General Discussion (11)

If there’s something of interest in the news that’s not covered in one of the topic threads, or you have a question to ask, a comment you’d like to  make about anything under the sun, more or less, this is the thread for you. However, please check first, to ensure that you haven’t missed a topic thread or another thread where it would be appropriate to post your comment, as the GD discussion threads fills up very quickly.  Readers, all too often, go straight to the General Discussion thread to post news that is already the topic of a thread or to ask a question that is already being discussed elsewhere. So, do your Sherlock Holmes – at the very least check the side-bar – before posting here, please and thank you!

Join in the conversation

Join in the conversation

Feel free, also, to share your favourite spiritual reading books, prayers and devotions. Whatever.   Enjoy! 

To read previous 10 General Discussion Threads, click on the links listed below.
click here  (2) click here  (3) click here  (4) click here  (5) click here
(6) click here 
(7) click here  (8) click here (9) click here (10) click here

486 responses

  1. Following on from Wendy Walker’s comments about Abp Oscar Romero – I have no idea if he was a homosexual, but the main promoter of his Cause in this country is none other than Julian Filochowski, who is the Chair of Trustees of the Archbishop Romero Trust

    Mr Filochowski is mentioned in this article:-

  2. Yes, but Julian F was also director of CAFOD, an organisation that admires Oscar Romero.

    And by homosexual, do you mean of homosexual orientation or a sexually active homosexual ? And if the latter, merely in youth or after ordination ?

  3. Am I alone in finding speculation about the sexual orientation of the late Archbishop Romero distasteful?

    • Elizabeth,

      It is distasteful but that’s what the LGBT lobby does all the time. They besmirch the names of famous Catholics, including Cardinal Newman, in order to push their agenda. They seek to give the impression that a significant number, if not a majority, of people, including famous Catholics, including among the beatified and canonised, were homosexual. It’s diabolical.

    • Summa,

      That is an excellent letter, but I have to wonder about yet another “leak.” Might there be some mole in Menzingen who is attempting to use passive-aggressive disobedience to fight any normalization?

  4. Elizabeth
    I wasn’t speculating about his sexual orientation. I know little or nothing about him and his life in general, let alone anything about his sexuality. I was responding to the comment made by Wendy Walker in General Discussion 10. The point I was trying to make is that the promotion of his Cause has been very closely allied with the ‘Catholic LGBT’ lobby in this country, and I’ve never understood why that should be so.

  5. I always mean to follow these threads but am sometimes away for a while and when i go back online suddenly there are a million posts and I’m ages catching up!! Looking forward to meeting bloggers at conference in June.

  6. Great article on why the SSPX should be regularised. There would be great benefits to the Church with the sound catholic faith of such Traditional catholics.

  7. “Veri Catholici, an international association of Catholics dedicated to opposing the errors promoted by Cardinal Kasper, is calling on all Catholics in the world to join us in Rome to condemn the document Amoris Laetitia and its many errors, and to demand from the Pope and Sacred Hierarchy that the document be withdrawn and its errors condemned, formally and canonically.”

    Aside from the obvious error of blaming Cardinal Kasper for AL, this could get interesting….

    • RCA Victor,

      I’ve just submitted a comment to ask them to avoid Saturday 18th June as there is a Catholic Truth Conference in Scotland on that day, and many who might attend theirs are already booked to attend that.

      It’s a brilliant initiative so I hope it is successful. If I win the lottery, I’ll be there, that’s for sure! Seriously, when the details are published, I’ll give serious thought to going over there for the event, despite being a nervous wreck in Rome due to the chaotic traffic; roads without rules, as seems to be the case across the European continent. To be fair, though, it’s been like that since well before Papa Francis’ election. We can blame him for working towards a Church with no rules, but the roads? No – we can’t blame him for that. I avoid the continent like the plague, due to those horrendous roads… You want to hear my stories about just trying to cross a road in Rome, never mind trying to drive, which I would never, in my wildest mad moment, think of doing. I’d sacrifice my nerves to attend, however, because it is an excellent way to send a signal to the Pope and Hierarchy that we’re not daft. We can still recognise heresy when we see it.

      Not all priests can say the same, unfortunately. I’ve been wide-eyed at some of the comments from clergy, ranging from “I haven’t read it yet” (So? The commentaries from informed and reliable critics should suffice at this stage. After “who am I to judge?” the shockers in AL should be no big surprise) to “there are certainly some ambiguities in AL” to “I’m not going to say anything about it… least said the better” – unbelievable stuff. The very stuff of pastoral, spiritual, religious and moral neglect, rolled into one.

      Anyway, thank you for posting the link RCA Victor. It would be great if we could all attend. You can then give me that tenner you owe me from 2009.

  8. Editor,

    I can only imagine your condition at having to drive in Rome, as I recall mine at having to ride with you from the airport to your flat, and from thence to the hotel in Glasgow, in 2008 – not from your driving, of course, but from all those cars whizzing by on the wrong side of the road!

    Anyway, I was about to return to that website to scold them for their Michael Voris imitation (i.e. sidestepping naming the Pope as the true responsible party for all these heresies – after all, Kasper proposes, Francis disposes), but since you are so enthusiastic about it, I’ll just swallow my urge to think I know better and go eat my dinner! Fish dinner, that is….

    • RCA Victor,

      Snitch! I’ll stick to driving you round the bend in future – you can jump in a taxi from the airport next time!

      I hadn’t noticed that the VeriCatholic group were sidestepping – I thought the opposite that they were demanding the Pope overturn AL – if they are going to sidestep the key issue, there’s no way I would go to their Conference, even if the Road Police are out in force for the event!

      • Well, I accused them of sidestepping, at any rate, since they refer only to “Kasper’s” heresies, rather than Francis’. You can see my comment on their website.

        • RCA Victor,

          Took a quick look and they replied that they’re not sidestepping just named the one who started the ball rolling (so to speak – I paraphrase)

          Still, it’s a bit of a concern. Will work on thinking about this. Oops! That is a bit of a Freudian slip – how DOES one “think” … again?!

          • RCA Victor,

            I’ve now posted the following comment – they are moderating all comments so posting it here in case it doesn’t get through:

            VC Editors,

            I share the concerns of RCA Victor, and sincerely hope that you will not shy away from denouncing the grave errors being promoted by Pope Francis. He has certainly used Cardinal Kasper right from the get-go, after his election in 2013, to help prepare us for the shockers to come, but Kasper is the monkey and we need to send a message to the organ grinder, not the monkey.

            The buck for the disgraceful papal Exhortation stops at the desk of Papa Francis. I’m hoping against hope to be able to make it to your conference but only if I am certain of hearing the truth about AL which, as Father Lombardi emphasised at the live press conference, which I heard with my own ears, was written by Pope Francis, no-one else. Fr Lombardi stressed that fact, in answer to a question from the floor. So, there’s no question about it. Pope Francis is totally responsible for this document and he must retract it as a matter of urgency. As others with greater minds than mine (must be at least one!) have said, clarifications are no use. Too late for sticking plasters. He must withdraw the document and apologise for foisting his misleading through to heretical personal views on Holy Mother Church. Won’t happen. We refuse it. And THAT’S why so many (we hope) have come from all over the world to attend this conference.

            Let’s all stand now and sing “Faith of our Fathers”! END.

            • VC Editors replied to my comment about laying the blame for AL at the feet of the Pope by saying they can’t understand why anyone thinks they are not doing that but went on to say that the laity don’t have the jurisdiction to “condemn a person” (you can read the comment for yourself on their blog – link at end of this post)

              I replied as follows:

              VC Editors,

              Nowhere in my comment have I suggested “condemning a person” – we may never “condemn” a person if by that you mean the ultimate judgment. That is not what I mean and I think my comment is very clear.

              The Pope – not “the Pope and the Bishops” has the power to retract this disgraceful document. The Pope is the Supreme Pastor. For this reason HE must be named and must be held accountable. Today is the Feast of St Catherine of Siena who wrote very straight talking letters to the popes of her time and told them – e.g. to “rid the Church of priests who poison and rot the Church.” Was she “condemning” a person, the person of the Pope? Of course not. She was telling him to get on and do the work of preserving the Faith and protecting the flock from bad priests. That’s what popes are for – not to be diplomats or ecumenical activists. On another occasion, St Catherine called on the pontiff to resign if he wasn’t up to the job. Was she “condemning” a person? No, she was pointing out that he was not living up to his duties. There’s nothing in her letters beyond a legitimate judgment based on observable data.

              St Catherine of Siena didn’t “condemn” those popes any more than we “condemn” Pope Francis but we are saying clearly that he is a bad pope. He’s a popular person, but so what? The world is never short of nice men who are popular. But, just as we would say that nice Mrs Smith was a bad teacher if she fed her history students false information, so we are permitted – indeed duty bound – to exercise our Confirmation prophetic duty to warn of the dangers within, as well as without, the Church, especially when living at a time of major crisis in the Church, as is our lot today. This simple distinction is one that far too many (most) Catholics appear unable to comprehend, because most Catholics today are papolatrists. They treat the pope as if he were a divine being.

              Pope Francis is not a good pope. Am I “condemning” him as a person, that is, am I saying he is bound for Hell? He may be Hell-bound, but that’s not my judgement to make. It IS my judgment to make as to his fidelity to the Faith because I can actually hear and read what he is saying and writing that runs counter to the traditional Catholic religion – in almost its every aspect.

              Too many Catholics who express themselves appalled at the (to quote yourselves) ” errors, lies, blasphemies, heresies, deceits and patent strategem of the document attacking the Catholic Faith and Divine and Apostolic Tradition, not to mention immemorial ecclesiastical Tradition, and the Family as God has willed it.” are pulling back from laying the blame where it firmly belongs – at the feet of Papa Francis.

              There have been plenty of petitions objecting to the shocking statements from Pope Francis and they’ve made no apparent difference. I would have expected that the organizers of a Conference of this weight, held in Rome itself, and about such a momentous matter, would – at the very least – merit a short meeting with the Pope himself in order to hand over a letter on behalf of us all. With all the usual cameras buzzing.

              After all, if atheists and adulterers can so easily get the ear of this pope, whether in interviews or via telephone calls from Vatican City, then that is surely the least you – as the organizers – should seek.

              One last word: I notice that every post is being moderated on this blog. I have a policy of NEVER contributing to moderated sites, since I just don’t have the time to spare to write lengthy comments like this one, only to find that they do not see the light of publicity. If that is, in fact, the fate of this comment, I will presume the worst, I’m afraid, and leave you all to it, with my best wishes.

              “Blackmail” you say? Me? Moi? Never…! END.

              Click here to reach the VC blog

              A few minutes later…

              The following reply was posted to my comment above:

              VC Editors,

              Nowhere in my comment have I suggested “condemning a person” …(very long praeter rem comment follows)

              VC Editor replies:

              We did not suggest you did, we only wanted to explain our position. And yes, these comments are moderated, because no commentator, especially one who leaves a 2-3 page comment, is the best judge of what should or should not be published on another’s website. Pax tibi! END OF COMMENT BY VC EDITORS

              It goes without saying, folks, that I won’t be attending that conference, nor will we advertise it. A conference of papolatrists? You kidding! A group who are deliberately withholding a comment such as the above, quoting a Doctor of the Church and warning of papolatry? Who, in their right mind, is going to travel across the continent of Europe to listen to them? Not moi. Definitely not moi.

              What about you, RCA Victor?!

              • Editor,

                My passport shall remain in my file cabinet…unless, of course, I happen to win the lottery, in which case my destination of choice will be Glasgow, not Rome!

                And thank you for eloquently exposing the sidesteppers.

                • RCA Victor,

                  Thank you – I sincerely hope you DO get that lottery win – Glasgow needs you.

                  I have just posted my final comment on that site – here it is, for the record… (play on your username fully intended!)

                  MY FINAL COMMENT ON THE VC SITE…

                  Your dishonesty and lack of true charity in not publishing my comment is staggering. I have posted it on the Catholic Truth blog, so our highly intelligent and fully informed readers will draw their own conclusions. We will not be supporting your conference after all – we’ve enough to do battling papolatry in Scotland without travelling all the way to Rome to support it! ‘Bye folks.

                  • Editor,

                    It will be interesting (yawn) to see how they intend to “condemn” AL without exposing the perfidy of its author….who knows, perhaps that treacherous document can be traced to the deleterious effects of global warming on the mind of Cardinal Kasper…or perhaps they will hire Michael Voris to concoct a plausible excuse…

              • We chose not to publish your long comment, not because you quoted a Doctor of the Church, but because of your chain-letter kind of threat at the end, which is very immature, if not vicious..

                • VC Editors,

                  Hilarious! Is THIS extract below, from the end of my quote, what you consider to be “immature” and (possibly) “vicious”…

                  One last word: I notice that every post is being moderated on this blog. I have a policy of NEVER contributing to moderated sites, since I just don’t have the time to spare to write lengthy comments like this one, only to find that they do not see the light of publicity. If that is, in fact, the fate of this comment, I will presume the worst, I’m afraid, and leave you all to it, with my best wishes.

                  “Blackmail” you say? Me? Moi? Never…! END.

                  Don’t make me laugh. I have posted my entire comment above, so our bloggers can make up their own minds about your reason for not publishing it.

  9. Editor, not to mention all the traditionalists who say “AL contains much that is good, but…”, and even Bishop Schneider does this.

    ‘The worst kind of heretic is the one who, while teaching mostly true Catholic doctrine, adds a word of heresy, like a drop of poison in a cup of water.’ (Pope Leo XIII)

    • Christina,

      I’m always saying that – this business of trying to appear so “reasonable”, see what is good in the offensive product, whatever it is, in this case AL, rather than get down to business right away and say it as it is. So, I agree with you on that, 200%

    • Christina,

      As our former Prior once told us, if the Devil laid out his agenda and purpose straight up, we creatures would be horrified and repulsed – so he disguises it with things that sound “good” in order to draw us in unawares, and hopefully trap us beyond the point of escape. Seems like the smooth-tongued, mealy-mouthed Conciliar hierarchy and their fellow travelers – the ever-burgeoning army of “dissenters” – have learned that lesson well, and have even invented a new language to suit their evil purposes.

      Except that now, the dosage of poison has become to large to hide under enlightened-sounding (but empty) words…

    • Meanwhile, before I forget, here is an audio sermon by a faithful priest on being the first to stop clapping:

      [audio src="" /]

      Unlike the wafflers and papolotrists at VeriCatholici, this priest gives the full dose of reality regarding AL and Pope Francis.

  10. Prognosticum,

    This is in case you missed my posts on the subject of The Case of the Disappearing Website (Apropos) on the Hans Kung and General Discussion (10) threads…


    I’ve had a letter today from Hamish Fraser, son of the famous Communist convert of the same name, and he thanks me (you) for alerting the family to the disappearance of the website, which they didn’t know had happened. They are now looking into the matter and hopefully it will be restored soon.

    So, sincere thanks to you for alerting us here to that. I always have it in mind to reprint many of the articles on that site but something always seems to turn up to prevent me doing so. Hopefully, when it is restored, I can make up for my tardiness. So, again. many thanks for the alert.

    • Prognosticum et al,

      I’ve now had an email from Hamish Fraser to say that the family have now restored the website and it is now up and running. It is linked from our website but for ease of reference, click here to reach the Apropos website.

      So, once again, many thanks to Prognosticum for alerting us to this matter.

    • WF,

      Shocking. It shows the sheer deviousness of Beattie and her dissenting comrades, not to mention the clearly culpable complicity of the hierarchy. I copied the following paragraph although I was spoilt for choice – the entire report is horrendous:

      It is now just over 7 weeks since we raised awareness about Ms. Carrie Morrow bringing in a homosexualist drama-group to present a play about two princes ”getting married” to the young children in her care at Sacred Heart School in Atherton. She had also got them to design ”Gay Pride” posters for the ”Wigan Pride” event. Since then, some 6,777 people have signed a CitizenGo petition asking for Liverpool’s Archbishop Malcolm McMahon to intervene for the defence of the Catholic Faith, childhood innocence and parental rights. As yet, there has still been no public response from His Grace or from any of the priests or teachers in the Archdiocese.

      I was just thinking what a good and useful website that is, when I clicked on About Us and laughed, truly laughed, out loud. Is there ANYONE involved in the crisis in the Church – either as participants in causing it, or those seeking to fight it – who does not quote “put out into the deep”? Drives me NUTS!

  11. Editor,

    I don’t mind putting out into the deep with the Modernist destroyers of the faith so long as I’m allowed to take a sufficient number of mill stones with me!!

    • Athanasius,

      That verse is quoted all the time, and is used to mean “don’t be afraid of change”. The implication is, that is what Our Lord was saying to Peter when he exhorted him to let down his nets, despite having had no catch of fish so far. The Modernists use it all the time to suggest that we need to adapt to their new “model” of Church, but as one of our readers pointed out on another thread (Hallam), the fact is that when the disciples DID cast out into the deep and landed their huge catch of fish, they immediately called for more help, not less! So, we need MORE priests, not less, as the “Cast out into the deep” brigade suggest in their efforts to re-model the Church as a lay-led institution, over the head of the Holy Spirit who clearly didn’t know what He was doing to create a hierarchical Church in the first place. Gimme strength!

    • Gerontius

      Thank you for posting that video of St. Pius X. I didn’t know that existed. Just watching the ceremonial around his casket reminds us of how holy and reverent things once were. Everything now is shabby and crude in comparison. So much for liberalism and its poisonous effects on the Church these past 60 years.

      Thanks again.

      • Athanasius and Jimislander,

        Many thanks for kind words. You may already have this, but I decided to post it in case you or anyone else is interested.

        Novena Prayer to Saint Pius the X

        Glorious Pontiff, Saint Pius the X, devoted servant of Our Lord and loving child of Mary, I invoke you as a saint in Heaven. I give myself to you that you may always be my father, my protector and my guide in the way of holiness and salvation.
        Aid me in observing the duties of my state in life. Obtain for me great purity of heart and a fervent love of the interior life after your own example.
        Pope of the Blessed Sacrament, teach me to love Holy Mass and Holy Communion as the source of all grace and holiness and to receive this Sacrament as often as I can.

        Gentle father of the poor, help me to imitate your charity toward my fellowmen in word and deed.
        Consoler of the suffering, help me to bear my daily cross patiently and with perfect resignation to the will of God. Loving Shepherd of the flock of Christ obtain for me the grace of being a true child of Holy Mother Church.

        Saint Pius the X beloved Holy Father, I humbly implore your powerful intercession in obtaining from the Divine Heart of Jesus all the graces necessary for my spiritual and temporal welfare. I recommend to you in particular this favour …(mention your request).
        Great Pontiff, whom Holy Mother Church has raised to the honour of our altars and urged me to invoke and imitate as a Saint, I have great confidence in your prayers. I earnestly trust that if it is God’s Holy Will, my petition will be granted through your intercession for me at the throne of God.
        St. Pius the X pray for me and for those I love. I beg of you, by your love for Jesus and Mary, do not abandon us in our needs. May we experience the peace and joy of your holy death.

        In Thanksgiving to God for the graces bestowed on Pope St. Pius the X
        Our Father, Hail Mary and Glory be 3 x each

        Taken from:
        A Novena to Pope Pius the X
        by Father Lovasik

        Robert C. Hunter, S.V.D., Provincial Girard Pennslyvania

        A.H. Wiersbiniski LLD., Censor Liborium

        John M. Gannon D.D., D.C.L., LL.D. Archbishop of Erie Pennsylvania

    • Geronitus

      Thank you for that Video Gerontius. The ceremony around his coffin shows the difference between the true faith and the Shambolic nonsense foisted upon the Church today

      • Yes, thank you Gerontius, especially for the novena prayer. If ever we needed the help of Pope St. Pius X it is now. I found the video uplifting in one way, but disturbingly ironical that Pope John XXIII conducted such a ceremony – now that we know what his Council was to unleash and can only imagine what the great Pope would have thought of it. It is sad also that his incorrupt, but rather shrunken body lies visible today behind a dusty grille below a dusty denuded and neglected minor altar in St. Peters, unnoticed and unheeded by the crowds of pilgrims and tourists. I did wonder, having seen the body a few times, why it looks so unlike that in the video. I looked it up and learned that when incorrupt bodies are shown after exhumation, they have make-up or wax applied to improve the appearance, but not in any way to hide or deceive. I am pleased now to have seen the great saint exactly as he must have appeared in life.

  12. In episcopal consecrations, the essential form, according to Catholic Encyclopaedia, is the Eucharistic Prayer and the laying on of the hands performed by the principal consecrator. The Co-consecrators lay on their hands separately whilst saying the words Accipe Spiritum Sanctum. What if the principle consecrator and one of the co-consecrators is a heretic and does not intend to do what the Church does? However, if the third consecrator has the right intention and lays on his hands along with the words Accipe Spiritum Sanctum, would that validly confer the episcopate, even though the Co-consecrator does not say the Eucharistic Prayer?

    • CC

      I can’t answer your question with certainty but I imagine that the co-consecrators are there for just such an eventuality, although I think the circumstances you describe would be rare indeed, if ever arising at all.

      I have to say with respect, you don’t half come up with some odd questions. What prompted this one?

  13. You’ve got to laugh, or you’d cry! Pope Francis is busy, in his morning waffle sessions (aka sermons) in Casa Santa Marta, adding to his ‘Little Book of Insults’ (May 3rd). I think he’s having a go at all those unmerciful mummies who don’t like AL!

    “Christians who stay still, who don’t go forward, are non-Christian Christians. We don’t know exactly what they are. They are slightly ‘paganized’ Christians: who are there, who stay still and don’t go forward in their Christian lives, who don’t make the Beatitudes bloom in their lives, who don’t do Works of mercy… they are motionless. Excuse me for saying it, but they are like an (embalmed) mummy, a spiritual mummy there. There are Christians who are ‘spiritual mummies,’ motionless, there. They don’t do evil but they don’t do good deeds.”

    • Hmmm…if Christians who are “standing still” but don’t do evil are like mummies, then what are Christians who DO do evil, like Pope Francis? Lutherans?

      Where in the world was this disgrace formed, anyway?

      PS: Christina, my copy of Malachi Martin’s The Jesuits arrived yesterday…..

      • RCAVictor, that’s good. I won’t say ‘enjoy’ but it’ll give you an insight into just what (de)formed our Sovereign Pontiff. Now unwind those embalming bandages and get reading!

  14. Christina

    It seems Pope Francis is not even conversant with basic Catholic spirituality, which teaches that one cannot stand still in the spiritual life. Either one moves forward in grace and virtue, or one slides back into sin. The Pope seems to think there’s a “mummy” phase where the soul stands still, doing neither good nor evil. Yes, I’m afraid, with respect to the Pope, this is just more confusing codswallop. Why couldn’t Pope Francis have been a Trappist instead of a Jesuit? Think of all the wonderful silence the rest of us would have enjoyed.

    • Athanasius,
      It seems to me that what you say about moving forward in the spiritual life is exactly the same as the Pope was saying.

      • Eileenanne, I can’t see why you should think that. As Athanasius said, and common sense dictates, one cannot stand still in the spiritual life – but Pope Francis says you can. It’s also noteworthy that he says that these ‘mummies’ aka non-modernists, don’t ‘let the beatitudes bloom in their lives’ and, in obvious grammatical apposition, he then says ‘who don’t do Works of mercy… ‘. Muddled in these off-the-cuff wafflings as usual, he seems to confuse the Beatitudes with the Corporal Works of Mercy. The former are not about ‘Works of mercy’ of which Pope Francis, in his teaching, overwhelmingly emphasises the corporal rather than the spiritual. As I understand the Beatitudes they speak essentially about the dispositions of the Catholic soul, not about feeding the hungry and giving drink to the thirsty.

        Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
        Blessed are the meek: for they shall possess the land.
        Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted.
        Blessed are the poor in spirit: That is, the humble; and they whose spirit is not set upon riches.
        Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after justice: for they shall have their fill.
        Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.
        Blessed are the clean of heart: for they shall see God.
        Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called children of God.
        Blessed are they that suffer persecution for justice’ sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
        Blessed are ye when they shall revile you, and persecute you, and speak all that is evil against you, untruly, for my sake: Be glad and rejoice, for your reward is very great in heaven

  15. It is not enough that the Bishops of Scotland have, by cowardly silence and inaction, allowed Catholic schools to be infiltrated by the wearers of the hijab, the followers of islam.
    Now look:

    The whole point of Catholic schools was that they were just that. Schools where technical and academic knowledge was imparted in a Catholic ethos, by teachers founded in a Faith that was shared by the pupils and their parents. Schools where the atmosphere, ethos and all underlying assumptions were Catholic.
    Where is the Rock when we need him?

    • Interesting, Andrew.

      Your link – plus this one – reminds me of a school in the south side of Glasgow, which was targeted by Muslim pupils and eventually had more Muslims than Catholics. Try selling the “Catholic ethos” in that neck of the woods!

      • My much better half taught in a primary school before we had our own little ones. There were many non-native speakers of English, and some who had no English at all. Not a new situation, but it was previously relatively rare, whereas it is now becoming overwhelming.

    • Catholic schools In Scotland are in the position of having little Church control. The Church makes NO financial contribution to their upkeep or running except what Catholics pay in taxes. They are owned and run by the local authorities with the Church having the right of approval of some teachers, which does not amount to hiring and firing, and of determining the Re curriculum.
      When the system was set up in1918 it seemed ideal, and for many years it worked admirably. However, it needed the consent of the non-Catholic community and that has to some extent been withdrawn. Many parents of other faiths and none have sent their children to Catholic schools, either to undermine them or because they are good schools – who knows? The point is that they are local authority schools, open to all. Bishops have no control over the admissions policy.

      • Eileenanne,

        “The point is that they are local authority schools, open to all. Bishops have no control over the admissions policy.”

        What’s the point of Catholic schools in Scotland then? The Bishops don’t have control over admissions, and the schools need the consent of the non-Catholic community. I can’t see how you can ask for Catholic schools and then let the non-Catholic local authorities dictate important policies. What is the point of them?

        • Margaret Mary,
          As I said, it was a system that worked well for many years. When I was a child, we had schools for Catholics and non denominational schools which were generally referred to as Protestant schools. Pretty much everyone identified with one of those groups and chose their child’s school accordingly. Over the years, a few parents began to choose Catholic schools despite not being Catholic, but I think the big change began when a new road made a non denominational school in Glasgow harder to reach for a number of its pupils so a fairly large group transferred their children to the nearby Catholic school. The publicity that received opened the floodgates and Catholic schools began to attract pupils from more varied background, including Muslims and others who would previously have been more inclined to go to the “Protestant” school.
          It is fair to say, however, that if all the non-Catholics were removed from Catholic schools many would not have enough pupils to keep them open.

          I did not mean to imply that the non-Catholic community needed to give consent in any formal way. I simply meant that the system could work only as long as it was not challenged.

          • Eileenanne

            It was always going to come back and bite them though, was it not? You cannot sell out your schools to secular authorities and then expect them to permit you to run them on a purely Catholic ethos. With all this human rights garbage going on today, it is now impossible for bishops to ban Islamic dress, etc. in Catholic schools. Non-Catholics and non-Christians as a rule should not be given access to Catholic schools; that’s why they are called Catholic schools (if only in name today). It’s all a big shocking mess with indifferent bishops at the helm. So much for the formation of young Catholic souls, which was one of the principle reasons for having separate Catholic schooling at the outset.

            • What a pity you were not around to give advice on 1918. I am sure you would have foreseen the current situation even though no one else did.

      • Eileenanne/Eileen…

        I restored your username and removed what I presume is your real name. I hope I’ve not done the wrong thing but I thought that your username had possibly disappeared due either to a typo at login or caused by one of these WordPress blips that we’ve all come to know and love. If you wish me to restore the other name, just let me know.

        • Thank you editor. I was doing it on ny phone which is fiddly, so it could well have been my mistake.

      • Yes, that is understood. However, there is no requirement to stand back and let it all slip away. The Bishops represent a fairly large constituency and could bang a fairly loud drum. So, why don’t they?
        It is a betrayal of those 19th century Catholics who were prepared to pay their whack for State schooling via taxes, and stump up for private Catholic schooling for their children. The Catholic schools were subsumed into the State system in 1918 and continued to be Catholic schools. I attended one. In my time there was only one non-Catholic pupil, a Buddhist who attended courtesy of the headmaster agreeing to the council’s request to allow this. The thinking was, that if he went anywhere else, he’d probably be killed.
        This has all been allowed to slip away, even encouraged, by our pusillanimous excuses for Bishops. It is not about the fact that they are, as you say, “open”, but it is about the fact that this is yet another area where our Bishops have comprehensively failed us.
        Indeed, I can think of no area in which our Bishops have reached even the minimum that we would have expected from them given their high responsibility, honoured positions, very excellent living and easy working conditions.

        • Andrew Paterson,

          I agree. I think I’m right in saying that the bishops were persuaded to allow the schools to go under local authority because Catholics were paying twice for schools. We were paying our taxes like everyone else to fund schooling and then paying through the collection plate for our Catholic schools. So, if it is now the case that the bishops have very little say over what happens in Catholic schools, which seems to be the case, then why not return to paying for them through the Church’s own funds. We could also ask for a tax reduction to take account of the fact that we’re not using the local authority schools any more.

          I think the truth is that the Catholic faith isn’t taught in the schools any more and there is no real desire to keep them, except for reasons of wielding power. It’s a terrible let down when you remember that Catholic teachers made great sacrifices to teach in the parish schools before 1918. They were paid less money than the teachers in the other Protestant schools. I remember being told that when I was at school myself and it made an impression on me that the faith was that important, that our teachers took less pay just to make sure we knew our faith. It’s terrible to see where we’re at now.

          • Margaret Mary
            Thanks for your response. However the schools may have come about it is the attitude of the Bishops that has brought about the present miserable condition.
            One could say that teaching the Faith is the primary responsibility of the Bishops and that they are commissioned by God to do just that. This is a high calling and there are few higher, except for those individuals singled out out to do special service.
            It is up to the Bishops to manage the health and growth of the Faith in this country. To teach the young, to foster vocations, to educate, and promote pastoral work and the devout life. This means interaction with the world, in controversial and non-controversial ways. The Church – the laity – as represented by the Bishops must always be a loggerheads with the world, with politicians, with the MSM, and with their functionaries, in areas such as immorality and perversion, euthenasia and abortion, and especially the intrusion and acceptance of these in the school curriculum.
            At every stage the Bishops have failed. This is a failure that has been ongoing since Vatican 2. Ironically one of the shortcomings that Vatican 2 was intended to fix, was the gap between the hierarchy and the Laity. The hierarchy swanned on, paying no attention to the needs of their flock in a changing world. In rural districts where there are no Catholic schools there has been no Catholic instruction available. The backsliding in Catholic schools with the admission of all sorts of children has led to a change in ethos and a fall in vocations.
            The shameful ruin of Cardross, a financial and religious disaster, is a monument to the way the Bishops have signally failed, jointly and severally. Soon Cardross may become a beacon for the triumph of worldly rubbish over the devotion of the Faithful.

            • Not quite true that rural children received no RE. I brought my children up in a tiny village and the lack of Catholic schools simply meant that we parents had to take the full responsibility ourselves. As well as what we did at home, some of us provided weekly classes for our children and supported each other. I was involved in that for eleven years. It wasn’t as good as a good Catholic school might have been, but it wasn’t nothing either. Others in other parts of the scattered parish did the same. It also had the advantage that our children experienced the sacraments as family and parish celebrations. I have some dislike of the showiness and regimentation we sometimes see when schools do,all the organisation of these events. Nowadays there is more family and parish involvement than there once was, but in the days when First Communion and Confirmation were school events it was easy to see why some children cast off the Faith. along with their school uniforms.

              • Eileenanne, I made my first Holy Communion in the days when it was organised by the school. We were catechised for a year, to a level few parents, certainly not mine, were knowledgeable enough to teach. Without any lack of understanding of wherein lay the importance of that day, the preparation (by our parents) of beautiful white dresses and veils, and corresponding boys’ dress, and the ‘Communion breakfast’ prepared by our mothers, served to emphasise the one-off solemnity of that most memorable day. Our parents were in the rows directly behind us First Communicants, and they truly shared in our great day. I do sense a lack of solemnity in the present custom as you describe it. And surely you don’t think that fewer lapse from the faith now than did in the ‘bad old days’!

                ‘… but in the days when First Communion and Confirmation were school events it was easy to see why some children cast off the Faith. along with their school uniforms.

                I promise you they didn’t!

              • ElieenAnne
                Please read my comments in context. I was saying that there was no religious instruction provided in rural areas by the Hierarchy. Yet, this is almost the entirety of their mission.
                I was not saying that Catholic parents could not do it. Not at all. Of course parents will do their best to step into the breach. That is a less effective means maybe than teaching in schools ina Catholic atmosphere. Both approaches, school and parent are required to reinforce each other. How many Catholic parents possess the certificate that allows them to teach the Faith in schools?

                • Oh Andrew, I could not agree with you more! I help with the RE for my grandchildren who do not have access to a Catholic school. They are in a diocese where many children are in the same position, and NOTHING is provided to help parents and parishes pass the Faith to the next generation.
                  I have emailed their diocesan RE advisor and the SCES assuming they would provide materials or suggestions for same. The former was not helpful, and the latter failed to reply – twice. The hierarchy seem to define Catholic Education as “that which goes on in Catholic schools”. Children in rural areas are simply not considered important.

      • Eileenanne,

        I was under the impression the Church made a contribution to the cost of building the schools, and/or bought the land they were built on – is this incorrect?

        And while anyone can attend a Catholic school, is it not the case that Catholics are prioritised for places? (though there are usually no conflicts over admissions).

        Personally, as a new parent, I view most contemporary Catholic schools only as a nominally Christian environment where children might be spared the worst excesses of the secular system.

        Certainly, they are good schools academically and have a much better reputation than non-denom schools in terms of fostering community and in discipline and general standards.

        In my own experience (1982 – 1995), the RE given is absolute garbage, of use to no-one.

        Given that people of all faiths and none attend the schools, I guess the teaching is limited to bland platitudes incase someone should take offence. Its my impression that even most of the Catholic kids are only nominally Catholic.

        In my 13 years at Catholic school I learned:

        – how to say an Our Father and a Hail Mary
        – communion in the hand (standing) was “just the same” as on the tongue (kneeling)
        – abortion was wrong
        – nuclear weapons were bad
        – it was OK for people to say they were gay and that we were still to be their friend

        As I say, garbage. I could not have even began to form an answer as to why God made us, or why the Church existed. And they wonder why people lapse.

        It will be years yet before my Daughter is of school age, but (as is likely) if we must use Catholic Schools then we will be stating that we wish to be left to our own devices as regards catechesis and sacramental preparation etc. (“thanks, but no thanks” to the school novus ordo masses also).

        • I believe what you describe is what happens in England, not here. In 1918 the Church in Scotland came to an agreement that transferred almost all control and all responsibility to councils. I believe they were paid a fair price for the buildings they owned.

  16. Editor, only one? Lucky old Glasgow! Read this link right to the end – you’ll LOVE the last few lines.

    • Christina,

      I did smile – 140 languages spoken in Scottish schools. Goodness, trying to get the native Scots children to speak standard English is difficult enough (Ah hate this posh stuff, disnae sound right!) but trying to teach groups of pupils who all speak different native languages – can’t imagine the chaos. Where do they all go sightseeing on holiday – Blackpool Tower or Tower of Babel?

