Wednesday, April 18, 2018

Michael Voris in Tulsa, Speaking On Religious Liberty. Somebody wake up Father! :)


Gotta love Youtube, despite all the political correctness that is trying to take over social media.  

In one sitting, you can watch the fun documentary about "Pope Francis" of Topeka, KS (popcorn worthy), a video made by a young Brit about how he made a primitive cabin in the woods using "bushcraft," and videos by Michael Voris over at ChurchMilitant.com

I like Voris.  He is one of the good guys.  It will be work like his that helps reverse the Crisis in the Church, one day. I hope. While my budget doesn't allow me to be a paying subscriber at the moment, there's all sorts of free stuff over at YT.

And then there was this whopper, Voris defending the Second Vatican Council's document on Religious Liberty here in Tulsa, Oklahoma, attended by local trads from the diocese.  In a nutshell, Voris' stated polemical position is squarely to the LEFT of the SSPX (and Archbishop Lefebvre's analysis, btw).



VIDEO (2013):  Michael Voris speaking in Tulsa, OK
On Religious Liberty

As an aside, a frequent Okie trad commentator here at the Okie Traditionalist blog, whose name shall remain private, helped organize this event.

"Cracker Jack" advisor Fr. Paul Nicholson was also present to set the record straight, for traditionalists.   Inside joke for his past followers. :)


Photo care of AKA Catholic, aka Loui Verrocchio.

Which brings me to Time 20:40 - 20:58, in the upper right hand corner of the video, you see a possibly interesting if not comical contrast.  Fast forward below:



It is the famous Fr. Angelo Van Der Putten, an affiliate of the FSSP, and former member of the SSPX.  

Either he was sleep deprived from being the Energizer-Bunny in persona, that he is, or he was closing his eyes in silent, prayerful reserve towards Voris' position.  Or both, I suppose.  :)

I for one once asked Fr. V:  "What should we make of the doctrinal errors of Vatican II?"  to which he answered "Well, like the Archbishop advised, whatever is clearly orthodox we accept, whatever is ambiguous we accept in light of Tradition, but whatever is an error we do not accept."

So when I saw Padre nod off, I imagined what he might have been thinking, at least during that particular talk, about the most controversial element of the Pastoral Council, i.e. so-called Religious Freedom (vs. the traditional doctrine of Religious Tolerance):  "This is not what I learned in the seminary, Mr. Voris."

At any rate, Traddom will always have its different polemical positions about Vatican II, the New Mass, conciliar papal policy, how to respond to a heretical Pope Francis putative pope, etc.  

As I always say, while there is a time/place/method for dealing with differences, what matters most is that we traditional Catholics be united under the bi-fold source of church unity:  unity in the Faith, and unity under the divine government of the Church.  Wouldn't you agree?

So what do you all think?  Is Voris right, that ALL VII's statements on religious liberty are kosher, in full continuity with Sacred Tradition?

Remember when the OKC mayor allowed a Black Mass on city property a few years ago,  because of religious liberty? 

And the Catholic response,  including an SSPX public Mass of reparation? 







Monday, April 16, 2018

Bishop Gracida of Corpus Christi, TX, for Pope

Seriously.   The man has more testosterone and bravery than any of the Cardinals,  including Burke, to be frank, not to mention a lower BMI and better posture.

At 94, by all appearances he seems to have the physical health and mental clarity of a fit and productive man in his 50s.  He is certainly more healthy than most of the Cardinals who look obese and low energy in comparison

And he is a self-professed introvert like the 2/3rds of bishops today, he says,  except he decided to overcome the weaknesses that come with introversion,  and confront liberal bishops, to the point of "burning bridges."  Only a rare Bishop today is willing to stand up for the truth to the point of being "ostracized."

And he is the only Bishop yet to call into question the election of Cardinal Bergoglio in 2013, and suggest the Cardinals consider a new conclave to elect a Pope.

Oh,  and for years now he celebrates exclusively the Mass of the Saints.

But it will likely never happen,  unless Burke and his colleagues step away from the lecture stand and start organizing real action. 

Saturday, April 14, 2018

If Cardinal Burke and the Other Cardinals Refuse to Impeach Francis


Gotta love Saturday mornings:

You can sleep in, kick back in your armchair with a Cup 'a Joe (mine has butter and coconut oil in it), log into Blogger, and let the stresses of the work week subside.  

I'm also readying myself to polish off a plate of Pizza Hut buffalo wings, which are the best.  Sliding back into my strictly low carb/ketogenic WOE (that's "way-of-eating" for all you not-horizontally-challenged folks out there), my clothes are definitely starting to fit more loosely.  

Later today, get the car washed, go to confession, and get my workout with an hour of hiking out at Brokeback Mountain (Turkey Mountain -- inside joke for us Tulsans).  Batteries are in serious need of recharge, before a heavy week next week.





Bishop Rene Gracida of Corpus Christi, TX, Added to My List of Favorite Bishops:

So this last week a very well respected bishop from Texas, one of the most traditionalist-minded bishops in the world (he now only says the Latin Mass), suggested Francis isn't pope, and that the cardinals look at electing another supreme pontiff.  Holy smokes.  Truth be told, I always suspected the same, ever since Amoris was promulgated, and we read the infamous Footnote 351, but this bishop tipped the scales for me.




Readers, I personally very much doubt that Cardinal Bergoglio of Argentina was elected pope in 2013.....I don't think he is the pope....It won't be a certainty until the Cardinals themselves make that pronouncement.  But I'm going to have to take down his framed photo from my hallway (which was a personal penance, reminding me to pray for the putative pontiff). 




                         There, I said it.


But I'm not a sedevacantist, in the traditionalist sense of the word.  John XIII through BXVI were valid popes.  Heterodox at times, scandalous, with varying degrees of detachment to our Catholic ecclesial tradition, in the wake of the Council.  But popes, I believe.  Compared to Francis himself, they almost look like pre-Vatican II popes, to me anyway, my point being the contrast itself shows how horrific the present pontificate is.


