Calling All Bishops With Backbone…

ArchbishopLengaCatholic Truth followed up a tip-off, published by a visitor to our blog, that the Archbishop of Glasgow had announced to his priests that if Part Two of the Synod on the Family continued in the same scandalous vein as the first part, then he wouldn’t be [remaining]  as Archbishop of Glasgow.  We checked around and found priests in Glasgow  willing to  confirm that our blog informant was on the button.  Thus, it appears to be the case that the Archbishop of Glasgow, to his credit, is prepared to resign rather than go along with the shocking “pastoral” care proposed by the Kasper Camp.   We are now delighted to report that another Archbishop has shown himself to have sufficient backbone to speak out very publicly on (quote) “the current crisis in the Church”.  Below, is his Open Letter, taken from the Rorate Caeli website

RORATE EXCLUSIVE: Open letter by Archbishop on the crisis in the Church ‘It is difficult to believe that Pope Benedict XVI freely renounced his ministry as successor of Peter.’ ‘I am forced to resort to this public means of expression because I fear that any other method would be greeted by a brick wall of silence and disregard.’ ‘… increasingly evident that the Vatican through the Secretariat of State has taken the course of political correctness.’

Rorate Caeli has obtained an exclusive copy of the English version of a rare open letter from an Archbishop on the crisis of the Church. 

The letter, written by His Excellency Archbishop Jan Pawel Lenga, bishop emeritus of the Diocese of Karaganda, Kazakhstan, hopefully will serve as a much-needed wake-up call to Catholics who have buried their heads in the sand for far too long.

Let us pray more of his brother bishops will have the faith — and the backbone — to stand up and be heard before there’s nothing left to defend.

***

Reflections on some current problems of the crisis of the Catholic Church

I had the experience of living with priests who were in Stalinist prisons and camps and who nevertheless remained faithful to the Church. During the time of persecution they fulfilled with love their priestly duty in preaching Catholic doctrine thereby leading a dignified life in the imitation of Christ, their heavenly Master.

I completed my priestly studies in an underground Seminary in the Soviet Union. I was ordained a priest secretly during the night by a pious bishop who himself suffered for the sake of the faith. In the first year of my priesthood I had the experience of being expelled from Tadzhikistan by the KGB.

Subsequently, during my thirty-year stay in Kazakhstan, I served 10 years as priest, caring for faithful people in 81 localities. Then I served 20 years as bishop, initially as bishop of five states in Central Asia with a total area of around four million square kilometers.

In my ministry as a bishop I had contact with Pope Saint John Paul II, with many bishops, priests and faithful in different countries and under different circumstances. I was member of some assemblies of the Synod of Bishops in the Vatican which covered themes such as “Asia” and “The Eucharist”.

This experience as well as others give me the basis to express my opinion on the current crisis of the Catholic Church. These are my convictions and they are dictated by my love of the Church and by the desire for her authentic renewal in Christ. I am forced to resort to this public means of expression because I fear that any other method would be greeted by a brick wall of silence and disregard. 

I am aware of possible reactions to my open letter. But at the same time the voice of my conscience will not allow me to remain silent, while the work of God is being slandered. Jesus Christ founded the Catholic Church and showed us in word and deed how one should fulfill the will of God. The apostles to whom He bestowed authority in the Church, fulfilled with zeal the duty entrusted to them, suffering for the sake of the truth which had to be preached, since they “obeyed God rather than men”.

Unfortunately in our days it is increasingly evident that the Vatican through the Secretariat of State has taken the course of political correctness. Some Nuncios have become propagators of liberalism and modernism. They have acquired expertise in the principle “sub secreto Pontificio”, by which one manipulates and silences the mouths of the bishops. And that what the Nuncio tells them appears as it would be almost certainly the wish of the Pope. With such methods one separates the bishops from one another to the effect that the bishops of a country can no longer speak with one voice in the spirit of Christ and His Church in defending faith and morals. This means that, in order not to fall into disfavour with the Nuncio some bishops accept their recommendations, which are sometimes based on nothing other than on their own words. Instead of zealously spreading the faith, courageously preaching the doctrine of Christ, standing firm in the defense of truth and of morals, the meetings of the Bishops’ Conferences often deal with issues which are foreign to the nature of the duties of the successors of the apostles.  

One can observe at all levels of the Church an obvious decrease of the “sacrum”. The “spirit of the world” feeds the shepherds. The sinners give the Church the instructions for how she has to serve them. In their embarrassment the Pastors are silent on the current problems and abandon the sheep while they are feeding themselves. The world is tempted by the devil and opposes the doctrine of Christ. Nevertheless the Pastors are obliged to teach the whole truth about God and men “in season and out”.

However, during the reign of the last holy Popes one could observe in the Church the greatest disorder concerning the purity of the doctrine and the sacredness of the liturgy, in which Jesus Christ is not paid the visible honour which he is due. In not a few Bishop’s Conferences the best bishops are “persona non grata”. Where are apologists of our days, who would announce to men in a clear and comprehensible manner the threat of the risk of loss of faith and salvation?

In our days the voice of the majority of the bishops rather resembles the silence of the lambs in the face of furious wolves, the faithful are left like defenseless sheep. Christ was recognized by men as one who spoke and worked, as one, who had power and this power He bestowed upon His apostles. In today’s world the bishops must liberate themselves from all worldly bonds and – after they have done penance – convert to Christ so that strengthened by the Holy Spirit they may announce Christ as the one and only Saviour. Ultimately one must give account to God for all that was done and for all what wasn’t done.

In my opinion the weak voice of many bishops is a consequence of the fact, that in the process of the appointment of new bishops the candidates are insufficiently examined with regard to their doubtless steadfastness and fearlessness in the defense of the faith, with regard to their fidelity to the centuries-old traditions of the Church and their personal piety. In the issue of the appointment of new bishops and even cardinals it is becoming increasingly apparent that sometimes preference is given to those who share a particular ideology or to some groupings which are alien to the Church and which have commissioned the appointment of a particular candidate. Furthermore it appears that sometimes consideration is given also to the favour of the mass media which usually makes a mockery of holy candidates painting a negative picture of them, whereas the candidates who in a lesser degree own the spirit of Christ are praised as open and modern. On the other side the candidates who excel in apostolic zeal, have courage in proclaiming the doctrine of Christ and show love for all that is holy and sacred, are deliberately eliminated.

 A Nuncio once told me: “It’s a pity that the Pope [John Paul II] does not participate personally in the appointment of the bishops. The Pope tried to change something in the Roman Curia, however he has not succeeded. He becomes older and things resume their usual former course”.

At the beginning of the pontificate of Pope Benedict XVI, I wrote a letter to him in which I begged him to appoint holy bishops. I reported to him the story of a German layman who in the face of the degradation of the Church in his country after the Second Vatican Council, remained faithful to Christ and gathered young people for adoration and prayer. This man had been close to death and when he learned about the election of the new Pope he said: “When Pope Benedict will use his pontificate solely for the purpose to appoint worthy, good and faithful bishops, he will have fulfilled his task”.

Unfortunately, it is obvious that, Pope Benedict XVI has often not succeeded in this issue. It is difficult to believe that Pope Benedict XVI freely renounced his ministry as successor of Peter. Pope Benedict XVI was the head of the Church, his entourage however has barely translated his teachings into life, bypassed them often in silence or has rather obstructed his initiatives for an authentic reform of the Church, of the liturgy, of the manner to administer Holy Communion. In view of a great secrecy in the Vatican for many bishops it was realistically impossible to help the Pope in his duty as head and governor of the whole Church.