      This is a good example of where teaching about the Mass, for example, would have been much easier when the use of the Church’s official language, Latin, was the norm. 😀

  17. Dear All,

    In your charity, please remember a prayer for my Auntie Cathy who went to be with the Lord yesterday pm. She was my Godmother. May she rest in peace +

    • Pat McKay,

      Will pray for your Godmother, repose of her soul. May she rest in peace.

      Sorry for your loss.

    • Pat,

      My sincere condolences and promise of prayers for the repose of the soul of your Auntie Cathy. May she rest in peace.

      • Many thanks. A widow for over 20 years, now reunited with her other half (my namesake), her parents and many siblings and especially her youngest son. Thomas died tragically in an accident at school back in ’76, only 12 years old.

        • Pat McKay,

          That’s very sad about her child dying at only 12 years of age. RIP.

    • Pat McKay,

      I am sorry for your loss and will include your Godmother and all your family in my prayers.

      God bless.

    • Pat McKay,

      Your aunt looks lovely and that’s a lovely tribute to her on the Facebook page.

      I will remember the repose of her soul in my prayers and I send sincere sympathy for your and your family’s loss. May she rest in peace.

    • Thanks for posting that Crofterlady. If you were to replace Pope Francis with a Che lookalike or a Hugo lookalike, leaving allelse unchanged, would you notice anything untoward? Or what about Ban Ki-moon?
      It’s like we are so removed from this stuff now, it’s frightening.

      • The insidious doctrine that men and women are the same is a great danger. There should be no argument that they are equal, but they are not the same.
        It seems to be very much the approach of the LBVGTI brigade that the sexes are the same, although there are apparently more sexes than there used to be, much to God’s surprise (“That’s funny, I thought I’d created just the two?”)
        Personally, I think the Che look is better than the others although some clever make-up might be needed. The message does not need much in the way of tinkering. I just wonder if the Pope might not be better directing his energies towards helping us save our souls rather than achieving sexual equality in paypackets.

  18. These are, as we all know, extremely dangerous times for souls. So a very potent warning from St. Pius X seems to be in order at this time, APPLICAPABLE OF COURSE, ONLY TO THOSE TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN.

    Compare what St. Pius X wrote here, with the link given after this extract.

    Pope St. Pius X, Motu Proprio, Praestantia Sacrae Scripturae –
    On The Decisions of The Pontifical Biblical Commission
    November 18, 1907

    “But we observe that some persons, unduly prone to opinions and methods tainted by pernicious novelties and excessively devoted to the principle of false liberty, which is really immoderate license and in sacred studies proves itself to be a most insidious and a fruitful source of the worst evils against the purity of the faith, have not received and do not receive these decisions with the proper obedience.

    Moreover, in order to check the daily increasing audacity of many modernists who are endeavouring by all kinds of sophistry and devices to detract from the force and efficacy not only of the decree “Lamentabili sane exitu” (the so-called Syllabus), issued by our order by the Holy Roman and Universal Inquisition on July 3 of the present year, but also of our encyclical letters “Pascendi dominici gregis” given on September 8 of this same year, we do by our apostolic authority repeat and confirm both that decree of the Supreme Sacred Congregation and those encyclical letters of ours, adding the penalty of excommunication against their contradictors, and this we declare and decree that should anybody, which may God forbid, be so rash as to defend any one of the propositions, opinions or teachings condemned in these documents he falls, ipso facto, under the censure contained under the chapter “Docentes” of the constitution “Apostolicae Sedis,” which is the first among the excommunications latae sententiae, simply reserved to the Roman Pontiff. This excommunication is to be understood as salvis poenis, which may be incurred by those who have violated in any way the said documents, as propagators and defenders of heresies, when their propositions, opinions and teachings are heretical, as has happened more than once in the case of the adversaries of both these documents, especially when they advocate the errors of the modernists that is, the synthesis of all heresies.

    Do these scandalous actions fall within the censure, so clearly delineated in the above extract? If so, then……..

  19. Eileenanne, I see you help with the formation of your grandchildren. I have some very good orthodox material with which I have finished as my children are grown up and I don’t yet have any grandchildren. If you give your address details to Editor I will send it to you.

  20. ….’These are, as we all know, extremely dangerous times for souls’…..

    Amen to that, Gerontius.

    I may risk sounding a bit flippant when I write about 2:30am ‘calls of nature’, but bear with me. (Perhaps that’s why these are known as the ‘wee, sma’ hours’?….) Anyway, if you’re like me, you may find a problem trying to get back to sleep after an interruption as such. Alas, these can be times when ‘Auld Nick’ tries to make inroads, sowing the seeds of self-doubt, plaguing us with anxieties, guilt-trips etc. The Rosary is, of course, always a powerful ‘get thee behind me’ weapon, but in this Month of Mary I wanted to share with you a little prayer to Our Blessed Lady, of my own composition (a few bits ‘nicked’ from here and there).

    Mary, my Dearest Mother, bless me with your maternal presence
    Enfold me in your womb, where Jesus once lay
    That I may be nurtured, loved, consoled, protected.
    Pray for me now and at the hour of my death. Amen.

    Well, she is Our Mother – and we are her ‘big babies’, after all.

    • Many, many thanks for this post Pat. I can assure you that it’s been a great help for me at this time.

  21. I’m having some trouble with my Internet connection right now, a cable provider upgrade to the system apparently. I am unreliably informed that this upgrade will be going on until around May 12, which means that my connection will be down intermittently for hours at a time. Sorry about this.

      • Athanasius and Editor,

        I’m beginning to wonder if the Scottish Government operates the internet over there – I haven’t seen so many reports of internet service interruptions since the days of dial-up modems!

        • RCA Victor,

          Nothing would surprise me about this Government. They lost votes due to the growing resistance to their daft and dangerous Named Person Scheme, so now they’ve stepped up their campaign to impose it, using taxpayers’ money to fund a PR initiative. Read more here. For sheer nerve, you have to give them full marks.

  22. The name Teresa Tomeo will probably be familiar to some of you – she’s one of the regular presenters on EWTN’s ‘Catholic View for Women’ show.

    On a recent programme when so-called ‘contraception’ was being discussed, she made a very valid point with regard to ‘equality for women’, when she said something like….’we keep hearing so much on the media about how women are supposed to have equality these days. Well, if that’s true, why are WE always the ones who are expected to keep pumping this garbage into our bodies?’….

    What did she mean by ‘garbage’? Well, in scientific and medical circles the impacts of chemical ‘birth control’ on the female body are well documented.

    The ‘Pill’, injectable Depo Provera, Norplant, the IUD and all methods that use steroids to inhibit or subvert a woman’s natural fertility have countless side effects, ranging from headaches to severe depression and even death. Chemical ‘birth control’ methods have even been identified as carcinogens by the World Health Organization. Oestrogen, a key constituent of these drugs, is dangerous enough to be placed in the same category as cigarettes and asbestos. And while every cigarette packet carries a health warning, these chemical ‘birth control’ drugs continue to be dished out like sweets. (As I’m sure you’ll be aware, many of these are passed off as ‘contraceptives’, but they do not in fact prevent conception. Instead, they actually procure an early abortion. ‘Human pesticides’ would be a more accurate description).

    ‘You can’t interfere with nature with impunity’ is an old and very true saying. The sort of side effects women experience include…

    Acute allergic reaction; sudden total or partial blindness; deep vein thrombosis; heart attacks; liver, cervical and breast cancers; strokes; ectopic pregnancies; blockage of an artery in the lungs; high blood pressure; dizziness, vertigo and fainting; abdominal discomfort, bloating and pain; gall bladder problems, including gallstones; inflammation of the pancreas; nausea and vomiting; fluid accumulation; blot clots in the veins; insulin sensitivity; elevated potassium levels; migraine headaches; mood swings; breast pain and swelling; changes in menstrual patterns; acne and rashes; hair loss; fatigue and significant weight gain.

    To reiterate – Ms Tomeo raises a very good question. If equality does exist, shouldn’t women be asking why it’s always THEM who are expected to poison their bodies with this stuff?

    • You can always trust Pat McKay to do a marvellous post his intelligence and knowledge abour all things PRO LIFE are amazing and what a memory he has computers have nothing on him …… excellent comment our PAt well done

      • Wendy,

        Yes, Patrick always comes up with the goods. There is a real vacuum within the Church today for someone with Pat’s knowledge of the facts on these key issues of sexual morality; the “Church spokesman” waffle away and are safe guests for the TV companies when they’re looking for a “Catholic” voice on their shows, and, more often than not, they weakly assume that the “experts” on the other side, know best.

        If I’m ever asked to go on or provide a substitute on this topic, I’m going to recommend Patrick. Stand by Pat!

    • RCA Victor,

      I’m disappointed in the New Oxford Review. Admittedly. I haven’t read them for ages now but years ago they picked up on one of our reports about Cardinal O’Brien (then the new Cardinal, just received his red hat) and went along to his press conference in Rome where they (their journalist) challenged him, and was forcibly removed by the new Cardinal’s henchman, one of the Catholic media office minions. I would need to check the files for the exact details, but that’s the gist of it.

      Seems there are still folk who are willing to criticise the hierarchy until it gets to the desk where the buck stops, I presume these clowns pray TO and not FOR Pope Francis? Madness.

  23. I have been sent a link to a free e-book called “Can Documents of the Magisterium of the Church Contain Errors? Can the Catholic Faithful Resist Them?” It comes from the TFP organisation. I am not recommending it in anyway as I haven’t even read it, but when I get time I will have a look at it. I give the link here for those who may be interested, and would be grateful to hear any critiques:-

    • Westminsterfly,

      Please be careful here. The link you posted brought up this eShield alert.
      ( eShield is a Google Chrome extension )

      eShield Warning
      This page on the domain contains active threats and is not recommended for browsing. The access to this website has been blocked for your protection.

      Learn More

      Return to the previous page and choose another link (recommended). Go Back

      I use SUPERAntiSpyware Version 6.0.1218 to clean my PC – it works for me.

  24. I received an email this morning that claims that “Recently, the UK debated whether to remove The Holocaust from its school curriculum because it ‘offends’ the Muslim population which claims it never occurred.”

    I don’t recall this debate being mentioned on the blog, but I haven’t been back for all that long. Was there in fact such a debate?

    • RCA Victor,

      I’d need to check it out, because can’t remember. I doubt it though because they’re crazy mad about talking about the Holocaust at every opportunity over here. It’s the only atrocity EVER don’t you know.

        • I’ve just received your email but had released your Brexit post earlier so I presumed the disappearing trick had recurred. There’s nothing lurking anywhere in the system, so I’m guessing you only posted one “disappeared” comment and it’s now been published by my unworthy self.

          Detective Inspector Editor, at your service!

  25. WF and folks

    Could you hold fire on this link as I’ll be posting a Fatima thread on the Feast Day, 13th, after midnight. Would be more appropriate to discuss it there rather than use up the space here. Thanks.

    • Editor

      Sorry! I replied to Westminsterfly before reading your comment. A thick lug is on its way to me, I fear!!

      • Athanasius,

        That’s OK – it’s just a one-liner. I hope WF re-posts the link but I may have to do it for him, as he’ll be working (or putting on a show of it anyway!) I’ll leave it until mid morning and then re-post if he hasn’t done so. He won’t mind. Or else! The new Fatima thread is now online.

  26. Pope Francis to consider the ordination of female deacons. Sources: SKY TG24 (Italy) and the Guardian…

  27. Interesting commentary on the Bergoglio Effect:

    I sent in a comment, but apparently the moderator didn’t like what I had to say. I knew he wouldn’t so I saved it:

    “The temptation (more like a seduction) of Bergoglio succeeds because the clergy and the faithful have been gradually conditioned for 50 years, like the boiled frog syndrome, to accept the pseudo-catholic faith hatched at Vatican II, which replaced the true Faith. So it appears Lucifer has now determined it was safe to lay all his cards (and his light show) on the table, as he is sure no one will wake up and jump out of the pot.

    Yes, the heretics are emboldened, saturated in the foul wine of their own hubris. They got away with putting the Freemason Roncalli on the throne, after someone else was apparently elected and then threatened. They got away with hijacking Vatican II. They got away with the Novus Ordo, whose express purpose is to avoid giving offense to heretics. They got away with surrendering the Papal Tiara. They got away with murdering JPI, who threatened to expose them and their Freemasonry. They got away with Assisi. They got away with canonizing dubious and unworthy candidates. They got away with forcing Benedict to abdicate. So they know they will get away with Bergoglio and his excrement.

    That is, until Our Lord has had enough. Actually, I suspect He had enough a long time ago, and our punishment via the “malice of revolutionary men” is proceeding apace.”

  28. RCA Victor

    You are a naughty so and so, you really are!

    Roncalli wasn’t a Freemason (the Cardinal Siri story was never really credible), Benedict XVI wasn’t forced to abdicate (by his own free will, he said), and JPI is more likely to have been murdered because of the Vatican Bank scandal he was set to expose. He was himself a Modernist, as reflected in the double-barrelled name he took as Pope, so that rules out a Freemasonic hit on a Traditional leaning Pontiff.

    You’re some guy! I think you were winding that poor moderator up. You’re right about the Masonic influence in the high clergy, though. There are infiltrators in the Vatican, without a shadow of a doubt, though I do not believe they have ever infiltrated the Papacy. They don’t have to when the Popes already share their world vision!

    • Athanasius,

      Yep, my middle initial is “T” for “Trouble”! (Or maybe for my old nom de plume…) But seriously, thank you for the gentle scolding. Here is where I derived most of my post from:

      1. Roncalli: Bellegrandi claims in his “NikitaRoncalli” book that Roncalli was initiated into the lodge whilst Apostolic Delegate to Turkey during the 1930s. And one of our priests, who hasn’t read that book, also claimed the same thing. However, neither Bellegrandi nor our priest cited any source for the claim. Is this one of those urban legends?

      2. The 1958 Conclave: I wasn’t necessarily referring to the Siri thesis, since Bellegrandi claims (in the same book) that an Armenian Cardinal, not Siri, was actually elected and then threatened. Fr. Malachi Martin also referred to that threat during that Conclave, calling it “the little brutality,” but I can’t remember where he said that – maybe in one of his Art Bell interviews?

      3. JPI: I forget where I read that he was murdered because he was about to expose the Masons in the Curia – might have been an on-line booked linked on the Abbe de Nantes’ old website that I read years ago. I never thought he was a tradition-leaning Pope, though. Also, if I remember correctly, the Abbe thought very highly of him, but don’t ask me why….

      4. Benedict: I know he claimed he abdicated of his own free will, but don’t you think the disclosures about the “St. Gallen” group tend to cast serious doubt on his claim?

      Anyway, if these examples are questionable, there are probably a lot more examples of what the “enemy within” has gotten away with in the last 50 years. Maybe Editor can start a thread where we can make a list….

      • RCA Victor

        The first point I would like to make is that you are anything but “trouble”. Your contributions here are highly valued and always eminently well presented. Trouble for the Modernuists, yes. Trouble for us? Emphatically no! I should also add that I personally value my friendship with you.

        Anyway, yes, I see where you’re coming from with the information you provided. The problem with that info is that it has no official source, as you point out, and as such must be discounted as sedevacantist propaganda.

        There is no solid evidence whatever to suggest that Cardinal Roncalli (Pope John XXIII) ever joined the Freemasonic sect. There is evidence, however, that, as Pope, he failed to acknowledge the seriousness of the Fatima Message and Secret and paid the price for his misplaced optimism by seeing his Council deviate away from the Traditional Catholic Faith. It is worth recalling that John XXIII insisted that Latin must remain the language of the liturgy and that the Council was to remain on a modest level, not touching on doctrine. This at least rules out Masonic affiliation on his part and even raises questions about just how Modernist he was. He did, after all, rubber stamp the Missal of his predecessor Pius XII in 1962.

        I haven’t heard of an Armenian Cardinal being threatened into refusing the Papacy. The story that was circulating, and Malachi Martin certainly touched on it on more than one occassion, related to the Italian Cardinal Siri. But again there is no source to back up the claim and no senior prelate ever came forward to declare dirty dealings at the conclave, which means we have to dismiss the rumour as unfounded.

        Regarding JPI, there is every possibility that he was murdered by Freemasons in the Vatican. Bela Dodd, a very credible source, has confirmed the existence of such false prelates in the Curia. I also remember some newspaper headlines of the early 1980s stating that two senior bishops close to Pope John Paul II had been unmasked as Communist spies. Those headlines were very quickly silenced and have since been expunged from every Internet source. So yes, there is a very reasonable chance that JPI was done in.

        Just as Roberto Calvi (head of the collapsed Banco Ambrossiano) was found hanged symobolically under Black Friars bridge in London (the Mafia group inviolved in the collapse at that time called themselves the Black Friars), so JPI’s death had its symbolism. He died 33 days into his Pontificate, 33 being the number of degrees in Freemasonry. But it could also be argued that the 33 days was symbolic of Our Lord’s 33 years on earth, that perhaps God had removed him from office because of his rumoured intention to relax Church teaching on contraception.

        We’ll never really get to the bottom of these mysteries and that’s why I personally never raise them in my commentaries. At the end of the day it’s all speculation that serves only to distract from the real issues. I will never believe that any of the conciliar Popes were/are Freemasons intent on the destruction of the Faith. I think they are just misguided Modernists, victims of the “diabolical disorientation” that they themselves have invited by their love of novelty and resultant refusal to accede to Our Lady’s Maternal request for a public and solemn consecration of Russia to her Immaculate Heart. They chose to follow their own lights instead of heaven’s and now the darkness is everywhere visible!

        • Athanasius,

          Many thanks for your warm reply, and I also value our friendship tremendously…though it might be better if we saw each other more often than once every 8 years!

          I will write more later about this Bellegrandi book, esp. his treatment of Roncalli, but I need to do some shopping, pubbing, clubbing and grubbing at the moment, so perhaps more tomorrow…when I have time to indulge in that rare activity, says Editor: thinking!

          • RCA Victor,

            8 years? Has it been that long? I blame the scrapping of concorde for it myself. Atlantic crossings are just not the same any more.

        • Athanasius,

          Just a few thoughts on a smattering of things about Bellegrandi’s book (which I would love to have your opinion on, along with any other blogger who is interested). He does not pretend to be an investigative journalist, the book is more like an insider’s reflection, at the death of John XXIII, on the brief but tumultuous years after the death of Pius XII, a comparison of the accidentals/styles of the two Pontificates, and then going back to early in Roncalli’s career. Bellegrandi was, according to this manuscript, Chamberlain of the Sword and the Cape of His Holiness, and a journalist for L’Osservatore Romano.

          Bellegrandi paints Roncalli (whom he claims was known as “the Pope of the Communists”) as a two-faced figure, a Janus, with a hidden revolutionary agenda: opening the Church to communism/Marxism (and thus, actually, Freemasonry). With one face he appeared to preserve Catholic Tradition, while with the other he was busy putting the pieces in place, behind the scenes, to undermine Tradition and transform the Church. For example: forming the Secretariat for Christian Unity under Cardinal Bea – apparently, a liberal (a Secretariat which quickly became the headwaters for the new “ecumenism,” “dialogue,” re-evaluation of the “Jewish question,” etc.); calling questionable theologians to his Council as peritii; allowing the violation of procedural rules so that the liberals could reject the draft schema prepared for the Council, as well as rejecting the membership of the Commissions; ensuring that his Council refused, for the first time in the history of the Church, to condemn Communism in accordance with the secret pact he had made with them; installing the ultra-liberal Montini as, in effect, the back-seat driver of his pontificate….and, of course, the claim that Roncalli was a Mason. Not only that, but that he was elevated to the Papacy, by the embedded “enemy within,” precisely because of that membership.

          At any rate, I leave all that for your perusal. The book is quite gripping. But a couple of other thoughts:

          1. You express the need for an official source to confirm these speculations, or unproven statements. The problem with that, as you know, is that in the modern Church, the official sources are also corrupt – which leaves us perhaps with relying on outside sources (e.g. Antonio Socci?) to dig up facts.

          2. I agree with you that it doesn’t really matter, at this point, to speculate or state that Roncalli was a Freemason, as it has no bearing on a 53-years past Pontificate. However, were it discovered that he actually belonged to the Lodge, I think that it would have a dramatic bearing on his beatification – i.e. immediately annul it.

          3. An unrelated question, about Pope Benedict: I’ve never understood how he can be referred to as a “Pope Emeritus,” or a Pope Anything, for that matter, when he in fact abdicated the papacy. Is this just an honorary title – i.e. is he just the Kentucky Colonel of the Church (!!) – or is there more weight to it than that?

          (I’m going to save this post in case Editor’s computer does a Cardinal Lienart and diverts me to the black hole…)

          • RCA Victor

            Since my last comment I have revised much of the Pontificate of John XXIII and the conclusion I have come to is that he was a tragic and careless dreamer.

            It has to be remembered that Pope Roncalli knew that he had been elected as a stop-gap Pope, a shadow of the former Pontiff (Pius XII), chosen to fill the Chair of Peter for a short time without incident. Well, John XXIII had different ideas. He wasn’t about to sit quietly on the Papal Throne awaiting his demise.

            Rather than being inspired by Masonic directives, John XXIII believed himself to be inspired by the Holy Ghost to bring about a “New Pentecost”. Intellectual and/or spiritual pride seems to have been at the root of his disastrous decision making, although not all decisions made by him were disastrous. For example, He very suddenly and inexplicably removed from office arguably the most dangerous liturgical revolutionary in Rome at that time, one Fr. Annibale Bugnini.

            Now I ask you: would a Freemason Pope have sacked Bugnini? No, I don’t think he would have.

            On the other hand, he did, as you rightly point out, promote some very dangerous theologians to important roles in the preparatory commissions for Vatican II. The singular most dangerous man, one who was to exercise great influence on the conciliar documents, was Henri de Lubac, the French theologian whose works were for so many years banned by Pius XII, and who was forbidden to preach by the same Pope.

            John XXIII did not ask de Lubac to recant his errors, errors so serious that Pius XII addressed them directly in his Encyclical Mediator Dei. Instead, he just appointed him to a senior role at the Council against the statutes of Canon Law which forbade the appointing of heterodox theologians as periti at a Church Council. This act of John XXIII was to prove greatly detrimental to the Traditional teaching of the Church.

            Another grave mistake of John XXIII was to meet in the Vatican with the Soviet leader of the time, Nikita Khrushchev. Having dismissed in his blind optimism the warning of the Third Secret of Fatima, John thought it opportune to welcome that scheming Communist with a view to securing a Russian Orthodox presence at the Council. This was all part of his dream that the schism could be ended between East and West and a new Christian era begun. Khrushchev played him like a fiddle! He promised a token representation from the KGB controlled Orthodox church in return for a silence on Church condemnations of Communism. It was the very antithesis of what Pius XII stood for and what Our Lady of Fatima requested, yet he went along with it like a little naive school boy, thinking his judgment greater than that of his predecessor and indeed the Mother of God. That year saw a one million increase of votes for the Communist Party in Italy. “Diabolical disorientation”? You bet it was, and on a grand scale.

            I could go on at length here relating both the good and the bad of John XXIII’s Pontificate, but it still wouldn’t get us to the real truth of what exactly was going through the mind of this Pope.

            There is no question that he made some very serious errors in judgment, greatly damaging to the Church. But it is also demonstrable that he made some very sound declarations concerning the liturgy, Our Lady, etc. For me, he epitomises the Modernist mind described by St. Pius X.

            As regards the Cardinal Siri business, I have read many reports, mostly only available on sedevcantist webistes, and it remains my opinion that the claim is false. I do not believe that Cardinal Siri was ever forced to decline the Papal election. What I do find interesting is that those who claim he was make their claims in books, the sales of which depend on a bit of sensationalism. No serious source, by which I mean any Cardinals of the time, and they weren’t all Freemasons, have come forward to declare dirty goings-on at that particular conclave. They would have been obliged to do so had there been a serious threat to the integrity of the Papacy. All we have is the assurances of some minor minions in the Church who couldn’t possibly know anything about the secret balloting of a conclave.

            Finally, as regards Benedict XVI. You are absolutely right, there can be no such title as “Emeritus Pope”. The whole business is a scandalous novelty which is not remotely sustainable in Tradition. He is Cardinal Ratzinger now, as far as I’m concerned. And by the way, there are no special privileges attached to his new title, it’s a meaningless office created by Francis to give the impression that Popes can resign. He knows that Benedict did not resign, he abdicated, yet he insists that Benedict created a new precedent for the Church, that of Papal resignation. Hence the title forced on Benedict to great detriment of the authority of the Petrine See.

            • Athanasius,

              Many thanks! On the subject of the “Siri Thesis,” now that you mention it, I believe Father Gruner did a video with John Vennari (one of their “” series) debunking the whole claim.

              I hope the whole truth about him and his successors comes out at some point – perhaps the equivalent of the opening of certain archives after the “fall” of communism….meanwhile, it appears to be mostly up to the faithful to keep the pieces together….

              • RCA Victor

                I agree entirely. Whatever is hidden, if there is anything, will come to the surface one day. In the meantime, we have to get on with keeping the faith and avoiding sensationalism. There are so many opinions out there that I stick only to what can be proven without a shadow of a doubt. That usually means I’ll try to give everyone the benefit of the doubt, except editor who is definitely not La Popessa in waiting!

                  • Editor

                    The good thing about that 1P5 article is that for the first time a source close to Benedict XVI is revealing what the Pope actually told him. This adds great substance to what, as you rightly say, we have all known for quite some time. It’s yet another testimony in support of the truth about Fatima.

                    • Athanasius,

                      I have read that before about that priest revealing what the Pope told him. It seems that IP5 is reporting anew things that have been in the public domain for a while. Still, it’s good to be reminded of them.

      • RCA Victor

        You’ve had it tonight, she’ll be pubbing and clubbing at this hour. I guess you’ll just have to remain suspended in cyberspace until she returns bleary eyed and bedraggled in the morning. That should get me a few more zeros in my pay packet!

        • Athanasius,

          Well, how wrong can you be?! I decided NOT to go pubbing and clubbing tonight, and instead do an all night vigil… !

          Actually, I was posting a fresh topic thread on AL and about to close the old one which is too lengthy now.

          So, THERE!

          • Editor,

            I once stayed up all night reading the Aeneid – so I suppose you could call that an all-night Virgil….

            • RCA Victor,

              Now THAT’s clever! That’s very “thinking”. Well done!

              As Athanasius says, 8 years is far too long – you need to come and see us asap. You sure you can’t make it to our June Conference? I mean, you pay the fare from the USA and book your hotel and I’ll stand you your ticket. Well… Ten quid is ten quid. And I’m (almost) certain Athanasius would offer to pay half. Five each and you’re in the conference hall. Petrus will pay for your meal 😀

              Mean Scots? Did I hear someone say “mean Scots”? You’ve got us all wrong, RCA Victor. We can be very kind and thoughtful like the husband who was heading out to the pub when he turned to his wife before leaving and said, ‘Jackie – put your hat and coat on lassie.’

              She replied, ‘Awe Iain that’s nice – are you taking me to the pub with you?’

              ‘Nah, I’m just switching the central heating off while I’m oot.’

              Over and out!

              • Editor

                And let’s remind ourselves once again that copper wire was invented by two Scotsman fighting over a penny!!

                RCA Victor,

                I’m not sure that Petrus will stand you a meal. Better bring some sandwiches just in case. I suggest something mould resistant as they may have to last you a while. Mind you, my understanding is that the meals are being served with free bread and gravy, so assuming your constitution is ok you’ll be good for the bread and gravy. And the water is always free, as you know!

                • Athanasius,

                  Well, as a last resort, I could always dress like a Hare Krishna and sell flowers and pencils at the airport to earn my way across the pond!

                  Editor – would you let me into the Conference if I showed up in my “alternative” garb? I promise not to do any chanting or drum-beating…or smell like a sheep….

                  • Editor

                    I was merely pointing out that Petrus might not be so keen on your volunterring his wallet to RCA Victor. I know his wallet is a fat one but that’s only because it contains a picture of a relative with a hump!

                    Besides that, charity begins at home. If there’s a free meal on the go I’ll be at the head of the queue. A change from dog biscuits would be really welcome. And on that note, what’s a Conference without a free doggy bag? Something for you to think about!

                    • Athanasius,

                      I think Petrus is unlikely to be consoled by your “explanation”!

                      As for free doggy bags, even those of us directly involved in organising the conference and those good souls who are helping, are having to pay for our meals. Only those wearing clerical collars will be on the receiving end of a free doggy bag – so there’s an incentive for you to apply to the local seminary… if only we had one!

                    • That reminds me of this old joke: the Hunchback of Notre Dame wasn’t really a hunchback. He ate a cantaloupe, you see, and it backed up on him!

      • Sorry about that RCA Victor – I’ve now released it. Can’t explain it. The mysteries of technology are far harder to comprehend that any mystery of faith, if you ask me, which nobody ever does. See if I care!

    • gerontius

      I found this on Akita, and I have too agree with ED on this one. Quito And Fatima are sound. Remember Grabandal? People who make these videos tend to put their own interpretation into them, and omit that which goes not fit.

      “In 1976, Ito, bishop of Niigata (r. 1962 – 1985), created an inquiry commission which “declared that it was not in a position to prove the supernatural events. In 1978, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) published norms for examining “presumed apparitions or revelations. Following the 1978 CDF norms, Ito requested a CDF intervention in 1979 to create another inquiry commission to re-examine the facts. In 1981, the CDF was “unfavorable to the events” and responded that it would not initiate a new examination. But the 1981 CDF response “contained some misunderstandings, according to Ito, so he re-examined the facts in 1982 and “sent the complete dossier, augmented with the new facts” to the CDF. Ito met with CDF officials in 1983 but the case remained under examination by the CDF. Although the case remained under examination, on 22 April 1984, Ito wrote that he did not find “any elements which are contrary to Catholic faith and morals” in the events.

      So Bishop Ito acted on his own.

  29. The Italian press is reporting that, according to Joseph Ratzinger, a part of the third secret of Fatima has not been made public by the Church. From “Il Giornale”, 16 May:

    “Ci sarebbe una parte ancora segreta del terzo segreto di Fatima. Alcune frasi della rivelazione che la Chiesa non avrebbe ancora pubblicato. Lo scrive Maike Hickson, Benedetto XVI sul sito “OpenPeterFive”, affermando che a dirglielo è stato il professore di teologia tedesco Ingo Dollinger amico personale di Ratzinger.

    Make any sense?

    • Perplexed,

      “Make any sense?”

      Not unless you can read/speak/understand Italian! “Ciao” just about does it for me.. Even then, it took me years to get the pronunciation right…. 😀

  30. I’ve been reading a bit more and Dollinger says that he was told by Ratzinger that the as yet unpublished part refers to a “bad council and a bad mass that would appear in the future”. Secondo Dollinger, il papa gli avrebbe confidato che la parte pubblicata del segreto di Fatima è completamente autentica e che quella segreta parlerebbe di “un cattivo concilio e di una cattiva messa” che sarebbero successi in futuro.

    • Perplexed,

      Well, I’m trying not to say “We told you so….”

      I have to say that it seems incredible that the popes and others who read the Third Secret would actually ignore such predictions as Council / Mass, but then we know all about the problem of iniquity – more than a problem, a “mystery”.

      Not half!

  31. La Croix has published an interview with Pope Francis, part of which refers to the SSPX (relevant parts copied below):

    – On April 1, you received Bishop Bernard Fellay, superior-general of the Priestly Fraternity of St Pius X. Is the re-integration of the Lefebvrists into the Church again under consideration?

    Pope Francis: In Buenos Aires, I often spoke with them. They greeted me, asked me on their knees for a blessing. They say they are Catholic. They love the Church.

    Bishop Fellay is a man with whom one can dialogue. That is not the case for other elements who are a little strange, such as Bishop Williamson or others who have been radicalized. Leaving this aside, I believe, as I said in Argentina, that they are Catholics on the way to full communion.

    During this year of mercy, I felt that I needed to authorize their confessors to pardon the sin of abortion. They thanked me for this gesture. Previously, Benedict XVI, whom they greatly respect, had liberalized the use of the Tridentine rite mass. So good dialogue and good work are taking place.

    – Would you be ready to grant them the status of a personal prelature?

    Pope Francis: That would be a possible solution but beforehand it will be necessary to establish a fundamental agreement with them. The Second Vatican Council has its value. We will advance slowly and patiently.

    I wonder if this talk of a “fundamental agreement” contradicts what ++Pozzo said before, that disagreement on aspects of Vatican II were “not an obstacle” to the formal recognition of the Society.

    Still, his comments on the Society and Bishop Fellay seem quite positive.

    (Rorate Caeli also has a piece on this and notes that Francis statement on SSPX confessions recognised validity to absolve all sin, not just abortion which is specifically mentioned above).

    • Gabriel Syme,

      “…they are Catholics on the way to full communion.”

      That’s just hilarious. I laughed aloud when I read that and thought, “if only we could say the same about you, Pope Francis!”

      • Editor

        When I read the line you refer to I thought: “Can one be at the same time Catholic and yet not in full communion?” What an odd thing for the Pope to say.

    • Gabriel Syme,

      I meant to highlight Pope Francis’ remark about Bishop Williamson, speaking as if Bp W is still with the SSPX when he has been expelled. He’s NOT with the Society any longer, so it is either ignorant or mischievous of Papa Francis to speak about him as if he is still in the Society if not on the same planet.

  32. I meant to ask on the feast of Fatima thread (now closed) when the 13th May was designated as that feast day? It is neither on my SSPX calendar nor in my missal.

    • Helen,

      I was told recently the date and I’ve forgotten but it was too late for the missals – I remember that much!

  33. I am very surprised that there has been no mention in any of the blogs about the great Feast of Pentecost last Sunday. Surely now is the time that we should be imploring the Holy Spirit to ” fill the hearts of thy faithful”. If I had had the technical know how I would have posted one of the lovely versions of Veni Sancte Spiritus. I even checked the sspx calendar to see if by any chance they celebrate on a different day, but no. Anyone shed light on this please?

    • Elizabeth,

      My fault. I’m afraid I have been so busy that I didn’t think of posting a blog dedicated to Pentecost. You are right to point to my negligence. To see that I sincerely mean to make reparation, click on the video!

      Incidentally, your comment went into moderation because there was a mistake in your login – Elizabeth was typed Elizabetg so the system thought you were a new blogger. Apologies for any delay in releasing it, since I’ve been away from my computer for a few hours.

      • Sorry about my careless typing and thankyou for the hymn. I was not having a go at you by the way, just genuinely puzzled!

  34. Pretty disgusted right now with Paypal: see here for the homosexual picnic picture This banner picture may change but regardless, why are these companies so intent on pushing the fringes upon us. I know that this method is used to desensitise the younger generations to make the abnormal normal, but what commercial benefit does it have?

  35. Summa

    I agree with you, it brings tears to the eyes to see what these renegades are getting away with. But Our Lord will have the last word!

    • Never in my lifetime have I started every day deeply depressed by what I hear on the news, or the awful Victoria Derbyshire programme. This morning someone has become aware that there is an insufficient number of sodomites and lesbians in sport. Ergo, a number of MPs, e!ected by the British public, are too spend their time trying to determine wherein lies the ‘homophobia’ that is preventing them all from ‘coming out’. Utterly diabolical. Make sure all groups in society have enough perverts in their number or WE will want to know why.

  36. And another cause for my current state of mind – during the annual much publicised display of their sanctity and the kow-towing to it by the idiotic natives, Muslims will have the triumphal joy of seeing ‘GLORY TO ALLAH’ in Arabic blazoned across the buses for the whole month of Ramadan in the area where I live. This blasphemous demon-worship is to be implemented in London, Manchester, Birmingham, and other cities of high Muslim occupation.