The Dubia Watch?  Been there, done that.  Time for Action.

Canon212 is still counting the days since Cardinal Burke, and three other Cardinals, issued their Dubia;  but the Dubia has decisively been punted out of the stadium by the Francis pontificate.  Burk seems too introverted or unwilling to shake the boat and do his final duty.  That's just my impression.  The thing is, it is a common opinion of the traditional theologians that only the Cardinals themselves can call an imperfect Synod to impeach a sitting pope, and elect a new one.  And there is no other Cardinal that comes even close to being the one to organize that, besides Cardinal Burke.




To prevent the downward descent of the Francis Revolution, via the watershed 21st century CDR-WAR heresy (communion-for-the-divorced-and-remarried-without-annulment-or-repentance), that task rests squarely on the shoulders of the American Cardinal Raymond Burke.  That is simply a fact of Providence, is it not?

If he sits on his hands, the Cardinals will too, is how I see it sitting here in my Okie Armchair this cool, Spring, Saturday morning.

Cardinal Burke's disposition comes across defeated and powerless.  That or he has Vitamin B12 deficiency.  Folks, the final statement his Rome Conference issued was clearly weak.  It didn't even come close to correcting Francis. It would seem he would rather protect his own peace of mind and involvement in publicly resisting what already is a Papal Schism, then do the duty God's Providence has laid in his lap.  

If Francis continues to sit on the Chair of St. Peter, in other words if he is not impeached and replaced, in other words if Cardinal Burke doesn't step up to the Tee Ball placed there this week by his brother American bishop, Bishop Rene Gracida, 




If we Lay Catholics in particular, using all the modern means God's providence has provided us, don't try and compel His Eminence to do his sworn, sacred duty, then:


The Next Phase of the Francis Revolution will mean:




1. Systematic programs, diocese to diocese, parish to parish of officially allowing Eucharistic sacrilege.  

2. A deepening erosion of marriages in the Catholic Church.  More Catholics will divorce and remarry, without grounds for annulment, and still be admitted to sacramental communion with the Church.  It will be an official, disciplinary rejection of Church teaching on marriage and divorce, and worthy reception of the Blessed Sacrament.  It will be heresy.  

3.  The next phase will be to bless Civil Unions in the Church, diocese to diocese, parish to parish.  Blessing ceremonies, full inclusion in the sacraments, without any sign of repentance, liturgical ministry, full embrace of
one of the sins that "cries out for vengence from God."  

4.  A new torrential Flood of heretical disciplines and loss of Catholic morals will sweep over the Church.  It will go beyond the false spirit of Vatican II;  it will be a new paradigm of Revolution.  It already is.  

5.  Countless more souls will be lost.  The natural law cannot be denied by anyone. 


Solutions?

1.  Let faithful Catholics charitably confront Cardinal Burke.  Implore him, encourage him to ask God to transcend the limitations of his own temperament.  This is what Bishop Gracida, a professed Introvert (an INFJ like myself, which is rare), observes about most orthodox bishops -- they are introverted yet do not try and overcome the weaknesses that come with introversion in defending the Faith.  

2.  Let the Catholic Blogosphere shift its criticism away from Francis towards Cardinal Burke.  Enough talk about Francis.  It's urgently time for action.  

3. Let nothing be grey and up in the air.   As the Schism deepens, we must clearly choose sides, because the line has already been drawn across the sand.  Here in the Tulsa Diocese, as an example, the Bishop must side with public resistance to Francis' errors.  The FSSP and Clear Creek monks must support the orthodox stance of Cardinal Burke, et al officially.  

May Cardinal Burke call the Cardinals together to end this present crisis.  God's Will be done.  Happy Saturday.







Wednesday, April 11, 2018

*** THREE *** Days since The Okie Traditionalist Emailed Cardinal Burke His DUBIA about Organizing a New Conclave, On Behalf of the Laity



His Eminence, Cardinal Raymond Burke
at Clear Creek Abbey 
Hulbert, Oklahoma


Preface:  well, Cardinal Burke didn't get an answer to his Dubia he sent Francis 570 days ago, and it's very uncertain what his next action will be, if any.  So I figure if a Cardinal can question the Pope above him, and expect an answer, then we the Laity can write our own public Dubia to the good Cardinal above us and likewise expect an answer about what he is, or is not prepared to do.  So here goes, one can only try I suppose!  I'm emailing this through his Official Website and leaving it up at the top of the blog as a running story.  I'd be much obliged if someone somehow can make sure His Eminence reads it.  This is Day Zero, and counting.  Updates will follow!


JMJ

Dear Cardinal Burke,

You may have already read that Bishop Rene Gracida, the retired bishop of Corpus Christi, Texas, has just this week strongly suggested that the Chair of St. Peter is empty, calling for the Cardinals to consider a new papal conclave.  LINK.  He argues that Francis was "probably" invalidly elected because Pope John Paul II's conclave laws were broken; and, secondarily because of the many errors against the Faith taught by Francis.

He actively served as a Bishop for 26 years before retirement, has been a priest for almost 60 years,  and is a World War II Veteran. 

And, in an interview with Michael Voris of ChurchMilitant.com, Bishop Gracida said the burden is actually on us laity to confront the hierarchy of the Church about the present crisis, hence this open letter to you from Oklahoma.  He also said the decision will have to come from the Cardinals to elect a true Supreme Pontiff.




Bishop Emeritus Rene Gracida
Diocese of Corpus Christi, Texas
How we the Laity should Respond

With all due respect, Your Eminence, we the Laity, who are at the mercy of the Hierarchy, can no longer quietly wait for you to directly confront Francis and his supporters in Rome.  We are now confronting you, in charity, to act now, using your particular authority and reputation as a Cardinal to protect our Holy Mother the Church.  

