The Flying Buttress: What Inquisitors' Minds Want to Know

The Tapeworm Letters, #10

2009-04-03T22:10:00.002-04:00

“My dear Hollywood,

When you find yourself mystified by a public policy position of our little network, and its mouthpiece the USCCB, it is helpful to recall this principle: someone offstage has prepared the script. Those in the public eye, either our willing or unwitting allies and dupes, are just reading it.

So it is with the subject of your latest inquiry, our position on illegal immigration (or, as we have christened it, “immigration reform”). Two names should suffice to set those bloodhound research instincts of yours in motion. The first: Bella Dodd, and more specifically, her testimony in 1953-54 before the House Un-American Activities Committee regarding the Communist Party’s infiltration of the Church.

And the second? Saul Alinksy, socialist community organizer par excellence, whose life was dedicated to the acquisition of power for the “marginalized,” a Machiavellian anti-Machiavellian, if you will. Or course, as per our usual arrangement, you will never see either of these names exposed to the public as clues to the source of our policy. What you will see instead are certain stock words and phrases which attempt to portray the illegals as victims with a just cause, such as “human dignity,” “earned legalization,” “immigrant community,” and “compassion.” As you know, one of our oft-used, tried-and-true techniques is to coat the bitter pill in a deceptive outer layer: something sweet, something noble, something which tugs at the heartstrings, something which begets guilt!

But what is that bitter pill? My dear boy, once again I remind you that it is the intent of our hidden benefactors to destroy the American self-image, the American identity, the cohesiveness and integrity of American culture (along with the rest of western civilization), so that, having been brought low by a steadily progressing internal disintegration and corruption, this nation may take its place in our Brave New World.

And the deceptive outer coating? Oh, the humanity, the suffering, the anxiety of these poor folk! Oh, their willingness to take their lawful place in American society, if only they knew how! Oh, the service they render to our economy! Oh, the price they pay – not to mention the taxes!

Oh, what knee-slapping anarchist entertainment!

But two caveats accompany my counsel. First, it is my own preference to studiously avoid the company of these New World-ers (though scrupulously obeying their wishes), as I sense their promotion of our way of life is completely expedient, making you and I ultimately expendable. Second, they are, to put it kindly, rather one-dimensional to the point of crudity in their obsession with “revolution.” Give me a few arias from Gounod’s Faust and a glass of 2005 Chardonnay Grand Reserve, and away with their scheming sleepless nights!

Moreover, they have a tendency to make use of allies and dupes who are not at all well-endowed with the skills that you so nobly possess – so deficient, in fact, that their maladroit efforts are prone to backfire. I refer you, for example, to that ham-fisted attempt at a sound bite from Tommy Wenski, who, as he concludes that illegals are not breaking the law but are being broken by it, so transparently turns reason on its head as to make the whole effort laughable! Poor Tommy should be writing commercials for GEICO, not playing Saul Alinksy on behalf of the Mexicans!

Yet all is not lost, for our brethren always find a way to outweigh the clumsy with the slick, particularly through the deceptive manipulation of statistics. Especially subtle are our citations of taxes paid, crime rates, net benefit to the economy, and the healthcare burden. I will not insult your intelligence, my fine friend, by explaining to you how each of these citations utterly fails to counter the myth to which it is purportedly addressed – I am quite confident you can decipher that mystery at your own leisure. In fact, for your own good, I insist on it!

Your affectionate shepherd TAPEWORM”

Miscellanea Catholica

“The Communists learned that the clergymen under their control served as a useful “respectable face” for most of their front activities. In this way the name of religion was used to spearhead the odious plots hatched by the agents of anti-religious Soviet communism.” – Manning Johnson, testimony before The Committee on Un-American Activities House of Representatives, 83rd Congress, First Session July 7 and 8, and July 13 and 14, 1953. http://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/communism/communism.htm

Welcome to the tribe, Newt.

Here is one of the behaviors necessary to maintain the hegemony of “official versions.”

The Golden Age of American Innocence

The Tapeworm Letters, #9

2009-04-02T13:22:00.002-04:00

“My dear Hollywood,

There comes a time in the life of all men who aspire, as we do, to greatness, when the most delicate of subjects must be broached. In our case, this delicacy is rendered even more complex by the nature of our relationship. Yet we shall confront it together, without qualms, for the good of our brotherhood.

I have noticed your repeated laudatory references to one of your altar boys, and I cannot help but conclude that you have rather favorable designs on him. I have faced this with a countenance befitting my position - that is, with a certain stoic resignation, albeit tinged with jealousy. In light of the unfortunate events of recent years, what is most urgent for you, my friend, is to avoid scandal, to bide your time until the lad reaches legal manhood. But “biding time” is by no means a passive occupation. Gutta cavat lapidem non vi sed saepe cadendo!

The position in which you find yourself is analogous to a subplot involving two characters in that popular yet completely puerile cinema series “Star Wars,” whose paper mâche heroism you no doubt took in as a youth. I refer to the seduction of Anakin Skywalker to the dark side of the Force (dark side, indeed!) by the Emperor Palpatine, aka Darth Sidious – which, though hopelessly clumsy in portrayal, did employ valid psychology. Therefore, in your developing relationship with the boy, you will assume the role of the Emperor, while the boy plays – albeit unknowingly - the part of Anakin.

Your first and most productive tool, which was the very key to the Emperor’s success, is the careful use of flattery to induce him to rely on you for counsel. You will however studiously avoid compliments directed to his physical qualities, no matter how inspiring and admirable they may be. No, focus on his character and his intellect, his talents, his achievements in school or in sports, his devotion to his duties as a server.

Ideally you will hit upon something at which he excels, yet which you suspect may compromise him at some point in the future, and cause him great frustration or even agony. For example, is he an outstanding football player, yet finds himself benched in favor of another, whose father has contributed more to the Booster’s Club? Does he bring home excellent grades that are met with utter indifference by his parents? Is he fatally attracted to some winsome young thing who just happens to have serious character flaws and numerous bad habits?

Only after you have gained his confidence with your posture of understanding and support –a process which may take a year or two – can you begin to initiate the emotional intimacy that prepares the real relationship. That intimacy allows both of you to be vulnerable – a vulnerability which in turn opens the door to a discussion of certain of your friends (real or fictitious) who have certain habits, and which will ultimately culminate in your own confession. A tearful confession, perhaps?

In closing, my dear boy, I do not envy you this arduous courtship, but I perceive that you relish the challenge of recruitment and, of course, la chasse! I once felt as you do, but the maturity of years has cooled somewhat my sense of adventure, and I prefer to remain within our little network. Such self-imposed restrictions do, after all, provide me with a reasonable sense of fidelity…

Your affectionate Shepherd TAPEWORM”

Miscellanea Catholica +Father Zuhlsdorf offers a special prayer of mortification to bear some of our Holy Father’s suffering regarding the developing schism over the SSPX reconciliation. Miscellanea Americana +Swingin' the Alphabet +Who's On First? +The Mirror Scene +The $99,000 Answer: Part I Part II Part III +Jack and Groucho +Do You Trust Your Wife?

The Tapeworm Letters, #8

2009-02-11T12:27:00.002-05:00

“My dear Hollywood,

The draft of your Common Ground homily is satisfactory in some respects, but quite obtuse in others. Your rhetoric is by and large much too timid - I chalk that up to your inexperience as a priest, while presuming that it does not spring from any lingering guilt!

You see, dear boy, the secret to our success is boldness. Our orthodox enemies have grown smug, fat and lazy from constantly wrapping themselves in the mantle of tradition, or what is left of it, and so are easily outmaneuvered and outwitted. While they are lulling themselves into utter torpor reciting their Offices and Rosaries, we, the Swamp Foxes of the Church, are fully awake, always devising the next subversive scheme, the next power grab, the next “liturgical time bomb” (as one of our enemies put it so well) with which to establish our Counter-Tradition. Audentes fortuna iuvat!

Yet, if we face facts honestly (a scenario which, ordinarily, we should avoid like the plague), we must admit that all our efforts to date have produced only isolated bits and pieces of our new mansion. Bernardin, Pilarczyk, Mahony, Weakland, de Chardin, Kung, Rahner, McBrien, Chittister – they and countless more valiant warriors have given us a wall, a ceiling, a room…but who has laid the cornerstone of Counter-Tradition? Even Ratzinger has failed us! Here is a man who, as a Prince of the Church, gave us the Counter-Syllabus, but did he follow up with the cornerstone? No! He quietly tip-toed back into the camp of the enemy! He did the same thing when he ascended to the Throne. Look at his first appointments: Levada, Neiderauer, Wuerl – a perfect score! But then what? Like a pendulum, he swings back into orthodoxy. We cannot count on him.

My young apprentice, we don’t need someone who swings both ways - we need our cornerstone. And that, I say without hesitation, is your vocation!

Lest you, in your relative innocence, fail to grasp the true scope and enormity of this task, let me clarify what I mean by the cornerstone. I mean that our position must be formulated so that it can be inserted into the teachings of the Magisterium, be pronounced ex cathedra, appear in the next edition of the Cathechism! No more being thwarted by “pastoral” Councils, or “theological speculations,” or “ethical nuancing,” or the like. If our way of life is sacred, if the Word become flesh is an affirmation of our bodies and our instincts, then must it not become irrevocably enshrined in the sacred deposit of faith?

While we are temporarily indulging ourselves in this dangerous scenario of facing facts honestly, I now admit one more thing: I have written you an entire missive yet failed to offer a single specific comment on your draft! I hope that my abysmal performance serves as a lesson to you – but there is still something important you may take away from my failings. That is, the passion with which I have addressed this subject should have infected you and inspired you to imitate it, to carry it forward, to stand upon it and elaborate.

This passion is the very thing your homily is missing, for if you are not a passionate revolutionary, then a successful revolutionary you shall not be.

Your affectionate Shepherd TAPEWORM”

MISCELLANEA CATHOLICA

+We already knew your true colors, Father Thomas Reese. No need to remind us of your infidelity.

+Now that the media kangaroo court has tried and convicted SSPX Bishop Williamson and our Holy Father, has anyone been wondering why the Jews (or more accurately, the Zionists) have been acting like Muslims? Is this hair-trigger hysteria over the Holocaust now the Zionists’ equivalent of perceived slights against the Prophet Mohammed?

+Speaking of Zionists, our readers may be interested in this website: http://jewsagainstzionism.com/. In fact, they may be VERY interested in it...

+We applaud and support Archbishop Pilarczyk in his criticism of the University of Cincinnati’s descent-into-the-gutter program known as “Sexploration.” However, we should point out, Your Excellency, that it is difficult to speak with authority when you have a long and disturbing history of abusing, misusing, or failing to use that authority on this very subject – in your own back yard.

MISCELLANEA AMERICANA

+Frank Sinatra +Der Bingle +Lena Horne +Judy Garland +Tuxedo Junction +Boogie Woogie Bugle Boy of Company B

Commentary: "A Tangled Web"

2009-01-28T21:24:00.003-05:00

+This is a response to Pepperdine Professor Douglas Kmiec’s "A Tangled Web: the Election & the Blogosphere," which appears in the January 16 issue of Commonweal. We begin with a few general observations, followed by some exploration of them:

Mr. Kmiec is openly and unabashedly mesmerized by Barack Obama.

Mr. Kmiec’s understanding of his obligations regarding his Catholic faith has been completely distorted by and subjugated to his hero-worship of Obama.

A double standard is employed throughout this article. Mr. Kmiec repeatedly deplores what he apparently considers to be savage, personal attacks against him, yet as he deplores this, uses pejorative language which is equally inflammatory.

One of Mr. Kmiec’s two themes is that “right-wing bloggers” (see: pejorative language) have politicized his support of Obama, using the abortion issue to “drive a wedge” between the Vatican and the new administration. Yet it is Mr. Kmiec himself who attempts to politicize the issue.

The second of Mr. Kmiec’s themes is that he is a victim of “right-wing bloggers.”

Mr. Kmiec has also politicized the Eucharist.

I. Hero Worship

One explanation for the apparent anomaly between Kmiec’s presence in the Reagan Administration and his effusive support and admiration for Obama is this: Mr. Kmiec finds himself irresistibly inspired by good communicators, no matter what their political stripe. Yet one has to wonder how Mr. Kmiec found himself happily installed among Reaganites in the first place, given his stated esteem not only for Obama, but for FDR, JFK, and RFK (all good communicators) as well.

The tempting conclusion to be drawn here is that Mr. Kmiec is swayed by style over substance – a conclusion that is supported by the embarrassing emptiness of his arguments – and so is dazzled by orators who seem to appeal to unity, to “common ground,” to selflessness and service to country. To which we can only say, we hope that Presidential actions match the candidate’s rhetoric. But we have to ask this: if Mr. Kmiec is so deeply drawn to public figures who espouse civic idealism, why is he not even more attracted and committed to the spiritual ideals of the Catholic Church?

II. A Double Standard and the Victim Mentality

This piece may be accurately characterized as one long howl of indignation and hurt at being challenged, questioned and called names, as if Kmiec’s purity of character and motives are above reproach. The writer’s choice of terms to describe his critics’ behavior is revealing: “animosity,” “unrelenting personal attacks,” “lack of civility,” “highly concentrated rhetorical venom,” “tormentors,” “personal contempt,” “vilification,” “scurrilous remarks,” “demonizing me,” “blog calumnies,” and of course, the ever-popular “right-wing bloggers.”

Not one of these right-wing demons is named, nor a definition of “right-wing bloggers” offered, nor any of their “calumnies” specified - but given the unrelenting self-pitying tenor of this article we may safely speculate that Mr. Kmiec’s enemies list includes any and all critics, and that The Flying Buttress will soon be added to the list. But why do we point to a double standard?

We have already cited his pervasive use of inflammatory language to decry inflammatory language. Here, though, is how Kmiec justifies his use of the word “boneheaded” to criticize Obama’s support for FOCA: “…we all occasionally speak too glibly for our own good…” and “honest, substantive dissent.” Is this furtive glance in the mirror the extent of your examination of conscience, Mr. Kmiec? May we then use the term “boneheaded” to describe your fawning support for the most radical elected representative of the culture of death in American history?

III. A Self-Serving Political Fantasy

Mr. Kmiec’s “wedge” scenario (“…the attempt to use FOCA to drive a wedge between the church (sic) and the incoming administration…”) is just dismally vacuous nonsense. Mr. Obama’s voting record, his recorded statements and his chronic history of affiliation with radicals has already opened a bottomless chasm between his administration and the Church – a chasm into which any wedge would fall harmlessly as it dropped deep into darkness.

Does Mr. Kmiec only understand the world in terms of political motives? Is this why he feels compelled to impute a religious question to such motives? Is he just attempting to gain the upper hand over his critics by cheapening their point? Or is this really a straw man which he can then use to flatter himself? (“Having drawn the blogs’ Machiavellian FOCA gambit into the open…”)

The criticism of Mr. Kmiec stems from one thing and only one thing: his public and insistent infidelity to his faith. There is nothing “political” about this infidelity, yet Mr. Kmiec attempts to make it political. So who is politicizing the issue?

IV. The Sacred Deposit of Personal Waivers

Mr. Kmiec admits that “FOCA runs contrary to the pursuit of the common good,” yet this fails to diminish his fervor for Obama, as if Obama’s repeated promises regarding this demonic legislation were a minor exception to an otherwise commendable platform. He further glosses over the barbaric horror of FOCA by dismissing Obama’s commitment as a “one-time pledge of support.” Kmiec has also stated, elsewhere, that he believes Obama wants to reduce the number of abortions.

Reduce the number of abortions? How is that reflected in this statement, which went up on the White House website as soon as Obama was sworn in?

“President Obama understands that abortion is a divisive issue, and respects those who disagree with him. However, he has been a consistent champion of reproductive choice and will make preserving women’s rights under Roe v. Wade a priority in his Adminstration. He opposes any constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court’s decision in that case.”

(So much for the inaugural theme of “unity”!) The cold reality of the situation is that abortion has been the centerpiece of Obama’s radical leftist beliefs throughout his political career, and will continue to be so. If Mr. Kmiec requires further proof, perhaps he would be kind enough to consult Obama’s immediate reversal of the Mexico City policy.

Note also that although Mr. Kmiec admits that FOCA “runs contrary to the common good,” he fails to acknowledge that it is anathema to Catholic teaching, which just happens to be the foundation of the common good. Not only fails to acknowledge it, but then has the temerity to state that he voted for Obama because of his Catholic faith! What Catholic faith is it, Mr. Kmiec, that can so casually ignore the very core of Obama’s professional life: his affirmation of the culture of death? And what Catholic faith is overridden by an “alluring gift of inspiration”?

Kmiec cites Archbishop Burke’s description of the Democratic Party as “the party of death” for its embrace of abortion, but instead of taking this to heart, Kmiec finds it “hurtful” to his father and to “millions of...lifelong Democrats.” In other words, the affirmation of Catholic teaching, and His Excellency’s solicitousness for souls, is now “hurtful” and a source of resentment! This is the selfsame attitude of the homosexual radicals, who find Catholic teaching about their disorder to be offensive, hateful, and discriminatory.

(By all means, Professor, urge your father and millions of Democrats to continue to ignore the truth, and to condemn it, as long as it makes them feel better. After all, the human race, and Democrats in particular, have outgrown the need to be instructed by the Church.)

As it turns out, Archbishop Burke has plenty of company in his “hurtful” crusade. A few citations from that company:

Fr Matthew Habiger, Human Life International: “It is a scandal that Catholic politicians vote for bills which fund or otherwise advance abortion. They should be named, publicly shamed and admonished so that they can cease their evil and return to God. To vote for such a candidate is to willfully participate in that candidate's choices and deeds. It is a sin, and must be repented.”

Bishop Rene Gracida: “...the issue of voting for a pro-abortion candidate is primarily a moral issue rather than a political issue. Therefore, every Ordinary has an obligation to teach the people entrusted to his pastoral care without ambiguity that a Catholic cannot vote for a pro-abortion candidate.”

Bishop Robert Vasa: “...when candidates for office in these United States make bold assertions that they have every intention of working to assure that the alleged right of a woman to kill her pre-born child is either preserved or even expanded, many Catholics seem to think that it would be morally acceptable to vote for such a candidate as long as they somehow miraculously excised the candidate’s pro-abortion mindset out of the equation. A vote for such a candidate, like it or not, is likewise a vote for the firmly held abortion position; it is inseparable from the person.”

Kentucky Bishops’ Pastoral Letter of 1/22/08: “Catholics cannot vote for a political candidate that takes a position in favor of an intrinsic evil, such as abortion, unless there is a morally grave reason to do so.” (Mr. Kmiec, is the exhibition of inspiring oratory a morally grave reason?)

Bishop Joseph Martino, Pastoral Letter of 10/4/08: “Being “right” on taxes, education, health care, immigration, and the economy fails to make up for the error of disregarding the value of a human life. Consider this: the finest health and education systems, the fairest immigration laws, and the soundest economy do nothing for the child who never sees the light of day. It is a tragic irony that “pro-choice” candidates have come to support homicide – the gravest injustice a society can tolerate – in the name of “social justice.”