    • Christina

      Look on the bright side. At least the people of these cities can feel safe from suicide bombers as they travel on the buses during Ramadan!

    • Christina,

      This just in from Rorate today.
      My opinion on what follows below cannot be posted, especially regarding the last sentence.

      For the record: Francis compares Jihad with the Great Commission

      We were the first English-language medium to translate a portion (dealing with the SSPX) of the interview granted by Pope Francis to La Croix, and published yesterday.

      As we said in our update to that post, La Croix released a full translation today, and another remark has generated intense debate. We publish it here for the record of current events:

      La Croix: The fear of accepting migrants is partly based on a fear of Islam. In your view, is the fear that this religion sparks in Europe justified?

      Pope Francis: Today, I don’t think that there is a fear of Islam as such but of ISIS and its war of conquest, which is partly drawn from Islam. It is true that the idea of conquest is inherent in the soul of Islam. However, it is also possible to interpret the objective in Matthew’s Gospel, where Jesus sends his disciples to all nations, in terms of the same idea of conquest.

      • Gerontius, OF ALL THE UNBELIEVABLE THINGS THIS POPE HAS SAID THIS MUST BE ONE OF THE WORST. It’s absolute blasphemy to my ears. Presumably His Holiness has his own specially revised translations of the Gospels:- ‘ Going therefore kill ye all nations, beheading, burning and disembowelling them in the name of ……, (and of Allah, all-merciful, and of Mohammed his Prophet, blessed be he)’. For how much longer will God stay His hand?

  37. Gerontius

    No wonder you withheld your comment on this statement. I will likewise bite my tongue. All I will say to this scandalous Pope is that the “conquest” Our Lord sent His Apostles on was a conquest of love and life, not one of hatred and death by the sword. “All who take up the sword shall perish by the sword”, said He. Pope Francis must have missed that bit!

    And where does he get the idea that ISIS is only “partly drawn from Islam”? What else is he suggesting it’s drawn from? And what about Boko Haram and a hundred other jihadi Muslim groups around the world, whose numerous adherents are quite capable of walking into a public place with semtex strapped around their waste? But of course this has nothing to do with Islam, which is really a friendly religion! Right, Pope Francis?

    Give me strength!

    • We keep being told that Islam is a peaceful religion but there is little evidence of that. The chaos and violence in the Middle East and Africa are all down to either internal Muslim conflict or the wicked behaviour of boko haram or the Taliban. How the pope can draw parallels with that and Christian evangelism is just beyond belief. People say that the troubles in N. Ireland are just the same but that was mainly a political war based on historical differences with Britain, religion was a side issue and not to be compared with the Islamic situation. It seems the Pope Francis either just says what comes into his head or really has no idea of the effect of what he says. Can you even imagine Pius XII making such remarks? Where/when will it end?

      • Elizabeth

        If you watch this video you will see how England in 20 – 30 years time could be controlled by Islam.

  38. Anglican activist, David Skinner has sent the following petition – I have signed it…


    Dear Friends,

    the BBC has for long been an instrument for pushing Neo – Marxism In this it no longer bothers hide its agenda, but blatantly and provocatively pushes Islam and homosexuality into our faces. When the government says that what we do in private is none of their business they lie. What cronies in high places might do, might be private; but when it comes to our homes, schools and nurseries the government intrudes and micro manages every sneeze and blink of our children so that they sing sweetly from the cultural Marxist and politically correct hymn sheet. Their weapons of choice for corrupting our children are a coalition of victim groups: notably Islamists; homosexualists and feminists. – the Muslim Council of Britain, Stonewall and the Fawcett Society.

    Ultimately the only defence we have against this Satanic attack is our faith in the God of Jacob, our Lord Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit. This why the BBC and every government controlled and funded agency are working night and day to expunge any memory of our once having been a nation founded upon Biblical Truth. Meanwhile the nation sleeps.

    Lynda Rose of Voice for Justice has generated an excellent petition. Please sign it.

    We call on Lord Hall, Director General of the BBC, to protect the UK’s Christian heritage and reject current proposals to reduce and downgrade Christian programming in favour of increased coverage for Muslim, Hindu and Sikh faiths. We further call for Aaqil Amhed, Head of Religion and Ethics for the BBC, to be removed from office on the grounds of Islamic bias and clear disrespect for Christian belief.

    In recent years Christian programming has already been severely downgraded, yet Mr Ahmed, the Muslim Head of Religion and Ethics for the BBC since 2009, claims the BBC is ‘too Christian’, and has written a report saying non-Christian faiths are underserved. He says the BBC must be more diverse, and that there should be an increase in Muslim, Hindu and Sikh programming. It has even been suggested that the BBC might televise Friday prayers from a mosque, in similar format to the Christian programme ‘Songs of Praise’, as well as broadcasting the daily Muslim call to prayer.

    During his time at the BBC, and prior to that at Channel 4 where he exercised a similar role, Aaqil Ahmed has displayed a clear bias towards Islam and contempt for Christianity. He has regularly commissioned documentaries displaying clear pro-Islamic bias, while calling into question fundamental tenets and teachings of Christianity, in such a way as to trivialise and undermine Christian faith. While at Channel 4, for example, he screened a week of special programmes on Islam, including a feature-length documentary on the Qu’ran, and a series of interviews with Muslims around the world talking about their beliefs. But in the main Easter documentary of 2011, entitled The Secrets of the 12 Disciples, he encouraged disrespect for Christian belief, questioning core tradition and casting doubt on the validity of the Pope. In similar fashion he has sparked fury by comparing Mary, Joseph, and the baby Jesus, to refugees in the Calais jungle.

    This is unacceptable. The UK is a Christian country, established as such by statute. In marked contrast to the traditions and values of all other belief systems, our society – founded on the idea of respect for the individual as made in the image of God – is based upon Christian values. These values and beliefs have shaped our laws since before Magna Carta, and over time have become the foundation for Western democracy worldwide. It is entirely right therefore that Christianity be given more airtime than the beliefs of minority groups, and that it should be treated with respect. In particular, Islam should not be singled out for special interest and presented as impliedly superior to Christianity.

    We therefore call on Lord Hall as Director General of the BBC to reject this misguided and overtly anti-Christian proposal, and for Aaqil Ahmed’s immediate removal from office.

    Sign petition here

  39. A reader sent me the following very interesting email from John Vennari –

    New sun miracle in Fatima? [Ed: on Father Gruner’s birthday!]

    The Portuguese media is reporting that believers have experienced a new sun miracle in Fatima last May 4. The event had taken place in Vila Nova de Ourem shortly after 8am.
    According to media reports, more than a hundred people were witnesses of the phenomenon.

    On May 5, the newspaper Correio Da Manhã reporte:

    “More than a hundred faithful experienced yesterday a phenomenon in Ourem, which they describe as a new, sun miracle.'” The statue of Our Lady of Fatima had been venerated throughout the night in the church. For several months she pilgrimaged through the diocese of Fatima from place to place. In the morning she was taken to the next place, when the phenomenon occurred. It took more than a quarter of an hour, exactly the time it took the procession to move the statue from Ourém towards Caxarias and then disappeared from the sight of the faithful. “Those present reported an unusually bright light shining like a beam of light which was directed to them, with the light source turning at high speed.”

    The pastor of Ourém, Don Armindo Janeiro, had previously celebrated a Holy Mass. For 50 years the statue had not visited the parish.

    “It was spectacular.” “It was an extraordinary situation”

    More than one hundred believers – all locals – acknowledge that they have experienced an extraordinary solar phenomena during the translation of the statue, several of whom are quoted by the media, said the priest, who hasn’t seen “anything unusual”. He told Correio Da Manhã : “Such are the mornings in Ourem”.

    The phenomenon occurred a week before the international pilgrimage for the anniversary of the apparition of May 13, 1917. At the time, Our Lady appeared to three shepherd children. The Apparitions revealed the three secrets of Fatima which the children had been entrusted to keep.

    Next year, the event marks the centenary.

    The newspaper has published a video report [in Portuguese] on its website:
    – see

    From JV: Yes, Father Gruner’s birthday was May 4 END.

    • I’d be very wary about this. Even some good Catholics are not averse to ‘signs and wonders’. Since the genuine solar miracle in 1917, further solar miracles have been claimed at Fatima, which were probably due to nothing more than atmospheric conditions. On the same day that John Paul II’s beatification ceremony took place in 2011, claims were made of one such solar miracle:- I was contacted by a World Apostolate of Fatima supporter who told me about that alleged event, claiming it to be a sign of Heaven’s approval of the beatification. Also, World Apostolate of Fatima Catholics claimed to see a solar miracle at their Fatima shrine in New Jersey in 2009 This, sadly, is one of the rotten ‘fruits’ of Medjugorje. Spinning suns everywhere.

      • WF,

        Wise warning indeed. Thank you for that. We need to be very careful in assessing (before accepting) the likelihood of such events. It did cross my mind that a few thunder and lightning strikes at Fatima might be more appropriate, given the failure of the popes to fulfil the Message by consecrating Russia. So, again, thank you for that timely warning.

  40. Fr Gruner was much loved by Our Lady and for that to happen on Fr Gruner’s birthday surely is no coincidence. (Heaven does not do coincidences.)

    • Crofterlady,

      I’m the Numpty-in-Chief, so you’re in good company.

      If you click on the link yourself in your post, you can confirm whether or not that is what you meant us to see and read.

      I doubt it but I do wonder how this keeps happening – and not just to you. It’s puzzling.

      • Yes, I meant to post the “conversion of Muslims” story but not from my in-box! The copy I sent to myself worked OK. There must be gremlins in WordPress!

        • Crofterlady,

          WordPress has no control over how you copy and paste links. I don’t use gmail so can’t really help but I do know that the same principle applies across the board. If you copy a link from your browser on the page you wish to link, and then click “paste” here, it will appear. I can’t see how it will appear correctly in one place but not another. It really can’t be WordPress to blame for this. If you send ME the link by email, I will see if I can figure out what is the problem.

        • I’ve just tried again after our email exchange and still get the Google-mail advert

          For the record, (and thank you for sending me the link by email) when I tried the link from my email account I received a pop up asking me if I wished to open it using Internet Explorer or Firefox, so I tried both. Each time I received a different Google ad! As you know, I’ve sent you both links in my reply email.

          The only other time we had this issue, if you recall, was with a blogger (forget who) whose link also led to a Google-mail advert. So, the problem seems to be with Google-mail, not with WordPress.

          • Okay, thanks. In that case how can I post an interesting article, do you know? I suppose I could try cutting and pasting from Word?

            • Crofterlady,

              What I do when I want to post a link is I go to the article itself on whatever the website is, and I then cover over the link in my browser at the top where it says http://www (etc)

              I right click on my mouse to click “copy” and then I bring my curser here to the comment box and I right click to pick out “paste” and then click that, and the link appears in the comment box.

              It has to be the http://www line in the browser of the same page on the website where you are reading the article. The article has to be in front of you. Or else you can copy the article on the page, by covering the words and then picking “copy” from your right click on them mouse, then bring it here and right click your mouse to pick “paste” and then paste it here.

              I hope that helps.

    • Therese,

      I smile at this “we’re building a resistance” movement as if there hasn’t been a resistance movement for years now. John Smeaton is among those neo-Catholics who wouldn’t say a word about any of the modernist popes as long as they were sticking to the “abortion is wrong” script. There was no talk of building a resistance movement when scandals like the Assisi meetings were announced, or Cardinal Nichols was photographed paying homage to Hindu gods, and the rest, so I’m not getting remotely excited about this “better late than never” venture. Good luck to them. If their experience of being shunned, insulted and mocked is anything like what the rest of us have suffered, collectively, since the end of Vatican II, they’ll need luck in spadefuls.

    • Yes, and moreover I have it on good authority (sitting opposite me at the moment), that the golden eagle lays two eggs but that, without upsetting the order of nature, frequently the first hatched will kill the other, which, if you think about it, makes the contrast even more dreadful.

  41. Dear all,

    I have recently found this beautiful and moving rendition of Salve Mater Misericordiae sung by Croatian Franciscans on YouTube. I urge you to listen to it as it is truly divine.

  42. Lovely! I have not heard that for years. And how good to see so many young Friars too.

  43. An article in today’s “La Reubblica” reports that Joseph Ratzinger has said that the secrets of Fatima have been published in their entirety and that he has never spoken with Professor Dollinger about Fatima.

    • Perplexed,

      What strikes me about that which I saw online this morning earlier, is that it is very unusual for a Vatican press release to be given on something like this. How many people claimed that Pope Francis had spoken out about different things, and we still don’t know, as there’s been no Vatican statement, yet on Fatima, there is.

      That makes me think there is something in what Professor Dollinger says. Why would he lie?

      • Fidelis

        A very salient point indeed. Why this desperate response when it comes to Fatima.

  44. Perplexed

    Very curious indeed! We know very well that the text of the Third Secret has never been revealed, so this is a highly questionable statement by Cardinal Ratzinger, Fr. Dollinger aside. What goes on in the minds of these conciliar theologians. Me thinks the spirit of Fr. Dhanis S.J. is still influencing matters.

    Remember that introductory sentence to the Third Secret text as noted in Sister Lucy’s memoirs: “In Portugal the dogmas of the faith will always be preserved, etc…” Well, it wasn’t published as a heavenly commentary with the 2000 vision. I wonder why? And now they just deny its existence.

  45. How do I get full access to the La Reppublica article? Do I have to subscribe to the newspaper? If not, would some kindly soul post me a link directly to the piece so that I can read it in detail? Many thanks in advance to that kindly soul.

    • Athanasius & Perplexed …

      1P5 are reporting this matter. I’ve copied the entire article below, with an admission that I’ve not yet read it right through myself, but it looks very interesting…


      Today, May 21, 2016, the Holy See Press Office has released, in its daily bulletin, a statement attributed to Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI. The statement categorically denies the affirmation, reported here, from Fr. Ingo Dollinger, which speaks of a private conversation in which then-Cardinal Ratzinger spoke to Dollinger, a personal friend, about there being more to the Third Secret of Fatima than was published by the Vatican in June of 2000. Here is the full text of the Vatican statement:

      Communiqué: on various articles regarding the “Third Secret of Fatima”

      Several articles have appeared recently, including declarations attributed to Professor Ingo Dollinger according to which Cardinal Ratzinger, after the publication of the Third Secret of Fatima (which took place in June 2000), had confided to him that the publication was not complete.

      In this regard, Pope emeritus Benedict XVI declares “never to have spoken with Professor Dollinger about Fatima”, clearly affirming that the remarks attributed to Professor Dollinger on the matter “are pure inventions, absolutely untrue”, and he confirms decisively that “the publication of the Third Secret of Fatima is complete”.

      [00855-EN.01] [Original text: Italian – working translation]

      As the Publisher of OnePeterFive, I wish to respond to this statement. One cannot take lightly a rebuttal from someone of the stature of Pope Emeritus Benedict. It is noteworthy that — to our knowledge — this is the first time since his abdication in 2013 that the Pope Emeritus has issued an official statement through the Vatican press office. With all that is currently troubling the Church, with all the confusion that now assails the faithful, this is the story which has prompted Benedict to break his silence. Clearly, this is a matter of unusual importance in the eyes of the Holy See. [Emphasis added, for obvious reasons! – Editor CT]

      This statement is received by us with filial respect and love for the Pope Emeritus. And yet, it presents a problem. It conflicts directly with statements we have reported, and accuses us of false “atrribution” and “invention.” It also flatly contradicts our source, Fr. Dollinger, not offering the possibility even of a misinterpretation, but rather, an accusation that the events he recounts are completely fabricated. [Editor: which smacks of desperation.]

      It is, in itself, a strangely perfunctory communique, and is presented in a way that prompts questions about its provenance and completeness. It is not a full, unabridged statement from Pope Emeritus Benedict; nor does it bear his signature. We are presented instead with pull quotes attributed to Benedict, and lacking the full context in which they originally appeared. Neither is it given to us to know who conducted this apparent interview with him, or how the questions were phrased.

      We are, in other words, asked to take it on faith that the statement contains the authentic, complete, and ratified sentiments of the Pope Emeritus on the matter.

      It is noteworthy that when we presented the words of Fr. Dollinger as reported by Dr. Hickson, we were accused by some of reporting unverifiable hearsay. But now we are given partial statements attributed to Benedict by an unnamed member of the Vatican communications staff — statements which implicate us, and also Pope Benedict’s old friend, Fr. Dollinger, in wilful deception — and we are asked to believe that the matter is therefore settled?

      I hope you will forgive my scepticism. [Editor: most certainly – we share your scepticism, in dollops.)

      I have two questions about the semantics of this carefully-constructed statement. I believe they merit consideration.

      First, I would like to draw attention to the portion which states, “the remarks attributed to Professor Dollinger on the matter ‘are pure inventions, absolutely untrue’.”

      Dr. Maike Hickson, who personally called Fr. Dollinger, attests to the truth of what she recounted from that conversation. Inasmuch as the Vatican statement accuses her of “attributing” statements which are “inventions” to Fr. Dollinger, it is false. She did not imagine the conversation she had with Fr. Dollinger, she reported it, and I stand by her testimony with full confidence in her integrity, both as a journalist and as a faithful daughter of the Church.

      Further, this morning Dr. Hickson telephoned Father Dollinger with the news of the Vatican statement, and at that time he again confirmed to her emphatically and clearly his previous remarks. In other words, he stood by his story.

      We must also reiterate that Dr. Hickson’s original conversation with Fr. Dollinger could not have been an “invention” inasmuch as it was not original in its content. It was not an attempt to break news, but rather to seek direct confirmation of a story that had already been attributed to Fr. Dollinger years ago. As stated in Dr. Hickson’s original article, “This sensitive information pertaining to the Third Secret, which has been circulating among certain Catholic groups for a few years now, has now been personally confirmed to me by Fr. Dollinger himself…”

      The first published account of Fr. Dollinger’s testimony (of which we are aware) appeared in an interview with Fr. Paul Kramer in Fatima Crusader in May of 2009. It has since been referenced in various Catholic publications and venues. Anecdotally, one of our commenters on the Fr. Dollinger story recalled that as a Brazilian, he had heard this same story from a priest who was a student of Fr. Dollinger in 2003 or 2004. (Fr. Dollinger was the rector of the Institutum Sapientiae in Brazil, where he taught moral theology.) The only thing new about our report is the direct confirmation made by Fr. Dollinger (in German, his native language) to Dr. Hickson, which she sought in an attempt to gain clarity on the matter.

      Second, the communique quotes Pope Benedict as saying that “the publication of the Third Secret of Fatima is complete”. This is very cautious language, in a legal sense. If the Vatican has already published all that it intends to publish about the Third Secret of Fatima — even if there is more that they do not intend to publish — one would be technically correct in saying that “the publication is complete.” It does not in any way dispel the notion that a text written by Sister Lucia at the prompting of Our Lady as a means of interpreting the symbolic import of the Third Secret may yet exist.

      As I stated in my follow-up to our original article, one needn’t assume that the popes who have potentially concealed additional information relating to the Third Secret have lied to us; if they fear that the information it contains will cause severe damage to the Church in some way, they may be using broad mental reservation in their concealment of the portion of the text in question. [Which is a tad arrogant, since they are implicitly suggesting that Our Lady was careless or ignorant about damaging the Church! She asked for the Secret to be released in full in 1960; their arrogance is breathtaking – Editor.] There is also the issue, raised by Marco Tosatti, of internal questioning within the Vatican apparatus about which portions of an additional explanatory text, if it exists, can be attributed to Our Lady, and which to Sister Lucia. If there were sufficient doubt, one could conceivably conceal such a text while remaining technically correct stating that the full secret (ie., the portion that they were confident came from Our Lady) had been revealed. [Doesn’t wash – Editor.] The legalistic sense, therefore, is noteworthy in this regard.

      I believe that beyond the questions raised by the text of the communique, there are other known facts which simply do not add up in this statement as attributed to Pope Benedict. The language is strong, even harsh, and it seems uncharacteristic in that regard. Benedict has a reputation for kindness and gentleness, and the source of the information he is refuting comes from a long-time friend – a friendship that his statement does not deny.

      The statement also appears to close the door emphatically on the question of any further undisclosed import in the Third Secret. And yet Benedict’s own position on this issue has seemingly evolved over the past 16 years, and it would be difficult to characterize it as a settled matter. On June 26, 2000, when the Vatican announced the text of the Third Secret of Fatima, it was accompanied by a theological explanation by then-Cardinal Josef Ratzinger, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. In it, he said:

      And so we come to the final question: What is the meaning of the “secret” of Fatima as a whole (in its three parts)? What does it say to us? First of all we must affirm with Cardinal Sodano: “… the events to which the third part of the ‘secret’ of Fatima refers now seem part of the past”. Insofar as individual events are described, they belong to the past. Those who expected exciting apocalyptic revelations about the end of the world or the future course of history are bound to be disappointed. Fatima does not satisfy our curiosity in this way, just as Christian faith in general cannot be reduced to an object of mere curiosity. What remains was already evident when we began our reflections on the text of the “secret”: the exhortation to prayer as the path of “salvation for souls” and, likewise, the summons to penance and conversion.

      But as Pope Benedict, Ratzinger travelled to Fatima in May of 2010. And at that time, he offered a somewhat different interpretation. From his airplane on May 11, 2010:

      I would say that, here too, beyond this great vision of the suffering of the Pope, which we can in the first place refer to Pope John Paul II, an indication is given of realities involving the future of the Church, which are gradually taking shape and becoming evident. So it is true that, in addition to the moment indicated in the vision, there is mention of, there is seen, the need for a passion of the Church, which naturally is reflected in the person of the Pope, yet the Pope stands for the Church and thus it is sufferings of the Church that are announced. The Lord told us that the Church would constantly be suffering, in different ways, until the end of the world.

      Two days later, at a Mass at the Shrine of Our Lady of Fatima on May 13, 2010, Pope Benedict said:

      We would be mistaken to think that Fatima’s prophetic mission is complete.

      Christopher Ferrara, a noted expert and author on the topic of Fatima, recounted the following earlier this week, related to Antonio Socci’s book on the topic:

      [I]t should be said that, in fact, the Popes themselves have not told us that the Message has been fully revealed. The vision pertaining to the Secret was not revealed until 2000, after which John Paul II observed a conspicuous silence concerning the controversy over the completeness of the revelation. And in 2010, as Socci has put it, Benedict not only declined to say that all had been revealed but rather “reopened the dossier” on the Third Secret by alluding to contents that clearly do not appear in the vision. Further, Benedict sent Socci a note thanking him for publishing The Fourth Secret of Fatima (which I translated into English), even though it accuses the Vatican apparatus of concealing a pertinent text.

      For his part, in a blog post dated May 12, 2007, Socci relates that he keeps the letter Benedict XVI wrote to me about my book, thanking me “for the sentiments it inspired in me.” [per i sentimenti che l’hanno suggerito] Words that comfort in the face of insults and accusations…

      The inspiration for Dr. Hickson to seek out confirmation from Fr. Dollinger came, in part, from the new testimony of Dr. Alice von Hildebrand, who recently published formerly private information regarding an additional portion of the Third Secret which indicated an “infiltration of the Church to the very top.” This information, according to Dr. von Hildebrand, was revealed to her and her late husband in 1965 by Monsignor Mario Boehm, a former editor of the official Vatican newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano.

      Is Dr. von Hildebrand also to be accused of inventing her story? What of the late Cardinal Ciappi, the papal theologian to Popes John XXIII, Paul VI, and John Paul II? It is Ciappi who is widely credited with the public revelation of the information that Alice von Hildebrand has now confirmed: “In the Third Secret it is foretold, among other things, that the great apostasy in the Church will begin at the top.”

      There is a great deal that does not add up. There are many questions left unanswered. We offer our sincere prayers for the Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI and our gratitude that he broke his silence to address this open question.

      At the same time, we are being asked to believe that we are being lied to by our sources. That we are being deceived by individuals in the last years of their life, with nothing apparent to gain. Individuals who have established strong reputations as noteworthy and orthodox Catholics, and whose reputations have now been put on the line by presenting an alternate version of events.
      This is a great deal to ask, and we must respectfully request, therefore, that we be given a complete response — a full, unaltered, and witnessed statement from the Pope Emeritus himself. The filtered words of the Vatican Press office do not suffice. From One Peter Five

      Just as Cardinal Sodano dominated the televised press conference in 2000, so, arguably, he is keeping his hands on the reins to keep Fatima under wraps. If, as it seems, the explanation of the visionary part of the Third Secret reveals the attempts to destroy the Church, then it is no surprise that he, as one of the chief destroyers (in my considered opinion) will want to squash all and every piece of information that confirms what we all know, that the Third Secret has NOT be revealed in its entirety. I doubt very much if Pope Benedict is behind this communique.

      • “I doubt very much if Pope Benedict is behind this communique.”

        I agree completely, Editor. This smells like another one of those infamous anonymous Vatican communiques which purports to speak for the Pope. That is, just another of the many dirty tricks committed by those who have the fate of millions of souls to account for.

      • This is a video I found of Malachi Martin speaking about the Secret, although it is made when Sr Lucia was still alive. I copied the text below it:

        In ‘The Fourth Secret of Fatima’ Mr. Socci constructs a hypothetical account of what happened in 2000 behind Vatican walls. Socci believes that when John Paul II decided to release the Secret, a power-struggle of sorts erupted in the Vatican. He postulates that John Paul II and Cardinal Ratzinger wanted to release the Secret in its entirety, but Cardinal Sodano, then Vatican Secretary of State, opposed the idea. And opposition from a Vatican Secretary of State is formidable. First, we have the recent statement by Bishop Williamson of the Society of Saint Pius X, who relates that a priest acquaintance from Austria told him that Cardinal Ratzinger confided (to the Austrian priest) that he had two things weighing on his conscience. One was his mishandling of the Message of Fatima on June 26, the other was his 1988 mishandling of Archbishop Lefebvre. Cardinal Ratzinger is reported to have said that in case of Archbishop Lefebvre, “I failed”, and in the case of Fatima, “my hand was forced.” Socci’s hypothesis supports Cardinal’s Ratzinger alleged statement on the forcing of his hand

        • Margaret Mary,

          That video is good but spoilt towards the end by the sections on Garabandal which is an unapproved apparition. I couldn’t help wondering why Fr Malachi Martin, who says he’s seen the Third Secret but is under oath not to reveal it, would bother talking about other apparitions, that are questionable. I find that quite strange.

  46. Sorry to interrupt an important discussion, but I am desperate for advice. I like to spend much time from May to October in Galloway (between Stranraer and Drummore). At home I have access to a wide choice of traditional-rite Sunday Masses, while here I do not, so obviously there is a matter of conscience involved. Last weekend I tried going to Glasgow by coach and staying over on Saturday night, but for various reasons, including financial ones, that won’t work again. I would, at a push, kneel at the back of an NO Mass reading my missal if I could find an NO parish where abuses are minimal and I could do this in relative peace and quiet. So I wonder if any blogger can point me at one.

    I have tried the nearest Catholic church (14m away), but the din of the pop guitar and drum ensemble, with the children telling Father, at the ‘offertory’ where they went yesterday and what they had for dinner, was too much to face again. Today I am reeling (no, not the Highland sort) after my 33m each way journey in the other direction. The babble and occasional screech of laughter before Mass were as nothing when the DJ got going with his 60-something group of electronically-assisted keyboard, guitarists, cymbalists and drummers who performed fortississimo four times while the singers belted out ditties, the only recognisable words being to the entrance ‘hymn’: ‘Am wokkin to the Lord, alleeloo-oo-oo, alleeloo-oo-oo-ya, am wokkin to the Lord, alleeloo-oo-ya’. The communion pop song was introduced by the DJ with a wee joke which had everyone tittering then swaying to another belter immediate after they had returned from Communion, and before the poor priest was off the altar all were required by the DJ to give a round of applause to a visiting ‘singer’ who had contributed to this cacophony.Now I know what happened to those 15 year olds in the 70s who were so taken with the New Mass because being there was great – just like being in the Cavern. I love almost everything about Scotland – bagpipes, kilts, much of Rabbie Burns, even haggis at a pinch, and I used to be a mean Scottish dancer, but your Mass bands will send me packing. HELP! 😠

    • Christina

      I’m really sorry to hear about your awful experience in Glasgow last weekend. I only wish I had a home with guest accommodation but I’m afraid I don’t.

      I have just looked up the Travelodge in Hill Street (Glasgow) and you can see the Jesuit church at the top of the first photo; that House of Heresy is right round the corner from Renfrew Street where you will find the SSPX chapel, as you know.

      The prices there are a great deal less expensive than the hotels and even guest houses while the rooms look good and it has been refurbished inside and out, I’m told. I browsed through the links on the Travelodge in Glasgow website, and they seem to do rooms very reasonably – £59 was one quoted but I’ve seen even cheaper. I think they told me once, when I enquired before one of our conferences, that if you book early enough you can get a price as low as £20.

      I think if you can’t make the journey to Glasgow (or Edinburgh) for traditional Mass, sitting at the back of even the best of the novus ordo Masses would be distracting, to say the least. There always the EHMCs marching across the sanctuary and the sign of (anything but) peace, up with which to put, so I’d say either check in at the Travelodge (until I win the lottery and can buy a huge house with guest quarters) or pray your swears in your holiday home in Galloway using your missal and rosary and pleading for mercy. You will NEVER find a peaceful novus ordo in Galloway, that’s for sure, but, if, against all the odds, you do, don’t report the poor priest to the Bishop!

      Hope this helps. I will, I promise, buy that lottery ticket!

      PS – Stop Press! I’ve just remembered about a priest who does offer the TLM in Galloway – I’ll email him and get back to you…

    • Christina,

      A few days late, but hope this might help:

      I would bet Editor is correct about the typical mass in Galloway. Other posters here have indicated that Diocese seems especially moribund.

      Glasgow and Edinburgh are the only real options for a sunday TLM in Scotland. However – given you are very close to Cairnryan, why not get a ferry from there to Belfast where you could have:

      SSPX – 11am Sunday mass
      Saint Pius V Chapel – Belfast
      78 Andersonstown Road


      Diocesean provision at:

      I don’t think the travel cost or duration would be much more significant (if at all) than going to Glasgow or Edinburgh.

      (Apologies if you are actually from Belfast haha – that would be ironic! haha!).

      If none of the Cities are an option, I would definitely take the advice given by others of seeking a live TLM internet broadcast to participate in, rather than risking the bandit country of local parishes.

      The FSSP broadcast daily mass at this location:

      There are three participating Churches from around the world. Their schedules are stated on the “live broadcast page” at that link above (they warn you to remember time differences and advise on this).

      I think this is an excellent initiative.

      • Portsmouth Cathedral has a Tridentine Mass on Sundays at 8am which can we watched live by visiting their web site. I believe that the SSPX chapel near Rimini also has a live streaming of their Sunday Mass.

        Regarding the Belfast chapel, you could spend hours just trying to find it. It’s in the basement of a shop and is entered along a lane at the rear of the buildings. One lady from Edinburgh set out to go their and gave up because there was nothing to indicate that it was there. A few years ago a couple from Edinburgh had the same experience trying to locate it and the wife went into one of the shops and asked where no.78 was. What took place was like something out of a comedy show. The man behind the counter looked at her and, looking right and then left, in a whisper asked “is it the Mass you’re after?” When she said yes he started gesturing to the floor with his head. When she said that she didn’t know what he meant, he started pointing to the floor with his hand as well as his head. “What do you mean?” asked the confused lady, and, again pointing to floor he whispered “it’s down there.” “What’s down there?” she asked and he whispered back “the Mass.” She said “you mean the Mass in the basement?” Putting his finger to his mouth he shooshed her and then whispered “yes.” “How do I get down there?” she asked and, shooshing her again, he whispered “go along the street to end of the shops, turn left and then left again and down the lane and it’s the second door on the left.” Honestly, you couldnae make it up.

  47. Wow, that would be great! The Galloway one I mean, but would be surprised if he did a regular Sunday.You see I’m here with my dog, so can’t travel with her every week. The city hostelries don’t take dogs.. Last week my son was here and looked after her while I went to Glasgow. No, if I can’t find a quiet NO I’ll have to stay at home. I can ignore the EMs, etc. because I don’t look up from my missal – it’s the diabolical noise that can’t be ignored. Alas, I think my economical seasonal emigrations will have to stop.

  48. Christina,

    How about this to further insulate yourself from the NO “experience,” if you are unable to find a TLM: get yourself an iPod, or borrow one, and download a recording of a TLM (there are plenty on YouTube), which you can then listen to with your earphones (or earpods, or whatever they call them these days) during the NO, as you follow your missal. Perhaps your son could help you with that….failing that, if you are able to muster up an iPod, I recommend Leprechaun to you for expert assistance!

  49. Editor and Perplexed

    Thank you both for your responses to my request.

    Yes, it seems that famous old “Vatican source” comes a-rollin’ on out evey time someone gets too close to the truth about Fatima. The same tactic was used for years on the SSPX – “a Vatican source confims schism on the part of the SSPX”, etc., that kind of stuff. There was never anything concrete, no names, no evidence, no pack drill, just damaging statements from this annonymous mouthpiece called “a Vatican source” or “spokeman”. These guys are way too devious for it to be natural.

    The 1P5 response is masterly. I wonder if the Vatican will take up their challenge to clarify. Ha! No chance. These Vatican infiltrators are, as editor rightly observes, desperate.


    I’m sorry to hear about the trouble you’re having getting to a sound Catholic orthodox Mass. God reads the heart, however. He knows full well your good intentions, limited resources and crisis of conscience. It’s not your fault if regional Churchmen have robbed the district of the Mass of the saints and martyrs. You are quite right to avoid the sacrilegious events you describe in local parishes. God will reward your fidelity and will severely judge those whose infidelity has led to such a torment for the faithful. Stick with your rosary, a reading of the missal on Sunday and a spiritual communion until you return home. It is so incredible that the Church in Galloway has come to such a state under these false shepherds.

    There is no mortal sin involved when the desire to fulfill our obligations is denied us by the works of those who abuse their authority to destroy the faith. Mortal sin is only contracted when we miss Mass because we can’t be bothered going. What you suffer presently is a kind of spiritual martyrdom that can be offered to Our Lord, so worry not.