It will not be superfluous to remind my brothers in the episcopacy of an affirmation made by an Italian masonic lodge from the year 1820: “Our work is a work of a hundred years. Let us leave the elder people and let us go to the youth. The seminarians will become priests with our liberal ideas. We shall not flatter ourselves with false hopes. We will not make the Pope a Freemason. However liberal bishops, who will work in the entourage of the Pope, will propose to him in the task of governing the Church such thoughts and ideas which are advantageous for us and the Pope will implement them into life”. This intention of the Freemasons is being implemented more and more openly, not only thanks to the declared enemies of the Church but with the connivance of false witnesses who occupy some high hierarchical office in the Church. It is not without reason that Blessed Paul VI said: “The spirit of Satan penetrated through a crack inside the Church”. I think that this crack has become in our days quite wide and the devil uses all forces in order to subvert the Church of Christ. To avoid this, it is necessary to return to the precise and clear proclamation of the Gospel on all levels of ecclesiastical ministry, for the Church possesses all power and grace which Christ gave to her: “All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go therefore, and teach all nations. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and I am with you always unto the end of the world” (Mt 28, 18-20), “the truth will set you free” (John 8, 32) and “let your word be Yes, yes; No, no: for whatsoever is more than these comes of evil” (Mt 5, 37). The Church cannot adapt herself to the spirit of this world, but must transform the world to the spirit of Christ.

It is obvious that in the Vatican there is a tendency to give in more and more to the noise of the mass media. It is not infrequent that in the name of an incomprehensible quiet and calm the best sons and servants are sacrificed in order to appease the mass media. The enemies of the Church however don’t hand over their faithful servants even when their actions are evidently bad. 

When we wish to remain faithful to Christ in word and deed, He Himself will find the means to transform the hearts and souls of men and the world as well will be changed at the appropriate time.

In times of the crisis of the Church God has often used for her true renewal the sacrifices, the tears and the prayers of those children and servants of the Church who in the eyes of the world and of the ecclesiastical bureaucracy were considered insignificant or were persecuted and marginalized because of their fidelity to Christ. I believe that in our difficult time this law of Christ is being realized and that the Church will renew herself thanks to the faithful inner renewal of each of us.

January 1st  2015, Solemnity of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God 

+ Jan Pawel Lenga

Comment…

Are there likely to be many more bishops with backbone coming forward now, folks?  Tell us your thoughts.  

110 responses

  1. This courageous Archbishop deserves our praise and support. I hope that his humility will inspire other bishops – including our own Archbishop of Glasgow – to follow through the promptings of their consciences which must, surely, be troubled at the scandals coming day and daily since the election of Pope Francis.

    Today is the Feast of Our Lady of Lourdes (11th February) so we might pray especially to Our Lady on this Feast, for Archbishop Jan Pawel Lenga and for others who may be encouraged to follow his example, as well, of course, as praying for the sick and suffering who rightly receive our prayerful attention on this great Feast.

    A very happy Feast of Our Lady of Lourdes to one and all.

  2. Editor,

    I agree that this Archbishop is a true shepherd. As to whether or not others will follow his example, it’s very difficult to say. The Church has not exactly been conspicuous for saintly prelates these past decades. Still, with Cardinal Burke now also standing tall against the machinations of the Church’s enemies within, there is hope that others may find the courage to do their sacred duty before Our Lord.

    A happy Feast of Our Lady of Lourdes to you and to all.

  3. How shocking that there are priests in Glasgow who cannot keep their mouths shut about something the Archbishop presumably meant for their ears only. Having tempted them to blab, the least you could do, Editor, is publish their names in case any of us unwittingly tell them anything in the Confessional that we would rather not have spread round the neighbourhood.

    • This post shows ignorance on so many levels. It equates what Archbishop Tartaglia said to what is said in the Confessional. It’s also very insulting to those priests to insinuate that they might break the seal of the Confessional. It’s the classic 2 plus 2 makes 5.

      It also speaks volumes about you, eileenanne. You are a troll who doesn’t understand, or care for, the Catholic Faith. In the face of an open rebellion against Church teaching instigated by the Pope and some of his Cardinals you should be congratulating these bishops for speaking out. Instead, you look for something to criticise. A troll.

    • If a priest cannot keep confidentiality in one circumstance, why should I trust him in another? Do you think these priests have acted honourably?

      • Elieenanne,
        Do you think you act honourably? You could be defending the Faith when it is under the worst attack it has ever been under, and yet all you ever seem to do is carp and nit-pick at those who do defend the Faith. You are, as Petrus said, just a troll.

        • Yes. I make a point of speaking out against what i believe to be wrong. I think that is the honourable thing to do.

          • Then tell us what you think of Pope Francis giving the green light to the mid-term Synod document?

            If you don’t believe THAT to be wrong, then there’s something seriously wrong with your thinking.

            Say nothing, folks. Say nothing!

    • Eileenanne,

      Some might say how shocking it is that Pope Francis can’t, apparently, keep his mouth shut when it comes to feeding the press with daily controversy! I think those Glasgow priests pale into insignificance in comparison, don’t you?

        • I agree that the Pope does not always speak wisely but that does not excuse indiscretions by priests. Nor is it exactly honourable for editor to encourage such indiscretions by asking priests to reveal what they have been told in confidence.

          • Do not accuse me of anything unless you have cast iron proof that what you say is true. I have NEVER asked any priest to reveal what they have been told in confidence. Not once.

            On the general question, however, you need to examine your priorities. They are all upside down. Stop worrying about appearances and pseudo-discretion.

            You would be the very one who, WERE the Archbishop to resign and say that he had decided he would if the Synod continued in the same vein, would be saying “if that is the case, he should have spoken out.”

            Perverse, I believe is the word to describe Modernists like yourself. Utterly perverse.

            • Editor,

              You introduced this thread by saying:
              We checked around and found priests in Glasgow willing to confirm that our blog informant was on the button.

              Does that not mean something other than that you and other(s) asked priests whether it was true that the Archbishop had said what he was alleged to have said? Yet you say you …”have NEVER asked any priest to reveal what they have been told in confidence. Not once. ”

              We seem to have different definitions of what it means to tempt or encourage people to break confidences.

              Did the priests who confirmed what you had already been told also give permission for you to spread what they has blabbed via the internet?

              • Stop fishing. I have my methods!

                And you obviously haven’t followed the events. I didn’t know anything about the statement until I read it on the internet, here. Get with the programme.

                Now if you write on this subject again, your post will be deleted and I’ll have to begin to moderate your comments because you just do not participate in the discussions, you seek to disrupt. That is now overwhelmingly clear. You never answer questions and you want only to nit pick what you can nit pick to attack Catholic Truth. Comment on the subject or go away, Eileenanne. We’ve really had enough of your silliness and contrived superiority. We’ve done nothing wrong nor did any of our sources. You begin with the assumption that confidences have been broken. Wrong. End of discussion.

                • Comment deleted. Very rude. Always a mistake to allege that editor bullies and threatens others who don’t agree with her… And always a mistake to claim that she will delete posts that don’t toe her ‘part line’. [I presume you mean “party line” – whatever, we don’t have one…) Always a mistake to say that editor’s methods of obtaining information are dubious at least and generally downright dishonest, and to suggest that people do see right through the nonsense she espouses and to call this a very U catholic blog (do you mean “un”? Rhetorical question. Doesn’t matter. It’s not a U blog…) Always a mistake to tell editor to wake up and to call her a daft women [who needs to] see the truth before it’s too late for her.

                  Did you really think she would approve that post for publication? Seriously? What, [and this is another rhetorical question] you really think she’s daft?

                  😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀

                  • Editor,

                    Your patience in dealing with the ignorant is so commendable that I will loan you the first half of my username- JOB. 😀

                    • Jobstears,

                      Thanks – I see another batch in moderation, so “tears” might be more appropriate. They’re such pests. Am not going to encourage any more nonsense by responding so watch out for the latest from the “banned” Brigade, you know, the ones who can’t take a hint!

          • Eileenanne,

            What happened with that mid-term Synod report back in October, and what happened afterwards with the Pope’s approval, makes the indiscretions you speak of pale into complete insignificance. Editor was right when she spoke of camels and gnats.

    • EILEENANNE

      Personally, I wouldn`t worry about anything I said in the confessional being spread around the neighbourhood. The reason being that I am so pious and perfect.

      I sometimes tell lies though.

  4. The Catholic Church specialises in cover ups, compensation to victims of peodophile priests, will not solve the problem, the real question should be: are there any bishops who think its time for priests to start dressing and acting like men? Acknowledge that under their dresses, it’s no secret to me, trust me I know, they have the bodies of mortal men, if our church is to survive, drastic modernisation is required, to separate truth and power? NO it will never happen,

    • Lockton Mawby,

      Those abuse events and cover ups you speak started to happen in earnest when the Church was taken down the Modernist road at Vatican II. It is rather strange then that you should consider further modernisation essential for the Church’s survival.

