Night at the Big D

Work was very slow last night.  It was so nice out that no one was ordering in.  I thought on a delivery my job is to make Mothers and Dads happy.  I do that by getting the pizza pie to families to make the children happy which makes the moms and dads happy.  Coincidentally on that delivery I only got 2 for tip, and it was 12 miles round trip.  Ugh.  Another one I thought an assistant manager elsewhere was going to jump over the counter and hug me she was so happy to see pizza, got me a smile on the face there then unfortunately no tip, sigh.  But it was nice to see such appreciation.  At least I'm safe and have a job. 
Thank you Jesus Christ, Blessed Mother, St Michael the Archangel, my own Guardian Angel, Saint Paul, Saint Augustine, Saint William, Saint Gabriel, and Saint Pius X.

Our Lady keep you.

Saint quote of day

'May the Sacred Heart accomplish in you all His designs and be Himself your strength and your stay, so as to enable you to bear courageously the weight of your responsibility.'

St. Margaret Mary Alacoque

And she said, 'I refuse to live in a bubble.

 http://barnhardt.biz/

And she said, 'I refuse to live in a bubble.'

Posted by Ann Barnhardt - September 20, AD 2012 10:45 PM MST

Last week a cattle industry colleague of mine called to relate his afternoon's activity. He was driving with his four children, aged 9 to 1, when the following conversation took place in the car: 4 year old girl: Can two girls get married?
6 year old boy: NO, SILLY! Two girls can't get married. It has to be one boy and one girl.
9 year old girl: Nuh-uh. I saw on TV where two girls got married.
This is what it finally took for this man, this husband, this father, this guardian and protector, to FINALLY understand the full horror of what is being done to his children. This is what it took - having the sword of his 9 year old's parroting of Marxist-Sodomite propaganda pierce his soul. He could pretend that he had it under control so long as it was only the people on TV saying it. He could lie to himself and tell himself that "it is all going over their heads" and "we're a good Christian family, and we are raising our children in a Godly home in rural America," ... until he heard the Sodomite filth come spewing out of the mouth of his firstborn child, contaminating two of his other children in the process.
This horror was what was required for the Holy Spirit to finally get through. And this is a big lesson: if you need to get your heart torn out of your chest and stomped all over in order for you to comprehend some essential truth, God will permit that to happen. Don't you doubt that for one second.
As soon as they arrived home, my friend dug out the last satellite bill, called the customer service number, and in no uncertain terms told them to TURN. THE. SHIT. OFF. NOW.
It's over. No more. No more satanic Sodomite agitprop and pornography will be coming into his house. It's over. No more Marxist pagan filth. It's over. No more mind-numbing soul-killing innocence-destroying lies in his home. No more open attacks on his children while he sits by and watches. It's over.
TURN. THE. SHIT. OFF. NOW.
"But sir, what if we offered you two months free? Are you switching to cable? We can beat any cable package. What if we upgraded you to our premium high-definition package at no additional charge?"
TURN. THE. SHIT. OFF. NOW.
Praise God. Praise God. Praise God.
Significant damage has already been done, but that damage can be fixed, and this family is now on the road to healing. The lives of four children and two parents have just changed, and changed for the better in ways that they cannot yet imagine. Games of kickball and baseball will now be played that never would have occurred, forts will be built, books will be read, skills will be learned, adventures will be had and CONVERSATIONS WILL NOW TAKE PLACE that would have all been snuffed from existence by the godforsaken Marxist-Sodomite agitprop and pornography vector that is called "TV". Satan's main entrypoint into this home and family has now been firmly shut, and it was shut by the ACTION of the father in MASCULINE IRE IN DEFENSE OF HIS FAMILY.
Now to the flip side of this anecdote, which happened just this morning.
I attended a conference about Catholic ethics, and toward the end discussion opened up a bit. An upper-middleclass suburban woman raised her hand and complained that her 13 year old daughter persistently wanted to dress like Kim Kardashian, I believe the word "whore" was used, as the daughter has been regularly watching the Kardashian filth on TV and wants to be just like Kim Kardashian, who is, for those of you who do not know, a sociopathic moral degenerate de facto prostitute who is also teetering on the precipice of being mentally retarded.
I tend to keep fairly quiet in venues such as this. If I am not "the speaker" then it is my job to listen, but with the anecdote above fresh in my mind, and since discussion had opened up, I did lean forward and asked this woman why she allowed cable TV into her home in the first place, and why she allowed her daughter to watch evil filth. Some response was made to the effect, "Well, I can't control . . . " at which point I cut her off and told her that she could call and cancel the cable feed this afternoon, at which she bristled and snarled back at me, "I'm not going to have this discussion. I'M NOT GOING TO LIVE IN A BUBBLE."
Understand, this woman had no clue who I was, so the bristling and snarling was not because she was intimidated by me - it was an organic response to the thought of taking away her precious Marxist-Sodomite agitporn (new word!) delivery vector. She then got up and left.
Had I gone blowtorch on this woman, here is what I would have said:

Madam, you just raised your hand and volunteered that your 13 year old daughter is emulating as a role model and dressing like a whore in an effort to elicit sympathy from this group. When I asked you why you simply don't do the absolute minimum of what any parent should do, namely removing the evil of TV from your home and thus protecting your daughter, you snapped back that you refuse to "live in a bubble." Madam, from what little you have told us, it sounds like your daughter, being 13 years old, upper-middle class, living in the United States in 2012, and already EMULATING WHOREDOM, is well on her way to being lost to hell for all eternity. Her soul and psyche are being formed in profound ways, especially now as she is in the throes of puberty, setting up who she will be and the choices she will make for the rest of her life. And you, her mother, refuse to do what is clearly the BARE MINIMUM to stop your own daughter's descent into the grips of hell, namely eliminating cable TV from your home, because you don't want to "live in a bubble?" You would watch your own child be lost to hell before you would go without TELEVISION? Do you realize that in this you are also putting YOUR OWN SOUL at profound risk for eternal damnation?
I don't know your daughter, and probably never will. I don't know you, and to be frank, I don't like you and we will almost certainly never be friends on this earth. BUT, for some reason which I cannot explain, I CARE whether or not you and your daughter go to heaven or go to hell. I am not indifferent to your fate, and am intensely desirous of both of you making it to heaven. In fact, it appears that I care more about the eternal fate of your daughter's soul than you do. This is charity: not being indifferent to our fellow human beings. I do not like you, nor am I obliged to, but I am not indifferent to you, which IS my obligation.
Madam, you are the walking personification of the Marxist goal. You are a totally sensuous, self-absorbed person who can only see the world through the prism of your own faux-victimhood, so much so that your self-centered sensuousness even takes precedence over the eternal fates of the souls of your own young children. The last wedge, the wedge between mother and child, has been driven home, and you are the proof of that.
Madam, that "bubble" that you refuse to live in, that "bubble" that simply asks of us that we reject evil, is what the rest of us call "The Sacred Heart of Jesus", pierced and burning with love for you, your daughter and everyone else. But, if you don't want to live in that "Bubble", then I can promise you Sister, YOU WON'T. EVER. If you find the "Bubble" too boring, too isolating, too embarrassing and too socially awkward; if you hold that "Bubble", all who dwell in It, all those who seek to dwell in It, and those who are truly desirous of you and your daughter dwelling in It in scathing contempt, then Madam, I can promise you that you will never, ever have to experience It.

Cast out to worldly wolves

Over the weekend I felt like I was home, now I feel like I was cast out to the wolves.  This past weekend I visited my parents.  Well I actually spent more time with friends and acquaintances in KY.  I went to the Assumption Festival at Our Lady of the Assumption parish in Walton, KY.  I always feel so much at home there.  That and I am able to go to solemn High Mass when I go there.  Unfortunately in Evansville our priest that graciously drives out here can only have a Low Mass for us.  Now that I'm back here in Evansville it just seems like I'm back in the grind hoping to accomplish my research to graduate.  At least I can go to our chapel for the Rosary anytime I want to.