  50. Why Are Millions of Muslims Becoming Christian? (15190)
    COMMENTARY: Muslim conversions increase, and researchers explain why.
    by SHERRY WEDDELL 05/17/2016 Comments (11)
    2011 Jamie McCarthy/WireImage
    Miss USA Rima Fakih converted to the Catholic faith from Islam.
    – 2011 Jamie McCarthy/WireImage

    My oldest female friend (I’ll call her “Natali”) has lived in the Muslim world for 25 years. Her Arabic is fluent and her network of relationships incredibly broad, so listening to her has given me a glimpse of a world few Catholics know exist.
    Natali has often talked about “Muslim background believers” (MBBs) who are now emerging within the Muslim world. These are men and women who were born and raised Muslim and intentionally converted to Christianity as adults. They were popping up everywhere — as individuals, in families and within small fellowship groups.
    Because the cost of following Christ can be so high in the Muslim world, information was strictly on a need-to-know basis; and even then, it was always vague, so even my friend Natali had no idea how many MBBs there were. All she could tell me was that when she first went to the Middle East, there weren’t any — and now she is meeting them pretty regularly.
    Natali loves Muslims and lives in the Muslim world intentionally, as a witness to the love and mercy of Jesus Christ. I know that this will startle many Register readers, but she has told me many times that she doesn’t feel endangered or afraid living in a Muslim setting.
    Muslims are people she knows and individuals she loves. When she returned home for a visit after 9/11, I had to explain to her why the conversation in the United States had changed so much. Natali had not experienced what the average American had experienced because she was living in the Muslim world during the whole horrific event. She watched those terrible pictures from afar on the BBC, while being showered with apologies, sympathy and support from her local Muslim friends who had been close friends for years.
    In her world, ecclesial divides that loom so large for us — like Catholic, Protestant or Orthodox — mean little. What matters is “Are you a ‘believer’?” — a follower of Isah (Jesus) — or are you, perhaps, a true seeker like one wise Muslim friend of Natali’s.
    Recently, Catholics have begun seeing mainstream media coverage of mass baptisms of Muslims in Europe. Some of my friends who work in Catholic parishes have helped Muslims enter the Church through RCIA. This is a foretaste of something that has never happened before in history and the implications of which are just starting to dawn upon us.
    Duane Alexander Miller and Patrick Johnstone published the first serious global estimate of the size of the Muslim-background Christian community in their 2015 article in the Interdisciplinary Journal of Research on Religion, “Believers in Christ From a Muslim Background: A Global Census.” Miller estimates that there were between 5 million and 16 million MBBs in the world in 2010. The author believes the best estimate falls just short of 10 million.
    The U.S. is a magnet for MBBs, which is why about 477,000 lived here in 2010. Roughly 60,000 were Catholic, 40,000 were Orthodox, and the rest are almost all evangelical Protestants. There were approximately 180,000 Arab-Muslim background Christians and about 130,000 Iranian MBBs in the U.S. six years ago. What is especially stunning is to realize that the pace of MBB growth has dramatically accelerated since 2000. Dudley Woodbury, a Fulbright scholar of Islam, estimates that 20,000 Muslims in the U.S. become Christians every year.
    What draws people raised within Islam to Christianity? Woodbury published the results of interviews with 750 MBBs from around the world in 2008. Here were his top five reasons:
    The lifestyle of Christians. Former Muslims cited the love that Christians exhibited in their relationships with non-Christians and their treatment of women as equals.
    The power of God in answered prayers and healing. The Jesus portrayed in the Quran is a prophet who heals lepers and the blind and raises the dead. Often, dreams or visions about Jesus or a man of light were reported. (Some also have dreams of the Bible or of the Virgin Mary, who is revered within Islam.)
    Dissatisfaction with the type of Islam they had experienced. In his article “How ISIS Is Spreading the Gospel,” David Cashin of the Zwemer Center observes, “I have often referred to Islamic radicals as ‘proto-evangelists’ for the Christian faith.”
    The spiritual truth in the Bible. Muslims are generally taught that the Torah, Psalms and the Gospels are from God, but that they became corrupted. These Christian converts said, however, that the truth of God found in Scripture became compelling for them and key to their understanding of God’s character.
    Biblical teachings about the love of God. In the Quran, God’s love is conditional, but God’s love for all people in the Bible was especially eye-opening for Muslims. These converts were moved by the love expressed through the life and teachings of Jesus.
    In 2010, I received a thought-provoking letter addressed to Pope Benedict from a Protestant resident of the Muslim world. He described three ways that Catholics could help Muslims who are seeking spiritual alternatives:
    “That Catholic parishes in the West with significant immigrant Muslim populations be ready and willing to give out Bibles in the languages of local Muslims: Arabic, Urdu, Farsi, Turkish, etc. ‘Even in the most fundamentalist Islamic countries, if a person asks for a Bible, it is not considered to be antagonistic to Islam to give him one.’”
    “A key reason listed in the conversion narratives of Muslims is a dream or vision. Often, this is of [the] Messiah himself, but other times, it’s of an angel or saint like John the Baptist or the Blessed Virgin. What if each diocese were instructed to discern among their clergy (or laity?) an individual (or several) with the charism of interpreting dreams and visions? A small publicity campaign — small ads in local publications read by immigrants, notices at the church doors — letting people know that, if they have had dreams or visions which they cannot explain, that someone with experience in that field is ready and willing to talk with them.”
    (I have not come across a charism of “interpreting dreams” as such. But I do think that persons of considerable spiritual maturity, trained in listening and Ignatian discernment, with some background in Islam, and with a charism of wisdom or prophecy or encouragement, could be exceedingly helpful here.)
    “That each bishop have a plan for how to respond when Muslims ask to be baptized. ‘… I know well a new disciple of Christ who has been seeking baptism for some time. He has suffered for his faith more than most Christians ever will, and he knows the Scripture[s] better, too. … Yet the local Latin priest in his home city eventually chased him away. Why? He was from a prominent Muslim family. What if there had been a quietly-communicated policy in place? What if the believer had been discreetly told to visit a certain person? All of this, to be sure, after his devotion to and comprehension of the Good News, had been certified. As it stands right now, this young man was recently baptized by an evangelical pastor/elder. He was turned away from the church where he first sought fellowship. With a sensitive policy in place, this young man could have been a new, vibrant Catholic Christian.’”
    God is doing something new in our generation. Significant numbers of Muslims are quietly looking for spiritual alternatives. If you and I understand our mission as evangelizers and apostles, build relationships of trust, rouse spiritual curiosity through our lives, pray for and share our faith in Christ and his Church with the Muslims about us, we can play an important part in this unprecedented movement of the Holy Spirit.
    Sherry Weddell earned a bachelor’s degree in modern Near-Eastern history
    and studied Islamics and cross-cultural missions at the graduate level before
    entering the Catholic Church. She is theco-director of the Catherine of Siena Institute,
    creator of the institute’s “Called & Gifted” discernment process and the author of
    Forming Intentional Disciples: The Path to Knowing and Following Jesus.

    Read more:

  51. Does anybody know anything about a book called: “She shall crush thy head” by Stephen Mahoward? It’s available on Amazon at a cost of £48 plus postage!! Is it worth buying?

    • Crofterlady I have never heard of that author but if you think about it, you can buy a Douay Rheims bible for £17.99 so why would you pay nearly 50 quid for a book by someone you’ve never heard of? I wouldn’t. You can read the reviews on Amazon, though, to see if you think it’s worth the money. I wouldn’t pay that for a book unless it was written by a canonised (before VII) saint and bound in real gold, LOL,

    • RCA Victor,

      It’s a rather strange piece by Roberto De Mattiei this time. All over the place. He seems to be dismissing the importance of the unpublished part of the Fatima Message (Third Secret) which is something of an insult to Our Lady – these folk who seek to play down the Third Secret and the Consecration of Russia don’t seem to realise that they are effectively dismissing Our Lady’s words, as if they are of particular importance. Incredible.

    • RCA Victor

      I agree with you and editor that this is not the clearest article I’ve read on Fatima. I can see to some extent where the author is coming from, but his thoughts are not well expressed.

      What he’s basically saying, I think, is that we don’t need to prove the fulfillment or of the Fatima Message and Secret because the tragedy it speaks of is unfolding before our eyes by the Communist spirit that has taken hold on all Western governments and the unprecedented spectacle of two Roman Pontiffs, one ruling and one “emeritus” sharing different aspects of the Papacy. That’s revolutionary and counter-Catholic.

      I just wish he had made his poisiton a little clearer and insisted a little more on the need, more now than ever, for a true consecration of Russia to Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart.

  52. When I saw the following Mail Online headline (sent to me by a reader)

    Catholic priests and monks are told they must obtain a certificate to prove they are not a paedophile in Spain

    I presumed it was inspired by some Government initiative, so I replied: “And I hope Muslims are being required to obtain a certificate to prove they are not a terrorist…” But no – it’s the Bishop who is tarnishing all priests with the same brush – paedophile until you prove otherwise… Shocking.

    Read more here

    • Every cleric, and volunteer, within the U.K., working with the young, and vulnerable, has had to obtain a certificate from the Criminal Records Bureau, now replaced with the Disclosure and Barring Service, since 2002. I am surprised you are not aware of that fact as it has applied, for example, to those paid employees, and volunteers, within schools since that time too. The Mail headline misrepresents The Spanish initiative, and fails to point out similar measures apply here. It is sad you take your sensationalist lead from the secular press, and twist things. (Logically, as in The UK, the Spanish legislation will apply to people of all faiths and none.) I am shocked too that you are scandalised that any Bishop would want to safeguard children and the vulnerable.

      Editor: the Mail report makes no mention of Spanish legislation that applies to everyone. And, while teachers and those working with children in the UK are automatically police checked when appointed to a position of paid employment, no “certificate” is issued – as a teacher I was checked and never received any certificate, nor heard of anyone else receiving a certificate; in fact we heard nothing about it, and only the fact that we were given confirmation of the appointment, evidenced the fact that we had passed the security check. Further, no bishop in the UK, as far as I know, has publicly called for his priests and monks to obtain a “special certificate” to prove they are not criminals/child abusers. It seems a very strange system indeed, if paedophiles are expected to download a certificate which is then taken to prove they are not paedophiles! Crazy. And why only one bishop? If this is normal practice in Spain, why would any newspaper think it of interest? As for bishops wanting to safeguard children and the vulnerable – oh yes, that’s why not one Scots bishop turned up (not even once), at the recent 40 Days for Life in Glasgow to pray for the most vulnerable of all children, those in the womb. Instead of meekly giving the impression that all priests are child abusers or potential abusers, the bishops should be doing what the leader of any teachers’ union would be doing in similar circumstances; emphasising that this evil is perpetrated only by a minority of people within the profession and that while they will submit to any government initiative (as long as it DOES apply across the board and not just to the Catholic Church) they will not be insulting their clergy by requiring daft certificates, self downloaded from the internet, to “prove” they are innocent before even a criminal charge is laid against them. Crackers.

      • Since 2002 people receive a certificate, and they have to produce it, as necessary.

        Further, under CRB people had to have one for each employer/voluntary activity. Not so for the new scheme – one clearance is enough.

        In England and Wales, and I assume in the British Isles, every cleric has to have such a certificate.

        Further in addition, within England and Wales, and most probably the British Isles, every Bishop has to request, from the Ordinary of the cleric/religious, a Letter of Good Standing which would normally assert they have faced no claims of abuse, and/or have not been suspected/charged/convicted of abuse, and that they have no unresolved substance issues (i.e. addictions) if they come to work, even temporarily in his Diocese.

        I suspect the Spanish Bishop was unfortunate to be the victim of scandal-mongering for doing something other Bishops do.

        With regards The Certificates lo logically it would need to be a Civil Law authority that issues it.

          • You live in Scotland, but in England and Wales you need them for sure. At one time I had three for different “sponsors”.

            • I have been CRB checked in Scotland, but I was teaching in England in and after 2002. I was CRB checked there and I have never received or even heard of such a certificate, whether in Scotland or in England. Never. Nor was I ever asked for a “sponsor” – this is getting more ridiculous by the minute. The point of the CRB checks was always to see if the person applying for the post (or in most cases appointed TO the post) had a criminal record of the kind that would debar them from taking up a position working with children and young people. If they had such a conviction, what on earth use were “sponsors” (“Oh, in my opinion, despite being a convicted paedophile, this person would be great in this job teaching children” ?)

              I don’t know what sort of new system has been put in place, according to you, but it sounds decidedly dodgy. The principle “innocent until proven guilty” should apply EVEN to those alleged to be guilty of crimes against children. It is right, in the face of serious allegations, to suspend the accused until post-investigation, but it is absolutely wrong to treat those accused of these crimes as if by virtue of the allegation itself, or of belonging to the same profession as others accused/convicted of such a crime, they are already guilty.

              If I were a bishop I’d be on the offensive about this, big time, and REFUSE to blacken the characters of every priest on account of the (shocking) sins/crimes of a very small minority. If this witch-hunt were taking place within the teaching, medical or legal professions, there would be an outcry. And rightly so. Guilt by association is unjust. Absolutely unjust.

              • I still have the most recent certificate whichever body/organisation you worked for would have been the “sponsor”, In my case The Diocesan Trustees, and both they, and I, received a certificate.

                In England and Wales The Church works with The Statutory Authorities and not against them. They, of course, have the Criminal Records.

                The Certificate certifies the innocent innocent based on official records. It is not a trial but a declaration of the absence of things that would make a person unsuitable with the young and vulnerable.

                • Scandalous

                  What a pity the bishops are not so conscientious when it comes to abuses against the Blessed Sacrament. They have all gone with Communion in the hand against the Church’s in-force discipline of receiving on the tongue while kneeling. And of course you will know that while Communion in the hand is today an Indult permitted by the Holy See, it was originally introduced illicitly into the Church by Cardinal Suenens in Belgium and spread around until it became a widespread abuse.

                  I don’t see the Bishops acting with anything close to the same standards to protect Our Lord from the multitudes of abuses that have since occurred against His Real Presence.

                  As for these government checks, I am sick to death of the government and the media implying that the evil actions of a minority of clerics are potentially representative of the entire Catholic priesthood. Without doubt it is, as editor suggests, a case of guilty until proven innocent when it comes to Catholic priests in the eyes of these people. The bishops should resist these initiatives as excessive and biased, especially since clerics thus far convicted of child molestation had no previous record of offending and would not therefore have raised a red flag under this present system.

                  I will add that if the bishops had been more vigilant in terms of the candidates they admitted into seminaries, as well as faithful to the Traditional methods of priestly formation rather than adopting the hippy style post-Council, then I feel that a majority of those who went on to offend against children would have been identified as unsuitable for ordination and weeded out before they had the chance to comit their crimes. I wish there was a government check in place that could identify careless shepherds.

  53. Cardinal Capovilla has died – RIP. Read here

    When I attended one of Fr Gruner’s (RIP) Fatima Conferences, we were shown a very interesting interview with the Cardinal on the subject of the Fatima cover up. Read here

    We pray for the repose of the soul of the Cardinal – may he rest in peace.

    • If I recall correctly, Cardinal Capovilla was labeled a Marxist in Bellegrandi’s book about Roncalli, thus his choice as Roncalli’s personal secretary (Roncalli was apparently known as a socialist sympathizer). But he certainly plays a large role in the Fatima envelope story….RIP…

  54. Our Lady of La Salette

    Published by
    the Shepherdess of La Salette with Imprimatur by Mgr. Bishop of Lecce.

    “Well, my children, you will pass this on to all of my people.”

    Simple reproduction without commentary or controversy
    of the original edition of Lecce in 1879.


    Only the witness herself, Melanie, can, along with Maximin, give an account of the apparition. After giving it by word of mouth an incalculable number of times, she decided to write it all down in 1878. It was published at Lecce on the 15th of November 1879 – with the “Imprimatur” of Bishop Zola – and reprinted “ne varietur” at Lyon in 1904, a few months before Melanie’s death. This slim booklet is now a rarity. The text is followed exactly here.

  55. Gerontius

    There has always been something about the LaSalette apparitions that doesn’t sit right with me. I read the life of Mellanie and was not overly impressed by it. And I can’t seem to find anything on the life of Maximim. There’s too much of a mystery surrounding the entire business. Nothing like Fatima abd Lourdes.

    • Athanasius,

      I’ve always felt the same about La Salette. Can’t put my finger on it.

      Anyway, the author of this blog has asked me to link to it for your comment, one and all.

    • Athanasius,

      Yes, I know what you mean. The accounts of LaSalette always seamed to me to be somewhat disjointed. This may be in part because they refer to two events separated by an unspecified period of time i.e. Napoleonic and Antichrist. Who knows? (Napoleon – sounds very similar to Apollyon)

      However, Our Blessed Mother’s request for conversion, and especially because of her tears at that time, brought to mind the fact that some of her sacred images are now crying tears of blood.

      • Gerontius,

        I remember a Protestant saying to me once that the real miracle now is finding a statue that ISN’T crying tears!

        I had to smile 😀

  56. Can someone explain this information I have found pertaining to Papal Primacy and Universal Jurisdiction?

    While traditionalist Catholics tend to believe that their Church has always defended the Papacy’s powers of supreme and universal jurisdiction, there is strong evidence to suggest that this view gradually evolved in the West. One pope venerated by both Catholics and Orthodox as a saint, Pope St. Gregory the Great (r. 590-604), famously opposed Patriarch John of Constantinople’s desire to add the term “Ecumenical” to his title, writing to the patriarch that

    “Whoever calls himself the universal bishop, or desires this title, is, by his pride, the precursor of Antichrist, because he thus attempts to raise himself above the others. The error into which he falls springs from pride equal to that of Antichrist; for as that Wicked One wished to be regarded as exalted above other men, like a god, so likewise whoever would be called sole bishop exalteth himself above others. . .”

    Pope Gregory’s unequivocal condemnation of any primate calling himself “universal” or sole bishop might shock most Catholics who have never read it, since the Catholic Church has long attempted to convince its faithful that popes always professed the claim to universal authority and immediate jurisdiction over all other Christian Sees. Yet St. Gregory clarifies that this is anything but the case. He points out to Patriarch John that even when the 451 Ecumenical Council at Chalcedon offered the bishop of Rome the honorary title of ‘universal’ bishop, the reigning pope refused to accept it:

    “You know it, my brother; hath not the venerable Council of Chalcedon conferred the honorary title of ‘universal’ upon the bishops of this Apostolic See [Rome], whereof I am, by God’s will, the servant? And yet none of us hath permitted this title to be given to him; none hath assumed this bold title, lest by assuming a special distinction in the dignity of the episcopate, we should seem to refuse it to all the brethren.”

    This is the very antithesis of a pope claiming universal power and authority over all other Christian Sees. Pope St. Gregory refers to his fellow bishops as “brethren” and cautions against any bishop “assuming a special distinction in the dignity of the episcopate”. He not only reiterates that since his predecessors as Roman popes, first in honor among the five apostolic sees or patriarchates, declined the honorary title ‘universal’, all other patriarchs ought to avoid using the term, but he specifies that even when the Fathers at Chalcedon offered the popes this title, they understood it primarily as an honor of distinction, rather than a recognition of the Papacy’s unique power. St. Gregory clearly feared that this honorific title and similar ones offered to previous Roman popes could lead to an improper and heterodox elevation of one of the patriarchates above the others. Even the title ‘pope’, meaning ‘father’, was first applied not to the bishop of Rome, but to the Patriarch of Alexandria. Today, the primate of the Coptic Oriental Orthodox Church centered in Egypt is still addressed by this ancient title which precedes the Roman one.

  57. CC,

    I think a true reading of Pope St. Gregory’s words to Patriarch John is that no one amongst the bishops should seek to exault himself above his fellows, which truly would signify pride. He was not saying that Christ Our Lord did not in fact make Peter the head of the Church, elevated above the others in authority.

    Remember the words of Our Saviour to Peter alone: “To you I give the keys of the kingdom of heaven.” It is also recognised from the very time of the Apostles themselves that Peter was elevated in office above the rest by divine appointment.

    I think it safe to say that you have not stumbled upon a truth that the great Saints and Doctors of two thousand years missed. With the very greatest respect, you’ll need to be careful of that inclination to curiosity in matters already long established by the Church. I’ve known people who have lost their faith this way, confusing themselevs by delving into subjects they are not sufficiently instructed or qualified to investigate. I hope you’ll take what I say as a genuine admonishing in charity, not a nasty rebuke.

    And by the way, “brethren” is a perfectly normal address from a Pope to his brother bishops. It does not detract in the least from his superior office and unique authority in the Church.

  58. I presume the debate on Hallam and Kasperite Parishes has now gone to archive. Thank you to the editor and Michaela for their comments.
    It’s a good time to review what the Hallam situation etc is actually all about. Robert Aske leader of the Pilgrimage of Grace who fought against Henry VIII said ‘we will not have this new religion’ this I see is what Catholic Truth and its editor are all about. Titus Brandisima a Dutch Carmelite killed by the Nazis said ‘if we want to win the world for Christ we must be prepared to come in to conflict with it’ also see pages 11 & 12 of a booklet from SPUC ‘why the pro life movement needs the catholic church an address by John Smeaton to the Catholic Bishops conference of Nigeria Abuja 5/6/2014. Someone explained to me what the concept of passive aggressive means. Our inaction and passivity on for example no priestly recruitment and abortifacients etc can be a form of aggression supporting those within the church who are hostile to the truth. Before it went ecumenical and in its good days the Coursillo movement taught me that the three pivotal elements to our faith are prayer, study and action. If any members of catholic truth are suffering from inaction and passivity with regard to the catholic truth conference on the 18th June they should actively start campaigning for others to go in great numbers as well as going themselves. Our editor and the church need and deserve this in Jesus name.

    • Liam,

      Happily, as we approach the month of June, we are finding the Conference ticket orders piling in, so we are, increasingly, looking forward to the event.

      Thank you for your support for our humble work. I understand why you, personally, are unlikely to be able to join us for the Conference – joining, too, the several people who have booked from your lovely homeland of England – but if not, I know you will keep the day (with our intentions for great spiritual benefits for all concerned) in your prayers.

  59. “In pericolo e non un pericolo”, or “Not a danger but in danger” is a quote from Pope Francis from the L’Osservatore Romano, the official Vatican newspaper, and reported in English by Breitbart. The Pope was referring very specifically to immigrants.
    This alone shows that the Holy Father is now incontrovertibly an enemy of the West. We have defended our religion, our holy places, our people and our culture against all comers. Our bishops have given Communion to our soldiers on the morning of the day of battle, as they prepared to give their lives for us, the generations as yet unborn.
    So now the Bishop of Rome, our religious leader to whom we look for spiritual guidance and light, betrays us by welcoming our enemies.

    • Andrew,

      I understand your sentiments, and Papa Francis is not my favourite pope, that’s for sure, but I doubt if he’s deliberately making himself an enemy of the west – or even of the traditional Catholic Faith, more to the point. He just has a distorted world (and Church) view which will remain that way until (or unless) he consecrates Russia – see the new thread here on that topic.

      • Thanks for your response. He is surely of sufficiently of sound mind to be aware, not only of what he says, but of the effects that will be produced.
        This was a planned and orchestrated event with theatrical props.
        To welcome our enemies is indefensible. Those who stand with our enemies are our enemies.

        • Andrew,

          Yesterday, I stumbled across this video (scroll from 4.53 to end) and – believe me – any pope who can tell us not to “obsess” about abortion, is surely not “sufficiently of sound mind to be aware, not only of what he says, but of the effects that will be produced”. His every word on this subject should be calculated to command us to action, not to apathy. This has haunted me since I first viewed. Poor little baby.

          • I am continually surprised and ashamed at the lack of action being taken by our Bishops in respect of abortion. When did the Church offer to accept, raise and support to adulthood any unwanted baby?
            When was the last time that a priest assassinated an abortionist or burned down a clinic?
            These things have not happened, any more than has a continual and outspoken condemnation of those who support abortion. When did our Bishops publicly urge Catholics to refuse to vote for all of the main political parties, as they all (Tory, Labour, SNP, Lib/Dem, Green) support abortion? And that means abortion on demand, in reality. That is thirty-three a day in Scotland. The Bishops have not done this. A glance at Bishop Cushley’s engagements for May reveals a comfortable round of necessary work. Nothing that will upset anyone.
            Where does that leave the Catholic in the street? If our leaders do not lead we are left to stick our necks out. When the secular authorities get a grip on us will the Bishops also condemn us?

  60. That video should come with a health warning! It’s awful, shocking and almost beyond belief. The human race deserves to be annihilated for tolerating such barbaric practices. I don’t think I’ll ever sleep again.

  61. I’m not watching. I still have nightmares seeing a US hostage get his head chopped off by Muslims during the Bush era. I’m no longer morbidly curious about such things. They haunt your waking hours.

    • Summa,

      I wouldn’t compare the two things – the video of the baby is actually beautiful. To see the little leg moving and see the fully formed baby. The only horrendous thing about it is that it’s a baby that has been murdered by its own mother using the euphemism of abortion to ease her conscience and the consciences of the medical staff involved. Seeing that has redoubled my objection to abortion and I will always mention what I’ve seen when the subject comes up.

  62. Summa, you are right! I’ll never ever again open such a link. However, a lot of people need to know the reality of abortion and its consequences and so it must be publicised.

    • Oh, I have no problem with graphic videos, I’m just not sure if I can stomach another horrifying scene. But that’s just me.

      • Summa,

        Well, I have to admit, it’s to protect people who are offended or upset by such videos, as expressed by Helen and yourself that the print and broadcasting media refuse to publish graphic videos of aborted babies, let alone the procedure, as they publish other operations. Now the BBC can point to the comments here to justify their persistent refusal to broadcast such legalised horror on the TV news – where it manifestly belongs. My own response: upset people? I should jolly well think so. I will ALWAYS open such links, because I do not want to allow myself to ever forget or lose the full impact, of just what is happening to these innocent babies. If I lose some sleep over it (as I did last night) – shows my conscience and Catholic moral sense are not completely dead!

        Any normal person would, rightly, be horrified and upset by seeing that innocent baby moving after being “aborted” but instead of focusing on our “upset” we should be moved to spread it far and wide to waken up as many people as possible to the evil of this legalised slaughter. Let’s forget about our “upset” and use the video to try to RE-sensitise consciences. A young person seeing that, may, hopefully, think twice about abortion if she ever finds herself in the situation of considering the possibility.

        • Editor, I think you make some good points here about the MSM finding justification not to print/post graphics. Despite my own reservations about viewing (not screening) I do think you should have posted the video – I cannot of course comment on the content having decided not too, but I can guess that its not nice. And people need to see the truth of the abortion business, for that is exactly what it is: murder for money.
          I suppose I was just thinking out loud my reaction…”I’m not doing that again”… because I have a fair idea of the horror displayed. When I was at school I recall that for a while I helped distribute pro-life leaflets and the graphics on them displayed baby parts/limbs in dumped black bags. I defend the use of these to shock people into waking up to the reality of what’s going on. So to reiterate, I have no problem whatsoever about these stills/videos being posted. I suppose from my perspective, all I can say is that I have seen it (albeit not the exact clip) and that’s enough for me: I don’t need to see it again to be convinced. Once is enough.

          • Summa,

            I fear you have misunderstood the nature of the video. It’s not “graphic” in the sense normally meant. Nicky remarked that it’s actually “beautiful” and so it is. If more people saw that short clip, with the little aborted baby moving its legs, I have no doubt that many women would change their minds about the morality of abortion. If anything, it is much MORE powerful that the images of babies’ limbs etc.

              • Summa,

                I understand. Helen is too young to talk much sense. Don’t pay any attention. She’s a flibbertigibbet, so she is. With bells (and make up) on!

                I mean, she says she’ll never sleep again (after viewing the clip) and have YOU seen her back here since? She’ll have been sound asleep on beaches, on couches, in her comfy bed, you name it, for days now. When she comes to again, she’ll pop in here to cause havoc again. She’s a case for the High Court, Summa. Trust me 😀

                PS kidding, Helen. Only kidding… kinda…!

                • Just watched the video. I agree: it’s not what I thought it was going to be like. But some amount of sick people out there eh?

          • Andrew,

            Some may be – probably are – arrested but I suspect the way round that is to ask people if they would like to take a picture to see the reality of abortion. Nobody can be arrested for offering to give something away, surely. I guess the argument is that people are having the images “forced” on them, blah blah. If I find myself unthinkingly accepting a leaflet that I don’t want, I just make my way to the nearest bin and chuck it in there. These folks who are so easily traumatised, so “sensitive” blah blah, need help.

            • South Wales. Demonstrators holding graphic posters of abortions were taken into custody. I think that they may have subsequently been fined. I cannot remember the date.

  63. This is the reason we must keep on speaking up and out to save innocent little lives ……no wonder our world has so much pain ,illness and evil in it we are being punished by allowing this to happen to the tiniest ,most vulnerable of our Species ..Thank you Patricia for showing this

    • Thank YOU Wendy. You are doing this work day in and day out, trying to re-awaken consciences to the full horror of abortion. God bless you – keep up that great work.

    • Also, they mentioned on the news that multi-agencies had been involved in supposedly watching this little boy and actually believed the women when they explained away the toddler’s injuries by saying he was self-harming. Yikes! And these are the very people who would be Named Persons, lording it over perfectly caring parents! If they missed these obvious abusers, how could they possibly care for every child in Scotland for 18 years!

      • multi-agencies had been involved in supposedly watching this little boy and actually believed the women when they explained away the toddler’s injuries by saying he was self-harming

        Indeed Michaela, and I would bet every single one of the agencies was too “PC” / wary to suggest that the women might have been harming the boy, due to their homosexual identity.

        As usual, the state stood and watched the avoidable death of a child.

        The State doesn’t need “named persons”, it needs basic competence and accountability and to operate based on facts, not liberal ideology.

  64. Maybe this is a random comment but why is there always a small percentage of voters on the home page who vote against the motion? The present lot are ridiculous: setting the Pope against GOD! truly unfathomable.
    are they even Catholic, do you think? Or nasty trolls?

  65. My wife has just phoned me from Lourdes where she has been to confession. She told the priest that it was a disgrace that the printed format for examination of conscience contained no reference to contraception and especially the use of abortifacients. I therefore remind bloggers of the comments of May 25th 2016 as follows.

    Agreed. Pope Pius X1 said “The first and obvious duty the priest owes to the world about him is service to the truth, the whole truth, the unmasking and refutation of error in whatever form or disguise it conceals itself. To fail in this would be not only treason against God and your vocation but a crime against the true welfare of your people and your fatherland”. A theme of commentary on the Hallam situation emphasized the absence of parishioners as well as priests. A factor with regard to the absence of parishioners is the low birth rate. What follows is an extract from a submission I have suggested for publication following my initial published letter:

    1. The birth rate is below replacement level in the Western World.
    2.Natural Family Planning is wrong unless used for a justifiable reason.
    3.Many so called contraceptives are actually abortifacients. Vatican guidelines on Morality of conjugal life, handbook for confessors, pontifical council for the family pages 16 & 17, section 5 state “a specific and more serious moral evil is present in the use of means which have an abortive effect, impeding the implantation of the embryo which has just been fertilised or even causing its expulsion in an early stage of pregnancy” thus IUDS, hormonal birth control including progestin only pill, injections, norplant, Implamon, the patch, vaginal ring, emergency contraception and the pill cause abortion and their use is forbidden by church’s teaching.

    In this context Nazism was defined by Pope John Paul II as a manifestation of the anti-Christ and Jews etc. were killed by chemical pellets being inserted in the roof of the death chambers. An east European Cardinal, a prisoner of both the Nazis and the communists stated that contraception and abortion would finish of the work that Hitler had begun in the death camps. When couples use hormonal birth control they repeat the process that Hitler began when a pill is dropped in to a woman’s body which kills their child. From the pulpit there is perennial silence on these subjects. Many priests seem unaware of there own policy guidelines and some of them don’t even agree with them. I have heard one sermon on the subject in fifty years of church attendance. The devil hates every conception which is made in the image and likeness of God because it has a destiny of eternal life which Satan cannot share.

    For decades on these and many other issues the church has suffered from the twin evils of obscurantism and the ‘smoke of Satan’ which has entered the church. Thus the recent synod on the Family never mentioned abortifacients etc. and there was little reference to the blessing of children. Instead we got a treatise on the evil fruits of contraception such as divorce etc.
    Cardinal Biffi in a Lenten meditation given to Benedict XVI stated the anti-Christ is likely to be ‘a pacifist, ecologist and ecumenist’. He further stated that the antichrist was not necessarily a person but ‘the reduction of Christianity to an ideology’ and he criticised a tendency of some Catholics to promote vague spiritual goals, rather than focussing on the importance of Christ’s sacrifice.
    I was uplifted by repeated comments by fellow bloggers that the gates of Hell would never prevail. Our Lady of Good Success said ‘that when all seems lost She will intervene’. So lets all press on under the inspired leadership of the editor!

  66. Editor,
    Friday 3rd June, being the feast of the Sacred Heart Of Jesus, I thought I’d post this prayer of reparation to Our Lord, so necessary in these dark times of sacrilege, outrage and indifference.

    Act of Reparation to the Sacred Heart of Jesus

    O sweet Jesus, Whose overflowing charity for me is requited by so much forgetfulness, negligence and contempt, behold us prostrate before Your alter (in Your presence) eager to repair by a special act of homage the cruel indifference and injuries, to which Your loving Heart is everywhere subject.

    Mindful alas! that we ourselves have had a share in such great indignities, which we now deplore from the depths of our hearts, we humbly ask Your pardon and declare our readiness to atone by voluntary expiation not only for our own personal offenses, but also for the sins of those, who, straying for from the path of salvation, refuse in their obstinate infidelity to follow You, their Shepherd and Leader, or, renouncing the vows of their baptism, have cast off the sweet yoke of Your Law. We are now resolved to expiate each and every deplorable outrage committed against You; we are determined to make amends for the manifold offenses against Christian modesty in unbecoming dress and behavior, for all the foul seductions laid to ensnare the feet of the innocent, for the frequent violations of Sundays and holidays, and the shocking blasphemies uttered against You and Your Saints. We wish also to make amends for the insults to which Your Vicar on earth and Your priest are subjected, for the profanation, by conscious neglect or terrible acts of sacrilege, of the very Sacrament of Your Divine Love; and lastly for the public crimes of nations who resist the rights and teaching authority of the Church which You have founded. Would, O divine Jesus, we were able to wash away such abominations with our blood. We now offer, in reparation for these violations of Your divine honor, the satisfaction You once made to Your eternal Father on the cross and which You continue to renews daily on our altars; we offer it in union with the acts of atonement of Your Virgin Mother and all the Saints and of the pious faithful on earth; and we sincerely promise to make recompense, as far as we can with the help of Your grace, for all neglect of Your great love and for the sins we and others have committed in the past. Henceforth we will live a life of unwavering faith, of purity of conduct, of perfect observance of the precepts of the gospel and especially that of charity. We promise to the best of our power to prevent other from offending You and to bring as many as possible to follow You.

    O loving Jesus, through the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary, our model in reparation, deign to receive the voluntary offering we make of this act of expiation; and by the crowing gift of perseverance keep us faithful unto death in our duty and the allegiance we owe to You, so that we may one day come to that happy home, where You with the Father and the Holy Spirit lives and reigns, God, world without end. Amen.

  67. Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich on the “relationship between two popes”

    There is a glaring contextual break in this prophecy which indicates that an important part may have been kept secret. I wonder if the missing text contains similar information to Fatima’s famous “3rd secret.”

    “I saw also the relationship between the two popes… I saw how baleful would be the consequences of this false church.”

    Research so far has proved fruitless.

    • Gerontius,

      Thank you for the prayer to the Sacred Heart, much appreciated.

      As for the “two popes”/Catherine Emmerich – that does not refer to the situation today. Read this article, which points out that although the parallel between the two popes currently living in Rome is being applied all over the internet, it ‘s not a correct interpretation…

      • Editor,

        Perhaps there is more than one correct interpretation.

        Archbishop Gänswein made this startling remark at the presentation of a new book on Benedict’s pontificate at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome May 20,

        Archbishop Gänswein … said that Pope Francis and Benedict are not two popes “in competition” with one another, but represent one “expanded” Petrine Office with “an active member” and a “contemplative.”

        Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich’s: “I saw also the relationship between the two popes. . . I saw how baleful (harmful) would be the consequences of this false church. I saw it increase in size; heretics of every kind came into the city (of Rome). The local clergy grew lukewarm, and I saw a great darkness…”

        Hmmm…. “baleful” – “heretics of every kind” – “false church” – “great darkness” Makes you think, doesn’t it?

