of the holocaust is morally equivalent to claiming the Civil War and African slavery never happened but where the products of slick propaganda by the NAACP.

You just have to be a certain kind of nut job to believe this nonsense. Also if you tolerate such moral rot in your ranks of people who believe this you really have no moral authority to get mad at anything Francis or Dolan might do or be surprised at others lack of enthusiasm for your outrage over them.





BenYachov

said...

Oh and BTW where has the Catholic Church ever said "Holocaust denial is worst then denying the Messiah?"

Do I detect another spiritual libel by your own standards?

Also what is the point here? Murder is worst than Rape? But that does not make rape lovely or the advocates of rape laudable.

BTW Jesus forgave from the Cross the Romans who nailed him up and the crowd of Jews who called for his blood.

Those who believe they must avenge what Christ has forgiven and alone can only judge should remember what happened to Uzzah when he tried to grab the Ark of the Covenant.

Lastly :
>Ben. Your response was predictable. You refused to define anti-semitism.

MJY said "Once you do define that word you will realise it does not apply to Mike Jones and then you will realise you have the duty to publicly apologize."

I gave Jones' own definition of anti-Semitism(citing Blosser who quoted him directly) & I along with others (including the Blog master's son) reject it.

It's not my fault you can't defend it MJY. But like the New Atheists I argue with you like to shift the burden of proof as an argumentative trick. With the Gnus, atheism is defined dogmatically in pure negative terms ignoring all the other definitions.

You it seems, wish to ignore the definition you claim vindicates Jones.

Reactionaries and their games.

The playbook hasn't changed in almost 20 years.





Charles

said...

Ben,

You write:

"Oh and BTW where has the Catholic Church ever said "Holocaust denial is worst then denying the Messiah?""

If you're addressing Mighty Joe Young, as I think you are, that claim does not originate with him but with one of your fellow neo-Caths, the priest cited earlier by "Anonymous":

http://fatherpaulnicholson.blogspot.com/





Charles

said...

So what's up with all your cantankerous scrappy crappy puffing and dumping in these comboxes, eh, Ben?

Is the reason you're spending so much time here because you outstayed your welcome elsewhere?

You really seem to bring out the best in people don't you. It wouldn't surprise me if you've been banned from any number of other sites.

I wonder how much longer you'll last here. Just sayin' ...





BenYachov

said...

@charles

>If you're addressing Mighty Joe Young, as I think you are, that claim does not originate with him but with one of your fellow neo-Caths, the priest cited earlier by "Anonymous”:

I am. I think that was obvious since I make implicit references to what he wrote.

BTW what are you talking about? Anon 10:08 pm wrote "Ben, I think MJY's point is that the now ubiquitous charge of `anti-semitism' is hurled at Jones before it's even defined. So how about defining it, instead of throwing out red herrings?”

The only other citation of Anon is at the beginning with Fr Paul’s statement on SSPX & Black Masses where you & I had some substantial agreement.

No mention in either case of the Church teaching that Holocaust denial is worst than denying the Messiah.

Also I further checked out the link to Fr Paul's blog and used the search function. There is no reference to anti-Semitism or the Holocaust(other then equating Christ’s sacrifice with the OT holocausts) on the whole blog.

You lost me buddy.

>So what's up with all your cantankerous scrappy crappy puffing and dumping in these comboxes, eh, Ben?

A Traditionalist complaining about others being "cantankerous scrappy crappy puffing”…….no I’ll be good.

I am arguing & challenging. Or do you only want echo chamber because you are not secure in what you believe?

>Is the reason you're spending so much time here because you outstayed your welcome elsewhere?
wonder how much longer you'll last here. Just sayin' ..

Why are you making this personal? Just saying’...

>You really seem to bring out the best in people don't you. It wouldn't surprise me if you've been banned from any number of other sites.
I wonder how much longer you'll last here. Just sayin' ..

Sounds like you are rooting for something?
OTOH if you give me a chance you might wind up my friend?
You many not like me but that is OK. I have a lot of friends whodon’t like me. Also a bunch of trads I’ve bumped heads with over the years have become my friends.

Peace.





Charles

said...

Ben,

I was simply making a connection for you. You asked:

"Oh and BTW where has the Catholic Church ever said "Holocaust denial is worst then denying the Messiah?"

You and Mighty Joe Young were lobbing grenades at each other about Jews and the Holocaust.

It seemed to me that you had maybe lost sight of the fact that it was Fr. Nicholson who suggested that "Holocaust denial is worse than denying the Messiah," to quote your words with typological corrections.

That's all.





Charles

said...

Ben,

I was simply making a connection for you. You asked:

"Oh and BTW where has the Catholic Church ever said "Holocaust denial is worst then denying the Messiah?"

You and Mighty Joe Young were lobbing grenades at each other about Jews and the Holocaust.

It seemed to me that you had maybe lost sight of the fact that it was Fr. Nicholson who suggested that "Holocaust denial is worse than denying the Messiah," to quote your words with typological corrections.

That's all.





BenYachov

said...

>You and Mighty Joe Young were lobbing grenades at each other about Jews and the Holocaust.

Why then pick on me? I'm not the one downplaying holocaust denial?

>It seemed to me that you had maybe lost sight of the fact that it was Fr. Nicholson who suggested that "Holocaust denial is worse than denying the Messiah," to quote your words with typological corrections.

But where does he make this claim?

I searched his blog in vain.





Mighty Joe Young

said...

M.J. Young was the man who said that Messias-Denial is worse than Holocaust Denial; and that is an undeniable truth.

And while he now denies doing so, Ben did call Mike Jones an anti-Semite - he is the copy and paste source right from this thread:


Blogger Mighty Joe Young said...

Mike Jones sources every controversial statement he drafts. His sources range from authoritative Jewish and official Catholic sources - from Saint Doctors of the Church, to Popes,to Encyclicals to the great Jesuit editorials in Catholic Civilisation.

While he may be prolix, he is, neverthleless, profound and on point re the consequences of the Jews rejecting Logos.

Mike Jones has the intellectual cojones to write the truth about the Messias-deniers and their baleful influence on once formerly Christian nations whereas legion are the epicene ecclesiastics, the gate-keeper catholic commentariat and the gang of Grundy's anxious to label as a blackguard any man like Mike Jones.

Owing to their own craven constitution (fear of the Jews is one biblical principle still operative) many missed the opportunity to learn the facts about our ancient and permanent enemy (Rabbinical Judaism) butt they could simply buy his book on The Revolutionary Jew and make their own evaluation and they now have the opportunity to also intellectually disengage from the many Acton Institute Heresies (Fr Z's favorite economic source) by reading "Barren Metal."

Jones masculine approach to controversies is bracing and one would learn more about real matters of consequence were he to read just his books rather than to submit to the indoctrination of the modern academy.

Mike Jones is a hero of mine

8:54 AM Delete
Blogger BenYachov said...
@MJY

Anti-Semite conspiracy wonks are nothing more then plagiarizers of Jack Chick who replace the words "Roman Catholic" or "Jesuit" with the word "Jew".

They are also about half as smart & selective in their citations of Jewish source material.

Sort of like if you wanted to paint a picture of the Catholic Church via exclusive quotes from malleus maleficarum.

They are Morons. Nothing more there is nothing admiral about them


++++++++++++

Ben. You are a jerk and I am done dealing with you