Symbols of Rachel Corrie's Murder

SYLLABUS CONDEMNING THE ERRORS OF THE MODERNISTS

LAMENTABILI SANE
Pius X July 3, 1907
With truly lamentable results, our age, casting aside all restraint in its search for the ultimate causes of things, frequently pursues novelties so ardently that it rejects the legacy of the human race. Thus it falls into very serious errors, which are even more serious when they concern sacred authority, the interpretation of Sacred Scripture, and the principal mysteries of Faith. The fact that many Catholic writers also go beyond the limits determined by the Fathers and the Church herself is extremely regrettable. In the name of higher knowledge and historical research (they say), they are looking for that progress of dogmas which is, in reality, nothing but the corruption of dogmas.
These errors are being daily spread among the faithful. Lest they captivate the faithful's minds and corrupt the purity of their faith, His Holiness, Pius X, by Divine Providence, Pope, has decided that the chief errors should be noted and condemned by the Office of this Holy Roman and Universal Inquisition.
Therefore, after a very diligent investigation and consultation with the Reverend Consultors, the Most Eminent and Reverend Lord Cardinals, the General Inquisitors in matters of faith and morals have judged the following propositions to be condemned and proscribed. In fact, by this general decree, they are condemned and proscribed.
1. The ecclesiastical law which prescribes that books concerning the Divine Scriptures are subject to previous examination does not apply to critical scholars and students of scientific exegesis of the Old and New Testament.
2. The Church's interpretation of the Sacred Books is by no means to be rejected; nevertheless, it is subject to the more accurate judgment and correction of the exegetes.
3. From the ecclesiastical judgments and censures passed against free and more scientific exegesis, one can conclude that the Faith the Church proposes contradicts history and that Catholic teaching cannot really be reconciled with the true origins of the Christian religion.
4. Even by dogmatic definitions the Church's magisterium cannot determine the genuine sense of the Sacred Scriptures.
5. Since the deposit of Faith contains only revealed truths, the Church has no right to pass judgment on the assertions of the human sciences.
6. The "Church learning" and the "Church teaching" collaborate in such a way in defining truths that it only remains for the "Church teaching" to sanction the opinions of the "Church learning."
7. In proscribing errors, the Church cannot demand any internal assent from the faithful by which the judgments she issues are to be embraced.
8. They are free from all blame who treat lightly the condemnations passed by the Sacred Congregation of the Index or by the Roman Congregations.
9. They display excessive simplicity or ignorance who believe that God is really the author of the Sacred Scriptures. 10. The inspiration of the books of the Old Testament consists in this: The Israelite writers handed down religious doctrines under a peculiar aspect which was either little or not at all known to the Gentiles.
11. Divine inspiration does not extend to all of Sacred Scriptures so that it renders its parts, each and every one, free from every error.
12. If he wishes to apply himself usefully to Biblical studies, the exegete must first put aside all preconceived opinions about the supernatural origin of Sacred Scripture and interpret it the same as any other merely human document.
13. The Evangelists themselves, as well as the Christians of the second and third generation, artificially arranged the evangelical parables. In such a way they explained the scanty fruit of the preaching of Christ among the Jews.
14. In many narrations the Evangelists recorded, not so much things that are true, as things which, even though false, they judged to be more profitable for their readers.
15. Until the time the canon was defined and constituted, the Gospels were increased by additions and corrections. Therefore there remained in them only a faint and uncertain trace of the doctrine of Christ.
16. The narrations of John are not properly history, but a mystical contemplation of the Gospel. The discourses contained in his Gospel are theological meditations, lacking historical truth concerning the mystery of salvation.
17. The fourth Gospel exaggerated miracles not only in order that the extraordinary might stand out but also in order that it might become more suitable for showing forth the work and glory of the Word lncarnate.
18. John claims for himself the quality of witness concerning Christ. In reality, however, he is only a distinguished witness of the Christian life, or of the life of Christ in the Church at the close of the first century.
19. Heterodox exegetes have expressed the true sense of the Scriptures more faithfully than Catholic exegetes.
20. Revelation could be nothing else than the consciousness man acquired of his revelation to God.
21. Revelation, constituting the object of the Catholic faith, was not completed with the Apostles.
22. The dogmas the Church holds out as revealed are not truths which have fallen from heaven. They are an interpretation of religious facts which the human mind has acquired by laborious effort.
23. Opposition may, and actually does, exist between the facts narrated in Sacred Scripture and the Church's dogmas which rest on them. Thus the critic may reject as false facts the Church holds as most certain.
24. The exegete who constructs premises from which it follows that dogmas are historically false or doubtful is not to be reproved as long as he does not directly deny the dogmas themselves .
25. The assent of faith ultimately rests on a mass of probabilities .
26. The dogmas of the Faith are to be held only according to their practical sense; that is to say, as preceptive norms of conduct and not as norms of believing.
27. The divinity of Jesus Christ is not proved from the Gospels. It is a dogma which the Christian conscience has derived from the notion of the Messias.
28. While He was exercising His ministry, Jesus did not speak with the object of teaching He was the Messias, nor did His miracles tend to prove it.
29. It is permissible to grant that the Christ of history is far inferior to the Christ Who is the object of faith.
30 In all the evangelical texts the name "Son of God'' is equivalent only to that of "Messias." It does not in the least way signify that Christ is the true and natural Son of God.
31. The doctrine concerning Christ taught by Paul, John, and the Councils of Nicea, Ephesus and Chalcedon is not that which Jesus taught but that which the Christian conscience conceived concerning Jesus.
32. It is impossible to reconcile the natural sense of the Gospel texts with the sense taught by our theologians concerning the conscience and the infallible knowledge of Jesus Christ.