      Modernisation is precisely what is killing the Catholic religion off; more of the same will simply accelerate the process. However, you should note that the Church will always survive, we have Our Lord’s promise on that.

      Besides that, I don’t know why you should think that Catholics are not aware that priests are mortal men. I’m also a bit perplexed by your comment about priests wearing “dresses”. Assuming that you’re actually referring to the priestly cassock, under which all priests wore trousers anyway, these were tossed away by almost all parish priests after the Council. So to come back to those abuse cases, bearing in mind that only a small number of priests in terms of the numbers worldwide actually committed such crimes, and they were all in jeans by then. The cassock reminded them too much of their vocation to holiness and purity!

      • not true! The abuse was well established as far back as SIX decades ago (source: Los angeles times, 24 July 2003), well before…shock/horror…vatican II. The rest of the post is just petulant, puerile and illogical.

        • Duca valentine,

          When the (Modernist) Archbishop of Dublin, Archbishop Martin, was grilled on a late night TV news programme here (London, Newsnight, BBC2) on the subject, he was initially very reluctant to say when the abuse began. The journalist, (Jeremy Paxman), well known for his ability to get the truth out of inteviewees, persisted and eventually began to take the Archbishop through the decades of the 20th century: were priests abusing children in the 1920’s? (Archbishop shook his head) 30’s? 40’s, 50’s? Until the Archbishop snapped and said “60’s”.

          Of course there may well be some instances of abuse prior to that, but there can be no doubt that the infestation we have witnessed in recent years is directly linked to the apostate souls of the clergy and hierarchy who are hirelings masquerading as shepherds in our times, as a result of the withdrawal or refusal of the graces which previously flowed through Christ’s Church. Since the introduction of a new Mass, new this, new that, new everything, we’ve seen a decline in belief – we have Catholics who (like Adam & Eve) want to decide for themselves what is right and wrong, and who think nothing of desecrating the Blessed Sacrament by receiving in the hand and other sacrileges. Something was very rotten in the 60’s and beyond. And it’s all traceable to one source – which is probably why Our Lady wanted the third part of her Fatima message revealed in 1960; forewarned is forearmed.

        • Duca

          The priests, even if they had the inclination, certainly didn`t have the time
          before Vatican 11.

          They were too busy offering the Sacrifice of the Mass early each morning,
          hearing confessions, having Rosary and Benediction at least twice a week, Stations of The Cross and Benediction during Lent, exposition on a Sunday, processions of The Blessed Sacrament in May, sung Masses once a month, conducting funerals, marriages and (multiple)baptisms, instructing the many new converts to the faith, blessing houses (and even cars and bikes) organising the building of the new churches which were required in those days, attending the sick and dying, presiding at Legion of Mary, Young Men`s Society and St. Vincent de Paul meetings (to name only three), and in the case of my own parish priest, had to stay in the area during working hours because there were six coal mines in the district and the priest, like the doctors, always had to stay near in case of an accident or disaster. They regularly had to go down the coal mines to render to the ones who took ill or were injured.

          Easter and Christmas meant that they were even busier but they still found time to visit every one of their parishioners, not to mention fitting in a bit of gardening in the summer.

          I rarely remember my parish priest going on a lengthy holiday far less have the time to abuse anyone.

      • Thanks for the history lesson, firstly, I have great empathy for those genuine, faithful serving priests out there, who have given their lives to service. Certainly all priests are not peodophiles and recent exposures, must cause all preists to feel guilty, but please get your facts correct, because the priest who hurt me, was certainly wearing a dress and not jeans. For forgiveness to flourish, it must be preceded by the truth. I considered myself very brave, to allow my children a wonderful,safe catholic education, but I can assure you, I was always one step behind them, with my eyes open, I couldn’t bare my children to be broken emotionally and sexually messed up like me, my intellect and life wasted, without religion, we are a species without values and beliefs, let’s protect that ideal.

        • Lockton Mawby,

          What happened to you is certainly a heart-rending tragedy and the greatest possible betrayal a priest of God can commit. To hear that any consecrated soul has become so degraded as to abuse God’s “little ones” is, well, just too much to take in.

          In your case, I think you have handled matters extremely well in the circumstances, having gone on to have children of your own and taken the necessary steps to protect and properly educate them in the faith. I was particularly encouraged by your declaration that, without religion, we are a species without values and beliefs. That’s a very wise and true statement of fact.

          Sadly, the greater part of the modern world doesn’t agree and uses every opportunity to denigrate religion, especially the true Catholic religion. Hence, in the matter of the clerical abuse of children, they have painted such a picture in the press and elsewhere that one would think a majority rather than a minority of priests are paedophiles. So when you speak of truth in relation to forgiveness, I think that has to work both ways. Alas, this secular modern world isn’t really interested in the divine virtues of truth and justice. Rather, it thrives on stories of filth and scandal. And if it’s scandal involving a priest, then so much the better. Muck sells, truth doesn’t.

          The most obvious example of this degrading trend in society is the Kathy O’Beirne case. Now, Kathy went out there and told the world how she had been abused, first by her father, then by the Magdalene Sisters in Ireland, under whose care she claimed to have been twice raped by Catholic priests. Her story went global and grossed millions in book sales. It even went into film with the movie “The Magdalene Sisters”.

          But then a book appeared, entitled “Kathy’s Real Story,” by Hermann Kelly, containing evidence from Kathy’s family that shows her claims to be utterly false. It’s a real eye opener. Now, do you think the world was interested in that book and the truths it contained showing Kathy to be a liar? Not on your life. The publishers of Kathy’s works just carried on regardless, knowing where the profits lay.

          The point I’m trying to make is that if we lived in a society that genuinely had the good of children at heart, then it would be upright and honest in portraying only the truth about these matters. Instead, it offers financial compensation as an incentive for victims to come forward regardless of the obvious flaw in such a practice.

          Furthermore, our modern society itself robs children of their innocence by enforcing sex ed in schools at a very young age and by encouraging confused adolescents to embrace homosexual or lesbian inclinations as a sure sign of their sexuality – even now demanding separate schools for them. Also, any society that was genuine about safeguarding children would certainly have put child welfare before profit and shut the Internet down a long time ago.

          Anyway, I’ve gone off the track a bit here so I’ll come back to the point. The point in your case is that the priest who abused you would have done so whether in cassock or in jeans because he was already degenerate. What we argue here on this blog, and we do so from many studies of the evidence out there, is that the greater majority of these clerical abuse events occurred after Vatican II when the spirituality of the Church was gravely affected.

          It stands to reason that if you take the priest out of his cassock, or his black suit, symbolising his death to the world and the flesh for God, and if you tell him that he no longer needs to recite his daily breviary and rosary; that Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament is just a medieval emotionalism, just a piece of bread that people can take in their hands. And if you tell him that the Church was wrong for 2000 years in claiming to be the only true religion. And if he is given a new Mass in the vernacular that is more akin to the Protestant meal service of the Reformation than the Sacrifice of Calvary. And if you introduce lay people into the Sanctuary along with guitars and drums and Lord knows what else, etc., etc., then you end up with a priesthood that loses its spiritual compass.

          It is a well documented fact that in the years following Vatican II tens of thousands of priests abandoned their vocations, while new vocations virtually dried up in Europe and the U.S. Over the same period seminaries and religious houses everywhere closed down, all five in Scotland alone, and literally millions of Catholics apostatised from the true faith. It has been during this tragic unfolding of events that the greater number of child abuse cases are recorded.

          Why? because the true Catholic spirituality has been eroded away under the watch of careless popes and bishops who thought the Church would do well to modernise and embrace the spirit of the world. This is why there is now a really strong reaction of Catholics, including a growing number of prelates and priests, saying that a return must be made to the Sacred Traditions of the Church.

          These good people now understand perfectly well what Pope Paul VI meant when, in 1974, he declared: “Through some fissure in the walls, the smoke of Satan has entered the Church and set her on a path of auto-destruction.” Only a madman would deny the universal evidence of that auto-destruction these past 50 years.