        And Francis is going to join the celebration of one of the greatest heretics ever to afflict Holy Mother Church….. and lets not forget the horrors perpetrated against the Blessed Sacrament at Assisi. I’ll stop here, since I sense anger on the horizon.

        • Gerontius and other readers of Gerontius’s comment – I’ve just posted a thread on the claim of Archbishop Gänswein, so please,Gerontius feel free to re-post your comment on that thread and others likewise respond on the topic thread. Click here to reach it.

          Thank you!

  68. Hallam errupts again! This is my most recent letter to the Catholic Press.

    To the Catholic Press

    From the privileged and safe position of the pulpit Mgr Sexton Vicar General has today publicly rubbished and questioned the veracity of my letter to the Universe and the article in the Catholic Herald concerning the shortage of priests. Mgr Sexton knows only too well that I wrote to him and the Bishop several times concerning this issue together with issues of abortifacients use and a protocol for families facing euthanasia for one of their family members. I never received a reply, phone call or an acknowledgement to any of my communications to them. Thus I wrote to the press. In the April 2016 edition of the Hallam news our Bishop wrote as follows regarding the shortage of priests “The most common solution offered, as I move around, is to import priests from abroad. I would like to record my gratitude for the work that our Nigerian priests already here in the Diocese are already doing. Without their presence among us we would find it even more difficult to function as a Diocese. However, and I know that some would strongly disagree with me I do not believe this is a long term solution. Something more radical is needed.” The De La Salle College I attended taught me that I should précis that Bishop’s statement as meaning “no more foreign priests.” The Bishop goes on to say that we would follow a Kasperite model and in the subsequent May edition of the Hallam News we had an article ‘Liturgy in the Absence of a Priest’ confirming the Diocesan position for the future. Mgr Sexton now tells us today that we are waiting for three Indian priests to work in the Diocese. Good news at face value but nowhere near enough priests to cover the situation in many parishes where priests try to run two of three parishes simultaneously – an impossible pastoral task.

    A letter I previously sent the catholic press also tells the full story of racism in the Diocese, a factor in the non recruitment of Polish and Nigerian priests in Hallam and again an issue I have raised with the Bishop and Vicar General – again with no response.

    In his last pastoral letter to the Diocese the Bishop talked about the presence of God “in the Word”, His presence where “two or three are gathered in his name” and “most intensely in the Eucharist” making a sort of equivalence between the three scenarios. This could have been more softening up of parishioners to prepare for Kasperism, priestless liturgies and no sacramental provision etc. There is absolutely no such equivalence since the Eucharist is not an ‘intense experience’ but the ‘true Body and Blood of Jesus Christ together with His soul and divinity under the appearances of bread and wine’ ie the real presence of Jesus Christ in our midst. His real presence is being denied access and ‘rationed’ by these policies of inadequate recruitment of priests from abroad and racism.

    I will know we are making progress when the presbyteries of parishes of two or three clustered churches impossibly ‘managed’ by one priest are manned up by the wonderful priests abroad especially by the Polish and African priests who bear the brunt of racism, ill treatment and non-importation into the Diocese.

    Thanks to the proactive press corp of the Universe and Herald these crucial issues are now in the open and now being debated. An anecdotal episode contrasts the way the press is run compared with our Diocese. Some time ago the Catholic Herald were alerted by me that they had an insert from ‘Medicine Sans Frontiers’ on a regular basis. This organisation confirmed to me that they actually perform abortions. Thus in Catholic churches we canvass support for abortion providers. Swift action by the managing director and editor of the Catholic Herald stopped this practice immediately (the Universe having stopped some time before). The Tablet continues the practice. Again I had written to the Vicar General and Bishop about this several times with no response, no action, inertia and passive aggressive reaction to the death of the unborn both locally and indeed by the national Bishops conference in England and Wales. This was in sharp contrast to the action taken by the staff of the Catholic Herald. I stand by every word of my letter to the Universe and commend the Catholic Herald coverage for obvious reasons.

    Finally Mgr Sexton said from the pulpit today “Don’t believe everything you read in the papers.” He presumably includes the Hallam News in this advice!

    Many thanks

    Mr Liam Jenkinson

    • Liam,

      I’m glad you have managed to get some publicity out of the Catholic papers but it won’t last – trust me. You’re the new kid on the block, not yet identified to them as a troublemaker, but once they learn that you’ve been bad mouthed from the pulpit, they are more likely than not to add your name to the rest of our names, on the censored list. I sincerely hope I’m wrong but that’s been the form so far. I must have written more letters to those same newspapers than St Paul wrote to the early churches combined, and after the initial one or two, there’s been a Catholic Truth Blackout. Time will tell. Whatever, well done for rattling cages in Hallam. Well DONE!

    • Some years ago I amused myself by working out the retiral dates of all the priests in St Andrews and Edinburgh Archdiocese and comparing the rundown with the replacement influx from seminaries. I averaged the number of seminarians by year. It was easy to calculate the point where the the number of retirees exceeded new ordinations. The result of the imbalance would inevitably be closed churches and combined parishes. And so…
      Perhaps though, this comment should go under the article on Archbishop T’s proud boast concerning Catholic schools?
      Taking Bishops to task is a fruitless exercise. They have no humility. I tried it with Cardinal O’Brien after he delivered a particularly self congratulatory homily in St Mary’s Cathedral. I raised the matter of Catholic education and falling vocations. (Inshallah!)

  69. Here’s wisdom.

    Bishop Athanasius Schneider’s 12 steps to surviving as a Catholic family in a heretical wasteland

    ROME, May 27, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) – As the battle for the very soul of the family and all its members intensifies around the world with the push for sexual anarchy veiled as “education,” the undermining of what is truly masculine and feminine in the name of “gender rights,” and the destruction of marriage masquerading as “equality,” a spiritual leader who has suffered under the terror of a communist regime has laid out a survival plan for Catholic parents who find themselves in a secular, relativistic, and hostile environment but who simply want to raise their children to become future citizens of heaven.

    Bishop Athanasius Schneider of Kazakhstan told LifeSiteNews in an exclusive interview earlier this month that Catholic parents must take seriously their “first duty” of raising their children in the faith if their children are to overcome the negative and even hostile influences that are pressing in from all sides and seeking to destroy.

    In a wide-ranging interview that covered his experience as a Catholic boy growing up under communism, his thoughts on what it means to be a Catholic family today, his thoughts on education, bad parishes and dioceses run by agenda-driven priests and bishops, as well as his views on how faithful laity should address concerns about Pope Francis, the bishop laid out twelve steps that he said Catholic parents must take to safeguard their families and their children.

    Bishop Schneider said that to survive in a heretical wasteland, Catholic parents must:

    1. See persecution as a grace from God for becoming purified and strengthened, not simply as something negative.
    2. Become rooted yourself in the Catholic faith through study of the Catechism.
    3. Protect your family’s integrity above all else.
    4. Catechize your children as your first duty.
    5. Pray with your children daily, such as litanies and the Rosary.
    6. Turn your home into a domestic church.
    7. In the absence of a priest and Sunday Mass, make spiritual communion.
    8. Withdraw your family from a parish spreading error and attend a faithful parish, even if you have to travel far.
    9. Withdraw your children from school if they are encountering immoral danger in sex-ed.
    10. If you cannot withdraw your children, establish a coalition of parents to fight for that right.
    11. Fight for parental rights using available democratic tools.
    12. Be prepared for persecution in protecting your children (see first point).

    The bishop said that being a Catholic “family” in the truest sense of the word is the key to survival. “From my experience of the time of the persecution, the vital importance is the family, the integrity of the family, and that both parents are deeply rooted in the faith. This is then transmitted to the children. I would like to say that the children have to receive the faith with the milk of the mother. And then the first task of the parents is to transmit to the children the purity, the beauty, the integrity of the Catholic faith in a simple manner.

    • Thanks for that list of advice from +Schneider, Athanasius, its very helpful.

      I was going to ask what (beyond praying together) he meant by “domestic church”, but googled instead and found a decent list.

      Posting it here, in-case it is of use to others. Any other suggestions gratefully received!


      Domestic church traditions

      The blessing of the home: Whether your domestic church is a house or an apartment, invite a priest to come to bless it, either when you first move in or at any time. In addition to blessing your home, you may enthrone your home to the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Invite a priest to assist you with the enthronement or do it on your own by hanging up the images in your home and praying the following prayer together.

      Act of family consecration: Most Sacred Heart of Jesus and Immaculate Heart of Mary, we consecrate ourselves and our entire family to you. We consecrate to you: our very being and all our life. All that we are. All that we have. And all that we love. To you we give our bodies, our hearts and our souls. To you we dedicate our home and our country. Mindful of this consecration, we promise you to live the Christian way by the practice of Christian virtues, with great regard for respect for one another. O Most Sacred Heart of Jesus and Immaculate Heart of Mary, accept our humble confidence and this act of consecration by which we entrust ourselves and all our family to you. Most Sacred Heart of Jesus, have mercy on us. Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us.

      Devotions: Praying the Rosary is a popular devotion for many Catholic families, who, through its mysteries, reflect on significant events in Scripture pertaining to Jesus and Mary. Wearing the brown scapular is a devotion whereby the person places himself or herself under the protection of the Blessed Mother.

      Sacred images and sacramentals: A domestic church should be filled with sacred images and sacramentals. Holy pictures and crucifixes should be hung throughout. A holy-water font can be placed by the front door in order to bless oneself with holy water and remind you of your baptism. Holy water should be regularly sprinkled throughout the home.

      Parental blessings: Parents can trace the Sign of the Cross with their thumb or forefinger on their child’s forehead at any time while asking God to bless him or her.

      Celebrate namedays: Celebrate your family’s namedays, which are the days dedicated to each person’s patron saint.

      Follow the liturgical year: Families can pray the Liturgy of the Hours together.

      Creating family traditions: Establish your own family traditions. Enjoy regular dinners together, connecting as a family, sharing and praying together. Incorporate a holy pilgrimage into the family vacation by visiting shrines.

  70. Latest from Rennant TV – I don’t think I’ve ever seen Michael Matt so angry. (no wonder).

    • Therese,

      Brilliant! I am so glad to see such justifiable – dutiful – anger in Michael Matt. What a scandal. I’m afraid I know very little through to nothing about these film stars so I didn’t think much of these awards when I saw them reported, didn’t read the text. But hearing the details – utterly scandalous.

      I recommend we all use this latest fad of Pope Francis, his new Q & A website so see if we get answers to our questions along the lines indicated by Michael in that excellent video. I can think of a dozen off the top of my head, so we must search for the website address and get typing on there, fully aware that we are about as likely to receive an answer as we are likely to receive one of those ever so humble phone calls.

  71. Therese

    Thanks for posting that Remnant TV clip. It is absolutely incredible that a Successor of St. Peter should choose possibly the three most hostile apostate Catholics in Hollywood to present awards to. I can hardly believe he did that. And not a word of objection from a single prelate!!

    Michael Matt was justifiably angry at this scandalous abuse of authority by this ultra liberal Pope who is greatly harming the faith. How long will the hierarchy tolerate him before standing up for Our Lord? Has even one bishop in the Church got sufficient zeal for the faith left in him to stand up for divine truth and the salvation of souls? It doesn’t look like it.

    Michael Matt looked worn out, and no wonder.

  72. The Remnant Newspaper have a small article on Bishop de Galarreta on the possible recognition of the SSPX. See link:

    And here is more information from Catholic Family News:

    I wonder if the recognition of the SSPX depends upon the Society recognising Vatican II? Or, Bishop De Galarreta expressing his own thoughts? The Vatican needs to be forthright in its approaches to the SSPX and speak plainly.

    Our Lady of Fatima – pray for us.

    • Well the irony is that a Personal Prelature would not be possible without the SSPX implicitly acknowledging the validity of VII. For it was from VII that this canonical structure was born. I don’t have a problem with this. Only the Razoristers and the Sedefakeartists would have a problem.

    • Theresa Rose

      It’s only certain documents of Vatican II that the SSPX cannot accept, the two rejected by Archbishop Lefebvre which were/are Dignitatis Humanae (on religious freedom) and Gaudium et Spes (Church in the modern world). The Archbishop like his SSPX today never said that Vatican II was invalid. In fact, the Archbishop said that it was convoked with legitimate authority but taken over by liberals.

    • Theresa Rose, thank you for that link to The Remnant article on Bishop Galarreta. halfway down said article is a link to a video talk given by Archbishop Lefebvre. It’s in French with (not a completely accurate translation) and it would be worth learning the language in order to listen to it. C’est magnifique, as would say our friend, Lionel in Paris! One day the Archbishop will be canonised!

  73. Aquinas1225,

    I agree. But I don’t recall Archbishop Lefebvre and the SSPX ever rejecting the validity of Vatican II. They have always maintained that Vatican II was a valid Council of the Church. Archbishop Lefebvre refused to sign two of its documents and lamented the usurpation of the Council by a clique of liberals, but he never rejected the authority of the Council itself. In fact he participated in it, as we all know. Well maybe not “all”. It seems those “Razoristers” and “Sedefakeartists” you mention have rather selective memories when it comes to facts like these!

    • Athanasius, I think that ++Lefebvre signed some documents that he later regretted. I do not blame him for this, given the underhanded and ambiguous nature of the VII ambush on the Faith. I suspect that he would have rejected much more if VII had proper procedural and consultative processes in place.

  74. Summa

    There is an inerview with Archbishop Lefebvre somewhere on the SSPX Asia website in which he declares that he refused to sign only two of the 16 documents of Vatican II because of their outright contradiction of Church teaching. The rest he may have had reservations about but didn’t see them as the same threat to faith. The enemies of the SSPX try to make out that the Archbishop signed all the documents of Vatican II and then recanted his signature on two of them. But this is completely untrue. They confuse (probably deliberately) the formal signing of conciliar documents with the signing of the register that accompanied them to declare one’s presence during the debate and vote.

  75. Reading through death notices I came across this gem; “ashes reposing at her home from…etc. I mean I have ashes reposing at my home every other day….in the hearth!!! I think that it’s a sad day when people come to venerate ashes of a deceased in the same fashion as they would the “mortal remains” in other words BODY of the deceased. It wouldn”t have happened 60 years or so ago when The Church took a more serious view of cremation. Or does anyone else agree?? Am I being over the top here?

    • Spiritus

      You’re right about cremation, it was absolutely forbidden to Catholics before Vatican II. Those who requested it before death were denied the Rites of the Church. Now anything goes because they no longer believe that the body was a temple of the Holy Ghost in life.

      The only exception for cremation was when plague necessitated a quick disposal of remains in an effort to stem the spread of the disease.

  76. Currently hearing “once I had a secret love..” on the radio( not by choice). Isn’t that song sorta related to AL? (Sodomy?) Or have I got that wrong also? Hope to catch up with many bloggers on 18th. Can’t wait!

    • I don’t think that particular song has anything to do with homosexuality. It was originally sung by Doris Day in Calamity Jane, which was way back when homosexuality was anything but fashionable!

  77. The Summa of the South Seas is Glasgow bound at the end of June. On route from Terra Australis we will be staying in the Holy Cities of St Francis and St Barbara before flying over to city that never sleeps. We are so thrilled to find out that when in the Big Apple, there are two once a year events on: Gay Pride March and World Naked Bike Ride. How lucky are we?

  78. I have a question regarding TAN books. I have several of their publications and had always perceived them as a solid traditional publisher (which I believe was founded in response to V2 and the ensuing carnage).

    However recently I got their “Manual for spiritual warfare” and was surprised to encounter very modern things inside – e.g. talk of “anointing of the sick” as opposed to “extreme unction / last rites” and inclusion of the luminous mysteries, to give some examples. I also note the book was approved by a contemporary Bishop in 2015.

    This hasn’t spoiled my enjoyment of the book, which I feel I benefiting from (not finished it yet), but it has raised my eyebrows.

    Was my previous perception of TAN incorrect, or has their stance changed somewhat? TAN was bought over by “St Benedict Press” in 2008, was this acquisition perhaps related to possible changes behind the scenes?

    (Don’t get me wrong, the book still contains much which you would never hear in a million years in the typical parish – useful information about the Catholic faith etc, that kind of thing.)

    TAN also do a “Manual for Eucharistic Adoration” which I was intending on buying. Does anyone have any comments on that?

  79. More form Hallam:

    At a Hallam Catholic Primary School an 8 year old boy has returned to School after half term and at his Mothers instructions he is to be treated in all respects as a girl called Amber. The clergy say that legally they don’t have a leg to stand on but should the Church be following the law of God or the law of the land? Any expert advice is welcome so we can start an informed dialogue about the Church’s stance locally and nationally.

    • Liam,

      I’m about to leave my computer behind for the day so haven’t time to Google the link but there has been a statement from the Vatican, I’m almost certain, to the (obvious) effect that we must recognise the gender which God gave us at birth.

      Otherwise, think about it, I could end up as Pope!

      • “In 2002 the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith of the Vatican issued a letter sent without public release to every Bishop. It clearly stated that such surgical procedures do not alter a person’s gender and that in no circumstance are baptismal records of such individuals who have undergone them to be altered. Further, the document made clear that no one who has undergone such a surgery is eligible to marry, be ordained to the priesthood or enter the religious life. At the time the letter was sent from Rome, Bishop Wilton D. Gregory of Belleville, Ill., was the President of the U.S. bishops’ conference. He sent a letter to all US Bishops in which he wrote “The altered condition of a member of the faithful under civil law does not change one’s canonical condition, which is male or female as determined at the moment of birth.” The Gender Identity or Gender Expression Movement seeks the recognition in the positive law of a right to choose one’s gender and laws which accommodate, fund, and enforce such a new “right”. Those involved in the activist wing of the movement seek to compel the rest of society to recognize their vision of a brave new world or face the Police Power of the State. The Pope is absolutely correct, “the profound falsehood of this theory and of the anthropological revolution contained within it is obvious.”
        Full article here:-

        There are many cases of people regretting undergoing surgery to resemble a member of the opposite sex. The case of Walt Heyer is one of the most prominent examples. Once one of the darlings of the ‘LGBT’ movement, after masquerading as a woman for a time, he became a (non-Catholic) Christian and returned to living as a male – which is when the ‘LGBT’ movement turned on him. No surprises there. His website is here:-

        • WF,

          You have answered Liam’s question to perfection. Those links are all anyone needs to answer the pro-“trans” lobby and sympathisers within the Church.

          Hey up, our Liam – learn Westminster Fly’s response by heart and get thee to the diocesan office forthwith!

  80. We should carefully consider our position when our formation and beliefs bring us into conflict with the laws of the land. While we are required to “render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s” that cannot include our conscience. We are increasingly moving towards a state where Christianity is not tolerated. If our occupation puts us in the way of conflict we can choose to give up our occupation. This is to yield ground to the bad people. To accede to the wishes of the law may be necessary in order to maintain one’s livelihood. It is not an easy decision. To resist the bad laws, to disobey them presents different problems, no less serious.
    The people who propose and enact laws that will cause such conflict do not mind that this creates difficulty for Christians. They welcome it. They are amoral and working to destroy us, although they would argue that such an outcome is a by-product, and not an objective.
    We have step by backward step conceded everything to the agents of Hell. Our bishops have gone along with it, merely decrying it sotto voce from the pulpit from time to time. Had they acted as their calling demands, they would all be in prison. We have been effectively abandoned by them. We may be sure that unless they act then the slide will continue inexorably.

    • Thank you for the responses so far. The Headmistress in this situation has been put in an impossible situation because of the failure of the hierarchy and clergy locally to follow their own policy guidelines, most notably those of Pope Benedict. I have learned that there is a formal and an informal educative process. The very fact of the events now unfolding in this case means that the sensitive consciences of very young children are blighted by the infamy and corrupting influences of these events.

      The families of these children are similarly affected. Furthermore every primary school in the diocese is now compromised and will have to accept this “norm” should a similar event arise in their school. The senior cleric involved has said that we need to follow the local authority guidelines otherwise we would be sued. Thus money trumps conscience and morality yet again. We should follow the lead and inspiring example of the guest house owners who refused to accommodate a gay couple saying it went against their religious principles. They were fined but maintained their morality. Similarly the family bakery who refused to bake a cake with a gay icon on it were also fined but upheld their own morality.

      The headteachers left to carry the can by our weak hierarchy deserve our unfailing support. As with abortifacients, euthanasia we now have further attacks on the integrity of marriage and the family unit. On these and other issues we should remember the advice of Alexander Solzhenitsyn who said that the worst aspect of living under the communist regime was that eventually when innocent people were imprisoned and killed no one reacted! I would venture to advise fellow bloggers to the follow the example of Robert Aske leader of the pilgrim of grace who said before he was murdered by Henry viii “we will lot put up with this new religion.

      Any further insights and advice would be most welcome.

  81. Liam Jenkinson,

    There is no way the Church and school can accept that boy as a girl. They must stand firm over this and let themselves be taken to court if necessary.

    I also think the Church in Scotland should be standing up and speaking out about the evil Named Person scheme.

    This video clip shows how determined the SNP are to push this scheme through

    This video clip shows Nicola Sturgeon clearly not being truthful.

    • MM,

      Thank you for those video clips – Mzzzz Sturgeon is seen, her dishonesty laid bare for all on YouTube to see.

      The NO2NP campaigners have done excellent work in exposing the Scottish Government’s duplicity and contempt for the electorate, in particular for the rights of parents, in pushing this ridiculous NP scheme. And “scheme” is the operative word – their scheming to attack and intrude on family life is a scandal too far.

  82. Thank You Margret Mary.

    Just got in from Mass and I should have added the following to My earlier blog.

    Other head teachers in the diocese with no support from the hierarchy and the governors will be left to compromise their conscience and share in the guilt of an others sin by silence etc. (see penny catechism).

    These events should prompt us to take a reality check on the overall situation we are faced with. A 1960s Catholic dictionary said that the Greek for heresy meant ‘to choose’. According to R. Knox and others resisting a known truth is a sin against the Holy Spirit and the sin against the Holy Spirit according to the Gospels will not be forgiven in this world or the next. Thus Priests who by accident, design, default or omission resist the known truth, say a valid Mass but make an individual sacrilegious communion (I know a Priest who loves the old Latin Mass but doesn’t accept that the contraceptive pill is an abortifacient). This latest attack on the integrity of the Family is another grievous wound inflicted on the mystical Body of Christ.

    When giving a retreat to Pope Benedict Cardinal Biffi quoting Soloviev said that the Antichrist is likely to be a pacifist, ecologist and ecumenist. He went on to say that the Antichrist was not necessarily a person but the reduction of Christianity to an ideology promoting vague spiritual goals rather than focusing on the importance of Christ’s sacrifice. After this reality check I repeat the call of Robert Aske ‘we will not have this new religion’. Onward Catholic Truth.

  83. Thanks to all for support help and guidance. the latest news is that the mother of this unfortunate 8 year old boy (now called Amber “a girl”!) has put an entry in the births column of the Rotherham advertiser thanking the pupils and staff of his school for their support etc. With regard to hierarchical involvement in this affiar thus far I can only quote Isaiah “woe to those who call good evil and evil good.”

  84. What next?

    Europe – The rise of the Horned god
    Be afraid!

    Last week saw the opening of the Gotthard Tunnel – the deepest and longest tunnel in the world, running for an amazing 35.7 miles beneath the Alps. Something to celebrate? Definitely!

    Switzerland thought so too, and they pulled out all the stops, staging a glittering two part extravaganza before an audience of 80,000, which included a host of world leaders such as German Chancellor, Angela Merkel; President of France, Francois Hollande; Prime Minister of Italy, Matteo Renzi, and many others. But the overtly pagan and satanic content has both puzzled and amazed spectators, provoking not a little stunned complaint.

    If this is the first time you have heard of the event, the ceremony opened with a group of orange-clad zombies marching towards the tunnel entrance. There they were seemingly sacrificed, before re-emerging as scantily clad veiled spirits, followed by an actor dressed as a goat, who began ritualistically to consume and mate with the veiled dancers. During this, the huge image of the goat/Satan’s face was displayed on a massive screen, overlooking the proceedings with apparent relish, while three Eygptian scarabs floated in front of his face…

    Read full article at:

    Like us on Facebook at:

  85. I’ve just viewed this atrocity on Youtube. I wonder what Papa Francis would make of this? On second thoughts, I don’t think I want to know.

  86. I thought you might like to hear this bit of news. Utrecht is the Primatial See in the Netherlands and the parish of St. Willibrord was closed by the Archdiocese during reorganisation. Here is a description from a visitors guide to Utrecht:

    “One of the most beautiful neo-gothic churches of the Netherlands. The hidden treasure of Utrecht.
    Hidden in the historic city centre of Utrecht lies the St Willibrordkerk. The church’s wealth of decorations, unique to The Netherlands, will astonish you. Admire the colourful stained-glass windows, the beautiful woodcarvings and the lavishly painted walls and ceilings. The neo-gothic St Willibrordkerk offers the opportunity to experience a characteristic church atmosphere at the time of the Middle Ages.”

    Last year the SSPX started offering Mass in the church on the 1st and 3rd Sundays at 5 p.m. and a few months ago this increased to every Sunday. The Society in now in negotiations to take over the church completely and perhaps some of you would say a prayer for the success of this venture.

    • Thanks for sharing this wonderful news Vianney.

      How did the situation come about? Did the Diocese sell the Church to someone who contacted the Society, or did the local Church authorities actually demonstrate a bit of gumption themselves by inviting the Society?

      Whatever the case, its wonderful news and I am sure the Church will now go from strength to strength as a thriving center of authentic Catholicism.

      If you go to you-tube and search “SSPX Utrecht” there are a number of videos of SSPX masses / activities at this Church, here is one example:

      What a magnificent Church it is.

      • Such a contrast with the archdiocese of Glasgow where a Catholic Church (All Saints in Barmulloch) has become a boxing club. There’s a report in the current Flourish (official organ of the archdiocese) expressing delight at this development, excuse the pun.

      • From what I can gather, the Archdiocese closed the church but the congregation refused to move out and obtained the services of a retired priest, Fr. Kotte, who said the Novus Ordo ad orientem It became independent from the Archdiocese and Fr. Kotte founded the St. Willibrord Foundation which owns the building and upon his death there was a reconciliation with the Archdiocese who put in a priest, Fr. Schnell, who continued saying the Novus ordo, ad orientum, but in Latin. I don’t know what happened to this priest but I believe the SSPX approached the St. Willibrord Foundation requesting use of the church and they agreed. It is certainly a magnificent church and like so many ordinary parish churches in the Netherlands, is huge. In Amsterdam, before the Council, there were ten such churches within walking distance of Dam Square and of the four remaining churches three have Mass (Novus Ordo) in Latin. One of them, De Papegaai (the Parrot) a short walk from the Royal Palace, has both Sunday Masses in Latin. Ironically in the Netherlands, while their modern churches are often hideous beyond believe, many, perhaps most, of the older churches have never been vandalised and retain their original furnishings. Instead of pulling out the high altars they simply put a table in front and many retained the altar rails. The following video is in Dutch but it gives a great close up of the High Altar,

        • Thanks for the great info and video Vianney.

          So we can thank people power and Fr Kotte!

          Interesting you mention Amsterdam and its central Churches. I think there is a former Church right on Dam square which is now flats. The only Church I have been to there is St Agnes (FSSP; near Vondelpark). Despite visiting a few times, I haven’t yet made it to the Cathedral near the train station.

          Have you been to “Our Lord in the attic” in Amsterdam? A town house which was secretly converted to a Catholic Church inside, during times of persecution. Its quite remarkable.

          • The church on Dam Square is De Nieuwe Kerk, (the New Church,) which is no longer a functioning church and is used for concerts and exhibitions. It is still used for the inauguration of the monarch and the King and Queen were married there. I have been to Our Lord in the Attic and it was one of 40 clandestine churches that existed in the city. Each of these churches had a nickname like the dove, the parrot, the sower, and if people knew there was a church in a particular street they would walk down looking for a door with a dove, or a man sowing, or a parrot above the door and that’s where the church was. After Catholics were allowed to worship publicly these clandestine churches were replaced by proper church buildings but retained their nickname. Our Lord in the attic was replaced by St. Nicholas, near the station (it’s the main church in the city but not the cathedral which is in Haarlem) but the old church survived. There are another two clandestine churches and they are still in use. One is in the Begijnhof Chapel in the Begijnhof which is a hidden square off Kalverstraat. The other is St. Peter and St. Paul (the Parrot) in Kalverstaat, just a few hundred yards from the Royal Palace. It is the largest of the hidden churches and was a proper church building hidden behind other buildings. It now has a small frontage on Kalverstraat with a statue of St. Peter and a parrot above the door. Interestingly, you have to go through a turnstile to enter.The Sunday Masses here are all Latin Novus Ordo. The other two city centre churches are Our Lady’s (not far from the back of the Royal Palace) and now served by Opus Dei and the Jesuit church where the 11am Sunday Mass is Novus Ordo in Latin with Gregorian chant. If you are ever back in Amsterdam all five churches are well worth a visit and are very near each other.

            Begijnhof chapel

            The parrot (note the parrot at the top left hand of the photo. How can you hide a church that size?

    • Thank God. Let us hope that the enemy does not put a spanner in the works somewhere.

      Yet another reason to hope that the FSSPX will be “regularised” soon.

  87. We need to put the situation in Hallam, the magnificent work of Catholic truth, under the patronage of St John Fisher who said ” those who should have defended the fort have betrayed it” referring to his fellow Bishops etc. Also St Restituta Kafka who was beheaded by the nazi regime for the defending the rights of the weak and the sick. Faced with the anti religious supression of the nazis she responded by defending religious freedom, and refusing to remove crucifixes at the hospital she worked in, she also counted the swastika sticker with the cross of Christ. Spied on by two ladies she was denounced by a doctor close to the SS arrested on Ash Wednesday 1942 she was sentenced to death on 29th October 1942 and she was beheaded on 30th March 1943. (That’s within my lifetime!) From prison, before her death, she wrote ” No one can take from us the faith we have in our heart. In this way we can build an altar in our own hearts.” A fellow prisoner said of her “She was a saint because in that situation she encouraged everyone, she transmitted a power, a positive spirit, and one of confidence”.
    Without wishing to embarrass her too much the latter statement reminds me of our editor!
    Kind regards

    • Liam,

      You are very kind, if very wrong – I’m not remotely saintly, more’s the pity.

      But worry not – your cheque is in the post!

  88. Latest from Hallam. Bloggers should access schools catholic schools policy transgender students (Catholic-school-policy-and-transgender students). By Edward J Furton PhD. Director of publications national Catholic bioethics centre.

  89. Here is wise words from my son inlaw on the matter.
    “When they talk about genetic tests they mean looking at the sex chromosomes. Normally these are XX (girl) or XY (boy). However, there’s lots of scenarios where you get something else due to mum or dads egg/sperm being abnormal. This could be extra chromosome (like downs but with the sex chromosomes), eg XXY. Furthermore, you could have a mutation with a gene that meant you didn’t develop normally. You could be an XY (chromosomally a boy) with a defective testosterone receptor gene, stopping your body cells from responding to testosterone. The result would be physiologically developing as a girl, but biologically being a boy.

    So the genetic test won’t be a “solve-all” in every case. But the whole conflict if I’ve understood the dilemma correctly, is that gender is a social construct and biological sex is a scientific description (albeit with certain exceptions – as always).

    What I’m concerned by is the threat of a new form of bigotry, in this case based around gender identity, being picked up by the loony-left and being used to bully institutions like schools etc into bending over backwards to accommodate the minority. What we end up with is the majority being distracted and prevented from getting on with the task at hand, whilst we pamper the neuroticism of whoever the supposedly oppressed group of the moment is.

    My Dad was one of a handful of child psychiatrists in the country who specialised in helping children with gender issues, the vast majority were situations where there was either chromosomal or birth abnormalities. I chatted to him about this very issue the other week and he was quite clear that there’s a social / political undertone to some of this that has nothing to do with the difficulty and suffering of a small minority. Its serving the liberals who long to find potential human rights issues to champion in any environment no matter how obscure. Its almost entirely self-serving and will do more harm to children than good.

    I’ve got some academic papers that my Dad and a few others wrote on gender identity etc. If anyone wants to looks at them let me know and i’ll send you the links.”

    From all sources from Catholic truth etc the following now seems quite clear: the churches teaching is that the Gender inserted on the baptismal certificate for all time denotes the churches stance on an individual’s gender. Whatever happens in life thereafter does not change this baptismal gender definition. To add more weight to the brilliant blog above there is a small vociferous militant world wide view pushing this transgender agenda. Ps my son pointed out that on the ground headteachers and governors have policies for school covering dress code, hair colour school uniform etc. Thus a catholic school policy should also state clearly that boys should not come to school dressed as girls and vice versa.

  90. Just written to CDF asking them to instruct the Bishop of Hallam, the Vicar General and Parish Priest to immediately reverse their decision for the school to treat an 8 year old boy as a girl etc.

    Editor: I’ve now posted a thread on this matter, using your letter to the CDF as the introductory piece. Thank you for posting it here. Click here to read the new thread.

  91. FYI – in case not already posted – there’s a new Latin mass being offered in St Mary’s Cleland every Thu at 7pm. This Thu will be last for the summer but it attracted approx 100 at the first one last week which was heartening…

    • Thanks Michelangelo, I had heard of this initiative and am glad to hear that it has had a good response from lay people already.

      My understanding is that the mass in Cleland will become a permanent weekly mass from (I think) August.

  92. The latest “unbelievable” from The Remnant:


    In his blogpost Monday, Bishop Robert Lynch said that Catholicism “targets” and “often breeds contempt for gays, lesbians and transgender people.” The seed of contempt, he said, turns into hatred, “which can ultimately lead to violence.” Unless this attitude changes, he states, “we can expect more Orlandos.”

    “Sadly, it is religion, including our own, which targets, mostly verbally, and also often breeds contempt for gays, lesbians and transgender people. Attacks today on LGBT men and women often plant the seed of contempt, then hatred, which can ultimately lead to violence.” …Bishop Robert Lynch

    In Breitbart’s report on this bizarre blogpost, author Thomas D. Williams notes: “In his post, the bishop made no attempt to explain how a 29-year-old Muslim who never stepped foot in a Catholic Church would have been motivated to carry out his deed by a supposed Catholic “contempt” for homosexuality.” READ ARTICLE HERE

    REMNANT COMMENT: Such reckless irresponsibility on the part of a Catholic bishop at a time like this is nothing short of dangerous. Bishop Bob Lynch should be forced to retire for trying to politicize this horrific tragedy even before the police and FBI have discovered the facts of the case.

    Nothing is known for sure, other than that lots of people are dead after a Muslim shooter started spraying lead in a gay nightclub in Orlando. Reports are coming out today that the shooter himself may have been a homosexual, with the Associated Press reporting that Omar Mateen is reported to have been a regular at the nightclub. One witness told the AP that Mateen tried to pick up men there.

    So, what now? Is His Excellency going to blog blame the entire gay community (like he did the Catholic community) for this mass shooting, because the gay community didn’t do enough to make this nutter feel good about himself? No, of course not. The Bishop’s agenda is all about one thing: ingratiating himself with the far-Left.

    For Bishop Bob the politically correct message is: “Catholicism is homophobic, and aren’t I something for admitting the truth!” This on the very day when criminal proceedings were initiated against the Archbishop of Valencia, Cardinal Antonio Canizares—the “Little Ratzinger”—for inciting ‘hate crimes’ in a recent homily in defense of the Christian family in Spain.