33 Everyone who is not led by preconceived opinions can readily see that either Jesus professed an error concerning the immediate Messianic coming or the greater part of His doctrine as contained in the Gospels is destitute of authenticity.
34. The critics can ascribe to Christ a knowledge without limits only on a hypothesis which cannot be historically conceived and which is repugnant to the moral sense. That hypothesis is that Christ as man possessed the knowledge of God and yet was unwilling to communicate the knowledge of a great many things to His disciples and posterity.
35. Christ did not always possess the consciousness of His Messianic dignity.
36. The Resurrection of the Savior is not properly a fact of the historical order. It is a fact of merely the supernatural order (neither demonstrated nor demonstrable) which the Christian conscience gradually derived from other facts.
37. In the beginning, faith in the Resurrection of Christ was not so much in the fact itself of the Resurrection as in the immortal life of Christ with God.
38. The doctrine of the expiatory death of Christ is Pauline and not evangelical.
39. The opinions concerning the origin of the Sacraments which the Fathers of Trent held and which certainly influenced their dogmatic canons are very different from those which now rightly exist among historians who examine Christianity .
40. The Sacraments have their origin in the fact that the Apostles and their successors, swayed and moved by circumstances and events, interpreted some idea and intention of Christ.
41. The Sacraments are intended merely to recall to man's mind the ever-beneficent presence of the Creator.
42. The Christian community imposed the necessity of Baptism, adopted it as a necessary rite, and added to it the obligation of the Christian profession.
43. The practice of administering Baptism to infants was a disciplinary evolution, which became one of the causes why the Sacrament was divided into two, namely, Baptism and Penance.
44. There is nothing to prove that the rite of the Sacrament of Confirmation was employed by the Apostles. The formal distinction of the two Sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation does not pertain to the history of primitive Christianity.
45. Not everything which Paul narrates concerning the institution of the Eucharist (I Cor. 11:23-25) is to be taken historically.
46. In the primitive Church the concept of the Christian sinner reconciled by the authority of the Church did not exist. Only very slowly did the Church accustom herself to this concept. As a matter of fact, even after Penance was recognized as an institution of the Church, it was not called a Sacrament since it would be held as a disgraceful Sacrament.
47. The words of the Lord, "Receive the Holy Spirit; whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained'' (John 20:22-23), in no way refer to the Sacrament of Penance, in spite of what it pleased the Fathers of Trent to say.
48. In his Epistle (Ch. 5:14-15) James did not intend to promulgate a Sacrament of Christ but only commend a pious custom. If in this custom he happens to distinguish a means of grace, it is not in that rigorous manner in which it was taken by the theologians who laid down the notion and number of the Sacraments.
49. When the Christian supper gradually assumed the nature of a liturgical action those who customarily presided over the supper acquired the sacerdotal character.
50. The elders who fulfilled the office of watching over the gatherings of the faithful were instituted by the Apostles as priests or bishops to provide for the necessary ordering of the increasing communities and not properly for the perpetuation of the Apostolic mission and power.
51. It is impossible that Matrimony could have become a Sacrament of the new law until later in the Church since it was necessary that a full theological explication of the doctrine of grace and the Sacraments should first take place before Matrimony should be held as a Sacrament.
52. It was far from the mind of Christ to found a Church as a society which would continue on earth for a long course
of centuries. On the contrary, in the mind of Christ the kingdom of heaven together with the end of the world was about to come immediately.
53. The organic constitution of the Church is not immutable. Like human society, Christian society is subject to a perpetual evolution.
54. Dogmas, Sacraments and hierarchy, both their notion and reality, are only interpretations and evolutions of the Christian intelligence which have increased and perfected by an external series of additions the little germ latent in the Gospel.
55. Simon Peter never even suspected that Christ entrusted the primacy in the Church to him.
56. The Roman Church became the head of all the churches, not through the ordinance of Divine Providence, but merely through political conditions.
57. The Church has shown that she is hostile to the progress of the natural and theological sciences.
58. Truth is no more immutable than man himself, since it evolved with him, in him, and through him.
59. Christ did not teach a determined body of doctrine applicable to all times and all men, but rather inaugurated a religious movement adapted or to be adapted to different times and places.
60. Christian Doctrine was originally Judaic. Through successive evolutions it became first Pauline, then Joannine, finally Hellenic and universal.
61. It may be said without paradox that there is no chapter of Scripture, from the first of Genesis to the last of the Apocalypse, which contains a doctrine absolutely identical with that which the Church teaches on the same matter. For the same reason, therefore, no chapter of Scripture has the same sense for the critic and the theologian.
62. The chief articles of the Apostles' Creed did not have the same sense for the Christians of the first ages as they have for the Christians of our time.
63. The Church shows that she is incapable of effectively maintaining evangelical ethics since she obstinately clings to immutable doctrines which cannot be reconciled with modern progress.
64. Scientific progress demands that the concepts of Christian doctrine concerning God, creation, revelation, the Person of the Incarnate Word, and Redemption be re-adjusted.
65. Modern Catholicism can be reconciled with true science only if it is transformed into a non-dogmatic Christianity; that is to say, into a broad and liberal Protestantism.
The following Thursday, the fourth day of the same month and year, all these matters were accurately reported to our Most Holy Lord, Pope Pius X. His Holiness approved and confirmed the decree of the Most Eminent Fathers and ordered that each and every one of the above-listed propositions be held by all as condemned and proscribed.
PETER PALOMBELLI, Notary of the Holy Roman and Universal Inquisition