          Our duty, then, is to sanctify our souls in the tried and tested way of the saints and martyrs, that is, by getting ourselves back to the ancient Latin Mass and full Sacramental spirituality, including offering up our trials and sufferings to Our Lord, who knows well how to repay us both now and in eternity.

          Nor should we allow ourselves to become disillusioned because certain priests and prelates betray Our Lord and their sacred calling. Judas Iscariot was among the twelve Apostles, which was Our Lord’s way of telling us that there will always be some who are prepared to sell Him out for whatever reason.

          Thankfully, the majority of consecrated souls, even those who don’t know the Traditional Faith of the Church, try very hard to be faithful to Our Lord.

          Sorry to have gone on so long.

          • Thank you for your kind words. I have lived with my secret for 50 years, no amount of money could ever be equal to the long term consequences, my story will die with me, the really sad ramifications were however, I grew to be a frightened, cowardly individual, able to help everyone except myself. I have learnt that human beings posses such strong abilities and desires to hurt others that are vulnerable, priest, teacher, parents regardless, thank you.

              • LM,

                This latest post from you also showed a different username Diannah Paramour. If you go into My Profile and scroll down to where it says “display name publicly as” you can type in Lockton Mawby and then scroll down to click “save” the change. I can do it for you but I would need you to email me your password.

                • Editor, how can I remove my relatives name (DP) from this site? Unable to re-borrow her computer until I do, wish to continue participation, from Lockton Mawby, Dover Tasmania, thanks

                  • Lockton Mawby,

                    I’m sure editor will answer your query when she has time, but maybe you should follow the instructions she wrote out for name changing on the blog. I re-print those instruction below.

                    “If you go into My Profile and scroll down to where it says “display name publicly as” you can type in Lockton Mawby and then scroll down to click “save” the change.”

                    If you find these instructions difficult to follow, then email your password to editor and she can make the change for you.

                    By the way, your relative’s name only appeared once on the blog to my knowledge. The rest of the time your comments showed up as Lockton Mawby.

                    To be honest, no one is really that interested in real people’s names. I’m quite sure they have all well forgotten your relative’s identity, if it’s any comfort.

                    Take care.

            • Lockton Mawby,

              You are not a coward. Not at all. I know it is easier for us to say so on the outside, but it is true. For you to go on with your life, and protect your children, is not something cowards do – they would be sitting on their hands, perfecting the art of being a victim. God knows you’ve been hurt. May God have mercy on this priest’s soul, yes, we pray for that, but we know that God’s Mercy is accompanied by His Justice.

            • Lockton Mawby,

              I second what others have said in praise of your courage and balance. We’re so used to the victim status of the abused that it is refreshing to find someone like yourself who understands that not all priests are abusers and it’s not “the Church” to blame but sinful individuals including their negligent and sometimes indulgent bishops.

              I am particularly impressed that you are not denying your children the great grace of being brought up in the Catholic religion, the only religion established by God Himself – hence it is the main target of Satan. It is sad, but totally understandable that you are keeping a close eye on them – after your own experience, anything less would be irresponsible. Please God, they will only meet priests and teachers with whom they are – at the very least – physically safe.

              I see that Athanasius – who never uses two words when twenty will do (!) – has covered most of the things I would have said; well, that’s my story anyway, and I’m sticking to it, so I won’t blether on right now.

              I will only add that your comment about the need for religion reminds me of the remark of the famous convert and writer, G.K.Chesterton who said: “it is only the Catholic Church that keeps a man from the degrading slavery of being a child of his age”.

              And so say all of us!

            • Lockton Mawby,

              I’m certain that in your case money will never make up for what you endured. However, Our Lord Himself knows how to comfort and reward those who have suffered, as does the Blessed Mother. This is a wisdom lost to our modern world, the wisdom of the Cross.

              Who suffered more than Our Saviour in His Passion and Death? If we offer our sufferings in union with His, no matter how difficult, then we will certainly never falter. In this regard I am reminded of the words of Our Lady to St. Bernadette at Lourdes, who said: “I cannot promise you happiness in this world, only in the next”. Even so, there is still a certain peace of soul in this life that those without the grace of God sadly miss out on.

              Nothing you have said here on this blog gives me the impression that you are in any way a coward. Suffering some interior pain as a result of what happened to you, perhaps, but not a coward. The coward refuses to face life’s difficulties – that’s clearly not you.

              That you are able to help everyone except yourself is actually a refreshing change today from the many who help nobody but themselves, don’t you think? Ultimately, we all depend on the grace of God to overcome our own deficiencies and failings.

              Now, you say you have learned that human beings possess such strong abilities and desires to hurt others. This is what the Church refers to as “fallen human nature,” the remedy for which is the grace of the Mass, devotion to the blessed Virgin and frequent use of the Sacraments (Confession and Holy Communion).

              It’s a sad fact of life that few ever consider the unseen reality behind every mortal sin. Not only does it hurt ourselves and/or others, but much more importantly it drives the nails once more through Our Lord’s hands and feet. There can be no worse act of human ingratitude and wickedness than this!

              Without God’s grace, then, human beings are quite capable of descending into the most horrendous depths of sin and malice.

              But look at the more positive side, the lives of the saints and the lives of many, many good ordinary people, who have left this world a better place than they found it. The earth is a place of supernatural conflict where the devil vies with God for the souls of men. All have free will to choose their path. The selfish choose vice and Hell, the selfless choose virtue and heaven. It has been that way from the beginning and it will be that way till the end.

              I’m going to shut up now because I’m beginning to sound like the Rev. I. M. Jolly! Editor was right about me, I never use two words when twenty will do.

              Still, I hope you will understand that I’ve gone on so much because I want to try to encourage you to keep up the good fight and keep always your Catholic Faith. This life is short; eternity is forever!

    • I am totally floored by all your words of comfort and humanity, it has greatly touched my heart. my name is Lockton Mawby and I live in Tasmania, during research totally removed from my own life’s perils, I have been searching information on truth and forgiveness, not for myself, but for a book I am writing about the 30 year civil war in Sri Lanka. catholic blog merely appeared on my screen, little did I know that I would be propelled to ‘throw myself in’ I have never been able to share my story before, how fortuitous then, that I serendipidously, stumble upon you good people? Thank you for saying that I am not a coward, even though my life’s failures contradict that view. I do not see myself as a victim, but as a unwilling participant, my own parents could have detected my abuse, if they cared, which they didn’t. I assumed they were unaware! (Wrong) it was not for at least 30 years silence, that my younger sister, let it slip by accident, that before ‘he’ was secreted away, ‘he’ came to our home and there was a loud discussion,so they knew all along and left me to suffer alone and in pain, all those years. even when I failed at a botched suicide attempt, my parents ‘played dumb’ this shocking revelation so many years later, gutted me. So as you can see, families were complicent too in the wall of secrecy, shame on them all. The words that have been sent to me through this blog, have just washed away 50 years of feeling alone, uncared for and not valued, you have given me, that what was taken from me, by my abuser and my parents, who would have thought? Not me! Thank you. xXX

      • Regarding my words on modernising the church for survival, evolving to a higher level would have been a more appropriate choice of words. If we look at all the religions that have refused to allow their rules to be fluid and expansive, are still stuck in primiative ideologies and only survive through sheer fear and open brutality. I strongly cherish values of good people, all religions need to hold closely, traditions and rituals that give children a sense of belonging, I didn’t mean to modernise by becoming lose with morals and rules, I recall feeling shocked to see children wearing jeans and sneakers for their first holy communion, let’s continue rituals that make children feel inclusive and special. Those religions that have refused to advance, still choose religious teachings over literacy, enslave women and impoverish children, while chopping off heads is still acceptable for them, that’s why I suggested that maybe it’s time for priests to start to dress more family orientaed, in real clothes and if they had wives and children of their own, they would be in a much better position to counsel their parishioners. The world is changing rapidly and our church also needs those changes to be mirrored in our daily practises, otherwise, the growing trend for young men no longer receiving the calling,is going to increase, then what do we do when we have no priests at all? I would be very interested to know where others see the Catholic Church in 100 years! I am unsure if I am still a catholic or a athiest, or just lost, but I would love to see positive changes that ensured our churches survival. Thank you from Lockton Mawby, you probably will never hear from me again, I tend to try people’s patience, regardless, you have done me well. Thank you.