Since only the Cardinals can remedy the present papal crisis, and since you are the main Cardinal who has led resistance to it, then in God's Providence, Cardinal Burke, the terrible duty rests on your shoulders to lead them in this work.   How could God's Providence not be interpreted in that way?  

I am hearing from my fellow, faithful Catholics dismay and grief for your past hesitance to issue the Formal Correction.  As much as it would take courage for Francis himself to answer your dubia, to set aside his scandalous, personal opinions, and confirm us in the Catholic Faith, likewise it would take courage from you yourself and all the Cardinals to carry out your duty.

As you once presented an unanswered Dubia about Francis' now clearly manifest rejection of Church teaching, I, one Catholic blogger here in the Heartland, am presenting this Dubia to you, on behalf of my fellow Catholic Laity:


Cardinal Burke, faithful Catholics are asking, when will you take the necessary steps to organize the Cardinals (i.e. those who really possess that office) in impeaching Francis, and properly electing a valid Pope? 
How long must the Church keep descending more deeply into this sacrilegious crisis, while the Revolution of Francis and his faction keep tearing down the Magisterium and discipline of the Church?  
For how much longer can the Cardinals, who alone have the authority to impeach a putative pope and organize a new conclave, keep sitting on their hands while Christ's Mystical Body is crucified on the Cross before our eyes?

Your Eminence, have courage!  Our Lord is on your side, as are millions of faithful Catholics, including many bishops and priests.  When you decide to act, you will have our full support. You have Cardinals Brandmuller and Zen standing with you, in particular, and I am sure many more members of the College of Cardinals are morally behind you, who will join you in taking action.

This would not be the first time in Church history that one Prelate in particular was called to help save the Church from ruin.


I admire your dedication to your special vows of obedience to the pope, as a cardinal and member of Opus Dei.  But you took them first and foremost to God Himself.  Your allegiance is to all His Vicars, including Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI.  

In the true spirit of obedience, for the love of God please do your duty and publicly resist the current claimant, i.e. Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio, before the current crisis becomes exponentially worse.  

Sincerely,

Joseph Ostermeir
The Okie Traditionalist Blogger 
Tulsa, Oklahoma

P.S.  To reach me, my email is:

JosephOstermeir@gmail.com

Onward and upward.



Monday, April 9, 2018

Texas Bishop Suggests the Cardinals Consider a New Papal Conclave

FIRST Bishop to say this.  From Texas just to the south of us Okies, no less. 




Bishop Emeritus Rene Gracida


94 year old retired Bishop of the Catholic Diocese of Corpus Christi.  In excellent health.  Interviewed last year by Michael Voris.

Says the TLM. 

Here is his argument. Click HERE.

In a nutshell,  he suggests Bergoglio's election was invalid because it broke church law about papal elections,  based on John Paul II's new conclave laws that prevent breaking of conclave. 

Not to mention, Bergoglio's heretical statements,  he says. 

Francis' Cardinal appointments would be invalidated (I suppose his bishop appointments too...hmm) ,  and the one's who conspired to elect him would be excommunicated,  per JPII's legislation. 

Solution?   He says the remaining valid Cardinals would have to call a new conclave to elect a new pope.

Cardinal Burke,  the tee ball has just been placed on top of the tee.   We need you to step up to the plate.

As in now. 

Wednesday, April 4, 2018

Concerning Google Review of SSPX Chapel in Oklahoma City

(UPDATE: no email response yet from their parish, but I did post something conciliatory in the Google Review. Click on the first link below) 


We've been thinking to take a road trip to OKC sometime soon, to include a visit to St. Michael's Chapel, where the Society of St. Pius X offers the Latin Mass. So I was checking out their website for Mass times and directions, when I first came across a rather disconcerting public Google Review of their chapel, when I googled "SSPX Oklahoma City."  Which I thought appropriate for discussion.

(You can click on her name to view her Google profile, with more photos.  Apparently she is quite the foodie, writing several, fair-minded reviews about OKC restaurants.)



Marlene Puente
a month ago

Everyone was very cold. Except one nice old lady with a
tracheotomy. She even whent to get me a head cover
and im sure it took alot out of her to do so. If looks could
kill I'd be dead. Those men wanted me gone the second
I walked in. They weren't ashamed to show it. I felt
unsafe and one thing for sure God is not there at all.




Yikes.  The images of the scene she describes, that come to mind reading this review, leave me, how shall I say...speechless. 





Being the concerned kind of personality I am, especially for damsel's in distress, I emailed the Coordinator using their chapel email address on their website, suggesting they contact Ms. Puente (is that a Hispanic name?) to offer some kind words after her experience, and consider posting a reply, saying something conciliatory at least.  




I am waiting for a response...

My main reasoning is that for months, or even years in the future, countless people who are interested in the Latin Mass in OKC, whether at the Society or the Fraternity, will often first come across this objectively scandalous review. 

Nonetheless, this blog post will come and go in a matter of days.

The same kind of public relations could even be necessary at some point, I suppose, on this side of the state, to promote Catholic tradition on Google Review, Trip Advisor, and the like.  Any visitor of say Most Precious Blood in Tulsa (FSSP), for example, could get on Google and write a review, though from personal experience I suspect most or all would be glowingly positive. 

Oh I just checked, there are actually very positive reviews of MPB already on the ubiquitous, all-seeing eye of Google:  LINK.   

Google is going to become even more ubiquitous as we go.

True, there will always be anti-traditionalist types that come to the TLM, and peel out in the parking lot after Mass driving home, angry at the "oppression" they imagined there. 

But I didn't get that impression from this reviewer/visitor in OKC.  Did you?