    “The family is haunted today in our culture,” said the Cardinal, “by an endless threat of serious difficulties, and this is not hidden from anyone. We have legislation contrary to the family, the action of political and social forces, with added movements and actions of the gay empire, of ideas such as radical feminism or the most insidious of all, gender theory.”

    On June 3, 2016, a criminal complaint of hate speech was filed against the Cardinal by a coalition of pro-LGBT associations in Spain (including the Communist party). Would Bishop Lynch agree that those charges should indeed be filed against his brother bishop for defending the ‘homophobic’ moral theology of the Catholic Church? Apparently so.

    As for the merits (or lack thereof) of Bishop Bob’s statement, is it even necessary to respond to such crude and transparent kowtowing to the gods of political correctness? Are we to believe that His Excellency has suddenly developed amnesia, and just clean forgot that the whole revolutionary idea of the Catholic religion is to turn the other cheek, to love the sinner, to work for the salvation of all, to hate no one, even our greatest enemies?

    Remember all that, Bishop Bob? And this is to say nothing of the fact that the vast majority of Catholics today have more or less abandoned the Church’s moral teaching on homosexuality anyway. So what Bishop Bob is actually targeting here is a strawman. He’s doing what American bishops do best—kissing up to the far-Left, which is why his blogpost also calls for more gun control, less enorcement of immigration laws and an end to Islamic profiling.

    The reality is this: The Catholic Church has never taught, suggested or implied to anyone, anywhere or at any time that hate is okay, that murdering those who do not believe is an option, that slaughtering sinners and, objectively speaking, sending them straight to hell is somehow pleasing to Almighty God.

    The idea of murdering unrepentant sinners is arguably more repugnant to Catholics than to the followers of any other religion. We are the ones who still believe in the ‘antiquated and medieval’ notion of everlasting hellfire. We revere the Sacrament of Extreme Unction, whereby sinners are given one last chance to make themselves ready to meet God and save their immortal souls. For faithful Catholics, very few things on this earth are more terrifying than the thought of sudden and unprepared death for themselves and indeed for any and all of God’s children.

    Not all religions share this sentiment. The Sword Verse, for example, is the fifth verse of the ninth sura of the Qur’an. It is the Qur’anic verse widely-cited by critics of Islam to suggest the faith promotes violence against “pagans” (“idolators”), because it orders believers to “fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them.”

    But Bishop Bob says nothing about this in his blog post, of course, since it was so much easier for him to tell the world that Catholicism is to blame for Omar Mateen’s rampage. Political animals like Bishop Bob refuse to connect the dots, even if and when the shooter is standing in the doorway, AR-15 in hand, shouting “Allahu Akbar and “death to the infidel” as he mows down his fellow human beings.

    It’s Christianity’s fault, says Bishop Bob. Why? Because Muslims might take umbrage at the truth, and Bishop Bob is a coward who is using hate speech against soft targets. Christians can be counted on to do what Christians always do–turn the other cheek. So Bishop Bob has no problem making grandiose statements against Christians, which, by the way, are so very pleasing to the kids at MSNBC. He even asks us to make the monumental leap that an Islamic guy shooting up a gay nightclub is the result of the teachings of the Catholic Church. There’ll be no consequences for his outrageous claim, of course, and Bishop Bob knows it. In fact, he counts on it — that’s how “dangerous” Christians are in the real world.

    As the situation goes from bad to worse in our country, let’s not forget that Bishop Robert Lynch chose to ignore the facts about this horrific act of violence in order to issue a statement in support of his leftist ideology that further polarized people on all sides. Instead of bringing people together, he pointed fingers of blame, using hateful rhetoric that could so easily inspire still more violence, this time against people who had absolutely nothing to do with this twisted terrorist act. In other words, the Bishop is part of the problem, not the solution.

    Please pray for the victims of this truly ungodly and grotesquely anti-Christian act of terrorism in Orlando.

    • As you can see, Therese, the UK faithful don’t have a corner on the apostate bishop market. The US bishops, though, do have a tidy little corner on the illegal immigrant market, since they receive millions of federal dollars to process and relocate them – especially Mexicans, but now Syrians as well. It seems the worship of political correctness goes well with the worship of money…

    • Therese,

      Beyond belief – in truckloads.

      There are plenty of people close to the Orlando shooter who claim that he was “gay” – selection of articles below…

      Bishop Lynch is a disgrace and should be forced to resign but just imagine the LGBT Banana Brigade rushing to cause mayhem if he were in any way reprimanded or disciplined.

      I fear we’re stuck with such apostate bishops until the Consecration of Russia is carried out.

    • Therese
      Great post! Of course the Catholic Church is blamed for most acts of violence. No religious tolerence there! Great to have had your company over the weekend. Wasn’t it wonderful.

      • Spiritus

        Thanks pet! You’re right – it was great, and I was happy to meet so many soulmates – especially those with birthdays so near to my own! Hope your journey home was as uneventful as mine – and that your hound was as happy to see you as was my feline to see me!

        • Yes it was a great weekend and we loved meeting so many bloggers too. Congratulations to all who organised the conference.

          • Elizabeth, Therese, Spiritus, et al.,

            It was a great pleasure to meet you and to indulge in some person to person conversation. Now I can put faces to blog names, which is great. I thoroughly enjoyed the Conference. Just to be in the company of so many like-minded Catholics was a treat.


            Please pass on my regards to your husband, who is an absolute gentleman. I’m glad you all had a safe onward journey.

            • Thank you Athanasius for your kind comments. It was a pleasure for both of us to meet you too.

          • Spiritus, Therese, Elizabeth

            It was wonderful to meet you all (well, Spiritus, for the second time – we met at the Cork Conference some years ago)

            I’m delighted you all enjoyed the Conference. Thankfully, that seems to be the sentiments of most who attended. I had a telephone call from a woman who couldn’t praise it enough, especially, she said, to see the mixture of diocesan priests, religious priests, and traditional clergy all working together to make the Conference a success. That was, indeed, truly marvellous.

            The feedback was very positive, mostly full of praise; the only criticisms were perfectly justifiable matters of practicality and will be used to improve future events.

            Elizabeth, I second Athanasius’s praise of your husband; as I said to him when we were taking our “goodbyes” (for now!) he is the quintessential English gentleman. A pleasure to have met him, a truly lovely, kindly, man. Oh, and he had a truly lovely wife!

            Thank you for making your lengthy journeys to attend, and for going to the expense of travelling from Ireland and England for the meeting. Very much appreciated and now, as Athanasius says, it is great to be able to put faces to blog names!

            God bless.

          • Comment of june 22nd at 8.47 is in response to therese’s enquiry if my mutt was glad to see me back home. I think though that he knew the good times were over when “mammy” arrived back home!

  93. Andrew,

    I am more than happy to launch a thread containing your correspondence on this but I am up to my eyes today with last minute preparations for the Conference tomorrow.

    I suggest you post the material here, first of all, and if the subject is not exhausted before I get back to providing “normal service” – which will be Tuesday, I’m afraid, due to visitors staying over from the Conference since we can’t abandon them in Sauchiehall Street! – I will then launch a particular thread to discuss it. Sometimes, the significance of an issue gets overlooked on this thread but when we launch a dedicated thread on the subject, it takes off, so that may be the case here. If so, I apologise for not being able to attend to it today but I’ve already been out and home once, and have a list of boxes still to tick, so I really can’t post it today. I hope you understand.

    You may wish to post your correspondence over the the EU thread, rather than here, and again, if it doesn’t take off there, I’ll launch a thread on Tuesday.

    Hope this is OK with you.

  94. Michael Matt, Editor of the Remnant Newspaper, reports that Fox News has called for the resignation of Pope Francis.

    Extract from the Remnant’s Fox News article:

    “At this point it is clear, Bergoglio has repeatedly proven himself unable to lead, and is doing incalculable damage to the Church that will take decades to heal.

    “Pope Francis should resign, and Catholics should demand it, so the Church can begin recovering from the havoc his ill-advised and arrogant papacy has wrought.”

    • Gerontius,

      Thank you for posting that link – I’d have missed that. I laughed when I read the first comment below the article:

      “Yes, pretty bad when you have to pray for the conversion of the pope.”

      And so say all of us!

      • “Is the Pope a catholic?”. Sadly, no. Or at least he doesn’t speak and behave like one unfortunately. He needs prayers so that he will survive his Judgement. It would be great though if he did convert and become a great Pope.

  95. I received the following email which you will find self-explanatory and, I believe, very interesting….

    Dear Catholic Truth,

    Thought perhaps you and your readers would be interested in this report and photos of the solemn consecration of the City of Aliquippa, Pennsylvania, to the Immaculate Heart of Mary and the Sacred Heart of Jesus that took place on 4 June 2016. The consecration was performed by the Roman, Byzantine, and Ukrainian Catholic pastors of the parishes located in Aliquippa, and the mayor.

    We hope this solemn consecration will serve as an example to others, so please pass along to anyone you think would be interested,

    Wishing you a blessed month of the Sacred Heart,

    A. Todd Wilson, Past Grand Knight
    Woodlawn Council 2161

    • DOTF

      Thank you for that and I will take a look asap. I’m still trying to catch up with this blog (not to mention other lesser interesting things like housework!) following our Conference on Saturday. Be assured, however, that I will take a look asap and try to comment.

  96. RCA Victor,

    Sorry about this, but your comment of 4.52 pm went into SPAM This seems to be happening more and more, but I haven’t had time to contact the WordPress support people. It is on my list of things to do asap, though, so don’t give up hope!

  97. I’ve consulted various tea leaves and smoke signals, thrown dice three times that came up snake eyes, studied encrypted emails delivered by carrier pigeon, and through my thorough analysis concluded that the Conference was a huge success, esp. Petrus’ talk! (Though my sources informed me that Petrus failed to accompany himself on the organ…)

    Hearty congratulations to Editor, to all the speakers, and to one and all!

    • RCA Victor,

      Thank you for that – every speaker was given the thumbs up – all talks were very good indeed… even Petrus’ talk… “Growing up in the contemporary Church”? It’s a miracle the Church survived – he was some kid… 😀

      Also top notch were the Chairman/MC (Gabriel Syme) and the chairman of the discussions (reader Jim, who once blogged here but rumour has it he is now too busy raising his growing family to speak to the rest of us! )

      All in all it was a great Conference. Supa Dupa, in fact…

  98. I can’t remember which thread brought up the issue of the real nature of Freemasonry, and who the exchange was with (might have been Margaret Mary), but I mentioned that she should consult the writings of John Salza, a Catholic lawyer, former Freemason, and frequent speaker at Traditionalist conferences.

    Here is an interview with Mr. Salza conducted by Bishop Sheridan of Colorado Springs, Colorado. The topic: “Why Catholics Can’t be Freemasons”:

    • Westminsterfly,

      I am praying for a “LEAVE” vote tomorrow. Our Lady of Good Success pray for us!

  99. Spiritus,

    That is a heart-rending report about the girl who was raped and yet refused abortion only to have her baby removed by social services. How perverse!

    It shows that it is the anti-child mentality that the abortion providers are pushing, it’s really got nothing to do with women’s rights. That’s just the excuse.

  100. Euthansia
    Professor Pullicino needs our support and prayers and we should carefully study his advice available through all normal channels. See also issue number 60 pro life times-SPUC. Following his guidelines I have gone into hospices etc where good Catholics were being killed through dehydration and starvation what happens is the patient is given a “chemical cosh” to induce a coma and then starved and dehydrated to death. My involvement sometimes succeeds and sometimes doesn’t. Two lovely Catholic ladies took three and five days respectively to die. Their families thinking that the experts knew best. Transgender blog shows there are some areas where we can get directly involved in saving life and this is another one. There were some success stories most notably a lapsed Catholic who the hospital had advised should be “put down” like a dog he lived another six months after my intervention was reconciled to the church had the last rights and a Catholic funeral. I do urge bloggers to study the professor and dialogue and intervene wherever possible to save lives.

    • Liam

      You raise a very good point re:euthanasia in hospices. Imagine if that poor man had been “put down” as some would have wished. The chances are that he may have been lost for all eternity. Instead he was given a further chance to make his peace with God and thus save his soul. Perhaps also to have the opportunity to offer up some of his suffering and repair for his sins and those of others. People often forget that in seeking to end earthly suffering they may be doing a great injustice to souls not as right before God as they should be or to those good catholics for whom suffering presents an opportunity to prove love of God.

  101. Even though I have written to the Tablet and told them that their insert for Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) means they are promoting an organisation that performs abortions their latest issue repeats this evil advertising. Indeed before supporting any charity CAFOD with its condom provision etc and secular charities generally one should check with SPUC who have a comprehensive analysis of which charities Catholic’s can support. For example even the British Heart Foundation supports embryo research. As per my blogs on the transgender link this is another way we can become involved in the total war against life itself and the Family.

    • From Liam

      I should have added re. Euthanasia that Patients Faith Network have an advisory service for those concerned that someone is in immediate danger of enthanasia phone number 08001691719.

      Sometimes insights I get give me so much concern that I disscus them in confession before mentioning them to others. Thus following confession I relate the following. Dachau concentration camp had 2,500 priests in custody. The last surviving priest Father Scheipers recently died. He found his Nazi file which said he was a fanatical suppotor of the church and thus likely to cause unrest amount the general population. On arrival at Dachau he was told among other things “you are without honour, without help and without rights.” of 530 Polish priest that arrived in Dachau in 1941 only 8 survived their first winter there.

      I have been praying to these priest because the penny catechism says “We are in comunion with each other as in one body in Jesus Christ”. The serious issue is that the comments above without honour, without help, without rights apply in our time to victims of abortifacients, abortions, and euthanasia. The devil detests every conception and human being because they are made in the image and likeness of God and have an eternal destiny which he cannot share, thats the real war we are all currently engaged in. I can tell you from bitter personal experience that intervening in these issues in people’s lives bring accusations of poking my nose in and not minding my own business. In realality however again from the penny catechism we share in the guilt of others sins in 9 ways one of which is silence. Scrooges partner Jacob Marley when reflecting on his life said ” humanity was my business”. The role of the hierarchy and the clergy is the real issue here. In the transgender blog I commented on the role of the papacy in the last war and the ominous silence has gone on since on these issue with some notable exceptions. The video “the pill kills” on the transgender blog explains the fate of the clergy following their culpable silence. Pope Francis has said we don’t need to go on about abortion and contraception all the time and people like me with large families are rabbits and should have only had about 3 children. Like Mrs Thatcher with her many faults none the less said about the EU running the UK no, no, no and I apply this triple rejection to Pope Francis comment’s, call it the rabbits revolt if you wish. When the Prussians were on the outskirts of Nevers someone asked St Bernadette whether she was afraid and she said “the only thing she feared were bad catholics” Things have got much worse than then. Members of my family are in a constant battle against the ethos described by St Bernadette most especially one family member who is a school governor in his battle to uphold the timeless truths of our Catholic Faith. Please offer some prayers for him and all my family engaged in similar warfare.

      Love and prayers
      Liam, Margaret and family

      Editor: Liam, the reason so many of your comments are going into moderation is that you are posting under different names/email addresses. That makes the WordPress system think you are a new blogger, and every first comment from a new blogger automatically goes into moderation and has to wait there until I see it. I suggest you do your best to stick to the same name and email address, as far as possible. Over and out!

      • Liam

        While I greatly respect your outspoken defence of the unborn child, which is admirable and praiseworthy, I must nevertheless express my concern over your repeated claims and/or insinuations of sinful silence on the part of Pope Pius XII during the last war.

        I think the main problem you have, and I have stated this before, is that you are reading the wrong materials in respect to Pius’ Pontificate. Revisionist history is not the same as contemporary testimony. Pius’ Jewish contemporaries were unanimous and adamant in their praise for his efforts to save the Jews. They also agreed with his tactful way of handling the Nazis, which was not to publicly antagonise them with a blanket condemnation that would have exacerbated their fury and revenge.

        Here’s one example from the life of St. Edith Stein that demonstrates the wisdom of holding one’s peace for the greater good:

        “The Dutch Bishops’ Conference had a public statement read in all the churches of the nation on 20 July 1942 condemning Nazi racism. In a retaliatory response on 26 July 1942 the Reichskommissar of the Netherlands, Arthur Seyss-Inquart ordered the arrest of all Jewish converts who had previously been spared. Along with two hundred and forty-three baptized Jews living in the Netherlands, Stein was arrested by the SS on 2 August 1942. Stein and her sister, Rosa, were imprisoned at the concentration camps of Amersfoort and Westerbork before being deported to Auschwitz.”

        What this example tells us is that silence can sometimes be the better choice. Not all silence means consent to sin!

        St. Thomas More, if memory serves, remained silent when asked to explain his refusal to sign the adulterous marriage act of Henry VIII. Now Henry was committing a very grave public sin at that time, and yet St. Thomas remained silent. Why? Surely by your interpretation of the Catechism St. Thomas thereby participated in Henry’s mortal sin and thereby scandalised other souls? Yet we know this was not the case.

        The reason St. Thomas remained silent was because any outspoken condemnation on his part would have been pointless and imprudent, since others besides himself would almost certainly have perished as a result. So you see, not all silence constitues sinful collusion.

        Silence in certain circumstances is the wiser and more effective weapon. It was the only course open to Pius XII given what he was up against and he used it to great effect. Many Jews survived the Nazi persecution who would otherwise have perished.

        If there was a sinful silence during those years it was on the part of the allied powers who knew of the concentration camps and did nothing. They were collectively silent while the Catholic Church and some charitable agencies like the Red Cross did what they could by stealth to save as many as possible.

        • Athanasius,

          Well said. Those who continue to attack Pius XII can only do so if they accept the lies published by enemies of the Church. It’s incredible that there are any left who still believe the lies. I copy a very good article from Catholic Culture website – it shows the way people believe anything as long as it’s got the propaganda machine and the publishing world behind it:-

          Exposing Hitler’s Pope and Its Author

          by William Doino, Jr.

          Exposing Hitler’s Pope and Its Author — Part 1


          In this article, William Doino brings to light many facts about John Cornwell, author of Hitler’s Pope which completely destroy the credibility of his book. Doino gives us several examples of the deception and falsehoods committed by Cornwell as he attempted to tarnish the character of Pope Pius XII, and the actions of the Catholic Church during WWII.

          At the beginning of the 19th century, a book appeared in North America entitled The Awful Disclosures of Maria Monk. Lurid and shocking, it told the story of one Maria Monk who, after a Protestant upbringing near Montreal, entered a Canadian convent to be educated and become a nun. To her horror, she found the place a den of sin, with secret tunnels admitting priests to the convent for purposes whose results flowered in the strangling of unwanted babies, buried in lime pits. It was all very shocking and — given the anti-Catholic nativism rife at the time –just what a particular section of the American public wanted to hear.

          As the facts began to emerge, however, the truth appeared: Far from being a credible witness, Maria Monk was actually a mentally disturbed young woman who had spent time in a Canadian asylum, not convent. She had never been a religious postulant much less a nun, and her “disclosures” were not penned by her but by an anti-Catholic fundamentalist minister, who exploited her fantasies for his own bigoted agenda. Nonetheless, Maria Monk was ripe for the nativist propaganda machine. Her book sold 300,000 copies before the Civil War, a great many more afterward, and is still read in the dark recesses of anti-Catholic America.

          Over 150 years later, another book appeared which shook the establishment even more: At the beginning of 1983, Stern magazine, Germany’s leading news-weekly, announced that it had unearthed the secret diaries of Adolf Hitler, which it would begin serializing in April of that year. After weeks of an unprecedented publicity campaign, touting the diaries as “the find of the century,” Stern was forced to subject them to scientific tests, whereupon the truth emerged: The Hitler diaries were not authentic, but grotesque forgeries pieced together by a skilled artist, long known to be a con man. So the hoax was exposed, but not before Stern and The Times of London (which both had published excerpts of the supposed diaries), Europe’s leading journalists, and even renowned historian Hugh Trevor Roper (who had initially vouched for the authenticity of the Hitler diaries) all fell for the elaborate hoax, irretrievably damaging their reputations.

          Last October, Viking Press published a book, which, for sheer melodrama, tops the sensational nature of the previous two. Entitled Hitler’s Pope and soon to appear in paperback, it purports to be the “definitive biography” of Eugenio Pacelli, who served as papal nuncio to Germany (1917-1929) and cardinal secretary of state (1930-1939) before serving as Pope Pius XII from 1939 until his death in 1958. Hitler’s Pope combines the anti-Catholicism of Maria Monk with the wartime intrigue of Hitler’s Diaries. It has the added allure of having been written by John Cornwell, a supposedly distinguished scholar — who, we are assured by Viking’s publicity department — is “a practicing Roman Catholic” who takes his faith quite seriously.

          What is more, Cornwell reportedly set out to exonerate Pius XII only to discover that Pius was much more guilty than he could ever have imagined. Indeed, Hitler’s Pope purports to reveal the “untold story of the most dangerous churchmen in modern history. . . Backed by new research and exclusive access to a wealth of Vatican and Jesuit archives, John Cornwell tells for the first time, in depth, the truth about Pacelli’s long career as a Vatican diplomat and the accord between Pacelli and Hitler that helped sweep the Nazis to unhindered power. . . Hitler’s Pope shows how Pacelli’s entire life and career led to this. . . Cornwell’s explosive conclusion is that without Pacelli’s contribution, Hitler might never have come to power or been able to press forward with the Holocaust” (from the fall 1999 catalog of Penguin Putnam Inc., the parent company of Viking Press).

          When the definitive history of deceit is finally written, this book will take pride of place. For make no mistake, Hitler’s Pope is one of the great publishing hoaxes of our time, every bit as disreputable as The Awful Disclosures of Maria Monk or the discredited Hitler’s Diaries. And just as those notorious fabrications were once accepted as fact, so too has Hitler’s Pope been received as gospel truth by the gullible and ignorant — not to mention the “educated” elites who are always ready to believe the worst about the Roman Catholic Church and, in particular, the papacy.

          The deception of Hitler’s Pope begins right with the cover, which is a small masterpiece of artful propaganda. The cover of the book depicts Eugenio Pacelli, in full religious garb, leaving a German government building guarded by two soldiers. To the unsuspecting eye, this photo — combined with the book’s outrageous title — appear to be an image of Pope Pius XII leaving a meeting with Hitler. The clear implication is that the two were involved in a secret, unholy alliance, working hand-in-hand for the destruction of Western civilization.

          In reality, however, Eugenio Pacelli, both before and after he became Pope Pius XII, never met Adolf Hitler. Pacelli’s contacts were limited to subordinates in the German government. Moreover, the book’s cover photo is not of Pope Pius XII visiting the Third Reich but of the then-Archbishop Pacelli as nuncio to Germany in 1927 — six full years before Hitler came to power in Germany (1933) and 12 years before Pacelli became Pope Pius XII (1939). But one does not discover any of this unless one turns to the back flap of the book’s jacket and strains to read, in tiny print, the true circumstances of the cover photo:

          “Eugenio Pacelli, before his election to the papacy, leaving a reception for President Hindenburg in Berlin, 1927.” Worse yet, this photo — which has been used before in its full clarity — is now cropped and blurred so one cannot easily see that the two German soldiers surrounding Pacelli are not Nazis but ordinary German soldiers in the pre-Nazi Weimar Republic! If this is not deliberately lying through a picture, what is? The blatant misuse of the cover photo of Hitler’s Pope symbolizes the rank dishonesty of the entire book, and sets the stage for the hurricane of lies contained within its covers.

          In his prologue, Cornwell wastes no time misleading his readers. He presents himself as a dispassionate scholar and committed Catholic who set out to write an objective study of the life and legacy of Pope Pius XII. The truth, of course, as has since come to light, is that despite his fancy position as a “senior research fellow at Jesus College, Cambridge” Cornwell is neither a trained historian nor a competent theologian. He is nothing more than a journeyman newspaper man whose chief claim to fame is his previous book, A Thief in the Night: The Death of John Paul I (1989), which “disproved” the theory that the late Pontiff was murdered (as if that ludicrous notion needed to be disproved), but blamed his natural death on Vatican incompetence and neglect. An incisive review on’s web site had this to say about Cornwell’s intrepid reporting:

          “Eight out of ten for suspense and plot. But this book should be under ‘fiction.’ Very sad to see that Cornwell lets his private journalistic ambition sully his integrity as a writer of supposed ‘history.’ This man has a clear agenda: Vilify the Vatican in every possible way, cast aspersions on those who cannot defend themselves, and where possible make the Catholic Church generally and the Vatican ‘establishment’ in particular look like a bunch of power-hungry egomaniacs and a den of thieves. Sadly, many ignorant Catholics and non-Catholics won’t know enough to refute his slander, and this book is wonderful fodder to anti-Catholics. Avoid this trashy ‘journalism’.”

          In the preface to his new book, Cornwell again poses as the great detective, claiming he has obtained “generous access to unseen material: depositions under oath gathered 30 years ago for Pacelli’s beatification, and also documents in the office of the Secretariat of State.” These claims are fraudulent. “In fact,” writes Kenneth Woodward, Newsweek’s distinguished religious editor, “the Vatican archives Cornwell perused are open to any inquirer with an academic connection. (Amending what he wrote in his book. Cornwell insisted to Newsweek that he was nonetheless the first to open certain folios, which the Vatican archivist denies.) He also examined testimony given in connection with the Pope’s beatification process, which is under the direction of Jesuit scholars in Rome. These are private documents, but hardly secret: I have seen them myself. And what he cites from these materials in no way supports his portrait of a moral ‘hypocrite’ ” (Newsweek International, September 27, 1999, emphasis added).

          Moreover, Cornwell’s assertion that he began his book with a sincere belief in Pius XII’s innocence (“I was convinced that if his full story were told, Pius XII’s pontificate would be vindicated,” p. viii) simply cannot be believed. For John Cornwell had already attacked Pius XII ten years ago, speaking of his “alleged anti-Semitism” without refuting that canard, and mocking him as “a Roman emperor” who was “somebody totally remote from experience,” and who looked like an “emaciated, large-eyed demigod” (cf. Cornwell’s A Thief in the Night, pp. 50, 162).

          Underscoring these facts, Cambridge historian Felicity O’Brien — who, ironically, is thanked by Cornwell in his afterword as one of the authorities he consulted — wrote a letter to Newsweek magazine, flatly contradicting Cornwell’s claims:

          “It was refreshing to read Kenneth L. Woodward’s feature on John Cornwell’s Hitler’s Pope. . . In the late 1980s, I studied the sworn testimonies gathered for the canonization cause of Pius XII in Rome. Several of them speak of his concern and help for Jews, both before and after he became Pope, Cornwell charges him with hypocrisy, but the testimonies show him to have been a transparently honest person. While ascetic and always requiring the best from himself and others in the service of the Church, he is shown also to have been courteous and kind, with a sense of humor. In an article on Cardinal Martini in London’s Sunday Times magazine in 1993, Cornwell described Pope Pius as a diplomat, a hypochondriac, and a ditherer. This was hardly the most positive image to have in mind when he was setting out to write his book” (British edition of Newsweek, October 25, 1999, p. 18).

          As for his alleged commitment to Catholicism, Cornwell recently wrote a cover story for that same Sunday Times magazine of London (March 12, 2000) in which he revealed his true agenda. The article mocks Pope John Paul II and his “sclerotic pontificate,” ridicules his supporters as “right-wing,” “reactionary,” and “ultraconservative,” accuses John Paul II of “rank heresy” suggests the Pope resign, and speaks luridly of a “Deep Throat” informant inside the Vatican. None of which should surprise anyone, for Cornwell is an ex-seminarian who has a long history of assailing the Church (cf. “Hitler’s Pope Author Exposed as Bitter Ex-Seminarian,” The Wanderer, September 24, 1999, p. 1). One passage from his “spiritual” autobiography will provide some essential background for understanding John Cornwell. Describing his loss of faith in the seminary, Cornwell writes:

          “I had managed to linger in a state of late childhood. Now on the grim city’s edge, the storms of adolescence, with accompanying ravages of scrupulosity and guilt, were unleashed. I suffered migraines and stomachaches; I lay awake at night and fell asleep in chapel and through lectures in the mornings; I took up smoking and drinking; against the severe rules of the house I escaped whenever I could to the cinemas down in Birmingham. I was desperate for affectionate companionship, wracked with sexual torment” (The Hiding Places of God, New York: Warner Books, 1991, p. 23).

          This is the man, we must never forget, who set out to judge the life and character of a Pope many believe to be a saint.

          In his attempt to assassinate the character of Pope Pius XII, Cornwell leaves nothing unsaid. Every imaginable crime is laid at the feet of Eugenio Pacelli, both before and after he became Pope. According to Cornwell, Pacelli was an anti-Semite and racist; Pacelli was an ambitious power broker whose machinations unleashed worldwide turmoil; Pacelli’s policy on the German Concordat helped sweep Hitler to power; Pacelli suppressed the German resistance to Hitler; Pacelli kept silent about Nazi atrocities, especially Hitler’s persecution of the Jews; Pacelli collaborated with fascist Croatia; Pacelli saw Nazism as a bulwark against Communism, and therefore aligned himself with the Third Reich; Pacelli was an extreme reactionary who sacrificed humanity for the sake of aggrandizing papal power. Pacelli, in short, is blamed for every major evil of the 20th century — including World War I, World War II, and the Nazi Holocaust. Deaths from AIDS and cancer are the only evils Eugenio Pacelli is not held responsible for — though perhaps that is the subject of Cornwell’s next book.

          That such charges can be made and believed in is astonishing even in an age, which takes its philosophy from Jerry Springer and its history from Oliver Stone. But the capacity for deception now appears boundless, with no clear remedy in sight.

          In his opening chapters, Cornwell wastes no time aiming a moral dagger at the heart of Eugenio Pacelli, portraying him as a typical anti-Semite. This is done by providing a highly charged survey of European anti-Semitism, and quoting some of its leaders — then trying to implicate Pacelli in their bigotry. On page 27, using the special pleading of a prosecutor who has no case, Cornwell writes that “Pacelli in all likelihood” was influenced by these fringe anti-Semites, just as he was “surely influenced” by (the supposed) anti-Semitism of Italian schools — which is another way of saying that no convincing evidence exists for either charge. Pressing his imaginary case further, Cornwell writes that in 1917, a rabbi in Munich approached Nuncio Pacelli to see if the Holy See might help import Italian palm fronds, so the rabbi’s congregation could celebrate the Jewish Feast of Tabernacles. After inquiring about the request and exchanging letters, Pacelli replied that, regrettably, he was unable to do so. This asserts Cornwell, combined with the nuncio’s alleged reference to the rabbi’s Jewish “cult,” proves Pacelli was an anti-Semite.

          It proves nothing of the sort. First of all, the very fact that the rabbi approached Pacelli demonstrates that Jewish leaders regarded the German nuncio as a trusted friend of the Jews — an obvious fact Cornwell ignores.

          Second, the reason that Pacelli was unable to have the Holy See import the requested goods was because Germany and Italy were then at war, the Church was a nonbelligerent, and any such intervention would have jeopardized the Vatican’s strict neutrality during World War I — which was essential for maintaining access to its countless victims, whom the Holy See did so much to assist throughout the conflict. Indeed, Cornwell himself concedes that “[Nuncio] Pacelli traveled tirelessly in Germany during the final 12 months of the war, bringing food and clothing to the starving ‘of all religions’ on behalf of the Holy See” (p. 69). Exactly. And among these unfortunates were Jewish soldiers whom Pacelli helped feed and nurse back to health, along with all the others. Protecting the basic human rights of these victims took clear precedence over engaging in special religious favors, which could easily have backfired and wrecked the entire humanitarian project.

          Third, Pacelli never used the words “Jewish cult”; that is Cornwell’s English translation of Pacelli’s use of the Italian word “culto,” which quite normally means Jewish liturgy and faith. To use the English word “cult” — which is a complete mistranslation, and carries a very negative connotation — to describe Pacelli’s standard Italian phraseology is to blatantly misrepresent the nuncio’s attitude toward the Jewish people and religion.

          Finally, after Nuncio Pacelli personally explained to the rabbi why the Vatican could not import the palm fronds to Germany, the rabbi was, as Pacelli wrote to his superior in Rome, “perfectly convinced of the reasons I had given him and thanked me warmly for all that I had done on his behalf — a statement that Cornwell briefly mentions (p. 71) but does not realize invalidates his accusations against Pacelli. (Why would the rabbi thank an anti-Semite?) Instead, Cornwell presents this wholly innocent affair as if Eugenio Pacelli were playing a devious cat-and-mouse game with the rabbi, deliberately raising his hopes then deserting him, just so he could experience the anti-Semitic thrill of manipulating a prominent rabbi. This interpretation is beneath contempt, but typical of the tactics Cornwell uses throughout his book.

          Having proven nothing, Cornwell then supposedly cements his case against Pacelli by presenting his chief piece of evidence: a 1919 letter, signed by Pacelli and sent to his superior in Rome, describing an eyewitness account of Communist revolutionaries in Munich. The letter reads in part:

          “The scene that presented itself at [Communist headquarters] was indescribable . . . the building, once the home of a king, resounding with screams, vile language, profanities. Absolute hell. An army of employees were dashing to and fro, giving out orders, waving bits of paper, and in the midst of all this, a gang of young women, of dubious appearance, Jews like all the rest of them, hanging around in all the offices with lecherous demeanor and suggestive smiles. The boss of this female rabble was Levien’s mistress, a young Russian woman, a Jew and a divorcee, who was in charge. . . This Levien is a young man, of about 35, also Russian and a Jew. Pale, dirty, with drugged eyes, hoarse voice, vulgar, repulsive, with a face that is both intelligent and sly” (pp. 74-75).

          In the publicity blitz coinciding with the release of his book, Cornwell claimed that “this letter has lain in the Vatican archives like a time bomb until now” (The Times of London, September 12, 1999). That is a blatant lie. The letter was published long before Cornwell’s book appeared and was well known to scholars. As L’Osservatore Romano (October 13, 1999) documented: “In fact, said letter (of which Cornwell only quotes some limited phrases . . .), had already been published in 1992; in other words, seven years before the publication of Cornwell’s book. The full text of this document appeared in Emma Fattorini’s book, Germany and the Holy See: The Pacelli Nunciature Between the Great War and the Weimar Republic (Il Mulino: Bologna, 1992, pp. 322-325).”

          Ignoring this fact, Cornwell presents the letter as his own spectacular discovery, and claims that it conclusively proves Pacelli’s ‘anti-Semitism:

          “Pacelli’s constant harping on the Jewishness of this party of power usurpers is consistent with the growing and widespread belief among Germans that the Jews were the instigators of the Bolshevik revolution, their principal aim being the destruction of Christian civilization. But there is something else about the passage that is repugnant and ominous. The repeated references to the Jewishness of these individuals, amid the catalog of epithets describing their physical and moral repulsiveness, give an impression of stereotypical anti-Semetic contempt” (p. 75).

          Only someone devoid of critical faculties would accept this perverse interpretation. Pacelli was not, as Cornwell claims, condemning Jews as a people and a race, much less associating Judaism with Bolshevism. When the nuncio used the phrase “Jews, like all the rest of them” he was not speaking about all Jews, or making rash generalizations. He was decrying the conduct and character of a tiny handful of Communist revolutionaries who happened to be Jewish — who in no way represented most European Jews — and who, far from being faithful children of God, were radical apostates who hated and persecuted every form of religion, including Judaism — a fact recognized by faithful Jews at the time.