Civil war and the truth about communists

We sure do need somebody....but I doubt if your Romney or Ryan will save any of us.

 

But for the sake of the nation I hope in a miracle that with eyes wide open you'll have some reason be just as satisfied with Mittens in about a year from now. 

Oh, and the commie "crap" you mention got it's start in America long before Obama was handed the reigns by the old entrenched gang of handlers who imposed upon us Bush, Clinton, Bush, and McCain. 

 

Now you should fear that Romney is just their latest alternate in their "two party" game of "good cop/bad cop" played so effectively against the mostly naïveté population.

 

The ugly truth is that Americans lost their nation when Abe Lincoln's Jewish handlers created the communist Federal Government after killing 600,000 soldiers while killing and raping untold numbers of civilians in the South.

 

Today, America is run by two aligned communist parties, both pretending to represent the people via "election" when it's only been one iron fist-velvet glove political system that has existed in America since 1865.

 

 

 

Here's a bit of history that the commies didn't get around to teaching us in their John Dewey public schools.:

http://www.newswithviews.com/Stang/alan30.htm

From the beginning, the Republican Party has worked without deviation for bigger, more imperial government, for higher taxes, for more wars, for more totalitarianism. From the beginning, the Republican Party has been Red.

Why? In 1848, Communists rose in revolution across Europe, united by a document prepared for the purpose, entitled Manifesto of the Communist Party. Its author was a degenerate parasite named Karl Marx, whom a small gang of wealthy Communists – the League of Just Men – hired for the purpose. The Manifesto told its adherents and its victims what the Communists would do.

But the Revolution of 1848 failed. The perpetrators escaped, just ahead of the police. And they went, of course, to the united States. In 1856, the Republican Party ran its first candidate for President. By that time, these Communists from Europe had thoroughly infiltrated this country, especially the North. Many became high ranking officers in the Union Army and top government officials.

Down through the decades, Americans have wondered about Yankee brutality in that war. Lee invaded the North, but that sublime Christian hero forbade any forays against civilians. Military genius Stonewall Jackson stood like a stone wall and routed the Yankees at Manassas, but when Barbara Frietchie insisted on flying the Yankee flag in Frederick, Maryland, rather than the Stars and Bars , that sublime Christian hero commanded, according to John Greenleaf Whittier, “‘Who touches a hair of yon gray head/Dies like a dog! March on!’ he said.”

But the Yankees, invading the South, were monsters, killing, raping and destroying civilian property. In one Georgia town, some 400 women were penned in the town square in the July heat for almost a week without access to female facilities. It got worse when the Yankee slime got into the liquor. Some two thousand Southern women and children were shipped north to labor as slaves. Didn’t you learn that in school?

Sherman’s scorched earth March to the Sea was a horror the later Nazis could not equal. Why? Because the Yankees hated Negro slavery so much? There can be no doubt that the already strong Communist influence in the North, combined with that of the maniacal abolitionists, was at least one of the main reasons. Slavery was a tardy excuse, an afterthought they introduced to gain propaganda traction.

In retrospect, it appears that because nothing like this had ever happened here, Lee and Jackson did not fully comprehend what they were fighting. Had this really been a “Civil” War, rather than a secession, they would and could easily have seized Washington after Manassas and hanged our first Communist President and the other war criminals. Instead they went home, in the mistaken belief that the defeated Yankees would leave them alone. Lee did come to understand – too late. He said after the war that had he known at the beginning what he had since found out, he would have fought to the last man.