That said, I have to say St. Michael's in OKC has been for several decades, a beacon of traditional Catholicism, in terms of preserving the traditional Mass and doctrine, having been served by both the FSSP and SSPX.  I have known a number of their members over the years and can vouch for their personal character.  And the chapel itself, their weekly liturgies, and the pastoral setting of the place, makes it an idyllic, hidden traditionalist oasis, in the west OKC suburb of Bethany.

Yet, reading this Google Review I have to admit I was quite taken aback, but frankly not surprised.  It does come across at least somewhat sober and level-headed, and I interpret the last part "one thing for sure God is not there" as hyperbole.  She did not personally experience the presence of God in a peaceful way that day, due to her painful experience.

For all we know, she was screaming profanities at the people, or dressed like a street hooker, but I seriously doubt that.   At any rate, even a street hooker can dress modestly.  :)



I hope she was not so burned by the experience to never want to attend the traditional Mass again.

And that future readers will not be scandalized.
This blog post will come and go quickly, but I think that major review will likely stay there for months or even years.

If you would like to also respectfully express concern, here is their chapel email:


stmichaelfriend@gmail.com




  Well said, my son.




Tuesday, April 3, 2018

The Okie Traditionalist Challenges fellow Okie Trad Blogger Laramie Hirsch: "Alt-Right, Rad Trad" Apologist, Sir Charles Coulombe (indirectly) Helps


Preface: I believe many Okie Catholic readers have associated this blog with that of fellow Okie Trad Blogger Laramie Hirsch, the author of The Hirsch Files.  He now has a new blog called The Forge and Anvil.  We agree on many things, especially on preserving our Catholic tradition, but take opposing views on a variety of subjects, worthy of debate.  Such is life.

The second half of this post discusses Sir Charles Coulombe's Podcast on the Alt Right. 

Introduction:

Well, I haven't received a reply yet from Hirsch about re-engaging this debate from a year ago, on our blogs.  Darn it.  I know he is very busy, as I am. No worries, I'm sitting up late ruminating and reflecting, sipping some diet Coke, before he gets back to me.  I hope.  

But I did notice a comment this week on his new blog (not me, I pinkie swear) saying:

Haven’t you distanced yourself from the Alt-Right brand? Do you no longer buy into the 16 Points? Okie Traditionalist re-posted an old article saying you’re trying to convince Catholics to be Alt-Right.

The reader must be thinking of his recent comments about traditional Catholics and the Alt Right:


But to my surprise, when I attempted to discuss the Alt-Right with my fellow Traditional Catholics in the beginning of 2018, they also blew off the Alt-Right as a group of neo-Nazis. I was shocked at the ignorance of my colleagues. Have they not kept up with things as I have? ...

Yet, at the end of the same post, Hirsch surmises:


Will I continue to proudly claim to be Alt-Right in the future? I’m not so sure anymore. Some people such as Vox Day continue to hold onto the brand, as they’ve invested a lot into it. I know that I have certainly talked it up in public and with friends. However, as I sometimes say, I’ve made mistakes before.








Yes, The Okie Traditionalist Knows Laramie Hirsch, a fellow Okie Trad: 

The thing is, I've personally known Hirsch for over two years in the flesh, and probably since 2013 in the trad forums online, and have collaborated in the past on blogging stories.  

But I feel this disagreement is worthy to be engaged because he has made the Alt Right (and associated movements MGTOW, Game Theory, etc.) central to his weekly articles and outlook.  So I'm challenging him in charity, as a Catholic, and because Hirsch does have quite a following of Catholics who read these opinions.

The well-followed Chicago-based blogger Oakes Spalding of Mahounds Paradise has us both linked in his list of favorite blogs. Thanks Oakes.


Hirsch spreading his Alt Right Message to Traditional Catholics:

Recently Hirsch posted to Catholic Info forum his blog post promoting the Alt Right, and elsewhere on FB, etc., saying to a fellow traditional Catholic who challenged him:


As for us...the Alt-Right can teach us to be the vicious political animals we need to be again.

Vicious political animals?  Again?  Catholics used to be "vicious political animals?"  Catholic immigrants to this country - my ancestors -typically interacted in politics in a "vicious" way?  As "political animals?"  I would be very interested to read from what American history book  Laramie got this information, Catholic or otherwise. Or is he thinking of the Hollywood movie Gangs of New York?


                                               
Incidentally, I would be remiss if I did not gently admonish Laramie when he spoke mispoke on another CI thread:


My philosophy, if you stumble upon your enemy's AK47, pick it up and use it until it runs out of ammunition.

Knowing Hirsch fairly well, I can't believe this is really his position, in his heart of hearts, but more a reflection of typical Alt Right bloggers he follows daily, like the secular Vox Day who disagrees with Our Lord on at least one major point:

43 You have heard that it was said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour and hate thy enemy.[6] 44 But I tell you, Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, pray for those who persecute and insult you, 45 that so you may be true sons of your Father in heaven, who makes his sun rise on the evil and equally on the good, his rain fall on the just and equally on the unjust. 46 If you love those who love you, what title have you to a reward? Will not the publicans do as much? 47 If you greet none but your brethren, what are you doing more than others? Will not the very heathen do as much? 48 But you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect


(Matthew 5: 43-48)  emphasis mine


In the same CI thread, Hirsch tried to legitimize the Alt Right movement by citing Pat Buchanan as a traditional Catholic Alt Righter that he respects.  But try and do a long, extensive google or yahoo search, of articles going back many years.  You will discover the fact that Buchanan himself does not identify with the Alt Right;  rather some in the Alt Right claim he is one of them.  No other well-known traditional Catholic online, or in the flesh, actively supports this online phenomenon.

Except for Laramie Hirsch, from Tulsa, Oklahoma!