But Professor Kmiec doesn’t care to form his conscience by the words of faithful clergy. No, he would rather turn to those infamous members of the Lavender Mafia, Cardinals Mahony and McCarrick, for political and emotional support.

V. The Eucharist as a Weapon?

Mr. Kmiec’s response to every corrective action and teaching of the Church directed at him is to take it as a severe blow to his ego and reputation, and an offense to his feelings (again, a reaction identical to that of the homosexual radicals). Thus it is predictable, though tragic, that he should describe the denial of the Eucharist as a “weapon” to punish him.

No Mr. Kmiec, the Church has not punished you. You have already punished yourself by voting for a notoriously unrepentant pro-abortion candidate and foolishly assuring others that they may do so. You have placed your soul in grave danger by these actions. What the Church does in denying you the Eucharist is to ensure that you do not receive Communion while in a state of mortal sin. Therefore, this action actually protects you from further harm to your soul!

But why hasn’t that simple fact occurred to you? It is because you do not think as a Catholic thinks, which is to consider first and foremost what is good for his soul. As your article demonstrates, you only think of what is good for your reputation; consequently your words reek of egotism and narcissism.

Furthermore, being denied the Eucharist is not an invitation to “discussion,” it is an invitation to Confession and penance. But rather than face this, the Professor suddenly drags those of other faiths into the picture, who “do not see themselves as bound by the Magisterium.” Why this non sequitur? When did this become a matter involving other faiths? The answer is that it never did: this is just another evasive maneuver produced by pride.

In conclusion, we assure Professor Kmiec that we do not presume to effect a change of heart and mind in him, though we do implore him to humble himself before his Creator in the Confessional and repair the damage he has done to his soul and the souls of others. Mr. Kmiec, it is indeed a tangled web we weave - when we seek to deceive ourselves. Has it once occurred to you that you could be completely, irrevocably, unmistakably, absolutely and finally…WRONG?

No, we write this in order to resist the efforts of those who attempt to reconcile the culture of death with the teachings and the sanctity of the Catholic Church. There can be no rapprochement between the sanctity of life and the evil of disposable life. No rapprochement, no détente, no compromise, and, ghost of Joseph Bernardin, no common ground.

Epilogue

Let’s not forget to address the periodical who solicited Mr. Kmiec’s self-pity, self-absolution and evasion of responsibility and then had the poor taste and bad judgment to publish it, thus lowering Catholic discourse to the level of the Oprah Winfrey Show. If our readers hadn’t already concluded that Commonweal was no friend of the Church, they should surely be convinced of it after reading Kmiec’s piece. Or should we just portray them in the same idiom and spirit employed by Kmiec: as a left-wing propaganda sheet?

The Tapeworm Letters, #7

2009-01-28T21:16:00.002-05:00

“My dear Hollywood, I have a little extracurricular assignment for you, one which will provide not only a welcome change of venue, but quite a bit of pleasurable socializing. I would like you to represent me at the next conference of the Common Ground Initiative. A word to the wise is necessary, however, about this excursion. Once the news gets out about your trip, you will no doubt encounter all manner of harsh criticism of this project from certain members of your parish, who will unfailingly take every opportunity to revel in rigidity. For example: “Common Ground is just a means for liberals to obtain prominence and legitimacy for their positions.” Or, “the Church already has common ground in its Scriptures and Traditions, as reflected in the Catechism.” Or, “dissent cannot be dialogued away, and to attempt to do so is to engage in mutual deception.” We may safely dismiss these criticisms as not only mean-spirited and polarizing, but completely inconsequential, as they are parroted by people of no influence who cling desperately to outmoded patterns of thought. You must not allow their petty nagging to wear you down, but you will be required to arm yourself against them in a convincing manner – not only to maintain harmony in your parish, but, on a much more important level, to demonstrate to our little network that you have the intellectual capacity to be successful in our Conciliar world. After all, my real purpose in sending you as my emissary is to introduce you to the highest levels of our brotherhood, a move which will ultimately accrue benefits for us both. Toward that end, I want you to prepare a homily on this topic, approved by me beforehand, which you will not only deliver to your parish, but which I will forward to the Common Ground Committee. In this homily, you will elaborate on the following themes: § The Church is in crisis because the modern world has swept by her; § The Church must respond to this crisis with honesty and imagination, not with rigid defensiveness and internal bickering; § This honesty and imagination is the basis for rebuilding a venue within which our differences may be addressed constructively; § All dialogue will take as its starting point a consensus about “the big picture” – i.e. the essentials of our faith – and our accountability to those essentials. Now, if I have gauged your subtlety of perception correctly, you will have already discerned my use of the phrases “honesty and imagination” and “the big picture,” and the term “accountability.” None of these are typical of the traditional Catholic lexicon, which instead hobbles about on such archaic terms as “Scripture” and “Tradition” and “fidelity.” Your task and ours, my dear Hollywood, is to gently coax the Church, festina lente, away from this Neanderthal orientation and towards a process and a terminology to which the real world can relate. Only by adapting to the world can we be a leavening force in that world! I will have more to say on this once I have reviewed your draft.

Your affectionate Shepherd Tapeworm”

MISCELLANEA AMERICANA

On "The Things that are Caesar's"

2009-01-08T20:57:00.003-05:00

+This week The Flying Buttress takes a little political detour, in order to dissent – while dissent is still permissible – against the prevailing manufactured euphoria regarding the imminent presidency of Barack Obama. +Conventional wisdom holds that we are on the brink of a historic event: a member of a once-enslaved race ascending to the White House. And historic it is. But there are other equally historic dimensions to this event. For example:

America may well have a president who is prohibited by the Constitution from holding this office because he is not a natural-born citizen. Numerous lawsuits, including some initiated by Democrats, have been filed over Obama’s true birthplace and lack of valid birth certificate. Members of his own family claim he was born in Kenya. Is Obama a usurper? Will we ever know, or will the evidence continue to be suppressed by him and others?

The foremost elected promoter of infanticide in American history was essentially voted into office by the moral turpitude of Catholic laity, religious and clergy, who dismissed or ignored the public warnings of some (but not nearly enough) priests and bishops and instead voted for the Utopian mirage of “racial healing.” Did this happen because of the casual Conciliar cafeteria mentality, the prideful attitude that every individual knows better than the Magisterium, and the worldly confidence that sin and its consequences really aren’t anything to worry about? Or did everyone forget that only Christ, not a politician, can bring peace?

More than sixty-three million Americans voted for “change,” responding affirmatively to a candidate who portrayed himself as the righteous advocate of the disenfranchised, the virtuous warrior against corruption, the apostle of hope, the outsider who would clean house and who would end our military adventures in the Middle East. Yet:

This media-polished and media-buffed illusion is nothing more than a product of the corrupt Chicago political machine, a machine whose corruption we can deduce even with only a glimpse at the tip of the Blagojevich scandal. “Change”? “Outsider”?

This media-polished and media-buffed illusion has populated his Cabinet and administration with Clinton re-treads and Bush holdovers, and it has become apparent that “change” means a third Clinton administration. “Change”? “Virtue”?

This media-polished and media-buffed illusion will not only NOT withdraw the United States from the so-called “War on Terror” in the Middle East, he will intensify our entanglement! “Change”? “Hope”?

· This was perhaps the first presidential election in American history where neither major candidate was qualified by experience to serve in the office for which he ran. · It was the first presidential election in American history where the media openly worked to promote one major candidate and openly worked to subvert the other. · It was the first presidential election in American history where one candidate raised nearly a billion dollars (see our second “Miscellanea” link for the source of much of this money). · It may have been the first presidential election in American history where hundreds of thousands of votes (a conservative estimate) were registered and cast illegally, thanks to an organization (ACORN) who received more than $800,000 from the Obama campaign. · And finally, it is the first presidential election in American history where the winning candidate has a long rap sheet of close associations with radical socialism, communism, black liberation “theology,” and domestic terrorism.

+There is a Lutheran Church on the east side of Cincinnati which has displayed the following outdoor sign since November 5th:

“THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN. NOW GOD WILL SPEAK.”

+The Protestants, as usual, are largely far ahead of us in assessing the coming danger. And the coming danger can be discerned by evaluating its mouthpiece, Barack Obama. Obama is a serviceable prop, a prop not only for corrupt self-interest and business as usual, but also for an entrenched and powerful international criminal syndicate that serves neither America, nor her sovereignty, nor her Constitution, nor her foundation in the morality of Judeo-Christian civilization, nor her citizens.

+America, in fact, is not only economically bankrupt from war, Wall Street, and Washington, but as this past election proves, she is politically and morally bankrupt as well, and we therefore suggest to you that the most historic dimension of all of January 20th, 2009 will be this:

AMERICA AS WE KNOW IT WILL SOON BE...HISTORY.

~ Miscellanea Catholica ~ +Obama and the Laughable Beast +George Soros Funds the Catholic Left +The University of San Francisco provides abortion coverage +Catholic politicians funded by abortion lobby +Beware the book "Conversations with God." ~ Miscellanea Americana ~ +This week we begin a new section dedicated to recalling the optimism, innocence and traditions of the American culture and character that flourished before the cynical depravity of liberalism destroyed it, and to help inspire our readers to fight against the coming hegemony of the Satanic tyranny known as the United Nations/New World Order. +The Stars and Stripes Forever +Anchors Aweigh +The Longest Day March +The Caissons Go Rolling Along +The US Air Force Song +The Marines' Hymn

Ring Out, Wild Bells

2008-12-26T21:26:00.003-05:00

Ring out, wild bells, to the wild sky, The flying cloud, the frosty light; The year is dying in the night; Ring out, wild bells, and let him die. Ring out the old, ring in the new, Ring, happy bells, across the snow: The year is going, let him go; Ring out the false, ring in the true. Ring out the grief that saps the mind, For those that here we see no more, Ring out the feud of rich and poor, Ring in redress to all mankind. Ring out a slowly dying cause, And ancient forms of party strife; Ring in the nobler modes of life, With sweeter manners, purer laws. Ring out the want, the care the sin, The faithless coldness of the times; Ring out, ring out my mournful rhymes, But ring the fuller minstrel in. Ring out false pride in place and blood, The civic slander and the spite; Ring in the love of truth and right, Ring in the common love of good. Ring out old shapes of foul disease, Ring out the narrowing lust of gold; Ring out the thousand wars of old, Ring in the thousand years of peace. Ring in the valiant man and free, The larger heart, the kindlier hand; Ring out the darkness of the land, Ring in the Christ that is to be. -Alfred, Lord Tennyson

Hodie Christus Natus Est

2008-12-18T21:24:00.000-05:00

O magnum mysterium Et admirabile sacramentum et animalia viderunt Dominum natum jacentem in praesepio. O beata virgo, cujus viscera meruerunt portare Dominum Jesum Christum. Alleluia! -Tomas luis de Victoria The Flying Buttress wishes our readers a Christmas filled with His grace, holiness, peace and joy.

The Tapeworm Letters, #6

2008-12-09T18:28:00.000-05:00

"My Dear Hollywood, I should have warned you that it was only a matter of time before one of your resident tradition-hankerers objected to our diocesan Safe Environment program. Thank heaven it is only one - you must act swiftly and decisively in order to keep this person isolated. Do not let this virus spread, under any circumstances! You know as well as I how much care and effort we have invested in commissioning and refining a program which not only shifts the burden of suspicion, accusation and guilt away from our little network, but succeeds in placing the consequences of scandal onto the laity and, to top it all off, conditions youth to become our future recruits! Brilliant! Therefore, for some doddering old fool to question the program because because she saw an article about that CMA rant which questions its appropriateness, or because she heard about some lowbrow group in Tucson who hurled those interminable polemics at Billy Skylstad, is unacceptable. What unmitigated impudence! Does their chutzpah never end? Carthago delenda est! But I digress. Your response to this effrontery should take its theme from that very care and effort I just cited. I suggest you dwell at great length on all the collegial hard work that has gone into this curriculum, the meetings, the studies, the professionally credentialed and highly respected psychologists, the reports - all the result, you add, of the deepest and most heartfelt concern for the "victims," and especially of our universal desire to respond quickly to the shame inflicted on the Church! But this is not merely a private and personal initiative on your part - once again it involves the pulpit, and thus calls for considerable passion, the most animated emotional affect, and a thinly-veiled sense of outrage that such exhaustive efforts could be questioned. In fact, to suggest that this person has crossed the threshold of sanity, and perhaps resembles one's crazy aunt living in the attic, would not be out of the question. I leave that to your instincts. As an insurance policy, one preliminary step is advisable before you launch into any righteous invective: request that your parish Education Commission review this person's complaint (as summarized by you, that is, with appropriate spin) and issue an opinion in your parish newsletter affirming that the curriculum is indeed the very best thing "for the children." (In advising this step, it goes without saying that you have already tested the fidelity of your Commission members to our Conciliar playbook, and found none of them wanting). And finally, if you sense that none of these attempts at marginalization are working, and having by then, one would fervently hope, realized the importance of this issue to our very survival, you have the ace up your sleeve: invoke the USCCB charter. Imagine - a national network of bureaucrats in service to our cause!

Your affectionate shepherd, TAPEWORM"

An Open Letter to Coadjutor Archbishop Dennis M. Schnurr

2008-11-12T21:26:00.003-05:00

Your Excellency, On behalf of the long-suffering faithful of the Cincinnati Archdiocese, we warmly welcome you. You are probably familiar with this newsletter from your former post in Duluth, so it may surprise you that this issue is not only directed to you personally, but is also a straightforward greeting and not a satirical one. Though you surely by now have been briefed on the state of the Archdiocese, we are guessing that you have not been briefed on why this newsletter exists. If you are somewhat disconcerted by our stagnant revenue, the shortage of priests, parish closings, and the ill will generated by the sex abuse scandals, we are hoping and praying that you are much more profoundly disturbed by other, much darker problems - which, it could be said, are the real causes of the more superficial problems with which you are now familiar. For example: Your New Archdiocese is Hostile to Tradition. (Note: by "Archdiocese" we mean its leadership, so-called, not its faithful) Your newspaper, The Catholic Telegraph, is a reliable indicator of this. Its Editor, Tricia Hempel, wrote a column a few years ago dismissing the desire for the old Mass as a mere nostalgia, equivalent to a sentimental wistfulness for old pop tunes and old TV shows. The Telegraph also did its level best to discourage local Catholics from going to see Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ, on the grounds that it was terribly offensive. Fr. Timothy Daly, a syndicated enemy of tradition, has regular column space.

Given this hostility, Summorum Pontificum has not been implemented in any parish, despite interest in several parishes among both priests and laity. Those priests understand where the hostility comes from (by contrast, there are already two parishes in the much smaller diocese of Covington, across the river, which have instituted the "Extraordinary Form.")
In other words, the marginalized status of the two former "indult" parishes effectively remains the same as it was before Summorum.
A few years ago, your soon-to-be predecessor rejected an offer from the FSSP, which is locally based in southern Indiana, to help with the priest shortage here. Priest shortage? What priest shortage? (An FSSP priest now says the "EF" at both former indult parishes - that is the extent of their involvement.)

Your New Archdiocese is a Nest of Dissent. Much of it comes from the Theology and other faculties of Xavier University - and those whom they have "educated" - who are in the forefront of those who think that the Church was re-invented and "liberated" by Vatican II. So, rather than fidelity to the Holy Father and to the Magisterium, we have "dialogue" and "nuancing." Rather than solumn liturgy, we have experimentation and novelty and desacralization. Rather than social justice grounded in Faith, we have faith drained away by left-wing social activism. Disgraceful garbage such as "Constantine's Sword" and the alleged anti-Semitism in the New Testament are taken seriously among this "elite," which includes Arthur Dewey, who is associated with the Jesus Seminar, and until recently included Paul Knitter, a fellow traveler of Dewey's and a founding member of that Seminar.

The liberal and desacralized approach of Xavier is either featured or echoed regularly in The Catholic Telegraph, which is known to many of the faithful here, generously, as the "Occasionally Catholic Telegraph."
The University of Dayton is not exactly a fortress of fidelity either.

Your New Archdiocese is a Nest of Homosexual Advocacy (and, by inference...). Your soon-to-be predecessor and his former auxiliary, Carl Moeddel, were for years heavily involved in assisting groups like "Dignity," GLSEN and NACDLGM in their assault against the Church's teaching on homosexuality. Moeddel is on record numerous times as misrepresenting, distorting and outright falsifying Church teaching in the name of "compassion."

Moeddel's efforts culminated in the formation of a "support group" for gay and lesbian high school students known as "CRYSM" - Catholics Respecting Youth in Sexual Minorities - which by its very nature gave credence to the lie that making homosexuality an objectively disordered sin is an act of hate, discrimination and bigotry that must be combated. CRYSM has now been disbanded due in large part to the efforts of outraged parents, but the filthy mind-set that created CRYSM still skulks below the surface.
The faculties of both St. Xavier High School and Xavier University are both infested with those who support Moeddel's position. Hint: both of these institutions are Jesuit.
If you've read "Good-Bye, Good Men," then you know that our Seminary was formerly notorious for its homosexual subculture. This appears to have been largely cleaned up, and the Seminary faculty is now blessed with a few wonderful and holy priests. But there are other focal points for this subculture, such as:

A parish in Clifton (the University of Cincinnati's neighborhood), St. Monica-St. George, is well-known as a "gay-friendly" parish.
We suggest you look into those involved in promoting the observance of the "National Day of Silence" at St. X High School.

Your Parishes are Largely Controlled by Liberals. You will find that the parish staff - Pastoral Associates, DRE's, youth ministers, deacons - of most Cincinnati parishes are quite liberal, even militantly so, and typically feminists, for whom the term "inclusive language" is a cool breeze on a hot summer's day. In this they reflect and complement the secularized arrogance, dishonesty and mediocrity of the rest of the self-styled "intelligentsia" of this Archdiocese: the diocesan bureaucrats, the editorial staff of the Telegraph, and the university faculties.

Needless to say, the apples of liberal catechesis do not fall far from the liberal tree.

We have sketched for you the root causes of Cincinnati's decline, causes which could be stated even more succintly: the Faith has been abandoned. Not only abandoned, but scorned in favor of an entirely different religion - politically correct and academically prestigious, but most assuredly not Catholic. Finally, we urge you not to take our word for any of these things, but to investigate them for yourself. In the meantime, our hopes and prayers are with you.