          As The New York Review of Books (March 23, 2000) commented: “Most leaders of the Bavarian Soviet Republic were in fact [apostate] Jews, and conservative German Jews found these rather childish and yet often brutal young intellectuals similarly unappealing.” (Indeed, if anyone was anti-Semitic, it was these atheistic Marxists, who following the command of Karl Marx — who called for “the emancipation of humanity from the Jews” — tried to achieve just that when they later endorsed the infamous Nazi-Soviet pact, thus paving the way for Auschwitz.) The reason that Pacelli referred to the ethnicity of these Communists was to provide a physical description of them for his superiors, so the latter could identify who was persecuting people of faith in Germany. To argue, as Cornwell does, that Pacelli’s language reveals anti-Semitism is as absurd as stating that an Israeli police officer writing a report about Arab terrorists is an anti-Arab racist if he mentions that the terrorists were Arab. Lest there be any doubt about the vacuous nature of Cornwell’s charges, one need only quote Professor Ian Kershaw’s description of these same Communists in his acclaimed biography of Hitler:

          “The revolution in Bavaria had preceded that in the Reich itself. It took place in circumstances and developed in ways that were to leave a profound mark. . . It was more radical . . . it degenerated into sheer anarchy, then into a short-lived attempt to create a Communist-run Soviet-style system; this in turn led to a few days — though a few days which seared the consciousness of Bavarians for many years to come — that amounted to a mini-civil war, ending in bloodshed and brutality; and a number of the revolutionary leaders happened to be Jewish, some of them east European Jews with Bolshevik sympathies and connections. Moreover, the leader of the Bavarian revolution, the Jewish journalist and left-wing socialist Kurt Eisner. . . had unquestionably tried to stir up industrial unrest” (From Hitler 1889-1936: Hubris, New York: W.W. Norton and Co., 1998, p. 112).

          Note here what Professor Kershaw has done: He describes these revolutionaries as bloodthirsty and mentions their Jewish ethnicity three times in a space of two sentences. Does this mean that he too harbors anti-Semitic sentiments and associates Judaism with evil? Of course not; he is merely providing a factual profile of those radicals — which is no more than what Pacelli did.

          But none of this would be necessary to explain if Cornwell had not so grossly misrepresented his subject’s attitudes toward Jews and Judaism. For anyone familiar with the life and character of Eugenio Pacelli knows that to accuse him of anti-Semetism is not only false, it is positively defamatory. Far from being anti-Semitic, Pacelli was an active opponent of anti-Semitism. Throughout the 1920s, Pacelli, who was then serving as papal nuncio to Germany, witnesses firsthand the rise of anti-Semitism and never ceased to alert the Vatican to its potential dangers.

          And as the historian Fr. Robert Graham, S.J., frequently and emphatically told the present writer, “It was at Archbishop Pacelli’s explicit insistence that the Holy See make a clear and unequivocal statement against anti-Semitic bigotry.” Consequently, on March 25, 1928, Pope Pius XI’s Holy Office (with the assistance of Eugenio Pacelli) issued a formal decree, which did precisely that. “Moved by the spirit of charity,” it declares, “the Holy See is obligated to protect the people of Israel against unjust persecutions, and since it condemns all jealousy and strife among peoples, it accordingly condemns with all its might the hatred directed against a people which was chosen by God; that particular hatred, in fact, which today commonly goes by the name of anti-Semitism.”

          At the time, the Nouvelle Revue Theologique, one of the leading theological journals in Europe, devoted an entire issue to it, and concluded that the decree was “one of the most explicit condemnations of anti-Semitism that Rome has pronounced up to this time” (Nouvelle Revue Theologique 40, July 1928, p. 537). This solemn condemnation came five years before the Nazi seizing of power, so no one can claim that the Vatican did not sufficiently warn the world about the poisonous hatred, which culminated in the Nazi persecution of the Jews. Moreover, when that persecution came. Catholic religious leaders and laymen frequently referred to this famous decree as a way to protect their Jewish brothers and sisters.

          Thus, the July 25, 1942 issue of The Tablet of London — the leading English-language periodical in war-torn Europe — documented how Roberto Farinacci, Italy’s notorious fascist propagandist, was claiming that the Nazi campaign against the Jews was a divine prerogative. “In waging this supreme struggle,” Farinacci wrote to his fellow Italians, “we are sure of obeying the injunctions of the Church; we are sure of doing our duty as Christians.” But these statements were nothing but blatant lies, grossly perverting Catholic teaching. As The Tablet commented: “[Farinacci] was forgetting, no doubt, the official declaration of the Church on anti-Semitism, issued from the Holy Office in Rome on March 25, 1928” — which it then quoted.

          It is Eugenio Pacelli that we have to thank for this declaration, which, according to Fr. Peter Gumpel, S.J. (relator for Pius XII’s beatification cause), “was directed against authors who had left the Catholic Church to promote racism and an exaggerated nationalism, the exaltation of the Nordic race, and scorn for everything else” (ZENIT News Agency, March 16, 1999).

          What does John Cornwell have to say about this early condemnation of Nazi-style anti-Semetism? Absolutely nothing. In a book of 430 pages which purports to be the definitive history on the topics covered, Cornwell does not mention the 1928 decree even once–much less Eugenio Pacelli’s responsibility for it. Nor does Cornwell mention the work of the eminent Polish Jewish scholar Dr. Joseph Lichten (himself a refugee from Nazism) whose immensely important monograph A Question of Judgment: Pius XII and the Jews (1963) documents the extraordinary assistance Pacelli provided Jews both before and after he became Pope. As Dr. Lichten reveals, shortly after World War II broke out in September of 1939, the Vatican “operated a rescue mission during the war for Nazi victims that was the direct outgrowth of the work Eugenio Cardinal Pacelli, when Vatican secretary of state, had begun on behalf of Jews in 1936 [immediately after the Nazis passed the notorious Nuremberg Laws, which stripped German Jews of their remaining fundamental rights]. That year the German bishops had requested Cardinal Pacelli to ask the Vatican to found an International Emigrant Organization; Pius XI agreed, and the cardinal himself had written to all the American bishops asking for their support” (from A Question of Judgment, reprinted in Pius XII and the Holocaust: A Reader, the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, 1988, p. 123).

          Indeed, shortly before he ascended to the papacy, Eugenio Pacelli, acting in his capacity as Vatican secretary of state, appealed to governments throughout the world to throw open their borders to persecuted Jews who were seeking emigration and refuge from Hitler’s reign of terror. Tragically, most of these countries kept their borders tightly shut but Cardinal Pacelli, undeterred by these rejections, continued his heroic work, especially after he became Pope. Dr. Lichten writes:

          “Prior to Italy’s entry into the war, masses of Jews fled to Italy from Germany, Austria, Poland, Hungary, Yugoslavia, and other Balkan states. St. Raphael Verein, an organization long active in helping emigrants leaving Europe for the New World, received instructions from Pope Pius to give the refugees care, without regard to their religion or nationality, . . . Passports, visas, medical certificates — valid and otherwise — had to be procured; the papal Ministry of State made innumerable requests of foreign governments for exit and entry papers, with more than fair success. … The operating costs of the rescue group were enormous . . . and the first source for this money was the Vatican itself’ (ibid., p. 123).

          Among the countless Jews who were rescued by these actions was Guido Mendes, a childhood friend of Pacelli’s. When Pius XII died in 1958, Dr. Mendes gave an interview to The Jerusalem Post revealing Pacelli’s love and respect for the Jewish faith and people:

          ” ‘The late Pope Pius XII was an excellent pupil at school, and even then spoke of devoting his life to the Church,’ 82-year-old Prof. Guido Mendes told The Jerusalem Post in an interview.

          “Prof. Mendes, a lung specialist, studied at the Collegio Romani Gymnasium in Rome with the late Pope. The young-looking octogenarian recalled that in the late 1890’s ‘we were all anticlerical, but Eugenio (the late Pope) was always outspokenly in favor of the Church. . .’

          “They had been good friends, and Prof. Mendes recalled visiting the home of the Pacelli family, who were of princely stock and had always been closely associated with the Vatican. . . ‘When Pacelli came to my home, he asked to borrow my copy of Rabbi Ben Hamozeg’s work Apologetica and Dogmatica,’ Prof. Mendes recalled.

          “Their paths separated after their school years — Pacelli going into the Church and Mendes to medical school. They next met in the First World War whilst he was an officer in the Medical Corps and the Pope already a monsignor.

          “In 1938, with the beginning of the persecution of the Italian Jews, Pacelli’s secretary called from the Vatican to ask the Mendes family if they needed help. The Mendes later escaped to Switzerland, and the Vatican secured them certificates to Palestine in 1939.

          “Since World War II, the professor had met with the late Pope twice, and on both occasions the meeting had been extremely cordial. . . Mendes recalled that the Pope, meeting survivors of the concentration camps in Italy in 1945, had then predicted, ‘Soon, you will have a Jewish state’ ” (The Jerusalem Post, October 10, 1958).

          Not exactly the actions of an anti-Semite. Needless to say, Guido Mendes and his story appear nowhere in Hitler’s Pope.

          Cornwell is not content with smearing Eugenio Pacelli as an anti-Semite: He actually accuses him of provoking world war. In chapter three (offensively entitled “Papal Power Games”), Cornwell argues that Pacelli, as a young Vatican diplomat, personally and decisively contributed to World War I by helping negotiate a Vatican concordat with Serbia in June 1914. The charge is as ludicrous as it is malicious. In the last five years, two major histories of this conflict have appeared: The First World War: A Complete History (Henry Holt, 1994) by Martin Gilbert (the official biographer of Winston Churchill); and The First World War (Alfred Knopf, 1999) by John Keegan, Great Britain’s leading military historian. The first work is 615 pages long, the second 475. Neither book even mentions the Vatican-Serbian concordat, much less the name Eugenio Pacelli. Yet Cornwell places Pacelli at the front and center of the war’s causes, wildly exaggerating the influence of this relatively minor concordat, as ‘well as Pacelli’s involvement in it. Pacelli was then in a subordinate position; his superiors Pietro Gasparri, cardinal secretary of state, and Pope Benedict XV were responsible for the concordat and they had very good reasons for signing it, as Robert Graham revealed in his Vatican Diplomacy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1959) — a definitive history of concordats which Cornwell nowhere mentions.

          The origins of World War I are the result of centuries of ethnic and cultural conflict, which the 1914 concordat had nothing to do with, and which Eugenio Pacelli and his Vatican colleagues actually tried to heal and resolve. If Cornwell had genuine historical knowledge and understanding he would have explained all of this. But John Cornwell has neither, and so must write: ‘There is no indication that Pacelli questioned the dangerous implications of the Serbian negotiations . . . the episode marks the ominous beginnings of Pacelli’s pattern of aloofness from the far-reaching political consequences of his diplomatic actions” (p. 58).

          Having blamed Pacelli for the outbreak of World War I, it is only natural that Cornwell blames him for World War II as well. Indeed, had Pacelli not lived, according to Cornwell, Hitler never would have accrued power and World War II never would have occurred. To quote Viking’s lurid publicity release:

          “As a brilliant young Vatican lawyer in the first decade of the century, Pacelli helped shape a new ideology of unprecedented institutional papal power of the 20th century, drafting new church laws granting future popes legal means to dominate from the Roman center and reducing the power of the world’s bishops. Until now few have known of Pacelli’s central role in the creation of the 1917 Code of Canon Law, which scholars have dubbed the single most important event in Church history this century. . . As papal nuncio (diplomatic ambassador) in Munich and Berlin during the 1920s, Pacelli sought with cunning and frequent moral blackmail to impose that power, province by province, on Germany’s 23 million Catholics — the largest, best-educated Catholic population in the world. . . In 1933, as the Vatican’s secretary of state, he found his perfect negotiating partner in Hitler, with whom he forged the fatal Reich Concordat — a church-state agreement for the whole of the Third Reich. The treaty authorized the papacy to impose canon law on German Catholics, and granted generous financial payments to Catholic clergy in exchange for Catholic withdrawal from social and political action. . . Pacelli secretly influenced the Catholic Center Party vote for Hitler’s dictatorial Enabling Act then encouraged the party — the last democratic group in Germany — to disband. . . The ‘voluntary’ abdication of political Catholicism imposed from Rome ensured the rise of Nazism unopposed by the most powerful Catholic community in the world.”

          No greater number of fallacies was ever strung together in one short paragraph. To begin with, there is not one major biographer of Adolf Hitler who believes that Eugenio Pacelli had anything to do with Hitler’s rise to power; this is the sole superstition of John Cornwell. Neither Alan Bullock (Hitler: A Study in Tyranny, 1962) nor Joachim Fest (Hitler, 1976) nor John Lukacs (The Hitler of History, 1997) nor Ian Kershaw (Hitler: 1889-1936 Hubris, 1998) place Pacelli anywhere near the tumultuous events which paved the way for Hitler. On the contrary, all place great emphasis on the cultural, economic, and political factors which Cornwell’s book races over or even fails to mention: the catastrophic Treaty of Versailles, which sowed the seeds of German resentment after World War I; the backlash created by the murderous Bolshevik revolutionaries in Russia, who sent their agents to Germany to wreak similar destruction; the economic depression of 1929, which traumatized Germany and created an atmosphere of havoc and desperation; the virulent assault against Judeo-Christian faith and morals during the decadent Weimar Republic; and the nefarious rise of atheistic Darwinism and eugenics, which laid the foundation for Hitler’s campaigns against the disabled and Jews and Poles and Gypsies — and everyone else “unfit” for his demented concept of Aryan supremacy.

          “What made Hitler’s triumph possible,” comments Dr. Kershaw, “were important strands of continuity in German political culture stretching back beyond the First World War — chauvinistic nationalism, imperialism, racism, [and the] glorification of war” (op. cit., p. 434) — all evils which the young Eugenio Pacelli loudly and consistently condemned.

          If there is one fact we know about Eugenio Pacelli, it is that he was a deadly enemy of Nazism, and did everything possible to prevent Hitler from attaining power. “Of the 44 speeches which the Nuncio Pacelli had made on German soil between 1917 and 1929,” writes the illustrious Jewish historian Pinchas Lapide, “at least 40 contained attacks on Nazism or condemnations of Hitler’s doctrines. ‘Germanism,’ said Hitler; Pacelli, who never met the Fuhrer, called it ‘neopaganism’ and countered with ‘humanism’; ‘racial struggle’ thundered the Austrian house-painter; but the archbishop from Rome preached ‘fraternal love’; to ‘master race’ he responded with the ‘universal kinship of mankind’ and against ‘the combatant spirit’ he stressed time and again ‘peace, and always peace’ ” (Three Popes and the Jews, New York: Hawthorn Books, p. 118).

          In 1929, four years before Hitler came to power, and right before he left Germany to become cardinal secretary of state, Eugenio Pacelli poured out his feelings about Germany to Sr. Pascalina Lehnert, his lifelong assistant. What he said, as testified to by Sr. Pascalina, is of capital importance now that Cornwell’s book has appeared:

          “A distressing thought disturbed the nuncio on his departure from Germany: the continuing progress of National Socialism. How perceptive he had been already at that time in judging Hitler and how many times he had warned the German people of the tremendous danger that threatened them! They did not wish to believe him. People of every rank and class let him know at the time of his departure what they expected of Hitler: the ascent and greatness of Germany.

          “On one occasion I asked the nuncio if he did not think that this man could have some good in him, and that . . . he [Hitler] could perhaps help the German people. The nuncio shook his head and said: I would be very, very much mistaken in thinking that all this could end well. This man is completely obsessed: All that is not of use to him, he destroys; all that he says and writes carries the mark of his egocentricity; this man is capable of trampling on corpses and eliminating all that obstructs him. I cannot understand how many in Germany, even among the best people, do not understand and are not able to draw the lesson from what he writes and says. Who among these has at least read his horrifying book Mein Kampf?

          “When, later on, one of the Hitlerites of that time came to Rome, he said to me: ‘How much moral misery; how much humiliation and how much shame we and the world would have been spared if at that time we had paid attention to Nuncio Pacelli!’ ”

          (Translated from the original German edition: Sr. M. Pascalina Lehnert, Ich durfte ihm dienen: Erinnerungen an Papst Pius XII. Wurzburg, first edition, 1982, fourth edition, 1983, pp. 42-43).

          When Cornwell was “researching” his book in Rome, this key passage of Sr. Pascalina’s memoirs was brought to his attention by Jesuit Fr. Gumpel, the aforementioned relator for the cause of Pope Pius XII. “The late Sr. Pascalina’s memoirs were originally published in German in 1982,” said Fr. Gumpel to the present writer in a recent interview. “The book went through several editions and was translated into various languages, but not into English. Both the German and Italian editions were made available to Cornwell.”

          Yet, though Cornwell lists the German edition in his select bibliography, nowhere does he quote this crucial passage. This can only mean one of two things: 1) Cornwell did not actually read the book but pretends that he has by listing it in his bibliography; or 2) Cornwell has read the book but deliberately omitted using Pacelli’s prophetic 1929 condemnation of Hitler, lest it invalidate the thesis of his book. In either case, these facts destroy John Cornwell’s credibility, and expose as fraudulent his claim that “I have attempted to write the first scholarly and honest appraisal of Pius XII” (The Times of London, September 12, 1999).

  102. Thank you Athanasius. A long time ago I read the Edith STein wrote to the pope twice asking him to intervene in reply he just sent his apostolic blessing. I am familiar with much of the material you quote. I don’t doubt the integrity of the scholarly people you quote. From their perspective their perception of Pius Xii Rome was understandable. However, that does not reflect the perspective of the countless millions in excess to 800,000 who were killed. I in no way want to besmirch the overall reputation of Pius xii. However, I have learned two important lessons in real life and in research 1) never to defend the indefensible 2) sometimes people can be very very sincerely wrong. Thus I still maintain that silence and non excommunication of nazis was not the right decision. I could well be wrong only time and history will tell the full story.
    Sometimes providentially and surprisingly things happen which I never anticipated or expected to happen. In the early morning of the day following my last blog I met a lovely old man who keeps bees and who had just emptied his hives and wanted me to feel the weight of the honey he had just collected. I had heard from others that at the end of the war he spent 18 months in a catering role looking after the needs of the captured leading nazis. So he was a walking, talking, real time, history lesson in himself. Dialogue surfaced the following issues and below are his comments.
    1) Did all the Germans know what was happening to the Jews etc?
    “Yes they all knew.”
    2) What was those war criminals, some of them later to be executed, like?
    “With the exception of R Hess who had lost it they were all highly intelligent men especially A Speer.”
    3). Why did such intelligent men support nazism?
    “They had no choice in their view it was either support nazism or be killed themselves.”
    4) When these men met God for judgement how were they able to explain themselves?
    “They wouldn’t be able to.”
    This dialogue put into sharp focus my earlier details of good Catholic people killed by their families via euthansia following “expert” advice. In one case the parish priest was given two opportunities by me to follow my direct intervention with the family which I had already done. Nothing happened and the dear old lady was killed after two days of food and drink deprivation. In spite of my intervention three other people met a similar fate but a good rock solid family of working class Yorkshire Irish stock listen to my advice to kill their lapsed twin brother/uncle etc as previously explained he was reconciled to the faith received the last rites and had a Catholic funeral after his eventual, inevitable but NATURAL death. If we don’t all in our turn carry on this battle via Catholic truth where we dialogue, don’t always agree but carry on opposing all the death dealing anti life and anti family nonsense within the church until in each case we conclude we are at a point where St Matthew’s Gospel chapter 15 verse 14 applies then we could end up like the nazis who were as the sage like honey gatherer said “Were unable to explain themselves when they met their God.”
    Roosevelt said “We have nothing to fear but fear itself” but that’s wrong. Jesus Christ himself tells us “I will tell you who to fear. Fear him who has the power to cast you into hell.” As well as being a clear guide on discipleship making us aware of a holy fear this in itself a wonderful challenge from Jesus and encouraging us because we know Satan has lost the war in spite of some battles and we just have to ensure that in thought word and deed we don’t allow ourselves to be dragged down into hell with him. Thanks to the editor for giving me a total justified telling off I will try to do better. To Athanasius if I am wrong on this issue I ask God to give strength to your arguments to straighten me out. Love and prayers Liam

    • Liam,

      I had started to reply to your letter, specifically on the matter of Pope Pius XII, but I now see that you are determined to hold to the rubbish spouted in the anti-Catholic sources (whatever they are – you’ve still not provided that list) who are obviously off the wall.

      I am going to take the word of the famous Jews, including Albert Einstein, who couldn’t praise Pius XII enough for his work on their behalf during the war. Einstein specifically said he had detested the Catholic Church until he saw that it was the ONLY institution that acted in defence of the Jews.

      I’m not going to waste my time by sending you the material I had taken the trouble to print off – it’s available on EWTN anyway, if you care to Google it (the article exposes the lies peddled by John Cornwell, picked up and widely used by other pseudo-scholars) – but I really am too busy to cast pearls, if you get my drift.

      I have never EVER met a Catholic who wasn’t delighted to learn the truth about Pius XII against the propaganda of the Church’s enemies. You are the first one I’ve ever encountered. And I am appalled.

      You just ignore the facts – such as Athanasius’s examples of saints who had kept silent for good reason – and so we have to presume that you consider St Thomas More and others who maintained a prudential silence when called for, as having sinned by complicit silence.

      Thus, there is clearly no reasoning with you. Please don’t contact me by post, about this matter again; if you insist on posting on the blog on the matter, we will continue to refute your false claims, and you are free to do so if you wish, but I don’t have time to enter into correspondence with readers. One of the key reasons why we launched the newsletter was to take our cause into the public arena, because we were wasting a lot of time in telephone and written correspondence with people, including bishops, who were determined to keep to their own agenda, no matter what evidence we placed before them. I hope you understand. Time is short, and resources are scarce. I can hardly keep up with the Catholic Truth outlets, newsletter, website and blog as it is, so be aware that – seeing your response to Athanasius’s latest post on the subject of Pius XII – I will not be replying to your letter, now or in the future, except via this blog.

      Finally, and to underline the above, a reader who noted your comments about Pius XII wrote the following when I mentioned that I planned to write in reply to a letter I’d just received from you, lamenting, as I do, that this was yet one more thing to add to my list of things to do over what was/is an already very busy weekend. I had intended to include his observations in my reply to your letter, with apologies for any hurt feelings. It is blunt, but it really expresses my own feelings at this time, on this subject: I hope, therefore, that you don’t take offence, but, instead, use the remarks to search deeply into your soul, as to your motivation in refusing to accept the first hand testimony of famous Jews, and other thoroughly reliable unbiased scholars, in preference to the proven propaganda of the enemies of the Faith…


      My advice would be to politely express your disagreement with Liam and tell him that you’re way too busy to get involved in old controversies that have been shown to originate from the enemies of the Church. Pius XII will be canonised not too many years from now, his cause being complete. Had there been any substance to these accusations of evil doing on his part during the war I’m sure the world’s leading Jews would have known about it and expressed it with vigour. As things stand, world Jewry is on record as praising Pius XII for his great efforts to save Jews, even to the extent of having beggared his family fortune. I can see why Rabbi Zolli, Chief Rabbi of Rome during the war, converted to Catholicism and took the name of Eugenio as his Christian name. It seems Liam is suggesting indirectly that Rabbi Zolli was an ignorant fool who didn’t know the real Pius…
      people like Liam get on my nerves with these daft controversies they pick up from books and the Internet. If he wants to believe ill of Pius then that’s his lookout. He’ll answer for his attack on this Pontiff, specifically in justice because he maligns a holy Pope who can no longer answer for himself.

      God bless.

    • Liam

      I think it would have been irresponsible of Pius XII under the circumstances to have put a stark choice to many hundreds of thousands of Catholic German soldiers that they either rebel against Hitler and be shot or say nothing and be excommunicated. The latter punishment is one the Church takes extremely seriously and only administers in the case of wilful heresy.

      You seem to proceed from the viewpoint that all German Catholic soldiers were wilful killers rather than drafted-in subordinates of a brutal regime. The Church did not share this viewpoint at the time, nor has it since claimed such an extreme.

      Excommunication is a terrible condemnation of a soul, much worse than death of the body. If you have ever read the wording of formal excommunication then I’m sure it would have sent shivers down your spine. The Church, like Our Lord, is not so quick to condemn souls to Hell for all eternity. That’s why every case of excommunication is weighed thoroughly and individually.

      As I intimated before, I think you are looking at the Pius XII situation more from an emotional rather than spiritual and rational perspective. Emotions often get in the way of objective truth and that’s why I believe you are, to use your own words, a very genuine person who just happens to be wrong. The problem is that by airing your wrong views on a public forum you add fuel to the Church’s enemies.

      Just one more point on this, which is that Hitler was in the process of setting up a puppet papacy in Lichtenstein. He would not have thought twice about storming the Vatican had he taken it into his head. Pius XII was not the free voice the enemies of the Church say he was. No, he was constrained to act with diplomacy and prudence in order to save as many Jews as possible. The alternative was to shoot his mouth off and end up with a much higher body count at the hands of some very unreasonable people. Speaking out with condemnations against a madman at that time would have been catastrophic.

  103. Above should read ” a good rock solid family of working class Yorkshire Irish stock listened to my advice not to kill”

  104. Liam

    One of my best friends is the daughter of 2 Germans who settled in Yorkshire; her father as a prisoner of war, and her mother after the war. From what she could gather from their stories, and after the devastation that the First World War wreaked on Germany, they naturally saw Hitler as a saviour for their country. They had been left bankrupt and starving. No doubt they were misled, as we have been, and no doubt are being.

    I think it ill becomes us, as a generation who have known only plenty, to judge harshly the general populace of a country ravaged by war and left literally starving. Our own country has committed atrocities of which we are aware, but I don’t know of anyone yet who has lost their life in protesting, and we don’t even have the fear that we will lose our lives by doing so.

    As for the old gentleman beekeeper, I only hope he can adequately explain his own life to God when his judgement day comes. I await my own with fear and trembling.

  105. Can someone tell me if the Church still refuses to grant Requiem Masses to unbaptised infants, as it used to do? I found this on Fish Eaters:

    ‘Catholic funerals are denied to the unbaptized (note that catechumens, including infants whose parents planned on having them baptized, are baptized by desire, and that martyrs are baptized by blood); infidels; heretics; suicides (unless they were of unsound mind or showed signs of repentance); notorious, unrepentant sinners; the excommunicated; the schismatic; those under ecclesiastical censure; and those who, without remorse, have openly held the sacraments in contempt; and those who, for anti-Christian motives, choose to be cremated’.

    It says unbaptised children whose parents intended to have their children baptised are baptised by desire, but surely this applies to all unbaptised infants?

    • No, it doesn’t apply to all unbaptised infants. I know someone who had a baby die, suddenly, unbaptised – they had stopped practising. Then they had another baby and they still didn’t get that baby baptised either.

      The babies won’t suffer in eternity but if Christ meant what he said about baptism being necessary to get into Heaven, then we have to assume they are enjoying natural happiness, short of the beatific vision. I don’t see any problem with that, as long as they are happy.

      • 100% agreement, Lily. Those who argue otherwise fail to understand that unbaptised infants, lacking sanctifying grace, i.e. the life of God in the soul, are incapable of seeing the Beatific Vision, but being innocent of personal sin live for all eternty in perfect natural happiness. The pre-Vat II universal understanding of this among Caholics ensured that babies were baptised as soon after birth as possible. Moreover, a Catholic couple, correctly instructed on th importance of Baptism, would themselves baptise a newborn in immediate danger of death, as friends of mine did a few years ago. Miscarried foetuses, an instructed Catholic woman would know, were baptised with the form “If thou cans’t be baptised, I baptise thee, etc.”. Many an infant soul owed its immediate entry into the everlasting glory of the Beatific Vision to a Catholic nurse.

        This is the now, largely forgotten, greatest evil of abortion. That this act of wilful murder deprives a human being of his natural life is a very great evil as understood by all anti-abortion groups; that it has the even greater evil consequence of depriving him of the eternal vision of God is seldom, if ever, mentioned.

        It is only the post Vatican II Church that has dared, in the arrogance of its members, to anthropomorphise God, imputing to Him our imperfect, humanly limited ideas of His divine and infinite mercy, love and justice.

      • RCA Victor,

        I read that “Papal Hymn To ‘Gays'” yesterday on another link which I came in to post and then got so caught up replying to others, that it slipped my mind. Or, rather, more accurately, I meant to post this report – another homosexually-friendly shocker. I should add that, of all the things I’ve ever lost, I miss my mind the most 😀

        Absolutely horrendous stuff. This Pope is really off the wall. Given that most Catholics appear to think that popes cannot make errors in faith and morals, without understanding the limitations of the infallibility guarantee, it is calculated to do incalculable damage to souls. Of course that papolatry doesn’t extend to the pre-Vatican II popes or they would be forced to think more deeply.

        We can only re-double our prayers to Our Lady of Fatima, for the scales to fall from Pope Francis’ very clouded and anything-but-Catholic vision.

        • Editor,

          Speaking of post-VII-only papolatry, and apologies for resurrecting unpleasant memories, but I am reminded of the hypocrisy of a certain Fr. A, who twisted our criticisms of the current Pope into “attacks,” but then said that St. Pius X had a “reds under the bed” mentality when he wrote Pascendi.

          Yes, the faithful and vigilant pre-VII Popes are open to real attack – when they are not being ignored, that is….

          Think I’ll go have a large helping of triumphalism with my morning coffee…

  106. Therese

    You’re right, it’s pure lunacy. Pope Francis is on the verge of speaking public heresy, if he hasn’t already done so. What troubles me is that the three men discussing his statements on the video are way too relaxed in their disagreement with his dangerous propositions. They should be stating in no uncertain terms that he is utterly wrong and must be brought to book by the Cardinals. Trying to excuse him by saying that he may have meant this or that is not good enough, not honest. Pope Francis is a great danger to souls and it should be stated clearly.

    • Athanasius, I must be getting soft, because I felt that the three men in the video were sufficiently clear in their condemnation of all aspects of the particular papal lunacy discussed, within the limits of this particular discussion. I think that what was said will be of great help to the scandalised millions who are thrown into confusion by a Pope intent on undoing 2000 years of Catholic moral teaching. I agree otherwise with all you and Therese say (and thank you, Therese, for posting the video), especially that he must be brought to book by the Cardinals, but I think that question is for a different discussion. This one, it seemed to me, was to let the average modern Catholic, trying to live according to God’s grace, to understand that this Pope is not to be heeded when he denies and teaches against what has always been believed and taught by the Church.

  107. RCA Victor

    What is really so disgusting is that not one member of the hierarchy, as far as I am aware, has expressed their shock/horror at his latest statements.

    • Therese,

      That is a crucially important point. As I said openly at our Conference on Saturday,18th June, we – here in Glasgow – have a manifestly duplicitous archbishop. Putting together his brave homily on appointment as Bishop of Paisley, exhorting us all to be prepared to go to prison rather than fail to speak out about the growing influence of the homosexual lobby, with his later apology for daring to refer to the health/early deaths brought about by that “lifestyle”; put that together with his implied threat to resign if the 2015 Synod on the Family continued with the same anti-Catholic agenda as evidenced in the 2014 Synod, and his now published plans to train priests and teachers to teach and apply Amoris Laetita, we can see that the hierarchy has seldom, if ever, been so weak.

      So, let’s not hold our breath. We can hope and pray that there are bishops with sufficient Catholicity left in their souls to challenge this pope’s shocking toleration and even apparent approval of sexual sins,

      I agree with you entirely, too, when you say that there is neither charity nor mercy discernible in this Pope. It is a most scandalous pontificate with a sickeningly weak hierarchy to match. There’s not a bishop in Scotland who could set the heather on fire by responding to this pope’s shocking statements, as they should, with vigour. In fact, I doubt if even a committed arsonist following them around, day in and day out, could set the heather on fire around them.

      • Next thing we know, he’ll give his ‘blessing’ to same-sex ‘marriages’ in Church, further profanation of the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony.

        I can hardly wait for my first invitation to one. See you in Barlinnie…..

  108. To All
    Thank you for your comments I certainly get “their drift” as you put it. I have already addressed the issue raised by the lady whose friends parents were German in a previous blog. To Athanasius Cardinal Mercier a prophetic witness to the evils of birth control, who also made some mistakes asked Benedict XV to intervene when Belgium was attcked and cilvilians killed etc. Benedict XV also refused to get involved and I think this was a mistake too. Athanasius speculates on what could have happened to Rome and the Pope following excommunication of nazi supporters. However his worst case scenario may not have occurred since others did on occasion stand up to Hitler with some success. However supposing Rome had been invaded and the Pope killed etc there are many previous martyrdoms of Popes which in the economy of salvation meant that their blood became the seed of the church. One of the sins I confess from time to time is allowing moral cowardice to mask itself as prudence and maybe this worth reflecting upon in analysing the role of these two Popes in the wars. However I now put on my professional hat as an organisational analyst, designer and developer and appraiser of individual performance and associated training requirements including my own, looking for the key result areas in this total debate and analysis of organisational effectiveness and prevailing culture of Catholic Truth which I love. I only have the following points to make using your “drift” concept thus far.
    1)My history lecturer told me I had the enquiring mind of a true historian.
    2) It’s very dodgy to tell people what they should and should not read (unless there is a sin or occasion of sin involved)
    3) It’s very dodgy to tell people how they must interpret what they read.
    4) Bloggers seem repeatedly to be answering questions I have never asked-“Thou protesteth too much” comes to mind.
    5) It’s very dodgy to tell people what they must and must not think.
    6) It’s very dodgy to take a “settled view” of any historical event in the absence of all the relevant facts and none of us have all the facts in this debate.
    7) My view is not “settled” in this debate because I could be right or wrong in a process of ongoing fact gathering and evaluation. Thus it’s a serious misinterpretation to say I “can’t be reasoned with” for the reasons given in 6.
    8) all the items above of course exclude the essential articles of faith which I must accept without question.
    9)Items 2-7 above severely restrict open and honest debate, fact gathering and therefore effective resolution of different views of historical and current events.
    10) Excommunication is a process which is used to get people to repent and change their ways not to condemn them.
    I will end the debate by simply saying in response to the culture that says “you must read this and not that” ” you must say this and not that” “you must interpret events in this way not that” syndrome etc that it is not wrong or sinful or a breach of an article of faith to take the view I have taken (mistaken though it might well be) but remember 6 above.
    Past experience is a great tutor and Cardinal Hulme in a written answer to a question I asked him about why he did not follow church teaching and speak out on abortifacients etc said “The only comment I have to make is that I do wish you would learn to spell my name correctly”. So I will end by simply saying thank you to all concerned for their interest and involvement. I assure you it’s not an “emotional response” where I have let my heart rule my head but is based on an honest (but what could be a mistaken) objective assessment. All I will say for the record in this ongoing process in dialogue and fact gathering is “What I have written, I have written” which is about the only good thing Pontius Pilate ever said!

    • Liam,

      I am dismayed that you have believed the lies about Pius XII. I hope this defence of him puts your false fears at rest.

      People often ask: why did Pius XII, Eugenio Pacelli, not speak out more forcefully against Hitler? Historian Fr Dermot Fenlon of the Birmingham Oratory looks at the facts and sets the record straight.

      The answer is recounted by a former inmate of Dachau, Mgr Jean Bernard, later Bishop of Luxembourg:

      “The detained priests trembled every time news reached us of some protest by a religious authority, but particularly by the Vatican. We all had the impression that our warders made us atone heavily for the fury these protests evoked … whenever the way we were treated became more brutal, the Protestant pastors among the prisoners used to vent their indignation on the Catholic priests: ‘Again your big naive Pope and those simpletons, your bishops, are shooting their mouths off .. why don’t they get the idea once and for all, and shut up. They play the heroes and we have to pay the bill.'”