On the Contrary, Sir Charles Coulombe's Criticisms of the Alt Right, an Excellent Podcast:




In fact, after Hirsch told me he was writing a book as a kind of bridge between traditional Catholics and Alt-Righters (half of that equation at least would be noble, I'll concede that), about a year ago I asked the very well respected Sir Charles Coulombe (whose books converted Hirsch to Catholic monarchism) his thoughts on the Alt Right.  Interestingly, he did a Podcast a few months later on the Alt Right, aired on Veritas Radio Network, interviewed by traditional Catholic author Br. Andre Marie, MICM of The St. Benedict's Center where he is Prior.

Brother Andre Marie himself, a very high level thinker by the way, begins by saying the Alt Right is at heart reactionary, and more defined by what it is against than what it is clearly for.  He recognizes it as a "Big Tent," but underlines "deeply flawed ideologies" of its main leadership, which some Catholics are falling into.  (Time 4:00 - 06:30).  Later he says "I find the movement repulsive on a purely intellectual level," while sympathizing with some similarities it has with the Old Rite of once Catholic Europe.  His opinion alone is very sound and authoritative.

This is an excellent and very informative talk, but here are the main criticisms from Coulombe about the Alt Right, which I challenge Hirsch to consider and address.  I'll list them as I listen to the podcast, pausing to type them out.

Charles Coulombe's Criticisms of the Alt Right:

1.  Racism and anti-Semitism are serious moral problems in the Alt Right, those terms understood in the Catholic sense.

2.  From a Catholic perspective, it tends to "deify" "lesser things" of the world, especially race, ethnicity, and nationalism (Time 34:00 - 35:12).

3. He agrees with Br. Andre that the Alt Right does not respect the role of Black Americans in our history and culture.  (Time 54:00ish - 55:25).

4. And that Eugenics is a serious moral problem, in the sense used by Alt Right leaders in general (vs. the Catholic view of it).

5. And about their common love of Machiavelli, Nietzche, and Darwin in particular. "Regurgitated, German, 19th Century garbage," he completely agrees.

6.  The Alt Right makes religion a mere tool or means to political ends, rather than an end in itself, and Catholic Christianity is not necessarily the true religion for those purposes.

How then can a Catholic, in good conscience, seriously support the "Alt Right" movement?

We can't.


Conclusion:

Hopefully Hirsch will find this debate worthy of his time, from a fellow traditional Catholic blogger, and Okie no less.  Time will tell.  If/when I do a podcast with Sir Charles, as we have discussed, this could be one topic to cover. 

That said, I did find Hirsch's defense of Church Latin, in his OnePeterFive article, to be fascinating and superb.  Click HERE.

As Laramie likes to say, Toodles!

Monday, April 2, 2018

Fundraiser for St. John Cantius' Fr. Frank Phillips Legal Fund. PLEASE HELP

Friends,

I got an email asking for help with this worthy cause,  after I joined trad blogger Oakes Spalding up there in Chicago in reflecting on the already national story.

Here is the link,  where you can donate to help this impeccable traditional priest:

https://www.protectourpriests.com/our-mission

Help keep Father in his apostolate,  so he doesn't become yet another exiled traditional priest.   Help protect the good name of the Canons Regular of St.  John Cantius (they offer the TLM)  he founded.

Joe

Saturday, March 31, 2018

The Alt Right. My Opinion. (Re: Laramie Hirsch, an Okie Trad Blogger and Alt-Right Apologist)

Re-posting this from a year ago,  when Laramie Hirsch told me he is writing a book called Alt-Right, Meet Rad Trad  which he stated is an attempt in part to explain and advocate for this "movement" to his fellow traditional Catholics.  From his new blog,  he is still promoting the Alt-Right and writing his book, for now.  Will email him to see if he'd like to re-engage the debate,  for old times sake.  Happy Easter Hirsch.




How to define what Alt Right is? How much can traditional Catholics get involved in the Alt Right?


It's Saturday morning, and the caffeine from my morning coffee is setting in. I'll be addressing these poignant questions in today's segment.


You'll be very hard pressed to get an Alt Right advocate to clearly explain what the Alt Right is, define it, list its specific ideals, especially it's positive goals and truths.  But I'll try and give my own fair take on what it is.


The Okie Traditionalist's Definition of the Alt Right!

The "Alt Right" is an ideology and socio-political movement, mainly on the internet, of websites, blogs, and forums, which opposes liberalism, neconservativism, multiculturalism, and globalism, while promoting a mainly caucasian European-American nationalism, return to foundations of Western Civilization, and restoration of the dignity of white men.
Can we get involved in this movement?

I think we can, but marginally at most.  There are good alt-right authors and principles, but in my observations this online phenomenon is riddled with serious problems, from the perspective of Catholic morality and Catholic teaching on race, gender, sexuality, religion, etc..  The Alt Right does not per se hold a Christian society as an ideal, as one of its central values.  Some may, but generally the ideology is not promoting a Christian society or world view.   It's conservativism is libertarian and nationalistic, but not "socially conservative."


Can there be a "traditional Catholic niche" within the Alt Right movement?  Hirsch thinks so, and is an advocate for the notion, God bless him.  But I remain skeptical.

What is the alternative?


As Catholics we must be political.  We must promote just government and a society that is based on Christian morality.  The Church says that.  How much we get involved in any political movement would depend on the proportion that movement is in conformity with this standard.


But I don't see the need for a loose "umbrella" which the Alt Right says it is, under which conservatives dwell, i.e. those who reject liberalism and neo-conservativism.   It's like Hans Solo walking into that bar with all the different exotic aliens.  So what if all sorts of species fit into the intergalactic Empire. Unless the "Empire" presents itself as a clearly definable, definite entity with a specific creed--and a creed that is in conformity with the true religion--then it comes across nonsensical to be seriously part of it.  Why not just be under the smaller umbrella of a more specific political movement?  In this case the Alt Right would be the Empire.  And it comes across as deliberately nebulous.