Sincerely Yours in Christ, "Tomas de Torquemada"

The Tapeworm Letters, #5

2008-11-11T17:53:00.000-05:00

"My dear Hollywood, I see that I cannot escape the tedious charade of the presidential election that is upon us once again. No doubt many of your parishioners - the more dutiful among the sheeple - have inquired about voting with "an informed conscience." You may recall, from your seminary days, my private assessment of this political theater-cum-popularity contest: Americans do not really choose their president. Why? Because the candidates of both major parties only appear to be opponents. That is, the choice is not really between opposing platforms, but merely between two facets of the same platform. The Democrats, you see, are responsible for the cultural revolution, while the Republicans oversee the economic revolution. This little pre-arranged show has been drawn up by our powerful behind-the-scenes benefactors - and who are we to object when it is our brethren who will benefit? We are not fools! Now of course the ignorant will whoop like cranes about this candidate's position on abortion (which we so recently discussed), that candidate's position on illegal immigration, the war on terrorism, social and environmental justice, the death penalty, drilling for "American" oil, stem cell research, the marriage amendment...let me see...have I overlooked anything? In point of fact, they are examining the icing while ignoring the cake, the substance of which is that our Brave New World will continue to take shape no matter which puppet sits in the Oval Office. Such are the birds and the bees of politics, which you must never divulge to the uninitiated. Instead, you will emulate the press by sending your charges off on one superficial wild goose chase after another, such as the one which our little network has produced through the USCCB. Toward that end, I heartily recommend your perusal of their most recent document on "Faithful Citizenship." You will find it strongly reminiscent of Donnie Wuerl's masterpiece on denying Communion, though it achieves equivocation by contradiction rather than by the illusion of noble collegiality. For example: A Catholic cannot vote for a candidate who takes a position in favor of an intrinsic evil, such as abortion or racism, if the voter's intent is to support that position. In such cases a Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in grave evil (#34). Sounds like it might pass muster, no? But wait: as if by magic, a loophole appears! There may be times when a Catholic who rejects a candidate's unacceptable position may decide to vote for that candidate for other morally grave reasons. Voting in this way would be permissible only for truly grave moral reasons, not to advance narrow interests or partisan preferences or to ignore a fundamental moral evil (#35). And just in case the would-be voter is not yet tied in knots, we come back with this: In making these decisions, it is essential for Catholics to be guided by a well-formed conscience that recognizes that all issues do not carry the same moral weight and that the moral obligation to oppose intrinsically evil acts has a special claim on our consciences and our actions (#37). You see, my boy, in order to serve our cause we must become the masters of the blind alley, the dead end, the enigma, the sleight of hand, the Gordian Knot. Our palette never consists of blacks and whites, but of endless shades of gray.

Your affectionate Shepherd, TAPEWORM"

The Tapeworm Letters, #4

2008-11-11T17:32:00.000-05:00

"My dear Hollywood,

O that I had expended more effort to extirpate the rabble-rousers in your parish! So now they are demanding that Senator X be denied Communion, are they? I suppose they are flailing you with his position on abortion.

I am satisfied of your understanding that we cannot, without exception, offend or alienate powerful and influential public figures, especially those like Senator X who have been so helpful to our cause. Thankfully, you have several resources at your disposal with which to deflect and defuse this issue, the first of which - need I really remind you? - is that your bishop has not issued any instructions to his priests on the matter! However, should any of your troublemakers happen to clear that standard hurdle, this provides you with an opportunity to learn at the feet of a master. I refer to none other than our compatriot Donnie Wuerl, whose 2005 statement on the subject is a tour de force of obfuscation, evasiveness and bureaucratic double-talk. How he thought up that "national ramifications" line is beyond me - such brilliance even surpasses calling the 1962 Missal the "Extraordinary Form"! Lest you miss the point of Donnie's "collegial" stratagem, note that his appeal to unity in effect guarantees that in most cases nothing absolutely nothing at all will be accomplished, since our little network always sees to it that there is no unity on anything, except within our own camp. My dear Hollywood, the only unity that will serve out cause is unanimity with that very cause - which, as you know, is a long way off. In the meantime, we shall divide and conquer. Ad astra per aspera! But what, you ask, are you to tell your parishioners who continue to press their case? I will sum up my response by coining a clever phrase: give ambiguity a Wuerl! Start with the personal warning - that due to Senator X's hectic schedule, you have not been able to sit down with him to converse about his position. Then use our "consistent ethic of life" ploy - that we must examine the entire spectrum of his policies, rather than just taking one completely out of context, and if that is done, then it will become apparent that the Senator's overall record is quite favorable to the Church and to our "hierarchy of beliefs." And finally, you might adopt the position of another adept, Nancy Pelosi (would that she were a religious!), who uttered this gem: "I believe that my position on choice is one that is consistent with my Catholic upbringing, which said that every person has a free will and has the responsibility to live their lives in a way that they would have to account for in the end." There you have it, old boy, a potent arsenal indeed. Welcome to the deep end of the pool!

Your affectionate Shepherd, TAPEWORM"

The Tapeworm Letters, #3

2008-11-09T21:40:00.000-05:00

"My dear Hollywood, While we are on the subject of the "Extraordinary Form," do indulge me in a little quiz. Do you know the real reason why the bishops and priests of our little network are so enamored of - even dependent on- the Missal of Paul VI? It has to do with acceptance and authority. Since I have protected you, and all my priests, from any knowledge of that detestable old Missal, you will not understand a comparison between the two forms, and you will have to trust my wisdom and judgment on the matter. The new Missal, under the guise of bestowing upon the people a greater role, a more active participation, and a clearer comprehension, completely revolutionizes and alters the traditional authority of the priest. Now, before you object to a loss which you didn't even know had afflicted you, let me remind you that it is not authority that our priests want, it is acceptance: acceptance of our way of life. After all, we don't wish to draw undue attention to our uniqueness, do we? And what better way to obtain acceptance than by diffusing your authority to the point where you are practically one of the assembly? What a godsend, to take so much attention off you and place it instead amongst all those busy bees: lectors, deacons, extraordinary ministers, Our Father hand-holders, petitioners and peace passers! Not only that, but what little attention that remains fixed on you is no longer as an authority figure, but as a master of ceremonies - and I don't mean a traditional one! My dearest Hollywood, the new Missal gives entirely new meaning to the term "Host"! And you know as well as I that, if nothing else, our brethren are riveting entertainers... No doubt you are wondering whether the slack of this lost authority is taken up elsewhere. I assure you that it is, and that is the other half of the equation. Don't think for one moment, however, that your lost authority is somehow distributed among the laity! Pah - Marxist rubbish! This is just a clever ruse, a feint towards populism, a master stroke by Bugnini and his Consilium! Besides, what would those ignorant sheep in the pews know about matters in which we are so highly trained? No, it is the bishop who takes up your lost authority. And yes, that makes your dependency on us, your fealty to us, greater than ever before. Both Missals demand fidelity: one to Tradition, the other to the Conciliar playbook, the scripts of the Spirit of Vatican II. But who writes and enforces those scripts? We do, and that makes us your masters! You see, you are the vassals, and we are the feudal lords. Fortunately for you, and for our brethren, I am a benevolent lord who always rewards correct behavior with great munificence. Cuius regio, eius religio. Now do you understand why we bishops cannot possibly admit the old Missal into our dioceses? Our priests lost acceptance and our bishops lose authority. Such losses would be devastating, a veritable anathema.

Your affectionate Shepherd, TAPEWORM"

The Tapeworm Letters, #2

2008-11-06T10:06:00.000-05:00

"My dear Hollywood, I am most displeased to learn that a "stable" group of your parishioners has requested a weekly Mass in the so-called Extraordinary Form. I will resist the temptation to chalk up this unfortunate development as your first failure, realizing that we can probably lay this scandal at the feet of your predecessor - who, as the result of his audacious disobedience, now toils among the decrepit in a malodorous nursing home. We shall of course focus on your response, which - if you are wise - will vary from individual to individual, yet which sounds pleasing to all, argumentum ad captandum. Two principles should guide your interaction with these loathsome nostalgics: one, you are all things to all people, and two, divide and conquer. What do I mean by this? I recommend an individual meeting with each member of this misguided group. Probe for their character flaws (which, I am sure, you have already catalogued from their confessions) and exploit them, all the while making them feel quite good about themselves. For example, is Person A an officious busybody? Then assign them an important-sounding task, such as investigating the relevant issues: adding another Mass to your already crowded schedule, finding a priest who knows Latin and the rubrics (knowledge of which, I trust, I have long since snuffed out of this diocese!), and calculating the cost of extra utilities for heat, light and air conditioning - not to mention the extra costs for your organist and cantor. Is Person B insufferably pious? Their task, then, could be to pray for divine guidance as to how to pull this thing off. Whatever you do, make sure you send each one off in an entirely different direction, feeling very good indeed about themselves (and you!) and delaying as long as possible any opportunity for them to make further connection with each other. In addition to this strategem, you ought to use your bully pulpit to subtle effect. Carefully - you do not want to offend the loathsome traditionalists (or have them vote with their checkbooks), you only seek to inject even the faintest doubt and nagging guilt among them - develop the concept of "nostalgia," comparing the desire for the old Mass to a wistful wish for days gone by, for old popular songs and old TV shows. If need be, throw in a few reliable chestnuts about Vatican II, with some vague warnings about violating its spirit - or even, for that matter, its letter (how many of these ignoramuses have actually read a Council document?). For my part, as you know, I have already formed a committe of retired priests to examine the credentials of any of you who may dare to request this Missal. I trust it is well understood that anyone who is foolish enough to make such an outrageous request will not only flunk that exam quite miserably, but will be sure to face a prolonged battery of psychological tests... Your affectionate Shepherd, TAPEWORM"

The Tapeworm Letters, #1

2008-11-06T09:46:00.001-05:00

PREFACE

+The Flying Buttress will of course never divulge how the correspondence which we are about to publish fell into our hands. +There are two equal and interrelated tendencies into which traditional Catholics fall when evaluating liberal bishops. One is to impute their liberalism to homosexuality. The other is to attribute it to the "Spirit of Vatican II." +Liberal bishops themselves are equally amused by both. They chuckle with glee when their nebulous subterfuges, cloaked in the latter, somehow pass muster, and smirk privately but knowingly when the former charge is leveled against them. +Our readers are advised to remember that liberal bishops, of either persuasions, are liars. Whether mutilating the faith for their own ends, or even when dispensing their grubby confidences or tawdry advice to those of like mind, as these letters do, their offerings cannot be taken at face value, for the possibility of betrayal and exposure is always present, and the necessity of plausible denial is always at the back of their minds. +Finally, the identity of the author of these letters does not matter. He could be any one of the dozens of sexual, doctrinal and theological Pol Pot-ted perverts who are presently dripping their self-serving poison into the veins of the Church and leading the souls of the faithful to the slaughter. +We present the first in the series. "My dear Hollywood, I note with considerable amusement your anxiety over being assigned to a "conservative" parish. You seem to forget that I have spent countless hours doing my best to place certain "moles" in all my parishes, who quietly monitor the local presentation of the faith and who report back to me any potential or actual deviation from our Conciliar playbook. You see, my friend, in a Conciliar world, "conservative," as with everything else, is relative. You seem to fear that your little secret will be discovered; I assure you that it is safe with me and with our brethren - who, by the way, have long since moved past your tiresome novice drama. And no, I do not have the manpower to assign you a mentor to coach you in appearances! There is one principle by which we are obliged to live our double life, and that is this: "orthodoxy sells." This no doubt seems to create a glaring contradiction with my previous advice, but keep this in mind: like the rest of humanity, what we clergy preach is one thing; what we mean and what we practice is another! Yes, you must at all times appear to be orthodox. Yet, in keeping with the techniques used with such wonderful effect at the Second Vatican Council, the language in which you couch your orthodoxy is crucial. For example, how do you describe the Eucharist? Not, heaven forbid, as the Holy and Unbloody Sacrifice - no, refer to it as the "Memorial Meal," that which honors the "memory of Christ," or some such feel-good rhapsody. The poor fools in the pews will nod approvingly at the sound of your words and the soothing tone of your voice - those elements, after all, are what reaches them, not the rigid mechanistic zeal of Rome. Let us dwell on this last idea somewhat. The perennial question is, how do you make your parishioners feel? Guilty? Sinful? Ashamed? Or loved, comforted, assured? Do they feel a sense of belonging to a benevolent and accepting community, or do they squirm and shrivel up in the glaring spotlight of accusation, cowing before your pointed finger? You can live by these words: the people must like you. Once you win them over, they will become your allies, not only unwilling to imagine the possibility of any deviation on your part, but always ready to defend you in the face of any accusation. I conclude with a note of disappointment at your ingratitude. Have you forgotten that it was I who placed you in this parish? Has it once occurred to you the reason, that being the highest and most heartfelt personal esteem, ab imo pectore, in which I hold you? Have I not told you repeatedly that you have the makings of the greatest of all us great pretenders?

Your affectionate Shepherd, TAPEWORM"

Journey to the Center of the Faith

2008-10-28T20:17:00.000-04:00

+In this, our last issue of the 2007-2008 publishing season, we recall the story of Sodom, in which God agrees that He will not destroy the city if there are 50 righteous people in it, then 45, then 30, then 20, and finally, only ten righteous people.

+Abraham’s fascinating negotiation provokes several questions: one, how many righteous Catholics would it have taken to avert what Gerald Warner calls the “Second Vatican Catastrophe” (to which we add the moniker “the Sodom of Modernism”)? Two, what is a righteous Catholic? Three, why are we asking such abstruse questions?

+Consider this: traditionalists have engaged in the battle for the restoration of the Catholic faith, but do they really understand why the faith was so badly obscured in the first place? Or will the same mistake be repeated?

+The predominant strain of traditionalist thought holds that if only the Church could return to its pre-Vatican II state, all Conciliar chaos would be healed. It also holds that during this pre-Vatican II era, the Church was strong: Catholic education was sound and turned out phalanxes of well-catechized and devout laity, consciences were well-formed, priests were holy and faithful, doctrines were clear and succint, bishops were good shepherds. The Church flourished.

+This assessment begs the painful but obvious question: if the pre-Vatican II Church was so healthy, then why, when attacked by her ancient enemy, did she collapse like a house of cards (romanita translation: “experience renewal”) in a just few short years?

+The Flying Buttress proposes an unpalatable answer to this unpalatable question, an answer which we do not intend or pretend to be definitive, but one which, we hope, will stimulate thought and prayer. Our answer is that the traditional Church collapsed because there was a grave weakness among her human members: there were not enough righteous souls within the Body of Christ. In other words, the appearance of strength was precisely that: the Church was in some way hollow, and thus failed to repel the attack. Therefore, not only is the “Conciliar Church” a “great façade,” but, tragically, and in a different sense, so was the traditional Church.

+Could this hollowness have been what John XXIII sensed, causing him to call a Council? (Though he apparently never understood that the Church could not possibly become more attractive to the world, nor more potent in the world, by becoming more like the world.)

+Could it have been what Dom Jean-Baptiste Chautard was referring to in 1907, when he appealed, in The Soul of the Apostolate, to the “soldiers of Christ” who “might be exposed, because of the very activity they display, to the danger of not being, above all, men of interior life?”

+Question No. 2: what is a righteous Catholic? The formulaic answer to this question is that a righteous Catholic is a good Catholic. For example, §204 from the Baltimore Catechism, “How can a Catholic best safeguard his faith?”:

“A Catholic can best safeguard his faith by making frequent acts of faith, by praying for a strong faith, by studying his religion very earnestly, by living a good life, by good reading, by refusing to associate with the enemies of the Church, and by not reading books and papers opposed to the Church and her teaching.”

+However, we are not going to settle for the formulaic answer, since we suspect that, ultimately, that answer was responsible for Vatican II and its aftermath. We propose that being a good Catholic is not righteousness, but is in fact the foundation for righteousness, the preparation for righteousness, and the first prerequisite for righteousness. In other words, righteousness is the next step. So how do we define righteousness? We turn to St. Francis de Sales for a clue:

“The purpose of the Interior Life is to unite one’s soul to God.” (Introduction to the Devout Life)

+Righteousness is the pursuit of the interior life, which is the pursuit of union of one’s soul with God. Righteousness is living Catholic mysticism.

+Is it reasonable to expect all the laity to seek the path of the Catholic mystic? No, even though, according to John Paul II (Novo Millenio Ineunte), that path is open to all Catholics. How many good Catholics are there, let alone how many approach the narrow gate? Nevertheless, if the story of Sodom is a guide, then might it take only a relatively small number of Catholic mystics to make the Church whole, by the grace of God?

+With that in mind, we leave you to ponder this: who among us will ignite in their hearts the flame of desire for the mystical union with Christ? And who among us, in so doing, will help return the Church to her holy servitude?

Keeping Up With the Funeses

2008-06-07T18:42:00.000-04:00

+Not wishing to be eclipsed by the Vatican Observatory's endorsement of the possibility of other forms of life in the universe, the Director of the Vatican‘s newly formed Institute for the Study of Karma and Dharma, at Parma, today issued a statement outlining the Church’s latest position on the doctrines and practices of occultism.

+Speaking to a group of journalists gathered with him around his crystal ball, Father Giovanni della Piccolo Bologna, SJ, also known as the Vatican’s Chief Sorcerer, indicated his openness to the idea that assorted new age beliefs were entirely compatible with Roman Catholicism.

“Since it is the duty of the Church to consecrate the mundane to the Kingship of Christ,” said Fr. Bologna, “must it not also be our duty as well to consecrate the ultramundane?”

+When Flying Buttress new age correspondent Saul Invictus pointed out that the term “ultramundane” might be unfamiliar to the Church at large, Father explained that these are the forces and energies that reside within the hidden planes of existence, yet which can have a palpable effect on our daily physical lives when invoked.

“We of the Church,” added Father, “always keeping our windows and doors open to the fresh air of modern times, cannot but consider that the invocation of hidden forces stems from an instinctive desire to ameliorate the suffering of humanity. The Church must find common ground with this desire, and give it her blessing; to fail to do so would be to put false and artificial limits on our universal salvific mission!”

+After distributing a gift set of chakra-balancing crystals to each reporter, giving individual Tarot readings, and exchanging secret handshakes all around, Fr. Bologna handed out a copy of a brief official statement, which read as follows:

“By positioning itself to bridge the gap between the Church and the occult, our Institute has boldly staked out a territory where few have ventured before us. The ancient Mystery Religions are an invaluable part of the heritage and dignity of the human race, and those who practice these arts must be considered our brothers and sisters.

What could better illustrate this deep bond than the scientific finding that praying Franciscan monks and magicians chanting spells generate similar brain scans?

Furthermore, in holding to that spiritual quest which defines the Church, let us also recognize that this same quest, in its search for understanding of the worlds around and within us, makes use of tools historically condemned by the Church, such as telepathy, clairvoyance, divination and telekenesis. This condemnation has caused deep fissures among mankind, and we wish to heal these wounds of incomprehension.

Dare we say it, that our Holy Father is the Vicar, not only of the Church, but of all beliefs? Let us then, as we acknowledge the legitimacy of the hidden sciences, apply the principle of ecumenism inaugurated at Vatican II. Let us give a new name to our audacious pursuit of unity: we hereby christen it “ecu-esotericism.”

+Unfortunately, Father Bologna was forced to end his audience rather abruptly, when a strange pinkish ectoplasm was observed inexplicably seeping from his nostrils. The Flying Buttress will of course report any new developments to this story...

Miscellanea CATHOLICA

+If you believe you have had a paranormal experience or a brush with the occult, the researchers at Fr. Bologna’s Institute would like to investigate your case. You may contact them here. (click on “English”)

In Search of the Historical Pilarczyk

2008-05-14T05:41:00.000-04:00

+The Flying Buttress is pleased to announce that a coalition of traditionalist scholars and theologians has received a planning grant from The Flying Buttress Foundation to develop a new think tank, whose purpose is to determine - through a careful study of his life and writings - the sexual orientation of Cincinnati Archbishop Daniel Pilarczyk. Coalition fellows, with affiliations as diverse as the FSSP, SSPX, SSPV, ICRSS, PAASJV, CMRI, TGIF, LSMFT and Una Voce, have named themselves “The Pilarczyk Seminar.”