  5. It’s good to hear that Archbishop Tartaglia cares about the Faith not being undermined and distorted. But I think he should stand his ground for the Catholics in Glasgow, to fight for the flock, not flee. Those looking to try to undermine the Faith and the Church need to be the ones driven off. It’s time perhaps for the real bishops to take a cue from Saint Nicholas punching out Arius at the Council of Nicea for denying the divinity of Jesus, which is what these current crop of modernists are doing in all but the words. I see that he was consecrated as a bishop by concelebrator Cardinal Burke and he needs to stand with him at this time.

  6. Reblogged this on EX MAGNA SILENTIUM or EX MAGNO SILENTIO and commented:
    Many real Catholics are more than concerned as they watch the machinations of the modernist sophists in the hierarchy attempt to change the dogmas of the Faith as it has been since Jesus. Not just the laity, but Cardinals, Bishops and Archbishops are speaking bluntly about what is being toyed with by others who are ordained to defend, teach and uphold the Faith but instead seek to destroy it. By doing what they are doing, and speaking what they speak, they are, in effect and in deed, denying Jesus, denying His divinity and defying God. Those in their ranks who do not do so, who are still apparently the majority cannot quietly allow it. We are now hearing their calls more loudly with every passing day. Here from the Catholic Truth blog we learn that Archbishop Tartaglia of Glasgow has indicated that he will resign if the modernists, the heretics, succeed in implementing what we can only recognize as a diabolical plan to wound the body of Christ. Real Catholics need their shepherd to be just that, to stand, challenge, chase and drive off the wolves that threaten the flocks. The modernist heretics in the sheepfold must be the ones to resign, not the other way around. The Church needs the real men to do their jobs, men who do not wear red for no reason. And we in the laity will stand and fight alongside you. And we will succeed.

    • CS,

      I agree with you that it would be much more helpful if these bishops would speak out during their term of office. In this case, however, since the Synod only took place recently (I presume the Archbishop was retired at the time) this case is a little different. You make a good point, however, one that I have made myself in the past. There’s only a certain amount of good can be done by speaking out after retirement. But in these days of grasping at straws, we’re grasping at this one.

      As for “backbone” – given that any priest or bishops who speaks out in this way is likely to suffer at one level or another, I’d say it does take some backbone even for a retired bishop to draw attention to himself in this way. Credit where it’s due.

    • Common

      I would say it takes a lot of backbone for a retired Bishop to speak out. He risks being booted out into the street at an age where he probably can`t earn a living.

      There`s not a lot of vacancies even for young bishops in the Jobcentres and he
      is now dealing with some ruthless gentlemen who now run the Catholic Church as if it were a branch of the Mafia.

      There will probably be a visitor to his palace soon who is the double of Marlon Brando.

      • The Church fulfils its obligations to all retired clergy. That includes those who have attained public notoriety.

        Ed: wrong. For several years before his death, I was in correspondence with a priest in England who, when he said he would like to continue to offer the old rite Mass when the new Mass was introduced, was chucked out on his ear and but for the kindness of a couple, friends who gave him a room in their house, he would have been literally on the street. The bishop actually told him that if he had been leaving to marry, he’d have gotten more help from the diocese. Believe me, all the so called “mercy” and “charity” we keep hearing about is a scarce commodity when it comes to doling out some to “traditionalists” or even a cleric who is mildly orthodox.

  7. What has this bishop actually said that everyone doesn’t already know? I doubt Francis will pay much attention to a retired bishop from the former Soviet Bloc. Abp Lenga has nothing to lose now so he can say anything he wants.

    I would agree with Eileenanne that Abp Tartaglia was speaking to a private meeting, so who knows what he is alleged to have said. Either way, it’s equally unlikely Francis will pay him any attention either. His Holiness would probably struggle to locate Glasgow on a map, so who cares who the bishop of some remote backwater has to say.

    • Alex F

      Your post speaks volumes. The Pope SHOULD be able to locate Glasgow on a map; he SHOULD care (very much) what a bishop has to say. (Does the phrase “Feed My Sheep” ring any bells Alex? You seem happy to accept that the Pope will ignore the concerns of a brother shepherd. One can’t but have grave doubts of your Catholicity.

    • Alex F

      You must think the Pope is really thick if he can`t locate even a remote backwater on a map, especially in this day and age when even you and I can get all the information we need at the click of a keyboard.

      Or, in your opinion, will he be too thick to use a keyboard also?

    • You’re quite right to question my catholicity- I question it myself on a daily basis!

      One accusation that cannot be levelled at Francis is that he is an idiot, but I don’t expect a pope from Buenos Aires to be familiar with the geography of a rather insignificant (in terms of Catholicism) Protestant country on the edge of Europe. Until yesterday I had never heard of Karaganda. The point was about the significance of the Archdiocese of Glasgow to the Catholic world, not about Francis’ ability to use Google Maps.

      When the Archbishop of Glasgow starts allowing more traditional Masses and reinstates the priest he got rid of for saying the Latin Mass, I’ll have more confidence in his traditionalism, or when he publishes an open letter defending the Faith. Just now, I’m not going to read too much into second hand reports of a private conversation. If he archbishop of Glasgow resigns, he’ll just be replaced, probably by someone even more liberal.

      To date, Francis has not shown much sign that he will take stock of the concerns of anyone. Generally, he just calls people who disagree with him rude names, so there’s no reason to think that he will listen to Abp Lenga or Abp Tartaglia. He’ll just write them off as “stick-necked Palagians.”

      • Alex F,

        I agree with your point about Archbishop Tartaglia and the Faith. It is no secret that Archbishop Tartaglia is a rank liberal, a prelate who is into Modernism in a big way. Nevertheless, he appears to be prepared to take a stand on this single issue of the Synod, against the attempts of some to alter the Church’s moral teaching by stealth. I suppose we have to be grateful for this positive news and hope that others follow suit.

        Still, what is happening with this Synod is only the latest bitter fruit of a 50-year old liberal modernisation programme that has almost completely obscured the truths of the Catholic religion.

        Archbishop Tartaglia has largely subscribed to this faith revolution, so he should not be surprised to discover that the next phase is a rejection of the Church’s moral teaching and authority. Take away the Traditional Catholic Faith and sooner or later the Traditional morality will go too!

      • Alex

        My apologies. I mistook your well-founded cynicism. I’ve given myself a good talking to and am sitting in the naughty corner.

        Carry on regardless….

  8. While I agree with the zeal of the AB of Glasgow, I STRONGLY DISAGREE WITH THE MEANS OF EXPRESSING IT: He should not resign, on the contrary he should lead the ArchDiocese in open defiance of the false church which would arise from such a synod of heretics. We need Bishops who are willing to stand against the spirit of Anticrist afoot in the world, and that means, recognizing there is something worth fighting for in this world (the Catholic Church) at the cost of every personal sacrifice. He should rather state publicly that the Archdiocese of Glasgow shall never abandon the eternal Faith of Christ and will work for the restoration of the faith, if the bishops of the Synod apostatize from Christ. And then if they did, ordain Catholic Bishops for all the Dioceses of the world wherein the local bishop falls into heresy, just as St Athanasius did as he traveled throughout the Roman Empire in the evil days of Arius and his many disciples in the clergy.

    • Brother,

      The Archbishop didn’t actually say he would “resign” – his words were, we’re told, to the effect that he “wouldn’t be archbishop of Glasgow any more” which certainly implies resignation, as I’ve said in our blue blog comment above, but until he uses the word, we need to be careful not to attribute it to him.

      He’s no friend of Catholic Tradition, either – be clear about that. He is a Modernist, and one of the problems with this synod is that the already confused neo-Catholics are becoming even more confused because they see those few churchmen who are coming out in defence of the natural moral order – God’s moral law (very basic stuff) – as being a sign that they are “traditionalists” and “faithful bishops”. Unfortunately, contrary to what you say, Archbishop Tartaglia of Glasgow doesn’t think there is any need to restore the Faith – he’s quite happy with the post-Vatican II version of Catholicism. The fact that he is not willing to play ball with the Kasper Camp is a pleasant surprise and relief to those of us who have been disappointed in his attitude to the rest of the crisis in the Church to date.