The alternative is simply to be a traditional conservative, and to support political movements, but not to become seriously committed to their ideology. Instead of shifting, man-made ideologies, the Church says to turn to doctrine, especially from the popes, on the Social Kingship of Christ, government, society, culture, etc.  Make the Catholic system the primary source of socio-political truth, and ultimate guide to navigating the waters of political movements like the Alt Right.





Wednesday, March 28, 2018

My Review of "The Young Pope" Addressing the Cardinals Scene




Yes, the progressives can point to this scene, and probably are, saying "See, that is the traditional version of the pope!  A fascist tyrant!"

Yet, some traditionalists hail this scene, while over-the-top, ironically very much articulating the traditional Catholic view of the papacy and Church.

This video has 271,000 views on Youtube, with several hundred thousand views combined of other parts of the scene, which suggests it's somewhat popular and widespread.

Watching it the first time, it put a smile on my face.  Frankly, I loved it.  I did think the writers probably tried in part to paint the traditional papacy in a negative light; however, in my view their probable bad intention backfired.  

The themes and purpose of this TV series are, in my observation, ambiguous.  The "young pope" seems crazed, at times unfaithful, and scandalous; at other times he is a sympathetic figure, conservative, sincere, seeking God.    

So I will go out on a limb, despite some of my fellow trads boycotting this series, and suggest this scene itself (not the series as a whole) is splendid, both from a theological and cinematic point of view. And so I offer my own review and analysis.

My Review:

Of first note is the fact the character of "Pope Pius XIII" is wearing the papal tiara, the three-tiered crown.  The suppression by the post-Vatican II popes of this papal custom, which began in the 8th century, has been significant.  The pope in fact is the spiritual head of both the visible Church, and also Christendom as a whole, signified in the various levels of the crown.  

Yet, the conciliar popes have effectively disconnected the papacy from the temporal power of rule, as if the Church is merely a spiritual system with no temporal authority.  The Church by design is not over in the protected corner, hovering effeminately up in the clouds;  it is by its nature in the very center of society, though distinct from it, and on ground level saving souls.

"Pius XIII" is saying "No" to this dislocation of the Church, that the Pope in fact has sovereignty in both ecclesial and temporal matters.  And it took Cable TV to inadvertently illustrate that point.

The pope in this scene makes some very stark comments, but taken in context of the fact he was found fit for office by the Cardinals who elected him, who later continue to tolerate his reign, and by his otherwise tempered rhetoric in other scenes, it is quite clear his invectives are hyperbole to make his main point.  And, that main point is this:  the Church's embrace of progressive openness has left Her in ruins.

His task was to undo progressive openness, and restore the proper relation of the Church to the secular world.  The Church follows the teachings of its Savior, which are clear.  Narrow is the path to salvation.  Sin, the devil, and the City of Man (vs. the City of God, as St. Augustine says), cannot be tolerated by the Church, otherwise She leads souls to hell.  The viewer acutely senses those realities from the forcefulness of the speech.

The message conveyed is the point of view of many traditionalist Catholics who want the pope to again embrace the Church's tradition, in particular in governing the Church.  What makes the scene so comically inspiring for us traditionalists who appreciate it, is that I think many of us have imagined ourselves, what we would say and do if we were pope, i.e. what should be done.  

And here is this young conservative bishop elected pope, grabbing the bull by the horns and telling it like it is.  Looking at the face of the Cardinals sitting in the Sistine Chapel, their blank stares say "Is this man crazy?" but the stares also imply "What he is saying is true."

As crazy as this character comes across, if you consult a Catholic catechism, it is plain he is saying what the Catholic Church has always taught, that the road to heaven is narrow, that salvation does in fact require turning away from the wide, permissive road of the world.  

Using more hyberbole as a rhetorical device, as did many saints in the past by the way, he illustrates this reality by showing the Cardinals a small, golden door.  It is also a brilliant device for the show.

The Pope goes on to be frank with his Cardinals, that despite them disagreeing with him, he expects complete obedience.  And this is exactly what is missing in the conciliar papacy today.  It sets aside its authority to command and prohibit, yet retains its collegial role of permitting.  

Pius XIII is basically saying "No, that is not how Christ set up the Office of St. Peter."  Even if the authors of this scene are godless unbelievers, the narrative ironically serves the purpose of showing the traditional, bimillennial authority of the Pope, vs. its downfall since Vatican Council II in the 1960s.

He goes on to say "better to have a few that are reliable than a great many who are distractable and indifferent."  While he says this with a kind of sneer, is the statement not true?  And, if it is true most Mass-attendees are indifferent, isn't that grounds for a sneer?   

Another question, is Pius XIII being literal, that it is better to have a few actual fanatics than churches full of heretical worldlings?  I don't intepret it that way.  This character happens to say what all sober historical critics of the current life of Catholic churches are thinking, that there is something phony and inauthentic about mainstream parishes, and the claim of the many to be practicing, believing Catholics, while church statistics prove otherwise.

"The public squares have been jam-packed, but the hearts have been emptied of God," he continues.  And here it takes an HBO TV series, as objectionable as the series later is, to more fully articulate what most get, yet few except us "nutty traditionalists" are bold enough to say out loud.

Perhaps it takes a "mature audience" to appreciate this satirical message, but to me this scene could almost be a resource for teenage traditional Catholics to reflect on the current battle over Catholic tradition, or to send a secularist friend before they come over for dinner and discussion.  

At Time 4:45, the Pope points at a Cardinal, who we learn later is a liberal, who unsuccessfully tries to frame him as a fornicator in order to remove him from Office.  We know this in fact represents the state of those who run the Vatican, as if they are the papacy, a la conciliar collegiality.  

"The liturgy will become hard work, and sin will no longer be forgiven at will," he states.  Again hard truth.  The traditional liturgy of the Church is challenging, and not by design easy.  The priest cannot absolve the penitent unless they are contrite and firmly resolve to amend their life, i.e. stop the sinning.  Few understand this, including the current authorities, generally speaking.  