+The Foundation staff, whose spacious and well-appointed offices are right across the hall from our Editorial Board Room, was kind enough to share The Pilarczyk Seminar’s proposal abstract with us, with the hope that its widespread publication would fuel Catholic interest in this groundbreaking new initiative:

“The proposed Pilarczyk Seminar wishes to undertake a scholarly investigation that will have significant consequences not only for the Cincinnati Archdiocese, but for many dioceses throughout the United States: a documented determination of the likelihood that Daniel Pilarczyk is a homosexual.

We will pursue this goal using two methods: one, a painstaking analysis of Pilarczyk’s recorded public statements, and two, a parallel and likewise meticulous consideration of Pilarczyk’s written opus. In order to achieve these goals, our first task will be to synthesize, standardize and verify the widely scattered rumors, anecdotes and underground, somewhat apocalyptic accounts describing and commenting on the personal relationships and activities of his ministry. We will then undertake a comprehensive campaign to educate the Catholic world on our findings, so that priest, layman, scholar and student may develop a well-formed assessment of this controversial figure. It is also our fervent hope that this study may serve as a best practice for future studies of other controversial figures in the Church.

Of particular interest to the fellows of The Pilarczyk Seminar is the rumored existence of a document which allegedly spells out, in vivid detail, the sexual activities of His Excellency. Known to scholars as the Lost Queer Chronicle, it has come to be known simply as “Q.” Seminar scholars believe that much, if not all, of the accounts of Pilarczyk’s sexuality were copied from this pre-existing “Q’ document, and that our determination of his orientation, if it is to be inerrant, must begin with a thorough reconstruction of “Q.”

According to our admittedly speculative analysis, “Q” can be subdivided into three sections, Q1, Q2 and Q3. Q1 would be a transcription of oral traditions stretching back to the sexual customs of Sparta, as discussed on the walls of the men’s room at Mt. St. Mary Seminary, and would deal with such questions as man-boy love, the ideal male physique, and current trends in interior décor. Q1 reflects the early Pilarczyk, the Bernardin protégé, as a firm believer in alternative sexual lifestyles, but probably provides no indications that he practiced what he preached.

Q2 adds another anecdotal layer to Q1, being characteristic of the atmosphere of unbridled freedom and license which swept through the Church during the 1970s and 1980s as a result of the “Spirit of Vatican II.” Q2 would contain evidence that disordered sexual practices and preferences, as well as a philosophical alignment with “liberation theology,” were the primary criteria not only for admission into Seminary but for all parish assignments, and that this environment was conditioned by the desires of Pilarczyk himself. Q2, however, might still be missing the proverbial smoking gun.

Finally, there are the rather brazen Q3 anecdotes, which come to us from the period of the culture war and the pride of “coming out,” and which reflect confidence in the superiority and ultimate victory of homosexuality over the Judeo-Christian moral code in a final ecstatic catharsis of blazing sexual glory. Q3 material would not only confirm the suspicions generated by Q1 and Q2, but provide free-standing evidence of homosexual orientation.

As to procedural method, the Pilarczyk Seminar will conduct all its deliberations in public. Decisions on the significance and import of each passage of text under consideration will be arrived at by voting, using the following system of colored beads:

Hot pink: “Pilarczyk is undoubtedly gay;”

Fuchsia: “Pilarczyk is probably gay;”

Lavender: “Pilarczyk may be gay because he is highly sympathetic to gays;”

Puce: “Pilarczyk may not be gay but is the victim of jealous rumor and innuendo.”

Finally, our reconstruction of Daniel Pilarczyk will pose critical questions based on our determination of his sexuality. For example, was he really a Roman Catholic archbishop faithful to the teachings of the Magisterium, or was he an itinerant Eastern European sexual shaman who went about initiating underage young men into his scrofulous cultus? Did his written opus really affirm Catholic dogma, or was it an esoteric system of hidden themes and code words containing keys to his sexual gospel?

The Pilarczyk Seminar eagerly anticipates funding from The Flying Buttress Foundation so that we may begin our rigorous process of discovery.”

Miscellanea CATHOLICA

+The New Stage Collective Theater in Cincinnati will present the blasphemous “Jerry Springer: The Opera” from June 26 to August 3. We request that you send an e-mail protest to ericamckeown@newstagecollective.com The disgusting details of this piece of garbage have been compiled by the Catholic League here.

+This same theater has just completed a production of “Bug,” which featured a Content Advisory, according to the theater’s website, of “Mature Themes/Full Nudity.” This show was sponsored by Dr. Robert J. Theirauf, Professor Emeritus at Xavier University. Those Jesuit achievements just keep on rolling in.

+“Spirit of Vatican II” Department: the Diocese of Toledo, on its webpage for Our Lady Queen of the Most Holy Rosary Cathedral, an extraordinarily beautiful church, boasts the following:

“The Cathedral, a masterpiece of art and a monument of immigrant faith, most recently experienced a new birth as the mother church of Toledo in its renewal and renovation according to the directives of the Second Vatican Council. In 1979, Bishop John Donovan, our fifth shepherd, re-dedicated the altar (now brought forward to the people)...”

The Flying Buttress hereby invites the Diocese of Toledo to cite the Vatican II document, chapter and verse, which includes directives for moving altars or any other architectural changes. We will be happy to publish your response. Our response is below.

+Debunking the myth that Vatican II called for any architectural changes.

The National Conspiracy of Silence

2008-04-19T07:23:00.001-04:00

A Flying Buttress Alert

+April 25 has been designated by the Homosexual Mafia as a “National Day of Silence,” to encourage high school students to protest the alleged bullying, name-calling and harassment against “gays” and to demonstrate their solidarity with them.

+The Flying Buttress is commenting on this event because a Catholic high school in the Archdiocese of Cincinnati, St. Xavier, is listed as participating in this scandal.

+This should come as no surprise to our readers, given that St. X is a Jesuit high school, that it is located in a lavender diocese, and that our Archbishop, Daniel Pilarczyk, has made a career out of undermining the teachings of the Church by supporting the homosexual “cause.” But Pilarczyk is certainly not alone in the American Church.

+So it is that on April 25, all across the American Conference, our most degenerate elements will don the prestige of their sanctimonious self-deception, and in a futile attempt to mask their enslavement to sin, jump willingly into this national game of Look the Other Way.

+The Flying Buttress does not condone bullying or harassment. Neither do we condone, however, the bald-faced lie that homosexuality is perfectly normal behavior because homosexuals are “born that way,” and/or have no control over their fate. It is that lie which has created this national game.

+Playing the game certainly has its advantages. It allows both homosexuals and their heterosexual “allies” to flatter themselves with labels like “compassionate,” “tolerant,” “diverse,” and “inclusive” - and, conversely, to label those who refuse to participate as bigoted, hateful, homophobic and discriminatory. It paves the way for participants to receive plenty of foundation money, intellectual and academic affirmation, media attention, and prestige. It supposedly allows participants to have sex with whomever they wish without the burden of guilt – not only without guilt, but with pride! It means membership in an exciting militant movement, a revolution. And it means, of course, “liberation.”

+But playing the game also has its disadvantages. First and foremost among them is to willfully invite spiritual and eternal death by celebrating crimes against God. Second is leaving oneself open to the seduction of satanism, which is closely linked to homosexuality. Third is the cultivation of another deadly sin, pride. Fourth is the vulnerability to physical disfigurement or death by sexually transmitted disease or by the rage of a jilted sex partner. Fifth is the delusion and self-deception inherent in the misuse of the word “compassion.”

+Let’s consider this interpretation of “compassion.” Is it really compassionate to encourage the self-destruction of a soul, to cheer his descent into suffering and darkness by assuring him that there is nothing wrong with his behavior because, for example, “God is love”?

+No, this is not compassion at all, but the most vicious and cynical cruelty.

+What about prestige? Is it really enlightened to approve of homosexuality because all the Very Important People do – the UN, the European Union, the US government, academia, the press, Hollywood, psychologists?

+Oh, do you mean like all those Very Important People who, their prestige threatened by their own Messiah, plotted against Him and eventually put Him to death?

+What about love? Don’t homosexuals have the right to have loving same-sex relationships, even marriage?

+No, there is no right to be loved, except in a society which has made itself sick with the idea of “entitlement.”

+What about discrimination? Doesn’t the Church discriminate against the civil rights of homosexuals by denying them the sacrament of marriage, the sacrament of Holy Orders, and by condemning their behavior as sin?

+If morality is discrimination then there is no civilization, only the inverted and perverted anarchic world of Lucifer.

+If anything, April 25 should be a National Day of Mourning and Prayer for all the souls who have been lost to this disorder. Yet publicly, and in too many darkened corners of the Roman Catholic Church, there will be no mourning, but only more vain and foolhardy stanzas added to this ever-quickening Invocation of Death.

By Their Fruits You Shall Know Them

2008-04-07T20:44:00.004-04:00

+In this, the last in our series about the Roamin’ Homosexual Catholic Church in America, we respond, less discreetly than is our custom, to this schismatic federation’s sacrilegious insults against decency, dignity, and all that is holy.

+The blasphemous degeneracy of the RHCCIA is embodied in the “Sisters of Perpetual Self-Indulgence,” one of their new religious orders based in San Francisco, which brazenly confronts us with the most advanced development as well as the logical conclusion of “liberation.” We refer of course to the satanic heresy that homosexuality is normal behavior.

+In order to help sane Catholics put this plague in its proper perspective, The Flying Buttress has submitted an article on the topic to the Catholic Encyclopedia, excerpted below, which traces the recent history of this school of “thought.” We hope that those readers who have been baffled and frustrated by the pervasive double-talk of their own Roman Catholic Church (from whom the RHCCIA, after all, has sprung) will find it to be a handy reference tool and a source of refreshing clarity.

DOCTRINE

While not foremost among the doctrinal disputes that troubled the Church during the Second Vatican Council (1962-65), homosexuality nevertheless occupies a pervasive if unspoken place in modern ecclesiastical history. According to reliable observers at the Council, it was the liberal peritus Franz Faerius, a Bavarian theologian, who most insistently attempted to de-mythologize and rationalize the ancient taboo. In this he was carefully groomed by his uncle, the Dutch prelate Hans Cardinal Nefaerius, who occupied a position on the Theological Commission.

The doctrine which Hans and Franz attempted to promulgate was their affirmative response to the ageless question of whether homosexual relationships, which can neither beget nor be begotten, can have any validity when measured by the standard of “be fruitful and multiply.” Since their initial conclusion in favor of validity was too radically opposed to tradition, thus meeting with little favor and much revulsion, they were forced to soften, as it were, the blow.

Their solution to the obstacle of tradition was developed by blurring the problem itself. That is, the terminologies of science and psychology were employed both to obfuscate the issue and to clothe the taboo in an aura of respectability. Thus, two different causes of homosexuality were proposed: the first, homofusion, was based on the hypothesis that homosexuality is inborn because of an imbalance among x and y chromosomes and their faulty amalgamation, resulting in gender confusion.

The second variety was dubbed homofission, and referred to the theory that this behavior resulted from an early separation from one’s father or from some traumatic early childhood experience.

As their new ideas were feverishly circulated behind the scenes, Hans and Franz gained considerable support among the liberal alliance of Church Fathers.

HISTORY

Attempting to exploit their influence at its height, Faerius and Nefaerius inserted a pregnant footnote favorable to their cause into the Council Declaration Nostra Aetate. This footnote, appearing at the first phrase of the Declaration’s second sentence (“In her task of promoting unity and love among men…”), read as follows:

“By the words of Our Lord, ‘Come ye after me, and I will make you to be fishers of men,’ (Mt. 4:19) it is readily apparent that Our Lord’s own vision of unity and love among men did not exclude same-sex attractions and relationships. The Church therefore also recognizes and does not reject that which is good and holy among the practices of the ancient Greeks, whose spiritual patrimony has added so much to the theological foundation of our faith.”

However, after this footnote was discovered and, in a rare defense of tradition, removed by Paul VI himself, the doctrinal cohesion among advocates of the initiative quickly unraveled into petty and vindictive internecine disputes. For example, a prominent spokesman for the “homofusion” school of thought, Swiss theologican Otto Opprobrious, contemptuously dismissed the “homofission” theory as a “logical phallusy.” In response, his counterpart, comparative religion professor Charles Constantine Contumelious, repudiated “homofusion” as a “riddle wrapped in an enigma cloaked in a condom.”

Though these early attempts to portray homosexuals as universal victims of either biological or familial circumstance proved temporarily unsuccessful (despite their wholehearted adoption by the Society of Jesus), this in no way restrained or discouraged the clerical practitioners of this behavior, who flourished throughout the Church after the Council. In fact, as evidenced by the 1986 USCCB document “On the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons,” their heresy ultimately carried the day and is now espoused by a solid majority of American bishops and priests.

NOTE: Should our readers be interested in locating the full article in the Catholic Encyclopedia, please go to their website and search under the keywords "Faerian Heresy."

Miscellanea CATHOLICA

+The third episode of “Silencing the Christians,” “Grandma Behind Bars,” may be viewed on-line here.

+Volunteers for the American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property (TFP) found that 45% of the websites of 211 major Catholic universities contained information about pro-homosexual clubs.

+Apparently, to ask relevant questions of the new Jesuit Superior is to be accused of a lack of civility.

+Oh-so-compassionate me.

+Of global warming, dental floss, and St. Francis of Assisi.

+Sign a petition to de-fund Planned Parenthood.

All You Need Is...

2008-03-22T18:02:00.000-04:00

+The Roamin’ Homosexual Catholic Church in America (RHCCIA), reaching for a level of sophistication previously unheard of amongst liberals and progressives, has given an official name to its doctrine of salvation through liberation.

+Taking their cue from the famous policy of “Ostpolitik” that has swept through the Church since Vatican II, the five Extraordinary Presiders (Mahony, Niederauer, Wuerl, Flynn and Pilarczyk) have named their doctrine “Ostseelenheil,” that is, “Ost-salvation.”

+As you might guess, since “Ostpolitik” requires rapprochement, negotiation and compromise with the enemy rather than condemnation and stout resistance, “Ostseelenheil” involves a similar approach to the traditional obstacle to salvation: sin.

+In order to report to our readers how Ostseelenheil might work during Confession (as well as to satisfy our own idle curiosity), we sent one of our Secret Shopper Sinners to an RHCCIA Reconciliation Suite for a first-hand look:

“I stepped through the door and was greeted by the pleasant tinkling of a silver bell that hung from the doorknob. Apparently this was to alert the priest to my presence, since he was in the kitchenette. He called out, ‘Who’s there?’ ‘I’m here for Confession,’ I replied. ‘Oh! Well just a moment then,’ he assured me. ‘Let me finish making this latte and I’ll be right with you!’

While I waited I looked around the front room, which was comfortably furnished with a top grain black leather sectional sofa, dark cherry coffee table with antique burnished gold accents, and rose burgundy brushed velour armchairs. I noticed several posters on the dark jade walls, featuring a large Michael Jackson ‘We Are the World’ print surrounded by smaller portraits of Teilhard de Chardin, Annibale Bugnini, Che Guevara, Chairman Mao, and Joseph Bernardin. The quiet but insistent thump of techno-music came from a Bose radio in a corner of the room, only partially muffled by the velvety even cut pile of the plush cream carpet.

Finally the priest came in with his latte, and apologized. ‘How rude of me – I should have asked if you’d like one! Mocha with caramel sound good?’ When I declined, he motioned me to the couch and said ‘So! What can I do ya for?’

‘Bless me father, for I have sinned.’

‘Oh yes, that! Well first off, young man, let’s eliminate this unnecessary distance between us – please call me brother, not father. Now second, what makes you think you’ve sinned? That exhibits a rather extreme lack of self-esteem, don’t you think? Have you got post-sin traumatic guilt disorder?’

‘I don’t think so, fath – uh, brother, but doesn’t the Church teach us not to look at women with lustful eyes?’

‘You’re looking at women? Tsk, tsk, how unfortunate! Are you sure you’re in the right church? Well – chacun a son goo! Anyhoo, let me suggest this: has it ever occurred to you that women enjoy being looked at?’

‘No, not really, I mean, I hadn’t really noticed.’

‘And by looking at them and appreciating their beauty, aren’t you fulfilling their desires?’

‘Gee, I never thought of it that way...’

‘Gotcha! Explain this to me, then: how could you be sinning when you’re contributing to the self-esteem of your neighbor? BTW, this latte is to die for! Sure you don’t want one?’

‘Uh.....no thanks.....’

‘See, you’re just turned all upside down and bass-ackwards! Tell you what: I think the real problem is not your perception of women: it’s your perception of yourself and your perception of sin!’

‘Really?’

‘Of course! Here you are performing an act of charity, a corporal and spiritual act of mercy all rolled into one, but you think you’re doing something terrible! Why are you carrying around all this guilt, my friend? Just let it go – give in to your feelings, don’t resist them! God understands!’

‘He does?’

‘Yes, yes, silly – God is love, remember? And does love judge and punish? Does love limit? Does love exclude and refuse to embrace? Can we talk Sermon on the Mount here? Oh! Don’t get me started!’

‘But...’

‘Now look: the next time you start to think you’re sinning, embody this ‘sin’ so you can separate yourself from it, and have a dialogue with it. Talk to it, ask it why it’s being so harsh, ask what it is doing to change so it can understand your point of view! Get it?’

‘I’m not sure – can you give me an example?’

‘OK, imagine an attractive woman walks by: your eyes pop right out of your head, and you say to yourself “Wow!! Look at that!” Then you fall into that old trap and think “Uh-oh, I just sinned.”’

‘Then what?’

‘Then here’s where that dialogue comes in: you have to establish a relationship with this false sense of sin, see? Find out what makes it tick, learn what its principles are, try to understand why it wants to condemn you. And once you have this relationship and reach a common ground, you can move forward together with your perceptions, and everything will be smooth! Instead of being your enemy, sin will be your friend! After all, we can’t have any enemies in the new civilization of love, can we? Now do you get it?’

‘Well, I think so. And thank you for your counsel, uh, brother, but I really should be going. Do you want me to do any penance?’

‘Ab-so-toot-ly! As penance for condemning yourself, I want you to memorize this Act of Affirmation, take it to heart, and recite it every day:

“I deserve good things. I am entitled to my share of happiness. I refuse to beat myself up. I am attractive person. I am fun to be with. I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and doggone it, people like me."'

Miscellanea CATHOLICA

+Blogger “Athanasius” understands that ecumenism, in its post-Conciliar sense, is nothing more than a vain and futile attempt to simultaneously deceive both sides of an irreconcilable equation: good and evil, truth and falsehood, and Catholic and non-Catholic:

http://athanasiuscm.blogspot.com/ (scroll down to 2/12)

http://athanasiuscm.blogspot.com/2008/02/problems-with-new-good-friday-prayer.html

+Episodes 1 and 2 of "Silencing the Christians" are now on-line.

