Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Denial IYesterday’s post dealt with dying religious communities and a subject matter that is quickly becoming the 4th Principle of the LEX ARMATICUS, namely:

Dishonesty Is The ONLY Neo-Modernist Policy. (see here)

In the attached link, your humble blogger provides two examples of “Neo-modernist” dishonesty in two different sub-sets of human endeavor, namely  public policy – relating to the 2nd Amendment Right to bear arms and the  ecclesiastical area– relating to paragraph 299 of the GRIM. We noticed that in both cases, what we call the NEO-MODERNIST EXPERIMENTS™ are failing, and they are failing everywhere. We are talking EPIC FAIL.

With respect to the specifics, in yesterday’s post (see here) we highlighted the plight of a religious order whose mission is coming to an end. This religious order is the Society of Jesus. In that post we cited a quote attributed to Francis, the bishop of Rome, i.e.:

It is just another religious order whose mission on Earth is coming to an end, but does not want to sell its real estate.

In today’s post, we will examine the second half of this quote, namely the “does not want to sell its real estate” bit. This should provide us with some very prescient insights into the decision making process of the post-conciliar church.

To understand the critical issues relating to religious orders that need to dispose of their real estate holdings (tangible assets), it is important to understand that these religious orders are no longer in a position to either maintain nor to fund the real estate assets themselves. The main reason in the case of the maintenance issue is that the vocations of the order have dried up, as per the Jesuits. In the case of the funding, the religious orders most likely lost the Faithful who attended their chapels and who most likely were the source of their funding.

Given the above, I came across a post at the The Catholic Thing blog titled: A Modest Proposal for Dying Religious Communities (see here). The writer begins by explaining the issue: (emphasis added)

“Over the last several years, I’ve come into contact with a number of dying religious orders: groups of men or women religious, dwindling in number, who haven’t had a new vocation in over thirty years. Some of these religious live in what is now the somewhat embarrassing palatial splendor of a convent or priory financed and built during headier days when vocations were many and the assumption was they would always remain that way.”

So the natural place to begin is by asking, why had the vocations dwindled?

Here is the most likely answer:

(…) Not only did the number of novices drop, in some cases, the better vocations these orders did get were often turned away, as being psychologically “unhealthy.”

Hold that thought!

So a decision is taken to dispose of the property. The below appears to be the CRITERIA used to determining the buyer:

They’re often desperate for buyers and want to get out from under the responsibilities of caring for a big building they no longer need. To developers who want to turn these houses of prayer and reflection into (A) condos, or (B) retirement villages for the elderly, the answer is always “yes” (if the price is right). But when a young vibrant conservative religious order or a start-up Catholic college comes their way looking to buy, then the answer is no, no, and by the way, did I mention, no!

So let us stop here and try to wrap our heads around this issue.

What we have here is a “c”atholic dying religious order who does not want to sell their tangible assets to a vibrant Catholic religious order. Not only does this appear to be a case of “c”atholic on Catholic hate, but it also appears to be a case of discrimination on the basis of religious belief under the Fair Housing Act of 1968.

Let us move on since it is not the legal issue that your humble blogger wants to address in this post.

What I want to address is to identify the source of the motivation behind the decision making process of “c”atholic dying religious orders not wanting to sell to vibrant Catholic religious orders.

Back to the story. What is also of significant importance to understand is that this “c”atholic dying religious order offered to have a “regional Indian tribe (…) to take over the property”. The implication here is that the Indian tribe would receive the property at no cost. Unfortunately, for the “c”atholic dying religious order, the Indian tribe was not interested.

So how does one explain the above situation?

Here is how the author sums up the situation:

But please understand, these people do have their scruples. They won’t sell to just anyone. They draw the line at selling to Catholics “of the wrong sort.” That would be Catholics who don’t share the same “spirit of Vatican II” that they do.

So how can one explain this situation from a Catholic perspective?

As we know, Catholicism has a philosophical base due to its first source of knowledge about God i.e. as known through “natural light of human reason from the things that are made”. In this case, “philosophy” is defined as the science of acquiring knowledge. That philosophical base was provide to the Catholic religion by the Scholastics. The Scholastics developed what is today known as the scientific method. The scientific method is defined as the process by which knowledge is acquired based on empirical and measurable evidence.

In our case, a situation whereby a “c”atholic dying religious order would rather “hand over” its tangible assets to an Indian tribe as opposed to selling it to a vibrant Catholic religious order is not a rational decision. Therefore, it is not a decision based on either Catholic teaching or compatible with the MISSION of the Catholic Church.

Furthermore, the above decision would appear to run afoul of the 2nd Principle of the LEX ARMATICUS, namely that “even Neo-modernists need to eat”.