I don't think Pope Francis himself would be caught dead saying anything remotely akin to this speech; frankly, he doesn't.  But this fictional Pius XIII, the "Young Pope," happens to be the one to tell the 21st century world absolute Catholic truths.  I want to shake my head at HBO, because I doubt they had any plan of exposing liberal Catholicism; but I also have to shake my head that it takes the likes of an HBO TV show to accidentally teach traditional Catholicism in one of its scenes.

A final observation, the Cardinals in this scene show different facial expressions of dismay and disbelief.  But what can be gleaned from their reaction, apart from them thinking the new pope is bananas, is that they are frightened to the core by the veracity of his words.

Conclusion:

As a traditionalist Catholic, I could watch this scene over and over again.  It is so truthful and relevant. It even suggests from its view count and popularity, that there is some subconscious awareness at least that something is very askew in the post-conciliar Church.  

Sunday, March 25, 2018

Reviving Thomism in Tulsa


Introduction:

How many of our Local Church's diocesan priests have received an adequate exposure to the writings of St. Thomas, especially the Summa Theologica?  Few if any,  I'm afraid to be the case. 

Though, I do hear our Bishop Emeritus Slattery is very Thomistic!



So how can our priests and pastors give an integral, reliable catechesis, advise in the confessional,  or marriage preparation without a solid,  anchored,  and wise theological system, as that of St. Thomas?  Go off the writings of Teilhard de Chardin or Karl Rhaner?  Or even by reading books by then Cardinal Ratzinger published by Ignatius Press? 


That would be like practicing for the NBA playoffs with a nerf ball and one of those little plastic hoops you attach to a bedroom door. 




The restoration of Catholic tradition today requires not only observing the lex orandi, the "law of prayer," through the Church's liturgical tradition.  This work also requires preserving the lex credendi, the "law of belief," by maintaining the theological tradition of going first and foremost to St.  Thomas, to understand revealed Doctrine
 

Wouldn't you agree?

On one side of the coin we have to be honest that Thomism has not been preserved in our Local Church of the Tulsa Diocese, and throughout the Universal Church;  on the other side of the same coin we can highlight positive works of restoring and preserving the thought and spirit of the Angelic Doctor here in the Heartland, and elsewhere.  

Thomism in the Tulsa Diocese, Here's a List:

1. The Fraternity of St. Peter priests - who pastor Most Precious Blood parish just southwest of downtown Tulsa,  near Chandler Park.   Thomistic principles  permeate their daily,  pastoral works,  which they learned in the seminary.  At Our Lady of Guadalupe seminary,  in Nebraska,  the seminary program is thoroughly Thomistic, explicitly in line with what even Vatican II itself mandated.



2. The Clear Creek monks - thankfully Abbot Forgeot of their original Motherhouse in France,  i.e. Notre Dame de Fontgombault Abbey in France,  preserved Thomistic studies for their priest monks,  who went on to found Clear Creek Abbey in Oklahoma.  Within the monastery walls, the priest professors teach seminary-style classes to brothers preparing for the priesthood.   Talking in the past to Abbot Anderson and Fr. Bethel in particular,  who teach,  it is evident they espouse a classical Thomism. 



3. Professor William Dunn, S. T. L.   A professor of Thomistic theology and philosophy at Tulsa's Pastoral Studies Institute,  at the Chancery.  For years he has taught St. Thomas, classes being open to anyone wanting to more deeply pursue Truth.  Come prepared for an enlightening, sit-down lecture/discussion, and to read from the Summa itself.  I hear Joey Spencer, Director of the PSI, also has a love of Aquinas. 


4. James DePrisco is a traditional Catholic family man and professional, who lives in the Tulsa Diocese.  He is a published Catholic author and podcaster, who has extensively studied the philosophy of St. Thomas over the years.   He often incorporates Thomistic thought into what he has to say.

5.  Joseph Ostermeir (me!).  Feel free to check out my Thomistic podcasts at the top of the screen, for what they are worth. I happened to earn an MA in Catholic Philosophy, based mainly on St. Thomas and Aristotle, through Holy Apostles College and Seminary's distance education program,  in order to complete the philosophy phase of seminary.  I once discerned a priestly vocation, before later getting married.  The take away wasn't a professional career as a scholar, but rather the core philosophical teachings and principles of St.  Thomas,  which I continue to apply in my daily life and vocation.  They are a blessing I want to share.


The podcasts are meant as a basic, condensed introduction to Thomistic philosophy, to inspire others to learn more.  I plan to do more blog posts and podcasts on Thomistic topics soon.  Possible subjects include the Natural Law, Medical Ethics for health care professionals, Thomistic cosmology vs. that of Stephen Hawking, a Thomistic critique of Artificial Intelligence, etc.  Should be fun!

Did I miss anyone?  Other examples of Thomistic Revival in Eastern Oklahoma?


Have a bless-ed Holy Week!

Wednesday, March 21, 2018

Tulsa Bishop, Bishop Konderla Suggested for Papal Nomination for Synod-2018, by George Weigel. One Tulsan's Argument to the Contrary.


This story popped up on my phone this morning, as I did my morning constitutional, which customarily includes checking Canon 212, an invaluable traditional Catholic news aggregation website.  The title the website's administrator (who I really respect personally) gave to the link was:


"Weigel:  Bishop Konderla would make a very apt papal nominee to Synod-2018?!"





Seems like a reasonable question to me.  It is after all now 2018!  Here is the LINK to Weigel's blog post, in which he recalls the scandal of the rigged 2014 Synod, but then does an About-Face, turning optimistically to the next Synod, opining:

But, hey, memory is a tricky thing and this is the season of mercy, so let’s let bygones be bygones and concentrate now on Synod-2018, which will discuss youth ministry and vocational discernment. Those are very important topics.

5 Paragraph's down Weigel writes:

Bishop David Konderla of Tulsa was the director of campus ministry at Texas A&M for eleven years, where St. Mary’s Catholic Center has set the gold standard in traditional campus ministry and created a model for others to emulate. Over the past twenty years, Konderla and his predecessors have fostered more vocations to the priesthood and religious life than that school with the golden dome in northwest Indiana, while helping many Aggie men and women prepare for fruitful and faithful Catholic marriages. Bishop Konderla would make a very apt papal nominee to Synod-2018.  (emphasis mine)

So of course, being the Diocese of Tulsa's effective Traditionalist Blogger here in the Heartland, I could not refrain from comment.  So folks, here goes.  I'm on vacation, and blogging is good R&R, sitting here in my Okie Armchair sipping diet Coke.





The Okie Traditionalist's Argument to the Contrary:

First, I must preface this post by assuring the reader, including my bishop if he reads this, and my pastor, I am committed to due respect of my Local Ordinary, who is now the recently consecrated Bishop David Konderla, formerly college chaplain and priest at College Station in Texas. 


I'm thinking I'll use the scholastic method to structure my argument, mixed with a bit of satire.  Why not?  It is after all an excellent way to boil down issues.  My approach will decidedly not be traditionalist criticism of + Konderla himself, but about the progressivist orientation of current Vatican Synods, and Weigel's own reputation for pollyanna optimism about the current state of the Church, post-Vatican II.



My Argument:

Question:  should Bishop Konderla of Tulsa be Nominated for the 2018 Synod?  It would seem Yes.

One, Mr. Weigel argues the scandal of the 2014 Synod should be forgotten, and the 2018 Synod approached in an optimistic way, which includes focus on young adults and youth, of which Bishop Konderla has had great experience.

Two, Mr. Weigel argues for Bishop Konderla's role in the Synod, since he apparently fostered more vocations to religious life at College Station than the priests at Notre Dame.

On the contrary, recall that Cardinal Burke, Bishop Schneider, and other cardinals and bishops have condemned the scandal of the 2014 Synod, as a kind of Revolution under Pope Francis to institute a progressivist pastoral policy on moral issues throughout the Church Universal, in particular regarding human sexuality.  They have also issued grave warnings about plans for the next 2018 Synod.  And this is now 2018.

In fact, Pope Francis himself has confirmed that the next Synod will continue the general agenda of the last one, explaining the theme:

"The theme, an expression of the pastoral care of the Church for the young, is consistent with the results of the recent Synod assemblies on the family and with the content of the post-Synodal apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia.   (emphasis mine)   LINK


I would argue that Bishop Konderla, my bishop, should not be nominated to any special role in the next Vatican Synod.  Accepting such a nomination would mean the Tulsa bishop and Local Church objectively endorses the work of the next Synod, not to mention the work of the last one which it is continuing.  

Of course the crux of the argument over the next Synod is one's view of the last Synod and its outcome.  Weigel somehow takes a positive view to the outcome, in particular Amoris Laetitiainsisting being in denial there is any sort of rupture from the Magisterium of John Paul II, et al.  

Hello.  Where can I buy some smelling salts?  :)

Others disagree, including prominent Cardinals, plainly reading what Francis has stated about the document's interpretation, including elevating his famous Letter to the Argentinian bishops (confirming sacriligeous communion) to the Acts of the Apostolic See.


The agenda has already been established, to deepen even more a liberal, Francis-style pastoral policy towards modern ills.  That should be obvious, and require no more demonstration. This likely includes considering official Church endorsement of the heretical position of so-called "civil unions," which the Holy Office (CDF) has already clearly condemned in past pontificates.  After all, young adults also deal with the same sexual, moral issues presented in Amoris. 

The main problem with Weigel's personal nomination of Bishop Konderla is that Weigel is in a serious state of denial at how scandalous the outcome of the last Synod is.  Loui Verrechio has discussed this at his AKACatholic Blog, i.e. Weigel's effective dissent from Catholic teaching about marriage, in his blind, "neoconservative" adherence to Francis' policy.

Reply to Point 1.  The problem of Bishop Konderla having a special voice at the next Synod, on behalf of the youth, is that he was appointed by Francis, who Cardinal Burke, three other Cardinals on record, and other prelates, are basically rightly accusing of a heretical position on communion-for-the-divorced-and-remarried-without-annulment, among other positions. 

The point being, it is reasonable to suspect the modernist powers-that-be in the Vatican (and the Local Church), got the good Fr. Konderla appointed as the new bishop, because he does have a somewhat progressive approach to ministry, but more importantly because he is a team player, and someone that could be wrongfully manipulated to help advance the next phase of the great apostasy in the Church. 

Reply to Point 2.  Being a member of the Tulsa Diocese, having read a good deal about and by our new bishop these last couple years, my personal impression is that, yes, Bishop Konderla is committed on a personal level to orthodoxy and saving souls, in particular young people, as he did in fostering vocations.  That was clear from his successes at College Station.  

But, personal orthodoxy does not always equate to orthodox diocesan policies or pastoral decisions, especially during this Crisis in the Church.  This is especially the case when the bishop is under the control of a presbyteral council that is as a whole, by-and-large committed to Catholic modernism, and holds sway over their Successor to the Apostles in the name of collegiality.  Surely, Weigel would agree on some level this is the dynamic in virtually every diocese in the world, including at the level of Bishop Synods, even in the Vatican, as it was in 2014. 

Conclusion:

I would support an initiative of faithful, Tulsa Catholics appealing to our bishop, Bishop Konderla, to join with Cardinal Burke and other Prelates, in their defense of marriage and the Blessed Sacrament, here in the Heartland, but also if he attends this year's Synod.  Oh, and to refuse participation with Cardinal Cupich in Chicago leading the American Episcopate in the implementation of the next revolutionary "paradigm shift" in the Church.  Read about his Program HERE.  

Emailing this post now to Mr. Weigel, to ask for a response...