The RHCCIA Meets the Bible Belt

2008-03-08T18:55:00.000-05:00

+Our latest feature article about this schismatic homosexual federation investigates the liturgical practices of one of their sects that has sprouted up recently, in fact what seems like mere moments ago. Apparently, this sect is a result of a cross-fertilization between the Novus Ordo and certain pentecostal practices that originated deep in Appalachia, in the heart of the American Bible Belt.

+We refer to a new group of RHCCIA faithful who, due to their unique style of liturgical celebration, have become known as the CRYSM-matics.

+The CRYSM-matics, based in Steubenville, Ohio, not only echo the name of their charismatic brethren, but several of their celebratory customs as well. Our glossolalia correspondent Azusa Lollapalooza recently attended a CRYSM-matic Mass in Steubenville, and filed this report:

“It was with a great deal of trepidation that I crossed the threshold of St. Slain-in-the-Spirit. I was afraid that before I sat down, someone would hand me a large snake and ask me to stop, drop and roll, but - much to my relief - my presence was acknowledged with nothing more than a warm handshake and a friendly welcome.

Truth be told, there were only a relatively few points in this Mass that stood out from what I’m accustomed to (Publisher’s note: though The Flying Buttress is strictly a traditionalist publication, we do retain a few Novus Ordo Catholics on our staff in order to be inclusive). These departures, in fact, were listed in an Explanatory Note inserted in the Glory & Praise hymnal, which justified them by referring to the doctrine of the ‘hypo-ecstatic union’ – a doctrine which, as the Note acknowledged, is often referred to outside the CRYSM-matic community as the ‘hyper-ecstatic’ union, due to popular misunderstanding of the high energy level inherent in these rituals.

The first departure from the Missalette occurred at the Kyrie, where, instead of that ancient and venerable chant, the assembly began moaning very slowly, in a low voice, something which the Explanatory Note listed as ‘Kyrie II’:

‘OH---WAH.....…TAH---GOO.......SI---AM’

(Publisher’s note: our staff linguist theorizes that by singing this chant at a faster clip, one might be able to discern a plausible meaning in English. However, we leave that to the judgment of our readers.)

The next novelty was the homily, which consisted of some simple folk-wisdom chanted by the Presider (‘P’) in a kind of repetitive sing-song refrain, punctuated by rhythmic clapping and verse from the congregation (‘P+C’), who seemed to know in advance what the Presider was going to say:

P:  ‘Oompa loompa doompety doo;
I’ve got a perfect sermon for you.
Oompa loompa doompety dee;
If you are wise you’ll listen to me.

 P+C:  What do you get when you practice safe sex?
It sure beats the heck out of abstinence!
Who are these people who tell us ‘Be chaste’?
Sex is such a terrible thing to waste!
Do you like the sound of it?

 P:  Oompa loompa doompety doo
I’ve got another sermon for you
Oompa loompa doompety dee
If you are wise you’ll listen to me

 P+C:  Monogamy’s fine when it’s once in a while,
But soon you’ll be bored and you’ll need a new style!
Who says multiple partners are wrong?
If you don’t sleep around will you really belong
The way that we do?

 P:  Oompa loompa doompety da
With all the gay graces you will go far
You will live in happiness too
Like the Oompa Loompa Doompety do!’

Finally, in what may have been the most unusual variant, there was the Blessing, which the Presider began with this formula:

‘Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo! Give it up for Jesus, and then I’ll let you go!’

After which he was heartily joined by all, with this:

‘Salagadoola mechicka boola bibbidi-bobbidi-boo: When we’re together the Spirit is hot - bibbidi-bobbidi-boo! Salagadoola mechicka boola bibbidi-bobbidi-boo: He can do magic believe it or not - bibbidi-bobbidi-boo! Salagadoola means mechicka booleroo But the thingmabob that does the job is bibbidi-bobbidi-boo Salagadoola mechicka boola bibbidi-bobbidi-boo: When we’re together the Spirit is hot - bibbidi-bobbidi bibbidi-bobbidi bibbidi-bobbidi-boo!’

All in all, I must say the CRYSM-matic Mass had quite an infectious spirit, and I look forward to filing a follow-up report.”

A New Encyclical

2008-02-17T19:18:00.000-05:00

+Choosing St. Valentine’s Day to mark the auspicious occasion, the five Extraordinary Presiders of the RHCCIA have issued their first encyclical, Extra Ecclesiam nulla liberatio, which translates into the vernacular as “Outside the Church there is no liberation.”

(Flying Buttress readers might find it odd that this schismatic homosexual federation would furnish their work with a Latin title, given their foundations in populist revolution, individualism and self-expression. However, as the EP’s explained in their press release, this was an attempt to demonstrate a legitimate alternative to those who might be tempted to think of Rome as the only seat of Latin Catholicism.)

+In an attempt to exhibit legitimacy of a different sort, the RHCCIA has also announced that its Extraordinary proclamations will not be called “encyclicals.” Instead, as a display of environmental sensitivity and solidarity with the earth, they will be promulgated as “recyclicals.”

+Here then is an excerpt from the first RHCCIA recyclical, Extra Ecclesiam nulla liberatio:

“February 14, 2008

To our Illustrious GLBTQ Presiders, Deacons, Eucharistic Ministers, Pastoral Associates, and all parish staff enjoying full, conscious and active communion with the Extraordinary Presiders.

Sincere, faithful and committed Sisters and Brothers, and everyone in-between, Greetings and Universal Approbation!

1. It is with great joy and exhilaration that We address Ourselves to you, our new Church, indeed to the entire world, for the very first time. We stand together on the threshold of a great new revelation, a brave new world. We support you, We affirm the holiness of your sexuality, and We call you together to this Great Crusade for equality and civil rights.

2. Yet Our joy is tempered with sadness, for We are troubled by the lack of unity in this vast movement to re-fashion and transform the very foundations of Western Civilization. The Holy Spirit has called us to follow our intuitive and sensate hearts, yet too many do so in isolation, or grope in dark alleys, or embark on fruitless paths. For this reason, We issue today a universal call to gather within and to follow Our new Church on the ecumenical path to liberation, for it is only within the RHCCIA that the true Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit of Vatican II, which is the spirit of salvation through liberation, subsists.

3. Now, it may readily be seen that each of us, through sanctifying grace, has the natural law of liberation written upon our hearts and on our souls. But it is our Church, by the power of the Holy Spirit of Vatican II, which alone gives supple and discernible form and order to the supernatural theological virtues which emanate from this sanctifying grace. It is this very order which equips the RHCCIA with the most efficacious means of offering salvation through liberation.

4. Though, we hasten to add, that those who, through their invincible ignorance and no fault of their own, do not know of or who cannot find the saving graces offered by the RHCCIA, yet who hold fast to the Law of Liberation solely through the power of the Supreme Architect, may also be saved. To put it simply, We’re OK – you’re OK!

5. What then are these theological virtues? The first is liberty. What is liberty? Liberty is the virtue by which we believe that freedom is the application of an absolute natural faculty that allows us to do whatever we please in self-contentment, as long as we do not prevent others from being liberated. Freedom has no limits except those which ensure that the other members of the Church enjoy the same freedom: the freedom of free will, the freedom to choose free will, and the freedom to exercise the intelligence to choose free will which liberates without limit, absolutely.

6. The second theological virtue is equality. What is equality? Equality is the virtue by which each of the faithful is guaranteed the same sexual rights, the same sexual capacity, and the same sexual fulfillment, all operating within the marvelous sphere of diverse orientations that characterize the natural and independent law of man unto himself, freed of artificial social and moral distinctions which breed hatred and strife. Equality is all for one and one for all, each fully endowed with the inalienable rights of one-ness and all-ness.

7. The third theological virtue is fraternity. What is fraternity? Fraternity is the virtue by which all men are inherently brothers – or sisters. For in our Church it can readily be seen that gender matters not, only the humanistic quality of the relationship, the liberation that results from that relationship, and the guiding realization that the oneness of all sexual truth can only be revealed by loving our neighbor as ourselves, so that they are no longer merely neighbors but intimate and mutually supportive pilgrims on the path to liberation, in a truly neighborly sense. And verily may it be said that if one cannot be with the one you love, then one should love the one you’re with...

(Here follows an exegesis of the Seven Gifts of the Holy Spirit of Vatican II, which concludes with this solemn warning):

...Finally, if anyone denies the doctrine of salvation through liberation, let them develop exanthema!”

Miscellanea CATHOLICA

+See for yourself what liberation hath wrought. WARNING: THIS VIDEO, FROM THE ST. JOSEPH’S MEN SOCIETY, IS EXPLICIT AND CONTAINS OBSCENE VISUALS.

+If you would like to express your support for the Holy Father, who is being criticized by the International Rabbinical Assembly for his revision of the Good Friday Prayer, send an e-mail before Monday noon to editor@remnantnewspaper.com A partial list of signers to the Declaration in his support may be found here.

A Call to Order

2008-02-10T18:01:00.000-05:00

+The Flying Buttress has learned that the schismatic homosexual federation known to our readers as the RHCCIA is now attempting to offer a deeper level of spiritual enrichment to its followers. As outlined in their recently published Extraordinary Bulletin No. 1, “The Inclusive Tradition,” the federation has formed three new religious orders. They are described briefly as follows:

+The first order, based here in Cincinnati and appealing to staid and conservative bedrock midwest values, has been named the “Log Cabin Franciscans.”

+The second order, based in San Francisco and targeting the federation’s more flamboyant, expressive and dramatic followers, is calling itself the “Sisters of Perpetual Self-Indulgence.”

+The third order began by calling itself the Society Against Traditional Dogma (STD). However, in response to concerns raised by the Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta that the initials STD might result in the unintentional promotion of promiscuity, the Society has changed its name to simply “The Disputians.”

+This week we offer our readers the Rule of the Log Cabin Franciscans.

Rule I

The rule of life of the Log Cabin Franciscans is to study the radical social gospel of Our Lord Jesus Christ, to live in continual dialogue with the Holy Spirit, and to maintain fidelity to the Impresarium¹ of the RHCCIA and to our sexual orientation, without any other thought but civil justice and equality.

The friars promise their loyalty to the Extraordinary Presiders and their canonically discerned successors and representatives of the RHCCIA.

Rule II

Let the brothers study diligently the Divine Office and bend all their energies to revising it in accordance with the principles of the Book of Common Prayer. The brothers shall fast on all the patriotic holidays, especially July 4, Labor Day, Memorial Day and President’s Day, as a celebration of their solidarity with all Americans and their love of country.

Rule III

The friars are not to receive cash donations, as they are not to consider themselves poor but rich in the Holy Spirit. However, they may accept gifts of high quality investments, annuities, government securities and real estate, as long as these gifts are properly redistributed to needy RHCCIA parishes and worthy social causes. In lieu of social causes, donations to the RHCCIA Foundation will be accepted.

Rule IV

The friars are to clothe themselves in a brown tunic and capuche, though a gray Bill Belichick hoodie may be substituted on Super Bowl Sunday. A rainbow flag pin must be worn and be visible at all times.

Rule V

Let the brothers place the highest premium on limited government, laissez-faire socialization and personal responsibility, to ensure that the abbot does not usurp the powers of discipline and enforcement, and to ensure that the brothers maintain that self-determination and individual liberty which is so vital to maintaining their freedom.

Rule VI

When the brothers have business outside the monastery, let them not consort with hate criminals or homophobes, nor anyone else tainted by an association with the radical Christian right. When the brothers find themselves among other orders who share their sexuality, such as the Society of Jesus, let them comport themselves with the dignity that befits members of the same family.

Rule VII

The brothers may not participate in any ostentatious displays of identity, such as Gay Pride parades or USCCB conferences², no matter how deeply their sympathies may lie with those involved in such events. They may, however, assist such efforts behind the scenes, while being careful to avoid any recognition which might contribute to a false sense of self-importance.

Rule VIII

The friars shall elect a Minister General through representation by an Electoral College of provincials, who shall be chosen by straw polls conducted at each monastery. The Minister General shall proudly bear the title of The Great Emancipator, after our great President and role model Abraham Lincoln.

1. That is, the dogmatic diversion office of the RHCCIA. 2. Though those from our former affiliation who share our identity may not wish to acknowledge our bond publicly.

Miscellanea CATHOLICA

+Una Voce Carmel (Indiana) is proud to present Fr. Gerard Saguto of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter, who will be giving on a talk on "Culture, Convenience and Catholicism" at St. Elizabeth Ann Seton Catholic Church, 10655 Haverstick Rd, Carmel, IN on Feb 10, 2008. For more information, please call (317) 581-0315 or visit www.uvcarmel.org.

+Liturgical Dancing with the Stars

+Sandro Magister reports that Pope Benedict will be publishing a new formulation for the Good Friday Prayer for the Conversion of the Jews in the 1962 Missal, which will eliminate references to the “darkness” and “blindness” of the Jewish people. Using this new PC formulation as our guide, The Flying Buttress hereby submits to the ICEL our new translation of Matthew 21:12:

“And Jesus went into the temple of God and earnestly began to dialogue with all those who sold and bought in the temple, and offered His gentle wisdom at the tables of the money changers and began to fold and stack the chairs of them that sold doves."

A Capital Idea

2008-02-10T17:46:00.000-05:00

+While The Flying Buttress has been boring our readers to tears with neo-apocalyptic tedium about the end of progress and convoluted rebuttals of an obscure 20-year old remark about a “countersyllabus,” the RHCCIA (Roamin’ Homosexual Catholic Chuch in America) has been steadily expanding its foothold in the American Catholic community.

+It seems that the five Extraordinary Presiders of the RHCCIA, having been evicted from the cathedrals where they formerly sat as Roman Catholic bishops, have quietly settled on a new home for their schismatic federation.

+The parish they have selected, after due consideration, is Most Holy Redeemer Church in San Francisco. Unfortunately, already faced with vociferous resistance from many Holy Redeemer parishioners, the leadership of the federation has been forced to agree to make their residency only temporary, until a new RHCCIA Cathedral can be built.

+Toward that ambitious end, a capital campaign targeting wealthy and influential members of the gay community is being planned to raise funds for this new cathedral. While a catchy campaign slogan has been announced to the public (“Let Us Build a Temple of Justice”), our Alternative Lifestyles Correspondent John Elton has learned that among the federation’s private circle, the campaign carries a slogan that’s much less imposing but more to the point:

“Pray, Pay and Be Gay”

+According to Elton’s confidential sources, the centerpiece event of the “Pray, Pay and Be Gay” campaign will be a lavish golf “outing” held at a prestigious San Francisco country club. While we recognize that the details of this posh gala may be discomfiting to our readers, we must insist on holding your noses to the grindstone of reality:

~Sponsorship Levels~

$250,000 and above. The Cole Porter “Begin the Beguine” Title Sponsorship. The first sponsor at this level will win naming rights to the new cathedral, and all Title Sponsors will have a stained glass window named after them in said cathedral.

$150,000 - $249,999. The Barney Frank “Statesman” Supporting Sponsorship. Sponsors at this level will win a seat in Congress, paid for by the Ford Foundation, George Soros, and the Human Rights Campaign. Your congressional office will be staffed by aides and pages carefully screened by HRC, PFLAG, NAMBLA, GSLEN and DIGNITY/USA.

$75,000 - $149,999. The Oscar Wilde “Bon Vivant” Hole Sponsorship. These sponsors will win lucrative ten-year contracts to write feature articles for the National Catholic Reporter.

$50,000 - $74,999. The Bette Midler “Continental” Contest Sponsorship. Sponsors at this level win a lifetime membership to a gay bathhouse of the sponsor’s choice.

$25,000 - $49,000. The SpongeBob SquarePants “Bump and Run” Table Sponsorship. Sponsors at the post-golf tradeshow may choose between a voiceover role in the famous cartoon or an engagement as the keynote speaker at the next annual dinner of Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

Below $25,000. Interested parties should consult with sponsors of heterosexual golf events.

~Contests~

The Robert Nugent Longest Drive, in which distance is measured not so much in yards, but by the sincerity and vigor of one’s swing.

The Gumbleton/Weakland Skins Game, in which prize money is paid to the other contestants to keep them quiet about intrinsically disordered scores.

The Richard McBrien Closest to Pin Par 3, in which the caddy’s advice about which club to use is ignored, the pin location may be moved in mid-contest, and the golf balls may be other than USGA-approved.

The Matthew Fox Putting Contest, in which each contestant prophecies exactly where his ball will stop rolling.

The Richard Rohr Blind Partner, in which foursome members may analyze each others’ golf swings, but all encounters are required to remain anonymous.

NOTE: For more information about sponsorships and contests, please contact the chanceries of the Archdioceses of Los Angeles, San Francisco, Minneapolis, Washington D.C. and Cincinnati.

The End of Progress

2008-01-05T12:11:00.000-05:00

+A visitor to the Carousel of Progress at Walt Disney World will find himself entertained with a song as his seat revolves through decades of domestic technological wonders. The song begins as follows:

“There's a great, big, beautiful tomorrow, Shining at the end of every day; There's a great, big, beautiful tomorrow, and tomorrow’s just a dream away…”

+This Disney exhibit and its soundtrack exemplify and enshrine the once-irrepressible optimism of modern Western man as he created his paradise on earth: the pursuit of the limitless possibilities of his inventiveness, resourcefulness, intelligence, imagination, and power.

+Born in the Age of Reason and fed the steroids of the Protestant Ethic, the Industrial Revolution, the mastery of fractional reserve banking (“capital”) and the American and French Revolutions, “progress” has been the de facto religion of modern times, pursued with an unflagging messianic zeal that has swept aside everything in its path.

+The Church was one of many institutions, and by far the most important, to be overwhelmed by this display of man’s power and self-confidence. Progress, in fact, has overshadowed the Church for more than 200 years, diminished its light (as seen through the eyes of men), and pushed it to the sidelines of civilization, where it could only watch and protest as the human race drove itself from one pinnacle of earthly achievement to the next.

+The Church protested because man, invincibly convinced of the goodness and inevitability of his utopian visions, dismissed God and anointed himself the sole and undisputed master of his own destiny and designer of his own salvation. Here in America, more than any other the land of boundless progress and opportunity, we were told by one of our more popular novelists of the 20^th century that we believed in “the green light.”

+But the light we see before us is no longer green: it is whatever terrorist threat level is issued by the Department of Homeland Security. In other words, out confidence in our worldly religion has been stopped dead in its tracks.

+What stopped it? A progressive decay since the 1960s: the assassinations of our leaders, the disgrace of Vietnam and Watergate, the disappearance of our manufacturing base, massive waves of illegal immigration, energy prices spiraling out of control, religious beliefs and customs pushed out of the public square, terrorism and radical Islam, new and strange epidemics sweeping across the landscape, declining birth rates, the narcissism of moral decadence…a universal sense that we have lost control of our lives to a comprehensive, inescapable and shrill juggernaut of quickening insanity.