Therefore, if a decision does not have a CATHOLIC (philosophical) basis, it must fall into the catch all category of an IDEOLOGICAL DECISION. And as we know, IDEOLOGICAL decisions do not need to be REASON based, but rather can be EMOTIONAL. An IDEOLOGY in this case would be defined as an “archaic visionary speculation, especially of an unrealistic or idealistic nature”.

And what proof do we have that this is exactly the nature of the beast that we are dealing with?

The author identifies just this in the following:

If the current residents don’t want to use them (tangible assets) to support the mission of the Church, then let someone else do so.

The reason that understanding the above is critical, is that the INFERENCE here is that “current residents”, i.e. the “c”atholic dying religious orders do not see their MISSION as being the same as the MISSION of the vibrant Catholic religious orders.

Actually, the“c”atholic dying religious orders see their MISSION in terms of THWARTING or STOPPING the vibrant Catholic religious orders from carrying out their MISSION.

Let that sink in for a second or two.

Or to put it another way, the respective MISSIONS of the two communities are not only not compatible, but are of a contradictory nature. Hence the THWARTING or STOPPING action.

PROOF of the above is that the “c”atholic dying religious orders would rather hand over their tangible assets to strictly secular organizations RATHER THAN to vibrant Catholic religious orders.

One can easily take this reasoning and determine that the “c”atholic dying religious orders see the vibrant Catholic religious orders as their enemies, since they do not want to allow the latter to form, develop and continue the MISSION of the Holy Roman Catholic Church, an institution to which the “c”atholic dying religious orders nominally belong.

It is not by a long stretch that we witness this same IDEOLOGICAL decision making processes playing itself out in other areas of the post-conciliar church. The Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate is one case in point. In this case, we see the Roman Pontiff suppressing a vibrant Catholic religious order just because they appear to be “of the wrong sort.”.

Furthermore, the same “thought processes” and explanations appear when looking at the wider actions and statements of Francis, bishop of Rome. Here is a passage from the first ever “formation directors” meeting that took place in Rome: (see here) (emphasis added)

All the people who know the human personality — may they be psychologists, spiritual fathers, spiritual mothers — tell us that young people who unconsciously feel they have something unbalanced or some problem of mental imbalance or deviation unconsciously seek strong structures that protect them, to protect themselves.”

As the loyal readership already know, starting an ARGUMENT with a logical fallacy, (Appeal to Popularity) and a rather weak fallacy at that, is not a positive sign. It is also not a good sign for possessing a REASON based decision making process.

But it gets better. In a follow up address, Cardinal João Braz de Aviz, the Prefect of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life, made the following claim:

Do not distance yourself from the great lines of the Second Vatican Council,” he said. “In fact, those that are distancing themselves from the council to make another path are killing themselves — sooner or later, they will die.”

Needless to say, the above is an OBJECTIVELY FALSE statement. It is precisely those religious institutions that conform to the “great lines of the Second Vatican Council” that are dying. That is just the OBJECTIVE REALITY of the matter.

Furthermore, is it any wonder that the Catholic Church, who is managed by people such as Francis and Card. Braz de Aviz is going the way of the “c”atholic dying religious orders such as the Society of Jesus? And is it any wonder that theecclesiastical structures that fall into their grip eventually die away – a process now visible all over the world”.

Summing up the above, Mr Randall Smith, the author of the post titled A Modest Proposal for Dying Religious Communities, makes a brilliant observation, namely:

In Melville’s Moby Dick, Ahab (Francis et al.), caught up in the ropes of the harpoon he himself has thrown, cries out as he is dying to the silent implacable foe he has spent his life obsessively trying to exterminate from the earth: “to the last I grapple with thee; from hell’s heart I stab at thee; for hate’s sake I spit my last breath at thee.” Dylan Thomas begged his dying father to “Rage, rage, against the dying of the light.” These orders are determined to rage, rage, against the coming of the light.

Yes, what we are observing is Francis, his Revolutionary soviet and all the post-conciliar dying religious orders and structures raging, raging against the coming of the light.

But at least in Anno Domini 2016, ALL the respective parties, whether they are in a state of denial or not, at least see “the light”.

PS If they don’t want to sell us the property, we will build our own! (see here)

SSPX Seminary Virginia

UPDATE 14:28 17 August 2016

And here is another one, if you like Benedictine Nuns.

This is the 4th or 5th vibrant Catholic religious orders who is building either a convent addition or a chapel, that I have come across just this year. As for FrancisChurch “Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose”.

UPDATE #2 14:43 17 August 2016

Or maybe Carmelite Monks are your flavor: see here

Carmelite Monks

 

Advertisements