      Remember, any evangelical Protestant worth his salt is appalled at what happened at the recent Synod on the Family so, while it’s a relief that we have some bishops – retired or not – challenging this scandal, don’t let’s start canonising the Archbishop of Glasgow or any other “voice in the wilderness” for doing his basic duty in upholding the Ten Commandments and Canon Law based on those Commandments. This is the equivalent of your doctor acknowledging that you’re really unwell when you present at his surgery with a bad cold. Basic.

  9. I agree that the words of Archbishop Tartaglia should not have been put in the public domain by anyone other than the Archbishop himself. This might come further down the line, or maybe not. The person who repeated his words betrayed a trust, unless he asked if he could do this.If he was not given permission, he betrayed a trust and so he is part of the culture that is contaminating the Vatican itself with no one able to trust anyone.
    However I do think that when even a few bishops, retired or not speak out, ( there have been others already e.g. Athanasius Schneider and a Polish bishop too) then it affects others and may give them that bit of courage they should have, but don’t. It is still early days, remember.

  10. Well, reading the attacks on the Glasgow priests who confirmed what someone – not necessarily a priest (I don’t know) had posted on this blog – the rather sarcastic rebuke from Matthew’s Gospel sprang to mind: “You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel.”

    In other words, worrying about secondary matters while ignoring the important things, really doesn’t help.

    Allow me to point out two things. Firstly, what I keep pointing out in the hope that the penny drops somewhere, we are not living in normal times. In normal times, no priest would feel the need to divulge anything his bishop said at a meeting of clergy but we are not living in normal times.

    Secondly, has it not occurred to anyone, that the person who posted this information may well have been trying to signal to us that the Archbishop of Glasgow – a major cause for concern,, no friend of the traditional Catholic Faith and liturgy, who has been frequently criticised in our newsletter and blog – is also concerned about Pope Francis following the Synod, and perhaps this would lead us to support him (the Archbishop) a little more? Is it possible that the blogger who posted the information was motivated by true charity or even simply ordinary human kindness for the Archbishop?

    Keeping up appearances is a hallmark of the contemporary neo-Catholic. They want things to LOOK good, “discreet” priests, for example, without ever having heard the phrase “discretion of the saints” – which is not quite the silly secrecy aimed at keeping the truth out of sight. Pope Gregory the Great said: “It is better that scandal should arise, than that the truth be suppressed.”

    And so says any Catholic who gives a toss about the Faith at this time of terrible crisis in the Church.

  11. It is about time there was some resistance. I pray we see more of it. Anyone who is a true faithful Catholic should be resisting this attack on the morals of the Church. Resisting the Pope and this Synod is our duty now.

    A blessed Feast of the Our Lady of Lourdes to all. Penance, Penance, Penance is needed.

  12. Well I would like to know the exact circumstances in which the Archbishop’s words were spoken, where and to which group.
    Could you let me know where on the CT blog the information, or some of it at least, was written?
    Thank you

    • Spero,

      Keep with the programme! Click here to find the relevant thread and then scroll to Steve’s comment of 19th November, 5.31 pm and subsequent responses. I’d forgotten about his comment on the previous day, 18th November, at 11.07 pm – the Archbishop apparently said of the Synod that “Francis was there but Peter wasn’t.”

  13. I may be missing something here (I don’t belong to the Glasgow diocese), but isn’t it good news to know that the Archbishop cares enough about the Church, to stand up for what is right? He is after all, called to serve the Church. It seems to me, in refusing to go along, to get along, this prince of the Church is showing some backbone. 😮

  14. Happy feast day of Our Lady of Lourdes.

    Its great to see that there are a couple of good apples in the barrel. The sooner the rest of the good ones speak out then throw out the dross!

    More rosaries and penance as DOTF reminds us.

    Why do these trolls keep turning up? I guess they might learn something about their faith and help those of us to keep clear heads.

  15. Editor thank you.
    Well if I had friends who were priests, I would not pass on anything they said to me of this nature to anyone and it is questionable if even the priest should have relayed the remarks to his friend.
    That is my opinion.
    Sorry editor, I don’t read the blog every day.
    Jobstears, I agree it is good that the Archbishop thinks as he does ( if the report is correct). I think like one or two others that the manner of the disclosure is reprehensible.
    PS. I hope I’m not a troll( I had to google the word to find out what the heck it meant!)

    • Spero,

      I find your comments interesting, about the “not passing on…” – whatever happened to the need for more transparency blah blah? I don’t think there should be anything secretive about meetings of diocesan priests. Anything which is not for public consumption should be indicated to priests by the bishops privately. After all, there are so few priests these days that they’re not exactly going to cause the post office to run out of stamps, are they?

      • Any leader should be able to talk off the record to their team, and more especially a Bishop to his co-workers.

        Ed: well, he didn’t say anything untoward, did he? Is there something shameful in a bishop saying he would be deeply troubled, indicating possible resignation, if his “co-workers” in the Vatican decided to change the Ten Commandments and contradict Jesus’s description of divorce and remarriage as adultery? I’d have thought he ought to be praised – we sure praised him… I’d have presumed that whoever mentioned it outside the meeting, did so to put the Archbishop in a good light. Shucks, am I a simple gal, or what?

        • Comment removed because it is focusing on the comment from Archbishop Tartaglia at the meeting of the Council of Priests. That’s not the subject of this thread, and it has been given a very generous airing despite that fact. So move on and tell us what you think of the contents of the letter from Archbishop Lenga. No more red herrings, please and thank you – Editor.

          • I think The Archbishop has been scarred by his past experience, and it is foolish of him not to accept the solemn word of Pope Benedict on why he resigned. Perhaps, The Archbishop needs more help than his fellow prelates, and The Church in general. Should open letters – with scant evidence – damage rather than help The Church.

            • Common Sense,

              Well, you’re entitled to your opinion but I think the rest of us are more inclined in the circumstances to trust the word of a senior Church prelate who actually worked in the Curia and knows what’s going on.

              In fact, I think the Archbishop has been scarred more by what he saw and heard in the Curial offices than anything he suffered under the Communists.

              • No where is it said the emeritus Archbishop worked for The Curia. Facts are wonderful things. Hopefully, one day your posts will contain some.

  16. I didn’t think Eileenanne would be into trailing her fishing line behind a slow moving fishing boat, you see. So now I know what troll means. Internet slang has me beat!

  17. Sorry that doesn’t make sense.
    I meant “those of us who are not so well informed in our faith…”

    Just read your article Athanasius from The Angelus site. Truly amazing. Nothing but nothing else to say.

    • Clotilde,

      Thank you for your kind comments about my Angelus article, I’m glad you found it informative. The credit of course belongs to the Almighty. And no, I’m not referring to editor!!

  18. Well done, Archbishop Tartaglia! However, Traditionalist or not, I hope he hangs around to help Mother Church. Resigning won’t help the faithful but the threat of same shows he has courage. He should (if he hasn’t already) team up with the good guys. Surely there must be a few goodish ones in Scotland? What about Archbishop Cushley? And Bishop Robson: I heard he’s open to Tradition and is about to instigate Traditional Latin Masses in his diocese.

    • Crofterlady,

      On the contrary, I think his resignation would of immense help to the Church in Glasgow. And if, as likely, an even MORE “liberal” prelate is appointed, so much the quicker, we imagine, will the eyes of the wilful papolatrists be opened.

      And please don’t think that I place too much importance on his words at the Council of priests. Yes, it is to his credit that the thought even crossed his mind that he should not remain archbishop in this circumstance, never mind that he indicated to his priests that “enough [of the Kasper Camp] is enough”. However, it’s not really that simple, nor is it a foregone conclusion that he will not remain in office no matter the outcome of the Synod. After all, when he became Bishop of Paisley he made headlines with his statement that we would all have to be prepared to go to prison over the homosexuality issue. Next thing we learn he’s played a leading role in organising the funeral of a former priest, partnered “gay” man and apologised for remarks he made in a reference to this same (40 something) “gay” about the early deaths which are a feature of homosexual activity. Remember, Catholic funerals are prohibited in Canon Law to public sinners. And the partnered “gay” man was not only a former priest, but a well known Labour politician. That was, therefore, a monumental scandal. Coming from an Archbishop who realises we ought to be making a strong stand on homosexuality, this was a monumental scandal with bells on.