+The West – in particular, its champion, America - no longer looks forward; it now looks over its shoulder in fear and apprehension. Incremental erosion has crossed the subliminal threshold into consciousness of a full-bore crumbling. Strange foreboding slogans and warnings bombard us daily: we live in a world where everything is scarce and will rapidly become more so. Our standard of living is much too high, and since investors are more important than employees, our jobs are outsourced to the Third World. We have been negligent stewards of the earth: now we must pay for having created “climate change.” Not only has our progress religion disappeared, but we are now asked to feel guilty for having had so much progress in the first place! Progress has run its course, and has turned to self-destruction and self-recrimination. Tomorrow can no longer be better than today – only worse.

+The greatest popes of the 19^th and 20^th centuries issued warning after warning about this, about where mankind would end if it abandoned Christ and the Christian social order. They were correct, but they were ignored or pushed aside.

+Our Lady issued warning after warning about these errors. She was correct, but she was ignored or pushed aside.

+Why do we bring these gloomy thoughts before you? Because when man no longer believes in himself or in his creations, when all his proud powers have deflated into delusions, when science and technology can no longer save him and in fact are used to debase him, there are two places he will turn: either to self-indulgence and depravity (which might be described as satiating oneself on the fruits of progress, without contributing to further progress), or back to God.

+The vast majority are ready to turn back to God. This turning creates a unique and decisive opportunity for the Roman Catholic Church, who once built and nurtured the most extraordinary civilization the world has ever seen, a civilization that glorified God.

+Is the Church aware that Her time has come once again to meet the barbarians at the gates, and wield the truth of the social kingship of Christ? Or are Her leaders still groping blindly in the fog which has been cast over them since 1960 – the fog of a buried Third Secret, the fog of aggiornamento, the fog of Vatican II, the fog of the errors of Russia?

For a CHILD IS BORN to us, and a son is given to us,

and the government is upon his shoulder…

Contra "Countersyllabus" II

2008-01-05T11:40:00.000-05:00

+In our last issue, we juxtaposed Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger’s 1987 remarks about the Church in relation to the French Revolution - his justification for a “countersyllabus” - with the background and true nature of the Revolution itself.

+We also pointed out that the progressives’ Ostpolitik orientation toward the world after 1789, an orientation toward which Ratzinger helped to steer the entire Church at Vatican II, was based on weakness and a false version of Catholic charity.

+This week, we will consider how selected articles of the Declaration of the Rights of Man are further proof that “the world after 1789” is something to be lamented and conquered for Christ, not something to be reckoned with as if from a position of unenlightened inferiority, inadequacy, or deficiency.

A General Observation

+Nowhere in this document do the worda “God,” “Christ,” or “the Church” appear; only a desultory reference to “the Supreme Being” (usually a Masonic moniker) in the preamble. The sole reference to religion is in Article 10, but that reduces faith to mere “religious views.” In other words, man has become, in this Declaration, the measure of all things. How shall the Church “reconcile” Herself to that?

Article 1

“Men are born and remain free and equal in rights. Social distinctions may be founded only upon the general good.”

Response

+ This is lifted directly from the fervid gibberish of Jean Jacques Rousseau. God grants each of us the same essential dignity, but we are only free if we use that dignity to move within the realm of holiness and obedience. Beyond equality of dignity, there is no such thing as equality of personhood or of personal circumstances. It might be claimed that men are equal in the eyes of secular law, but that is another fantasy reserved for nonexistent utopian states. In reality, the laws of men are always perverted, either in their codification or their application, to serve some selfish or nefarious end, resulting in inequality (for example, the Reign of Terror, which followed shortly after this document was enacted). Further, if “social distinctions” are allowed, that immediately leads to inequality of “rights.” Whether social distinctions are founded “upon the general good” is deceptive and irrelevant, since the “general good” can be defined by whoever has the power to define it, enforce their definition, and misrepresent it as “good.”

Article 3

“The principle of all sovereignty resides essentially in the nation. No body nor individual may exercise authority which does not proceed directly from the nation.”

Response

+Here we have the overt seeds of Communism, Nazism, and all other forms of totalitarianism: the individual exists for the purposes of the state. The human cornerstone of a Christian state, on the other hand, is the sacred and dignified nature of the individual and the family, who are granted that nature by the grace of God. Further, the principle of sovereignty does not reside in a nation, but in God, who grants his sovereignty to the nation’s leader in holy stewardship.

Article 4

“Liberty consists in the freedom to do everything which injures no one else; hence the exercise of the natural rights of each man has no limits except those which assure to the other members of the society the enjoyment of the same rights. These limits can only be determined by law.”

Response

+More Rousseau. This false definition of liberty is really the definition of license, which is one of the keys to anarchy. What is meant by “injury”? Physical? Legal? Spiritual? Note the stark contradiction between this Article, which proposes “liberty,” and Article 3, which lowers the fist of tyranny by placing the individual at the disposal of the state. Note also that injury or offense to God – i.e. sin – is omitted. If the limits of license can only be determined by law (that is, not by the teachings of the Church), then we must ask: by what standards are these laws enacted? Answer: by whatever standards best serve anarchy and tyranny.

Article 5

“Law can only prohibit such actions as are hurtful to society. Nothing may be prevented which is not forbidden by law, and no one may be forced to do anything not provided for by law.”

Response

+Note the phrase “hurtful to society,” and the continued absence of the phrase “hurtful to God.” This Article completely destroys the moral teaching authority of the Church. Since many of those teachings are enacted into Western civil law, it also destroys the basis for that law (see: anarchy). And what if the foundations of society – the laws of godless men - are evil? Will not the teachings of the Church then be deemed “hurtful” to society? This is the selfsame inverted and perverted – i.e. satanic - foundation of the radical homosexual agenda: good is now evil and evil is now good. Therefore, good is a “hate crime.”

Article 7

“No person shall be accused, arrested, or imprisoned except in the cases and according to the forms prescribed by law…”

Response

+…except for the victims, royal or otherwise, of the Reign of Terror, which in and of itself exemplified lawlessness and anarchy. In other words, it did not take very long for the Masonic thugs to ignore their own “lofty” principles.

Article 10

“No one shall be disquieted on account of his opinions, including his religious views, provided their manifestation does not disturb the public order established by law.”

Response

+See: Reign of Terror. In other words, everyone has freedom of speech unless the “public order established by law” has criminalized any part of it. Once again, we are left with unanswered questions: how is the law established, what does it legalize, and how is the public order defined? What constitutes a “disturbance”? What if the law and public order are inimical to the Church?

Summary

+It should be glaringly evident from this sampling that the French Revolution was based upon principles which were not only intrinsically anti-Christian, but calculated to completely destroy Christian civilization. Their poisonous intent aside, these articles are in and of themselves completely fraudulent, as they are not only rife with circular arguments and inconsistencies, but are comprised of vague generalities which permit any number of interpretations – most typically, tyrannical and anti-Catholic ones.

+Fraudulent too is the infamous battle cry of the Revolution: “Liberté, égalité, fraternité.” We have already exposed liberty and equality – what about fraternity? Isn’t the “brotherhood of man” a noble ideal? That depends on how you define it, and the applicable definition here is Masonic. +The Masonic definition of this slogan is that all men are brothers because they all seek light and spiritual truth (our readers may recognize in this the basis for post-Conciliar “ecumenism”). However, while requiring all initiates to profess belief in the existence of a Supreme Being, Masonry does not require its members to profess one particular religious creed, for it believes that all religions are equal:

"The true Mason is not creed-bound. He realizes with the Divine Illumination of his lodge that as a Mason his religion must be universal: Christ, Buddha or Mohammed, the name means little, for he recognizes only the light and not the bearer. He worships at every shrine, bows before every altar, whether in temple, mosque or cathedral, realizing with his truer understanding the oneness of all spiritual truth." - Manly Hall, "The Lost Keys of Freemasonry" That these sentiments are the polar opposite of Christianity could not be clearer.

+As Catholics we have been taught, by the greatest Popes of old, that Modernism advances by the exploitation of vague language, such as the language which appears in the documents of Vatican II. Vague language is the final nail in the Declaration’s coffin, as it employs the following terms – pleasing to the ear, but undefined - as the basis for its propositions:

FREE……EQUAL……RIGHTS……

GENERAL GOOD……SOVEREIGNTY……LIBERTY

+Finally, a full and accurate understanding of the French Revolution allows us to grasp the real import of Fr. Wiltgen’s famous “Rhine Flows into the Tiber” analogy. It points directly backward to that calamitous event by describing the attempt to graft the Masonic lies of 1789 onto our sacred and Apostolic deposit of faith. What can possibly result from this but schizophrenic madness, and ultimately, collapse from an extraordinary hubris? So we ask again: how is it that the Church must reconcile Herself to this?

Miscellanea CATHOLICA

+As the old joke goes, “If you remember the 60s, you probably weren’t there.” Here is a grim reminder of what was unfolding early in this grafting process, in 1967: the first fruits of schizophrenia.

+An appeal by the same author to Pope Paul VI.

+Some of our readers have accused us of publishing, in these French Revolution issues, a broadside against Pope Benedict. Not so. However, there are some astounding anomalies in his pre-papal writings which deserve to be challenged – or rather, challenged again – such statements having already been condemned by the great popes of the last two centuries. For example:

“Hence, these followers of liberalism deny the existence of any divine authority to which obedience is due, and proclaim that every man is the law to himself; from which arises that ethical system which they style independent morality, and which, under the guise of liberty, exonerates man from any obedience to the commands of God, and substitutes a boundless license." – Pope Leo XIII, Libertas, June 20, 1888.

+The Bishop of La Crosse, WI, the Most Rev. Jerome Listecki, warns his flock against the movie “The Golden Compass.”

+If you would like to inquire as to why USCCB movie critic Harry Forbes still has a job, you might e-mail his supervisor, Ms. Helen Osman, USCCB Secretary of Communications: hosman@usccb.org .

Contra "Countersyllabus"

2008-01-05T11:32:00.000-05:00

+We apologize in advance to our readers for beginning the liturgical year with overt (rather than subliminal) gravity, but we have come across a deeply disturbing statement in a 1987 work by then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, “Principles of Catholic Theology,” which requires some extensive and direct rebuttal.

+Ratzinger, defending the Vatican II document Gaudium et Spes, had this to say, pp. 381-382 (this excerpt is quoted in “The Devil’s Final Battle,” Chapter 6):

“If it is desirable to offer a diagnosis of the text (Gaudium et Spes) as a whole, we might say that (in conjunction with the texts on religious liberty, and world religions) it is a revision of the Syllabus of Pius IX, a kind of countersyllabus ... Let us be content to say here that the text serves as a countersyllabus and, as such, represents on the part of the Church, an attempt at an official reconciliation with the new era inaugurated in 1789. … the one-sidedness of the position adopted by the Church under Pius IX and Pius X in response to the situation created by the new phase of history inaugurated by the French Revolution was, to a large extent, corrected via facti, especially in Central Europe, but there was still no basic statement of the relationship that should exist between the Church and the world that had come into existence after 1789.”

+In response, some background is necessary. “The new era inaugurated in 1789” refers of course to the French Revolution. Contrary to the propaganda taught to us all in “school,” the French Revolution was not a “popular uprising” against Louis XVI and the French aristocracy. It was an event carefully planned by Freemasonry at the Masonic Congress of Wilhelmsbad in 1782, and executed through their front groups known as Jacobin Clubs.

+This brutal attack on the Old Catholic Order, and the French Crown which exemplified it, was engineered with two purposes in mind: first, as the fulfillment of revenge sworn by the Knights Templar for their suppression in France in 1307, on false charges, and the burning at the stake of Jacques de Molay, Templar Grand Master, in 1314. These indefensible acts were the responsibility of King Philip the Fair of France and Pope Clement V, who, though he absolved the Templars, was blackmailed by Philip into suppressing them (yes, the Freemasons and the Knights Templar are one and the same).

+But the French Revolution was much more than revenge. It was the first step in replacing the visible aristocracy with a hidden aristocracy of banking dynasties, who would rule the entire globe through the manipulation of paper money – specifically, the manipulation of debt through a fractional reserve system first perfected in the Bank of England. The Templars, after all, had distinguished themselves much more as the bankers of Europe than as Crusaders: it was their enormous wealth that had made them the target of King Philip.

+How would this hidden aristocracy rule? It would use two principles: one, the introduction of paper currencies which would gradually replace and empty the old wealth until it collapsed (hastened, to be sure, by wars which profited the manipulators of debt), and two, the promotion and enforcement of anarchy and its intermediate phase, “democracy.”¹ Emptying of wealth was initiated simply by applying this new banking system to the financing of governments. The promotion of anarchy was accomplished by various ruses, chief among them two. The first was Marxism, which re-cast, expanded and reinvigorated the principles of the French Revolution after they failed to catch fire throughout Europe. Marxism not only supplied a “philosophical” basis for anarchy, but also justified and supposedly ennobled the emptying process by calling for the “redistribution of wealth.”

(Where does all the “redistributed wealth” go? A tiny dribble of it ends up in the hands of the poor, the object of so much slavish utopian affection and middle class guilt. The rest ends up in the hands of bankers.)

+The second method of cultivating anarchy we will call the “Pleasure Island Deception.” Our readers may remember the allegory of Pleasure Island in the Walt Disney version of Pinocchio: Pinocchio and Lampwick, along with other urchins, are carried off with extravagant promises to Pleasure Island, a place where all boys are encouraged to act as they please, eat whatever they please until they are gorged, destroy anything they please, do and say anything they please. After engaging in this behavior for a certain period of time, they begin to transform into donkeys. When the transformation is complete, they are shipped off to the mines for a life of slavery.

+In other words, anarchy, which is really slavery, is created by appealing to the basest instincts of humanity, while labeling the unlimited indulgence of those instincts “freedom.” The more we are seduced by this, the more we indulge in “freedom,” the more enslaved we become.

+Why anarchy? As the enlightened despots well knew, anarchy among the populace is necessary to ensure the success of tyranny.

+Thus the background of the French “Revolution.” How is it, then, that the Church must “reconcile” herself to this, the work of Her enemies? How is it that She must do the very thing against which so many saintly Popes warned? How is it that Joseph Ratzinger, a learned man, convinced himself that either (a) the fruits of the French “Revolution” (the Reign of Terror, perhaps? Napoleon?) were benevolent and beneficial for mankind, and must be embraced in order for the Church renew itself and save more souls, or (b) the French Revolution unleashed forces too powerful for the Church to resist?

+Finally, what exactly was this “relationship that should exist between the Church and the world that had come into existence after 1789”? It was that very orientation that surfaced and took control of the Church at Vatican II: aggiornamento, openness, cooperation, dialogue, ecumenism, Ostpolitik, the hand of “mercy” instead of “condemnation” (mercy, that is, toward everyone except those who attempted to preserve their Catholic traditions).

+We know now (though many knew it from the beginning) that this new attitude was nothing more than appeasement, the diplomacy of weakness, and it has failed as miserably as Neville Chamberlain failed with Hitler. It is, in fact, the “smoke of Satan” swirling through the Church: a diabolical doppelganger which disorients weak minds and inspires them to chase after what is merely an ersatz version of Catholic charity. In grasping at nothingness, they abandon truth, and so abandon their faith.

+The “fortress mentality” was too “one-sided”? The firm defense of truth in the face of evil is too “one-sided”? Perhaps all the post-Conciliar Neville Chamberlains have forgotten their politically correct manners, since pejorative references to the “fortress” would surely be offensive to all the Protestants who sing “A Mighty Fortress is Our God.”

+In our next issue we will look at the “Declaration of the Rights of Man,” the so-called French Bill of Rights, to see if any of those 17 articles might prompt a new relationship between the Church and the world.

1. That democracy is an intermediate phase of anarchy is being demonstrated by the rapid balkanization and deterioration of the political, economic, and cultural structure of the United States.

Miscellanea CATHOLICA: A CALL TO SCHOLARS

+The Flying Buttress would be most interested in obtaining access to the original schema of Vatican II, carefully prepared before the Council but tossed out by the Masonic/Communist/liberal cabal once the Council was underway. If any of our readers knows if these documents are still extant, please reply. We would like to publish them, so that the faithful may compare them to the vague and self-contradictory mush that replaced them.

+We offer our gratitude to the Most Reverend Kevin Rhoades, Bishop of Harrisburg, PA, for establishing an ecclesial community to worship using the Missal of 1962.

+For our readers who prefer to see the humor in all things, here is what the popular mind can do with revised history (requires Rhapsody/Real Player).

Whatever Floats Your Float

2007-11-12T10:53:00.000-05:00

+In our last issue, our readers were introduced to what we’re calling the RHCCIA (Roamin’ Homosexual Catholic Church in America), the new schismatic American federation led by five formerly Roman Catholic bishops: Mahony, Wuerl, Niederauer, Pilarczyk and Flynn.

+The Flying Buttress, following this developing story, has learned that the RHCCIA, seeking to give itself a more tangible and visible public image, has accepted an invitation to enter a float in San Francisco’s next Gay Pride Parade.

+Former Archbishop George Niederauer, now an “Extraordinary Presider”¹ – (that is, a high-ranking RHCCIA prelate), speaking for the RHCCIA leadership, recently released the following statement to the National Catholic Reporter - who, we understand, is negotiating to become the exclusive in-house organ of this federation:

“The clergy of the RHCCIA feel it is of the utmost importance to engage in a defining act in order to confirm the validity of our separation from the Roman Catholic Church. In so doing, and in order to affirm the very founding principles of our new Church, we hope to assert our solidarity with those in our society who, like us, have taken such great strides toward establishing their own identity: the gay, lesbian, bi-sexual, transgender and questioning communities.

Therefore, the RHCCIA has commissioned a float which will appear in our City’s hallmark event, the Gay Pride Parade. We consider this float to be the centerpiece of our commitment to those who have suffered discrimination for so long at the hands of the Church and of Western Civilization.”

+While the blueprint for this float is apparently a tightly kept secret, our West Coast correspondent “Airplane” Jefferson has uncovered one feature of its design: a plan to pipe a song through several loudspeakers on the float. In fact, the assiduous “Airplane” was even able to obtain the lyrics to this song - which, he speculates, will be sung to the tune of Simon and Garfunkel’s “Scarborough Fair”:

Are you goin’ to the Gay Pride Parade - Roger, Dan, George, Harry and Don? We’ve had our fill of the Roman charade: Just give us the theme of Blessed Pope John.

Won’t you embrace our justice crusade - Roger, Dan, George, Harry and Don? It’s time to vest for this masquerade: Robes of black and flowing chiffon.

Sing to those faithful afraid to come out - Roger, Dan, George, Harry and Don! Our church subsists in your deepest doubt With dogma running hither and yon.

Are you climbin’ to the heights of Brokeback - Roger, Dan, George, Harry and Don? We’re now immune from Rome’s endless flak; Join us as we pass the baton!

1. “Extraordinary,” for short.

Miscellanea CATHOLICA

+Speaking of San Francisco...

+Father Tom Euteneuer responds like a true Catholic priest to the “self-outing” of Rev. Thomas Brennan, SJ in Philadelphia. Will Cardinal Rigali follow Fr. Tom’s example?

'Til "Conscience" Do Us Part

2007-11-05T20:33:00.000-05:00

+A stunning development, the very schism long feared by Pope Benedict, may be in the works for the American conference of the Roman Catholic Church.

+The Flying Buttress has received word that a surprising number of American bishops, “progressives” all, have apparently grown impatient with the pace of the Masonic/modernist makeover of the post-Conciliar Church. As a result, they have been conducting high-level discussions about leaving the Church to form a new and independent federation.

+Rumored to be leading these schismatic deliberations are Their Excellencies Roger Mahony, Donald Wuerl, Daniel Pilarczyk, George Niederauer and Harry Flynn. Moreover, a disturbing yet persistent element of these reports is that this group - which may consist of as many as one-third of American bishops - is being advised behind the scenes by none other than William Levada.

+From what we understand, these august powwows have addressed two pressing concerns: one, how to justify the abandonment of the modernist principle of transforming the Church from within, and two, the development of a set of viable, ethical and coherent operating principles for promulgation. Apparently, the group is satisfied that the principles they have agreed upon – reportedly, there are eleven of them - speak to both their concerns. Their consensus is that these principles possess sufficient messianic and utopian magnetism as to immediately attract huge numbers of those disaffected with the Roman Catholic Church, creating an exodus which will cause its collapse:

Principle One

The overarching founding principle of the modern Church is individual conscience, joined together with other individual consciences to form a common conscience, shaped by the rigorous ideals and demands of social, environmental, and sexual justice, and fortified by the universal bonds of humanity.

Principle Two

We must look neither to the past, nor to nostalgia for the past, for hierarchical solutions with which to govern the modern Church. In order to create a workable, global font of justice, the modern Church must arise from the ashes of the past to fully embrace a collective and egalitarian present. Simply put, the modern Church is a collegial democracy, governed not by a pope, but by wise elected councils doing the will of the great congregation of the faithful.

Principle Three

The modern Church, rooted in the ever-changing present, can successfully adapt to its time only by remaining responsive to the needs of the community it serves. All its signs, symbols and sacraments must reflect that eternal responsiveness.

Principle Four

As such, the inclusive and responsive modern Church can no longer identify itself as “the Bride of Christ.” Henceforth the modern Church, desirous of partaking fully of all the joys and sorrows of its faithful, shall be known as “the partner of humanity.”

Principle Five

The modern Church does not have the answers to every modern dilemma. These answers can only be produced by the community of the faithful, who will arrive at them through a process of communal discernment guided by an intuitively formed conscience and goodwill toward all.

Principle Six

The development of the liturgy of the modern Church shall be guided by Principles One and Two, be implemented through Principles Three and Five, and facilitate Principles Seven, Eight, Nine and Eleven. The keystone of all liturgical development shall be “sincere, faithful and committed consensual dynamic participation.”

Principal Seven

The priest has no special status or privilege in the Church or in society: he is a collaborator with the laity, their servant, brother and presider, and a facilitator of the Universal Priesthood of Believers. He represents Christ only as he succeeds in representing humanity, and in so doing, is empowered to lead the faithful into a new garden of social enlightenment.

Principle Eight

We believe it is counterproductive to place unreasonable demands upon priestly vocations in a world already suffering from undue stress. Therefore, in order to make vocations more attractive to the modern mentality, and for the good of the modern Church, the requirement of celibacy is hereby abolished.

Principle Nine

The Church’s ancient taboo on the ordination of women and homosexuals is clearly outdated, offensive and discriminatory. The modern Church, upon whom the mantle of justice must rest, opens its priesthood to all who may desire it.

Principle Ten

In Roman Catholic parishes, wherever there is a stable group of faithful who reject all liturgical tradition, the pastor should willingly accept their requests to leave the parish, so that they may be welcomed into a parish aligned with our new federation of churches, and celebrate the Communal Meal according to the liturgy to be developed using Principle Six.

Principle Eleven

The modern Church will not discriminate against any of its members or catechumens because of race, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation, disability, national origin, or sin. The modern Church will ensure that all its members achieve universal salvation regardless of race, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation, national origin, or sin. The modern Church is an Equal Opportunity Redeemer.

_______________

+To date, the thorniest issue facing this group is, surprisingly, the issue of names. What to call this Manifesto of operating principles? More importantly, what to call this new Federation? The Flying Buttress, whose own operating principle - “Romanita, no! Vox Populita, si!” – nicely captures our predilection for getting to the bottom line, has a few suggestions:

Titles for “The Manifesto”:

1. “Our Disorders Were Burning Within Us.”

2. “Copulo ergo sum” (from one of our readers, “The General”).

Names for the New Federation:

1. Federatio Sensuous Catholicus (FSC).

2. The Roamin’ Homosexual Catholic Church in America (RHCCIA).

Miscellanea CATHOLICA

+Both Franciscan University at Steubenville and Ave Maria University – yes, you read that right - have denied large numbers of students (155 at Franciscan) petitioning for Mass in the Extraordinary Form, whereas similar groups at Notre Dame and Georgetown have been accommodated. Fr. John Zuhsldorf is keeping a watchful eye on Franciscan on his blog.

+How’s attendance at Notre Dame’s Extraordinary Form? See for yourself!

Where There's Smoke...

2007-11-05T20:20:00.000-05:00

+ We’re all familiar with the near-apocryphal tales of the end of Paul VI’s reign. Wandering distractedly through the halls of the Vatican, he was given to chanting the Nicene Creed and wailing that the “smoke of Satan” had entered the Church. Whether he meant this figuratively, or he had belatedly learned of the enthronement ritual performed on 6/29/63, we cannot say.

+Ironically, it was the allegedly homosexual Montini himself who opened many of the Church’s doors and windows to said smoke, by allowing himself to be manipulated by Bugnini. Some have suggested that this manipulation was really sexual blackmail, though we can neither confirm or refute this theory. The tragic success of Bugnini’s Revolution hinged upon, and owed much to, this manipulation.

+More recently, Pope Benedict XVI has uncovered a new dimension to this problem, and has made its elimination a top priority of his Papacy. It seems the smoke of Satan not only struck at the very highest levels and at the heart of the Church, it eventually wafted down into the bureaucracy of middle management, where it hovers thick and unchecked. In order to better isolate and exorcise this toxic presence, the Holy Father has given it a distinctive label:

“The Second-Hand Smoke of Satan”

+Benedict’s corrective solution to this phenomenon, which distinctly resembles that of Ex corde ecclesiae’s “mandatum,” is in keeping with the more precise and orderly Teutonic mind of Ratzinger and is clearly more detailed, providing specific measures for enforcement. In fact, the Holy Father has outlined an eleven-step process for the identification and removal of the Second-Hand Smoke of Satan:

Step 1. VALIDATUM

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith investigates and verifies the complaint. For example, a Diocesan Director of Religious Education (DDRE) is accused of active membership in Call to Action, Voice of the Faithful, or, in worst case scenarios, consorting with brothers of the Society of Jesus or the theology faculty of Xavier University. CDF will document the charge via a thorough examination of books, articles and lectures by the deviant bureaucrat, any extant memoranda to parish DRE’s, or the presence of a rainbow sash in the bureaucrat’s closet.

Step 2. ADMONATUM

Continuing with our example, CDF issues a formal admonition to the deviant DDRE (now referred to as the DDDRE), copying the bishop, warning him that his heterodox or heretical activities have been exposed and verified. The DDDRE is given the opportunity to respond to the charges in writing. (If the deviant happens to be a bishop, a not uncommon occurrence here in the United States, then the Papal Nuncio and the president of the national conference are also copied.)

Step 3. EXHORTATUM

The third step in the corrective process, issued even before a response to “Admonatum” is received, is a personal exhortation to the DDDRE urging and encouraging him to return to full communion with the Holy Father and the Magisterium, and to abandon his unsavory activities. Unfortunately, rather than explain himself to the proper authority, the defendant at this stage often chooses defiance, asserting himself in the pages of the National Catholic Reporter, America magazine, or, if here in Cincinnati, via ample column space provided by The (Occasionally) Catholic Telegraph.

Step 4. PORTENTUM

The standard CDF response to a defendant who seeks to distract from the issue at hand with inflammatory, self-serving publicity is to issue yet another warning, this one ominous in character, warning of disastrous consequences to the soul of the DDDRE – not to mention to his career - for non-repentance.

Step 5. PROCLAMATUM

In the event of the DDDRE’s failure to respond to the charges, CDF issues a proclamation, published in L’Osservatore Romano and Zenit, notifying the Catholic world that one of its own has gone astray. “Proclamatum” is frequently met with jeers and protests heavily laced with the phrase “academic freedom.”

Step 6. OBLIGATUM

CDF issues yet another formal document to the defendant, reminding him of his obligations to the Church. The “Obligatum” is also posted on every parish bulletin board of the diocese in question, as well as the door of the bishop’s office. The danger of posting “Obligatum” in this manner, however, is that it can be frequently obscured by parish festival flyers, job postings, or “Safe Environment” procedures.

Step 7. POSTULATUM

“Obligatum” is accompanied by a supporting document which lists the specific teachings of the Catechism that have been violated. “Postulatum,” as you might guess, also postulates the existence of objective truth and infallibility, often described by the deviant as the “dictatorship of objectivism.”

Step 8. DICTUM

Step 8 dictates to the offending party the specific authoritative pronouncements to which the defendant must agree, pronouncements which must replace any questionable assertions in the defendant’s writings. Defendants have been known to evade “Dictum” by responding “It depends on what you mean by ‘agree.’”

Step 9. DECRETUM (CANON)

Step 9 is the CDF’s official and curt notice that the offending party has reached the end of his rope. It outlines the remedies to be applied to his case under Canon Law, as specified under the Decretum Gratiani. The citation of an obscure canonical collection is quite deliberate, as it is intended to cause the same kind of confusion and uncertainty in the mind of the deviant as the deviant has sowed in the minds of the faithful.

Step 10. ULTIMATUM

Finally, CDF’s patience having been exhausted, the DDDRE is notified that he has been removed from his post, and is prohibited from the further dissemination of any writings purporting to represent the Church or its teachings. This prohibition does not extend to any of the publications listed under Step 3, however, since none of them is Catholic.

Step 11. CAVEATUM

In a concluding act of Catholic charity, the exiled educator (following our example, now the DDDRE-E) is reminded that Holy Mother Church, ever solicitous of the state of his soul, will always accept him back into the fold were he to decide to comply with the corrective process outlined above. However, it is rare that the Second-Hand Smoke of Satan, once having been inhaled, can ever be released from body and mind, except through the offices of an exorcist…

Miscellanea CATHOLICA

+What’s wrong with the revised Rite of Exorcism? A better question would be: what's right with it?

+How are the bishops responding to Summorum Pontificum? Consult http://www.summorumpontificum.net/ or http://wdtprs.com/blog/

+Why is the post-Conciliar Church more protestant than Catholic? Well, let's start at Square One...

+The Angelus Press is reporting donations of over $100,000 to their appeal for extra funds in response to overwhelming demand for the 1962 Missal. You can now donate to them on-line: http://www.angeluspress.org/reprint-appeal.html

+The 90^th anniversary of the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima would be a good time to start reading this book: http://www.devilsfinalbattle.com/content2.htm

WWPD?

2007-09-30T08:58:00.000-04:00

+ An exciting new public relations campaign, complete with wristbands, headbands, key chains, necklaces, t-shirts, coffee mugs, bobbleheads - even scapulars - is sweeping across the Archdiocese of Cincinnati!

+ It’s a campaign generated by the Archdiocesan Office of Communications and The (Occasionally) Catholic Telegraph to celebrate the long and distinguished ecclesiastical career of Archbishop Daniel E. Pilarczyk as it draws to a close in August of 2009. Featured are highlights of his integrity and wise stewardship, the milestones of a track record which has brought such a wealth of vocations (and so many fruits) to our Archdiocese. Though this campaign is officially called “A Celebration of Archbishop Pilarczyk,” it has become known in certain underground circles by another name, based on the popular “What Would Jesus Do?” movement.

+Here at The Flying Buttress we have developed our own collection of Pilarczyk career highlights, culled from various scenarios which have occurred during his tenure. We’re hoping these highlights, gathered from the tireless research of WCPO-TV's I-Team, will add a significant dimension to our readers’ appreciation of this distinguished servant of the Church...

Scenario 1

Victims of sexual abuse in Cincinnati call for the publication of the full history of abuse in the Archdiocese to help the healing process, as was done in the Covington Diocese.

What Would Pilarczyk Do (WWPD)?

Why, he’d not only waffle about finishing such a report, he’d even waffle about making it public! After all, who needs a sincere apology?

Scenario 2

Victims of sexual abuse in Cincinnati want to know why the police weren’t called in specific cases, and why abusing priests weren’t fired.

WWPD?

Why, he’d claim he didn’t know he had to call the police, and that he couldn’t fire priests! He'd even say he never lied to anybody about it!

Scenario 3

The WCPO I-Team interviews the Archbishop twice in 2003 to establish some background on sexual abuse cases.

WWPD?

Why, he’d claim through a paid lobbyist that the interviews never took place!

Scenario 4

A victim of a gay priest files a civil lawsuit against the Archdiocese.

WWPD?

Why, he’d have the Tribunal dismiss the young man’s allegations and attempt to discredit him!

Scenario 5

One of Cincinnati’s gay priests, addicted to crack cocaine and male prostitutes, is potentially a big headache. But there’s an even bigger problem: this priest is heir to a family fortune worth tens of millions of dollars, which he has bequeathed to the Archdiocese.

WWPD?

Why, he'd pretend the problem was diabetes, place the priest on medical leave, and ensure this priest’s inheritance could still be bequeathed to the Archdiocese!

Scenario 6

The pastor of Cincinnati’s largest parish, a close personal friend (sic) of the Archbishop, is caught misusing parish funds.

WWPD?

Why, he’d refuse to comment on the case, merely allowing the priest to take early retirement, and stall on releasing the audit!

Scenario 7

One of Cincinnati’s brave priests sends a letter to the Archbishop, warning him about the ongoing homosexual sex abuse activities of a fellow priest.

WWPD?

You guessed it - nothing!

Scenario 8: The Mother of all Scenarios

The person hired by the Archdiocese to perform criminal background checks for all Church and school volunteers turns out to be a criminal himself, with a long rap sheet and a history of a homosexual relationship with the Archdiocesan Personnel Director.

WWPD?

Why, he'd write a letter to the parish that complained about this, claiming that “…we need to be able to give people a chance to do right after they've done wrong"!

Miscellanea CATHOLICA

+The Flying Buttress renews our dedication to St. Michael on this his feast day, and we wish a blessed Michaelmas to all our readers! Here are The Prayers to St. Michael (short version, long version and Exorcism); and the Act of Consecration to St. Michael.

ALERT: Weapons of Mass Disruption

2007-09-30T08:27:00.000-04:00

+Reviled Flying Buttress publisher Tomas de Torquemada, noticing a certain trend among American bishops who, for a variety of reasons which come under the category of “smokescreens,” do not approve of the apparent liberation of the 1962 Missal, (READ: are threatened by it, since it signals the beginning of the end of their post-Conciliar joyride) asked the St. Joseph Foundation for help in interpreting one particular phrase of Summorum Pontificum.

+The English phrase in question is “juridically impeded.” We focused on this phrase because we thought it was being used to create a loophole wide enough to accomodate a Mexican 16-wheeler, resulting in various illicit restrictions being placed upon priests who wish to celebrate this rite.

+What follows is the full response of the St. Joseph Foundation, who was kind enough to not only point out that we were mistaken, but to give us permission to use their answer, provided we printed their response in full. We are delighted to do so, and truly grateful for their clarification:

“Dear [Senor Torquemada]:

I am responding to your question concerning Summorum Pontificum, art.5 § 4. You ask about the meaning of the phrase “juridically impeded.” In this context, I believe that the term refers to priests who have certain canonical limitations on their celebration of the sacraments. For example, if a priest has been placed under a penalty such as excommunication or interdict, he is prohibited from celebrating Mass (cf. cann. 1331 § 1, 1^o, 1332). Thus, this passage of SP simply means that priests who are prohibited from celebrating the sacraments generally, also are prohibited from celebrating them according to the 1962 liturgical books.

With regard to your question about the interpretation of SP by some bishops, I do not believe that they are focusing on the requirement relating to juridical impediments. Rather, I think that they are focusing on another term that appears in SP. The provision of SP that you cite (art. 5 § 4) has two requirements for priests wishing to celebrate Mass accoding to the 1962 Missal:

“idonei esse debent ac iure non impediti.”

The second requirement is that they not be juridically impeded (iure non impediti); the first requirement is that they must be idonei. That is, they must be worthy or suitable. I believe that it is this requirement of worthiness that some bishops are interpreting as providing authority for them to examine priests on their ability in Latin and their understanding of the liturgy.

Whether this interpretation is compatible with SP is a question that the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei” may need to decide. For my own part, I have great difficulty in reconciling some of these interpretations with the letter and spirit of SP. By contrast, Edward Cardinal Egan of New York has issued a statement on SP in which he interpreted this requirement of worthiness to mean simply that the priests celebrating with the Missal of John XXIII must be able to pronounce the Latin words correctly. This interpretation by Cardinal Egan seems to me to be much more sound.

I hope that this information will assist you.

Sincerely yours,

M.D. The St. Joseph Foundation San Antonio, Texas”

Miscellanea CATHOLICA

+Once again, Mother Angelica reminds us how Catholic liturgy should look and sound.

Does Peter's Barque Have a Bite?

2007-09-09T06:43:00.000-04:00

+Our readers may recall that before releasing Summorum Pontifium, Pope Benedict XVI met privately with about 15 bishops to discuss their reactions to the document. However, as our Rome correspondent Alfredo Fettuccine reports, the Holy Father conducted a second meeting by conference call on the same subject, just a few hours later, with his “liberal” American bishops.

+Pope Benedict, hoping to score some collegial points with this historically hostile audience, apparently took pains to compose a rather progressive Responsorial Psalm, based on an old Broadway standard, with which to open this call. Unfortunately, his original responses were rudely interrupted and replaced by Bishop Donald W. Trautman, Chairman of the US Bishops’ Committee on Liturgy and the apparent spokesman for this group From what we understand, the resulting Psalm, somewhat reminiscent of the disjointed language of Sacrosanctum Concilium, has now been inserted into all the Gather hymnals in the Diocese of Erie, PA (with guitar tablature added).

+Here, sadly, is what became of the opening of that phone call. Note that the verses were sung by the Holy Father, while the untoward responses were sung by Bishop Trautman.