      Albrecht von Kessel, an official at the German Embassy to the Holy See during the war, wrote in 1963:

      “We were convinced that a fiery protest by Pius XII against the persecution of the Jews … would certainly not have saved the life of a single Jew. Hitler, like a trapped beast, would react to any menace that he felt directed at him, with cruel violence.”

      The real question is, therefore, not what did the Pope say, but what did the Pope do? Actions speak louder than words. Papal policy in Nazi Europe was directed with an eye to local conditions. It was co- ordinated with local hierarchies. Nazi policy towards the Jews varied from country to country. Thus, although anti-Jewish measures were met in France by public protest from Archbishop Saliege of Toulouse, together with Archbishop Gerlier of Lyons and Bishop Thias of Mantauban, their protest was backed by a highly effective rescue and shelter campaign. 200,000 lives were saved. In Holland, as Fr Michael O’Carroll writes, the outcome was ‘tragically different’. The Jewish historian Pinchas Lapide sums it up:

      “The saddest and most thought provoking conclusion is that whilst the Catholic clergy of Holland protested more loudly, expressly and frequently against Jewish persecutions than the religious hierarchy of any other Nazi-occupied country, more Jews – some 11,000 or 79% of the total – were deported from Holland; more than anywhere else in the West.”

      Van Kessel’s view is therefore borne out by the experience of Nazi Holland: protest merely made for more reprisals.

      What of Rome itself? In 1943 the German ambassador to the Holy See, Von Weizsaecker, sent a telegram to Berlin. The telegram has been cited as damning ‘evidence’ against Pius XII.

      “Although under pressure from all sides, the Pope has not let himself be drawn into any demonstrative censure of the deportation of Jews from Rome … As there is probably no reason to expect other German actions against the Jews of Rome we can consider that a question so disturbing to German-Vatican relations has been liquidated.”

      Von Weizsaecker’s telegram was in fact a warning not to proceed with the proposed deportation of the Roman Jews: ‘there is probably no reason to expect other German actions against the Jews of Rome’. Von Weizsaecker’s action was backed by a warning to Hitler from Pius XII: if the pursuit and arrest of Roman Jews was not halted, the Holy Father would have to make a public protest. together the joint action of Von Weizsaecker and Pius XII ended the Nazi manhunt against the Jews of Rome. 7,000 lives were saved.

      In Hungary, an estimated 80,000 baptismal certificates were issued by Church authorities to Jews. In other areas of Eastern Europe the Vatican escape network (organised via Bulgaria by the Nuncio Roncalli – later John XXIII) has impressed those writers who have studied the subject, with the effectiveness of the Church’s rescue operation. David Herstig concludes his book on the subject thus:

      “Those rescued by Pius are today living all over the world. There went to Israel alone from Romania 360,000 to the year 1965.”

      The vindication of Pius XII has been established principally by Jewish writers and from Israeli archives. It is now established that the Pope supervised a rescue network which saved 860,000 Jewish lives – more than all the international agencies put together.

      After the war the Chief Rabbi of Israel thanked Pius XII for what he had done. The Chief Rabbi of Rome went one step further. He became a Catholic. He took the name Eugenio.

      Note that the quotes in this article are take from Fr Michael O’Carroll’s book, Dublin, 1980.

    • Liam

      With all due respect, we are not involved here in organisational analysis and appraisal. We are debating contemporary war history Vs. revisionist history, the latter being your presentation of Pius XII’s Pontificate and the former mine.

      For my part, I have amply demonstrated that the people of Pius’ time, the eyewitnesses so to speak, namely, World Jewry and the Church’s authorities, did not recount nor record what you now accuse the Pope of. They do admit to a certain silence on the Pope’s part for prudence’ sake, but all are agreed that this was praiseworthy not sinful or criminal. Indeed leading Jews asked Pius not to speak out too strongly for fear that the Nazis would exact retribution upon their people. So I think that takes care of the silence matter once and for all. In the case of Pius XII there was no cowardice disguised as prudence, only genuine wisdom and prudence.

      As for speculating on what the Nazis would have done to the Vatican, it was a little more than just speculation. Nazism was an evil regime that made no secret of the fact that it hated religion, especially the Catholic one, which it merely tolerated to preserve a certain peace within the ranks of the German Catholic forces. That could have, and would have, changed very quickly if Pius XII had decided to don the martyrs cloak for himself and countless tens or hundreds of thousands of Jews in Europe. He was at liberty to sacrifice himself, yes, but not them. He was forced to play the diplomatic game rather than the suicidal one, I’m afraid.

      I would now like to qualify your list of statements, if I may.

      “1)My history lecturer told me I had the enquiring mind of a true historian.

      The enquiring mind can also be called a curious mind, and curiosity is warned against in the spiritual life. You need to take that into consideration.

      2) It’s very dodgy to tell people what they should and should not read (unless there is a sin or occasion of sin involved)

      I would argue that there is a very great sin involved in publicly maligning a Pope’s reputation, especially one who can no longer answer for himself. Wouldn’t you?

      3) It’s very dodgy to tell people how they must interpret what they read.

      Not at all. This is the argument of the Modernists who now reinterpret our entire religion in a different and dangerous way since the constraints of the pre-council Popes on how the faith should and must be interpreted were removed.

      4) Bloggers seem repeatedly to be answering questions I have never asked-“Thou protesteth too much” comes to mind.

      I would say rather that bloggers have answered questions you either hinted at or that they anticipated from prior experience. And we cannot protest too strongly in defence of this much-maligned holy Pope. Soemone has to defend his good name.

      5) It’s very dodgy to tell people what they must and must not think.

      It is rather a duty incumbent upon all who hold and value the truth to tell people what the must and must not think, as well as what they must and must not believe. It’s called being apostolic. Confronting error is the Church’s mission in this world. What you mean to say is that we must not force people to act against their conscience. That’s not the same as telling them in no uncertain terms that their conscience is misinformed.

      6) It’s very dodgy to take a “settled view” of any historical event in the absence of all the relevant facts and none of us have all the facts in this debate.

      We do have all the facts. The facts were established during Pius XII’s lifetime from the most trustworthy sources. Controversies only arose with the launch of Stalin’s “Black Legend” in the 1960s followed by a revisionist re-writing of history. Don’t forget that I have personally spoken with two senior Vatican officials who knew the Angelic Pastor personally and have been appalled by the untruths put out in the public domain about him since his death.

      7) My view is not “settled” in this debate because I could be right or wrong in a process of ongoing fact gathering and evaluation. Thus it’s a serious misinterpretation to say I “can’t be reasoned with” for the reasons given in 6.

      You shouldn’t have to be reasoned with. There is a mountain of evidence that speaks in Pius XII’s defence. That’s why I have warned that your present course is not one that will lead you down the road of facts and evaluation concerning Pius XII, but rather to a twisting of the facts and a detrimental re-evaluation of this Pontificate. Modern history on Pius XII cannot be trusted!

      8) all the items above of course exclude the essential articles of faith which I must accept without question.

      And yet it is a fact that the faith of others can be seriously affected when Catholics involve themselves in pointless controversies, appearing to side with the false and tendentious claims of the Church’s enemies.

      9)Items 2-7 above severely restrict open and honest debate, fact gathering and therefore effective resolution of different views of historical and current events.

      Again, this was the argument of the Modernists against the Church’s restrictions on what they reckoned was their open investigative minds. We now see the damage the removal of those restrictions has caused.

      10) Excommunication is a process which is used to get people to repent and change their ways not to condemn them.

      Well, it didn’t work with Luther and so many others against whom the terrible declaraion was made! But as I said before, there is no such thing as a blanket excommunication of souls. Individual circumstances must be weighed if the sentence is to be just.

      Liam, I urge you to reflect.

  109. Liam,

    As a teacher, and as all solid teachers do, I emphasised to my students the absolute necessity of using sound sources, whatever they were researching. John Cornwell is the key source for all of the contemporary attacks on Pope Pius XII. He has been thoroughly discredited. Here is a link to an article on him, posted at EWTN – a different article from the one I had planned to send you.

    So, that’s number one. It’s not about telling you not to read this or that but any genuine historian wishes to use good sources and not waste time with non-reliable sources. It’s not a sign of an uneducated person to refuse to read this or that source – I, she said humbly, have two degrees and I wouldn’t dream of wasting my time reading the rubbish spouted by the likes of John Cornwell. Informed, solid Catholic commentaries suffice. Nor do I read other anti-Catholic publications such as The Tablet. I am sometimes forced to read particular articles in them, sent by well meaning readers or which show up on a Google search, but I begin by knowing that this is, more likely than not, yet another attack on the Church. I refuse to keep an “open mind” – or, put another way, I refuse to be a useful idiot, drinking in propaganda and then defending it on the grounds that it’s important to be free to read what one wants. Catholic have always been warned of the dangers of poisoning our minds and souls with bad reading. Indeed, the Founder of the St Paul (now “Pauline”) Bookshops, started his publishing work because he couldn’t sleep at night for thinking about the souls being led to Hell due to bad reading. He must be turning in his grave now, seeing what his “Pauline Sisters” are selling in their awful bookshops. So, while – in our “enlightened” society – it might look good to claim an “open mind” and willingness to read anything and everything, it can be, in fact, a grave sin. That’s why the bishops are given responsibility for everything published in their diocese. If they were doing their jobs, which of course they are not, the likes of John Cornwell and his offshoots wouldn’t have been given the time of day in any Catholic bookshop. And faithful Catholics wouldn’t have dreamt of reading such propaganda. See page 8 of our every newsletter, where we invite the Pope and hierarchy to correct us, invoking Canon 823, if we are publishing any error.

    Liam, you repeatedly admit that you may be mistaken – you ARE mistaken, and that fact has been demonstrated absolutely clearly since you raised the subject on this blog. There is NO evidence that Pope Pius XII was a bad pope or negligent during the war. Yet, you press on,repeating the same falsehoods. That you are reduced to quoting Pontius Pilate in your defence, says it all.

    I’m surprised that you dismiss the effects of excommunication so lightly. In any case, despite your constant refrain that you may be mistaken, with the implication that this will only be known in years to come, if not eternity, I do think your mind is set against this holy pope. I say “holy pope” because of the first hand testimony of all those who knew him, notably the Jews in World War II, and because of the tell-tale attacks on him by the revisionist historians, though their malicious propaganda. I’m just very disappointed – and very surprised – that you have fallen for it.

  110. To Pat McKay
    Your comment on the a Pope giving his blessing to same sex marriages could be not too far off.
    The pope has now apologised to gay people on behalf of the church. He has said words to the effect that the Church/ we should not judge gay people on their choice of lifestyle.
    This has made national news in the middle of all the other brouhaha about Brexit.

    • As I recall, a New York priest was de-frocked back in the ’70s for conducting a same-sex ‘wedding’ in his Church. Before long, they’ll be getting de-frocked for REFUSING to entertain such profanity.

      For decades we’ve heard it said that the Church ‘needs to move with the times’ as regards Her teachings on e.g.divorce and re-marriage, contraception, abortion, women priests and homosexuality. We are surely seeing this ‘movement’ now – and it’s like a dose of the ‘gary glitter’…..

  111. What is it about getting on a plane that inspires Pope Francis to start proclaiming such appalling ideas? And is no one at all among the hierarchy or priesthood going to have the courage to put his head over the parapet and say “enough”? It is as if he pushing all the boundaries, or tearing them down maybe, to see what he can get away with. But ordinary Catholics just seem to go along with it believing that he is guided by the Holy Spirit. Who are WE to judge they might well ask! Well imho he seems almost unhinged at times! With no sense of the dignity or appropriateness of his position as he chats away to the press in the sky. Does he ever truly think before he opens his mouth?

    • Elizabeth,

      What, indeed. It seems he just cannot resist microphones.

      As for the silent hierarchy – we can but recall Our Lady’s warning at Quito in the 17th century, that when marriage and the family is attacked in the 20th century “those who should speak out will fall silent.”

      We’re living through that time now, and it is really only when prophecies begin to unfold that we can really see their truth.

  112. Here’s a petition worth signing – a Spanish Cardinal facing prison for preaching against “gender ideology”

    I’ve signed, and urge others to do so, as well, before priests and bishops are required to submit their sermons to an LGBT official for vetting. I’m not joking. Seriously.

  113. Editor: I’ve removed this comment, Liam, because I deleted the final paragraph of my post (at 11.29 am) which you felt was a breach of confidentiality. Apologies, but since the issue you raised was a mere PS in your letter, I didn’t think anything of it. Anyway, all deleted now. Hope that’s acceptable. If you still want blood, let me know…

  114. Here’s a youtube video you may find of interest, re the proposed New Northampton Cathedral centre:-

    • Pat McKay,

      LOL! That’s about as close to a marketing promo as you’re likely to get – Richard Branson eat your heart out!

      In the good old days, the PP would announce there would be special collections to built a parish hall beside the church and that would be IT! Then we had a hall, a couple of loos and a parking lot. The Women’s Guild, the Legion of Mary and the SVDP would have their meetings and you might be able to book it for a wedding. That would be about the sum and substance of it. How times have changed!

      • What’s the betting there’ll be an open-door policy for the local ‘wimmin’s right to choose’ brigade and LGBT societies, lest there be accusations of ‘intolerance’ and ‘prejudice’?

  115. Changing tack completely, does anyone here know what has happened to the esteemed Gerald Warner. As far as I can tell, he is missing from the CAPX website since the beginning of May. I caanot believe that he has been silent on Brexit and its aftermath.

    • Prognosticum,

      Although Gerald writes a column (monthly, I think) for the Scottish Catholic Observer, I believe the other papers (Scotland on Sunday, for example, and the Telegraph) let him go, due to cutbacks. At least, that was the excuse. Hitting too near the bone, is the more likely reason.

    • I too have been checking Capx regularly, hoping for something from Gerald Warner on Brexit. It does look ominous that nothing new has appeared since early May.

  116. Can someone tell me if it would be sinful to attend a bullfight whilst on holiday in somewhere such as in Spain, or to participate in some other sport that exploited animals and exhibited cruelty? I have always thought that being cruel to animals or using them for sport is an evil act.

    • The Church doesn’t go into details like that about stuff like animals. If you think it’s cruel and an evil act to use animals for sport, then don’t go to the bullfight, don’t back a horse in the Grand National and don’t go to a greyhound race. It’s up to you to decide whether these things are immoral or not. I’m too busy worrying about the state-sanctioned killing of babies in their mother’s womb to worry about animals.

      • Nicky

        Yes, I think this is a good response. It often amuses me (in the strangest sense) that animal rights activists tend to be the most liberal when it comes to pro life issues. How on earth they come to their crazy positions I don’t know!

        • Oh well, my own opinion is that it’s not a question of whether you think bull fighting is cruel; it is. End of. Similarly, the Grand National is a grand disgrace, and I don’t think it’s a personal choice whether or not one decides if such “sports” are immoral, or not. God gave us the animal kingdom, and we have the power to do with it what we will; we are their “gods”, with the power of life and death over them. I hope I am a good “god”, and would never wish to inflict unnecessary pain and suffering, and I really can’t understand how anyone with a modicum of humanity could take pleasure in tormenting a dumb animal.

          End of rant.

          • Therese, I couldn’t have done a better rant myself – I second, third and fourth yours.

            ‘I’m too busy worrying about the state-sanctioned killing of babies in their mother’s womb to worry about animals’.

            Nicky (SPORT – a bullfight? Really??) and Petrus, surely you aren’t suggesting that there is a dichotomy here? I see, rather, a continuum. It is a well-known fact that serial killers often start off by torturing and killing animals, and IMHO any human being who can watch an ultimately helpless animal, whether bull, dog, bird or fox-cub being tortured, perhaps torn to pieces, and killed is unlikely to balk at the idea or sight of a human foetus being torn to pieces. It’s a matter of degree, though not of equivalence.

            CC, I don’t know how you could even think of going to so savage a spectacle!

            • Christina,

              For the record, I wouldn’t ever dream of advocating cruelty to animals. I’m an animal lover myself. However, in the grand scheme of things I have more to worry about and more to get emotional about.

              In my experience, the hippy brigade who tend to fight for animal rights wouldn’t think twice of promoting abortion. I know one in particular who is a vegetarian for “moral reasons” but thinks nothing of abortion.

              If only people were so concerned and outraged by the murder of humans in the womb!

              • Petrus

                Like you, I am an animal lover. In fact, half the dogs in my home town abandon their masters and come running to me the minute I set foot in the street, and all because I have the bad habit of giving them grub!

                One story in particular is quite amusing. A local man had a great dane that was absolutely terrified of high visibilty jackets. Now I happen to wear one of those a lot in the winter and the first time I saw this dog, or rather the first time he saw me, he went absolutely ballistic with fear. Then he realised that I kept a pocket full of biscuits, usually for my lab retriever, Well, he partook of a few treats from the pocket of the high vis jacket and from thenceforth ran to everyone wearing one. What a turnaround that was!

                Anyway, getting back to the point, I think one of the reasons many animal lovers condone abortion yet screem cruelty when animals gat maltreated is because they can see what’s happening to the animals. You’ll have noticed that there are no abortions shown on TV. And you know what they say: “out of sight, out of mind”. Many pro-abortionists, I believe, would have a very rapid change of heart if they actually saw what they tacitly approve of in their ignorance.

            • Christina,

              I wholeheartedly second what you say. I was not saying that I was considering attending a bullfight- I merely made an enquiry regarding the issue. Animal cruelty is an abomination. Gerragrip!

                • Petrus,

                  I know- I’m a bit of an old Wee Free Puritan when it comes to decadent worldly forms of entertainment. I once let my friend’s bike tyres down to stop him cycling on the Lord’s Day. Lol 🙂

  117. Can I ask bloggers to please sign this petition (linked below) against Nicola Sturgeons intentions to introduce the “LGBT” agenda into primary schools in Scotland.

    The main voice against the proposals currently seems to the Moderator of the Free Church of Scotland, Mr David Robertson. I haven’t heard anything from the Scottish Catholic Bishops. I know the outgoing chief of the Scottish Catholic Education Service, Mr Michael McGrath, did rattle his sabre somewhat on the subject.

    I am surprised that the Government think this is necessary. I recall my Catholic High School in the early 1990s teaching tolerance of homosexual persons in both RE and Guidance classes. They didn’t balance this by explaining Catholic teaching on homosexuality. And I am aware that, today, the local Catholic High School where I live specifically identifies “sexual orientation” as a protected characteristic in terms of bullying, as listed in its guidebook.

    • Gabriel Syme

      I have duly signed the petition. However, my experience with the SNP’s online consultation on “Gay Marriage” a few years back suggests to me that Nicola Sturgeon will ignore any and all petitions that oppose her domineering agenda, even if every person in Scotland signs them. It was a tragic day for this country when the SNP were voted into power. Nicola Sturgeon in particular has had far too much to do with LGBT causes, way beyond what the average godless politician does for appearance’ sake. She is aggressively devoted to them, the wretched soul.

      One thing is now patently clear in Scotland, which is that the SNP (remember the State Guardian legislation) is set on full State intrusion into every aspect of family life. It’s utterly shocking, pure Communism.

    • Signed. We have this curse already in Australia masquerading under the misnomer of The ‘Safe Schools’ program. It’s disgusting.

  118. I hope this question is not out of order! Can someone tell me the difference between Dogma and Doctrine? Thanks.

  119. Here we go again – cardinal against cardinal.

    Cardinal Sarah asks priests to start celebrating Mass facing ad orientem….Bravo!
    Cardinal Nichols discourages priests from celebrating Mass ad orientem….

    Oh how I wish these modernists destroyers were removed from the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. Does anyone know when Cardinal Nichols is due to retire? Soon, I hope!

    • And here we go again – cardinal against cardinal.

      Cardinal Schönborn Says Amoris Laetitia is Binding Doctrine.

      Really? Maybe it does in the church he belongs to, but it does not in the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. These modernist wolves are a very grave danger to souls. My own hope is that they will be defrocked, one and all, and formally drummed out the Brownies.

      Here’s what other Cardinals say:

      Cardinal Raymond Burke had previously claimed that Amoris Laetitia did not have a doctrinally binding character; Cardinal Carlo Caffarra and Cardinal Walter Brandmüller both had insisted that Amoris Laetitia had to be read in light of the previous magisterial texts.

  120. Thanks, Fidelis, but is there any “answers for dummies” version anywhere? A friend asked me if contraception was a dogma and I hadn’t a clue!

  121. Helen,

    My understanding is that contraception is part of the moral order and is unchangeable. So the Church is just repeating that moral teaching which has always been believed by Christians. It was only challenged in very recent history.

    I thought this article might help you – I don’t think it’s what you call a dogma, but it is infallible teaching that it is immoral to use contraception.

  122. Thanks Fidelis. I always knew it was morally wrong but found it hard to explain. That quote from St. Peter where it says: “always be ready to account for the hope that is in you” has always bothered me. Made me feel guilty not to be prepared to be able to do just that.

    • Christina,

      That seems to be a very good article on St Thomas Aquinas and immigration, but in the biography section, we read the following:

      “Mr. Horvat is vice president and a member of the board of directors for the American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property (TFP), head of the TFP Commission for American studies, a TFP Sedes Sapientiae Institute instructor, and webmaster of the American TFP website ( Additionally, Mr. Horvat is a member of the Association of Christian Economists, The Philadelphia Society, the National Association of Scholars, and the Catholic Writers Guild, as well as an Acton University participant.

      His research began in 1986 when he was invited by Prof. Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira, founder of the Brazilian TFP, to study the crisis of modern economy and to prepare a conservative response. Mr. Horvat continues studying and writing and is now one of the most sought after experts on the subject.”

      If you check out our recent thread on the Tradition, Family, Property (TFP) organisation, I think you will agree that, generally speaking, they ought to be avoided. I have unsubscribed from the America Needs Fatima group which is run by the TFP, for example, and would not, personally, purchase any of their works.

  123. After my short stay in Glasgow recently, I have to say that the parish has a cracking wee tea stall, absurdly inexpensive… but what happened to the legendary soup? 🙂

    • Summa,

      It was great to see you there and to meet your wife and mother in law.

      We’ve never had soup in all the years I’ve been going to the Glasgow chapel. Only tea, coffee, biscuits and crisps. The Edinburgh chapel serves a variety of hot dishes, probably including soup, so I maybe you’ve been there at some point, and your memory is playing tricks?

      • I must have read it somewhere. Perhaps it was the Edinburgh parish. Soup and a roll. That’s the reason I came! I had a perfectly good Clown Mass lined up too. If only I had known 😇

        • Summa,

          LOL! You can always go to y our Clown Mass next week! I wonder if they do soup and a roll? LOL!

  124. Right on time for Pope Francis’ upcoming Lutheran buffoonery!

    Here’s the latest bilge concerning the women priests brigade.

    The pernicious fruits of Ecumenism are ripening.

    These people would actually dare to put woman in front of our Blessed Mother. Iv’e long suspected that the reason Russia hasn’t been Consecrated to Her Immaculate Heart is due to that Modernist abomination known as Ecumenism.

    • Gerontius,

      I agree about ecumenism being at the root of the women priests movement. I am appalled (but not surprised) that the Vatican is willing to meet with reps from that movement. It’s pointless to take their petition, because the excommunications can’t be lifted while they cling to their heresy, but it’ll make a good headline in the liberal press. LOL!

  125. There have been Cardinals speaking out on Amoris Laetitia and other matters. In this blog itself Cardinals Burke, Brandmuller, and Caffara are given, as examples of Cardinals saying openly what they believe.
    Now Cardinal Sara is advocating what will be dear to the hearts of bloggers here.
    It cannot be easy, in the present climate, to fly your colours. Is there more to be lost in terms of influence, than there us to be gained! You may be relegated to the third division. And then some!
    I can think of an outspoken blogger priest who seems to have ‘disappeared’ off the radar.
    Father Ray Blake now has been critical of Cardinal Nicholls. Brave priest! His blog posts are among the best going, I think; personal, thoughtful, accurate.
    I’d hate them to ‘disappear’. What influence would he have then? Would WE do anything then on his behalf?
    It’s not easy in the present stranglehold being exerted ruthlessly on the Church, for priests at any level to take ‘them’ on.
    I’m not sure I’d have the courage. Maybe some of you are.
    Let’s hope and pray that when the chips are finally down, there are priests and lay people who have the courage to walk away from the heresy.

    • Spero,

      It cannot be easy to fly your colours…

      I’ve been thinking lately about the sentence that introduces the Third Secret: “In Portugal, the dogma of the faith will be preserved, etc.” I’m wondering if the “Spanish” priests who write for the Denzinger-Bergoglio site, albeit anonymously, are fulfilling that prophecy (and thus whether they are really Spanish, or perhaps Portuguese). Here is their rationale on the English site for remaining anonymous:

      Why have we chosen to remain anonymous? Well, just like our Spanish counterparts, we do not want to give our Bishops problems. It is already not easy to be a Bishop these days… With their consent, but shielding them from any possible repression, we happily make time for this translation – between already too many pastoral obligations – out of love for the Church and for the good of souls.

      At any rate, their excellent analysis of one of the more outrageous statements in AL:

    • Spero,

      Fr Ray Blake hasn’t gone anywhere. His blog is where it always is – right here !

      I’ve just paid a flying visit and pleased to see that he lists the “Traditional Latin Mass” with no mention of “Extraordinary Form” that I can see, so that’s both unusual and wonderful, latter due to former! He obviously knows that it’s a huge mistake to use the language of the enemy!

      Your argument about whether by “outing” themselves the sound priests (? how many? Not many in Scotland, be assured) somehow diminish their influence.

      Well, there has to be a prudential judgment made by individual priests, I suppose, but my own gut feeling is that if more priests stand up to be counted, it could only be a good thing, and that Divine Providence would protect them, with that one hundred fold reward for those who put Christ first, before anything else, including the good opinion of their bishop.

      • Editor,

        I wasn’t sure if I should post this on the “Two Religions” thread, but I continue to wonder about the Third Secret phrase, “In Portugal the dogma of the faith will be preserved, etc.”

        Ignoring my reply to Spero for a moment, why Portugal, when it has been the SSPX, internationally, that has been preserving the dogma of the faith?

        • RCA Victor,

          My own theory about that phrase is as follows:

          Our Lady spoke of Portugal because that is where she appeared to the children.

          However, I’ve always doubted – and friends who have visited Portugal have confirmed – that it doesn’t seem to have kept the Faith much better than any other part of the world.

          The answer to the question, what did Our Lady actually say, in full, therefore, has to lie on what followed, i.e. what replaces the “etc”. How does this grab you…

          “In Portugal the dogma of the faith will be preserved where the traditional Mass is preserved and the authentic Catholic faith taught, as will be the same around the world.”

          Well? What do you think? Am I a Fatima expert now or what?

          If you say “or what” you’re in trouble 😀

          • Editor,

            What, a Fatima expert? 🙂 But seriously, your reply makes sense. Have you been reading the Capovilla envelope again?

            • RCA Victor,

              Have I been reading the Capovilla envelope? You kidding?
              I’m too busy ready envelopes which say “return to sender, do not send this newsletter to me again”!

        • I remember someone asked Fr Gruner this in Glasgow and he said that this means that there will be some countries around the world where the Faith will disappear completely.

          • Petrus,

            That’s a separate matter. Portugal has NOT kept the dogma of the Faith any more than anywhere else, which is what makes the “etc” so important.

  126. Editor
    I wasn’t referring to Fr Ray Blake as the blogging priest who seems no longer to comment on this Papacy.
    I was referring to another, and meant that I would hate Fr Blake to be similarly brought to heel, in whatever way outspoken priests are censured .
    Fr Blake will long ago have lost the good opinion of his bishop. Bishops can make things very difficult for priests.
    And no, there are not many who are outspoken publicly in Scotland.

    RCA Victor
    Denzinger Bergoglio are brilliant but anonymous ( for whatever reason they give) and that is precisely the point. They are anonymous. Maybe they have decent bishops but maybe they are a afraid.
    The blogging priests, with names, are very courageous.

    • Spero,

      I’d need to know the name of the priest you think has disappeared – if it’s Fr Michael Clifton, well, he caved in to threats of legal action from Monsignor Loftus years ago when Mgr Loftus threatened to sue because Fr Clifton had allowed a blogger to call him a heretic. Well, he IS a heretic, so that’s one law suit that would have gone nowhere. Mgr Loftus was bullying Fr Clifton, as he has bullied others, so it’s a pity Fr C, caved in to his threats and closed down his blog. Click here to read one of the many accounts about the matter published on the internet at the time.

      If it’s not Fr Clifton, you’ll need to spell it out – I can’t think of anyone else in England. There are, of course, no sound priest bloggers in Scotland.

      As for “not many (priests) are outspoken publicly in Scotland” – not many? Name one, please and thank you.

  127. The priest I am thinking of is still blogging, but the blog has taken a quite different tack, and this priest was also moved. Another priest, with a quite different theological perspective, was assigned to his parish. Voila!
    No, there are not any Scottish priests who invade the public square; or have a blog; or write a column in the press. But there are some ( and I can’t be everywhere, so there may be a lot more) who do proclaim the truths of the Faith, and they are not the most popular people on the planet.

    • Well if he is still blogging, what’s the mystery? I think I know who you mean, no big deal. None of the blogger priests are ever going to be linking to us, so they’re safe enough!

  128. Goodness, I certainly hope this news report is wrong:

    Eponymous Flower says the media is reporting that Balloon-Schonborn is to replace Cardinal Muller at the CDF, with the later being farmed out to be Archbishop of Mainz.

    The news report is from Kuala Lumpar (!?) and so we can probably doubt its veracity.

  129. Gabriel Syme,

    I’ve only taken a quick look at that article. There’s always a chance that it is one of these increasingly “popular” spoofs but I now find them irritating. Partly because they could so easily be true! The joke, in other words, is no longer funny.

  130. Spero,

    Before the election of Pope Francis, I would have agreed with you wholeheartedly.

    However, I stand by what I wrote at 11.56 am.

    For example, the very fact that we had several priests publicly advertised as speaking at our recent Conference, with none of them being hauled before the Sanhedrin (so to speak!) or suffering – so far at least – for associating with rebels like us, is a huge advance.

    You may recall that on previous occasions when we advertised events involving priests – and one was merely an afternoon of Advent reflections, to be given by a priest friend of my family, who could never be described as “traditional” (if only); the other a “Day with Mary”, led by a Glasgow priest in a church in the archdiocese of Edinburgh, thanks to a friendly Edinburgh priest – all Hell broke loose, with the hierarchy directly involved, west coast and east coast respectively, contacting the priests to warn of dire consequences if they did not withdraw from our event or, in the case of the priest permitting us the use of his church, refuse the use of his church for the honour of Our Lady, since we were doing the honouring. Unbelievable. If the Church of Scotland, or the Church of Anytown, Anywhere, had booked the church for a ecumenical shindig, there’s no way the Cardinal would have stepped in to prevent the gathering.

    That didn’t happen this time. The Bishops are much more relaxed now; the majority of the clergy have been bought. The few others, well, who cares? What “damage” can they do, really?

    And I think that is, more likely than not, the attitude adopted towards the English blogger priests. “Let them go, let them tarry”… The revolutionaries are winning (or so they think!) So, no big deal…

    Teachers, however, are, I believe, a very different kettle of trouble. They have to be kept in check or they’ll be telling the kids that Catholic Tradition is the litmus test. We can’t have that! So, they really are at risk; however, the clergy, for the most part, don’t have too much to fear from our lukewarm-through-to-apostate bishops – or so it seems to me… moi.

  131. Editor
    There is perhaps a difference between the priests at your conference this time and the previous occasions when priests were to be involved. Is it not so that in the cases before, Cardinal O’Brien was in charge?
    While others in the hierarchy may not have been orthodox, the Cardinal positively hated traditional leanings, and his influence was powerful.
    Scotland is free of that now……..largely.
    But look, I agree with you that more priests could be seen and heard in the public square.
    They need to “screw their courage to the sticking place” and place their hope in the rightness and justice of what they believe, and in Whom they believe.

    • Spero,

      Certainly Cardinal O’Brien was responsible for the Edinburgh cancellation. He, personally, phoned the parish priest to tell him that it was not going to happen.

      The west coast culprit was Archbishop Conti who went to extreme lengths to prevent our humble Afternoon of Advent Reflections, and the priest concerned was utterly flabbergasted. He had communications from the Archbishop himself and from the then chancellor; Father told them that he was in the habit of giving retreats to all sorts of groups and never once had he experienced anything like this attempt to scupper the event. He also said that if, as the Archbishop & Chancellor claimed, we were very bad people (I paraphrase, of course – I’m sure their language was much stronger!) then surely they should be sending for us to explain where we were (are!) going wrong. We’re still awaiting the invitation!

      Clearly, Archbishop Tartaglia has taken a different approach, wise man, but I think it has more to do with the fact that they are now Rome-approved in their Modernist running of the archdiocese, and nothing to do with tolerating the true and undiluted Faith being preached openly at a public event run by CT.

      Having said that, although there were archdiocesan priests present at our Conference, they were not publicly advertised as speakers. Now, THAT may bring a whole new situation into play. Might be worth testing out… Watch this space!

  132. I received a newsletter the other day from our US District Superior, which contained the very surprising note that the faithful in our District number only 25,000! I suppose I expected there were many more, given that we have so many locations around the country, but it seems we are truly the “remnant”!

      • Editor,

        At any rate, a number much smaller than the population of Glasgow…though I haven’t been able to verify that….

    • RCA Victor, I thought I had read, somewhere on the blog, a post which said the US was, numerically, the largest district in the SSPX. I thought this was rather strange as I was always under the impression it was France, especially as St. Nicolas du Chardonett alone has a good few thousand attending it’s five Sunday Masses.

      • Vianney,

        Don’t know – maybe Father meant 25,000 registered parishioners? I suppose there are quite a few hearing our Masses who attend anonymously…we’re such dangerous people, you know, keeping Tradition and all that….

    • RCA Victor,

      I know we’re overdue a new thread but I’ve been away from my computer all day and now need to head for the pubs and clubs 😀

      Tomorrow, we sincerely hope, is another day so watch this space!

      Next morning…

      New thread posted now. Click here

      Catholic Truth at your service!

  133. You must fight this. This plague is already in Australia.It is akin to grooming youth for sexual deviance.
    A spokeswoman for the Catholic Church in Scotland said: “The Church is working with the Catholic Head Teacher associations to ensure that all teachers have adequate knowledge, understanding and training and feel confident in addressing all aspects of relationships education, including LGBTI+ matters, in an appropriate and sensitive way.”

    • Summa,

      I’ve been hearing about this from teachers who are faced with the dilemma of being forced – by the Church authorities! – to participate in this normalising and de facto approval of the LGBTI (what the heck is the ‘I’ and why do they keep adding on new categories? Don’t answer – strictly rhetorical)

      Either the Catholic education people/bishops are thick and don’t realise that this nonsense about “discrimination” and “bullying” is merely the excuse to promote the depravity of the LGBT (I!) lifestyle, or they are approving of it. My money is on the latter.

  134. This thread, having reached the 500 comments mark, is now closed. Click here to reach the new, current General Discussion.

    Note, too, that the important news, of the complicity of the Catholic Church in Scotland in the promotion of LGBT issues in Scottish Catholic schools, posted by Summa above, will be the subject of a fresh discussion thread within a day or two, so hang fire on that topic, for the moment.

    Thank you to everyone who contributed to this thread.