      So, I, for one, will be open-mouthed if he resigns – even if he receives a letter from Papa Francis commanding him to instruct his priests to give Communion to the divorced, remarried, those in civil partnerships and anybody else to wants to “celebrate” his “relationship with Jesus.”

      And, Good guys? Archbishop Cushley’s opening remarks on taking office in Edinburgh were that he didn’t think there’s a crisis in the Church, in Edinburgh or anywhere else, homosexual scandal surrounding his predecessor notwithstanding. Oh and shucks, thanks to Bishop Robson for allowing a traditional Latin Mass in Dunkeld. WOW. That’ll be packed, for sure… Not minimising the fact that this is some good news, but it’s very late arriving and it’s not even happened yet.

      But my over-riding thought on reading your (and certain other) comments on this thread is this:

      Is there ANYBODY out there who connects the dots when they read our newsletter reports?

      • Did the public sinner repent…..did he receive the Last Rites…..???……no problem with a catholic funeral if he did.

        • Crouchback,

          By public sinner Canon Law means someone who is living in a state of manifest public sin. I think the editor refers to David Cairns MP who was living with his civil partner when he died. The civil partner attended the funeral and it was him who demanded an apology from Archbishop Tartaglia for speaking about the link between the gay lifestyle and early death in men. If he was living with his gay civil partner, then that is a very public state of sin and he should not have had a public Catholic funeral. If he repented in his heart, that is good but we can’t know that. We can be scandalised that he was living in a civil partnership and allowed a Catholic funeral because that is against canon law.

    • DominieMary,

      Way before his heart attack. The talk of being prepared to go to prison over homosexual issue was before he was even Archbishop of Glasgow – when he was appointed Bishop of Paisley. We’ve reported it all and more in our newsletter over the years. Which is why it drives me crazy when, at the slightest sign of a bishop doing the right thing, everyone falls over themselves to say “faithful bishop, well done”. It’s like knowing that Dr Shipman murdered over 200 of his patients and then hearing from one (survivor!) that he once correctly diagnosed her headache. Who cares?

      Having said that, I do agree, credit where it’s due. He’s apparently said he will not thole the same shenanigans at next year’s Synod, and since he’s a known supporter of Cardinal Burke, and may take strength from his courageous example, I’m very pleased about his apparent decision not to remain silent if the Kasper Camp continue in the same vein and with the same support of the pontiff, as happened at the first part of the Synod. “Well done, faithful Archbishop T”, I will say! 😀

      • Editor,

        I couldn’t agree more. Well done to His Grace for hinting that he will take a stand.

        However, Archbishop Tartaglia must hold up his hands and recognise the part he has played over the years. He went along with the Modernist mission of modern churchmen (how’s that for alliteration?) for years without opening his mouth and that same silence is what has allowed the more rampant Modernists to run amok, most recently at the Synod.

        I really hope that this is Archbishop Tartaglia “waking up”, but we are a long way from counting him as one of the faithful bishops.

  19. I do not feel any encouragement from anything I hear relating to Bishop Robson, who was held in high regard by Cardinal O’Brien. I think he knew, or surmised the goings on that were going on, in a certain way( but maybe not the ‘gay” way,) but still he played the field. Maybe he has had a conversion and that is possible, but trust has been broken.
    Archbishop Cushley is a diplomat. He will smile and try to be all things to all men. I don’t think anyone will ever know which side he will land on until, if ever, decision time confronts him. I wouldn’t bet my shirt on him, that’s for sure.

  20. Lots to think about. My, I never knew all that about Archbishop Tartaglia before he was even an Archbishop. How awful! Perhaps you are right, Editor, the sooner the genie is out of the bottle the better. However, will the eyes of the papolatrists ever be opened?!!

  21. As I’m just a lowly Sassenach, I’m a bit bewildered about the lop-sided attention being paid to part of the lead article (together with a lengthy diversion about the rights and wrongs of priests spilling beans), while +Jan Pawel Lenga’s awesome open letter is receiving relatively little.

    I don’t know if bloggers have seen this yet https://fromrome.wordpress.com/2015/02/11/bishop-athanasius-schneider-we-must-create-groups-of-true-catholics/, but I think that things are very definitely looking up (pun unintended).

    • Christina,

      I’ve been hoping someone would single out sentences/key points from the Archbishop’s letter, but nobody has done so, which is very disappointing, so far.

      Which parts of it struck you as being of particular interest or importance?

    • Christina,

      I’m not really sure that the archbishop’s letter is all that “awesome”. He does say some important things, but he also talks of the recent “holy popes” and he talks about the bishops’ conferences dealing with issues, instead of pointing out that these conferences have usurped the role of the individual bishop who is supposed to preach the doctrine and defend it in his own diocese.

      I did like these parts of his letter, where he says:

      “Unfortunately in our days it is increasingly evident that the Vatican through the Secretariat of State has taken the course of political correctness… ”

      Also:

      “The “spirit of the world” feeds the shepherds. The sinners give the Church the instructions for how she has to serve them. In their embarrassment the Pastors are silent on the current problems and abandon the sheep while they are feeding themselves.”

      That’s very good and needed to be said especially after the Synod, but do we know if this bishop goes along with the novus ordo etc? I’m not really convinced that he’s a traditional bishop just because of this letter.

      • I think we can take it for granted that the Archbishop was saying the novus ordo and accepting what was going on in the name of Vatican II, but the key thing is that bishops like him are at last speaking out, albeit as a result of the Synod, not Vatican II. It will take them longer to see the connection between the two.

        It is, in fact, because he is “mainstream” that his letter will have an impact on those who would (and do) write off anything said by a bishop like the SSPX Superior General, because, well “he would say that, wouldn’t he” is their (unthinking) response.

        Archbishop Lenga is to be commended for speaking out and he deserves our support. I liked the quotes you highlighted, summarising the dilemma for the papolatrists today. That “the Pastors” – especially the Supreme Pastor – “are silent on the current problems” and, in fact, being led by the sinners, is a hugely important problem for a bishop to highlight.

        If we were into the “roses” and “raspberries” awards popular in certain other publications, he’d be receiving the CT roses award – definitely!

        • Editor,

          I can’t get italics in wordpress! Looked it up, but it was no help. 😥

          I thought the Archbishop’s letter was beyond outstanding! This, for me described the Synod, “The “spirit of the world” feeds the shepherds. The sinners give the Church the instructions for how she has to serve them”. Succinct. Precise.

          The Archbishop’s observation that the Vatican “sacrifices the best sons and servants”, is very astute, except I would add that they are sacrificed to quiet, not just the media, but also,and perhaps more importantly, the modernists/ masons in the hierarchy. These faithful souls are the stumbling blocks. Look what they did to Archbishop Lefevbre!

            • Olaf,

              My comment about what was done to Archbishop Lefevbre?

              I can see now, from the careless way I worded the post that I may have given the impression that I have concrete proof of masonic involvement in the Archbishop’s case. Sorry! I don’t have any information on that right now, but I am going to do something about it (like turn to someone who does!).

  22. Editor, I didn’t mean to offend, although you’re right to reprimand me by implying that I should have commented on Abp. Jan Pawel Lenga’s letter myself instead of complaining that no-one else had! Mea culpa. To be honest, I didn’t see the thread until there were many posts about it, and I was riveted by the contents of the letter (i.e.gob-smacked and speechless) and, while still speechless, a bit curious as to why it had been largely overlooked.

    I’m not struck by the importance or interest of any ‘parts’ in particular, but rather by the entire thrust of the letter, aimed as it is at the Vatican Secretariat of State, and therefore at Abp. Pietro Parolin (Pope Francis’s ‘man’ – appointed immediately upon his election) together with the eight ‘papal advisors’.