V: I dreamed last night we got off the boat to heaven;/ This “great façade” it just couldn’t be prolonged,/ And so I wrote/ Such a Universal Indult!/ So the bishops they would know right from wrong…/

R/: But the bishops all say sit down,/ Sit down, you're rockin' the boat!/ Don’t assume we’ll all come around;/ Your Summorum we won’t promote!/ That old Missal will drag us under -/ All those smells and bells will just never float./ Sit down, we frown, take off that gown,/ Sit down, you’re rockin’ the boat!/

V: The most wondrous thing on this side of heaven,/ Whose cause I plead, and whose treasures are my gist,/ Is why I beg to restore our one Tradition,/ ‘Tis a blessing, not a change to resist…/

R/: But the bishops all say beware -/ You’re on a divisive trip!/ You’re giving us quite a scare/ Our jurisdiction you will clip!/ Those Lefebvrites will drag us under/ We know their objections as if by rote:/ Sit down, we frown, take off that gown,/ Sit down you’re rockin’ the boat!/

V: I bowed my head, “Lord, have mercy on my bishops,”/ And a great big wave came and washed them overboard!/ But as they sank, they all hollered “Someone save us!”/ Did they finally awake, my Dear Lord?/

R/: But the bishops all say sit down,/ Sit down, you’re rockin’ the boat!/ There’s no way we could drown,/ Vatican II keeps us afloat!/ This nostalgia will drag us under;/ Your authority is just so remote -/ Sit down, we frown, take off that gown,/ Sit down you’re rockin’ the boat!/

Miscellanea CATHOLICA

+Bishop Trautman, in fact, has already violated in writing the terms of Summorum Pontificum, by requiring his priests to pass an examination in Latin and in the rubrics of the 1962 Missal before offering it. What part of “does not need the bishop’s permission” didn’t you understand, Your Excellency? And since Latin and the 1962 rubrics are shunned by Trautman as if they were anathema, who exactly will be administering those exams?

+How many priests (and bishops) do you suppose will react to Summorum Pontificum the way Father Peter Daly, of St. John Vianney parish in Prince Frederick, MD, has? Why is it that the post-Conciliar Church is so adept at producing arrogant, devious and mealy-mouthed ideologues, and so inept at producing humble saints?

+If you’re looking for others in your area to start a petition for a Traditional Latin Mass, here is a link: http://www.lumengentleman.com/motucontacts.asp

Commentary on "Summorum Pontificum"

2007-09-09T06:32:00.000-04:00

The Exorcism Begins in Earnest

+Our readers may be familiar with the claim of the late Father Malachi Martin regarding certain mysterious events that took place during the evening of June 29, 1963.

+Father Martin describes, in “Windswept House,” a satanic enthronement ritual -performed by members of the Church’s own hierarchy - that took place that evening in the Vatican and in Charleston, South Carolina, simultaneously and coordinated by telephone. He then indicates that this enthronement of Satan within the Church was the true cause and sustenance of the revolution that swept through Her in the years that followed.

+If Martin’s story is true (and he claimed it was), then The Flying Buttress views this motu propriu as the first serious public step toward undoing this enthronement ritual, and therefore at healing all the far-reaching confusion which followed. Confusion is, after all, the first trademark of the presence of the Church’s ancient enemy.

+We predict the eventual effect of Summorum Pontificum on all the heterodox, “progressives,” dissenters, heretics, and the proud and sinless homosexuals who infest the Church will be quite similar to the reaction of a possessed person when a Crucifix or a Rosary is brought near to them, or touches them.

+That being said, however, we offer some critical commentary on several phrases in this document and the accompanying letter which, to a layman attempting to employ both faith and reason, sadly indicate a Rome who still appears to be weak and compromised. Is Benedict XVI that Knight in Shining Armor who will restore the Church Militant and Triumphant? No, but he is laying the groundwork for that Knight:

“Up to our own times, it has been the constant concern of Supreme Pontiffs to ensure that the Church of Christ offers a worthy ritual to the Divine Majesty, ‘to the praise and glory of His name,’ and ‘to the benefit of all His Holy Church.’"

+Paul VI, however, in promulgating his Missal, seemed more concerned with offering a worthy ritual comprehensible and acceptable to mankind than in offering a worthy ritual to the Divine Majesty. In fact, in the all-too-common usage of his Missal, mankind has replaced the Divine Majesty as the object of worship.

“In more recent times, the Second Vatican Council expressed a desire that the respectful reverence due to divine worship should be renewed and adapted to the needs of our time.”

+One wonders, first of all, how “respectful reverence” can be adapted to anything, let alone to the needs of our time. Is this therefore a relativistic reverence? And how are the spiritual needs of mankind in our time – the Church’s primary concern - different from man’s needs in any other time? Be that as it may, we all know how “reverently” the Missal of Paul VI has been used in practice.

+While many have attempted to defend this Missal based on the fact that it can be celebrated “reverently,” that is not the issue. Pagans can slaughter chickens “reverently.” The issue is the omission of the sacred mystery, the omission or merely oblique focus on the Holy Sacrifice, and the replacement of the alter christus priest with the Amiable Lecturer, Congenial Social Worker, Psychologist, Team Leader, and All-Around Swell Guy.

+While sacred mystery evokes reverence, reverence does not in and of itself invoke sacred mystery.

“These [Paul VI’s liturgical books of 1970], translated into the various languages of the world, were willingly accepted by bishops, priests and faithful.”

+...except for those tens of millions of faithful and many thousands of clergy and religious who left the Church rather than accept the “reforms” of 1970.

“Thus Roman Pontiffs have operated to ensure that ‘this kind of liturgical edifice ... should again appear resplendent for its dignity and harmony.’”

+More recently, however, Roman Pontiffs have operated to ensure something quite different, namely, that a Missal based on a Calvinist communion service (as Paul VI himself admitted) – in other words, a rite which is in its essence not Catholic - should appear to be Catholic. They have also operated to perpetuate the myth that the “reforms” of Vatican II have been good for the Church, rather than devastating.

Articles 7 and 8: legal and procedural disputes.

+Though these articles intend the very opposite, they in practice will be nothing more than the loopholes which disobedient bishops have always managed to find, bogging down urgent questions in years of canonical proceedings.

And, from the accompanying letter:

“In the first place, there is the fear that the document detracts from the authority of the Second Vatican Council, one of whose essential decisions -- the liturgical reform -- is being called into question.”

+What should be called into question is the work of Bugnini’s Consilium: whether it fulfilled the liturgical decree of the Council, or whether it embarked upon its own prefabricated and premeditated revolution which it then attempted to disguise as the work of the Council. How do we know that the Missal of Paul VI was not what the Council Fathers had in mind on the question of liturgical reform? They voted it down soundly when it was presented to them!

+If the Missal of Paul VI violates both the letter and the spirit of the liturgical decree of the Council, does it not therefore also violate its authority? Is not this “fear,” therefore, just a smokescreen?

+In order to better understand how the vague and internally inconsistent language of the Vatican II documents laid the foundation for Bugnini’s Revolution, the student of history would do well to compare the procedural technique of the Freemasons as applied to the French Revolution/Reign of Terror, the passage of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, the Bolshevik Revolution, and Vatican II. They are one and the same technique.

“…a good number of people remained strongly attached to this usage of the Roman Rite, which had been familiar to them from childhood.”

+Yet it is among those who never knew the Missal of 1962 in their childhood that this Rite attracts the most devotion (as the Holy Father acknowledges elsewhere).

“The celebration of the Mass according to the Missal of Paul VI will be able to demonstrate, more powerfully than has been the case hitherto, the sacrality which attracts many people to the former usage” [as a result of mutual enriching of the two Rites].

+How this will occur remains to be seen: it will require the priest to turn around and once again face the altar; it will require the faithful to receive Holy Eucharist kneeling and on the tongue; it will require the use of an altar instead of a communal table; it will require the restoration of the Tabernacle on the altar; it will require prayers and rubrics which restore the priest’s role as alter christus, it will require…

“There is no contradiction between the two editions of the Roman Missal. In the history of the liturgy there is growth and progress, but no rupture. What earlier generations held as sacred, remains sacred and great for us too, and it cannot be all of a sudden entirely forbidden or even considered harmful. It behooves all of us to preserve the riches which have developed in the Church's faith and prayer, and to give them their proper place. Needless to say, in order to experience full communion, the priests of the communities adhering to the former usage cannot, as a matter of principle, exclude celebrating according to the new books.

+ Is there really no contradiction between the sterile, secularized and philistine Protestant parodies of worship upon which the Missal of Paul VI is based, and the Catholic Mass lovingly and carefully developed over centuries based on Apostolic Tradition? Is there really no rupture evident in the revolution of Bugnini’s Consilium, which took an officially sanctioned Sherman’s March through our Tradition?

+Does the Holy Father mean that there has been no rupture in the history of the development of the “Tridentine” Mass? That would be correct. Or does he mean that the promulgation of the Missal of Paul VI does not constitute a terrible rupture in the liturgy? That would be a ludicrous statement, a slap in the face to any Catholic who takes his faith seriously, and a contradiction of his previous statement as Prefect:

“After the Council… in place of the liturgy as the fruit of organic development came fabricated liturgy. We abandoned the organic, living process of growth and development over centuries, and replaced it, as in a manufacturing process, with a fabrication, a banal on-the-spot product.” (Quoted by Philip Goddard in “The Latin Mass Society Newsletter,” May 2004)

+The Pope’s prior remarks on this lack of continuity and unity should be enough in and of themselves, but Goddard adds: “In order to justify their desire to deprive traditionalists of access to their preferred rite, therefore, the modernists are compelled to argue that they are not two different rites, but an older and a newer version of the same.”

+Does the last sentence of this paragraph (“Needless to say…”) also now force the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter, as well as all the other orders and societies “adhering to the former usage,” to celebrate the Novus Ordo?

“The total exclusion of the new rite would not in fact be consistent with the recognition of its value and holiness.”

+Just as the attempted total exclusion of the old Rite was not consistent with the recognition of its value and holiness (note the reference to the “new rite,” a slip of the tongue which all by itself destroys the previous attempt to make these two Missals one unified rite). Moreover, any value and holiness present in the new rite is not inherent, since it did not come from within Tradition but from something utterly inimical to it. If it has any value, it would be only that holiness added by those priests who have refused to surrender the alter christus to modernism.

+We conclude our perspective on the Missal of Paul VI with some thoughts recently posed by one of our readers to several members of Cincinnati’s Catholic intelligentsia. To our knowledge, he has never received the courtesy of a reply:

“Regarding the approaching universal indult for the Missal of 1962, I am at a loss to explain the utterly schizophrenic behavior of the Church. The Church bemoans the scarcity of vocations to the priesthood, yet Her default liturgy, the Missal of Paul VI, is one that demeans priests and the sacrificial nature of the priesthood, reducing them to “presiders” over the “assembly.” The Church affirms that the Holy Eucharist is the “source and summit of Christian life,” yet Her default liturgy degrades the Eucharist by having laity receive standing, in the hand, and from other laity. The Church bemoans the loss of faith in the Real Presence, yet Her default liturgy is one that emphasizes a communal meal at the expense of transubstantiation. And worst of all, the Church twice dismisses the architect of Her default liturgy, Annibale Bugnini, under suspicion of being a Freemason, yet She promulgates the very liturgy he created! Can anyone explain this to me?”

+Let the exorcism begin…

At fine booksellers everywhere...

2007-06-26T04:39:00.000-04:00

+Reviled Flying Buttress Publisher Tomas de Torquemada (not pictured at left) has made a daring new foray into the world of fiction! His novel, first feverishly sketched on several napkins at The Olive Garden, explores the ethical boundaries of science and theology applied to the sacred teachings of the Church, as seen through the eyes of a Xavier theologian.

+We now offer our readers an exclusive preview of our Publisher’s work, with this first installment from the Preface:

Frankincense, or The Modern Antidote to Prometheus Preface

“Long, long ago, when I was but a sophomoric lad on this very Xavier campus, during the Neanderthal years before Vatican II, an old theology professor took me aside after class. Perhaps sensing in me some roiling and troublesome urge, he confided in me forthwith a saying, which he evidently prized as his deepest and most hard-earned insight:

‘Victor, you seek for knowledge and wisdom, as I once did; and I ardently hope that the gratification of your wishes may not be a serpent to sting you, as mine has been.’

Young, foolish, and prideful as I was - I, Dr. Victor Frankincense, SJ, Professor Emeritus of Theology - paid little heed to his words. Even then, you see, I was determined to revolutionize the Church, having conceived of the grandest of all schemes against her. Though it was only recently that my plan came to fruition, yet I confess this to you: I have come to curse that day!

Has it been, truly, only three years since I completed my dream? O, it seems now like an eternity! How easily I bent my secret knowledge of biology, chemistry and metallurgy to the task! How effortless was my acquisition of internal organs from Planned Parenthood and Stem Cell Inc., and body parts of statues from closed Cincinnati parishes! How perfectly did I recreate the potions of Wicca, re-enact the rituals of Freemasonry! With what marvelous speed did I construct my creature!

Dear reader, I had set out to create a mighty theologian, whose intelligence and reasoning capacity would far surpass that of ordinary men. A being who, by the sheer force of his invincible logic and will, could single-handedly destroy the outmoded myths of Divine Revelation, and all the dogma and liturgy which rested upon them. A veritable Master of Dissent, standing astride the ruins of tradition! A Colossus of Social Justice and Liberation, cloaked in the banner of Ignatius!

But that is not what I awoke in my laboratory. Perhaps you, so wise in the ways of the world, can tell me what went so horribly wrong. My computers all running at optimal performance, the latest Windows XP Updates installed, virus protection, surge protection, spyware protection, spam firewall – not a stone left unturned! And yet…

The toggle switches were all flipped on; electricity coursed through the electrodes to the perfected fiber optic nerves of my magnificent new theologian. His giant body twitched again and again, ‘til at last he drew breath! And then, after what seemed an eternity, his eyelids flew open, his steel gray eyes focused, he sat slowly upright. He was conscious!

Trembling with excitement, I drew close and spoke to him. “Can you hear me?” I whispered. But I shall never forget the first words he uttered – nay, chanted! - for it was with these very words that he utterly crushed my spirit, and from whence my nightmare ensued:

Asperges me, Domine, hyssopo et mundabor: lavabis me, Et super nivem dealbabor. Miserere mei, Deus, Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam. Gloria Patri, et Filio, et Spiritui Sancto: Sicut erat in principio, et nunc, et semper, et in saecula saeculorum. Amen. Asperges me, Domine, hyssopo et mundabor: lavabis me, Et super nivem dealbabor. Miserere mei, Deus, Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.

+To be continued…

Miscellanea CATHOLICA

+Speaking of Planned Parenthood, Jesuit tradition at the University of Detroit Mercy includes endorsing the culture of death and consorting with their representatives.

+The KGB and the attack on Pope Pius XII.

+A note to the Holy Father and the American Papal Nuncio: Your Holiness and Your Excellency, we humbly offer a suggestion regarding the approaching universal indult for the Missal of 1962. There are many priests for whom career advancement outweighs spiritual advancement. This is not necessarily a bad thing, as long as they remain faithful to the Church and to their vows. However, for these priests, the celebration of the Missal of 1962 is probably not seen as a wise career move, but as a backward one into an ecclesiastical Never-Land. Therefore, may we urgently suggest that some career incentive be offered – for both bishops and priests - in order to make this indult more attractive?

A kinder, gentler Flying Buttress (II)

2007-06-26T04:32:00.000-04:00

+ We hope our readers haven't been too distracted by the ongoing disintegration of Western Civilization to recall our April 29 issue, in which we published Archbishop Pilarczyk's responses to an Enneagram questionnaire.

+This week, holding fast to our new, more understanding, and more compassionate posture, we offer an entirely free, no-obligation analysis of His Excellency's personality based on his questionnaire responses, concluding with some suggestions as to how he might use his personality traits to enhance both his job performance and his personal well-being.

+Analysis. Daniel Pilarczyk, you are a Type Four personality, an "Innovator." You seek the new and different, the thrill, the highly charged sensory experience, the emotional rush. Small wonder, then, that you refer to the restoration of tradition as a "liturgical winter," for the old ways simply bore you. "Why should people keep on doing the same thing in the same old way for centuries?" you ask. You need variety, a constant change of pace and scenery to satiate your inner restlessness.

+Though you can be the life of the party (a role not unsuitable for a Leo) this constant search for thrill and titillation has its down side, for should you descend from your impetuous peak, your life becomes a vale of tears characterized by depression, moodiness, and instability. Your compensatory reaction against this downswing frequently leads you to plunge recklessly into numerous shallow and fleeting relationships which have no meaning, and which only postpone the inevitable day of reckoning.

+Ironically, your propensity for doing, thinking, and feeling "outside the tabernacle" creates in you a wistful nostalgia for the very patterns and comforts you spurn. In your innermost, secret self, you long for stability, tradition, monogamy, and most of all, the security of being like everyone else. You are envious of those who have secured these comforts in their lives, and that creates in you a perpetual dissatisfaction with the status quo and with yourself, a constant self-critical search for "greener pastures." Yours is the tragic view of life, though you deny it vehemently. You mischaracterize and then dismiss the "nostalgia" of traditionalists, yet it is a longing for the norms of civilized life which chronically plague you.

+Recommendation. There are ways, however, to overcome these weaknesses. You must focus on your strengths, and the resourcefulness you bring to the table. Learn to explore and develop the possibilities of every task without becoming impatient. Think about the advantages of habit and ritual. Overcome your moodiness through physical exercise, such as liturgical dance. Channel your self-criticism into championing a cause or program you believe in, like CRYSM, or the many other forms of sexual, environmental, immigrant, racial and animal justice which you hold so dear and which make you feel accepted.

+Above all, Daniel, you must find equanimity. Learn to move beyond labels such as "good" or "evil," and live in a neutral present without pain or anguish, reward or punishment. Understand that everything in the world is relative and impermanent.

+In order to facilitate the achievement of equanimity, we find that the painstaking construction of sand mandalas, that assiduous pursuit of Tibetan Buddhist monks you so recently featured in the Telegraph, would bring you a salutary change in perspective and open up entirely new vistas of enlightenment. This newly achieved equanimity would not only serve you well in your roles as administrator and shepherd, but also serve to remind you, in a supremely tangible way, of the ephemeral nature of life, and above all, of the fragility of your position as Ordinary.

Miscellanea CATHOLICA

+Your Excellency, if you found this thumbnail Enneagram sketch helpful, you might also enjoy this.

+ The true origin of the Lavender Mafia.

A kinder, gentler Flying Buttress?

2007-05-09T05:37:00.000-04:00

+Reviled Flying Buttress Publisher Tomas de Torquemada, apparently feeling guilty over his unremitting adversarial relationship with Archbishop Pilarczyk and his fellow travelers, has decided to adopt a new, more understanding posture toward His Excellency's lavender peccadilloes.

Just recently, the whole Chancery gang engaged in a self-awareness exercise - in the form of an Enneagram questionnaire - at a team-building retreat. The Flying Buttress has obtained a copy of the questionnaire filled out by the Archbishop, and, as our first gesture of goodwill, we publish it here. In our next issue, we will offer our most understanding and compassionate analysis of this data, so that His Excellency will be better empowered to understand his personality style and how that style should interact with his staff, his priests, and with the flock of which he is the shepherd.

Here then are the Archbishop's questionnaire responses:

1. I seem to know the right thing to do. x Seldom Sometimes Often

2. I find it easy to make ethically nuanced decisions.

Seldom Sometimes x Often

3. Compromise is wrong when making moral decisions.

x Seldom Sometimes Often

4. I work well within systems. Seldom x Sometimes Often

5. I have some trouble with a lot of “shoulds” in my life.

x Seldom Sometimes Often

6. What I should do is often more important than what I may feel.

x Seldom Sometimes Often

7. Obeying authority is important to me.

x Seldom Sometimes Often

8. Being obeyed is important to me.