    The analysis and description of the wholesale and worldwide corruption of the hierarchy from the top (i.e.the Secretariat of State) down, and the machinery and manipulation whereby this has been accomplished, are startling and frightening, especially when Abp Lenga recalls the Freemasonic affirmation of 1920 in connection with this:

    The seminarians will become priests with our liberal ideas. We shall not flatter ourselves with false hopes. We will not make the Pope a Freemason. However liberal bishops, who will work in the entourage of the Pope, will propose to him in the task of governing the Church such thoughts and ideas which are advantageous for us and the Pope will implement them into life.

    Traditional Catholics are all well aware that there is an unprecedented and dreadful crisis in the Church, but I have never seen the reasons for its rapid spread suggested and described so convincingly, and nor have I understood fully the part that earlier Freemasonry would play in the present-day ‘diabolical disorientation’ of the Church.

    (The papal nuncios) have acquired expertise in the principle “sub secreto Pontificio”, by which one manipulates and silences the mouths of the bishops. And that what the Nuncio tells them appears as it would be almost certainly the wish of the Pope. With such methods one separates the bishops from one another to the effect that the bishops of a country can no longer speak with one voice in the spirit of Christ and His Church in defending faith and morals..

    Abp. Lenga speaks with the same voice as Abp. Schneider, which is why I gave the link above. I think that there is real hope for us and for the whole Church here. .

    • You didn’t offend, Christina, not at all.

      I was also struck by the Archbishop’s quote – with which we are all familiar – about the role of freemasonry in bringing about the current crisis, although disappointed that he didn’t include the quote about the Freemason’s hope for a pope who – while not a Freemason himself, they recognised the unlikelihood of that – would, nevertheless, march under their banner. I’d have liked him to include that quote – in fact, I haven’t got the Alta Vendita in front of me right now, but I wonder if what he quoted is, in fact, an adaption of that quote changed to “liberal bishops in the entourage of the Pope” instead of the quote directly referring to the pope. I could be mis-remembering this and don’t have time to double check right now, but, whatever, it was great to see him quoting that stated goal of Freemasonry.

      Thanks for the link to Bishop Schneider’s latest gem – I will read that more carefully later.

  23. Laura, you posted while I was composing (I’m very slow). With respect, and a willingness to be corrected, I think you have misunderstood what Abp. Lenga is saying about bishops’ conferences when you say … and he talks about the bishops’ conferences dealing with issues, instead of pointing out that these conferences have usurped the role of the individual bishop who is supposed to preach the doctrine and defend it in his own diocese.

    In fact he clearly demonstrates what has happened to bishops in their conferences when he says Instead of zealously spreading the faith, courageously preaching the doctrine of Christ, standing firm in the defense of truth and of morals, the meetings of the Bishops’ Conferences often deal with issues which are foreign to the nature of the duties of the successors of the apostles. Thus he is stating quite clearly what the bishops, in conference or not, should be doing, and he blames the papal nuncios, who have become ‘the propagators of liberalism and modernism’ for the fall of whole hierarchies. He also says of the bishops the Pastors are obliged to teach the whole truth about God and men “in season and out”, which, read in the context of the whole paragraph, reveals that Abp. Lenga considers the duty of the individual bishop is to his own flock and not to a bishops’ conference,

    As for ‘holy popes’, I took that as somewhat tongue-in-cheek in the context in which the goings on in those popes’ reigns are described!

    (This isn’t addressed to Laura) I won’t be thanked for saying it, but I think that some traditional Catholics, and especially some of those who, like myself, almost always attend SSPX chapels, are forever suspicious of any prelate in the ‘mainstream’ who speaks out in the way that Cardinal Burke, Abps Schneider and Lenga, and others have done and are doing. I think that such men deserve our prayers, encouragement and active help rather than criticism. Cardinal Burke’s case has shown us what putting ones head above the parapet means for a prelate, and the Church is crying out for others with his courage. I think that she just might be getting some at last.

    • Christina,

      I’ll respond only to your final paragraph, not addressed to Laura but to the rest of us…

      I don’t think that it’s so much being “suspicious” of any “prelate in the mainstream who speaks out in the way that Cardinal Burke, Archpb Scheiner and Lenga” have done. I think it may be a feeling that they each have their own particular “problem” with what is going on in the Church and speak out about that, but refuse to acknowledge the elephant in the room – the Council and its aftermath per se, notably the Mass.

      So, Cardinal Burke, for example, allowed himself to be “persuaded” to withdraw from a Pro Ecclesia conference in London because they were regarded as critical of the bishops. Even though he knew they were in the right at the time, in their concerns about Catholic schools (not even the Mass was an issue – just Catholic schools) Yet now he is hitting the headlines with his protest about the Synod – and rightly so. It’s the fact that there is a certain inconsistency with hese “mainstream” bishops, that I think makes certain “traditional” Catholics say, well, that’s good in so far as it goes but I’m not going to celebrate just yet.”

      That’s my tuppence worth on that subject, but – be assured – I believe we should thank and encourage these “mainstream” bishops for speaking out. It will surely make the more intelligent among the pew Catholics think more critically about what is going on in their parishes and diocese. It might even make them realise that we are not the wacky ones after all 😀

  24. We desperately need an American Bishop or Archbishop to speak out against the rising tide of Apostasy. Are their any with the faith, courage and fortitude to do that? Or are they more concerned with their careers, comforts and titles?

    • Fr.DuffyFighting69th,

      I think Cardinal Burke is up front on that score, and becoming more so as time goes on. He has great influence with the American bishops. I feel sure that Our Lord will inspire others.

    • Just looking at your username, I’m not sure if you are a priest (don’t tell us if you don’t want to do so) or a layman who is fighting on behalf of a persecuted priest. Or if you’d just had one too many glasses of the hard stuff when you signed up!

      Whatever, you at least have Cardinal Burke speaking out. Over here in not so sunny Scotland, we haven’t got a single priest or prelate publicly speaking about the crisis in the Church. We’re hoping that will change if Part Two of what one of our readers terms Sin Synod goes according to the Kasper Plan.

  25. Fr.DuffyFighting69th,

    I agree, we desperately need a bishop or archbishop with a backbone!

    I don’t see any action on the part of the laity either (and Michael Voris in my book, is part of the diabolical confusion in the Church). Very few know enough to be concerned- so long as we appear charitable and in union with our separated brethren, we are ‘living’ the gospel and walking with the Lord. Any problem with Communion in the hand? Nope. Communion Services? Certainly not, it’s a chance for the laity to be involved.

    How many bishops will stand with Cardinal Burke? I know a lot of priests who would, but their bishops? I don’t know. The folks at this site seem to be hopeful, we will see. http://www.newoxfordreview.org/note.jsp?did=0514-notes-tables

    On the brighter side, the parishes that offer the TLM see more parishioners attending that Mass than the NO.

  26. Sorry I am a total noob at computers, yes this is Lockton Mawby, editor please use only my name as I am using a relatives email and computer, I scribed a long heartfelt reply to the kind comment, then it just disappeared?

    • Lockton Mawby,

      My sympathies! That happens to me, too! If you write your comment (if it is a long one) in word and then copy it into your post, it would save you the trouble of rewriting.

    • What a pity – I will now change your other post to Lockton… and I would suggest (having suffered the same thing – a lengthy post disappearing, thanks to WordPress shenanigans) that you get into the habit of typing your comments in Word to save them and then posting on the blog. You can then delete the Word copy if you wish. It is infuriating to lose a post, as I know myself. So I urge you to type in Word first, save and then copy and paste on the blog.

  27. I rejoice that the Archbishop of Glasgow has spoke out on the Synod and supported Church teaching. I was beginning to believe that the changes we are seeing, the slow restoration of the Faith in England, would not happen in Scotland. One little cog can start turning a big wheel and if he receives support who knows it may encourage him to go further.

  28. “The idea that would consist in placing the Magisterium in a nice box by detaching it from pastoral practice — which could evolve according to the circumstances, fads, and passions — is a form of heresy, a dangerous schizophrenic pathology. I affirm solemnly that the Church of Africa will firmly oppose every rebellion against the teaching of Christ and the Magisterium.”

    – Cardinal Sarah

    http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2015/02/important-cardinal-sarah-detachment-of.html

%d bloggers like this: